Rip-off tossers

[SeanR]

on account of the btopenworld.com IP I mean?

where are demon star supposed to be based?

Duh!

[Unsettled]

Oh...I thought this was a comedy thread.

[marsh]

Comedy poster?

I reckon.

Hmmmmmmm....................

A wasted opportunity to send the Rev into a frenzy of fits and spasmodic convulsions has been missed I'd say.

[Rev. Stuart Campbell]

You've gone from 'Piracy is ace

Sigh. Yeah, right.

Why not buff up the original, add some more features, and then distribute it for nowt?

Why don't you send me the proceeds of your importing business for the next three months?

As it stands I'd put money on it that they know all abouut this thread, and really could not give a rats about what it is you've done.

Good, then everybody's happy.

[marsh]

Why don't you send me the proceeds of your importing business for the next three months?

Because you'd probably owe me money.

I'm sure I can arrange something.

[DemonStar]

Comedy poster?

I reckon.

Hmmmmmmm....................

A wasted opportunity to send the Rev into a frenzy of fits and spasmodic convulsions has been missed I'd say.

I'll get my coat...

This thread is funny enough by itself anyway.

[Alex W.]

What a load of shite.

End of story, folks. How many crap Galaxians clones were around that didn't credit Namco? Or Galaga clones? Or Space Invaders clones? Or those left-right dodging LCD racing games that were all identical? Or illegal ROMs or other stuff that breaks the letter of the IP law? Are you starting a massive court case against the tiny groups behind those?

No, someone creates a game similar to your lunch-time bodge-job from the days of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and suddenly, they're sucking Satan's cock, and you're going to try to pursuade the company that inherited the IP to sue them, or you're going to steal their code and redistribute it. Well, frankly Stu, you can take your years of industry experience and go to the job centre, because we're sick of your made-for-TV legal drama nonsense.

[JPickford (retired mod)]

To be fair Stuart is acting in accordance with the Poll.

I voted for 'leave them alone' BTW.

[Alex W.]

I just felt like ranting. It's been so long.

[Rev. Stuart Campbell]

What a load of shite.

End of story, folks. How many crap Galaxians clones were around that didn't credit Namco? Or Galaga clones? Or Space Invaders clones? Or those left-right dodging LCD racing games that were all identical? Or illegal ROMs or other stuff that breaks the letter of the IP law? Are you starting a massive court case against the tiny groups behind those?

No, someone creates a game similar to your lunch-time bodge-job from the days of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and suddenly, they're sucking Satan's cock, and you're going to try to pursuade the company that inherited the IP to sue them, or you're going to steal their code and redistribute it. Well, frankly Stu, you can take your years of industry experience and go to the job centre, because we're sick of your made-for-TV legal drama nonsense.

You know what? I really give a fuck what you think!

So obviously I'm pretty distraught now.

[Unsettled]

You know what? I really give a fuck what you think!

Thats why you made a poll I guess.

[The Liberal Elite]

You know what? I really give a fuck what you think!

Thats why you made a poll I guess.

[Alex W.]

[toonfool]

To be fair Stuart is acting in accordance with the Poll.

I voted for 'leave them alone' BTW.

After reading only the beginning of the thread I voted for option 4. It seemed that Stu was going after a massive corporation and he'd end up in court shouting "you just don't fucking get it!" at the judge, which would be nice. I think he could have even won it.

After voting, I realised I should have went for option 3, leave the poor bugger alone. I reckon there'll be others who have gone through the same motions.

Leave him alone Stu, he's not your natural target. In this case, you're your natural target.

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

I've been working on a Nuclear War remake with many added options, beefed up graphics (FMV!) and an attempt at A.I. Hell, it's even got George Bush, Blair, Saddam and Bin Laden in it.

I think I'll never make it see the light of day ... Or some failed-to-extinct New World Computing dinosaur might hunt me down for using their IP.

[Monkichi 2.0]

So Stu, how do they know you are who you are? I'm just thinking that although they may know who Sensible are they may not know Stu Campbell was involved. I'd never heard of you until I went to the Edge forums and maybe this Dark Star bloke thinks you're some kid pulling his leg. Just a thought.

[Dimahoo]

So Stu, how do they know you are who you are? I'm just thinking that although they may know who Sensible are they may not know Stu Campbell was involved. I'd never heard of you until I went to the Edge forums and maybe this Dark Star bloke thinks you're some kid pulling his leg. Just a thought.

Actually i might be to blame for that.

If they heard about it via Trainsim-UK as the story was posted there.

[Boyatsea]

Is there any need for all this?

It was wrong.. what they did. But I don't anything is going to become of it. When EA sign it,up - that's when you take action.

It's just turned into a Campbell-hater thread, and he's never going to win those arguements, however right he might be. It's sad it always ends like this. I think he's a decent fella. It's better to have opinions, than to be a spineless bastard.

