Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Andir]

I've noticed that people who have never really had to work for what they get, or have never labored over a creation completely of their own devising, seem to think that everyone else who does so should be forced (by government or mob) to distribute that to everyone else. The feel entitled to the fruits of the others' labors.

Can you really say that you've created anything that was truly unique and not an iteration/conglomeration of something else?  I'd argue that there are very (VERY) few actual unique inventions that fit the description you are are portraying.  Software is an especially evolving technology where you borrow ideas from others.  (Heck, I imagine Toady didn't create his world gen from the ground up.  I'll bet he used a previously used algorithm to generate the land shape like Perlin noise...)  He borrowed ideas from other people and conglomerated them into one package.  Does that make something worthy of invention?

I never said that the truly unique ideas people come up with should be distributed by force.  (Not sure where you read that...) But if I come up with a game that looks and smells like Dwarf Fortress because I use creatures from Tolkien fable, Dungeon Keeper like AI and use Perlin noise for the landform generation should Toady be able to sue me?

[Spreggo]

Andir:

I never made any statements about myself, just what I noticed in other people's attitudes. I also never made any statement about you, and my observation wasn't directed at you, so I'm not sure why you thought that I said you had personally said something.

I only thought it was something which might be helpful to consider for the general conversation.

I'm not passing judgment on this 'clone' either, since I don't know much about it.

If you came up with such a game as you describe, I'm sure it wouldn't really be similar enough to DF to irk Toady over intellectual property, as the way you describe it, it seems to be an original creation with some derived themes. Derivation is not synonymous with copying. There seems to be some confusion about what intellectual property is and what copyright is suppose to do.

Toady has a right to the fruit of his labors, and that is protected by the law in most places, by allowing him legal compensation when someone else makes a profit off of his work in whole or part. For his case to hold up, the other product would have to have elements which are clearly copies and not just similarly themed original creations, and the author would have to be deriving some sort of profit (or copying with the intent to derive a profit from), or causing measurable damage to Toady and his business. This doesn't stop anyone from copying DF for their own use, only from copying DF and distributing. A similar game with similar themes is not necessarily a clone, and a clone (in the way the word is used for games) is not necessarily a copy.

I don't meant to defend a specific implementation of copyright law, which could probably be improved where-ever you might be.

[Andir]

Toady has a right to the fruit of his labors...

I never argued that he doesn't.  I can't take his game, decompile it, use his raw data in my own release game, use his name, etc...

But I sure am able to use the idea, a few names here or there...  This is what some people are saying is wrong.  This is why I have a problem with IP law as it is.  I have no problem with copyright, trademarks, and patents on physical items... but software is not something I support patent law on.  If I supported software patents, I'd have to support literature content patents.  That means that nobody else in this world will be able to write a book/movie about "an adventurous young animal who finds himself out of his element and tries to get home" or some other obscure idea they came up with one day because Walt Disney (not picking him exactly, first name that popped in my head) would own all book/movie ideas perpetually.  That's currently how Software patents work.  You describe an idea and you get full rights to any creation of it.  It's sick.

[Kogut]

It is not how it works. It is nothing wrong in making copy of existing software (Open Office etc)

[Max White]

It is not how it works. It is nothing wrong in making copy of existing software (Open Office etc)

Spread sheets and written documents were around long before microscore, so the concept behind MSOffice isn't microshifts interlectual property. Clippy, however, is, and you will never seem him in products that arn't microscotch. So a game where dwarfs build a fort is fine! Go for it! But a game where dwarfs named Urist grow plump helmets isn't so much.

[CoughDrop]

So a game where dwarfs build a fort is fine! Go for it! But a game where dwarfs named Urist grow plump helmets isn't so much.

What gives you the right to make that decision? Couldn't it be considered that each person that makes a mod of DF is making their own game?

[Max White]

What gives you the right to make that decision? Couldn't it be considered that each person that makes a mod of DF is making their own game?

Not there own game, but the parts of the raws that they edit belong to them. For example, it would be illegal for me to say I made genisis mod. If I wanted to use something cool I found in Deons raws, I would need to ask him before I slapped it into my mod and started to distribute it.

A modder owns not the game, but the mod for the game.

[DwarvesH]

A modder owns not the game, but the mod for the game.

Unfortunately, you need to be very careful here. There are EULAs and other restrictions imposed when using official modding tools. Some of them clearly stipulate that if you agree to use their tools, they own your mod. I am not aware of single case where this ownership was imposed, but it is something to keep an eye out for. See Bethesda creation tools (Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises) or Starcraft II mods (custom maps) for two different kinds of attitudes of game publishers regarding their modding tools.

[Max White]

Wow, noted!
Although I have yet to confirm, now that I know this, I have my doubts that Toady is going to claim rights for the works that modders produce. And in either case, it does not allow me to take anothers work and call it my own, nor does it allow anybody, bar Bay12 (All two of them) to try and claim any works I make.

[DwarvesH]

Wow, noted!
Although I have yet to confirm, now that I know this, I have my doubts that Toady is going to claim rights for the works that modders produce. And in either case, it does not allow me to take anothers work and call it my own, nor does it allow anybody, bar Bay12 (All two of them) to try and claim any works I make.

While you can't make a mod and claim anything except your mod your own, AFAIK DF does not have an official modding kit and does not impose such limits. I think that you are in full ownership of your DF mod, but you might want to check that if you have concerns with someone more knowledgeable about Bay12 internals.

As for myself, I'll release a full set of modding tools, impose no restrictions but take no responsibility for the content created by third parties. I am working on a feature that allows you to create any small object from different materials without having a fix set of products. As you can imagine, this lends itself very well to "abuse". If I ever reach any level of popularity or or not trivial user base, I am sure that there is going to be someone who will find it hilarious to create a sexual themed mod that consists of nothing more that dildos. There is no way I can restrict what you can do with the tools and I don't want to be the one who decides what is appropriate and what not.

[Max White]

Ooh, modders tool? I'm currently using this, and it is fairly sexy, but still under done, so I'm always looking out for new things!

[squeakyReaper]

If I ever reach any level of popularity or or not trivial user base, I am sure that there is going to be someone who will find it hilarious to create a sexual themed mod that consists of nothing more that dildos. There is no way I can restrict what you can do with the tools and I don't want to be the one who decides what is appropriate and what not.

While it contains more than dildos, there is the Succubus mod, which includes...  new body parts and actions to them.

[DwarvesH]

Here is a little thing that has been pointed out to me on the blog: http://sourceforge.net/projects/manicdigger/. I wonder what your opinion is about that project. I must confess that my first instinct would be to say that it is a Minecraft clone. Screenshots certainly point to the same kind of game, even the graphical style is similar. And of course the description of the project. I did not try it or read anything about it so I won't express an actual opinion until I look into it further.

[Rose]

Nah, we only rabidly defend DF.

[Tack]

Indeed. And posting a link to the 'gigantic discussion about copyright' on YouTube kind of opens this niche forum up a little more than I typically enjoy.