Directions: For the following question, use this excerpt from Alex Weiss's essay "Should
Gamers Be Prosecuted for Virtual Stealing?" which appeared in Slate.

The Dutch Supreme Court... convicted a teenage gamer of stealing something that
doesn't exist... while playing... [an] online video game.... The defendant's attorney
argued that the stolen amulet and shield "were neither tangible nor material and... had
no economic value." The court, however, disagreed, ruling that the time the 13-year-old
victim spent in the game trying to earn the objects gave them value.

In the court's argument, the claim is that
O teenagers are stealing from video-game makers
Studio
O a teenage gamer was guilty of the virtual theft of two objects from a video game
Help
O while objects in video games may be virtual, they are not without value
O objects can't be stolen from a video game because they have no economic value

Alex Weiss in his essay describes that the ruling the Dutch Supreme Court gave for the teenager did not make much sense. It convicted a teenage gamer as he stole items that were not existent in the real world.

Court's claim is given in Option C. The last line in the given excerpt says that the victim spent some amount in earning the objects, which gave them value.

Neither those items had any value nor they were tangible. Weiss said that the punishment was given by the prominent online gamer himself, which seems quite unruly.

sahilnagarbiology sahilnagarbiology · Answer 2 · 2022-02-05T20:37:45+01:00

A Rhetorical Analysis of Alex Weiss' exposition "Should Gamers Be Prosecuted for Virtual Stealing?" Gamers ought not be indicted for virtual taking since computer games are not work or ventures for which individuals ought to be redressed they are idealism.

In the court's argument, the claim is that

The correct answer is option C.

While objects in video games may be virtual, they are not without value.

Alex Weiss in his exposition depicts that the decision the Dutch Supreme Court gave for the young person didn't seem perfect. It sentenced a high school gamer as he took things that were not existent in reality.

Court's case is given in Option C. The last line in the given passage says that the casualty went through some sum in acquiring the items, which gave them esteem.

Neither those things had any worth nor they were substantial. Weiss said that the discipline was given by the unmistakable web based gamer himself, which appears to be very wild.

Therefore, correct answer is option C.

For more information, refer the following link:

https://brainly.com/question/1023408