-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Pokemon Goes to Court in Backyard Monster Trespassing Case
- Thread starter Dalek
- Start date
- Status
chrisPjelly
Member
The lengths people will go through to protect their team's gym...
Nobody even trespassed. He's complaining about people knocking on his door lol
.
Put up a rude sign instead of a lawsuit.
unless there is actual tresspassing going on, I don't see an issue here.
There is nothing wrong with individuals asking permission to enter private property. People do it to request hunting privileges, people do it to retrieve errant baseballs, I've been asked if someone can metal detect on my land, etc.. I just see no impact/injury in how this suit is framed by the homeowner. He was asked permission? Oh the horror
Put up a rude sign instead of a lawsuit.
unless there is actual tresspassing going on, I don't see an issue here.
There is nothing wrong with individuals asking permission to enter private property. People do it to request hunting privileges, people do it to retrieve errant baseballs, I've been asked if someone can metal detect on my land, etc.. I just see no impact/injury in how this suit is framed by the homeowner. He was asked permission? Oh the horror
SecretMoblin
Member
It should be opt in by default, dude shouldn't have to contact some company to get his home exempted from a irl video game.
The suit has bad ramifications if it succeeds but honestly I sympathize with the guy.
Opt in for private property doesn't seem like a bad idea.
I funny indeed
How exactly do you propose Niantic contacts everyone in the world asking them if they'd like to opt-in to the game?
Ideally you'd go to the site and put your addy in and in the next update they'd add you. But people could just put in any address if they wanted I suppose, so...
I unno.
TheCochese
Banned
That's not the homeowner's problem.
Shamrock7r
Member
Yea, those 5 whole people he had to answer the door to has probably given him day to day medical and psychological related damage. Poor dude. I hope he will be ok come Halloween.
Exactly. Calling bullshit on this until I see the size of his yard. I've seen older idiot republicans on my FB posting meme's about staying out of their yard. I think this guy is taking it and running with it, without knowing specifics of the game, and hoping to make a quick buck.
SecretMoblin
Member
I don't think the suit has merit (based on the description) and dude might be overreacting, sure.
But what if there's an augmented reality game in the future where your home is an essential pit stop, where there's a character or location centered on your property that is necessary to proceed in the game? Why on earth would that be on the homeowner to proactively seek out the private company and say "hey, I didn't want this"?
Don't other AR games use public landmarks/locations as hotspots? I don't understand why that would be untenable.
ProfessorLobo
Banned
No, that's not Niantic's problem.
They're literally directing people to go there putting markers on people's property. I mean, it's literally Niantic's problem in every way this issue can be seen.
Duane Cunningham
Member
Then you're basically saying the game shouldn't exist?
Man Called Aerodynamics
Member
I could be wrong but I'm fairly sure that the intent with Pokemon Go is exactly that-- all stops and gyms are public places. To the extent that landmarks are located at private homes, those are mistakes and that's what the opt-out system is in place for. They didn't purposely pick out people's private homes to be landmarks in the game.
Nitantic also needs to re-do the algorithm outside of parks to where pokemon spawn closer to the road. There was literally a pokemon in someones yard confirmed by a tracker when the in game one was also working at the time in the dead center of two streets. You had to go onto someones yard to get it to pop.
wrestleman
Member
"Stop playing a fun, social game that makes you exercise, and go get drunk and make life decisions under the influence."
This guy's lawsuit isn't complaining about a gym or Pokestop at his property. It's Pokemon spawning on his property. Pokemon can spawn anywhere, so it's not Niantic "putting a marker" on his property and directing people to go there. It's just random whether a Pokemon spawns in this yard and whether people are around to see it and/or want to get it.
Niantic can't prevent them from wandering outside public spaces?
Professor Beef
Banned
And you can contact Niantic to have them remove Poke Stops/gyms from a location.
I don't think Google Maps distinguishes between public or private spaces. And since the whole thing is built on Google Maps, no not really.
SoRuffShoNuff
Member
Id really hate to be the one person in the city who had a Dratini spawn point in their backyard. That would get annoying in a hurry.
I really don't get why this is an issue at all! In the game, you can find pokemon in a radius of about 50 meters, and they stay on your screen until you get roughly 100 meters away (IIRC from the datamined notes). You can tap them as long as they are on your screen, so you can catch them from a long ways away. Unless these homeowner have backyards larger than a football field, I have trouble understanding why players continually try to go on to someone's property. In my suburban area and even when I go into a larger city, the blocks are small enough that I can catch pokemon that are sitting in someones backyard while I'm on the street or the sidewalk.
People are going to be stupid no matter what, I don't think that Niantic can be held too responsible for these problems.
People are going to be stupid no matter what, I don't think that Niantic can be held too responsible for these problems.
TheCochese
Banned
I'm saying there should be some recourse to the property owners to not be included in the game.
Pandora012
Member
Atleast they knocked.
- Status