User:Jaepayne/Payne - J - A1 - Theft of Virtual Items

Annotation A1		Payne – J – A1 Theft of Virtual Items
Strikwerda, L. (2012). Theft of virtual items in online multiplayer computer games: an ontological and moral analysis Ethics and Information Technology, 14(2), 89-97. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-011-9285-3

Narrative
This article interests me because I have been playing computer games since as long as I had a computer but the specific game I thought of when I read this article was the MMORPG RuneScape. This was the first online game I had ever played with other people, and I quickly learned that not everyone in this virtual universe was an upstanding citizen. My best friend growing up also played it and he showed me several ways to scam or steal items and in game currency from other players. So when searching though the different articles this one stood out to me because this is a real issue within the online gaming community.

Questions
1.)	In what way can virtual items be seen as real enough that it constitutes theft in the real world?

“The judges in these cases seem to have assumed that the act of stealing in the virtual world of RuneScape orHabbo is a real institutional activity. In line with Searle’s “constitutive rule” they have recognized that the act of stealing in the virtual world of these online multiplayer computer games (X) counts as theft (Y) in the non-virtual world (C). They have, thereby, also recognized that the requisite objects, a virtual mask, virtual amulet and virtual furniture (X), count as “objects that can be stolen” (Y) in the non-virtual world (C).” (pg 91).

2.)	What type of value can be assigned to virtual items in a game?

“If a player really needs to pay in order to purchase a virtual item in the virtual world of an online multiplayer computer game, this virtual item represents pecuniary value in the non-virtual world (Rijna 2010, pp. 792–793). As a matter of fact, most things that count as property in the non-virtual world are of pecuniary value. As was established in the last section, the key harm that is caused by theft is pecuniary loss.” (pg 94).

“They can also represent (pecuniary or hedonistic) value in the non-virtual world. If they do it makes sense, from a moral point of view, to bring the act of stealing them under the prohibition on theft and to count these virtual items, thereby, as requisite objects of theft (objects that can be stolen).” (pg 95)

Author’s Main Idea
The theft of virtual items within games should be considered to be similar if not the same as stealing items in the real world. A player’s in game items can be counted as their personal property even though they are virtual. These items can hold a monetary and/or a sentimental/pleasurable value to the owner of said items.

Additional Citations
Brey, P. (2003), The Social Ontology of Virtual Environments. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 62: 269–282. http://doi.org/10.1111/1536-7150.t01-1-00011

Mooradian, N. (2006). Virtual reality, ontology, and value. Metaphilosophy,37(5), 673–690. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2006.00460.x

Two Questions for later
I understand this may not have been the focus of the article but I didn’t notice anywhere that it stated what kinds of punishments virtual thieves would face. So, would a virtual thief receive the same type of punishment as a physical thief? Why or why not?

How would a theft of an item in the virtual world that has a monetary value compared to a theft of a virtual item that has a sentimental or hedonistic value; and how can we measure the hedonistic value?