I'm going to reply in English. Let's not unleash our Orkut ways on Slashdot =)
You just said they find it a chore to translate the documents and request the data to Google US and, instead, they are opting to strong-arm Google BR into, most probably, violating US laws by giving away said data.
It's not that they find it a chore, it's that it actually is a chore, and that Google BR would be easier to get the data from. If Google BR actually had it. No data will ever be disclosed by Google BR no matter what happens. This is the entire point (and catch). The MPF are not strong-arming Google BR, they're following perfectly reasonable Brazilian law by asking a Brazilian judge for warrants directed towards a subsidiary of an American corporation installed in Brazil, subject to Brazilian law, in cases concerning crimes committed within Brazil or by people within Brazil. They're not being abusive; they're acting on a constitutionally imposed duty of prosecuting criminal offenses. Since the state MPs and the MPF need to gather data in order to even start action against people involved in crimes that were arranged or perpetrated through Orkut, they do so by following the law, which means obtaining warrants that are only granted after analysis of preliminary evidence. We're not talking about a judge holding a baseball bat either.
The problem is: they think Google BR has access to what they need to prosecute these criminals. Google BR doesn't have access to the data because Google knows what it's doing, and purposefully arranged things in such a way that Google BR has absolutely no access to data stored in the US, even if it wanted to. Google Inc. knows that Google BR is at arm's reach of Brazilian authorities, and that Google US isn't (though it does happily comply with requests by Brazilian authorities to disclose data). Really, the Brazilian proceedings involved in this case are much less intrusive of anyone's privacy than the average DMCA subpoena in the US. This is a trivial judicial matter that's been blown way out of proportion. We should definitely start worrying if Brazilian Police broke into Google BR's headquarters without a warrant and confiscated servers, but that's not what's going on here, and that's not something that's ever likely to happen.
Nothing has been decided yet, mind you. What you call strong-arming is merely a request to a judge that may or may not be granted. And even if granted, the way things look, the warrant will be totally ineffective since Google BR simply can't comply because of the way the company is internationally structured. Google has nothing to worry about this, and the suit they just filed will probably be successful. They did their homework. They're more than willing to hand out data, but only through Google Inc., which is harder for Brazilian authorities than Google BR, but not at all out of reach. That's the beauty of Google's strategy: we simply can't complain, but it's going to be harder than it should be to access data necessary for criminal prosecution.
But the show is not the most important part. The more interesting issue is, indeed, one of jurisdiction. If the servers are located in the US and a Brazilian law was broken by material posted on the server, did the poster commit a crime in Brazil by posting it in the US-based server or is the material posted in the US-based server protected as free-speech?
Matters of free speech are indeed more complicated, but we're not strictly talking about free speech here in most of the crimes involved. Publishing child porn might fall under a free speech controversy, but sexually assaulting a child does not. Insofar as grabbing hold of the identities of people who publish child porn (a crime in itself, but let's not worry about that for the sake of this discussion) is necessary for the investigation of a rape, for instance, we're out of the free speech debate.
It bears mentioning that what really bothers Brazilian authorities is not child porno
That doesn't change the fact that we do have constitutionally guaranteed privacy, in even more explicit terms than the US. While it is indeed very different from US privacy, which covers up for a lot of other rights and is much broader in scope (rights which are also present in our Constitution, by other names or means, with a few exceptions - abortion being the most blatant one), there are similarities that can't be simply dismissed as you seem to wish. It's different but it's still privacy and very relevant to the case reported by TFA, as far as fully anonymous speech is not concerned. There are crimes being commited through Orkut that do not involve speech, such as drug dealing.
No one is bypassing due process here. It's the exact opposite. All of the data requested from Google (Brasil or US) goes through the usual "quebra de sigilo" proceedings. A warrant is requested from a judge on preliminary evidence, then granted or not granted based on the strength of said evidence. If granted, the data is then requested. The MPF doesn't just go like "HEY, HEY! GOOGLE! Give us your data, man, or else!", holding a baseball bat. They have to be backed by a warrant, which can be troublesome to get in some cases. The recent suit by the MPF requests a blanket-warrant to be granted by the Judiciary to make up for the difficulties in getting Google to comply with warrants already granted on a case-by-case basis. This blanket-warrant would cover all of the previously granted (and not complied with) warrants, and would be enforced by the threat of daily fines which would be applied as long as Google BR refrains from complying.
