Jump to content


Photo

Mirror, Mirror


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
33 replies to this topic

#1 Doc_Brown

Doc_Brown

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 12 January 2005 - 08:01 PM

I've voiced this concern in the past, but I thought it worth repeating here a bit more in depth. The short of it is I'm worried about how closely the world of the Dark Mod will be to that of Thief. There are, of course, legal issues to deal with if the line is toed too strongly. Naturally, the desire is to make the design close enough to be familiar to the fans, and to allow FM designers to easily port over projects originally intended for TDS. It is possible to make the Dark Mod world similar to TDS' and yet still make it interesting and original on its own account, and to be perfectly honest I'd be less interested if it matches Thief too closely.

At this point, early though it is in the development cycle, I'm concerned over some of the character designs being almost carbon copies of their Thief counterpoints. Consider the Builders. Outside of the name (which is itself that of the Hammers' god) and the slightly different visual direction, they seem practically identical to the Hammerites. Consider: their primary color is red, they wield warhammers, their symbol is a short-handled hammer in profile, they're a harsh and industrious religious order, etc. This isn't limited to just them, either. The city's own guards are called City Watch, they wear blue, and their symbol is a falcon with its wings spread.

Some aspects of the Dark Mod can't help but be identical, such as the elemental arrows, while others are general enough to not be an issue. The thief design, for instance, will likely not be a sticking point. While I'm on that point, by the way, I must say I approve the decision to mask the character, as this makes it easier for FM designers to use the same model but claim him to be a different character. But to get back to the matter at hand, I really do think something needs to be done to further differentiate the characters/factions of the Dark Mod from those of Thief. Some visual changes, I think, should be considered.

Something I haven't gotten into yet, but relevant to this discussion, is the backstory of the world you're creating. Admittedly, I do not know what you've got in store, but this is the one area, even more than in the visual designs, where you can make some fascinating changes to the Thief formula. In doing something interesting here, you can open up a world of possibilities not available to Thief FM designers. And like I said earlier, in doing so, in making the Dark Mod unique from Thief, it becomes more interesting to fans and FM makers.

What if, say, this industrious order was based on a non-diety religious system? Consider the implications. Creation, then, goes solely into the hands of man, compelling the order to build as a manner of ascending themselves to a state of divinity. This gives them a holier-than-thou personality, looking down their noses at those who do not create. Think about how this could turn the Pagan concept on its head. What if Pagans believed in a creator god, and that He was the only one who should create. The natural world reigns supreme, for to build structures is to attempt to compare yourself to God. Look at the dynamic this creates, how it is similar to Thief but unique in its own ways. Consider the possibilities it opens up.

Let me give you another example, a suggestion for the Dark Mod equivalent to Haunts. Let's say that when a truly vile crime is committed in the eyes of this industrious religious order, one which no earthly, mortal punishment is appropriate for, a special ritual is enacted. The guilty party has chains wrapped around their torso, chains blessed with an enchantment that traps soul in body of whoever is bound in them. The condemned is then cast into a body of water, drowning from the weight. With the soul unable to leave the body, they rise again and walk out of the water. The process drives them mad, inflicting them with the desire to make any living being they see suffer as they have suffered.

Now, think about this in comparison to a Haunt. You've got a skeletal, decompsed body distinct from a zombie, one which moves with the rattling of chains, which wishes to inflict great torment on the living, torment like it feels ("Join us!"). Essentially a Haunt, but unique. In turn, the actual gameplay experience is uniquely distinct from Thief's. In order to fell this creature, it is the chains you must target. Either break them, or, if possible, sneak up behind one while it's stationary and pick the lock holding the chains together. Just don't screw up, lest you want to alert it.

