I got termination ban but I thought it was too harsh

[Canadane]

Only mouse macros. No more, nothing before mouse macros.

This is still automating gameplay, which is a prohibited activity.

[kaynide]

the fact is there doesn't mean they do it or plan to in the future this is stated just to cover all bases and basics, is cute you try to defend or find the legality in that but the reality is different, if they did something like that EVEN if stated in the ToS DOESNT make it 100% binding nor legal , remember thats not a contract just an agreement with no signature so the validity of such is somewhat low at best, there has been several mmo companies that have been sued for this, if you think companies cant be touched legally just because the ToS state one thing, here in this scenario OP must likely did something more and not just the "Mouse macro" what shes saying just doesn't add up

I never said anything about legality. My point was, they specifically say they can decide to refuse service if they want to, and they wanted to in this case.

It’s basically the very same thing Disneyland or even a random manager in a random restaurant can do if they decide they a customer is no longer welcome on the premises and can have them trespassed/ejected via security.

It’s not up to us to decide how arbitrary or severe the penalty should be. And as SenseiMaria pointed out (assuming they are in fact a lawyer), OP has avenues to challenge this, but…

The more important tidbit is the fact that 99.99999% of the population aren't interested to go through a lengthy, stressful & costly legal battle to challenge it over a video game account that you might ultimately end up losing anyway and be in a worse off situation than before, when just quitting or paying $60-ish bucks to restart are infinitely cheaper alternatives.

I’m not a lawyer, but especially this point makes sense to me.

[george357]

you lost your case with the company so just move on and stop bein a forum cry baby.

[rainichan]

You're welcome to die on that hill, but to quote the ToS in the ONLY PART THAT IS ENTIRELY BOLDED, UNDERLINED AND IN CALL CAPS:

Their user agreement talks about how any court cases will play out if you go down a bit:

10.4 Limited Time to File Claims. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IF YOU WANT TO ASSERT A DISPUTE AGAINST SQUARE ENIX, THEN YOU MUST COMMENCE IT (BY DELIVERY OF WRITTEN NOTICE AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 10.2) WITHIN ONE (1) YEAR AFTER THE DISPUTE ARISES, OR ELSE IT SHALL BE FOREVER BARRED.

10.5 Injunctive Relief. The foregoing provisions of this Section 10 will not apply to any legal action taken by Square Enix to seek an injunction or other equitable relief in connection with any loss, cost, or damage (or any potential loss, cost, or damage) relating to the Game, the Licensed Software, this FFXIV User Agreement, any additional terms and/or Square Enix's intellectual property rights (including such Square Enix may claim that may be in dispute), Square Enix's operations, and/or Square Enix's products or services (collectively, "Excluded Dispute").

10.6 Small Claims Matters Are Excluded from Arbitration Requirement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, either of us may bring qualifying claim of Disputes (but not Excluded Disputes) in small claims court, subject to Section 10.8.

10.7 No Class Action Matters. Disputes will be arbitrated only on an individual basis and will not be consolidated with any other arbitration or other proceeding that involves any claim or controversy of any other party. But if, for any reason, any court with competent jurisdiction or any arbitrator selected pursuant to Section 10.3 holds that this restriction is unconscionable or unenforceable, then our agreement in Section 10.3 to arbitrate will not apply and the Dispute must be brought exclusively in court pursuant to Section 10.8.

10.8 Federal and State Courts in Los Angeles. Except to the extent that arbitration is required in Section 10.3, and except as to the enforcement of any arbitration decision or award, any action or proceeding relating to any Dispute or Excluded Dispute may only be instituted in state or federal court in Los Angeles County, California. Accordingly, you and Square Enix consent to the exclusive personal jurisdiction and venue of such courts for such matters.

10.9 Limited Liability/Remedy. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, SQUARE ENIX AND/OR ITS AFFILIATES HAVE NO LIABILITY TO YOU WHATSOEVER, AND IN NO EVENT WILL SQUARE ENIX AND/OR ANY OF ITS PARENT, SUBSIDIARY, OR AFFILIATED COMPANIES BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES OF ANY KIND (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, LOST PROFITS, OR LOST DATA, REGARDLESS OF THE FORESEEABILITY OF THOSE DAMAGES), ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT, YOUR USE OF THE GAME OR OTHER MATERIALS PROVIDED TO YOU BY SQUARE ENIX, REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL THEORY. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL SQUARE ENIX BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR MORE THAN A REPLACEMENT COPY OF THE GAME, WHICH SHALL BE YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY.

10.10 Injunctive Relief. In no event will you be entitled to obtain any injunctive relief or otherwise enjoin, restrain, or otherwise interfere with Square Enix or with the distribution, operation, development, or performance of the Game or any related products or services.

The user agreement IS their legally binding, "you have agreed to this" and is much different than their terms of service which talks about what you can and cannot do in their game in more detail, but the user agreement, which is their actual legal thing, flat out says "you get none of this."

11.7 Entire Agreement. This User Agreement, together with the License Agreement, the Square Enix Account Terms of Use, the Privacy Policy, and any other terms of use relevant to your use of the Game, such as the user manual, constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties with respect to your use of the Game and supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous oral or written communications with respect to the subject matter hereof, all of which are merged herein. This User Agreement shall form a part of your License Agreement and is expressly incorporated into that agreement by this reference. In the event of any conflict between this User Agreement and the License Agreement, the terms of this User Agreement shall prevail; provided, however, that for all matters that are not covered in this User Agreement, the terms of the License Agreement, the Square Enix Account Terms of Use, or the Privacy Policy (as applicable) shall continue to apply.