The problem is that Google BR just can't comply with the warrants because they don't have the data. Google US can, and usually does according to Google itself (check the link I provided above). This has nothing to do with bypassing due process, since the law is actually being applied as written, and according to the usual interpretation of article 5, XII of the Brazilian Constitution by Brazilian courts. I mentioned it being a chore dealing with Google US directly because authorities have to translate a series of legal documents in order for a warrant to be even read by Google US, something that wouldn't have to be done with Google BR.
As long as crimes are being committed here in Brazil (which they are), Brazil does claim and have jurisdiction. It's not a matter of where the data is located. Location of data is an entirely different issue, related to procedural criminal law and the production of evidence, and Google US has delivered and will deliver data over to Brazilian authorities if asked:
This is pretty smart of Google, by the way. The procedures for getting data sent from a foreign country are more problematic than simply subpoenaing a company that's around the corner, like Google Brasil. It all comes down to the volume of crimes that are being perpetrated. Five? Not a problem at all going after Google US. Hundreds? It becomes a chore.
Apology to crime is a seldom invoked crime. Defense is very, very easy under the free speech clause of the Brazilian Constitution (apology to crime is one of the relics of our ancient Penal Code, which has gone through many constitutional changes, two of the constitutions involved being "constitutions" only in the nominal sense - more like instruments of totalitarian regimes).
Prosecutors don't usually care about that crime, unless it involves apology to organized crime institutions (like the PCC - Primeiro Comando da Capital, a terrorist organization that has been burning public transportation buses in São Paulo and killing dozens of cops in orchestrated simultaneous events), and even then, rarely. The apology to crime crime is only used to intimidate people with no knowledge of Brazilian criminal law.
I don't think Brazil's legal system is as porn friendly as the US legal system.
It's far, far more porn friendly than the US legal system. Brazil doesn't give a damn about porn as long as it does not involve anyone under 18. There's no Miller Test in Brazilian law. What we're talking about here is Orkut being used for drug and child pornography transactions and racism (which is prohibited under the Brazilian Constitution - there's no free speech here as far as racism is concerned). Brazilian prosecutors want information about Orkut users involved in those crimes handed over. Google only wants to do that through Google US, which is very smart of them. This case has nothing to do with regular porn, and even the child porn component is minor. Not even racism is really an issue, what's bugging the prosecutors is people buying drugs over Orkut. It happens quite a lot.
I doubt Google is going to be thrown out of Brazil, and they're being very smart about this whole deal. Subpoenaing Google US is a bureaucratic nightmare for the prosecutors, much more of a hassle than subpoenaing Google Brasil. It's not a matter of a simple e-mail or phone call, there are procedures to be followed, and we're not used to having to deal with said procedures in bulk. A few of them a month is fine, but hundreds of probable crimes requiring us to directly deal with Google US is kind of a headache.
Do your research. We DO have constitutionally guaranteed privacy. It's spelled out in article 5, X, under "intimacy and private life":
X - são invioláveis a intimidade, a vida privada, a honra e a imagem das pessoas, assegurado o direito a indenização pelo dano material ou moral decorrente de sua violação;
Except they can't legally circumvent DRM...It's a shame, really. You're screwed from every single point of view if you're not a member of the content industry.
This is interesting, but what about the child? If I were to use one of these as a kid, I'd rather run the risk of having my laptop stolen than being seen with such a ridiculous computer. Besides that, speaking as a Brazilian, a citizen of one of the countries I believe they're targetting, I doubt these wouldn't get stolen just because they look like a toy. Other kids would probably steal it if they had the opportunity, and adults just wouldn't care anyway. They'd take it.