I'm rambling now, but I think I got across the point I was trying to make. From what I can tell, as an outsider not privy to the specific goings on within the project, it appears to me that the Dark Mod is currently too close for comfort to Thief as regards these factions. As I have stated and hopefully demonstrated, however, I believe a further distance can be devised, one that maintains the basic connection while opening up unique possibilities inherent to the Dark Mod alone. I believe it at least merits consideration.
Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads.

#2 Ombrenuit

Ombrenuit

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 332 posts

Posted 12 January 2005 - 08:44 PM

Doc_Brown:

You have some good points. The setting in The Dark Mod does resemble Thief, and no one will deny that this project's purpose is to bring the game into fashion with the technology of today. However, could there be a legal problem? Not likely. I'll lay out the basics of the matter.

Copyright law is a very convoluted and difficult to understand business. Working extensively in the MUDing community I have acquired much experience on this issue. Look on any MUD database and you will see that over half are based directly on copyrighted games. Yet, they are still up and running. Why is this when they are so blatantly violating copyright law, you ask? There are more Dragon Ball Z and Star Wars MUDs then you could possibly count. There are exceptions: Sony Online Entertainment did shut down a chosen few to make room for Star Wars Galaxies way back when, however I can not stress more that sort of occurrence is rare.

The reason why these Copyright violators are not being shut down?:

1) Court costs time and money- Court is one long, monstrous, money consuming battle. Even if you were to file a case now, it would be years before an trial occurred. Lawyers cost serious money for both sides. Companies don't bring people to court lightly. They try to avoid it at all costs and they only ever do it sure of their success.

2) Fan made projects = publicity- In the instance of games, when fans put enormous amounts of effort and time into a game they love, they are respected. Fan made projects for the most part will promote and highlight a company's interests. They create hype, excitement, extend the life of the game in question, and draw in a new crowd people who before were uninterested. It's free publicity for them, and if it's positive they love it. The repercussions of bringing a highly respected and hyped fan project to court could wound any company greatly. Loyal customers supporting it feel betrayed: the company is a money hungry legal machine bent on world domination, in their minds.

3) Fan made projects and money- Firstly, when a company sues in court, that company has the burden of proof that they have lost money. As discussed earlier, a company will only go to court when they feel threatened--a threat to a business is a threat to their money. Thus, a non-profit fan production such as The Dark Mod, poses no threat to that company. In United States Copyright law: you bring someone to court when they are profiting off your idea. Copyright is the desire to protect your economic claims to an idea (in general). Therefore, with no money involved, there isn't a problem. Also, The Dark Project is discreet enough not to directly claim it's using Eidos's intellectual property. So, while similarities exist, it's not directly associated with Eidos. Anything negative about this project can not be associated with Eidos in this case, and it would have to be something negative for the business department to even take notice enough to think about shutting this down.

Bottom line: There is nothing to gain by threatening or staging a legal battle over a small project that would chastise fans and cost serious dollars with such little legal significance when there are zero damages to collect.

The probability that this project would be shut down is understatedly minute.

You have many unique and interesting ideas, however, the Dark Mod doesn't need to tailor their system for you. The beauty of Fan Missions is the freedom for you to express your creativity, which I observe you would greatly enjoy doing. You can tailor fan missions any way you would like and make any world you like. All the Dark Mod is providing are tools to help you with that world you want to create. It's a foundation. As the creator, it's your job to build on that.

Edited by Ombrenuit, 12 January 2005 - 09:02 PM.


#3 Springheel

Springheel

    Creative Director (retired)

  • Admin
  • 37752 posts

Posted 12 January 2005 - 08:52 PM

While we will indeed come up with a backstory for a campaign, the Dark Mod is primarily an editor. It will be up the FM authors to come up with backstories for their missions and campaigns. We can't wait to see what they will come up with! :)
TDM Missions:   A Score to Settle   *   A Reputation to Uphold   *   A New Job   *    A Matter of Hours
 
Video Series:   Springheel's Modules   *   Speedbuild Challenge   *   New Mappers Workshop  *   Building Traps

