Games Workshop should have sued Blizzard into the dust when Blizzard originally pilfered Warhammer. Blizzard deserves no sympathy as they simply clone shit and make the most marketable version with no regard to what it may do to the genre. Blizzard has killed a lot of dreams. I hope Nos mounts a strong defense and wins on some public use or reverse engineering precedent.
I don't know who sounds more pathetic, the idiots who think they can take on blizzard or the person who says "blizzard has killed a lot of dreams" lol.
Prove they haven't
Proving a negative, seriously? the onus as always is that the claimants have to prove that something has been done, not that it has not.
Civilized men and their laws... "I own this and tomorrow I will own that..." "But this guy doesn't believe I own this, even though I have the papers..." "So i have to fine him or put him to jail or kill him... cause I'm civilized..."
Sharing is caring. Sharing code is definitely caring.
Taking something that does not belong to you, in the civilised world, is called theft. in the uncivilised world, you can often end up on the wrong end of a rope for stealing from the wrong person, in the civilised world, you'll get a fine or maybe some jail time, depending on the severity.
in the uncivilised world, they are unlikely to stop and argue semantics with you too.
What the word of laws is whats relevant, not your personal moral judgement.
thats great and all but not all countries agree with the USA on copyright, which is why some countries dont have a problem with it and have laws saying as much.
additionally, lawyers will but all sorts of stuff in agreements, both for work and other documents, like a EULA. Neither does this mean that they are just or legal, which is why all of them have a clause stating"the law will supercede this agreement"
as much as you may like to say that people don't have a legal right to play vanilla, many countries believe that if you paid for the software, you have the legal right to use it. Hence why servers like this are put in countries that hold that view.
except Blizzard is located in the US hence the service follows american regulations <snip>
No that is a fallacy. Companies have to obey the law of the land in which they operate. (There are nuances but that is the ground zero position.)
Lets turn what you say on its head. Shady Company X based in Cheap Nasty Country Y opens up in the US and starts selling food that - unknown to you - is stuffed with nasty additives and a few toxins.
You get ill and sue. They turn round and say: "well is legal in country Y where we are based".
I'm going to say not really as they are offering a version of the game that cannot be played legitimately. While it may be unethical I don't see it as doing anything worse than the people who emulated games such as Star Wars Galaxies or Shadowbane. Or more closely, the game modders who reinvent earlier games inside later ones, such as The Elder Scrolls Renewal Project. <snip>
The key difference with SWG and Shadowbane is that the servers closed thereby providing people who (technically) bought the game a claim that they should be able to continue using something they bought.
The key difference with The Elder Scrolls Renewal Project is that it has Bethseda approval. WoW hasn't closed; Nost didn't have Blizzard approval. Maybe the defence that "todays WoW is not vanilla" would have worked but I don't believe so.
Unfortunately, that leaves players in a position where they have to pay more (for expansions) than they ever agreed to or was aware of when purchasing base WoW.
Even if you go purchase the base version today, it's not what was originally sold. <snip>
In short and to illustrate the underlying point, it'd be like Ford not allowing you to continue using "their" F150 unless you buy the new rollbar, RC lights, and shocks they just released for it. if you don't wish to buy those products and change the style and functionality of your truck, your just SOL about that F150, nor will Ford honor any part recalls unless you're up to date on the extras they've released for your model since you bought it in 2010.
Except computer software is not a car. People keep trying to compare the two, but they are two different industries. <snip>
You might think so but actually the EU Supreme Court ruled that software is a product. So - at its most fundamental - software is the same as a car! They are both products and as such beholden to and protected by product law.
Doesn't mean they are "identical" of course - lots of different products out with specific laws - just that the core bedrock of laws apply to both. Specifically those that pertain to consumer / business rights and those that protect a company's IP.
From a consumer point of view the argument @MisterZebub is talking about could have been mounted. And, as I said, I don't think it would have succeeded. Blizzard released a patch every 2 months for 2 years after WoW launched in the US; then BC and more patches. As such I believe Blizzard would have been able to establish that players should have expected - and did accept - change. Whcih would leave you trying to argue that WoW today is totally different to WoW at launch. Not going to happen imo but that might have been an argument.