While in a theoretical world, this makes sense, in reality this isn't what's happened. When you look at the distribution of wealth (or knowledge, or access, or whatever), you find that since the internet these gaps have grown bigger, and while the big players may be new, the truth is out of the billions of sites online, the top thousand sites get 99.99% of the traffic. How's the democracy? How's that "power to the people"?
Yochai Benkler makes a few excellent counterarguments to what you're saying in his new book. Check out chapters 6 and 7 here.
I was thinking how cool it would be to start a collaborative writing project dedicated to CYOA-like books, and found out someone has already done something exactly like that. It lacks content, but the idea has potential.
...and I like how Nintendo is getting weirder by the day. The fact that gamers everywhere are having a fit over this is great, and makes me think that the Nintendo Wii will really "break down that wall that separates video game players from everybody else."
...but it's also true of most places on the Internet where people can ask questions. Message boards, IRC, mailing lists, etc. It's probably worse on open source communities, but not by any means exclusive to them. What I usually do anywhere, when I have a question, is Google the hell out of it. If I can't find the answer, I politely ask on a board with a glaring notice telling people that I ran the question through Google and couldn't find an answer. Even so, I run the risk of getting unhelpful non-advice, like "RTFM", or a straight out insult, like "What a stupid gay-ass question, please die".
Funny enough, I usually have the same fear of asking questions about Linux or open source software in general that I have when asking questions on computer game boards. Maybe because the demographics of both overlap in some fashion: extremely socially inept young men, or very immature older men (a stereotype, but one that's hard to avoid). I'm socially inept myself, but at least I'm polite and have some consideration for other people's feelings. It hardly ever pays to be rude with people who need help, however clueless they are.
What about Brazil? Has everybody in Brazil been fined once so far?
Nope. And God willing, things will remain this way. In theory, we're criminally and civilly liable for sharing copyrighted material without permission, but let's see the **AAs deal with the mighty, monolithic, and very, very slow Brazilian legal system! That would be quality entertainment. One thing I can guarantee you: no one will even remotely consider settling, and by the time the first final decision is reached, both Duke Nukem Forever and Chinese Democracy will be out...freely downloadable.
I'm a Linux newbie, and I fail to see the point of something like Automatix.
Caught up by the Ubuntu hype, I've recently set up a dual-boot machine running WinXP and Ubuntu. I had a brief experience with Mandrake a few years back, and ran into so many hardware issues that I decided to go back to Windows. My Linux virginity was lost, but I still longed for the sweet taste of Windows. I rarely boot Ubuntu (I'm just too comfy with Windows), but everything is running fine at the Ubuntu part of my HD. I've managed to install everything that I needed. By myself. Because it was so easy. As far as my needs go, everything is practically automated through apt/Synaptic. I'm still learning my way around Linux, but I'm very good at cutting and pasting and button-clicking.
That is why I fail to see the usefulness of Automatix. If you can't cut and paste a few lines or select from a menu and click a couple of buttons, you probably can't use Windows too. Hell, if you can install Automatix, you can install what Automatix installs...and if we're talking convenience here, I still don't see the point. Install things when you realize you need them...if you don't know how to do it, just Google and you'll be fine. But here's what really bothers me...
From TFA:
Once running, Automatix got my permission to access Ubuntu repositories and check for some necessary packages in one window. Then, in another window, it showed me a list of all the packages it could install for me and what they contained. I selected the ones I wanted by clicking the check box next to them. I checked everything -- what the heck, Automatix was doing all the work for me, and if something gets messed up, it wasn't my fault!
I might be missing something here due to my newbieness, but...doesn't Synaptic do exactly that for most of the programs Automatix installs? Maybe I'll have to add a repository, but so what? In the end, Automatix might even make things harder for the newbies, because it doesn't need to exist and will make people dependent on a crutch when they already have a health leg.
Alex Kidd and R-Type, well remembered! Those two games and Phantasy Star are probably the only Master System titles I think are really worth playing.
You have a point about a lot of crap on the NES, but ah, the good stuff (and there's lots of it!) more than makes up for that.
No but really, the sega master system was a good console, and never really got the recognition it deserved.