#4 oDDity

oDDity

    Former Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6146 posts

Posted 13 January 2005 - 07:11 AM

Yes, FM authors are free to create new models, skins and names for anything they want. They can call the thief Garrett if they want to, or call him Alan and make him a chartered accountant.
THey can even call him Nazara and give him a blowgun;)
Let's face it though, the majority of people will want a world that's as close to Thief as possible.
Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.
- Emil Zola

character models site

#5 Domarius

Domarius

    Mod hero

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7659 posts

Posted 14 January 2005 - 03:37 AM

While we will indeed come up with a backstory for a campaign, the Dark Mod is primarily an editor. It will be up the FM authors to come up with backstories for their missions and campaigns. We can't wait to see what they will come up with! :)

Yeah if they confront us, we can just take Napster's stance and say "We're not making copies, we're just providing tools for people to do it themselves" :)

#6 sparhawk

sparhawk

    Repository Manager

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21776 posts

Posted 14 January 2005 - 05:08 AM

Yeah if they confront us, we can just take Napster's stance and say "We're not making copies, we're just providing tools for people to do it themselves" :)

Well, that's what we are doing. We are NOT telling people to do that, so the decision is theirs.
Gerhard

#7 Doc_Brown

Doc_Brown

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 12:33 AM

Excellent post, Ombrenuit, but I must caution you there are differences between the MUD world and the mod world when it comes to copyright law, historically speaking. Unfortunate to say, but I too have acquired much experience on this issue. While you've given excellent reasons for why they wouldn't shut down the project, there are many legally strong reasons why they would. To cite one example, you said yourself SOE shut down the Star Wars MUDs to protect the success of their own game. I wouldn't put it past EIDOS to shut down a too similar set of mod tools for another game to protect their own (eventually released) editor. Irrational? You and I would probably agree on that, but there are far too many examples of companies shutting down mods that treaded on their copyrights without, to us at least, good reason. Sapphire Scar, anyone?

But getting back to the issue I raised, I think you guys are underestimating your influence on FMs, even when you're specifically trying not to influence them. Can I make the religious order I mentioned in my last post? Of course I can, there's nothing stopping me. But do you believe the FM makers who come to use your tools will look at those models, characters wielding warhammers, dressed in red, and bearing the symbol of the Hammerite order, and not use them as Hammerites? I don't believe every single designer will go to the efforts of coming up with their own backstory for them when they can use what's immediately obvious to them. And although I know you guys are striving to not infringe on EIDOS' rights yourself, I do not think a flurry of Dark Mod Hammerite FMs is exactly going to endear them to your cause. Need I point out the file sharing program parallels?

In truth, if you really want to give the FM designers a blank slate from which to work, you would have to release what are essentially nondescript models for use. Guards, for instance, without any immediately obvious Thief insignia, and so forth. In creating content that too obviously matches concepts unique to the Thief world, you're unintentionally slanting the potential use of said content in the direction of a literal interpretation. Don't get me wrong, guys, I'm behind you 100%. I just don't want to see you hit any snags along the way that could derail the project. A corporate entity's legal department is a powerful foe, believe me.

THey can even call him Nazara and give him a blowgun;)

Quite right, but you of all people should know Naraza needs his mouth uncovered. Hard to use a blowgun when you look like this --> :ph34r:

Let's face it though, the majority of people will want a world that's as close to Thief as possible.

Aye, and like I've said, that may very well be the problem. What I'm suggesting is cutting them off at the pass and providing an alternative that won't risk legal endangerment.

And since you reminded me of it, considering some of your TTLG Dark Mod idea posts, let me sort of combine it with one of my own. You'll recall your mention of elite guards appearing in place of regular ones on harder difficulty settings? Taking an aspect of my Haunt idea, specifically the lock on a character model, imagine if Dark Mod steam beasts could have doors on their boilers. On the easiest setting there are none, so a simple water arrow will shut them down. On the medium setting doors are closed over the boilers, but you can dash up and open them. On the hardest setting, these doors would be locked, requiring you to pick the lock to open them before even thinking of shutting them down.

