life, liberty, and the pursuit of swords and armor - Emory University ...

1340 EMORY LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 57
Other scholars contend that without regulation, most MMORPG
communities will resort to informal modes of social control, such as
shaming—where members of the community ostracize those players who steal
from others. 272 Yet, “[w]here individuals lack complex online interdependence
it is unlikely that reintegrative shaming would be effective in reducing
recidivism.” 273 In other words, the ephemeral and anonymous nature of the
online context suggests that disintegrative shaming tactics will have limited
impact. 274
Moreover, if shaming were an effective deterrent, all states would not have
implemented strict theft statutes. Restorative shaming is only effective in
communities of known individuals, where people know each other and care
about future relationships. 275 After all, restorative justice is premised on the
idea that “victims and offenders . . . meet face-to-face, with the ultimate goal
of encouraging genuine remorse and forgiveness.” 276 The anonymity in
MMORPGs, however, suggests that shaming would have little effect as a mode
of punishment or deterrence. 277 Thus, in relation to MMORPGs, vigilante
modes of regulation that rely on reintegrative shaming are likely to be only
marginally effective when applied to bonded individuals. 278
Given the shortcomings of shaming, one scholar recommends that
vigilantism and organized policing should be combined, and that MMORPG
communities should rely on techno-mediated forms of punishment when social
forms fall short. 279 Implementing this proposal, video game developers have
begun to internally regulate MMORPGs. World of Warcraft, for example, has
a Restoration Policy that provides guidelines as to when stolen virtual property
272
WILLIAMS, supra note 5, at 138.
273 Id.
274 Id.
275 Douglas Litowitz, The Trouble with ‘Scarlet Letter’ Punishments: Subjecting Criminals to Public
Shaming Rituals as a Sentencing Alternative Will Not Work, 81 JUDICATURE 52, 54 (1997) (arguing that
shaming is inappropriate for an anonymous, secular society). See generally JOHN BRAITHWAITE & HEATHER
STANG, RESTORATIVE JUSTICE AND CIVIL SOCIETY 1–13 (2001).
276 Brent T. White, Say You’re Sorry: Court-Ordered Apologies as a Civil Rights Remedy, 91 CORNELL L.
REV. 1261, 1268 (2006).
277 John Rothchild, Protecting the Digital Consumer: The Limits of Cyberspace Utopianism, 74 IND. L.J.
893, 967–68 (1999) (identifying how LambdaMOO’s self-regulation failed because the punishment was
unenforceable: the miscreant managed to evade the decree of banishment, rejoining the MMORPG under a
new pseudonym shortly after the toading). But see Lior Jacob Strahilevitz, “How’s My Driving?” for
Everyone (and Everything?), 81 N.Y.U. L. REV. 1699, 1713–14 (2006) (noting that eBay’s feedback system—
a quasi-form of shaming—has successfully regulated behavior over the Internet).
278
WILLIAMS, supra note 5, at 138.
279 Id.