Is it acceptable for zenimax to scour through your messages and take account actions at random?

pklemming

No

No, despite the fact it is their system, there exists a reasonable expectation of privacy in both private messaging and mails, which they are in breach of.

Just imagine what would happen to their reputation if it was publicly known they spy on private conversations.

I would strongly suggest they check with their lawyers regarding the invasion of privacy, because I am pretty sure they have not.

Theignson

I mostly PvPed before I quit the game and cancelled my accounts recently.(Long ago I did all the PvE things, I tanked Vet trials, did all the dungeons, did all the arenas, etc)

IN PvP this game encourages: murder, assassination, suicide bombing (one of the most despicable of human acts) and mass murder.

But this is all "role playing" so it is supposed to be ok.

Yet our characters that are out there performing these objectively heinous acts-- if they curse in character in the game or say a wrong word that is on a list that no one can see or see published (because the words must be that bad) -- they get banned.

Think of the mental dissonance of the above situation. Our brutal, murdering, bloodthirsty war mongering characters must be sweet as tiny children when they speak. This imposition of censureship destroys the role playing illusion . Previously I had thought that any delicate ears (delicate, pious ears on people out there slaughtering their neighbor on the PvP battlefield!! Seriously ?!) -- that any delicate, easily blushing, innocent ears would be protected by the filter.

Well, PvP was ruined anyway by now. Good luck to all.

amig186

No

Amottica wrote: »

The_Meathead wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I'm not going to vote because the poll is biased.

My answer is "sometimes" or "other" if those were included.

I understand scanning for certain criminal things to protect themselves from liability and also because it could save lives. I don't have a problem with that.

But, I don't think AI should be looking for things like rude language. If someone else reports you, that's a different story.

And honestly, this^

Someone messaging their pal with "Hey F-word, what's hanging?" is obviously a ridiculous thing to act on, but there probably are legitimate outliers.

There should be humans making the final decisions, and those humans should have a great deal of familiarity with context, familiarity, slang, and humor that they take into account.

Kevin stated that the AI only flags things to be looked at and takes no action on an account on it's own. Humans look into the flagged issue and decide how to act. He also stated they are learning from their experience and making changes.

I'm not sure if the humans doing the reviewing even get the proper context. My friend was suspended for 3 days for 'naming and shaming' when what he did was go on a bit of a rant, using words unsuited for polite company, about a particularly troublesome boss. In group chat, with only 1 other person whom he knew, so it wasn't possible that he was reported.

karthrag_inak wrote: »

Their system. Their responsibility. Their privilege.

I sure hope you never share anything personal in your 'private' chats with online friends, then.

Czeri

Yes

Chats in the game are not private. If you want to chat to your friends in private, don't do it via a game server.

Online game publishers were getting a lot of bad press for things going down in the in-game chats. This seems like the obvious way to guard against that.

loosej

No

pklemming wrote: »

No, despite the fact it is their system, there exists a reasonable expectation of privacy in both private messaging and mails, which they are in breach of.

Just imagine what would happen to their reputation if it was publicly known they spy on private conversations.

I would strongly suggest they check with their lawyers regarding the invasion of privacy, because I am pretty sure they have not.

I'm not so sure about that, I've always had a sense that nothing happens at zeni without approval of their lawyers. My guess would be the legal argument goes a bit like this:

• They aren't actually reading our private messages, a bot with access to an llm is, no privacy issue so far.
• Banning players is also done by the bot, still no privacy issue.
• Players request the ban to be reverted - at this point a human checks the conversation at the request of the player, so consent was given.

alpha_synuclein

Groterdan wrote: »

Wauw the amount of yes . Rly surprised by that . Sad to see freedom gets given away so easy 😭

What freedom? The one you are "giving away" the moment you accept the terms of service (in 99,9% without reading) that says not a single element of what you're paying for actually belongs to you?

JiubLeRepenti

No

I don't want to give too much personal info, but since I'm working on privacy and data protection IRL, I can't agree at all with the idea of ZOS snooping on my personal conversations.

For those saying they can check your messages: would you be okay if your landlord was eavesdropping on all your personal chats just because you’re using his kitchen, his toilet, his bathroom, etc.? Sounds pretty wild, right?

It's honestly mind-blowing to see/read in 2024 how some people still don’t grasp the threat to their privacy.

• You have no idea what ZOS might do with your personal information (and trust me, what a company says can be very different from what it actually does);
• You have no clue where or how this personal data will be stored;
• You have no idea how ZOS is securing/protecting this information against potential external threats if they had to store your conversations for further investigations.

Never let a company read, interpret, or take action based on your private conversations.

And if they do, I’d be more than happy to investigate whether this complies with the European GDPR and take personal action against it.

Urvoth wrote: »

[snip]

You’ll get snipped soon, but yeah, I totally agree. It’s the same people who would say IRL: "Lol, do whatever you want with my personal information, I've got nothing to hide anyway." Crazy.

[edited to remove quote]

Veryamedliel

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

I don't want to give too much personal info, but since I'm working on privacy and data protection IRL, I can't agree at all with the idea of ZOS snooping on my personal conversations.

There are no 'personal' conversations on a platform you don't legally own. Every part of the game, including what you call 'private conversations' are not private, but legally owned by ZoS, which you use only with their permission. Every letter you type, every in-game action you take is owned by ZoS. That's what you agreed to when you started playing this game. And yes, in itself this is perfectly legal.

In fact, the GDPR doesn't even apply to this. The GDPR deals with storage, usage and security of said data, not the freely given agreement of sharing it. If it did, Facebook and other 'social' media wouldn't exist in the EU either. Now, if a ZoS staff member starts browsing mindlessly through your conversations hoping to find something illegal, you may have had a point. But since it's automated and only potential issues are 'flagged' before being used, read and acted upon by staff, there is no legal issue.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

For those saying they can check your messages: would you be okay if your landlord was eavesdropping on all your personal chats just because you’re using his kitchen, his toilet, his bathroom, etc.? Sounds pretty wild, right?

Nice try, but It's a false analogy. You don't have an legal agreement with your landlord that allows him to see and record everything you do in the house you rent. You do have such an agreement with ZoS.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

• You have no idea what ZOS might do with your personal information (and trust me, what a company says can be very different from what it actually does);
• You have no clue where or how this personal data will be stored;
• You have no idea how ZOS is securing/protecting this information against potential external threats if they had to store your conversations for further investigations.

All fair questions and concerns, but irrelevant in this case. But if you want a probable answer: M$ has a datacenter in Ireland and Amsterdam. Considering ZoS is owned by M$, it's fair to assume that European data collected by ZoS is stored there. Otherwise, the ZoS HQ in Amsterdam might store it. That said, I do not have first hand evidence for my statement. It could (and should) be somewhere in the ToS. ZoS is legally bound (in the EU at least) to inform their users on such matters. So go ask or read and they will have no choice but to answer. If they do not, you're free to take them to court.

The question was if it is acceptable. Legally, the answer is yes, provided they follow the GDPR laws with regards to your -very valid- questions above. Anything else is your personal opinion. Valid as that opinion may (or may not) be, it is not the law and ZoS is perfectly in it's right to ignore said opinion. If you don't like the legal answer, it's up to you to stop using their services.

Jaimeh

Yes

I clicked on 'yes' but an 'other' option would be more accurate. They should take action for example, if someone is spewing problematic rhetoric in the zone chat, or someone is arguing and using abusive language, but only if these cases are reported and only after they did a thorough review of the situation and context. I wouldn't mind a random monitoring of public chats, if it was by an actual zone master (and not AI) because it would be easier to gauge context and there wouldn't be accidental bans, like we saw recently. But the days of the zone masters are gone, and personally I feel uneasy about them using AI for monitoring. They still haven't made it clear if and how they are implementing this, and also what they do with the information. I realize we are all subject to their TOS, but a private conversation, or even RPing, that hasn't been flagged by any players as an issue, should remain private, imo.

JiubLeRepenti

No

Veryamedliel wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

I don't want to give too much personal info, but since I'm working on privacy and data protection IRL, I can't agree at all with the idea of ZOS snooping on my personal conversations.

There are no 'personal' conversations on a platform you don't legally own. Every part of the game, including what you call 'private conversations' are not private, but legally owned by ZoS, which you use only with their permission. Every letter you type, every in-game action you take is owned by ZoS. That's what you agreed to when you started playing this game. And yes, in itself this is perfectly legal.