But I'm rambling now. I do that. Hope it doesn't lessen the importance of the rest of my post.
Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads.

#8 sparhawk

sparhawk

    Repository Manager

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21776 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 04:30 AM

You and I would probably agree on that, but there are far too many examples of companies shutting down mods that treaded on their copyrights without, to us at least, good reason.  Sapphire Scar, anyone?


That's why we try to avoid the problems SS run into.

I don't believe every single designer will go to the efforts of coming up with their own backstory for them when they can use what's immediately obvious to them.  And although I know you guys are striving to not infringe on EIDOS' rights yourself, I do not think a flurry of Dark Mod Hammerite FMs is exactly going to endear them to your cause.  Need I point out the file sharing program parallels?


Well, as long as we are NOT proposing this, which we don't, and stay clear of everything is a potential infringment, we can not hold liable for FM authors doing this. Eidos would have to hunt down each FM author individually. And when you look at our models and textures, they capture the spirit of Thief, but they are very different at the same time. I doubt that anybody can say that our builder model is looking like anything in a Thief game and the same is true for other models. Making the gameplay can not be copyrighted, otherwise there wouldn't be so many FPS games out there, and we also changed names and everything to avoid copyright problems.

In creating content that too obviously matches concepts unique to the Thief world, you're unintentionally slanting the potential use of said content in the direction of a literal interpretation.


Well we already explained that this should not be done, and we also will tell our FM authors later that they should avoid this. For some this is an important point and for some it is not. I don't really care if the Thief is named Garrett or not, because in the end, gameplay is what matters to me. And for our campaign, we will have a different story anyway.

Don't get me wrong, guys, I'm behind you 100%.  I just don't want to see you hit any snags along the way that could derail the project.  A corporate entity's legal department is a powerful foe, believe me.


I know. :)

On the medium setting doors are closed over the boilers, but you can dash up and open them.  On the hardest setting, these doors would be locked, requiring you to pick the lock to open them before even thinking of shutting them down.


I guess this would be very tough to play. :) Lockpicking a robot while he is running around?
Gerhard

#9 Fingernail

Fingernail

    Mod Founder

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3210 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 06:29 AM

Don't forget the huge number of fan fictions, which are standalone works, based on the Thief series, containing all the trademarks of such. Or the artwork, most of which is a comlete ripoff of their designs (well, it is fan artwork). Eidos never complained about that.

#10 sparhawk

sparhawk

    Repository Manager

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21776 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 06:38 AM

That doesn't really say much. Fanfiction doesn't really compete with the game on their own area.
Gerhard

#11 Fingernail

Fingernail

    Mod Founder

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3210 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 06:42 AM

I know that, it was just an example of them not really interfering.

Besides, I think that at least one member of ION, if not Eidos had heard about us by now. And we haven't heard anything yet.

But then, didn't SS actually CONTACT EA first? That is sort of asking for trouble.

#12 sparhawk

sparhawk

    Repository Manager

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21776 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 06:57 AM

Besides, I think that at least one member of ION, if not Eidos had heard about us by now. And we haven't heard anything yet.


That is not official and doesn't mean much. You don't know how this particular member feels about copyright or his project, and also management has quite a different view on this. As a developer he might be pleased to see that his project inspired such a lot of activity. Maybe he was not happy as T3 turned out and sees our mod as what Thief should have been. There are hundreds of reasons why he doesn't need to laucnh into immediate actions, so we can not really count on that.

But then, didn't SS actually CONTACT EA first? That is sort of asking for trouble.


