> The victims in this case had their stuff stolen, but by playing the game they acknowledged that their in-game stuff may be stolen.
>
> [...]
> The issue here is really one of bots. Most MMOs don't allow you to use them, and I imagine this one would be the same. In that case, his using a bot would mean he broke the contract. That would be the only thing he did wrong, and I can't quite see that being an arrestable offence.
>

The other players may have consented to the possibility that their in-game stuff might be stolen by other characters, but the fact that bots were excluded by the rules of the game indicates they did *not* consent to their stuff being stolen by bots.

Presumably their characters would have had a fighting chance of either preventing, defending against or avenging theft by another player-character, which is what makes it a game. *That* is what they consented to.

Taking something of real monetary value from someone without their consent is theft. Also, the breach of game rules resulting in real monetary loss could potentially raise civil liability issues if the players wanted to sue him for damages.

Compare hockey, where the players clearly consent to physical violence, but some players have been conviced of criminal assault for certain types of on-ice cheap shots causing serious injury that were not merely "part of the game".

^v^:)^v^
FB