Release DosBox EX - Ultimate

[sebt3]

Article 6 of the 1991 EU Computer Programs Directive allows reverse engineering for the purposes of interoperability, but prohibits it for the purposes of creating a competing product [this might be SC executable in PND created by Notaz], and also prohibits the public release of information obtained through reverse engineering of software.

and i dont think license could be overriden by EU if you're bid to license while buying product. Wether you're in UE or USA. It doesnt matter.. Buying means accepting license..

Not a competing product : to be able to play the PND you need to buy a starcraft licence so Blizzard still get the coins. So it's a compatibility stuff.He did not release any information he gathered while reverse engenering it.

He only release a ARM compatible binary of the game, which by european law qualify as fair use.

 

[ekianjo]

Don't use the word "stealing" when referring to copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is the only right word. That's why there is a word for it, and why lawyers never refer to "stealing". "Stealing" is what the copyright owners want to use but are not allowed to use in actual legal context.

Thats what the part after the "-" was for

Then why do you use the word stealing in your sentence in the first place if you know the difference? dont compare thongs which are not related.

 

[commander-beef]

Not a competing product : to be able to play the PND you need to buy a starcraft licence. So it's a compatibility stuff.


He did not release any information he gathered while reverse engenering it.


He only release a ARM compatible binary of the game, which by european law qualify as fair use.

Judgement for this lays in lawyers hands. The law interpretation not lays here [on me or on You]. Its the same situation like in stunts. I say free, you say not [and we both we have proofs]. the same situation is with starcraft. YOu cant judge without being lawyer..

other than that:

Reverse engineering a program you have legitimately bought and studying or modifying its code is perfectly LEGAL, at least in the European Union, as long as


* You do it only for your personal use or for "educational purposes" (i.e. study) 


* You do not use big chunks of the code for applications you SELL You may for instance completely modify Wordpad for your personal use, as I did, in order to have as defaults *.txt, *.alf and *.asm instead of the almost useless *.doc You may rip off whatever code you want from whichever application you want in order to use it, modify it, squash it with a mace or throw it away


 


this clearly states that releasing stuff by notaz is illegal.


 


"illegal pnd is illegal" you said?


 


http://www.woodmann.com/fravia/legal.htm

 

[thatgui]

Then why do you use the word stealing in your sentence in the first place if you know the difference? dont compare thongs which are not related.

Thats why I put "analogy" in it

 

[ingoreis]

Another Idea and a maybe good Solution:

Is it a Problem when we Download via Wget from Stunts.hu itself and extract it via Unzip or unrar?

Then have we not hosted the Game itself and only a Install.bat from another Servers than Openpandora.

So can everyone choose itself with a disclaimer to Download or not Download the Game.

And the only Thing what we make is the install.sh

Important is that the Game itself is not hosted on OPServers,right?

So can we use for example the direct Links from Dosgamesarchive.com or near.

What mean you here?

 

[sebt3]

Important is that the Game itself is not hosted on OPServers,right? So can we use for example the direct Links from Dosgamesarchive.com or near.

Indeed. sound like a plan to me

 

[ingoreis]

@ Commander Beef ....maybe we can share a Direct Link List to Demoversions,Freewares and Sharewares...and maybe we can make install.bats then

Tons of work await us,but first i must go to Work for today

Maybe this can be a new Beginning for Dosbox and Qemu symbiosis

 

[commander-beef]

@ Commander Beef ....maybe we can share a Direct Link List to Demoversions,Freewares and Sharewares...and maybe we can make install.bats then


Tons of work await us,but first i must go to Work for today


Maybe this can be a new Beginning for Dosbox and Qemu symbiosis

No problem. PM me..

 

[ingoreis]

Ok,but PM comes Lately this Evening

 

[thatgui]

Another Idea and a maybe good Solution:

Is it a Problem when we Download via Wget from Stunts.hu itself and extract it via Unzip or unrar?