Good console, but seriously lacking in the software department. Except for Phantasy Star, I can't remember the names of any of the games I've played on the Master System. Genesis, on the other hand, would deliver on so many levels...
Thats fine, I can see that you dont like my games enough to buy them, I am fine with that.
I never said that, since I've never played any of your games. That was my point. Maybe I would download one of them if you gave it away for free, on a whim. And who knows, maybe I'd enjoy it enough to pay for it. I didn't mean to comment on the quality of your games, they might be great. I don't know. It all boils down to motivation: why should I try your games? For some people, like me, it's a plus if the developer delivers the entire product and transfers the decision to pay or not to pay to the consumer. It makes me want to download. You could say I'm not representative of most gamers, but I think there's a culture being currently fostered among file sharers that could become the norm in the future.
If there's the smallest interest in your product, it's a given that it will be available for free download in a p2p network. I think that you should consider distributing the full games instead of demos. There's no point in protecting IP if in reality your games are out there, competing with every single other semi-popular game also available for free in file sharing networks. People who enjoy your games will most likely pay you for it. If you offer the full product, I think you have more chance of getting money back than by only offering the demo. And then, protecting IP wouldn't even be an issue.
Someone's probably going to point me towards Stephen King's failed The Plant experiment, but if I recall correctly, he still got a lot of money even though most people didn't pay for the installments. And hey, that was Stephen King, not exactly the poorest of writers. That counted in people's decisions whether to pay him or not. In your case, there's this romantic notion of the lone independent struggling game developer, and that's bound to get a few people's eyes teared, and some of their money in your pocket in exchange for your games. I know I'd pay if I liked your games. But to know if I like them or not, I must be motivated to try them. Free distribution would be a big motivator.
Im just about making ends meet as a software develoepr, and one of my games is available as a torrent. No doubt this isnt exactly helping sales.
You know, I could download Starship Tycoon from the torrent indexing site someone just linked to above. But...I won't. I don't even have the curiosity to try. For free. Much less pay for it. I'm probably not the only one in the same situation.
But just think...I had never heard of you or your games before. Imagine someone searching for Rollercoaster Tycoon on Torrentspy, and the search results include Starship Tycoon. That person downloads it just for the heck of it, and ends up enjoying it. Your game spreads across the Internet, by word of mouth. Torrent distribution is so darn efficient, when the product is good and popular. I'd say that's awesome publicity for a small company like yours. Even if most people end up downloading your games and not paying for the privilege of playing them, you'll still get a few tipsters once in a while. Folks who appreciate your work and will gladly pay for it, if they think you deserve it. Believe me, we're out there. I just bought the new Franz Ferdinand album, which I had in my iPod for ages, downloaded from a private tracker way before the official release date. I like it enough, I buy it.
Instead of thinking "OMG THOSE FREE RIDERS WILL STEAL MY IP", a little modesty might go a long way. Your IP, right now, doesn't even look attractive enough to "steal", judging from your website alone. I went over your games, and I honestly feel I can get better stuff for free (as in beer) in sites like pogo.com, if I'm in the mood for a quick puzzle game. Or, if I'm in the mood for some serious stretegy gaming, I'd go for a solid mainstream release. Why buy Democracy for 22.95 bucks, when I can get Civ IV for 49.95 or cheaper?
Free distribution will get you more popular and rich in the long run. Just a hunch, you don't have to take it seriously. I would, though, since your games are out there in the free download zone, legal threats are not threatening enough for the most of us, and morality is not an issue with the majority of file sharers (when I download stuff from the Net, I do it with a clean conscience and spread the joy with my friends and family afterwards!). Complaining won't get you anywhere. You might as well devise a new business model. One that suits the small game developer that you are.
Slashdot Mirror
As a fellow Brazilian, the parent post sums up precisely what's going on here.
I had to solo through about 80% of Factions, since there's a lot of assassin hostility going on, and I was rarely welcomed into a party.
I'm going to reply in English. Let's not unleash our Orkut ways on Slashdot =)
You just said they find it a chore to translate the documents and request the data to Google US and, instead, they are opting to strong-arm Google BR into, most probably, violating US laws by giving away said data.