So as software is afforded the same IP and copyright protections that a car gets! Nost, I believe, would have been found guilty.
Games Workshop should have sued Blizzard into the dust when Blizzard originally pilfered Warhammer. Blizzard deserves no sympathy as they simply clone shit and make the most marketable version with no regard to what it may do to the genre. Blizzard has killed a lot of dreams. I hope Nos mounts a strong defense and wins on some public use or reverse engineering precedent.
Unless Nos rebuilds the client engine, all the data assets (textures, 3d models, animations, voice, and music), and lore they don't stand a chance to win based on public use or reverse engineering. Ownership of the data that is the one obstacle standing in everyone ways.
Post edited by Konfess on
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that. On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that. On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Thanks for reading! :awesome:
Is the actual images on screen considered artwork? Is the Warcraft Logo protected? If so then this is about more than just code.
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that. On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Thanks for reading! :awesome:
Is the actual images on screen considered artwork? Is the Warcraft Logo protected? If so then this is about more than just code.
I think that is what he was trying to say.
Reverse engineered code - ok Using the IP of someone else - not ok
I fully agree with this balanced stance. I've been more or less working for a private server for 10 years now. We are also vanilla (the game isn't WoW though) so we provide an old school feeling.
However at no point did I ever get the twisted idea that my acts of piracy are making me a martyr which seems to be what many people are implying here about the Nost guys.
Well after 16 pages I've yet to see why gamers or even Blizzard should truly care about this. They have shown no intention of caring about vanillla WoW or creating a server ruleset for that. So the big argument people have are that it is illegal and or "wrong" and that is why we should care. I'm not big on getting worked up about... it's "wrong" or illegal but doesn't affect anything else or the right holders at all. Now if Nost was able to profit from it...that would be something to get upset about.
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that. On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Thanks for reading! :awesome:
True you are not a lawyer. Maybe you didn't see my post right above your. Your post addressed no issue pertaining to private servers. The server code is fine, because it is all original code and data. But what is a server with out a client. Every court on the face of the earth will up hold Blizzards claim of ownership to the client and the relevant data. Until a client and data set are created free of ownership, all private servers will be illegal. With no legal options.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
My understanding is that the art assets are what are installed through the disks, that the player purchased and have nothing to do with the client, which is only rendering the assets installed on the players computer. IF they take action, it would have to be on each individual player.
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that. On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Thanks for reading! :awesome:
True you are not a lawyer. Maybe you didn't see my post right above your. Your post addressed no issue pertaining to private servers. The server code is fine, because it is all original code and data. But what is a server with out a client. Every court on the face of the earth will up hold Blizzards claim of ownership to the client and the relevant data. Until a client and data set are created free of ownership, all private servers will be illegal. With no legal options.
The client is what is reverse engineered.
Not only that but, you say that every court will uphold ownership, but many courts will uphold a consumer who purchased that software as having the right to use it legally. This is where the dispute is.
This is why countries like Sweden, Russia, Romania, etc, do not recognize blizzards assertions about not utilizing software by the purchaser. This is why Blizzard is not able to do much about private servers in certain countries, and why some private servers have been up for years, even in the face of cease and desist and legal attempts to shut them down. This is empirical, not your opinion about what courts around the world should or should not believe or action.
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that. On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Thanks for reading! :awesome:
That code is only a small element at play here, there's far more to it than that, the most important part being IP laws, all it takes is Blizzard to argue successfully that the offender is offering a competitor to their service, by means of their legally owned property (the Warcraft IP). Very few Judges (if any) would side with the offender in that scenario.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that. On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Thanks for reading! :awesome:
That code is only a small element at play here, there's far more to it than that, the most important part being IP laws, all it takes is Blizzard to argue successfully that the offender is offering a competitor to their service, by means of their legally owned property (the Warcraft IP). Very few Judges (if any) would side with the offender in that scenario.
Except that the Defendant would simply argue that they are not the ones making the infraction of the IP, but the player who has the assets. And the player could argue that they paid for them so they have the right to use them.