Don't know if this also applies to downloading something, but if you set a link to a site where illegal things can happen, you can get sued (even if you distance yourself from a possible, illegal activity on the site you link to).

 

[ingoreis]

I found it on Netzwelt.de

Netzwelt.de is one of the famoust German Computer Magazines.

Like Chip.de and Heisse.de

They have the Game hosted on their Server too as Freeware:

http://www.netzwelt.de/download/4091-stunts.html

and they must have much attention to Licences before they host  this Game.

And another Source for saying that its Freeware 

http://www.kalpen.de/stunts/stunts.htm

I dont think that any will happen when i download from them  ^_^

 

[thatgui]

They have the Game hosted on their Server too as Freeware:

And they host other stuff too, that isn't freeware. Just because they violating copyright and no one is pursuing them, does not mean it isn't a copyright violation. Thats why I repeatedly said: let ED decide, if he thinks its ok, then you are free to do so as he is the one you will get mail if the worst case gets real - which I deem not likely, but who knows what the future may hold.

And another Source for saying that its Freeware 

http://www.kalpen.de/stunts/stunts.htm

The only reason they gave is that "its not available any more for purchase on two distributers stores" if that would be a valid criteria, almost the whole "abandonware" scene would be legal.

 

[ekianjo]

almost the whole "abandonware" scene would be legal.

Just to be clear, though, a lot of the companies who produces such games are long gone, and copyrights may not have been passed to anyone else, or if they were, they are not exercised by anyone at the moment:

 

Even in cases where the original company no longer exists, the rights usually belong to someone else, though no one may be able to trace actual ownership, including the owners themselves.(wikipedia)

Besides, even game developers are OK with that practice as long as they dont get revenue from the said game anymore.

"Is it piracy? Yeah, sure. But so what? Most of the game makers aren't living off the revenue from those old games anymore. Most of the creative teams behind all those games have long since left the companies that published them, so there's no way the people who deserve to are still making royalties off them. So go ahead--steal this game! Spread the love!"

- Tim Schafer

The risk should be minimal if you ensure:

1. the game is not sold anywhere (especially on GOG or Steam for example)

2. The game is already distributed in abandonware sites and has not caused issues so far

3. There is a way for the copyright owner to flag a game if inappropriate for distribution -> a button in the repo could do. 

Instead of "yes/no" position, let's adopt a rational risk analysis. 

 

[commander-beef]

almost the whole "abandonware" scene would be legal.

Just to be clear, though, a lot of the companies who produces such games are long gone, and copyrights may not have been passed to anyone else, or if they were, they are not exercised by anyone at the moment:

 

Even in cases where the original company no longer exists, the rights usually belong to someone else, though no one may be able to trace actual ownership, including the owners themselves.(wikipedia)

Besides, even game developers are OK with that practice as long as they dont get revenue from the said game anymore.

"Is it piracy? Yeah, sure. But so what? Most of the game makers aren't living off the revenue from those old games anymore. Most of the creative teams behind all those games have long since left the companies that published them, so there's no way the people who deserve to are still making royalties off them. So go ahead--steal this game! Spread the love!"

- Tim Schafer

The risk should be minimal if you ensure:

1. the game is not sold anywhere (especially on GOG or Steam for example)

2. The game is already distributed in abandonware sites and has not caused issues so far

3. There is a way for the copyright owner to flag a game if inappropriate for distribution -> a button in the repo could do. 

Instead of "yes/no" position, let's adopt a rational risk analysis. 

True, and also

More hazardous for ED could be having starcraft* pnd on repo , than old stunts game, since starcraft is still in distribution and as i already mention in http://boards.openpandora.org/topic/14409-dosbox-ex-ultimate/page-22#entry321385/URL] post blizzard could not be happy with decompilation/disassembling blizzards code and creating new game / engine from it.. 

The same can be told with awesome ports of M-HT:

http://repo.openpandora.org/?page=detail&app=xcom2_sr

http://repo.openpandora.org/?page=detail&app=xcom1_sr

because XCOM 1/2 are still sold by GOG and other..