In fact, the GDPR doesn't even apply to this. The GDPR deals with storage, usage and security of said data, not the freely given agreement of sharing it. If it did, Facebook and other 'social' media wouldn't exist in the EU either. Now, if a ZoS staff member starts browsing mindlessly through your conversations hoping to find something illegal, you may have had a point. But since it's automated and only potential issues are 'flagged' before being used, read and acted upon by staff, there is no legal issue.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

For those saying they can check your messages: would you be okay if your landlord was eavesdropping on all your personal chats just because you’re using his kitchen, his toilet, his bathroom, etc.? Sounds pretty wild, right?

Nice try, but It's a false analogy. You don't have an legal agreement with your landlord that allows him to see and record everything you do in the house you rent. You do have such an agreement with ZoS.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

• You have no idea what ZOS might do with your personal information (and trust me, what a company says can be very different from what it actually does);
• You have no clue where or how this personal data will be stored;
• You have no idea how ZOS is securing/protecting this information against potential external threats if they had to store your conversations for further investigations.

All fair questions and concerns, but irrelevant in this case. But if you want a probable answer: M$ has a datacenter in Ireland and Amsterdam. Considering ZoS is owned by M$, it's fair to assume that European data collected by ZoS is stored there. Otherwise, the ZoS HQ in Amsterdam might store it. That said, I do not have first hand evidence for my statement. It could (and should) be somewhere in the ToS. ZoS is legally bound (in the EU at least) to inform their users on such matters. So go ask or read and they will have no choice but to answer. If they do not, you're free to take them to court.

The question was if it is acceptable. Legally, the answer is yes, provided they follow the GDPR laws with regards to your -very valid- questions above. Anything else is your personal opinion. Valid as that opinion may (or may not) be, it is not the law and ZoS is perfectly in it's right to ignore said opinion. If you don't like the legal answer, it's up to you to stop using their services.

First off, just because ZoS owns the data doesn’t mean they can do whatever they want with it. The GDPR is all about protecting personal data, which includes how they use it. So even if you agreed to their terms, they still have to be upfront about how they collect and use that data.

You mentioned that the GDPR doesn’t apply because of the terms of service, but that’s not how it works. The law exists to protect users, and it requires companies to be transparent about their data practices. The GDPR has a significant focus on clearly communicating your purposes to customers (I wrote a 150-page thesis on it). Just because ZoS can technically monitor chats doesn’t mean they’re off the hook if they don’t follow the rules. If players don’t know their chats might get flagged, that’s a serious violation of their rights—and I bet many of them don’t.

Regarding the landlord analogy, I’m not sure you got my point. Sure, there are legal agreements, but people still expect a certain level of privacy in their homes. This expectation is fundamental for building mutual trust. In gaming, it’s the same: players assume their private conversations will remain private unless they’re breaking some very serious rules and would be reported for it. Ignoring this expectation isn’t just unfair; it undermines the relationship between the platform and its users. When players feel like they’re being watched or monitored without their consent, it creates an environment of distrust that can drive them away. Trust is essential for any community to thrive, and if ZoS fails to respect this, it jeopardizes the overall experience for everyone involved.

Now let’s talk about that automated monitoring. Just because it’s done by a system doesn’t mean it’s free of legal issues. If conversations get flagged without context, it can lead to unfair bans, raising a lot of ethical questions. Plus, you’ll never have a clear idea of how this information is monitored, how it’s used, or whether it’s stored for potential future use.

Finally, players absolutely have the right to question how companies operate. Dismissing these concerns as mere opinions ignores the reality of corporate accountability. Legal doesn’t always mean ethical, and it’s crucial for players to feel safe and respected in their games.

So while ZoS might be following the letter of the law (and in this case, I'm not even sure it would be the case if they use some very recent technology like AI), we should all push for better standards when it comes to user privacy. It’s not just about legality; it’s about doing the right thing.

Muizer

No

Strictly speaking the answer has to be 'No' of course. There are definitely actions that would be outright illegal. For instance inserting one user's personal account details into a message received by another or falsifying messages and inserting illegal/incriminating content. Not what you mean? Better rephrase the question then.