Defendant would simply argue that they are not the ones making the infraction of the IP, but the player who has the assets. And the player could argue that they paid for them so they have the right to use them.
That's an interesting point.
I know almost nothing about IP laws, but I see the reasoning. Are there any law sites that might shed some light on the weight of this legal argument?
And I'm genuinely asking out of curiosity, just so I'm nothung is lost in translation here.
and all those who bought and played a blizzard product, also agreed to their rules of conduct. so wtf... 16 pages?
what do you think will happen, if you reach 20 blizz will magically notice and agree?
this discussion is useless, and you know you have no legal rights to start an own blizzard server. why keep it up? bc there ARE legal servers? there are also people killing people, some even for several years.
doesn't make it legal.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
and all those who bought and played a blizzard product, also agreed to their rules of conduct. so wtf... 16 pages?
what do you think will happen, if you reach 20 blizz will magically notice and agree?
this discussion is useless, and you know you have no legal rights to start an own blizzard server. why keep it up? bc there ARE legal servers? there are also people killing people, some even for several years.
doesn't make it legal.
I was with you up until you compared murder to what is going on with the nost server. Killing someone is a pretty significant thing, while starting up a vanilla server against the wishes of the publishing company is another. I would say keep the conversation on topic without bringing murder into it. Metaphors are great when you understand what you are comparing.
Defendant would simply argue that they are not the ones making the infraction of the IP, but the player who has the assets. And the player could argue that they paid for them so they have the right to use them.
That's an interesting point.
I know almost nothing about IP laws, but I see the reasoning. Are there any law sites that might shed some light on the weight of this legal argument?
And I'm genuinely asking out of curiosity, just so I'm nothung is lost in translation here.
All it would take to nail them for contributory IP infringement (like Napster was) is proof that some of their users do not own the clients but have pirated copies instead. And then there's the issue of client patches...
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
We need to consider also that the Nost Team is French so Blizzard needs to abide to French laws. I am sure if they could sue the crap out of Nost, they would have done so already.
Piracy and criminality currently runs rampant on the internet, but that won't last, of course.
The internet is slowly becoming an essential part of human activity, and sooner or later it will be regulated and controlled, because chaos is never allowed to persist in human affairs. It's just taking time, but sooner or later the situation will get so bad that the public will demand regulation.
Defendant would simply argue that they are not the ones making the infraction of the IP, but the player who has the assets. And the player could argue that they paid for them so they have the right to use them.
That's an interesting point.
I know almost nothing about IP laws, but I see the reasoning. Are there any law sites that might shed some light on the weight of this legal argument?
And I'm genuinely asking out of curiosity, just so I'm nothung is lost in translation here.
I dont have any sites, but this is major bone on a number of countries and how they view ownership of software, which is why it is so problematic for software companies that want to "lease" software.
Piracy and criminality currently runs rampant on the internet, but that won't last, of course.
The internet is slowly becoming an essential part of human activity, and sooner or later it will be regulated and controlled, because chaos is never allowed to persist in human affairs. It's just taking time, but sooner or later the situation will get so bad that the public will demand regulation.
Some parts of it, but for other people it just drives them to Open Source stuff. But I do agree with you, I think there will start becoming a clearer dichotomy between the two ends of the spectrum.
Defendant would simply argue that they are not the ones making the infraction of the IP, but the player who has the assets. And the player could argue that they paid for them so they have the right to use them.
That's an interesting point.
I know almost nothing about IP laws, but I see the reasoning. Are there any law sites that might shed some light on the weight of this legal argument?
And I'm genuinely asking out of curiosity, just so I'm nothung is lost in translation here.
All it would take to nail them for contributory IP infringement (like Napster was) is proof that some of their users do not own the clients but have pirated copies instead. And then there's the issue of client patches...
The thing that is so interesting about a game that goes through expansions is that you have signed different EULA for each expansion and the updates associated with them. I would argue that vanilla wow is a game that I paid for the box, the updates, and upkeep. TBC I did the same.
I realize that many people will tell you it is the same game, but it couldnt be farther from the truth concerning each release from every standpoint from which I look at it.
