I say this with the utmost respect to you as a human being (because I dont respect you for much else. - Kidding! Honest. =P). You seem to be suff'rin from what I think I'll name: elitist counterculturism.
Basically, this is the idea that you've risen above general society and have a new and better view on all its faults and complications. So, ya go around posting like you're a particularly enlightened soul and can offer epiphanies to any passers-by. In reality... yer coming off lookin like a big dork at best, and an airhead at worst. =] No offense intended there, but ya gotta lighten up and talk about these issues without waxing poetic. Normal people are... survey says!... normal!; and are generally not going to respond with respect to anything written like that.
Most people aren't oblivious to the problems of society - you're not doing anyone any favors by talking to them like they're unenlightened dullards. You've probably got some good ideas, but we cant really see em because of a huge brick wall: the way you try to deliver those ideas.
I've been a long time opponent (putting it mildly) of the scientology cult since I was very little and those Dianetics commercials came on and my dear ol mum explained to me what kind of crackpot blackhole-for-money it is. This Google development absolutely fantastic, not just for the legal benefits of Google starting to respond to DMCA-driven attacks jedi-style (think: blaster shots bouncing of sabers), but also allowing more people to see the disgusting truth behind scientology. Awesome popshot at the DMCA and the CoS.
Makes me think the boys at Google or some of us should start a more powerful "temporary religion" devoted to deprogramming scientologists before they've gone over the edge (search for scientology related deaths to see what I mean).
In the meantime, we all really need to start an 'accidental voluntary' DDoS network to continually cripple official scientology sites. =D
Yall remember - scientology doesn't just suck, it kills. =[
"Lesser of two evils," huh?
Well, I guess it depends on what your definition of the word "of" is. Gotta hand it to Clinton for a) making his interrogators looks like fools to those of us who get the joke and b) making himself look like a fool for those who dont. Now to the point (dtt, fsa!*)...
Exactly how many sales do you think Blizzard stands to lose...
Nearly the same percentage of players who played pirated copies of the originals and Starcraft will be playing pirated copies of Warcraft III. Hell, I even have the 'pixie' version of Warcraft2 laying around here somewhere - and not far from it is version I bought.
...if it becomes extremely easy to pirate their software?
Ahht - did I wake up on the Planet of the Perpetually Lame all of a sudden? It's already easy to pirate everything (er, in the software realm, I mean). That's not gonna change any time soon and certainly not from a lawsuit like this. I'm pretty sure there will also be a way to run my own battle.net server if Bnetd does get the legal shaft once and for all, too. *cough Warforge cough*
...sue intellectual property thieves...
Ahh, legal buzzwords.
Ernlanzmer: Imagine your mind as a plot of land (maybe not your whole mind - just the place where you've processed this issue). Currently there resides a movie set of plastic and paper meche crops - these are the ideas that generalized, legalized, lowest-common-denominator-safe society has placed there. Why do I say this? Because you've referred to the creators of Bnetd as 'intellectual property thieves.' Now, rip all that out, replace the thin layer of tainted soil with nutrient rich dirt and grow some fresh new ideas. Once you've done that, you'll realize that for one - the existence Bnetd isn't going to affect Blizzard's profit margin noticably, if at all; Tim Yung, et al. aren't thieves, but folks who simply want a good game of Warcraft, etc. so they made a way to get it; and finally, that this situation is simple corporate pettiness and isn't even complicated enough to be expanded to murky abstract moral debate (the legal ramifications if Blizzard wins this, however, are). [Plus, I'll even spell your nick correctly - no extra charge! Btw, just general info - you seem like a well spoken person with a good deal of rational thought to add to any conversation, I just disagree with the way you understand the scope of this situation. I tried to make this sound completely non-flamey, but I just couldn't. Sorry, 'dere. =P] Now!, aside from all this - personally, I wouldn't even regard the Bnetd crew as theives even if they did use Blizzard code - but I doubt they did.
Lesser of the two evils.