During the whole billboard debacle, a lawyer did go over things (this is mainly for the billboard thing, but he does go over the legalities of the docs), and the UA, Licensing Agreement, and the Software Agreements are what are the legally binding "contracts" in which they say "if you agree with these terms, install and play the game. If you don't, don't play." Even the licensing agreement mentions "you don't own your account, we do". The ToS may not be legally binding, but it's attached in the actual legal ones.

[Larirawiel]

This is still automating gameplay, which is a prohibited activity.

True. But there is not a reliable method to tell if someone uses mouse macros or not. And not so reliable methods could easily trigger false alarms. So i suspect, the thread starter has used other bot software and got caught. The instant perma ban is also an indication for it, that SQEX is really sure, that the thread starter did something.



Cheers

[hunkygladiator]

True. But there is not a reliable method to tell if someone uses mouse macros or not. And not so reliable methods could easily trigger false alarms. So i suspect, the thread starter has used other bot software and got caught. The instant perma ban is also an indication for it, that SQEX is really sure, that the thread starter did something.



Cheers

Have you guys never seen a company make false bans

Anyways, just funny how this thread is full of people defending SE. If you get put in the same situation - because no one's perfect and you're bound to trip up eventually - and get perma'd because you said the f-word in party chat and whatnot, or ever parsed or did any form of modding, or used G/Re-shade (which BTW the GMs have explicitly said that the old 2013 guidelines are not applicable), or really any minor infraction, you'd be "crying" too, maybe not on these forums but probably to your friends or something.

There are like maybe only one or two people in this thread that I can believe is completely above water like Canadane given how absolutely against literally any form of modding they are.

[kaynide]

Have you guys never seen a company make false bans

I mean, sure it’s possible.

But it’s also possible to go through the logs and see what actions OP did with time stamps…and if the craft took exactly 12.23 seconds (or whatever) each time that is logically not something a human with variable click speeds would do.

[hunkygladiator]

…and if the craft took exactly 12.23 seconds (or whatever) each time

Even minor ping fluctuations can offset this. There's no way for them to use timestamps to detect botting because bots aren't that precise either.

About the only time anything like this has even reasonably incriminated anyone in FF14 is when FFLogs banned the rank 1 BRD (or MCH, forgot) because they used sprint at an oddly specific timeframe or something and even that had enough variance that made some people believe it was flimsy evidence (and that was only a tipping point evidence rather than the sole evidence that got them banned).

If OP told the whole story, it's beyond 99% certain that they got banned not because of timestamps. It's probably 1000x more likely that they got banned because they didn't respond to a GM, or they crafted "too fast" (if they were using mouse macros to do the entire rotation instead of utilizing in-game macros, it'll be like 16% faster than macro-crafting) and raised suspicions because people are used to witnessing slower craft speeds. That may lead to them being banned on suspicions of speedhacking even though they're just automatically manually crafting.

Regardless though it's just bizarre so many of you place so much trust in this game's moderation in terms of never making false positives. If OP got perma'd because the GMs think they did something more severe than mouse macros, it's pretty likely they detected wrongly.

I mean this is the company that did this in ARR.

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...mounts-of-gil/

IMHO the two likeliest scenarios are that OP is not telling the whole story, or they got perma'd because the GMs think, wrongly, that they did something beyond mouse macros.

[Ath192]

Even minor ping fluctuations can offset this. There's no way for them to use timestamps to detect botting because bots aren't that precise either.

About the only time anything like this has even reasonably incriminated anyone in FF14 is when FFLogs banned the rank 1 BRD (or MCH, forgot) because they used sprint at an oddly specific timeframe or something and even that had enough variance that made some people believe it was flimsy evidence (and that was only a tipping point evidence rather than the sole evidence that got them banned).

If OP told the whole story, it's beyond 99% certain that they got banned not because of timestamps. It's probably 1000x more likely that they got banned because they didn't respond to a GM, or they crafted "too fast" (if they were using mouse macros to do the entire rotation instead of utilizing in-game macros, it'll be like 16% faster than macro-crafting) and raised suspicions because people are used to witnessing slower craft speeds. That may lead to them being banned on suspicions of speedhacking even though they're just automatically manually crafting.

Regardless though it's just bizarre so many of you place so much trust in this game's moderation in terms of never making false positives. If OP got perma'd because the GMs think they did something more severe than mouse macros, it's pretty likely they detected wrongly.

I mean this is the company that did this in ARR.

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...mounts-of-gil/

IMHO the two likeliest scenarios are that OP is not telling the whole story, or they got perma'd because the GMs think, wrongly, that they did something beyond mouse macros.

I agree, this person was probably crafting out of bounds in the middle of the ocean next to the limsa aetheryte while yelling RMT ads in a metallic green dye outfit. I exaggerate of course, but whatever it was it must have been hella sus.

[Larirawiel]

Have you guys never seen a company make false bans

Yes, false bans can happen. But the thread starter already admitted, that he used third party software to automate his gameplay. So if he thinks, that the ban was not right then he should contact the game support.






Cheers