Comments
in the uncivilised world, you can often end up on the wrong end of a rope for stealing from the wrong person, in the civilised world, you'll get a fine or maybe some jail time, depending on the severity.
in the uncivilised world, they are unlikely to stop and argue semantics with you too.
Lets turn what you say on its head. Shady Company X based in Cheap Nasty Country Y opens up in the US and starts selling food that - unknown to you - is stuffed with nasty additives and a few toxins.
You get ill and sue. They turn round and say: "well is legal in country Y where we are based".
Doesn't mean they are "identical" of course - lots of different products out with specific laws - just that the core bedrock of laws apply to both. Specifically those that pertain to consumer / business rights and those that protect a company's IP.
From a consumer point of view the argument @MisterZebub is talking about could have been mounted. And, as I said, I don't think it would have succeeded. Blizzard released a patch every 2 months for 2 years after WoW launched in the US; then BC and more patches. As such I believe Blizzard would have been able to establish that players should have expected - and did accept - change. Whcih would leave you trying to argue that WoW today is totally different to WoW at launch. Not going to happen imo but that might have been an argument.
So as software is afforded the same IP and copyright protections that a car gets! Nost, I believe, would have been found guilty.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Duplicating something isn't theft, though it can be a violation of copyright or trademarks.
TOS click throughs and EULAs are actually rather shaky in the legal world and may not apply, though few people have the resources to fight such a legal battle. On the other hand, the courts have clearly stated that it doesn't matter wtf those things may claim, they can NOT take away a consumers rights, period.
IP is considered property, but it still doesn't have the same treatment as physical properties for a number of reasons.
The code the NOS team wrote is their own, and there's not really anything bliz can do about that.
On the other hand, any art and other assets that NOS is using which came from WoW, is something that bliz can take action on.
IANAL, on the other hand I've been reading lots of articles and stuff from the legal proceedings on many cases over the decades, and what I've mentioned here (other than specific names) are all based on those legal decisions, so they aren't just the ramblings of another armchair idiot. This idiot actually listened to what the lawyers and judges said on those subjects.
Please feel free to research it yourself, I'm not going to waste my time trolling through google for old case results just to argue with someone that won't read them in the first place.
Thanks for reading! :awesome:
Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...
Is the actual images on screen considered artwork? Is the Warcraft Logo protected? If so then this is about more than just code.
Reverse engineered code - ok
Using the IP of someone else - not ok
I fully agree with this balanced stance.
I've been more or less working for a private server for 10 years now. We are also vanilla (the game isn't WoW though) so we provide an old school feeling.
However at no point did I ever get the twisted idea that my acts of piracy are making me a martyr which seems to be what many people are implying here about the Nost guys.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Not only that but, you say that every court will uphold ownership, but many courts will uphold a consumer who purchased that software as having the right to use it legally. This is where the dispute is.
This is why countries like Sweden, Russia, Romania, etc, do not recognize blizzards assertions about not utilizing software by the purchaser. This is why Blizzard is not able to do much about private servers in certain countries, and why some private servers have been up for years, even in the face of cease and desist and legal attempts to shut them down. This is empirical, not your opinion about what courts around the world should or should not believe or action.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
I know almost nothing about IP laws, but I see the reasoning. Are there any law sites that might shed some light on the weight of this legal argument?
And I'm genuinely asking out of curiosity, just so I'm nothung is lost in translation here.
so wtf... 16 pages?
what do you think will happen, if you reach 20 blizz will magically notice and agree?
this discussion is useless, and you know you have no legal rights to start an own blizzard server. why keep it up? bc there ARE legal servers? there are also people killing people, some even for several years.
doesn't make it legal.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Private servers are illegal?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I am sure if they could sue the crap out of Nost, they would have done so already.
The internet is slowly becoming an essential part of human activity, and sooner or later it will be regulated and controlled, because chaos is never allowed to persist in human affairs. It's just taking time, but sooner or later the situation will get so bad that the public will demand regulation.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
I realize that many people will tell you it is the same game, but it couldnt be farther from the truth concerning each release from every standpoint from which I look at it.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.