So, apparently on the Planet of the Perpetually Lame, Hell is where you go when you reverse engineer something to make it more suitable to your tastes. There must not be many tailors on the Planet of the Perpetually Lame, or folks who like to customize old cars. Game modifications are nonexistent and hybridizing plants is illegal due to a clause in the Constitution of the Perpetually Lame about not being able to infringe on the intellectual property... of god.
There's a lot of people stomping their feet and going "Oooh Blizzard now you've done it, grrrr, you've lost a customer!!!"
Most of us who have come to this conclusion aren't going to be so halfassed and childish about it, we're simply not going to buy the game. That said, you bet I'm one of the folks who's not gonna knowingly give them a dime ever again and I've bought every Blizzard PC game since Blackthorne (except for the Diablo titles). Not only have they lost me as a customer, they've also lost my respect and fanship. I thought people were being silly during the whole tech-support info-get fiasco, but this time we "roof-screamers," as you seem to view us, have a legitimate point and Blizzard/Vivendi are the ones being silly and childish. If you're comfortable with upholding this kind of action by large corporations against well-meaning people who play thier games - by all means, keep buying Blizzard titles.
Really-long-sentence alert. The erradication of Bnetd, if successful, will be a good legal footing in the form of precedent for every upcoming game developer who is too selfish and short sighted about the works he or she creates to allow improvement on it by anyone other than themselves. The current shift in logic of Blizzard's claims against Bnetd proves it's not about anything they want to admit - it's about thier own selfishness against letting others taking thier games closer to perfection. I'm sure ya know the line, and try not to sing it, "anything you can do, I can do better." Well, Blizzard is on the short end of that concept. Whatever mental midget at Blizzard released the attack dogs on Bnetd feels threatened in that sense. They're using the guise of "potential copyright infringement" to retaliate. If they really want to go against piracy, why didn't they attack the creators of key generators and program patches? They could use the same means that the MPAA used against DeCSS - put legal pressure on the host of the files.
Oh my god this is so much longer than I intended. Sheesh. I'll sign off now with my usual phrase to end long posts:
But of course, I could be completely wrong (*and in case you're wondering: "damn the typos, full speed ahead"). =]
Slashdot Mirror
I say this with the utmost respect to you as a human being (because I dont respect you for much else. - Kidding! Honest. =P). You seem to be suff'rin from what I think I'll name: elitist counterculturism.
... survey says! ... normal!; and are generally not going to respond with respect to anything written like that.
Basically, this is the idea that you've risen above general society and have a new and better view on all its faults and complications. So, ya go around posting like you're a particularly enlightened soul and can offer epiphanies to any passers-by. In reality... yer coming off lookin like a big dork at best, and an airhead at worst. =] No offense intended there, but ya gotta lighten up and talk about these issues without waxing poetic. Normal people are
Most people aren't oblivious to the problems of society - you're not doing anyone any favors by talking to them like they're unenlightened dullards. You've probably got some good ideas, but we cant really see em because of a huge brick wall: the way you try to deliver those ideas.
Way to go, s390! And way to go, Google.
I've been a long time opponent (putting it mildly) of the scientology cult since I was very little and those Dianetics commercials came on and my dear ol mum explained to me what kind of crackpot blackhole-for-money it is. This Google development absolutely fantastic, not just for the legal benefits of Google starting to respond to DMCA-driven attacks jedi-style (think: blaster shots bouncing of sabers), but also allowing more people to see the disgusting truth behind scientology. Awesome popshot at the DMCA and the CoS.
Makes me think the boys at Google or some of us should start a more powerful "temporary religion" devoted to deprogramming scientologists before they've gone over the edge (search for scientology related deaths to see what I mean).
In the meantime, we all really need to start an 'accidental voluntary' DDoS network to continually cripple official scientology sites. =D
Yall remember - scientology doesn't just suck, it kills. =[
"Lesser of two evils," huh? Well, I guess it depends on what your definition of the word "of" is. Gotta hand it to Clinton for a) making his interrogators looks like fools to those of us who get the joke and b) making himself look like a fool for those who dont. Now to the point (dtt, fsa!*)...
...if it becomes extremely easy to pirate their software?
...sue intellectual property thieves...
Exactly how many sales do you think Blizzard stands to lose...