It's not that they find it a chore, it's that it actually is a chore, and that Google BR would be easier to get the data from. If Google BR actually had it. No data will ever be disclosed by Google BR no matter what happens. This is the entire point (and catch). The MPF are not strong-arming Google BR, they're following perfectly reasonable Brazilian law by asking a Brazilian judge for warrants directed towards a subsidiary of an American corporation installed in Brazil, subject to Brazilian law, in cases concerning crimes committed within Brazil or by people within Brazil. They're not being abusive; they're acting on a constitutionally imposed duty of prosecuting criminal offenses. Since the state MPs and the MPF need to gather data in order to even start action against people involved in crimes that were arranged or perpetrated through Orkut, they do so by following the law, which means obtaining warrants that are only granted after analysis of preliminary evidence. We're not talking about a judge holding a baseball bat either.
The problem is: they think Google BR has access to what they need to prosecute these criminals. Google BR doesn't have access to the data because Google knows what it's doing, and purposefully arranged things in such a way that Google BR has absolutely no access to data stored in the US, even if it wanted to. Google Inc. knows that Google BR is at arm's reach of Brazilian authorities, and that Google US isn't (though it does happily comply with requests by Brazilian authorities to disclose data). Really, the Brazilian proceedings involved in this case are much less intrusive of anyone's privacy than the average DMCA subpoena in the US. This is a trivial judicial matter that's been blown way out of proportion. We should definitely start worrying if Brazilian Police broke into Google BR's headquarters without a warrant and confiscated servers, but that's not what's going on here, and that's not something that's ever likely to happen.
Nothing has been decided yet, mind you. What you call strong-arming is merely a request to a judge that may or may not be granted. And even if granted, the way things look, the warrant will be totally ineffective since Google BR simply can't comply because of the way the company is internationally structured. Google has nothing to worry about this, and the suit they just filed will probably be successful. They did their homework. They're more than willing to hand out data, but only through Google Inc., which is harder for Brazilian authorities than Google BR, but not at all out of reach. That's the beauty of Google's strategy: we simply can't complain, but it's going to be harder than it should be to access data necessary for criminal prosecution.
But the show is not the most important part. The more interesting issue is, indeed, one of jurisdiction. If the servers are located in the US and a Brazilian law was broken by material posted on the server, did the poster commit a crime in Brazil by posting it in the US-based server or is the material posted in the US-based server protected as free-speech?
Matters of free speech are indeed more complicated, but we're not strictly talking about free speech here in most of the crimes involved. Publishing child porn might fall under a free speech controversy, but sexually assaulting a child does not. Insofar as grabbing hold of the identities of people who publish child porn (a crime in itself, but let's not worry about that for the sake of this discussion) is necessary for the investigation of a rape, for instance, we're out of the free speech debate.
It bears mentioning that what really bothers Brazilian authorities is not child porno
That doesn't change the fact that we do have constitutionally guaranteed privacy, in even more explicit terms than the US. While it is indeed very different from US privacy, which covers up for a lot of other rights and is much broader in scope (rights which are also present in our Constitution, by other names or means, with a few exceptions - abortion being the most blatant one), there are similarities that can't be simply dismissed as you seem to wish. It's different but it's still privacy and very relevant to the case reported by TFA, as far as fully anonymous speech is not concerned. There are crimes being commited through Orkut that do not involve speech, such as drug dealing.
No one is bypassing due process here. It's the exact opposite. All of the data requested from Google (Brasil or US) goes through the usual "quebra de sigilo" proceedings. A warrant is requested from a judge on preliminary evidence, then granted or not granted based on the strength of said evidence. If granted, the data is then requested. The MPF doesn't just go like "HEY, HEY! GOOGLE! Give us your data, man, or else!", holding a baseball bat. They have to be backed by a warrant, which can be troublesome to get in some cases. The recent suit by the MPF requests a blanket-warrant to be granted by the Judiciary to make up for the difficulties in getting Google to comply with warrants already granted on a case-by-case basis. This blanket-warrant would cover all of the previously granted (and not complied with) warrants, and would be enforced by the threat of daily fines which would be applied as long as Google BR refrains from complying.