SteveCampsOut

Yes

Groterdan wrote: »

Wauw the amount of yes . Rly surprised by that . Sad to see freedom gets given away so easy 😭

You are not "Free" to create Anarchy in someone else's digital home and whether you like it or not, ESO and its servers belong to them, not you. If you don't want to be banned, behave decently. Curb your own speech or take it off their servers where you can expect privacy.

pklemming wrote: »

No, despite the fact it is their system, there exists a reasonable expectation of privacy in both private messaging and mails, which they are in breach of.

Just imagine what would happen to their reputation if it was publicly known they spy on private conversations.

I would strongly suggest they check with their lawyers regarding the invasion of privacy, because I am pretty sure they have not.

People know that their communications on the internet are not secure. You are only fooling yourself if you have any expectations of privacy on the internet. By its very nature it is the transmission and reception of data, and by its transmission methods it can and most likely will be intercepted.

TybaltKaine

Yes

There is no privacy on the web, ever, learn to accept that first.

Their game, their rules, their responsibility when things go pear shaped. If they can be left holding the bag for bad behavior in chats, then they should absolutely have recourse to police what is said in those chats.

If you don't want to abide by the TOS for in game speech, use an out of game platform for communication.

Go read the TOS and the EULA. These things are all made clear therein.

JiubLeRepenti

No

TybaltKaine wrote: »

There is no privacy on the web, ever, learn to accept that first.

No thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8BA7adK6XA

Veryamedliel

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

First off, just because ZoS owns the data doesn’t mean they can do whatever they want with it. The GDPR is all about protecting personal data, which includes how they use it. So even if you agreed to their terms, they still have to be upfront about how they collect and use that data.

That's 100% NOT what I said. In fact, I said roughly the same thing. Seems there's some misunderstanding there. My apologies for my part in that.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

You mentioned that the GDPR doesn’t apply because of the terms of service, but that’s not how it works. The law exists to protect users, and it requires companies to be transparent about their data practices. The GDPR has a significant focus on clearly communicating your purposes to customers (I wrote a 150-page thesis on it). Just because ZoS can technically monitor chats doesn’t mean they’re off the hook if they don’t follow the rules. If players don’t know their chats might get flagged, that’s a serious violation of their rights—and I bet many of them don’t.

Again, 100% NOT what I said. No ToS overrules the law in the EU. It's the other way around as you so rightly stated.
As for knowing your rights, there is a reason people are forced to accept any ToS before they can use a service. The fact people don't read it is not ZoS' concern and imposes no -legal- violation of any kind. They have been told their rights and what they give up in return and they willingly agreed to it. So as long as that ToS doesn't break any law, no rights are violated in any way.
Do I agree that such ToS should be written in plain language? Obviously. Sadly, due to lawyers and such trying to close any possible loopholes, such plain language isn't even remotely sufficient to cover all the basics of law. So yea, a high school education will be pretty much required to understand the average ToS.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Regarding the landlord analogy, I’m not sure you got my point. Sure, there are legal agreements, but people still expect a certain level of privacy in their homes. This expectation is fundamental for building mutual trust. In gaming, it’s the same: players assume their private conversations will remain private unless they’re breaking the rules. Ignoring this expectation isn’t just unfair; it undermines the relationship between the platform and its users. When players feel like they’re being watched or monitored without their consent, it creates an environment of distrust that can drive them away. Trust is essential for any community to thrive, and if ZoS fails to respect this, it jeopardizes the overall experience for everyone involved.

It is not the same at all. Again, there are no private conversation on a platform you don't legally own and tells you beforehand that they collect your game data. And players are not actively being monitored, it's passively. Quite a big difference. I don't count for the feelings of said players. They could (and should) have known what they signed up for. Nothing is being done without their consent either. It's not Zos' job to quiz you on the ToS before you can press the accept button. Should it be? That's food for another discussion.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Now let’s talk about that automated monitoring. Just because it’s done by a system doesn’t mean it’s free of legal issues. If conversations get flagged without context, it can lead to unfair bans, raising a lot of ethical questions. Plus, you’ll never have a clear idea of how this information is monitored, how it’s used, or whether it’s stored for potential future use.

I never said there are no rules concerning automated monitoring. Obviously there are. However, all I see so far is people speculating with not a shred of evidence showing any malpractice by ZoS. Show me actual proof of ZoS breaking any legal rules and you'll find me at your side faster than you can say Hel Ra Citadel.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Finally, players absolutely have the right to question how companies operate. Dismissing these concerns as mere opinions ignores the reality of corporate accountability. Legal doesn’t always mean ethical, and it’s crucial for players to feel safe and respected in their games. We saw this with Cambridge Analytica manipulating information flows on Facebook during the 2016 elections.

