Share this article

MMO Player Transferred Expensive Items Through an “Operator Friend” and Got Suspended for 10 Years

By Weilin Li
Aug. 30, 2022 updated 05:25

In a recently exposed lawsuit, a NetEase customer service staff member was found helping a Fantasy Westward Journey VIP player to illegally transfer a huge number of in-game items to another server.

In May and June 2020, a player named Lu made a request of his friend, who worked for the game publisher, to help him transfer in-game items to another server for “security reasons”.

Lu told his friend that he didn’t want to put the valuable items in the public auction channel as it would risk losing them if other players bid quickly. As a VIP customer service staff, Lu’s friend reported this need to his managers but received no reply.

Later, Lu’s friend found a loophole that allowed him to transfer the items during server maintenance by using the company's internal network. They tested transferring six items and then went on to move a total of 124 pieces of rare game items worth well over 1 million CNY (~144,600 USD) from Lu’s alt account to his main.

As a way to show his gratitude, Lu sent his friend money and a few game accounts with high-value items as compensation,

NetEase began the investigation after other players reported the incident and then shut down Lu’s account and suspended his VIP status for 10 years.

In response to losing the expensive account, Lu sued LeiHuo, the operator of the game, and NetEase, the publisher of the game.

A screenshot of the second instance judgment on the conflict between player Lu and  NetEase’s Fantasy Westward JourneyA screenshot of the second instance judgment on the conflict between player Lu and NetEase’s Fantasy Westward Journey

The court’s first instance verdict denied Lu’s request to change his account ban from 10 years to 1 year, and the player appealed.

The second instance judgment of this case upheld the original judgment, denying the request from this player and saying, “the measures [by NetEase] are not manifestly inappropriate.The court held that considering the number of transfers and their value, the law violations were very serious.

Source: Lawsuit Verdict