tain.totalcodex.net

Judeau wrote:people should find the REASONING behind the laws, not follow them to the letter.

http://take2store.stores.yahoo.net/mythiiworlds.html

Because when you DL a copy you are potentially taking away a sale.

Thank a lot Killswitch, high-quality version rocks

What you really want, is for your favourite game to be the property of a company with a sense of humour. IE. not Take 2.
Case in point - Marathon went freeware early this year, maybe late last year. They were cheerful and jolly about it.
I don't see Myth getting the same treatment even though (I reckon) the number of fans would be about the same. I think it's the same as Interstate 76, if they're not going to use it, they should just frigging release *everything*.

Doobie wrote:In all fairness, copyright infringement isn't really akin to theft. But yeah, we can't condone that here regardless.

In all fairness, your statement above is just your opinion. I feel similarly, but that's MY opinion, and many people who create intellectual 'property' or those who own the 'rights' to intellectual property think that copyright infringement is exactly that - THEFT. That is why (imo) the powers-that-be (music companies originally, now media conglomerates) push the label 'intellectual PROPERTY' when they refer to copyrights - they are trying to win the battle by naming it with a name that carries with it much real world connotations - if they can get people to THINK of copyrights as similar to physical property their complaints and draconian laws seem more reasonable/understandable.

William Wallet wrote:What you really want, is for your favourite game to be the property of a company with a sense of humour. IE. not Take 2.
Case in point - Marathon went freeware early this year, maybe late last year. They were cheerful and jolly about it.
I don't see Myth getting the same treatment even though (I reckon) the number of fans would be about the same. I think it's the same as Interstate 76, if they're not going to use it, they should just frigging release *everything*.

Do you think having it freeware would change much? I was pleasantly surprised when Take2 agreed to let MythDev have the source code for the games. I know it was an arrangement that the only monetary gain could be by take2, but a lot of companies just lock old source code in the vault or throw it away, I am quite happy they let fans continue to enhance it.

I am even happier that there are qualified Myth fans skilled and insane enough to spend the time and effort to continue to fix and enhance Myth II.

I do indeed wish that Take2 would release Myth TFL, SB and TWA as freeware. How was releasing Marathon different? (On a side note: I thought that Microsoft obtained the rights to Marathon.) If Bungie released Marathon, why can't Myth and Oni be released. Myth 3 would be different because it was originally Take2's property, not Bungie's.

vinylrake wrote:

Doobie wrote:In all fairness, copyright infringement isn't really akin to theft. But yeah, we can't condone that here regardless.

In all fairness, your statement above is just your opinion. I feel similarly, but that's MY opinion, and many people who create intellectual 'property' or those who own the 'rights' to intellectual property think that copyright infringement is exactly that - THEFT. That is why (imo) the powers-that-be (music companies originally, now media conglomerates) push the label 'intellectual PROPERTY' when they refer to copyrights - they are trying to win the battle by naming it with a name that carries with it much real world connotations - if they can get people to THINK of copyrights as similar to physical property their complaints and draconian laws seem more reasonable/understandable.

Ok, you're right, the statement that copyright infringement isn't akin to theft IS opinion.

If I were to say that "copyright infringement is not theft.", THEN it would be fact (or at least the present ruling of the US supreme court, and also the position of the Canadian Supreme Court).

Perhaps, it could be AKIN depending on your perspective, similarity is blurry, identity/equality is more cut and dry.

And you're right that the RIAA, the MPAA, the CRIA, etc very much want us to share their perspective on the matter.

Lugas wrote:I do indeed wish that Take2 would release Myth TFL, SB and TWA as freeware. How was releasing Marathon different? (On a side note: I thought that Microsoft obtained the rights to Marathon.) If Bungie released Marathon, why can't Myth and Oni be released. Myth 3 would be different because it was originally Take2's property, not Bungie's.

Bungie released marathon as freeware and open source, but Take 2 own the rights to the Myth series and Oni, so they are technically Take2's property now not bungie's, so the decision is up to them. If they were still in bungies hands
1) they probably would feel more kindly about releasing it
2) if bungie still owned the myth series that means that they wouldnt have been bought out by microsoft, and we wouldnt be in this mess!

um, bungie gave up the rights to the myth series because they were bought by microsoft and owed take2 for their stake.

They weren't bought by microsoft because they gave up the rights to myth.

Doobie wrote:um, bungie gave up the rights to the myth series because they were bought by microsoft and owed take2 for their stake.

They weren't bought by microsoft because they gave up the rights to myth.

Yeah, as much as it's convenient to want to pin the blame on Microsoft, it was really Bungie's sale of 19.9% of the company to Take2 which started Myth down the path we are on now - where the game is owned by a company who doesn't really care about the game and have no interest in giving it away.

Doobie wrote:If I were to say that "copyright infringement is not theft.", THEN it would be fact (or at least the present ruling of the US supreme court, and also the position of the Canadian Supreme Court).

Not too be too much of an asshat, and I don't have any idea what they call judgements in the Canadian Supreme Court, but in the US they call these interpretations of law "opinions". Granted the opinions of Supreme Court Justices hold a bit more heft than yours or mine and have legal ramifications, but they are still _opinions_ and can be changed.

My impression is that the issues surrounding intellectual property 'rights' are still pretty heavily debated and far from settled. I saw a quote once by someone who described copyright law as the area of law "closest to theology" - which makes sense since there is that basic divide of beliefs between those who believe copyright is a natural right property law of creators/authors vs those who believe it's some kind of limited monopoly granted by society/the state. I am an agnostic myself - I can see value in both sides' beliefs but I don't think either has a reasonable/realistic view of reality.

Doobie wrote:And you're right that the RIAA, the MPAA, the CRIA, etc very much want us to share their perspective on the matter.

I am sure I would want the public to think like me if I were them too. I mean it's hard to get behind Microsoft's anti-piracy complaints when they complain about how much money they 'lose' due to piracy. Seriously, so they have made billions and made Bill Gates the richest man on the planet (for 9 years in a row) and we are supposed to feel bad that he doesn't have the 10x as much money he would have if every claimed bootleg copy of MS software/OS were purchased legally? I don't think so. The _only_ support they can reasonably expect from average people is from people who agree with the _principle_ that software piracy is like property theft.

Death's Avatar wrote:

Judeau wrote:people should find the REASONING behind the laws, not follow them to the letter.

http://take2store.stores.yahoo.net/mythiiworlds.html

Because when you DL a copy you are potentially taking away a sale.

first of all, games are released with the idea that the greatest amount of sales will be made the first 2 years, after that it becomes negligible, and they move on.

I can assure you not all people who download, would have bought the game, so only a fraction of the downloaders are potential customers.

And you do realize that most games have outlandish price tags on them, like most music labels ?

right holders never give those up because it might still generate a trickle of income, even after a decade, by doing this they effectively slowly strangle the franchise as well.

however, let me take an interesting example of how uncaring rights holders are :

Tiberian sun, originally produced by Westwood studios, is still closed source after nearly 10 years, the engine of the game itself is quite dated, and the releasing of the source would cost EA nothing, seeing as you still need the original game to play the results of a modified engine.

EA is not even considering releasing the source, even though it has it's merits, the ease with which the usual C&C games are modded would be greatly improved, drawing in some more players( modders of course ) once again, with an increased fanbase EA might be able to sell more of their titles*of course this is a very small amount, so it's of no real consequence to a company which pumps out title after title*