[Tetchy]

I think you should leave them alone. Really, I have to say I'm surprised you use your loaf and do this.

[marsh]

Is there any need for all this?

It was wrong.. what they did. But I don't anything is going to become of it. When EA sign it,up - that's when you take action.

It's just turned into a Campbell-hater thread, and he's never going to win those arguements, however right he might be. It's sad it always ends like this. I think he's a decent fella. It's better to have opinions, than to be a spineless bastard.

Lets get something straight here. I don't hate campbell, as that requires me to waste time on some kind of emotion. I just don't agree with this line of aggressive behaviour on something as completely pointless as someone making £10 off the back of what is a truely awful game in the first place.

That's not hatred that's, a difference of opinion which I'm entitled to have just like the rev.

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

I think Stuart is right. But I also think that the game in question was made by a nice geek with good intentions, and not some scum trying to cash in on former glories by someone else. But Stuart's 'demands' (getting Sensible credited for the idea and the creator not to make any profits) are pretty reasonable. Maybe it's just his not very subtle fucking bitching swearing way of expressing himself that pits people against him.

[The Liberal Elite]

Is there any need for all this?

It was wrong.. what they did. But I don't anything is going to become of it. When EA sign it,up - that's when you take action.

It's just turned into a Campbell-hater thread, and he's never going to win those arguements, however right he might be. It's sad it always ends like this. I think he's a decent fella. It's better to have opinions, than to be a spineless bastard.

Lets get something straight here. I don't hate campbell, as that requires me to waste time on some kind of emotion. I just don't agree with this line of aggressive behaviour on something as completely pointless as someone making £10 off the back of what is a truely awful game in the first place.

That's not hatred that's, a difference of opinion which I'm entitled to have just like the rev.

And i agree with what marsh said.

believing that what someone is doing is fucking stupid is just that. that's not hatrred - that's a difference of opinion, and he's not known for holding back in telling people how, 'unbelievably stupid' they are, so why the hell should I treat him any different?

Stuart needs a wank. that'll sort it all out.

[whohe]

Why is Stuart getting so wound up about someone else's "intellectual property"?

In fact, quite probably, it was never his "intellectual property" in the first place (firstly, there's no claim that he was actively involved with the game at all, and secondly (unless Sensible Software was run by a bunch of complete idiots), any work done whilst in employ by the company would be owned by the company - not the individual who did the work). He just happened to work for a company that produced a freebie game way back when.

How all very amusing.

[Dimahoo]

Stu said he had nothing to do with it didn't he?

He said he'd contacted Jon Hare in Chaper 2.

Fuck am i looking through all that again.

[Sledge]

It's just turned into a Campbell-hater thread, and he's never going to win those arguements, however right he might be.

Seeing as the record now seems to demand it, I should clarify that I'm not a "Campbell-hater" either, even though I probably should be (him largely being the reason I pursued a career in games journalism, only to find it a fetid, rotting shadow of the world exhibited by the likes of AP.)

IP breaches are matters of civil law. Civil law exists to settle disputes between parties that are unable to come to an agreement between themselves, the inference being that, as a member of society, you have at least some obligation to make a genuine attempt at an independent resolution. Not waiting a reasonable amount of time for a response (and Demon Star's cited 24hrs is absolutely beside the point) before making a retaliatory IP breach in no way fulfills this obligation and Stu has done nothing but weaken his own position by taking this approach. What saddens me most is that the hot-headed attitude he's adopted totally ignores and negates the opportunity for constructive dialogue that notable figures like himself have with small, independent outfits.

It's for these reasons only that I believe this fandango to have been a risible, premature waste; it's hardly going to stop me picking up Zone to check out his regular slot.

Since when did two guys disagreeing and swearing at each other automatically indicate hatred, anyway? That circular never reached my desk.

[Dimahoo]

Since when did two guys disagreeing and swearing at each other automatically indicate hatred, anyway? That circular never reached my desk.

Isn't swearing at someone being hotheaded?

Anyway, regardless. All activists are hotheaded but this attitude enables them to make change.

I'd agree Stu's wasted with this, but he's making an effort with little regard for himself.

Suicide prehaps, but that was how the suffergettes won their case.

Thats the attitude to have, although i must stress its somewhat wasted on this case.

[whohe]

In the 1970's/80's, your humble correspondent spent some time having nothing whatsoever to do with Namco. During that time, Namco created a game called Puckman, a fun game made available to millions in arcades around the world. One story goes that it was renamed Pacman in the west to avoid people messing around with the name (who knows if this is true, in fact, given that it was so long ago, who cares!). It was one of Namco's first games, and intended as a little "cash cow" for the company.

The game was very simple in operation - the player took the part of an odd pizza-shaped thing, running round a maze avoiding ghosts, and was required to "eat" the dots by moving over them. (Eating a "pill" enabled the player to exact revenge on the ghosts - against a time limit.)

