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."

52 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 Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      WoW in its "classic", level 50 (or was it 60?) cap form, IS abandoned. Blizzard does not offer the option to play on a server where the old dungeons are the endgame and expansion creep isn't forcing people to play the game in a way they never wanted to.

      If Blizzard offered no-expansion servers, we can talk.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. 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?

    4. 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

    5. Re:Abandoned games... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      WoW ( as it stands may not be abandoned ), but as stated the version / release and content that excited people in droves back then most certainly has been.

      Perhaps software companies would do well to embrace communities like these to enhance player experience vrs kill them off cause they seem to do things better than they currently do. Lets face it the gaming industry is super stagnant right now, almost as bad as Hollywood and movies, any help to a company or genre of game should be welcomed not shutdown using DMCA which really is total B$ of the dubya era.

      Just sayin

    6. 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.
    7. Re:Abandoned games... by JMJimmy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Either way just move the server/code to Canada.

      We already have "interoperability" exemptions to copyright. This is an ideal example of why they were put in. User demand for a specific version of the product which the original maker refuses to support.

    8. 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.

    9. Re:Abandoned games... by CriticalYetLazy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They don't offer it because basically *nobody* (i'm sure you'll find a few exceptions here to try and prove me wrong) running a game of any real size offers it. That's not how MMO's work

      They're not going to run separate servers for every patch level, just to accommodate folks that forgot they signed up for a game that was going to be constantly updated.

      Even still, not offering that specific service, however interesting it may be to some, is still their call. I can imagine it may disappoint some people but thus calling it abandoned is pretty silly.

    10. 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.

    11. Re:Abandoned games... by subanark · · Score: 3, Informative

      To be clear WoW classic will be a compromise of the old game with probably some more recent features that don't impact the gameplay like cross game chat, security exploits removed etc... However you get into some gray area like multi-loot, or what ui addons they support it gets complex. Add into this how fast new content is released within the original game (there are over 12 content patches), and needing to run it on newer servers, and you can understand why it will take a while to get it out the door.

      I've seen non-Blizzard classic servers pull all kinds of shady tricks like being able to donate for grossly overpowered items (e.g. similar to best items in the game, but with an extra 0 on the end of each stat)

      Also, don't play WoW classic if you didn't play it back in the day. There is no class balance, and death was penalized by having to spend a good 5 minutes or more walking back as a ghost to your body (in harder content areas). This was however a drastic improvement over Ever Quest which had a massive XP loss penality (like 4 or more hours of grinding XP gone).

    12. Re:Abandoned games... by bv728 · · Score: 2

      Blizzard own copyright over things like Quest Text, art design, textures, logos, map designs, and sound/music independently of the game. If they rebuilt their servers without using any of those, the case would be in question, but it's not. Even if purchase of a game gave you the legal rights you're implying (and it does not!), it does not give you free reign to use the remaining copyrighted content.

      The second element is the question of abandonment. If you buy a copy of World of Warcraft off the shelf, and install it, you can still play it. That the specific version you want is not available doesn't mean the game itself is abandoned. Wizards of the Coast can (and do!) go after people who mass print for distribution their own copies of cards that are no longer legal or in print despite those being for a version of the game which is no longer in existence - there's no question that, even if they've effectively abandoned that version of the game, they still can control distribution of those cards.

      TL,DR: Blizzard owns multiple levels of copyright on WoW and it's constituent parts, and even if an out-of-date version of a ongoing, consistently updated game counts as abandoned, they still have a number of claims against people running servers in a even semi-public fashion.

    13. Re:Abandoned games... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would say the Everquest of now is a lot better than the Everquest of yore. Now, if one dies in EQ, they go to a room (guild hall annex), have their body summoned, and one of the NPC priests there give you your exp back. You can easily solo since regardless of class, you can get a mercenary to come with you, while previously, there was 0 way to solo for most classes.

