Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Blizzard Issues DMCA Notice to a Fan-Run 'WoW' Legacy Server (torrentfreak.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the war-on-World-of-Warcraft dept.

An anonymous reader calls it "the never-ending stupidity of copyright wars." TorrentFreak reports: Blizzard Entertainment is taking a stand against a popular World of Warcraft legacy server. The fan-operated project allows gamers to experience how the game was played over a decade ago and to revive old battles... In recent years the project has captured the hearts of tens of thousands of die-hard WoW fans. At the time of writing, the most popular realm has more than 6,000 people playing from all over the world... Blizzard, however, sees this as copyright infringement and has asked GitHub to pull the site's code offline.
The article notes the DMCA notice came "just weeks after several organizations and gaming fans asked the US Copyright Office to make a DMCA circumvention exemption for 'abandoned' games."

13 of 308 comments (clear)

  1. Abandoned games... by Rewind · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Um... I really do think that something needs to be done about classic and abandoned games. We are, unfortunately, losing those parts of history to the obscurity of copyright.

    With that said...
    "The article notes the DMCA notice came "just weeks after several organizations and gaming fans asked the US Copyright Office to make a DMCA circumvention exemption for 'abandoned' games."

    WoW is not even close to an abandoned game. They are working on a subscription right now and maintain and update servers that millions play on right now. In what way is it abandoned? The language in this post is more like the FUD spread by hardcore DRM supporters than someone who wants to preserve software. This is an awful sub EditorDavid...

    --
    ?
    1. Re:Abandoned games... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They have announced recently a "WoW Classic" so it's hardly an "abandoned game".

    2. Re:Abandoned games... by Xamindar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think the point is that "version" of the game is abandoned. You had to buy the game before you had the opportunity to pay monthly to actually play it. Shouldn't people be able to set up their own servers if they want as they have already bought the game?

    3. Re:Abandoned games... by mccalli · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is an issue though - what is 'abandoned'? Let's take the 8 bit games legacy. When mobile gaming took off, suddenly these games were appearing once again but on mobile phones - things like Lords of Midnight, which by every rationale people previously would have considered abandoned. They turned out to be a viable revenue stream again. Or all the Nintendo ones that found a new life in the 'virtual console' on their newer platforms.

      Don't get me wrong - I also agree there should be some solution found. But I really don't think it's simple, because even the definition of 'abandoned' isn't clear cut, and we have a recent example where a technology shifts have rendered viable again things one previously considered abandoned

    4. Re:Abandoned games... by houghi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Can you explain to me what the difference is in copyright between an abandoned game, an abandoned book and an abandoned movie? It is called a copyright, not a blocked-right-if-used. I can write a book and not even publish it, just let one person read it and then put it in a closet. I die and somebody finds it. That book will still have my copyrights and the kids will enjoy it for 70 years after I die.

      The fact that I have never published it, means it was abandoned.
      Obviously the period for copyright is WAY too long, but it was never dependent of the usage, just of the moment of creation.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re:Abandoned games... by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > Are you seriously claiming that other people playing one of the roughly two hundred and fifty dungeons released in the last ten years

      If you think that's why people play on these 3rd party servers then you simply haven't talked to any of the people involved.

      They're on those servers to return to the era when the game was played by people who's goal wasn't the collection of stuff and end-game play.

      Returning to an earlier version has the primary effect of selecting those players looking for the original, highly collaborative, user base.

    6. Re:Abandoned games... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not even a question of expansions existing. The original content was "replaced" by the Cataclysm expansion. You can't experience it at all. It is content that is abandoned.

    7. Re:Abandoned games... by TheInternet01 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But do you have the ability to remove the book from people's hands, update it's content without their permission and desire to do and then go after them if they find a way to read the original copy of the book?

      If they purchase your book, and you charge a subscription to access a book club so they can attend with other book readers, is it right that you can take the book away if they no longer wish to attend the book club? Or go after them if they take their book to another book club that doesn't charge them for attending?

      The biggest flaw is the fact that you have to purchase the game / book and then you're only paying for access to their servers. it shouldn't be illegal in these cases if using a legitimate purchased copy of the game to play on other servers. Or hosting the other servers / book clubs.

