PhillipEspinoza
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Messages
- 463
- Location
- San Diego, California
- WCA ID
- 2007ESPI01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
To clarify: I don't consider it a flaw. Or at least not ebay's fault. It's not ebay's job to play judge and decide what's legal to be sold,
I see. It may not be their job to judge and decide what's legal, just like it's not WCA's job to decide what's legal but it certainly says something to their credibility. I consider it good customer service to make sure members get treated fairly and not unjustly. I mean, I don't think it's technically part of their "job" but if it becomes a big enough problem then they will suffer for it as people will go elsewhere. And techincally it's not anyone's job to run the WCA but I will assume you mean responsibility. However, I still think your comparison is in itself flawed:
Stefan said:just like it's not WCA's job to play judge and decide what's legal to be played.
WCA Regulations said:3k) Puzzles must be approved by a judge before use in the competition.
WCA does indeed judge and decide what's legal to be played. That's why there are WCA regulations saying that certain cubes that are transparent or greatly modified to enhance performance for example are not allowed in competitions in the interest of fairness. It's not WCA's "job" to ensure fairness but in order to ensure credibility so that others do not start up their own organization or association, it is in the WCA's (and also the Community's) best interest that the WCA has policies that ensure fairness. That's what gives WCA legitimacy. To give a better understanding of what I'm trying to say, here's an example.
If it were the case that any random WCA cuber can accuse another cuber of cheating, without evidence or reason to back it up, and therefore cause a ban on the accused cuber until it's settled, there would be upset in the Community (justifiably so), especially if the cuber were a top cuber. Say this happened to Faz before he even got a chance to break the World Record. I think, even though it's not technically the WCA's job to make sure people are honest in their cheating claims that it would be wrong for the WCA to ban Faz without looking at proof or taking other measures to ensure that the cheating claim is a valid one. If the WCA had a VeRO equivalent, then I'm sure it's credibility would go down as people would know that the WCA would not be entirely representative of World Cubing if it allowed the best cubers to be banned by anyone's ungrounded complaint. I would even go so far as to say it would be a flaw in the WCA regulations.
But as Dan pointed out Ebay is more concerned with themselves than with any of it's constituents so if it means they're safer just assuming claims are valid in order to make sure that they don't get in trouble then maybe it's more of a problem with copyright law itself?
Stefan said:How so?
This is probably just my bias showing as I think anything designer is stupid. The example showed how a consumer would be protected by VeRO because it prevents them from getting "fake" purses, whatever that means. I mean, it's not like the purses are actually "fake" in the sense that they're not functioning like they should. The only sense in which it's "fake" is that it doesn't have the correct lettering or a pattern is slightly off, which I find completely insignificant and not representative of actual patent infringement issues.
Last edited: