Spring RTS Engine

zwzsg wrote:

Regret wrote:The current official Spring server does not in any way distribute (or helps to distribute) illegal content. No illegal data is relayed by the server either.

The current installer put a link to your start menu, that, as soon as you click it, downloads otacontent.sdz, tacontent_v2.sdz, tatextures_v062.sdz.

To clarify, I meant the lobby server where people play games.

Have you checked if it still does that? If it does, it's probably an oversight, and that's not even installed by default!

It still did that monday.

Oh i thought i removed that auto-download ages ago..
Well apparently not.. nm then..
Dont blame tasclient or lobby server. Springdownloader does it.

Perhaps, one foggy day, I will remove it. Or you can, if you care..

It would be fun for anyone to independently discover who to blame for this blatant violation of IP and possible loss of up to 0.01 sold TA copies per year!

Let's see - springdownloader, is open source program. So there is no author to blame.

Its hosted/downloaded from caspring.org, det pays for this server.

But it downloads those files from jobjol.nl, JJ pays for this server.

But its included in spring installer and starts with tasclient.

Tasclient connects to tasserver hosted by fnordia in his closet.

Spring installer is hosted on springrts.com though.

Springrts.com domain is owned by (forget name) guy.

But the server itself is paid for by Masure.

Masure is not using it, he only resels it at full cost to company conveniently called IT&Law.

This company employs me and I authorized this server use for this spring thing I barely heard about. Some guys, I only know by nicknames, like Tobi, Aegis or Lurker manage it.

And im not aware of any illegal content on that server of course.

Had I been, I would have already removed that!

P.S. now they at least have some chance by googling this post.

Argh wrote:Just for the record... I have never talked to them. So far as I know, the only person who ever has is Tobi.

I don't recall talking to infogrames. I think it was someone else, and I think it was to atari, and not infogrames.

zwzsg wrote:

Regret wrote:The current official Spring server does not in any way distribute (or helps to distribute) illegal content. No illegal data is relayed by the server either.

The current installer put a link to your start menu, that, as soon as you click it, downloads otacontent.sdz, tacontent_v2.sdz, tatextures_v062.sdz.

AFAIK a next->next->next->finish install will not get you this content, because TASClient isn't selected by default, and SpringDownloader only is installed when TASClient is.

Tobi wrote:

zwzsg wrote:

Regret wrote:The current official Spring server does not in any way distribute (or helps to distribute) illegal content. No illegal data is relayed by the server either.

The current installer put a link to your start menu, that, as soon as you click it, downloads otacontent.sdz, tacontent_v2.sdz, tatextures_v062.sdz.

AFAIK a next->next->next->finish install will not get you this content, because TASClient isn't selected by default, and SpringDownloader only is installed when TASClient is.

So we are protected by some special "install wizard next button legality loophole?"

So we are protected by some special "install wizard next button legality loophole?"

Well, maybe not a loophole, but at least an oversight that can be seen as separable.

OK... got done talking to some folks.

Here is their advice, and my analysis... the very short version. Yes, it's still well over a page. No haiku, sorry but there's a lot to process here.

1. We (as a collective) should look through all of the people who were responsible for the production of OTA. We already have a tenuous connection with that one artist- but OTA was made by a lot of people. I know that a few of you, like Licho, have had Industry insider status at one point or another- maybe we know people, who know people.

I'm not approaching Chris T. directly yet. At best, I have to send it sideways through the Stardock foodchain. This is financially perilous for me, as they're my only retail outlet atm, and I cannot afford to offend them, even inadvertently. So, that's a last resort.

So before I take that route, let's all take a few days and see if we can do anything else. If all we, as a group, can come up with is me throwing a Hail Mary at Chris T. and maybe some help from their artist... that's probably not a strong enough approach that I am willing to commit myself.

So, take a look at OTA's credit list, folks. We all know people, who know people. There may be other ways to deal with this.

