Java-Gaming.org    
Featured games (81)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (494)
Games in Android Showcase (114)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (563)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
 
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: 1 2 [3]
  ignore  |  Print  
  Java .class files safe?  (Read 13495 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #60 - Posted 2006-08-16 11:34:43 »

Likewise, the majority of people these days have major issues with the concept of copyright, it's just that they're only gradually discovering the issues and arguments and counter-arguments that until recently were the preserve of lawyers, corporations, and artists who'd been ripped off.

IMHO, copyright is due for reform in the not-too-distant future. In the 21st century where not only does it cost *nothing* to make a copy but the original also costs almost nothing beyond the original invention/inspiration to produce (compared to inventing e.g. machinery in the industrial age, which required lots of labour, hand-drawings, and manual prototyping), the idea of copyright WILL change. You own the original, but I doubt you will continue to have as much rights over the copies as you do now (and, lets note, even the original copyright doens't let you, the author, "own" the copies: you merely have some special rights over them, they remain *someone else's* property - and you get some rights taken away from you, e.g. you have to allow copyright libraries free copies, etc).

Not that I'm making any guesses on what copyright will morph into, mind you. But laws change all the time as society changes, and copyright is no different.

My mind isn't made up on patents in the general case, but we certainly need copyright reform. The biggest problem is not the concept of copyright, but that people have forgotten why it exists. This is entirely the fault of governments for distorting the law to the extent that it no longer servers it's original intent. When copyright law was first instituted, it was in response to a real problem. The intent was to give creators incentive to continue creating, while ensuring that their work would be available to all in the end. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a creator having exclusive rights to his work so that he can profit from it without the fear of competition from others who freely copy it.

In the United States, copyright law has become a farce. It has a duration of the lifetime of the copyright holder plus 75 years. That is well beyond the original intent and more than enough reason to call for reform. And I assure you that 70 years after the death of Walt Disney his company will be right back to lobbying Congress for another extension so that they don't lose the copyrights to their tradermark characters. Unfortunately, the most vocal opponents of copyright law want to abolish it entirely. That would ultimately put us right back where we were before copyright law existed.

IMO the two biggest reforms we need to make are to reduce the duration of copyright (25 years is reasonable in my opinion) and to clearly define fair use rights for the digital age.
Offline PavelJ

Senior Newbie





« Reply #61 - Posted 2006-08-16 11:48:48 »

i strongly agree with blahblahblahh. recent developments like drm or the attempt to legalize software patents in europe are basicly desperate measures trying to enforce antiquated laws in the digital world. governments and supporters of the old model will fight some time and will most likely use even more drastic methods than today (riaa/mpaa lawsuits), but they can only act against the majority of citizens for some time. not that the majority would say "abolish copyright", but i'm sure they see that something is going in a fundementaly wrong direction.
my personal wishlist would be something like this:
- no patents on software
- ban of drm or the right to break it for fair use purposes
- copyright lasts only 15-25 years
- private, non-commercial "piracy" is fair use, no matter of the media type or the content
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #62 - Posted 2006-08-16 17:16:30 »

- no patents on software
- ban of drm or the right to break it for fair use purposes
- copyright lasts only 15-25 years

I agree with these three points. DRM and all forms of digital anti-piracy measures are just pure evil. But it's all a direct, and expected, response to the rampant disregard of copyright law. Businesses are going to try and protect themselves against any threat to their bottom line, real or imagined. And until we get lobby groups powerful enough to make the voice of the people heard over the whining of coporations and special interest groups, our chances of seeing any abolition of DRM or reform of copyright law are slim.

Quote
- private, non-commercial "piracy" is fair use, no matter of the media type or the content

Do you mean copying for personal use, or copying to give to friends? If the former, I agree. That's supposed to be fair use now under existing copyright laws, but many EULAs try to nullify it. If you mean the latter, I disagree. Once you start handing out copies, for commercial gain or not, you are "distributing" -- that's something that should never be fair use.
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline PavelJ

Senior Newbie





« Reply #63 - Posted 2006-08-17 10:31:19 »

Do you mean copying for personal use, or copying to give to friends? If the former, I agree.

well, isn't it basicly the same? if i make a copy for personal use i have to copy it from somewhere, like from a friend. when my friend makes a copy for personal use he needs a source to, like me.