      The Everquest of the early 2000s was a game of frustration. One class (bard, druid, monk) could easily and continuously wipe raids just by running mobs onto the raid and either scooting away, or dropping all agro. Progression early on was part trying to get to mobs, part trying to get the mobs needed for a key (everything was gated in EQ), stuck under the world, so no other guild can progress. Since there was no instancing, guild fighting was common. Exploiting (MQ2, ShowEQ) were common, and most guilds were mainly into "fattening up" characters to eBay, since a raid geared character could sell for tens of thousands. In fact, one expansion had items only were droppable before a raid-triggered event happened (The Sleeper), and guilds would run the pre-sleeper event, not bothering with the fourth warder, then kill it once everyone was geared, just so that their characters, and no others had primals (which made them better for eBay.)

      The average player pretty had 0% chance of seeing all but maybe 1-2 high level zones, and early on, you needed access to those zones to get to max level.

      When WoW came out, Blizzard fixed what was driving people away from Everquest. Raids were instanced, so the cut-throat competition for the one week spawn that dropped one item useful for a single person in a 40 man raid was gone. If someone was a jackass in a dungeon, you kicked them out, and they no longer affected you. Bind on pickup eliminated the ebay sales of items. A death didn't mean 4-6 hours of lost work, and potentially losing all your equipment forever. You didn't need to spend cash on eBay for journeyman's boots or other items to survive for daily level grinding.

      Eventually Verant/SOE/Daybreak finally revamped EQ into something a lot more playable, but the damage was done. EQ became a ghost town because the developers told players to love it or leave it... and they left in droves.

    14. 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
    15. Re:Abandoned games... by MobyDisk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Companies only started releasing those games in response to the public constantly pirating them. It seems like we need pirates to help the copyright holders find valid business models.

    16. Re:Abandoned games... by AsylumWraith · · Score: 2

      As another poster commented further upthread, that's not what the GP is talking about.

      Since Cataclysm, there are parts of the original game that are literally no longer playable. The entirety of the Barrens and Thousand Needles zones have been completely revamped, for example. Most capital cities have evolved. There's a lot of content that's no longer in the game.

      Now, I don't think that makes a case to call that content "abandoned," and it's damned obvious that Blizzard is doing this now because they are indeed planning on releasing a "Classic" version of WoW; so I see this as a good thing. I'd rather play on a server maintained by Blizz, rather than some no name that could be doing God-knows-what.

    17. Re:Abandoned games... by PhoenixFlare · · Score: 2

      Yeah, perhaps I was a bit harsh, but that's basically what I was getting at.

      In Blizzard's collective mind, I imagine they don't feel like they've abandoned anything, only improved. Whether it's *actually* an improvement is debatable i'm sure, but their game, their rules.

    18. Re:Abandoned games... by subanark · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Lets see what do I remember about EQ (got to level 20):
      1. The game was full screen. Any attempt to switch to another app would close EQ
      2. Having to type /con to determine approximately what level an NPC was relative to your own.
      3. Solo play outside of a couple of classes was impossible due to anything granting XP being able to kill you
      4. Having to sit down to slowly regain mana, Also move, sit, wait for mana regen tick, move, repeat.
      5. Unlike WoW multiple characters couldn't occupy the same place.
      6. Massive XP penalization for dying. Clerics could resurrect you to restore some XP, but their 100% XP restore had a 1 day cool down.
      7. Players who volunteered to be in game customer support (they got free subscription).
      8. A high level quest which involved sitting under water for 3 hours +/- 15 minutes for an NPC to show up.
      9. Having to compete with other players on an NPC that spawns once per week for its loot/quest requirement.
      10. No private party only dungeons.
      11. Daylight savings screwed up the servers
      12. If you died you had to get your gear back from your body.
      13. I played after they removed the part where you had to stare at a book in the UI to recover mana
      14. If you got blind, the UI, including chat with other players was black. Although you could hit just fine.
      15. A hack called "Show EQ" pissed off devs and was pretty much undetectable, as you ran it on a proxy server running Linux.
      16 If you carry too much you can go to 0 movement speed. If you got a buff to walk, then even the smallest fall was fatal.
      17, An invisible NPC called "Pain and suffering" which would attack any player lower than 0 hp, but not yet dead (very unlikey at high levels).

      So, No thanks to that. I'm not touching EQ again.

    19. Re:Abandoned games... by bv728 · · Score: 2

      To play, you have to download a 5.6gb package from them. I very much doubt they're pushing a 5.6gb client package that contains none of that.

    20. Re:Abandoned games... by Cederic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Basically, you're confirming that EQ was hardcore. Sadly that's no longer commercially viable as MMOs rely on network effects, and the networks build around the less punitive games - as you indicate you'd prefer yourself.

      It's a shame though, as EQ did have a tremendous amount of content and did help define a genre. I'm not sure I'd want to play it myself if it was released today (with shiny new graphics, etc) but EQ does have its place in gaming history.

      Incidentally, points 2, 5, 7 and 16 aren't necessarily bad at all. Shit, you could /con something, find that it's pathetic and still get utterly hammered for attacking it. My first death happened that way..

    21. Re:Abandoned games... by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 3, Informative

      Vanilla WoW is indeed an abandoned game. There is nowhere you can play it and it is no longer supported in any way by Blizzard.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    22. Re:Abandoned games... by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      There is no class balance, and death was penalized by having to spend a good 5 minutes or more walking back as a ghost to your body (in harder content areas).

      There was class balance, but the devil is in the details. Like.. which patch from Vanilla will they settle on? The classes changed radically throughout alpha (you could claim that the classes were not finished on release), and my guess is that they'll settle on the Naxxramas release patch.

      Now, I said classes were fairly balanced, but it's worth noting that not all specs for a class were equally viable. IE, in end-game PvE, if you were a priest, druid, shaman, or paladin, you were a healer**. Ret/shadow/feral/etc were not viable until Burning Crusade. So if you really liked playing a DPS druid, yes that's true, you were definitely not viable. And don't bother being a fire mage in Molten Core, etcetc.

      ** Last note about balance, there was one exception where the balance was waaaaaay out of whack -- paladins were much, much better than shaman were. If you wanted real end-game progression, you were Alliance, not Horde. Shaman had nothing, NOTHING on Paladin blessings. That was crazy, and I don't blame Blizzard for making all classes usable by both factions later on.

    23. Re:Abandoned games... by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      Preferring the way the community was back then is a respectable opinion. There's just two problems with it. First, no, the community never was that way, you just have your nostalgia goggles on extra tight

      That's BS. Maybe that's the way it was on your server, but on mine the community was fairly tight. The people you saw on city chat were often people you knew, many of the big/progressed guilds knew each other, and it was that way because often you had to band together like that to get five-man groups. Once they added cross battlegroup random matchmaking partying, the in-server community faded away because game mechanics no longer forced a local server community. You could party elsewhere, more easily. That's good if you're looking to run dungeons easily, but it had the side effect of killing off server communities.

    24. Re:Abandoned games... by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Actually, some MMOs learned the hard way that they released expansions that killed the game. DAoC being my favorite example to be paraded out as a key example showing off how NOT to make expansions.

      Their Trials of Atlantis expansions killed the game. If you're interested, I can go into detail but the tl;dr version is that the game is very heavily realm-vs-realm focused and it became impossible to level new toons to competitive levels after ToA was out for about 6-8 months. Plus it killed crafting.

      It was actually SO bad that they did in the end release "classic" servers that contained only the first (and arguably best, in MMO history) expansion, Shrouded Islands. But the damage was done and players had already left.

      So yes, sometimes MMO makers make "classic" server available. Mostly when the expansion(s) they release kill off the game...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    25. Re:Abandoned games... by silverdirk · · Score: 2

      If you consider there are hundreds of servers and a handful of expansions, that doesn't seem unreasonable at all. There's at least enough players on the free servers to keep them populated.

      WoW runs a never-ending treadmill of delivering new items that make the old items obsolete, giving you ways to fast-forward to reach their latest content, and giving you new things to collect. The entire game operates on hoarder instinct and a feeling of progress. In the original game, most of the content was well balanced. There were reasons to collect the things, the collections were a manageable size, and you spent enough time at each level to enjoy the content for that level. I never even made it to the end game content and I didn't really care, because the journey was fun.

      Ever since that original release, each content pack has made the early levels of the game less enjoyable. Now, you rocket through the early levels, 10% of the original items are completely gone, and the other 90% have no purpose beyond 30 minutes of play time, especially if they take longer than 30 minutes to acquire.

      Then on top of that, in the Cataclysm expansion they literally wrecked a majority of the old game world. ('cause "cataclysm", right?) and so the old quest zones are all scarred and burned and look horrible. Blizzard deliberately destroyed all those zones where people might have had fun memories questing around with friends and there is no way to go back. The old dungeons are pointless, the player levels are so spread out (since you only remain at a level for a half hour) that you can't find anyone willing to waste time in the low-level content (or pretty much any content except end-game).

      I knew that back when I was paying monthly for access to the game that they didn't have any obligation to preserve the world for me, and that I was paying for a service rather than a copy of software. But I'm still highly annoyed at them for cutting out and obsoleting all the old content, and I'm more than happy to play on private servers and give the middle finger to their EULA that I clicked through 14 years ago.

      If and when they do re-release the Classic servers, I will probably try to recruit some friends and re-live some of the fun with an official server. And when the new players stop showing up and everyone maxes out at level 60 I will probably quit again, because I have no interest in investing my life in end-game raids, or moving to their current twisted up version of the game.

      (I'm a nostalgic sort of guy, as you might guess from my 14-year-old sig)

      --
      Mark of the Coder fades from you. You perform Opening on World of Warcraft. Warcraft crits GPA for 4. GPA dies.
    26. Re:Abandoned games... by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 2

      I definitely agree. I was lucky enough to get in on the Vanilla open beta and started playing the minute the official servers launched. The leveling was far more challenging than it is today, the skill trees were very in depth (I miss those). There are some conveniences that I would hate to give up (AOE loot for one), but in Vanilla, the worlds were actually worth exploring and advancement felt meaningful. These days any 6 year old who can mash a few keys and has 40h to play can get a max level toon using the LFG tool without ever leaving their capitol city. Back in the day if you persevered to 60, it really meant something and without cross realm function, if you were an asshole, you got left out in the cold, as was right.

      For me the sweet spot of difficulty, depth and game quality peaked in Burning Crusade and then Lich King. Everything since has been a cash grab and a dumbing down for the kiddies.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    27. Re:Abandoned games... by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      Well, I played till Mist of Pandora. Just a few days to level from 80 to 90 ... most boring expansion ever. Did only visit a part of the world, the stupid kung fu panda simply made me sad.

      I'll admit I liked the pandas, but that's fine. Warlords (the next expansion) had a good leveling experience, but the endgame was terrible outside of raiding. Probably their worst expansion. The current expansion, Legion, is probably their best expansion.

      I love BC, but the zone and quest design was pretty bad. They are simply much better at crafting interesting storylines and interesting zone design now than they were back then. BC had killer raids, though. 5-mans were fairly fun.

      Wrath had well-laid out zones and good quests. No problems there. However, they hit a nasty bump at the start of the end game, as the 5-man dungeons were a bit predictable and really really stupidly easy. Naxx-10/25 was ridiculously easy as well. They rebounded nicely with Ulduar, one of the best raids they've ever done, and added a hard mode for those who wanted more challenge. The rest of the expansion was pretty good too. There was a long time gap between the last content patch and the next expansion, though. That started an unpleasant trend.

      Cataclysm started off well, though the zones were a bit buggy. The 5-mans were hard (this is good!) but so much effort went into the 1-60 redesign that there was nothing left for the endgame. This was the first real endgame doldrums, and this expansion sucked because of it, its only saving grace being excellent raid design. But if you weren't raiding, you weren't doing much. At the end of the expansion, they made the decision to make 5-mans super-easy again, and the new 5-mans released towards the end which were bland and trivial. Dragon Soul lasted too long; there was too long a gap until the next expansion.

      Pandaria had very well designed zones and dungeons and raids, and there was a decent amount to do in the endgame. If you didn't like the whole panda thing, then that's unfortunate, but otherwise it was a pretty good expansion.

