Of privacy and streaming (serious legal chat)

I am not a lawyer or legal expert in any way, but I don't see how there would be any way to enforce rules forbidding streaming other online players you are playing with who don't want it outside of just forbidding streaming online gameplay in its entirety.

In some games, that is possible. In others (like, say, a game where the username shows up in multiple spots or even worse, it hovers around with a player character), it would be way more difficult.

To be fair, I think such technology is more of a when than an if. I could imagine reaching a point where that actually becomes possible.

I'd imagine more and more games will have "Streamer Mode" options. And of course they help the streamer avoid getting sniped as streamsnipers can't as easily confirm they got in their match, but since it often replaces everyone's names with anonymized alternatives it hides the "identity" of other players too.

That's honestly the best options. Doesn't hurt anyone (except for streamsnipers I guess?) and doesn't involve punishing people.

EDIT: Even though for DBD a "streamer mode" should probably obscure real usernames + make everyone appear as default outfit characters in the pre-match lobby to actually make it work. Streamers that use such a function to avoid + discourage streamsnipers probably won't have t.tv/epicgamertime as their steam name at least as that would defeat the entire purpose 😄

Uh, you're playing a public game, online, that you agreed with ToS for. It's like asking to not be photographed when you go to the store. There is a certain level of expected privacy loss when you enter public spaces. An online game is one of those.

The only thing that COULD help, but I wouldnt say is legally required at all, would be a streamer mode, where your name is randomized or a generic "Player3" tag.

Smite has this, it hides everyones name by saying for example: "Odin2" "Sobek1", etc. But it covers OTHER peoples names, not yours, and the killfeed still shows names....so it's less than ideal.

Other than that, you have no way to reinforce it. Because you're playing an online game, with other people.

If people message you, or try to harass you, report them, or just block messages while playing.

We've all signed away any rights we may have had in unread user agreements by now.

I screenshotted this and tweeted it out, I hope that's ok :)

I'm not a GDPR laywer but I have run into it a few times due to various jobs I've been involved with.

GDPR is not so much to do with being recorded etc, it's to do with maintaining a database containing data on a person without their consent, past the point where that data has fulfilled its collection purpose. For example you might want to scan the passport of someone staying at your hotel for the duration of their stay, but once they have gone, you cannot justify holding onto that image indefinitely. This is the kind of data to do with first name/last name/address etc. Images also count, but I don't believe it extends to in-game user names, although an argument can be made about Steam ID's when compared to something such as license plates or credit card numbers.

Also to the best of my knowledge, most of the stuff that you consent to when you use online software won't stand up in court, past justification to ban you from playing if you broke the rules and were then stupid enough to take the developers to court over being banned.

To address your point about the unfairness of monetizing streaming, streaming is a lot more than just recording and presenting gameplay footage. Is it fair that other players involved are not compensated? Maybe not, but their input in proportion to the host is menial at best, considering regular players do not carry over from game to game, and that money generated from a stream is done so via contracts between the streamer and consumers, and not gifted by a participation body. I don't want to get into this too much because if we start talking ethics I will literally write you a wikipedia article, but the game could definitely benefit from more privacy options at present.

I'm sorry you had such a terrible experience with some horrible people online, but in a case like this, there seems very little you can do unless it somehow blows out of proportion and you are being harrassed or doxed, and lets hope it never goes that far.

I guess a good first step on this issue as it pertains to DBD specifically is for people to start requesting more privacy features.

DBD was a game I had in mind when describing the issue, yes. :P

Your character in a game is not you, doesn't look anything like you, and cannot be tied to you, this post is a little bit ridiculous.

In USA.

Also I didnt say the store takes your picture. I'm saying if you went out to the store, or movies or whatever, and someone is taking a family photo, or doing a video recording for news, or personal records, etc, and you happen to be caught in it, you cant request them to ask consent unless it's something that's going to be aired on tv or the like. Then, the company itself will ask you for a release of your face, so that they avoid people trying to sue them for money later.

But a kid and their mom snapping a pic and you get caught in it? Nah.

Theres an expected level of loss of privacy when you leave your own home. That's my point.

How the law handles different levels of that privacy being disregarded, or where the laws are based in is almost irrelevant.