The problem is that Google BR just can't comply with the warrants because they don't have the data. Google US can, and usually does according to Google itself (check the link I provided above). This has nothing to do with bypassing due process, since the law is actually being applied as written, and according to the usual interpretation of article 5, XII of the Brazilian Constitution by Brazilian courts. I mentioned it being a chore dealing with Google US directly because authorities have to translate a series of legal documents in order for a warrant to be even read by Google US, something that wouldn't have to be done with Google BR.
IAAL
t 124u20482.shtml
As long as crimes are being committed here in Brazil (which they are), Brazil does claim and have jurisdiction. It's not a matter of where the data is located. Location of data is an entirely different issue, related to procedural criminal law and the production of evidence, and Google US has delivered and will deliver data over to Brazilian authorities if asked:
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/informatica/ul
This is pretty smart of Google, by the way. The procedures for getting data sent from a foreign country are more problematic than simply subpoenaing a company that's around the corner, like Google Brasil. It all comes down to the volume of crimes that are being perpetrated. Five? Not a problem at all going after Google US. Hundreds? It becomes a chore.
Apology to crime is a seldom invoked crime. Defense is very, very easy under the free speech clause of the Brazilian Constitution (apology to crime is one of the relics of our ancient Penal Code, which has gone through many constitutional changes, two of the constitutions involved being "constitutions" only in the nominal sense - more like instruments of totalitarian regimes).
Prosecutors don't usually care about that crime, unless it involves apology to organized crime institutions (like the PCC - Primeiro Comando da Capital, a terrorist organization that has been burning public transportation buses in São Paulo and killing dozens of cops in orchestrated simultaneous events), and even then, rarely. The apology to crime crime is only used to intimidate people with no knowledge of Brazilian criminal law.
Journalists like to mention it, too. A lot.
I don't think Brazil's legal system is as porn friendly as the US legal system.
It's far, far more porn friendly than the US legal system. Brazil doesn't give a damn about porn as long as it does not involve anyone under 18. There's no Miller Test in Brazilian law. What we're talking about here is Orkut being used for drug and child pornography transactions and racism (which is prohibited under the Brazilian Constitution - there's no free speech here as far as racism is concerned). Brazilian prosecutors want information about Orkut users involved in those crimes handed over. Google only wants to do that through Google US, which is very smart of them. This case has nothing to do with regular porn, and even the child porn component is minor. Not even racism is really an issue, what's bugging the prosecutors is people buying drugs over Orkut. It happens quite a lot.
I doubt Google is going to be thrown out of Brazil, and they're being very smart about this whole deal. Subpoenaing Google US is a bureaucratic nightmare for the prosecutors, much more of a hassle than subpoenaing Google Brasil. It's not a matter of a simple e-mail or phone call, there are procedures to be followed, and we're not used to having to deal with said procedures in bulk. A few of them a month is fine, but hundreds of probable crimes requiring us to directly deal with Google US is kind of a headache.
Google knows what it's doing, folks.
Do your research. We DO have constitutionally guaranteed privacy. It's spelled out in article 5, X, under "intimacy and private life":
o /Constitui%C3%A7ao.htm
X - são invioláveis a intimidade, a vida privada, a honra e a imagem das pessoas, assegurado o direito a indenização pelo dano material ou moral decorrente de sua violação;
https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Constituica
From the Questions & Answers section:
RELAKKS running Linux
Q: Is it possible to use RELAKKS running Linux OS?
A: Yes, it should be possible. We hope to be able to publish a guide shortly.
Except they can't legally circumvent DRM...It's a shame, really. You're screwed from every single point of view if you're not a member of the content industry.
Here's the full text of the recent amendments to the Spanish intellectual property law. It's a .pdf. Nasty stuff, I tell you...
This is interesting, but what about the child? If I were to use one of these as a kid, I'd rather run the risk of having my laptop stolen than being seen with such a ridiculous computer. Besides that, speaking as a Brazilian, a citizen of one of the countries I believe they're targetting, I doubt these wouldn't get stolen just because they look like a toy. Other kids would probably steal it if they had the opportunity, and adults just wouldn't care anyway. They'd take it.