In 1982 (ish), a company called "Acornsoft" released a game called Snapper. In it, the player took the part of an odd pizza-shaped thing, running round a maze avoiding ghosts, and was required to "eat" the dots by moving over them. (Eating a "pill" enabled the player to exact revenge on the ghosts - against a time limit.)

As a tribute, Snapper would be charming. It was, in every gameplay design and mechanical sense, a clear and exact copy of Pacman - only the graphics had been changed. Sadly, however, Acornsoft had no intention of paying any tribute to the original game. Their boxart presents the game as their own original work, and magazine articles even went so far as to offer up a detailed "story" of how the game came into existence. Nowhere in the game's documentation, the hi-score table, not even the title screen, the company's adverts or anywhere else is the blatant lifting of someone else's game acknowledged in even the slightest passing way.

(As an aside, Acornsoft were of course made to change the characters in the game due to a minor legal spat, but what remained - in every gameplay design and mechanical sense - was a clear and exact copy of Pacman. Even sticking with the one software company, there are many similar examples: Arcadians=Galaxian; Zalaga=Galaga; Killer Gorilla=Donkey Kong; Meteors=Asteroids; Hopper=Frogger; Missile Base=Missile Command; Planetoid=Defender; Rocket Raid=Scramble. In not one instance were the writers or publishers of the "original" games credited.)

All of these games were effectively "cloned" from other platforms, without any common decency to credit the original authors. What's worse - they actually had the audacity to release those games when the originals were still available to play in the arcades! Acornsoft certainly had no right to claim any of those games as their own work, and certainly no right to sell them for money.

Or did they...

It actually got even worse than that. Allegedly...

Following Personal Computer World's publication of details of how to break the anti-copying security built into Acornsoft's games, Acornsoft took legal action. Acornsoft had demanded that the offending issue be removed from the bookstalls and took out an injunction claiming that the publishers were "inviting others to infringe Acornsoft's copyright".

The publishers settled out of court for £65,000.

The magazine's editor is quoted as saying "One feels a bit sad about it, but the situation was that it could have been a long battle and we would have lost the issue"

(from The Micro User, February 1984).

[Dimahoo]

Whohe, Many of the arcade games cited were made in tiny numbers, or sold in China or countries where lawsuits would not have made a difference.

What about the Donkey Kong clone story at that computer show? Wasn't that Apple?

And what about Rainbow Arts and Great Ghana sisters/Super Mario World lawsuit.

(not a flame Whohe, but i can't remember the results of either cases)

[SeanR]

Rainbow Arts... and Katakis (R-Type) and Garrison (Gauntlet) and, something else...

[Rev. Stuart Campbell]

Rainbow Arts... and Katakis (R-Type) and Garrison (Gauntlet) and, something else...

There are, of course, countless cases of publishers taking the developers of unlicensed clones to court for precisely this sort of thing. Very kindly, Sega have chosen now to do exactly that over Simpsons Road Rage/Crazy Taxi, just to helpfully illustrate my point. (And Simpsons Road Rage is far less of a straight clone of its "inspiration" than Train-Tracking is. See my earlier point about Ridge Racer if you want to know why.)

I haven't done that. I could have just called Codemasters, in the absolute confidence that the notoriously IP-protective company would have got their lawyers to stomp on these guys - you think, if the Codies threatened them with a simple letter, this little tinpot outfit would have let it get anywhere near a court? Don't be stupid. They'd have caved in a second, the game would have been withdrawn, and that'd be that. No game for anyone.

I do, of course, still have the option to do that, which is the opinion of a large percentage of those polled (more than those who say "Leave them alone"), but I'm not going to. It'd be, as my page says, an over-reaction. (Even if it IS tempting to do it just to spite some of you whining twats. I'm not going to give in to spite. But Demon Star NOT getting crushed over this is no thanks to your "intervention" on their behalf.)

If anything, what I've done is an under-reaction. The offending game is still on sale, bringing doubtless small, but undeserved, profits to its authors. (Still I wait to hear what the difference is between them and market-stall pirates.) They're still claiming undeserved credit for something that doesn't belong to them. (And "credit" is what it is - the game has garnered considerable critical praise, as the reviews on their site show. We should be flattered, really, that everyone likes OUR game so much.) I've even emailed them every step of the way to give them a chance to explain themselves.

At the same time, people can now get the game for free, if they know about my site. So what have we got as the end result of my actions of this week?

- Rip-off tossers still get to make money and acclaim out of someone else's property, rather than being forced out of business.

- Visitors to World Of Stuart get a free, morally-legitimate, game. Added value!

- The usual RLLMUK suspects get something else to bitch and moan at Campbell about, making them terribly happy.

Can any of you whingers explain to me exactly who the victims are here, please?

No, I didn't fucking think so. And that's the end of this one for me, I think.