Nearly the same percentage of players who played pirated copies of the originals and Starcraft will be playing pirated copies of Warcraft III. Hell, I even have the 'pixie' version of Warcraft2 laying around here somewhere - and not far from it is version I bought.
Ahht - did I wake up on the Planet of the Perpetually Lame all of a sudden? It's already easy to pirate everything (er, in the software realm, I mean). That's not gonna change any time soon and certainly not from a lawsuit like this. I'm pretty sure there will also be a way to run my own battle.net server if Bnetd does get the legal shaft once and for all, too. *cough Warforge cough*
Ahh, legal buzzwords.
Ernlanzmer: Imagine your mind as a plot of land (maybe not your whole mind - just the place where you've processed this issue). Currently there resides a movie set of plastic and paper meche crops - these are the ideas that generalized, legalized, lowest-common-denominator-safe society has placed there. Why do I say this? Because you've referred to the creators of Bnetd as 'intellectual property thieves.' Now, rip all that out, replace the thin layer of tainted soil with nutrient rich dirt and grow some fresh new ideas. Once you've done that, you'll realize that for one - the existence Bnetd isn't going to affect Blizzard's profit margin noticably, if at all; Tim Yung, et al. aren't thieves, but folks who simply want a good game of Warcraft, etc. so they made a way to get it; and finally, that this situation is simple corporate pettiness and isn't even complicated enough to be expanded to murky abstract moral debate (the legal ramifications if Blizzard wins this, however, are). [Plus, I'll even spell your nick correctly - no extra charge! Btw, just general info - you seem like a well spoken person with a good deal of rational thought to add to any conversation, I just disagree with the way you understand the scope of this situation. I tried to make this sound completely non-flamey, but I just couldn't. Sorry, 'dere. =P] Now!, aside from all this - personally, I wouldn't even regard the Bnetd crew as theives even if they did use Blizzard code - but I doubt they did.
Lesser of the two evils.
So, apparently on the Planet of the Perpetually Lame, Hell is where you go when you reverse engineer something to make it more suitable to your tastes. There must not be many tailors on the Planet of the Perpetually Lame, or folks who like to customize old cars. Game modifications are nonexistent and hybridizing plants is illegal due to a clause in the Constitution of the Perpetually Lame about not being able to infringe on the intellectual property... of god.
There's a lot of people stomping their feet and going "Oooh Blizzard now you've done it, grrrr, you've lost a customer!!!"
Most of us who have come to this conclusion aren't going to be so halfassed and childish about it, we're simply not going to buy the game. That said, you bet I'm one of the folks who's not gonna knowingly give them a dime ever again and I've bought every Blizzard PC game since Blackthorne (except for the Diablo titles). Not only have they lost me as a customer, they've also lost my respect and fanship. I thought people were being silly during the whole tech-support info-get fiasco, but this time we "roof-screamers," as you seem to view us, have a legitimate point and Blizzard/Vivendi are the ones being silly and childish. If you're comfortable with upholding this kind of action by large corporations against well-meaning people who play thier games - by all means, keep buying Blizzard titles.
Really-long-sentence alert. The erradication of Bnetd, if successful, will be a good legal footing in the form of precedent for every upcoming game developer who is too selfish and short sighted about the works he or she creates to allow improvement on it by anyone other than themselves. The current shift in logic of Blizzard's claims against Bnetd proves it's not about anything they want to admit - it's about thier own selfishness against letting others taking thier games closer to perfection. I'm sure ya know the line, and try not to sing it, "anything you can do, I can do better." Well, Blizzard is on the short end of that concept. Whatever mental midget at Blizzard released the attack dogs on Bnetd feels threatened in that sense. They're using the guise of "potential copyright infringement" to retaliate. If they really want to go against piracy, why didn't they attack the creators of key generators and program patches? They could use the same means that the MPAA used against DeCSS - put legal pressure on the host of the files.
Oh my god this is so much longer than I intended. Sheesh. I'll sign off now with my usual phrase to end long posts:
But of course, I could be completely wrong (*and in case you're wondering: "damn the typos, full speed ahead"). =]