      Warlords of Draenor. Hooboy. I think most acknowledge that this was Warcraft's worst expansion. Some good questlines, but they had to scrap many things in development, and it threw the whole feel of the continent for a loop. It felt half-finished because it was half-finished. I think much of their design team either left or was fired or reassigned.

      Legion. Excellent, excellent expansion, top to bottom. I honestly do think that the game is in the best state it's been in since the Vanilla/BC days. If you want casual content you have LFR and regular dungeons, if you want the harder content you have the fixed 20-man mythic raids and higher levels of mythic+ five-man dungeons. Plenty of solo content (way more than I can do..)

      The developers/designers have no clue. They think attracting new 16 year olds to the game as new players makes more money than keeping the 50 year olds in the game.

      Not that many 50 year olds are going to stay in the game no matter how much you try to make it like the old days.
      Games need -new- players, or they die completely. There is no way to keep all the old players in the game. If it doesn't change/improve, the old players are going to leave anyway because "it's just the same old thing." Keeping it static in an attempt to keep the old player-base who didn't want change is a fool's dream.

      Also, they realized in BC that their raid design philosophy was totally broken. Less than 5% of the Warcraft players ever saw the inside of 40-man Naxx during Vanilla. Similar numbers apply to Sunwell in BC. That's too much effort that was put into the game that very few people ever saw. It was after that where they offered stripped-down versions of the raids so people could at least see the content, if not clear the difficult option. Afterwards they added flex-mode raiding, probably one if not the best post-launch features they ever added to the game, though it had the side effect of killing the fixed 10-man raid, so I'll never see the inside of mythic raids again. :-D

  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.
    1. Re:Not Infringing - Bliz fault by mfh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. 2.4.3 vs, 3.3.5...etc.

      Private servers run different EXPANSIONS. Because Bliz took that feeling away from TBC and WOTLK. CATA garbage, MOP garbage.... and everything else pretty much after.

      Even if Bliz starts to do classic mode (which they are) that still can't change the facts.

      Bliz is wrong; they changed MAJOR aspects of the game to the extent that each expansion is like a GAME in and of itself, and not a VERSION of a GAME.

      That is the final crux; Warcraft is many different games each time there is an expansion and the company DENIES PLAYERS the right of playing previous GAMES.

      ie: TBC is warcraft but it is the game TBC. WOTLK is warcraft but it is the GAME WOTLK. When they bring out this next patch, LEGION will be ABANDONWARE.

      I just hate how nobody UNDERSTANDS THIS. Dammit.

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    2. Re:Not Infringing - Bliz fault by RabidStoat · · Score: 2

      I think the word "EXPANSION" (the caps really helps by the way!) .. is the key to it. This isn't like Office 2013 vs 2017, try playing the latest _expansion_ without the "game". And as you well know, elements of every expansion exist in the game today, some more than others - yes elements have been changed or removed, but again, so has the original game from the "as released" version. Whether you like or not, the expansions are exactly that, they are not new versions of the "game".

  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.
    1. Re:and more by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

      vertical applications, etc.

      At one time I was looking for some older m68k ver of an mac app and corp that made it no longer had for sale but was still selling old PPC ver.

  4. How much Blizzard code ... by Rip!ey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How much Blizzard code exactly, has been copied, to produce the non-Blizzard server?

    1. Re:How much Blizzard code ... by KingRatMass · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure where creating a program that interfaces with proprietary software, with no API or documentation, going purely via trial and error, stands in the copyright arena.

      Such a technique is called a "Chinese Wall", the concept was used by Phoenix Technologies when the cloned the IBM PC XT BIOS. Two teams work in parallel. One develops the technical specifications by reverse engineering the code to be copied, the second uses the resulting specification to make the new, duplicate code. That way the developers never have a chance to copy the original code. Periodically, the first team would review the second's work for accuracy and steer them in the right direction if they got it wrong.

