AnimeSuki Forum - View Single Post - Sword Art Online - "Real-World" and Legal Implications [Speculation, NO Spoilers]

Trajan · 2012-08-07, 16:32

Actually, I think there would both a large public push to try and punish the worst offenders (at the least), as well as pretty strong grounds to secure convictions.

First, when the remaining players beat the game, they are going to be minor celebrities and put into the public eye, recounting their experiences. The victims' families are going to want to know how their loved ones died, and the players are probably going to want to tell them. This will lead to well-publicized stories identifying specific individuals who are accused of killing other individuals: "SAO Player Allegedly Murdered Twelve In-Game; Families Demand Justice."

Then the question becomes whether you can convict them. I'm not familiar with Japanese law so this is all US-based.

Worst case for the prosecution is no physical evidence: the servers don't record anything, and when SAO ends all the information is deleted (I don't know if this is what happens). All you have are the statements of the surviving players and the time of death.

Could you still secure a conviction? Most likely yes. Real-world convictions are secured all the time without any corroborating physical evidence based only on eye-witness testimony. If you had three witnessing saying "I saw A PK B right in front of me" then that could certainly be enough to convict. Also, you could easily get one member of a PK guild to testify against another in exchange for a plea bargain, and that would go a long way to a conviction.

The best defense one could raise is they didn't think killing in-game would actually lead to death. But this might not be that strong, and it won't work in all situations. It's not strong because there is a fair bit of contradictory evidence that could lead a reasonable person to believe that PKing in-game leads to real-word death.

The dev's announcement and description of what happens if you die in-game or if the Nerve Gear is removed is a strong point in support of the idea that a reasonable person would think death might occur. Also, a reasonable person would likely infer that since the game was on-going, and the authorities had not simply cut the power to the Nerve Gear system, that something bad was likely happening to those people who died in-game. It's not definitive proof, but that's not required. And the jury

Regardless of its strength, that defense won't work in all situations, because there are certain categories of murder and manslaughter where intent to kill doesn't matter. All that matters is that the person die through the perpetrator's actions. One category is felony murder, which is a statutory crime that basically makes it murder if a victim dies in the course of a perpetrator committing or attempting to commit a felony, such as robbery or burglary, no matter whether the perpetrator intended to kill the victim or not.

So in a situation where a PKer threatens another player: "give me your sword/money/etc. or i'll kill you" and the player resists and is killed, that's felony murder, so long as the PKer intended to rob the player, even if the PKer didn't intend to kill the player.

Also, the idea that it wasn't the PK that killed them, but the microwave pulse, really won't fly. The death is directly attributable to actions initiated by the PKer. To argue otherwise is to basically argue that its the firing pin striking the cartridge that causes the bullet to fire, not the shooter pulling the trigger.

2012-08-07, 16:32	Link #20
Trajan Six Shooter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: USA Age: 43	Actually, I think there would both a large public push to try and punish the worst offenders (at the least), as well as pretty strong grounds to secure convictions. First, when the remaining players beat the game, they are going to be minor celebrities and put into the public eye, recounting their experiences. The victims' families are going to want to know how their loved ones died, and the players are probably going to want to tell them. This will lead to well-publicized stories identifying specific individuals who are accused of killing other individuals: "SAO Player Allegedly Murdered Twelve In-Game; Families Demand Justice." Then the question becomes whether you can convict them. I'm not familiar with Japanese law so this is all US-based. Worst case for the prosecution is no physical evidence: the servers don't record anything, and when SAO ends all the information is deleted (I don't know if this is what happens). All you have are the statements of the surviving players and the time of death. Could you still secure a conviction? Most likely yes. Real-world convictions are secured all the time without any corroborating physical evidence based only on eye-witness testimony. If you had three witnessing saying "I saw A PK B right in front of me" then that could certainly be enough to convict. Also, you could easily get one member of a PK guild to testify against another in exchange for a plea bargain, and that would go a long way to a conviction. The best defense one could raise is they didn't think killing in-game would actually lead to death. But this might not be that strong, and it won't work in all situations. It's not strong because there is a fair bit of contradictory evidence that could lead a reasonable person to believe that PKing in-game leads to real-word death. The dev's announcement and description of what happens if you die in-game or if the Nerve Gear is removed is a strong point in support of the idea that a reasonable person would think death might occur. Also, a reasonable person would likely infer that since the game was on-going, and the authorities had not simply cut the power to the Nerve Gear system, that something bad was likely happening to those people who died in-game. It's not definitive proof, but that's not required. And the jury Regardless of its strength, that defense won't work in all situations, because there are certain categories of murder and manslaughter where intent to kill doesn't matter. All that matters is that the person die through the perpetrator's actions. One category is felony murder, which is a statutory crime that basically makes it murder if a victim dies in the course of a perpetrator committing or attempting to commit a felony, such as robbery or burglary, no matter whether the perpetrator intended to kill the victim or not. So in a situation where a PKer threatens another player: "give me your sword/money/etc. or i'll kill you" and the player resists and is killed, that's felony murder, so long as the PKer intended to rob the player, even if the PKer didn't intend to kill the player. Also, the idea that it wasn't the PK that killed them, but the microwave pulse, really won't fly. The death is directly attributable to actions initiated by the PKer. To argue otherwise is to basically argue that its the firing pin striking the cartridge that causes the bullet to fire, not the shooter pulling the trigger.