Yes. That's what I already said right from the beginning. We shouldn't ask them for permission as long as we make sure that we make it different enough. It would be different if we would try to recreate an exact copy of Thief, as Saphire tried to do in the beginning. But that is not what we try to do anyway.
Gerhard

#13 Napalm

Napalm

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 442 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 09:55 AM

Just to point it out the symbols dont really matter except in the extreamely detailed cases... THis is how parodies of movies work often. so long as you dont use th name, they dont copyright a guy in red with a hammer who religious, or a gaurd in blue. the symbols maybe, but even then it's streching it.

#14 medievalradley

medievalradley

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 10:54 PM

As DROMEDERS are we not given a certain license known as an understood usage license or something like that. do we not have the right given to us by Looking Glass Studios, Inc.to create fan missions so long we understand that we can never sell our ideas. or sell our FMs and that the owners of THIEF 1 and have the right to take and use any of our ideas

You may use this software to create or modify levels for use with the game Thief 2: The Metal Age (henceforth referred to as "levels") subject to these restrictions:

Any levels you create can only work with the full, legal version of Thief 2: The Metal Age.

By allowing us to create modifiy and distribute levels based on THIEF 2 are we not also allowed to make improvements to the characters RESKIN and scripts. So we can with scripts modify the engine functionality WHY NOT USE ANOTHER ENGINE? THEY GAVE US LICENSE TO USE ALL THE CHARACTERS IN THIEF 2 WHEN THEY GAVE US DROMED SO LONG AS WE DO NOT USE NEW THIEF IDEAS LIKE THOSE IN THEIF 3 we stick to stuff we made up or that was in THIEF 2 already

Your mod is only like creating really cool stuff to go in THIEF 2 Missions. The word THIEF, MECHANIST, HAMERITE BUILDER TRIXTER AND ALL THE IDEAS PRESENTED IN THIEF ARE LICENSED TO YOU THREW YOUR DROMED ENDUSER LICENSE AGREEMENT those ideas and themes are covered because they give you the right to modify any levels which includes any of the thief themes ideas or peoples.

I am no lawyer but it seems to me that if you wanted to use the actual names and places all you have to do is make the new engine verify THIEF2 GAME DISK or something at least once during installation.

i really love thief i really love your work

THANKS

On second thought maybe you should stay generic and safe. I'll do the changing all on my own

#15 sparhawk

sparhawk

    Repository Manager

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21776 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 03:39 AM

I seriously doubt that you would have any chance with this argumentation. It depends on the phrasing of the license, but I'm pretty sure that this license only extends to using Dromed and Thief, not giving you the rights to use this stuff with any other engine.
Gerhard

#16 medievalradley

medievalradley

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 06:36 PM

I have a thought
That may sound absurd but why not leave all the original factions out. Leave the faction creating to the FM Makers. how about just picking some of your favorite weapons from MEDIEVAL HISTORY and then design a Model CHARACTER based on the IDEA feel of each weapon.

No factions just blank characters we can skin how we want them no backstory
just a thieves doing thievy stuff

nobles
Clergy (Catholic) generic voice stuff like "is this a lost child i here or rats again"
Clergy (Protestant) generic voice stuff like "is this a catholic i see here or rats again"
CLERGY (EVIL) generic voice stuff like "life will end and we you'll will be
serfs generic voice stuff like "yes sir is that you Bah"
merchants generic voice stuff like "i hope you are here to buy something ah a sword"
knights generic voice stuff like "i thought i saw a foe of justice
guards: genarick voice stuff like " what i see there, Hello"
spooks genarick voice stuff like " ARRG"
creaturs genarick voice stuff like " spt spts"

maybe completly new and yet familiar to a thief of any universe

#17 New Horizon

New Horizon

    Mod hero

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13902 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 06:56 PM

Well, we've already been through these issues long ago at the beginning of this project. We took what we deemed to be the safest route. Faction creation can still be up the the FM makers if they wish, or they can choose ours. We are respecting copyright by not using any existing materials, they are simply "inspired" by them. Everything that we have has been crafted by some very gifted hands. Don't get me wrong, community concern is very much appreciated on the matter, but we really can't expect to move forward with our work if we are second guessing our direction. :) Forward HO!!!