      Phoenix was so cautious in this respect, the engineer they hired to write their BIOS code had never worked with the Intel 8088 or 8080 and had never seen any of IBM's codee or their technical specifications. All they worked from was the distilled version that the reverse engineering team fed them. Phoenix audited the whole process very closely to insure that any claims of infringement could be thwarted..

      As a result, IBM was never able to successfully sue Phoenix for copyright infringement. Because no matter how similar the two final products were, they were derived completely independently.

  5. Blizzard Issues DMCA Notice to a Fan-Run 'WoW' Leg by zifn4b · · Score: 4, Informative

    Blizzard Issues DMCA Notice to a Fan-Run 'WoW' Leg

    No. They issued the DMCA notice to GITHUB. Terrible summary.

    Blizzard has asked GitHub to pull the site's code offline.

    Blizzard asked Github to take down ONE file. Github complied because they are located in the United States. Light's Hope on the other hand is run outside of the United States so there is absolutely no jurisdiction for Blizzard to take it down and they can't really stop the code from being disseminated. Blizzard is just quite frankly wasting their time and money.

    --
    We'll make great pets
  6. 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.

  7. You can never please (any) of the people .. by RabidStoat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All these people, here and elsewhere that are claiming they should be able to play the game as released by Blizzard. Sure, go on then ! Having played since the early Betas, i remember what the game was like when it was first released and my account history shows how much free time there was when it was _released_. Oh and of course, next you'll have people claiming "oh no, we didn't mean when it was released, we mean when it was stable", or "oh no, we didn't mean when it was released we meant at the end of the expansion". Copyright is copyright. Like it or not, dislike the period or not , get over it.

    So what version are we talking about when they say its been "abandoned", as someone else pointed out that means they should be keeping servers running for every patch "I want to play the second Burning Crusade patch please - you've abandoned that Blizzard, I'm not entitling myself to create my own server and copy all your material". Reductio ad absurdum - I want to have my own server running the patch the day before yesterday, 'cause you've abandoned that version Blizzard.

  8. Re:Blizzard Issues DMCA Notice to a Fan-Run 'WoW' by lucasnate1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Someone in Blizzard needed to show he is working.

    --
    Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
  9. Re:Blizzard Issues DMCA Notice to a Fan-Run 'WoW' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lest you forget, Kim Dotcom's case should remind you that the US has jurisdiction wherever it wants.

  10. 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.

  11. Debatable by DrYak · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you look in the URL linked in the summary (Yeah I know, /. and actual article reading) :
    it might seem debatable.

    The complains hinge around 2-3 sql file using names and having a few data that looks like the data used in wow (spells have the same characteristic as old versions of wow, same old trademarked names are used, etc.).

    Fantasy Names – “Script” files and folders are named after and reference WoW fantasy names.

    They're not complaining about game assets being lifted of blizzard's own software (e.g.: bitmaps, etc.)
    They are complaining about the code using official Blizzard trademarked name to designate Blizzard's said trademarked characters.
    (Note: e.g. it's not a trademark violation when you use microsoft's trademarked "Microsoft Windows" name to speak about Microsoft Windows itself).

    They're complaining that the datamodel is very close to how it used to be in old servers :

    The LightsHope spell table has identical layout and typically identical field names as the table from early WoW. We use database tables to represent game data, like spells, in WoW. In our code, we use .sql files to represent the data layout of each table (i.e. the fields of each specific table, like a spell name or the magnitude of its effect). MaNGOS, the platform off of which Light’s Hope appears to be built, uses a similar structure. The LightsHope spell_template table matches almost exactly the layout and field names of early WoW client database tables.

    (Looks like the devs made their "Classic" recreation by using old dumps / backups as a referrence).

    Matching Record IDs – There are “scripts” that reference database records directly by ID; there are cases where these IDs directly match the ID from WoW’s content.

    "Hey, their serial numbers looks suspiciously close to our serial numbers !"
    Oh, come one.
    (Numbers aren't copyrightable in the US. That's basically Intel complaining that competitor's 386-compatible chip also use numbers like 386)

    None of the complain is anything that looks like : "these huges chunks of code are actually a un-licensed copy of the network code of our server".

