(though, you must agree that you're buying the game, not the toolset, which... most people would agree, since they'll never touch the toolset)
I would most certainly not agree with this assessment. If it comes in the box, then that's what I'm buying. Some of us were planning to buy this game exclusively for the toolkit so that we could make our own stories playable for others. The game is almost just a secondary thing. Regardless though, when you buy the game, you are paying for whatever comes with it as well.
The purpose for this agreement is to prevent people from doing exactly what happened with Doom. People sold their addons in the store for $10 a piece and id never saw a dime from their sales
That is not the purpose at all unless their lawyers are a bunch of morons. There's no reason that they need to give themselves the rights to distribute your creations. There's no reason they need to ban you from distributing your own creations free of charge. They could simply do what Blizzard did and ban people from selling mods or custom levels created with their editing tools. Since they didn't do that, it's obvious that they are intending to do much more than simply prevent people from selling these mods and levels.
They may not succeed this time, but that doesn't really matter all that much. The game isn't over yet. Microsoft may yet manage to ship a number of good games that will drive up sales. They can afford to lose this time. They have enough cash to play the game again next time.. and the time after that... Sooner or later they'll probably get it right. Which is exactly the way they work.
Ok then, the industry must be pretty clever to have secured such seemingly unassailable power for themselves, so yeah, I guess their creations don't actually have to be clever.
I'm thinking preemptive strike. Who's good with video? We need to whip up a tape of Osama using Windows XP to deliver orders to his terrorist organization. Maybe have him use it to download some pictures of unnatural acts between men and sheep too. Then we will have effectively defused any argument by MS that Linux facilitates terrorism.
It doesn't need to be everybody patching. Just the people that run important systems. One would hope that they would be competent enough to patch their systems. Hell, I'm just a lowly jr. grunt db/app programmer and I can keep my boxes patched. Any sysadmin out there who is paid to keep their systems up and running should be able to do at least as much. If they can't, then there is a problem. Either they are using software that is innappropriate for the task, or they aren't competent enough for their job. The first may or may not be their fault, but the second would be.
Microsoft already does both. They release hotfixes to patch specific problems, and later roll up a group of hotfixes into a service pack. That's part of the reason their argument is so stupid.
For example, if any inconvenient fact looks like it might support Creationism, there are those who immediately impugn it as being `War on Science'. (-:
Of course the other side uses the same tactic as well. It's opportunism at its best. It takes a lot of integrity to resist using such tactics, especially when your opposition isn't reluctant to use them. I wish we could see more integrity in the world.
I mentioned this very scenario in my comment to the DOJ regarding the proposed settlement. I proposed that the oversight committee (as long as no members were appointed by Microsoft) or the court be tasked with determining whether revealing APIs or protocols would constitute a legitimate security threat. It's probably not the best answer, but it beats the hell out of letting Microsoft decide.
Since when does Microsoft have to turn a profit on something? If it helps them get into other areas where they can eventually dominate due to their vast cash reserves, ruthless and sometimes illegal business tactics, and single-minded pursuit of ultimate control, they don't need to profit within any reasonable time-frame. They can keep wearing the market down like waves against a cliff.
First of all, Morrowind wasn't among his examples. I'm saying he's full of crap because the examples he gave don't contain what he claims they do. I thought I was quite clear about that. Even the Morrowind EULA isn't as harsh as the NWN EULA though. While they are claiming the right to use what you create in any way they see fit, at least they aren't denying you the right to do the same, as the NWN EULA does.
Intel considers it to be for business purposes, but I'm sure they also receive massive amounts of spam. Why aren't they suing for that? Then there's the fact that they probably do allow some personal use of email, so I don't think they can say it's soley for business use. On the other hand, if Intel wins this case, does this mean I can send a cease & desist email to anyone who spams me, and then sue them if they do it again, using this case as precedent? Interesting...
They won't purchase anything new for now. But if Hollywood plays it right, they'll phase in New and Improved DVD discs in the next few years. They'll require a new player, but hey, they're New and Improved!! Then, as they gradually stop releasing new movies on regular DVD, and you can only buy them in the new format, then people will begin to upgrade. It'll be another transition, just like the VHS to DVD one. If they're really clever, they'll make sure the new players will still play the old discs. This will make the upgrade easier to swallow for most people.