So while ZoS might be following the letter of the law (and in this case, I'm not even sure it would be the case if they use some very recent technology like AI), we should all push for better standards when it comes to user privacy. It’s not just about legality; it’s about doing the right thing.

Question? Certainly you can. In fact you should. We're not in disagreement on that front. As for ethical vs legal, that a personal opinion to every single user. ZoS, however only has the law to follow. Morality costs money after all.

I agree 100% that there should and could be much better and clearer standards when it comes both privacy and data usage. But again, as a company ZoS has to follow the law. not your, mine or anyone else's personal moral opinion. That's the sure path to utter chaos. The point is to make rules or laws that are both legal and morally acceptable to a large majority of people. Sadly, you'll never please everyone.
And even if you have those laws, there's always someone who breaks it or finds some loophole in it. There's no avoiding it unless you really want a Brother Eye to monitor the entire world. And I'm not a big fan of that idea.

Anyway, so far ZoS seems to follow the law and I agreed to everything else. Until evidence is presented of foul play I can only decide to play or not play just like everyone else.

JiubLeRepenti

No

@Veryamedliel sorry have to go back to work but be sure I'll check this later.

In all cases, interresting conversation

TybaltKaine

Yes

Equating 1984 with signing up to play a game that tells you that it is logging your actions in order to protect themselves is missing the plot.

You have no expectation of privacy on the internet. Someone, somewhere has access to everything you watch, say and do They even tell you that they are keeping that information. Your ISP even tells you this.

PrincessOfThieves

No

No. This AI watchdog thing makes me uneasy, even though I rarely swear and never use N-word and such.
I find it creepy and utterly pointless. A working report system and optional chat censor would be enough.
It just seems that they are jumping from one extreme to another. There was time when people got away with actual harassment and such, and now you can get banned for swearing in a private conversation.

Veryamedliel

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

No. This AI watchdog thing makes me uneasy, even though I rarely swear and never use N-word and such.
I find it creepy and utterly pointless. A working report system and optional chat censor would be enough.
It just seems that they are jumping from one extreme to another. There was time when people got away with actual harassment and such, and now you can get banned for swearing in a private conversation.

If only that were true. Sadly, it's not. I've seen my share of games where illegal real-life activities were being discussed, planned and even promoted. Games have been an easy target for such discussions for a while since the place to discuss such matters online have become more limited every day. ZoS has a legal obligation to try and prevent such activity. Having members of staff reading everything is also not allowed, so having AI flag things to look at seems the logical solution. How well it works remains to be seen as people often use code words for certain activities. I won't list any examples here.

Of course people should not get banned for swearing in chat, private or otherwise, be it by AI bot or staff unless such things are clearly not allowed according to the ToS. Furthermore, I've seen no evidence of people actually getting banned for swearing. All I see so far are rumours and baseless accusations.

I'm not saying I like the development per se. But it is what it is. The world gets less safe with every passing day. I'm not the one in power with the ability to change it. Nor am I entirely sure what would be the right alternative if I was.

Shara_Wynn

This poll will be getting taken down then

Also what is meant by "take account actions at random"?

Elsonso

I didn't vote because ZOS is perfectly entitled to ban or suspend anyone based on whatever legally approved whim excites the person reviewing the account at the moment.

That said, ZOS needs to make sure they aren't creating a hostile environment in the attempt to protect themselves from whatever evil might transpire in discourse between players.

Taking action against players without being asked to take action, when no laws are being violated by the players, can create that hostile environment.

Shara_Wynn

Pelanora wrote: »

n333rs wrote: »

All entities have to operate within the applicable laws.

I am pretty confident that Zenimax are operating fully within the laws (data, privacy or otherwise) of all the countries in which their products are sold and played.

davidtk

Yes

Tbh, I don't have a single problem with this. Why is that? Because:

• I literally only paid for a key that gives me access to this game's server, which is owned by ZoS.
• I only paid for permission to access the game, dlc and things that are otherwise locked and owned by ZoS.
• I agreed to the ToS before playing.
• I have never and can never consider in-game chat to be private or even something that falls under GDPR.
• GDPR applies to account ownership and payment information, if you are sharing your personal information in game chat, that's your **** and not a ZoS problem.

