EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

That we should fine hackers of multiplayer games

0 points
9 points
DatBoiDatBoi (CON)

My burden is to prove that the affirmation "We should fine hackers of multi player games" to be false.I can achieve this by choosing to prove either one of the following statements:
A)Hacking of multi player games does not violate the legislation of any country,therefore it should not be punished by law.
B)Hacking of multi player games should be punished in other ways than mere fines.
I will choose to prove the first affirmation to be true, consequently confirming the initial statement.

My case:

             First and foremost,the term of "hacking" has 2 definitions according to the English dictionary:
a)to modify a computer program or electronic device in a skillful or clever way;
b)to break into a network, computer, file, etc., usually with malicious intent.
             Now,considering the definition of a video game,according to the English dictionary, as "any of various interactive games played using a specialized electronic gaming device or a computer or mobile device and a television or other display screen, along with a means to control graphic images",we can safely assert that hacking multi player video games falls under the latter category of hacking.This is due to the fact that "online" games create a virtual environment which provides complete anonymity to any player,thus no personal information of the users is required to play.Therefore,the only advantage of hacking a multi player game is gaining in-game material which is not punishable by law.

             However,also considering the definition of art as "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination",modifying a program such as a video game so that it can work differently from the manner it was intended to can be considered a manifestation of art,as this kind of hacking is considered "clever" and "skillful".Therefore, according to The First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances".Censoring multi player game hacking means censoring a form of art,an expression of human creative skill,which would ultimately violate the First Amendment because art is considered a form of speech.Considering the fact that the Legislation prohibits "abridging the freedom of speech" I can safely assert that hacking a video game is not punishable by law, thus proving the statement "we should fine hackers of multiplayer video games" to be false.


Return To Top | Posted:
2016-09-19 06:39:13
| Speak Round

View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2016-09-22 09:42:59
Bi0HazardJudge: Bi0Hazard    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: DatBoi
2016-09-23 07:14:09
KelniusJudge: Kelnius
Win awarded to: DatBoi
I'm disappointed that the debate was so short, and I am getting a bit sick of these "0 round/1 round" debates. But, DatBoi, I thought your argument was pretty f***in' bulletproof. I didn't even consider it from the point of view of the hacker. And the way you elaborated upon your definitions certainly established your case very well. I liked it.
1 user rated this judgement as a vote bomb
0 comments on this judgement
2016-10-01 03:37:57
FamousdebaterJudge: Famousdebater
Win awarded to: DatBoi
Pro forfeited all of the rounds and only Con provided a case.

Don't forfeit.
1 user rated this judgement as a vote bomb
1 user rated this judgement as good
0 comments on this judgement
2016-10-06 08:51:15
ButterCatxJudge: ButterCatx    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: DatBoi
So Bonk forfeited, so he kinda gave up all of his points from the get-go.

Forfeiting is bad, Don't forfeit.
0 comments on this judgement
2016-10-10 17:03:53
KohaiJudge: Kohai
Win awarded to: DatBoi
Full forfeit
0 comments on this judgement
2016-10-17 08:09:27
MrMarxJudge: MrMarx
Win awarded to: DatBoi
2016-10-18 04:22:49
fire_wingsJudge: fire_wings
Win awarded to: DatBoi
0 comments on this judgement

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 3 rounds
  • 10000 characters per round
  • Reply speeches
  • Uses cross-examination
  • Permissive Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds does not mean forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 1 day
  • Time to vote: 1 month
  • Time to prepare: 12 hours
This is a random challenge. See the general rules for random challenges at http://www.edeb8.com/resources/General+rules+for+random+debates+%28version+2%29