    Overall : Some of the complain could almost fell under the "but these old numbers are necessary to get interoperation" exemption that exists to copyright in some jurisdiction (other /.ers have mentioned Canada as an example).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  12. Legal != right by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I understand the legal issues just fine.

    However, my mindset was best expressed by St. Thomas Aquinas:

    in so far as [law] deviates from right reason it is called an unjust law; in such case it is no law at all, but rather a species of violence.

    There are obvious examples: Slavery was legal; and in no case was it reasonable to follow the law. Forbidding women's right to vote was legal, and in no case was it reasonable to follow the law. And so on.

    The law, unfortunately, is not a golden chalice of right and reason, and there are definitely times when extremely bad law should be ignored until/unless it can be repaired. In my personal estimation, this is one of those areas.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  13. Re: Are they actually infringing copyright? by froggyjojodaddy · · Score: 2

    Hi,
    I didn't read the post as a 'shill' - just a statement on the current law and it's enforcement. I didn't detect any opinion from the OP on whether or not the law was fair or whether or not OP was in favor, just a factual statement.

    If the law says, "Don't do this" and you do it anyway, can you really reasonably expect to not face prosecution? You may argue that whatever "this" is is fine to do, but that doesn't change the law.

    At this point, I think the normal thing to say is something like, "If you don't like it, then vote or write to your " but I fear that might just be naive or overly-optimistic

    Sorry, I don't have a positive suggestion here :(

  14. Re:Are they actually infringing copyright? by Cederic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hmm. You're assuming though that the server has or provides the text and names.

    I'd expect all of that to be client-side. Server will send "Quest 044 status 382" and the client will interpret that as "Chief Boyo congratulates you on your successful conquest. Would you like the ring of glowiness or the necklace of pantswetting?"

    If the gamer has an original purchased copy of the game and is merely connecting to a different server then I'm not sure where the copyright violation lies.

  15. Software Owner's Bill of Rights by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 2

    It gets a little tricky there, because people still own a copy of vanilla WoW. I am pretty sure that companies like Blizzard could actually be sued for selling a retail software package that they remotely disable and prevent from operating. EULA that you agree to when you sign in to their servers have very little if any actual legal weight, and I know I didn't sign anything when I bought my copy at retail, which the courts have ruled is where that has to take place to be at any level enforceable.

    Furthermore, if you develop software that interacts with your copy of vanilla WoW and lets it run without Blizzard servers, there is not a damn thing they can do about it, as long as you didn't copy their code on the server side. They are alleging that here, but their evidence seems thin to the point of losing all credibility (almost the same is not the same).

    It is far and away time to counterbalance the DMCA with a software/users bill of rights, defeating once and for all all of the abusive EULAs and attempts to use the DMCA to enforce shit copyright claims.

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
  16. Emulation is violation of DMCA by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 2

    Whomever is running that server is pretty much boned. Reverse-engineering the WOW protocol is a violation of DMCA all by itself, so naturally running the software to provide a server is also a violation of DMCA. The question of some spell system or files being the sore point is moot.
    Emulation has always been a gray area that people have operated in. It's not legally permitted, but for the most part, companies have turned a blind-eye toward this.

    Sadly, Blizzard isn't one of those companies. At the end of the day, the legacy server doesn't have a leg to stand on here. If Blizzard wants them gone, they have little-to-none recourse.

    My suggestion? Don't play MMO's that are closed up like WoW. Move to an MMO that's more open. Like ARK Survival, Minecraft or Space Engineers, or any of the other open-world type offerings out there that include a server for you to run as you see fit.

  17. Maybe Not Abandoned At All? by Toad-san · · Score: 2

    https://wccftech.com/wow-class...

    "
    Gaming
    Blizzard VP Talks WoW Classic: Original Graphics the Starting Place; Mentions Nostalgia and Rose-Colored Glasses
    Author Photo
    By Aernout
    Feb 4
    15Shares
    Share Tweet Submit
    world of warcraft classic

    Blizzard’s Vice President and production director on World of Warcraft, J. Allen Brack, talks about re-recreating the original World of Warcraft experience in WoW Classic.