So this is not a toy, and I believe it. But why make it look like a toy? And a very ugly toy, at that?
While in a theoretical world, this makes sense, in reality this isn't what's happened. When you look at the distribution of wealth (or knowledge, or access, or whatever), you find that since the internet these gaps have grown bigger, and while the big players may be new, the truth is out of the billions of sites online, the top thousand sites get 99.99% of the traffic. How's the democracy? How's that "power to the people"?
Yochai Benkler makes a few excellent counterarguments to what you're saying in his new book. Check out chapters 6 and 7 here.
I was thinking how cool it would be to start a collaborative writing project dedicated to CYOA-like books, and found out someone has already done something exactly like that. It lacks content, but the idea has potential.
There will be a time when the joke's not funny any longer, then the Wii revolution will begin!
...and I like how Nintendo is getting weirder by the day. The fact that gamers everywhere are having a fit over this is great, and makes me think that the Nintendo Wii will really "break down that wall that separates video game players from everybody else."
...but it's also true of most places on the Internet where people can ask questions. Message boards, IRC, mailing lists, etc. It's probably worse on open source communities, but not by any means exclusive to them. What I usually do anywhere, when I have a question, is Google the hell out of it. If I can't find the answer, I politely ask on a board with a glaring notice telling people that I ran the question through Google and couldn't find an answer. Even so, I run the risk of getting unhelpful non-advice, like "RTFM", or a straight out insult, like "What a stupid gay-ass question, please die".
Funny enough, I usually have the same fear of asking questions about Linux or open source software in general that I have when asking questions on computer game boards. Maybe because the demographics of both overlap in some fashion: extremely socially inept young men, or very immature older men (a stereotype, but one that's hard to avoid). I'm socially inept myself, but at least I'm polite and have some consideration for other people's feelings. It hardly ever pays to be rude with people who need help, however clueless they are.
What about Brazil? Has everybody in Brazil been fined once so far?
Nope. And God willing, things will remain this way. In theory, we're criminally and civilly liable for sharing copyrighted material without permission, but let's see the **AAs deal with the mighty, monolithic, and very, very slow Brazilian legal system! That would be quality entertainment. One thing I can guarantee you: no one will even remotely consider settling, and by the time the first final decision is reached, both Duke Nukem Forever and Chinese Democracy will be out...freely downloadable.
I'm a Linux newbie, and I fail to see the point of something like Automatix.
Caught up by the Ubuntu hype, I've recently set up a dual-boot machine running WinXP and Ubuntu. I had a brief experience with Mandrake a few years back, and ran into so many hardware issues that I decided to go back to Windows. My Linux virginity was lost, but I still longed for the sweet taste of Windows. I rarely boot Ubuntu (I'm just too comfy with Windows), but everything is running fine at the Ubuntu part of my HD. I've managed to install everything that I needed. By myself. Because it was so easy. As far as my needs go, everything is practically automated through apt/Synaptic. I'm still learning my way around Linux, but I'm very good at cutting and pasting and button-clicking.
That is why I fail to see the usefulness of Automatix. If you can't cut and paste a few lines or select from a menu and click a couple of buttons, you probably can't use Windows too. Hell, if you can install Automatix, you can install what Automatix installs...and if we're talking convenience here, I still don't see the point. Install things when you realize you need them...if you don't know how to do it, just Google and you'll be fine. But here's what really bothers me...
From TFA:
Once running, Automatix got my permission to access Ubuntu repositories and check for some necessary packages in one window. Then, in another window, it showed me a list of all the packages it could install for me and what they contained. I selected the ones I wanted by clicking the check box next to them. I checked everything -- what the heck, Automatix was doing all the work for me, and if something gets messed up, it wasn't my fault!
I might be missing something here due to my newbieness, but...doesn't Synaptic do exactly that for most of the programs Automatix installs? Maybe I'll have to add a repository, but so what? In the end, Automatix might even make things harder for the newbies, because it doesn't need to exist and will make people dependent on a crutch when they already have a health leg.