Let's see how happy you are when you're facing 10 to 20 for possession of devices designed to circumvent copyright protection (i.e. anything not sanctioned by Hollywood). The solution is not to attempt to work around these laws. They'll just keep tightening them and throwing offenders in jail. Our government doesn't seem to have any aversion to imprisoning a large percentage of its population, as the drug war has amply demonstrated. As long as the rich and powerful get to stay that way, they'll do whatever it takes. Most people are too stupid, ignorant, or apathetic to take any action against these kinds of actions by the government. They just believe what they're told.
C. You are entitled to use the Program for your own use, but you are not be entitled to:
(iii) use or allow third parties to use the Editor and the New Materials created thereby for commercial purposes including, but not limited to, distribution of New Materials on a stand alone basis or packaged with other software or hardware through any and all distribution channels, including, but not limited to, retail sales and on-line electronic distribution without the express written consent of Blizzard;
Aside from that, there is no other limitations on what you or Blizzard may do with any "New Materials" that you create. (It said earlier that "New Materials" refers to custom levels created with the editor.)
So, yeah, I think he's full of crap when he says that these other EULAs contain the same control freakiness as Bioware's EULA. In fact, I'm going to send him an email and a link to this thread and maybe he can come back and explain himself.
Well gee, I feel so much better now. I always did think calling up the credit card company and canceling a card was just too easy, painless, and blood-free.
1. You can still extract a clip from a tape and comment on it. You can even play a clip from a DVD and comment on it. You can film yourself watching the DVD and commenting the whole way through. Etc, etc.
Tapes are being phased out in favor of digital media. Playing a clip is only suitable for live presentations. Even then there could be a problem as DVDs all contain warnings about public display. I'm not sure how enforceable those are in any given situation now. Filming yourself watching a DVD is a very poor substitute for embedding an actual clip. The quality is bound to suffer quite a bit and look quite unprofessional. So don't tell me we aren't losing something here. Before the DMCA, we could have extracted clips to include in our own works. Now we can't. Plain and simple.
2. Fair use is an exception to the exclusive rights of the copyright holder. It does not grant you any specfic rights other than the protection from the charge of Copyright Infringement.
Semantics. If the law prohibits me from doing something, then any exception will (re)grant me permission to do that thing. There is little, if any, difference.
Other than me "censoring" your ability to copy my work, which isn't censorship at all.
That happens to be exactly what it is. Just because the government has legalized that form of censorship doesn't make it any less a form of censorship. The DMCA and the proposed new law will just carry it even further and allow a greater degree of censorship.
Well, let's see. First of all, you most certainly did have to register copyrights in this country originally. The law was later amended to remove this requirement. Second, copyright law is becoming more draconian in its restrictions. For instance, today I can show a clip of a movie (VHS) and comment on it. However, I cannot legally extract a clip from a DVD because I would have to circumvent the encryption in order to do so. Since it is illegal for anyone to offer me a program that can accomplish this, my ability to criticize or comment on a work is restricted. The additional changes proposed in Congress will only make this situation worse.
I might believe that when Microsoft's marketshare drops below 90%. The problem is not just Windows, but Office as well. People use Windows because that's how they can run Office. They could use a Mac too, but that's at least as expensive thanks to Apple's proprietary hardware. The only other alternative had to be developed for free by thousands of people around the globe. There's no way any company could have done it without being driven out of business by Microsoft. Be is a perfect example of that. They had a better OS, but they couldn't get anyone to develop for it because there was no user base, and there was no user base because nobody developed for it. The government is supposed to prevent monopolies from harming consumers. The government is not doing its job. We pay the price.
That certainly doesn't help. Of course if the DOJ had taken my suggestions for the settlement proposal, it wouldn't be as much of an issue since Microsoft would have to disclose the information necessary well before the release of a new version of Office.
Could it be that Microsoft has figured out that the only way to beat linux is make sure that the only Standards that matter are Standards that microsoft has designed?
Yep. That's one of the cool things about being a monopolist. You get to push people around and make them play by your rules.
Could it be that the public hasn't realized that by giving up control of their information they are giving Microsoft control of their personal data?
Right again. People are generally ignorant and apathetic about computer issues (as well as most other issues).
oh well. I wish Microsoft the best. Lets just try to be as nice to Microsoft when OSS has stomped their butt.
The only thing I wish on Microsoft is justice. Looks like that's not gonna happen anytime soon though.
Slashdot Mirror
(though, you must agree that you're buying the game, not the toolset, which... most people would agree, since they'll never touch the toolset)
I would most certainly not agree with this assessment. If it comes in the box, then that's what I'm buying. Some of us were planning to buy this game exclusively for the toolkit so that we could make our own stories playable for others. The game is almost just a secondary thing. Regardless though, when you buy the game, you are paying for whatever comes with it as well.
