Aug

29

U.S. Sanctions Protect Iran from Trolls and Elves


Posted by at 9:07 pm on August 29, 2012
Category: Iran SanctionsOFAC

World of WarcraftThe way that U.S. sanctions protect us from Iranian nuclear weapons are indeed wondrous and diverse, as Iranians themselves recently learned when they sat down recently at their computers to don the virtual identity of sword-wielding warriors wandering through imaginary realms to defeat trolls, elves, ogres and other malevolent creatures. No World of Warcraft for you, their computers told them. No refunds either. Blizzard Activision, which makes the game, said that it shut down the game for Iranians because of the U.S sanctions on Iran.

Of course, the first question in analyzing the applicability of U.S. sanctions to World of Warcraft in Iran is the general license in section 560.540 of the Iranian Transaction Regulations for ” [e]xportation of certain services and software incident to Internet-based communications.” This permits Iranians to access YouTube, Facebook, instant messaging and other “personal communications over the Internet.” World of Warcraft, at least as it was explained to me, permits players to communicate with one another with real-time text messaging via their avatars. Whether the faux medieval trappings and the virtual sword play transform this into something other than a personal communication over the Internet is an interesting question, but we don’t need to resolve it because the general license in section 560.540 requires that the service be available at no cost to the user. World of Warcraft requires users to pay a subscription fee.

One part of the story announcing the demise of elf battles in Iran that intrigued me was this

[Blizzard spokesperson] Hilburger didn’t immediately respond to a question asking why the company had only recently blocked Iranian players from its service.

Good question! Do you think that Blizzard filed a voluntary disclosure with OFAC?

[Hat tip to Shawn Wheatfill for bringing this story to my attention]

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2012 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)


5 Comments:


Subscription-based system, end of story. Sanctions are not in place to deal just with the nuclear question, it is multifaceted. With regards to a voluntary disclosure, would need more information but it would have likely made sense to do so. Why gamble?

Comment by JP on August 30th, 2012 @ 8:02 am

    Obviously, they are multifaceted, and one of those facets is to prevent Iranian juveniles of all ages from pretending to be medieval warriors and battling trolls. Imagine the danger this country would be in if the Iranians were whipping our asses at WoW.

    Comment by Clif Burns on August 30th, 2012 @ 1:17 pm

That is hilarious.

Comment by Bryce Hanson on August 30th, 2012 @ 3:57 pm

One common theme of our sanctions laws is the intent to not block the flow of news and information. Many of our major newspapers (WSJ, NYT, etc.) now charge a subscription fee for access to full content. So, Mr. B, when read together, how do 560.315, 560.538 and 560.540 affect each other? And how, if at all, could the prohibition on payment of a subscription fee be overcome?

Comment by Mark S. on August 31st, 2012 @ 1:57 pm

Another of those facets is to prevent transfers of funds using the virtual world as a marketplace; more to the point, to prevent semi-large numbers of Iranians from playing at a commercial level to generate ‘sales’.

I know, I’m being a buzzkill.

Comment by Scott K. on September 4th, 2012 @ 2:53 pm