6 ms·

> And because Blizzard is a private company, offering a service they maintain, they have the house right, they have the final say about who can partake and who

> And because Blizzard is a private company, offering a service they maintain, they have the house right, they have the final say about who can partake and who can't. Except it's not a matter of some Chinese customers taking their business elsewhere. They don't have "the house right" if they are facing consequences from the Chinese government for exercising their freedom of association.

luckylion 7y ago
"They are a private company" is quite literally always the argument for why Facebook, Twitter, Google, Cloudflare etc should be able to ban anyone, any time for any arbitrary reason. I get why people are upset at Blizzard's behavior, but the outcry looks a bit fake. It looks more like there's a lot of anger because it hit somebody they agree with. Had the player said something supporting China, and Blizzard banned him, there would be congratulatory comments and "their game, their rules" arguments.
- freeflight 7y ago
  > "They are a private company" is quite literally always the argument for why Facebook, Twitter, Google, Cloudflare etc should be able to ban anyone, any time for any arbitrary reason. Exactly, and usually, that's also the consensus on HN on any such issues: It's the companies infrastructure and ecosystem. There is no "human right to service", if they don't want you there then they can just kick you out and usually wouldn't even need much of a justification, that's what hundreds of pages of ToS, EULA, and whatnot are there for.