The purpose for this agreement is to prevent people from doing exactly what happened with Doom. People sold their addons in the store for $10 a piece and id never saw a dime from their sales
That is not the purpose at all unless their lawyers are a bunch of morons. There's no reason that they need to give themselves the rights to distribute your creations. There's no reason they need to ban you from distributing your own creations free of charge. They could simply do what Blizzard did and ban people from selling mods or custom levels created with their editing tools. Since they didn't do that, it's obvious that they are intending to do much more than simply prevent people from selling these mods and levels.
They may not succeed this time, but that doesn't really matter all that much. The game isn't over yet. Microsoft may yet manage to ship a number of good games that will drive up sales. They can afford to lose this time. They have enough cash to play the game again next time.. and the time after that... Sooner or later they'll probably get it right. Which is exactly the way they work.
Ok then, the industry must be pretty clever to have secured such seemingly unassailable power for themselves, so yeah, I guess their creations don't actually have to be clever.
I'm thinking preemptive strike. Who's good with video? We need to whip up a tape of Osama using Windows XP to deliver orders to his terrorist organization. Maybe have him use it to download some pictures of unnatural acts between men and sheep too. Then we will have effectively defused any argument by MS that Linux facilitates terrorism.
It doesn't need to be everybody patching. Just the people that run important systems. One would hope that they would be competent enough to patch their systems. Hell, I'm just a lowly jr. grunt db/app programmer and I can keep my boxes patched. Any sysadmin out there who is paid to keep their systems up and running should be able to do at least as much. If they can't, then there is a problem. Either they are using software that is innappropriate for the task, or they aren't competent enough for their job. The first may or may not be their fault, but the second would be.
Microsoft already does both. They release hotfixes to patch specific problems, and later roll up a group of hotfixes into a service pack. That's part of the reason their argument is so stupid.
For example, if any inconvenient fact looks like it might support Creationism, there are those who immediately impugn it as being `War on Science'. (-:
Of course the other side uses the same tactic as well. It's opportunism at its best. It takes a lot of integrity to resist using such tactics, especially when your opposition isn't reluctant to use them. I wish we could see more integrity in the world.
You have a point. In the real world they also figure in the cost of bad publicity associated with product failures.
I mentioned this very scenario in my comment to the DOJ regarding the proposed settlement. I proposed that the oversight committee (as long as no members were appointed by Microsoft) or the court be tasked with determining whether revealing APIs or protocols would constitute a legitimate security threat. It's probably not the best answer, but it beats the hell out of letting Microsoft decide.
Look at how much money they make. Now tell me how anything they create could be anything but clever.
Since when does Microsoft have to turn a profit on something? If it helps them get into other areas where they can eventually dominate due to their vast cash reserves, ruthless and sometimes illegal business tactics, and single-minded pursuit of ultimate control, they don't need to profit within any reasonable time-frame. They can keep wearing the market down like waves against a cliff.
First of all, Morrowind wasn't among his examples. I'm saying he's full of crap because the examples he gave don't contain what he claims they do. I thought I was quite clear about that. Even the Morrowind EULA isn't as harsh as the NWN EULA though. While they are claiming the right to use what you create in any way they see fit, at least they aren't denying you the right to do the same, as the NWN EULA does.
Intel considers it to be for business purposes, but I'm sure they also receive massive amounts of spam. Why aren't they suing for that? Then there's the fact that they probably do allow some personal use of email, so I don't think they can say it's soley for business use. On the other hand, if Intel wins this case, does this mean I can send a cease & desist email to anyone who spams me, and then sue them if they do it again, using this case as precedent? Interesting...
They won't purchase anything new for now. But if Hollywood plays it right, they'll phase in New and Improved DVD discs in the next few years. They'll require a new player, but hey, they're New and Improved!! Then, as they gradually stop releasing new movies on regular DVD, and you can only buy them in the new format, then people will begin to upgrade. It'll be another transition, just like the VHS to DVD one. If they're really clever, they'll make sure the new players will still play the old discs. This will make the upgrade easier to swallow for most people.
They could do that anyway. They articles would just have a different slant to them.
Let's see how happy you are when you're facing 10 to 20 for possession of devices designed to circumvent copyright protection (i.e. anything not sanctioned by Hollywood). The solution is not to attempt to work around these laws. They'll just keep tightening them and throwing offenders in jail. Our government doesn't seem to have any aversion to imprisoning a large percentage of its population, as the drug war has amply demonstrated. As long as the rich and powerful get to stay that way, they'll do whatever it takes. Most people are too stupid, ignorant, or apathetic to take any action against these kinds of actions by the government. They just believe what they're told.
