Leaderboard

About the copyrighted stuff, at this moment i don't care. I am looking forward what the community will do with this leaked version. Because this version was promised to us in 2001 at E3. In 2011 we got a version with stupid / non working parts. To me, this leaked version is the version of the e3 2001 trailer! (I found the original maps what they used for the trailer) I played the version and to me, it was blast to the past: Playing a unreal engine 1 game, changing things using one of the first unreal editors, HUD Overlay weather effects (from MGS 2), Destructible bodies (Soldier of fortune), And switching between main-menu wallpapers of Nathalie Portman and Britney Spears (in their young days) I hope that the community will to things with it, like: Patching up the maps, creating new maps, adding new physics engine, upgrading their video renders, some re-shade, high textures and models, etc. I loved what the community did with "Duke Nukem forever 2013" (mod for Duke Nukem 3D) and "Serious Duke 3D" (mod for Serious Sam). But this leaked version is the real thing. (Until someone create/extract the editor from version 2011, for the community to make new maps) What do you think about this?

Agree with this, it's risky for the forum to publish downloadable content with copyright, because the person in charge is the owner/admin of the forum who allows it, not the user who put the link. but there the regulations of each country are valid in this regard, extrem use it in German forums according to their own experiences, which do not even allow images without these being checked before if they have copyright or not, if they are not their own images. I certainly find this somewhat exaggerated. Anyway, in any case it is a good habit to put the sources of content that is posted. Nor should anything happen if someone puts a link to a page, for example one dedicated to downloading games, if it can be verified that the downloads are virus-free, the user does not have to know if the game is legal or not. The responsibility of the Forum in this case can only be limited to checking the security, not any rights that the games on the list may have. It is also necessary to differentiate between a download for private use, practically always legitimate, or for commercial use, very different and where copyright becomes relevant. Although there are also nuances there that are sometimes somewhat absurd, such as the Eiffel Tower, without problems to photograph it during the day, but with lighting at night it is illegal to take a photo, because the lighting is copyrighted, it can be considered this problems when posting a photo of the Eiffel Tower at night.

Way too far fetched. I only saw strict rules against promoting, justifying piracy on old Steam forums. Probably also valid for the new discussions thing. But they are a store and a game company. Steam is also DRM in an of itself. So I guess that explains the reasons. Not sufficiently user friendly due to their monopoly as well. Yeah author's rights matter morally, but copyright doesn't mean that one should be a copyrast (pederast) for profit. And that's what copyright became.

Not only in games, also the companies of OS use plagiarism. Even the logo and default desktop image is the one of Windows, but it isn't from MS, its a Brasilian imitación of Windows 10 and 11 with Linux base, which run windows apps and is legit. (WindowsFX - Freemium OpenSource) Similar attempt with ReactOS, even using invers engineering to imitate a compatible clon of older Windows, at least using a own logo (OSS) As I say, for some companies, copyright is a relative thing.

Very solid FM. I'll admit I didn't actually *end* the mission in spite of fulfilling the main objective because I didn't quite feel up to grind the loot, but I might finish that someday.

Yes. Copyright infringement comes from using the copyrighted code, it has nothing to do with what you use it for. Even if you copy that code into an Android alarm clock app, you have committed copyright infringement. Nope. Copyright applies in full to the engine and the basic code. It does not apply to the generic "idea", although it can apply to the idea at a more specific level (so you can't make another game called "Duke Nukem", but you can make another FPS featuring a musclebound dudebro protagonist). If they are using the same engine then they have licensed that engine. They are not using stolen code. If they did, they would be sued into oblivion. Again, you are confusing "ideas" with code. Anyone can make a generic shooter, RPG or platform game without infringing copyright, as long as it's not called "Super Mario Brothers". The basic idea might be the same. That has nothing to do with the code. You don't need to steal code to implement a game which has similar ideas. Claiming that software which does similar things must be using stolen code is the sort of thing Darl McBride came up with in the SCO vs IBM lawsuit. It failed spectacularly because his assumption was wrong. There was never any stolen code. Correct. Not correct. Copyright law applies to large companies just as it applies to individuals, and since they are prominent companies with deep pockets, they are much more likely to get sued. That's why they have a legal department to make sure they are using all IP correctly. They do not steal code. I suppose if you're talking about some fly-by-night Chinese rip-off company, then they might be stealing code (since enforcing IP against companies in China is notoriously difficult). But if we're talking about AAA game companies in the US or Europe, using stolen engine code is not normal behaviour, although there may be occasional instances where it happens.

