jtr7 on 2/11/2007 at 07:19
Haplo, meet Digital Nightfall, TTLG Co-Founder.
Haplo on 2/11/2007 at 07:27
Quote Posted by jtr7
Haplo, meet Digital Nightfall, TTLG Co-Founder.
I already knew that. Sorry, I must be missing your point.
Volca on 2/11/2007 at 07:34
I'd say the CD protection argument is off. The new editions of Thief, be it the Sold-Out version or the Thief Anthology (I own both) have no CD protection. The games play without CD just fine.
The publishers of these editions would probably be the first to have a problem.
Otherwise, the legal view on OPDE discussion can be made endless. What matters if what EIDOS/EA will do once the project is released and used.
jtr7 on 2/11/2007 at 07:42
Quote:
If the forum guidelines say so, why not?
I apologize for not understanding you. Where do the forum guidelines come into play?:)
Haplo on 2/11/2007 at 07:58
Quote Posted by Volca
I'd say the CD protection argument is off. The new editions of Thief, be it the Sold-Out version or the Thief Anthology (I own both) have no CD protection. The games play without CD just fine.
Valid point.
Quote Posted by jtr7
I apologize for not understanding you. Where do the forum guidelines come into play?:)
Now I understand :D
jtr7 on 2/11/2007 at 08:51
\o/
:p
OrbWeaver on 2/11/2007 at 09:29
The fact that the legal status of a 100% original program is even questioned represents a very, very sad state of affairs in my opinion (see DeCSS, Bnetd, the list goes on). Are the developers of OpenOffice going to get sued because their software can open Microsoft Word documents? I'm sure Microsoft would love to do this if they could get away with it, and maybe in some jurisdictions they can.
It's time people and their elected representatives started standing up to corporations who assume the right to tell everybody else what original software they can and cannot produce, just so they can make a bit more profit without the tiresome threat of competition.
nident on 2/11/2007 at 09:48
Circumventing the copy protection with a nocd crack or using OPDE to play the game without having to use the executable, which does contain protection (i.e. the original) won't be illegal in the EU, where Volca lives IIRC. The DMCA obviously doesn't apply here, instead we have the EUCD and even though my knowledge of it is limited to court cases that I've read about, I'm absolutely sure that there won't be any problems for OPDE. Here's why (based on the knowledge I do have from what I've read):
- Circumventing copyright protection in the EU is only illegal if that protection can be considered "strong".
- The definition of "strong" is of course debatable but not too long ago a court in Finland ruled that DeCSS is legal since it's hard to claim that it's strong when it was broken long ago and DeCSS has been around ever since. That's the precedent for DeCSS.
- Similarly, it's hard to claim that the copyright protection for Thief is strong since it can be so easily circumvented. Would you claim that the protection is stronger than CSS?
- It would be a cold day in hell before EIDOS/EA put that to the test because they would have nothing to gain. Warezers can already play it with the crack (and owners of legitimate copies can use it with less hazzle too using it) and EIDOS/EA haven't done much to stop it. Arguably it's harder to track down whoever cracked it but what would the point be in shutting down an open source project that lets people that have legitimate copies of the game play it on newer systems when there's a crack around already?
- Even if EIDOS/EA did, Volca wouldn't need to be too worried - EU courts have a "losing plaintiff pays the legal costs of the defendant system" so Volca would have long line of lawyers queueing up to defend him and make some easy money on EIDOS/EA's stupidity. The fact that the project is not deliberately intended to circumvent copyright and that he doesn't benefit monetarily from it makes it very, very unlikely that he'd lose.
- In the hypothetical situation that Volca lost, it's unlikely that he'd face any serious consequences since he hasn't made any money on it and EIDOS/EA cannot claim to have lost any due to OPDE.
- And just to remind people: Even though it's legal to circumvent weak copyright protection, copyright infringement is just as illegal as before. So even though the license allows you to distribute OPDE freely, you cannot distribute the game data.
And Volca: Once again I must say that you're doing a fantastic job, I wish I had the time to help out.
Digital Nightfall on 2/11/2007 at 10:15
I just don't want the copyright discussion to hijack and derail the thread like it had with the DarkMOD thread; post after post of contradictions and disagreements. It was not inappropriate to discuss these things, just better left to a different thread. What is here right now is fine, but it could quickly spin out of control just like before.
How many more times will I said thread in this post? thread thread thread
OrbWeaver on 2/11/2007 at 11:27
Quote Posted by Digital Nightfall
I just don't want the copyright discussion to hijack and derail the thread like it had with the DarkMOD thread; post after post of contradictions and disagreements.
Heh, the copyright discussions took hold from page 1.
Quote Posted by kamyk
Is the Thief license public domain yet? If not then an engine that could play the games would be a copyright infringement.
:tsktsk: :laff:
