Piracy

I say we let them keep on going, then one day we can declare it judgment day, and then we can reap their souls in a tidy fashion on that day of reckoning.

They'll never see it coming.

I wouldn't explain it, just; "Piracy is illegal and is not welcome in any form at GameDev.net"

I would also leave it vague and merely stress the legality aspect, otherwise we're seen to be taking sides on a philosophical issue which is far from clear-cut.

I'd like to know where the lines on copyright infringement are drawn however. To my mind, someone offering a download of a cracked 3DS Max is significantly worse than someone admitting to having recorded the last episode of Six Feet Under on their VCR and lending it to a friend.

Similarly, announcing the intent to make a follow-up to a commercial game is not in itself a copyright infringement but might well end up that way. However it could probably be made legal with just a tiny bit of guidance, so lenience + a gentle warning seem adequate here to me.

Quote:

Original post by Kylotan Similarly, announcing the intent to make a follow-up to a commercial game is not in itself a copyright infringement...

Announcing isn't but starting any work is, because the simple fact of stating that it is based on someone else's copyright makes it a derivative work and as such a breach.

The problem with these projects is that most people simply don't understand copyright law and wrongly assume that if it is non-commercial or if a certain % of the work is their own creation or that it isn't finished, that they are safe. They also all miss the fact that it doesn't have to be an actual copy of an existing game to be in breach but if it is "based on" then it is a derivative work, which is equally a breach.

Quote:

Original post by Obscure Announcing isn't but starting any work is, because the simple fact of stating that it is based on someone else's copyright makes it a derivative work and as such a breach.

Well, no, I don't think any court would see it that way. If I'd said that my Organizing Code Files article was based on Lord of the Rings, and the Tolkien estate tried to sue me, they would lose. Declaring something to be a derivative work doesn't necessarily make it as such.

Quote:

The problem with these projects is that most people simply don't understand copyright law and wrongly assume that if it is non-commercial or if a certain % of the work is their own creation or that it isn't finished, that they are safe.

I wholeheartedly support educating people as to the legal truths of the situation. A link to the 10 Copyright Myths article is handy here.

Quote:

They also all miss the fact that it doesn't have to be an actual copy of an existing game to be in breach but if it is "based on" then it is a derivative work, which is equally a breach.

But the issue here is the definition of 'based on'. Copy the name, the graphics, the sound effects, and it's certainly a breach. Copy just the gameplay, the ruleset, or the general approach, and it's almost certainly not. Therefore a non-compliant project can often be made compliant very easily, once the legalities are pointed out to the developers.

While our own personal views on piracy, and the maintenance of our site image and community relation (after all, a lot of our members directly derive revenue from the kind of copyright material that is most often sought by the pirates who visit [programming books, games]) the concern I'd like to make clear is the legal one.

When someone posts a help wanted post, on our moderated forum, we are in essence intentionally hosting a job posting (like the careers section) an advertisement and even a mini website (if they show some screenshots) all in one.

If a particularly vicious group of attack lawyers catch wind of one of their properties being here (say, the lawyers for Fox Entertainment, after someone posts for help with their Simpsons MMORPG and shows some screenshots of 3D models) we will get caught in the middle.

While it would not be hard to comply with a demand to remove the offending content, we do not want to ever get into that situation. Basically the only people we ever want to contact us about removing content are crazy, powerless and anonymous internet folk with no basis for a real complaint. If we get a visit from lawyers once, it greatly increases the chance that they or one of their friends will visit again (they will be watching for future chances to charge money from their clients)

So can I get an official clarification on what action should be taken with Help Wanted posts of that nature?

For now I'm closing offending threads with a brief note and a link to this section of the Help Wanted FAQ (which I've already asked Dan for some help improving when he has time).

Is this acceptable, or do we need to actually delete offending content, raise warning levels, etc?

Well, I think its a case for deletion, PMing the poster explaining why and warning raising (and maybe more if they are persistant), the rules are clear on the subject and ignorance is never an excuse in my eyes nor the eyes of the law.

On the subject of piracy, I've been wanting to ask for a clarification on the issue of linking to or referencing so-called abandonware. Over the years I've seen a great many discussions in Game Design turn on references to historical games. Unlike technical discussions, which often involve the latest cutting edge techniques, discussions in Game Design have benefited tremendously from awareness of precendents and how they might be built upon, improved or expanded.

While I strongly agree with the need to set a clear moral and legal boundary regarding piracy, I'd be a lot more happy if the policy of not linking to abandonware sites was extremely explicit (maybe as a sticky?). But when it comes to discussions which reference known abandonware (while leaving the participants to their own devices) I'm not sure where we stand. Do we just not talk about it because the only place such a work could be found would be in on the abandonware sites? If so, I think Game Design discussions will be poorer if participants are not able to reference the past. To me, it would be like trying to comprehend film without studying the classics.

I know this issue came up earlier, but I was swamped and couldn't comment then. So what's the general feel on this on?

I think abandonware is a tragic legal travesty, but we have to remain on the side of the law. Consequently, my opinion is that we can not encourage links to abandonware, but we can't restrict references to abandonware or suggestions to "find it an play it" so long as no explicit reference to sources for such material are provided.

I've greatly benefitted from being able to acquire and experiment with or revisit material only available from sites like The Underdogs, so I'm really torn on the issue.


On a completely different note, I think we need to reduce the prevalence of "announcement stickies." Do we have other methods of informing our members, such as sending informational PMs in cases of site-wide policy updates? A sticky specific to a forum is fine, but something like piracy needs to be in the site FAQ - and we need to make all our members aware of changes to such an FAQ/rule.

Quote:

Original post by Oluseyi A sticky specific to a forum is fine, but something like piracy needs to be in the site FAQ - and we need to make all our members aware of changes to such an FAQ/rule.

There are a number of changes to the FAQ that need to be made. If we make them all at the same time, I think an 'FAQ has been updated' announcement sticky is fine for a couple of weeks.

So start submitting your changes to the main forum FAQ in the stickied topic in this forum....

Indeed. I've got some things to add to the FAQ as well.

On the topic of piracy, I think that the rule as far as the public goes can be a little vague (i.e. "advocating piracy of any form is prohibited on these forums, and may result in a ban"), but as I stated a while ago on gdmods, I'd prefer the punishment to fit the crime. Admitting to having pirated software in the past is probably only worth a warning. Actively encouraging people to use pirated software, or asking for pirated software, is bannable. Anything in between would be worthy of a suspension or possibly a ban, depending on the circumstances.