MyPVM Plugin Exposed/Violations

Locked for time being to prevent irreverent spam.

 

So I'll start by saying there bunch of information on this report which posted via post report or redact which doesn't need to redacted, it would take too long to post it all so I'm going to make the key points public

• The plugin guide: imgur.com, imgur.com, imgur.com , imgur.com (I removed sensitive information from the above, mainly being download links)
• Removed the edited post and the post report that came with it [Don't archive] MyPVM Plugin Exposed/Violations

• MyPvm post explaining about how the plugin works

• OP's post report, had MyPvm TOS and bunch of stuff without proof.

I normally would not do this but in the section sticky it states:

None of information above is sensitive, thus I am making it public and we are not under obligation to help your company to do damage control / hide non sensitive information. This can be considered company policy vs law.

There really is a lot at play here, I'll start off by pointing out some of fundamental issues with this report,

• The report is not from client.
• The report is from user who has direct competing discord.
• This is very much grey area in Sythe rules, as we have rules on botting directly, but not use of third party client / sideloaders.

I did extensive research into this case, techy and non-techy side into this report and have come to conclusion that this is a third party client as it's modifying the base code of Runelite (This can be seen in set up guide and hence it was made public), this would fall into the same bracket of OpenOsrs or Exilent Client or any other client and @MyPvM was also well aware of this so playing victum is not really necessary as they even used the word client in the title of the report here: Mcneill - Steroids Client owner and you could also argue there are dangers of RSNs being leaked without the customers consent.

You could easily argue for TWC or DNT and let me explain why:

• There TOS covers possible bans due to the plugin but claims it uses base Runelite and doesn't mention the modification which are needed to the base Runelite or that's it's not an updated version or even that's it's third party client thus this wouldn't cover them.
• There TOS is essentially invalid when comes to bans as they fully cover the extent of ban risk which is being applied to accounts.
• They knowingly used a client on customers which report in past for leaking RSNs.
• There very strong argument they uses bots/marco on accounts, we have obtained gif of there bank feature (which they claim is key mapped) and login, though we don't prove to say this is botted/marco'd

This circles back to reason why this won't be happening:

• The report is not from client, If a client makes report there strong argument for case being ruled in favour if there account was banned.
• There was no bad intent behind this and was more so protect there customer from bad workers.
• This is grey area in Sythe rules, but if another similar report appears we will not be as lenient.
• MyPvm updated (though not enough) TOS.
• This report is from competition rather then customer.
• This is grey area.

@MyPvM You have one week to remove any mention of RuneLite in your terms of service. Additionally, you must add a statement that you are using Steroid, a third-party client, to load the plugin. Include the possibility of bans that may result from using the client, and clearly state that your plugin is not an official plugin. Also you must add that RSN which are using you service are sent off third party which is outside of your company, and finally You will also receive an infraction for false advertising.

if these are not updated within a week a much more severe punishment will be put in place.

@Probemas You must do the same if you continue to work with @MyPvM

I'm going to close report for now.

Andy note, this ruling has been updated here: https://www.sythe.org/threads/mypvm-shop-dispute/

 

I have DNT'd @MyPvM for not correctly updating there terms of service and also for contempt of staff ruling, meaning of contempt:

Proof of contempt:

Spoiler: contempt

Proof of TOS/Section of site not being updated correctly:

Spoiler: TOS

when they are ready to handle this correctly they can dispute the ban or request a pardon depending how long it takes them.