Here's what the Starcraft EULA has to say:
C. You are entitled to use the Program for your own use, but you are not be entitled to:
(iii) use or allow third parties to use the Editor and the New Materials created thereby for commercial purposes including, but not limited to, distribution of New Materials on a stand alone basis or packaged with other software or hardware through any and all distribution channels, including, but not limited to, retail sales and on-line electronic distribution without the express written consent of Blizzard;
Aside from that, there is no other limitations on what you or Blizzard may do with any "New Materials" that you create. (It said earlier that "New Materials" refers to custom levels created with the editor.)
So, yeah, I think he's full of crap when he says that these other EULAs contain the same control freakiness as Bioware's EULA. In fact, I'm going to send him an email and a link to this thread and maybe he can come back and explain himself.
Ooh, you're a clever one. What a stinging retort. Heh.
Christ! It's a joke! Lay off! Being from Texas, my accent gets made fun of from time to time too. It's just not something to get upset over.
The DMCA specifically allows for reverse engineering for interoperability reasons. This would seem to be a pretty clear-cut case of that.
Well gee, I feel so much better now. I always did think calling up the credit card company and canceling a card was just too easy, painless, and blood-free.
1. You can still extract a clip from a tape and comment on it. You can even play a clip from a DVD and comment on it. You can film yourself watching the DVD and commenting the whole way through. Etc, etc.
Tapes are being phased out in favor of digital media. Playing a clip is only suitable for live presentations. Even then there could be a problem as DVDs all contain warnings about public display. I'm not sure how enforceable those are in any given situation now. Filming yourself watching a DVD is a very poor substitute for embedding an actual clip. The quality is bound to suffer quite a bit and look quite unprofessional. So don't tell me we aren't losing something here. Before the DMCA, we could have extracted clips to include in our own works. Now we can't. Plain and simple.
2. Fair use is an exception to the exclusive rights of the copyright holder. It does not grant you any specfic rights other than the protection from the charge of Copyright Infringement.
Semantics. If the law prohibits me from doing something, then any exception will (re)grant me permission to do that thing. There is little, if any, difference.
Other than me "censoring" your ability to copy my work, which isn't censorship at all.
That happens to be exactly what it is. Just because the government has legalized that form of censorship doesn't make it any less a form of censorship. The DMCA and the proposed new law will just carry it even further and allow a greater degree of censorship.
Well, let's see. First of all, you most certainly did have to register copyrights in this country originally. The law was later amended to remove this requirement. Second, copyright law is becoming more draconian in its restrictions. For instance, today I can show a clip of a movie (VHS) and comment on it. However, I cannot legally extract a clip from a DVD because I would have to circumvent the encryption in order to do so. Since it is illegal for anyone to offer me a program that can accomplish this, my ability to criticize or comment on a work is restricted. The additional changes proposed in Congress will only make this situation worse.
I might believe that when Microsoft's marketshare drops below 90%. The problem is not just Windows, but Office as well. People use Windows because that's how they can run Office. They could use a Mac too, but that's at least as expensive thanks to Apple's proprietary hardware. The only other alternative had to be developed for free by thousands of people around the globe. There's no way any company could have done it without being driven out of business by Microsoft. Be is a perfect example of that. They had a better OS, but they couldn't get anyone to develop for it because there was no user base, and there was no user base because nobody developed for it. The government is supposed to prevent monopolies from harming consumers. The government is not doing its job. We pay the price.
Could it be yearly upgrades of the Office suit?
That certainly doesn't help. Of course if the DOJ had taken my suggestions for the settlement proposal, it wouldn't be as much of an issue since Microsoft would have to disclose the information necessary well before the release of a new version of Office.
Could it be that Microsoft has figured out that the only way to beat linux is make sure that the only Standards that matter are Standards that microsoft has designed?
Yep. That's one of the cool things about being a monopolist. You get to push people around and make them play by your rules.
Could it be that the public hasn't realized that by giving up control of their information they are giving Microsoft control of their personal data?
Right again. People are generally ignorant and apathetic about computer issues (as well as most other issues).
oh well. I wish Microsoft the best. Lets just try to be as nice to Microsoft when OSS has stomped their butt.
The only thing I wish on Microsoft is justice. Looks like that's not gonna happen anytime soon though.