      --
      Uplink Hosting - Web/email at an affordable price with high performance - https://uplinkhosting.ca/link.php?id=3
  2. Not Infringing - Bliz fault by mfh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These private servers are interacting with old clients that were released freely by Bliz. They claim the tables are nearly identical; the tables can easily be remapped.

    If I was a judge that'd be my ruling: remap the table names and continue supporting ABANDONWARE; yes, private servers are running abandonware services; they designed the server stuff based on how the client expects to be communicated with.

    DCMA has a very specific clause that blocks copyright on ABANDONWARE. Old warcraft patches aren't currently available and were unavailable for many years.

    The servers are fine if there is an honest judge hearing the case.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  3. and more by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I really do think that something needs to be done about classic and abandoned games

    I see it as even more than that. Abandoned applications of every type: operating systems, drivers, vertical applications, etc.

    Frankly, if software is unsupported, I see no reason it should continue to enjoy the protection of copyright, patent, or anything else, frankly.

    I don't draw a distinction as to why. If the developer is gone or no longer willing, if the "upgrade" no longer supports the operating system or hardware you've been using (or vice-versa... operating systems should be treated the same), basically if the thing no longer is "live", then it's abandonware. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who steals it, reverses it, copies it or, as here, supports it from a third-party position should be blameless.

    And yes, I am a developer, and yes, I still think this should be the case. If you aren't going to support your customers, then there's no particular reason to expect your now ex-customers to support you. From my POV, that most certainly includes no longer honoring the legal protections you are awarded in trade for producing something useful. As soon as you, as a developer or large entity (Adobe, Apple, etc.) decide to abandon, compromise or outright destroy that usefulness, you are the one that has broken the compact.

    Let the chips fall where they may.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  4. To be expected by TheSanAdmin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Blizzard recently announced they were bringing back the classic version so it only makes sense they would start clearing out any "competition". These servers have been around for years and Blizzard didn't care until now.

  5. Reverse engineering != copyright infringement by bradley13 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Blizzard is really reaching here. AFAIK, this is a pure reverse-engineering effort. No code was copied. There's basically almost no case for claiming any sort of copyright infringement. In desperation, Blizzard claims, for example:

    "Blizzard’s notice targets several SQL databases stating that the layout and structure is nearly identical to the early WoW databases."

    Given the data to be stored, and the rules of normalization, of course the structure of the databases is similar. All that shows is that whoever designed the database was competent.

    They complain that the code includes direct references to - get this - another fan-run WoW server (Nostalrius). Whose copyrights Blizzard does not own, ahem.

    Some files have names that reference fantasy elements in WoW - they don't specify, but I assume things like town names. Which would make sense for the server-side implementations of these elements. Whether they can legitimately claim copyright on those names?

    Lastly, they point out that "some" database record IDs are the same. Not all, but some. How many, they don't indicate. Statistically speaking, of course some of them match, though it should be very many. Of course, Blizzard does not specify a number.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Reverse engineering != copyright infringement by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Some files have names that reference fantasy elements in WoW - they don't specify, but I assume things like town names. Which would make sense for the server-side implementations of these elements. Whether they can legitimately claim copyright on those names?

      If I remember right, when Phoenix reverse engineered the IBM BIOS, they had to put "Copyright IBM" in their BIOS because IBM had put it in the original and required it to operate. The judge ruled that since it was required for the reverse-engineered copy to work, that was a purely functional constraint and thus had no creative element, meaning it couldn't be copyright infringement - copyright infringement being when you have the freedom to do it differently, but you make it the same as the thing you're copying. If IBM had included "Copyright IBM" but not made it required for the BIOS to function, and the reverse-engineered copy also had "Copyright IBM" in it, then that would be a clear copyright violation. It's one of those "The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers" situations.

      So if their client requires those specific names for the server to function, copyright law doesn't apply and the private servers can use the same names. If it doesn't require those specific names, then Blizzard can claim copyright on the names (assuming they're unique to WoW) and force private servers to come up with different names for their towns and such.