Anyway. ED can always say, that he doesnt have enough time and technology resources to check every repo file, and then only uploader/maintainers will be encumbered because they should know best if they breach of copyright or not..

*- If you like or not, this will generate a lot of traffic, and many people will re-post the information in retro-gaming media about recompilation of blizzard intelectual property, and then blizzard should catch that information pretty quickly

 

[thatgui]

Just to be clear, though, a lot of the companies who produces such games are long gone, and copyrights may not have been passed to anyone else, or if they were, they are not exercised by anyone at the moment:

That maybe an unfortunate situation for gamers, but I does not alter the legal situation at all. No one knows, if some company thinks that they can start making money again with ine of their properties

Instead of "yes/no" position, let's adopt a rational risk analysis.

I need a spam bot: Yes, lets do this, but not the community > ED as he is the one that is legally responsible.

 

[commander-beef]

Just to be clear, though, a lot of the companies who produces such games are long gone, and copyrights may not have been passed to anyone else, or if they were, they are not exercised by anyone at the moment:

That maybe an unfortunate situation for gamers, but I does not alter the legal situation at all. No one knows, if some company thinks that they can start making money again with ine of their properties

Instead of "yes/no" position, let's adopt a rational risk analysis.

I need a spam bot: Yes, lets do this, but not the community > ED as he is the one that is legally responsible.

Uplader takes risk for breach of copyright while uploading on sites like youtube, not google, so similar situation should be here. Its not on ED's head to keep repo clean, but on maintainers head if nobody will be dleegated to check repo..

 

[ekianjo]

That maybe an unfortunate situation for gamers, but I does not alter the legal situation at all. No one knows, if some company thinks that they can start making money again with ine of their properties

So, because no-one knows, the correct attitude is to expect that, ad vitam eternam, you can't do anything, and therefore we just all die without replaying games which are less than 75 years old and not available through other means anymore ?

Sorry but your "conservative risk-free" attitude does not make much sense to me. If a company wants to make money on old games again, it's easy for them to contact places where the game is distributed, and issue a "comply and desist" order without suing anyone or bringing down the whole world of the Pandora. That's what happens with copyright infringement : the copyright holder complaints, and the stuff is pulled out, and people are happy and life goes on. 

 

[thatgui]

Uplader takes risk for breach of copyright while uploading on sites like youtube, not google, so similar situation should be here. Its not on ED's head to keep repo clean, but on maintainers head if nobody will be dleegated to check repo..

No, Ed is responsible as it his server - at least that is my understanding of german law. And he is in any case the first who gets mail as a repo account is anonymouse.

 

[ekianjo]

I need a spam bot: Yes, lets do this, but not the community > ED as he is the one that is legally responsible.

The repo is a place where anyone can upload stuff at anytime. Not sure if ED is responsible if tomorrow someone posts Angrybird PND without pre-approval. 

 

[ekianjo]

Uplader takes risk for breach of copyright while uploading on sites like youtube, not google, so similar situation should be here. Its not on ED's head to keep repo clean, but on maintainers head if nobody will be dleegated to check repo..

No, Ed is responsible as it his server - at least that is my understanding of german law. And he is in any case the first who gets mail as a repo account is anonymouse.

Then if that's the case there should be moderators on the repo. ANd ways to flag entries.

Note, even Google Play official store is full of stuff dealing with copyright infringement. Honestly, copyright infringement is an unsolvable problem for the copyright holders on the internet. There are just too many channels, too much to monitor, too much to do to get stuff pulled out, so we don't live in a perfect world. 

That's why I emphasize the risk-mitigation approach rather than pulling everything out and fear lifting any little finger because you are concerned about potential rights of potential active rights holders.

By the way, most of the repo stuff is probably breaching x amounts of patents as well, so if you are really concerned you should close the repo, and the internet as a whole.