    In an interview with Forbes, Brack and senior game designer Jeremy Feasel talked about the upcoming World of Warcraft vanilla server option, which was announced at BlizzCon 2017.
    Brack was asked whether Classic would be using the original 2004 graphics or the high-definition character models used in the recent World of Warcraft expansions, after which he replied that re-creating the original 2004 experience is the starting place and that the Warcraft community might help them decide."

  18. Dumb Tactic by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 2

    Copy right needs to be defended or it is lost. Blizzard does have to do something. But I always wonder why in the world companies don't simply negotiate carefully worded licenses with fan projects to both protect their rights AND promote fandom. Just draw up a license that allows them to continue specifically running the server but not to charge money, but not to use the IP in novel ways.

  19. Total Rewrite of Corrupt Copyright Laws by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Copyright needs a total revamp after the tampering by the music and movie industry in the 1976 for their exclusive benefit that completely destroyed the original intent of copyright laws in the first palce. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Copyright term for movies and TV shows should be limited to 14 years on the original work.
    Copyright on software and games should be limited to 7 years with a 7 year purchasable extension requiring that the software/game still be in use and for sale to the general public at market price in good faith.
    All software should be covered exclusively by copyright and all software patents summarily invalidated.

    Notwithstanding the above, all commercial copyright material (TV, Movies, corporate developed software and games) automatically enters public domain if unavailable for good faith purchase or un-aired for a period of 1 year in the US after initially released anywhere in the world.

    Books should be covered for 25 years with an automatic extension of 15 years if they are still in print.
    Music should be covered for 14 years with a 7 year purchasable extension.

    All books and music (and other small/single author content that requires a publisher) should be limited to a maximum of 3 year contract, after which the rights are reverted to the author(s) to be re-negotiated in a new contract of their choosing.

    Once an item leaves "commercial" copyright, a second stage should engage (call it distribution copyright), where only the rights holder can sell the copyrighted material, but it is free for anyone to share/distribute in a nonprofit maner. This period lasts an additional 20 years, at which point the work enters the public domain.

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
  20. Totally Revamp US Copyright Laws... by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 2

    Copyright needs a total revamp after the tampering by the music and movie industry in 1976 for their exclusive benefit that completely destroyed the original intent of copyright laws in the first palce. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Copyright term for movies and TV shows should be limited to 14 years on the original work.
    Copyright on software and games should be limited to 7 years with a 7 year purchasable extension requiring that the software/game still be in use and for sale to the general public at market price in good faith.
    All software should be covered exclusively by copyright and all software patents summarily invalidated.

    Notwithstanding the above, all commercial copyright material (TV, Movies, corporate developed software and games) automatically enters copyright stage two (described below) if unavailable for good faith purchase or un-aired for a period of 1 year in the US after initially released anywhere in the world.

    Books should be covered for 25 years with an automatic extension of 15 years if they are still in print.
    Music should be covered for 14 years with a 7 year purchasable extension.

    All books and music (and other small/single author content that requires a publisher) should be limited to a maximum of 3 year contract, after which the rights are reverted to the author(s) to be re-negotiated in a new contract of their choosing.

    Once an item leaves "commercial" copyright, a second stage should engage (call it distribution copyright), where only the rights holder can sell the copyrighted material, but it is free for anyone to share/distribute in a nonprofit manner. This period lasts an additional 20 years, at which point the work enters the public domain.

    Further, consumer purchases of copyrighted materials should have clearly described rights set in the law, rather than the current mess of EULA "heads we win, tails you loose" bullshit. Rights like right to resell for both physical copies and digital copies, right to switch format (disc, digital, streaming, whatever), right to un-adulterated use (updates cannot remove features, function or content from a purchase, nor can updates add undesirable features, like malware, adware, tracking or telemetry), etc. as well as penalties for any company violating these rights [something like $1000 per violation, in 2018 dollars (inflation corrected), per customer, paid to the customers injured, or 5x the purchase price, whichever is greater, and they still have to fix their underlying violation].

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like