Alex Kidd and R-Type, well remembered! Those two games and Phantasy Star are probably the only Master System titles I think are really worth playing. You have a point about a lot of crap on the NES, but ah, the good stuff (and there's lots of it!) more than makes up for that.
No but really, the sega master system was a good console, and never really got the recognition it deserved.
Good console, but seriously lacking in the software department. Except for Phantasy Star, I can't remember the names of any of the games I've played on the Master System. Genesis, on the other hand, would deliver on so many levels...
I understand your pain, but...
Thats fine, I can see that you dont like my games enough to buy them, I am fine with that.
I never said that, since I've never played any of your games. That was my point. Maybe I would download one of them if you gave it away for free, on a whim. And who knows, maybe I'd enjoy it enough to pay for it. I didn't mean to comment on the quality of your games, they might be great. I don't know. It all boils down to motivation: why should I try your games? For some people, like me, it's a plus if the developer delivers the entire product and transfers the decision to pay or not to pay to the consumer. It makes me want to download. You could say I'm not representative of most gamers, but I think there's a culture being currently fostered among file sharers that could become the norm in the future.
If there's the smallest interest in your product, it's a given that it will be available for free download in a p2p network. I think that you should consider distributing the full games instead of demos. There's no point in protecting IP if in reality your games are out there, competing with every single other semi-popular game also available for free in file sharing networks. People who enjoy your games will most likely pay you for it. If you offer the full product, I think you have more chance of getting money back than by only offering the demo. And then, protecting IP wouldn't even be an issue.
Someone's probably going to point me towards Stephen King's failed The Plant experiment, but if I recall correctly, he still got a lot of money even though most people didn't pay for the installments. And hey, that was Stephen King, not exactly the poorest of writers. That counted in people's decisions whether to pay him or not. In your case, there's this romantic notion of the lone independent struggling game developer, and that's bound to get a few people's eyes teared, and some of their money in your pocket in exchange for your games. I know I'd pay if I liked your games. But to know if I like them or not, I must be motivated to try them. Free distribution would be a big motivator.
Im just about making ends meet as a software develoepr, and one of my games is available as a torrent. No doubt this isnt exactly helping sales.
You know, I could download Starship Tycoon from the torrent indexing site someone just linked to above. But...I won't. I don't even have the curiosity to try. For free. Much less pay for it. I'm probably not the only one in the same situation.
But just think...I had never heard of you or your games before. Imagine someone searching for Rollercoaster Tycoon on Torrentspy, and the search results include Starship Tycoon. That person downloads it just for the heck of it, and ends up enjoying it. Your game spreads across the Internet, by word of mouth. Torrent distribution is so darn efficient, when the product is good and popular. I'd say that's awesome publicity for a small company like yours. Even if most people end up downloading your games and not paying for the privilege of playing them, you'll still get a few tipsters once in a while. Folks who appreciate your work and will gladly pay for it, if they think you deserve it. Believe me, we're out there. I just bought the new Franz Ferdinand album, which I had in my iPod for ages, downloaded from a private tracker way before the official release date. I like it enough, I buy it.
Instead of thinking "OMG THOSE FREE RIDERS WILL STEAL MY IP", a little modesty might go a long way. Your IP, right now, doesn't even look attractive enough to "steal", judging from your website alone. I went over your games, and I honestly feel I can get better stuff for free (as in beer) in sites like pogo.com, if I'm in the mood for a quick puzzle game. Or, if I'm in the mood for some serious stretegy gaming, I'd go for a solid mainstream release. Why buy Democracy for 22.95 bucks, when I can get Civ IV for 49.95 or cheaper?
Free distribution will get you more popular and rich in the long run. Just a hunch, you don't have to take it seriously. I would, though, since your games are out there in the free download zone, legal threats are not threatening enough for the most of us, and morality is not an issue with the majority of file sharers (when I download stuff from the Net, I do it with a clean conscience and spread the joy with my friends and family afterwards!). Complaining won't get you anywhere. You might as well devise a new business model. One that suits the small game developer that you are.