#18 Entropy

Entropy

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 07:28 PM

I think the tricky thing here is that whether you (the DM developers) feel you can legally justify that the mod is not infringing Thief copyright is not really the issue. The issue is whether Eidos decides it is, or that it might be, and they want to shut it down. Even if they don't lose sales in direct competition, which it could be argued that they might, at the very least DM encourages purchase of a competitor's product.

So if they decide to throw a Cease and Desist at you, are you really going to fight it? If so, more power to you, but I think they are going to be much more willing (and able) to shove, than you are to shove back. I think the point being made is very valid - by appearing so close to Thief's world DM may be inviting repercussions. I'd hate to see Eidos throw their weight around just because they'd been given a good excuse.

E

#19 New Horizon

New Horizon

    Mod hero

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13902 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 08:26 PM

I think the tricky thing here is that whether you (the DM developers) feel you can legally justify that the mod is not infringing Thief copyright is not really the issue. The issue is whether Eidos decides it is, or that it might be, and they want to shut it down. Even if they don't lose sales in direct competition, which it could be argued that they might, at the very least DM encourages purchase of a competitor's product.

So if they decide to throw a Cease and Desist at you, are you really going to fight it? If so, more power to you, but I think they are going to be much more willing (and able) to shove, than you are to shove back. I think the point being made is very valid - by appearing so close to Thief's world DM may be inviting repercussions. I'd hate to see Eidos throw their weight around just because they'd been given a good excuse.

E

It's the type of subject that appears to be different for each situation. Some mods could directly rip off a title without reprecussion, while others could simply suggest an affiliation with a title and be shut down.

We've done as much research on the matter as possible. With that in mind, we have to trust that we have made the right decisions. If it is deemed that we haven't, someone will certainly let us know and we will respect that decision. :) It's not something we want to see happen and all we ask is that the community trust and support those decisions.

#20 Entropy

Entropy

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 08:58 PM

It's not something we want to see happen and all we ask is that the community trust and support those decisions.

Of course, for all the interest that we (the community) have, this is your (the devs) baby, hence your call.

E

#21 sparhawk

sparhawk

    Repository Manager

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21776 posts

Posted 18 January 2005 - 04:20 AM

I think the point being made is very valid - by appearing so close to Thief's world DM may be inviting repercussions. I'd hate to see Eidos throw their weight around just because they'd been given a good excuse.

Appearing so close doesn't really matter. We are creating everything on our own and we definitely look to Thief for inspirement, but we are not copying. You can't copyright a gameplay (yet) so we should be safe, because this is essentialy what we are doing. We are taking a gamplay idea and exand on it. This is the same that ohte rgamecompanies do as well. If there were an issue with that, there would be much less games out there. Just think of all the Warcraft clones. There are some blatantly ripping of Warcraft, and Warcraft was not even the first of that genre.
Gerhard

#22 Gleemonex

Gleemonex

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 18 January 2005 - 10:03 AM

You and I would probably agree on that, but there are far too many examples of companies shutting down mods that treaded on their copyrights without, to us at least, good reason. Sapphire Scar, anyone?


I'm not sure if you're saying that we treaded on EA's copyrights without good reason, or if we were shut down without good reason -- I'd say the first is wrong, the second right ;) Of course, I'm naturally biased.

But then, didn't SS actually CONTACT EA first? That is sort of asking for trouble.


Yes.


Sort-of. We had been in informal contact with Irrational, and they basically told us that they had no problem with our efforts, but EA might. The System Shock IP is a huge, convoluted jumble, and the only thing that resulted from Irrational and EA trying to untangle them was legal fees. [1]

We had decided that we were going to fly under the radar until we had some solid material [2] -- a major concern of some of these publishers is if a crap mod will tarnish their image. But one of our forum members took it upon himself to bring us to EA's attention, before we had anything to show :/ In a last-ditch effort, we decided to fully disclose to EA and formally ask permission to proceed with the mod. The rest, as they say, is history.