What I was told, though, is that a direct approach is probably going to backfire, because the mid-level people won't have any empathy for us at all, and may indeed start stomping on things, because that's their job.

So I guess being straight-up won't work here. We need to work personal angles and find a relationship or three, and explain our good intentions.

2. Once we find and hopefully bend a few ears... we should ask whoever's highest on the food chain these days, if they'd be willing to talk to Atari.

From the description I've gotten from reading Stardock's blogs, Chris T. sounds like a pretty nice guy, and we know he feels pretty benevolent about the OTA modding scene, so he might very well help us talk to Atari, if approached correctly. Ultimately, he's probably the guy we want to reach... but probably indirectly, through either that artist or other folks.

3. Some other things to keep in mind:

A. Infogrames reorganized, and is re-branded Atari now, and they're concentrating on the US market.

So... one thing that the OTA mods can do, that would really help... is maybe put copyright notices on startup screens, credit Atari, make sure that you're not hiding your legal relationship with their IP.

C.Y.A... and it'll look better, if we actually talk to them, that we took care of this before talking to them.

B. Atari is, from all indications, in the doghouse financially. Operating losses for the last two quarters were huge, and they aren't EA- they may or may not be able to afford losses much longer.

There is, in fact, a remote possibility of either buying the rights to OTA, or maybe pitching a genuine remake made with Spring. Not that I have any idea where to go with that yet- that gets into find-a-vc range of money, and even if everything on my end starts growing and getting better, I cannot see myself going there for months to years.

I'm just saying... there might be opportunities here.

This situation doesn't mean that this is all nice and cuddly. But I think it really makes it possible that they'll see genuine, newsworthy benefits to being seen as the benevolent partners of the Spring scene, and a lot of media drawbacks to being the people who killed the OTA mods. One thing to explore is whether they'd like the OTA mods to promote their brand, as a way to trade with them.

C. I have not read all of their financials, and I don't know people in their foodchain. So the above is just what I think I know atm, as opposed to real research and some insider knowledge.

D. None of this stuff covers the piracy issue of the open torrent. That's another problem with this policy proposal. I would like to counter-propose that games submitted to this hypothetical thing must meet certain standards, in terms of legality, and that whatever technical solutions are put into place supports that idea.

Same thing with maps, frankly. Most maps are, technically, licensed (C), just like models, bitmaps, sounds, etc..

Argh you need to learn the art of summarizing at the end of your post. People read a post and take away the 'gist' of it, the details serve only to clarify what this 'gist' is.

Atari == infrogrammes.

Infrogrammes owned the atari trademark adn rebranded themselves.

I emailed them many years ago to ask how much the TA IP was worth, and got no response

Argh makes sense.

But, if Atari/Infogrames is in the crap they may not WANT to put a price on the TA IP, they may want that IP on their books for an optimistic estimated value to balance out borrowings.

I still dont understand what makes BA a evil theft of a game, whereas things like absolute annihilation (in ota) is just a mod?

Also i'd be very much interested in seeing someone explain how a non-profit fan made project is going to hurt the developers ~,~

Ethically, it's the people who don't own TA.

Argh, as far as maps, it's basically being treated as uploading a map to a spring filehost giving permission for it to be distributed around spring in a general sense.

Sleksa wrote:I still dont understand what makes BA a evil theft of a game, whereas things like absolute annihilation (in ota) is just a mod?

Scenario 1:I make something for C&C Generals that adds a few units and changes the balance of the existing ones. Its using Generals stuff in the Generals game, and you still need to OWN Generals to play.

Scenario 2:I export the C&C Generals content into Spring and add a few units of my own. You do not need to own Generals to access the Generals content or play the game.

Scenario 1 is all cool with everyone. EA likes it, your clanmates like it, some random guy in Germany likes it. You (and anyone who downloads & plays) are using the game in the manner that you are licensed to (ie by buying the game you are in effect buying the rights to play the game).