At times while building I've thought something like, this room is half stone and half wood. So I'll take the preset for WOODEN_MEDIUMROOM and CASTLE_MEDIUMROOM and average them. That's about as much micromanaging as I'd want to do though.

It's clear that forking the Duke Nukem code to make a imitación of it, also infringe the copyright, but is it a infrigement to use it to make a different game' The copyright is also for the script of the idea. less of the engine or basic code. How many games are out there using the saame engine and very similar content of the game, even they are different companies?.. Mostly all of them had copied things one from another in their games, in shooter games, RPG, platformer, sidescroller, selled as own game but only forks from others with different backgronds and protagonists, more o less complex. The basic code and idea of Mario Bros and the Dino from Google is the same. If you make a game, let's say a shooter, using your own engine, but with the same development and maps as DOOM, copied 1 to 1 you commit copyright infringement, because you use the same script and idea, but not if a big company does it, big game companies lives from the plagiats, own or from others, that is the difference. Remember that the old Doom engine is freely usable, but not the original wad files and every fork, be it Freedoom or Risen3D, needs these original wad files to work, at least the first level shareware. Copyright is a very complex theme and nearly inexistent in asiatic game companies. Same in movies and other contents https://plagiarismsearch.com/blog/15-scandalous-cases-of-plagiarism-in-hollywood.html

It's also copyright infringement by anyone who uses that code in their own game. Copyright doesn't magically vanish the moment the first person who leaked the code is caught and punished. Copyright follows the code/image/text/movie wherever it goes, and if you use that content in your own work without permission, you have made a derived work which is copyright infringing. You're saying that most games are based on illegally leaked code? I don't know what you're smoking, but I suggest you cut down on it. Making a work which is "similar" has nothing to do with it. Copyright applies to specific texts: code, images, movies, blog posts etc. It does not apply to generic "ideas", which is why anyone can make a first person shooter, or an anime series about heroes saving the world, or a story about a teenage wizard (as long as he's not called Harry Potter). If the company doesn't exist anymore and the rights to the IP were not sold or passed on to anyone else, then you have an "orphan work" which (depending on legal jurisdiction) may be covered by special rules. But in game development this is a rare situation, because if the studio who made the game is shut down, the rights to the game will pass to the publisher, or whoever else buys the original studio's assets. Companies don't usually disappear into thin air, they get bought out by someone else, or their assets sold off in bankruptcy proceedings. So it would be very unwise to assume that a particular leaked codebase is an orphaned work just because the original company which made the game doesn't exist anymore.

Copyright expired after 70 years, which at least in informatik don't make sense. If the Duke Nukem build was leaked, it's a copyright infringement by the guy who leaked it. If the script is now in the network, it can't be avoided that someone use it to fork a own Game with it. Most games are made this way, because also big companies use third party game ideas or scripts to make its own with it, even using invers engineering. Most old shooters and also new ones are very similar, only different in the storyline and graphics used, all they are descendient of Pacman in last instance as original idea. In the Manga games, even the protagonists have the same aspects, even there are different companies. This copyright thing is very debatable in many cases, especially in old games that don't even work on modern computers without having to use some kind of emulator, DOS Box, etc. and whose companies often don't even exist anymore

I managed to find more loot than there was available in the mission! Any idea where the extra 54 gold come from?

Copyright infringement of imaginary property is not theft. There are no "stolen goods". It's just copyright infringement, with its own criminal and civil penalties but typically lax enforcement. We'll see if Embracer Group or whoever currently owns the Duke Nukem IP tries to shut down distribution and modding of a 20+ year old dead game, but they can't stop it if the people working on it are determined. There's a reason pretty much every movie and TV show is downloadable and streamable on pirate sites within hours of release: whack-a-mole doesn't work very well. Some people will get scared off by a DMCA letter, but the files are already widely available now. As for whether or not it should be linked in here, that's a question for the forum staff. Maybe the links should be removed. Just provide helpful hints instead.