That's what I already said right from the beginning. We shouldn't ask them for permission as long as we make sure that we make it different enough. It would be different if we would try to recreate an exact copy of Thief, as Saphire tried to do in the beginning. But that is not what we try to do anyway.


Of course, it's safer if you can avoid direct copying, but that won't stop the highly litigious. When we got the EA "cease and desist" nastygram, the only mentions of copyright infringement were vague ("the System Shock name is under copyright") [3]. In fact, there was no direct mention of copyright infringement at all[4]. If we had gone to court[5], we would have ripped Mr Bené a new one. Unfortunately, in no way would we ever be able to even begin to confront EA in a court battle, no matter how right we were. And EA knew this.

Fortunately, Dark Mod won't have to face off against EA, but if I may quote one of my favourite movies [6]: "Innocence is a highly overrated commodity."

I don't mean to be a doomsayer, and I do think that you've taken sound precautions to stay out of trouble. I just hope you verily did learn the lessons that we had to learn the hard way. You have some solid work here, and I want to see it come to fruition :)

A fellow LGS-inspired modder,

-Glee

---------------------------------------------

Gleemonex
Sapphire Scar

---------------------------------------------
[1] Note that even Irrational themselves don't want to touch the System Shock franchise -- their newest endeavour only fleetingly mentions SS as an inspiration.
[2] Or any pertinent material at all, for that matter. All we had at that point were some concept images, the mod's name, and the attention of System Shock 2 fans everywhere.
[3] That may not sound like a big deal, but keep in mind that legal documents are written in a very specific manner, for a very specific purpose.
[4] Not surprising, considering that a. System Shock 2 is abandonware, and b. copyright infringement only applies in cases of actual or potential loss of revenue.
[5] It's obvious that the nastygram in question was written in haste and with poor attention to detail. Note the mention of "your company, Digitally Evolved" (Digitally Evolved was the parent website of SS2R, not a company).
[6] The Hurricane

Edited by Gleemonex, 18 January 2005 - 10:08 AM.


#23 sparhawk

sparhawk

    Repository Manager

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21776 posts

Posted 18 January 2005 - 10:14 AM

I don't mean to be a doomsayer, and I do think that you've taken sound precautions to stay out of trouble. I just hope you verily did learn the lessons that we had to learn the hard way. You have some solid work here, and I want to see it come to fruition :)

I guess we will see this when it comes to that. BUt SS was a kind of lucky occurence for us, because of which we were much more attentive to this problem then we might have been otherwise.

And I always was of the opinion that we never should ask for permission, because this would be a kind of admission that we intend to infringe copyright, which we wont. I guess if Eidos (or any gamecompany) wants to make a clone of Doom 3 they are not asking Id for permission either. They will make sure that they are not treading on certain aspects and that's it. Same as we are doing.
Gerhard

#24 Domarius

Domarius

    Mod hero

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7659 posts

Posted 19 January 2005 - 10:05 AM

Yes - Don't specifically ask for permission, and they won't specifically stomp you out with their huge corporate foot.

Security through obscurity.

Although I don't think we are going to be so obscure - this mod is slowly gaining more and more popularity :)

#25 Guest_Guest_*

Guest_Guest_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 January 2005 - 08:35 PM

What if, say, this industrious order was based on a non-diety religious system? Consider the implications. Creation, then, goes solely into the hands of man, compelling the order to build as a manner of ascending themselves to a state of divinity. This gives them a holier-than-thou personality, looking down their noses at those who do not create. Think about how this could turn the Pagan concept on its head. What if Pagans believed in a creator god, and that He was the only one who should create.


I could work with this.
The haunt idea is pretty cool too.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users