Scenario 2 may be cool with your clanmates and the guy from Germany, but EA is not happy. You are giving their content, which they paid to develop, away for nothing. (or even worse, selling it for your own profit) They will at the least tell you to cease distribution of their content, if you have really pissed them off they may begin legal action.

See the difference now?

*general note* Sure Infogrames/Atari don't appear to have shown any real interest in developing the TA franchise in the past 12 years, but thats their prerogative. People can say "TA is Abandonware" until they have used up all the oxygen on the planet, but 'Abandonware' is NOT a legal status, its something used by people to justify piracy (although in some cases it *is* justified, but we are talking old (pre 1995) DOS games here) As a further note, Wolfenstein 3d was released in 1992, Return to Castle Wolfenstein was released in 2001, thats 9 years. So calling TA dead after *only* 11 years may be a bit premature.

Pressure Line wrote:

Sleksa wrote:I still dont understand what makes BA a evil theft of a game, whereas things like absolute annihilation (in ota) is just a mod?

Scenario 1:I make something for C&C Generals that adds a few units and changes the balance of the existing ones. Its using Generals stuff in the Generals game, and you still need to OWN Generals to play.

Scenario 2:I export the C&C Generals content into Spring and add a few units of my own. You do not need to own Generals to access the Generals content or play the game.

Scenario 1 is all cool with everyone. EA likes it, your clanmates like it, some random guy in Germany likes it. You (and anyone who downloads & plays) are using the game in the manner that you are licensed to (ie by buying the game you are in effect buying the rights to play the game).

Scenario 2 may be cool with your clanmates and the guy from Germany, but EA is not happy. You are giving their content, which they paid to develop, away for nothing. (or even worse, selling it for your own profit) They will at the least tell you to cease distribution of their content, if you have really pissed them off they may begin legal action.

See the difference now?

*general note* Sure Infogrames/Atari don't appear to have shown any real interest in developing the TA franchise in the past 12 years, but thats their prerogative. People can say "TA is Abandonware" until they have used up all the oxygen on the planet, but 'Abandonware' is NOT a legal status, its something used by people to justify piracy (although in some cases it *is* justified, but we are talking old (pre 1995) DOS games here) As a further note, Wolfenstein 3d was released in 1992, Return to Castle Wolfenstein was released in 2001, thats 9 years. So calling TA dead after *only* 11 years may be a bit premature.

Isnt scenario 2 true in regards of all *A games, IE you need to own ta to play them legally? or was that on the TASpring era when it was still a ta2 engine?~~

Yeah - somewhere in the Wiki's "fine print" you'll find a remark about you needing a copy of TA. This doesn't change anything about spreading the entire content needed to play though. That's why TA3D has a better initial position as here you need the OTA CDs to get things to run. Not that this would be a problem for someone how doesn't own them but at least that's a violation on the player's side then - not one of the modder's / hoster's...

Any spring content which has any OTA content or IP present in it, be it a cob script, a bitmap, an fbi, or a remodelled unit, is Atari IP, and thus requires a legal copy of Total Annihilation to be used legally.

Playing without a copy of OTA is illegal

Distributing copies of TA is illegal regardless of wether you own a TA disc or not.

BA is mentioned normally with regards to this because its the most popular mod, and its easier to say BA than it is to say *A mods. But BA is not alone in this and anybody who says it is, is shit stirring. CA and SA etc etc are all just as implicated in this.

An fbi? It's just unit stats, after all.

Be careful when you say 'just as', the content in CA is a good bit less while it is definitely on the line too. And do half the *A mods even distribute otacontent?

Sleksa, your original question compared to the OTA version of AA. That is relatively fine because it doesn't have core TA files in it, except for leakage.

all of the *A mods that use the ta content are theft. there done. it isn't that hard to understand sleksa.

smoth wrote:all of the *A mods that use the ta content are theft. there done. it isn't that hard to understand sleksa.

Copyright infringement is not the same as theft

Copyright *is* theft.