Honestly, you could try using a new addon (Safe Chat) to "encrypt" the chat, or you don't feel comfortable with RP (eRP) right now so use another platform that does have p2p encryption (and even those are monitored anyway, they just don't serve you the information)
Or you could try hacking the game and setting up your own private servers where you are responsible for your own sensitive data and can do whatever you want there.

umagon

The reason they do it is because U.S. laws aren’t the only thing they have abide by. There exist laws in the other countries for example, the south Korean cyber defamation; where it would be expected of them to have chat logs and to monitor all channels.

ZOS is actually in a hard position with this, some places their monitoring would be expected, while in others region it would be considered to be on the verge of breaking privacy laws they have.

HazierBlue

Public? Yes.
Private? No, unless they receive a report.

AzuraFan

Is it acceptable in the sense that they can legally do it? Yes.
Is it acceptable in the sense that they should be doing it for private messages? No.

Personofsecrets

No

No, privacy should matter even though it doesn't.

Because moderation has been sorely lacking at times, a more objective and automated system that is able to hold toxic players accountable for their various forms of harassment is appealing.

But like I said, privacy should matter. In this modern environment, privacy should be a priority just like animals which are going extinct demand special treatment.

Additionally, those willing to justify anything a business does because of the businesses status as a business would do well to remember this important phrase. You didn't build that. Such businesses are not responsible for creating the infrastructure that they rely on every day. The habitat of the internet is best considered to be a public space where people are afforded the ability to interact without a TOS domineering their every move.

Personofsecrets

No

davidtk wrote: »

[*] I literally only paid for a key that gives me access to this game's server, which is owned by ZoS.
[*] I agreed to the ToS before playing.

Or you could try hacking the game and setting up your own private servers where you are responsible for your own sensitive data and can do whatever you want there.

> Suggests that the concept of ownership and TOS matters
> Suggests hacking the game

???

PrincessOfThieves

No

Veryamedliel wrote: »

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

No. This AI watchdog thing makes me uneasy, even though I rarely swear and never use N-word and such.
I find it creepy and utterly pointless. A working report system and optional chat censor would be enough.
It just seems that they are jumping from one extreme to another. There was time when people got away with actual harassment and such, and now you can get banned for swearing in a private conversation.

If only that were true. Sadly, it's not. I've seen my share of games where illegal real-life activities were being discussed, planned and even promoted. Games have been an easy target for such discussions for a while since the place to discuss such matters online have become more limited every day. ZoS has a legal obligation to try and prevent such activity. Having members of staff reading everything is also not allowed, so having AI flag things to look at seems the logical solution. How well it works remains to be seen as people often use code words for certain activities. I won't list any examples here.

Of course people should not get banned for swearing in chat, private or otherwise, be it by AI bot or staff unless such things are clearly not allowed according to the ToS. Furthermore, I've seen no evidence of people actually getting banned for swearing. All I see so far are rumours and baseless accusations.

I'm not saying I like the development per se. But it is what it is. The world gets less safe with every passing day. I'm not the one in power with the ability to change it. Nor am I entirely sure what would be the right alternative if I was.

Yes, unfortunately there are truly evil people in every big internet community. But the bans we've heard about weren't even related to anything actually harmful. And the swear words can actually be filtered by already existing ingame filter (it is on by default).
In my opinion, you shouldn't default to suspecting everyone and assuming the worst. Like, should I be investigated for saying that I like cheese pizza?

I also don't agree that the world is getting more dangerous. There were lots of bad things happening in pre-internet era, it was just easier to sweep them under the rug and people didn't know much about them. And in my opinion, the fact that such things are still happening is not a good argument for total censorship and surveillance.

Ingenon

Reading posts on these forums about folks getting banned for private chat, I am curious why ZOS would monitor private chat with an automated system. I see that ESO is M rated (Mature 17+), and games with this rating contain content that the ESRB believes is suitable for ages 17 and over, including intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, frequent use of strong language, drug use, and nudity.

1. Is there a law in one or more countries requiring ZOS to monitor private chat in an M rated game for illegal acts?
2. Is there a law in one or more countries requiring ZOS to monitor private chat in an M rated game for strong language, sexual content?

I think that ZOS should do what the law requires. No more, and no less.