Quote
That's supposed to be fair use now under existing copyright laws, but many EULAs try to nullify it.
really? i don't know the american copyright laws that good, but isn't copying software or dvds always an infringement? in germany only copying of music cds is allowed. and under no circumstances you may break a copyprotection to get an otherwise legal copy.

Offline blahblahblahh

JGO Coder


Medals: 1


http://t-machine.org


« Reply #64 - Posted 2006-08-17 10:51:49 »

Quote
- private, non-commercial "piracy" is fair use, no matter of the media type or the content

Do you mean copying for personal use, or copying to give to friends? If the former, I agree. That's supposed to be fair use now under existing copyright laws, but many EULAs try to nullify it. If you mean the latter, I disagree. Once you start handing out copies, for commercial gain or not, you are "distributing" -- that's something that should never be fair use.

Actually, no - this is another of the RIAA/MPAA's evils - convincing people that "copy for friend" and "building a million dollar factory and churning out hundreds of thousands of copies a day" and "providing free copies to the entire internet, including being the source for masters for dozens of those multi-million-printing factories" are the same thing, and the same in the law's eyes. They are not. They never have been. But it helps their political agenda to pretend otherwise.

Realizing this is exactly what's happening now - the general public is getting irate at being told these things are the same when they "obviously" are not (and western law is chock full of examples where the same logical action has 2,3,4 or more legal definitions according to the context in which it takes place - even killing someone, for example, has the various "degrees"). The RIAA et al are meanwhile building "logical" arguments - but that is not what law nor society is about. That would create a society suitable only for emotional and moral cripples who are incapable of making true moral judgements (which are much much harder than logical judgements). This is the basis of modern western civilization, and its insulting and disgusting to see large rich organizations trying to out-smart it Sad.

IMHO, the way forward that I desperately hope the world will finally settle on, though it may take decades of stupidity and wasted time and suffering, is that a stronger differentiation is made between:
 - copying and providing to a finite group of people on a small-scale (fewer than 5 copies, say - based on the fact that things like online licensing usually give an error margin of 5 copies anyway)
 - copying and providing to a non-finite group (publishing on the web, for instance)
 - copying and providing on a larg scale (if you get to double digits of copies, you've gone beyond "sharing a book with your friends").

And I'll fiinsh on that note - the mechanics of this should be based on book sharing: no-one thinks anything wrong of lending a book to a friend, or even giving it away, where the friend pays nothing, and the original owner loses nothing because once read a book is consumed. The real problem with the digital age is that it's possible to clone and mass produce for no cost Sad. But people should *alwyas* be able to share.

NB: even as recently as this year I have on multiple occasions downloaded pirate software and pirate books, illegally. SOLELY BECAUSE the online ordering systems of the places I had already purchased from were so f**ked up (literally made by lazy, incompetent, or stupid people) and had either taken my money and given me nothing, *refused* to take my money because of their own internal bugs, or had taken the money and said I would have to wait "2 to 4 weeks for shipping". I've got legal copies of everything, but I was using illegal ones for a long time whilst I waited. That common experience alone should be enough to blow out of existence the morons at the RIAA et al, and make them think twice about what it is they are doing, and how much their own incompetence is to blame for their losses. Sigh.

malloc will be first against the wall when the revolution comes...
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #65 - Posted 2006-08-17 11:40:22 »

Do you mean copying for personal use, or copying to give to friends? If the former, I agree.

well, isn't it basicly the same? if i make a copy for personal use i have to copy it from somewhere, like from a friend. when my friend makes a copy for personal use he needs a source to, like me.

Quote
That's supposed to be fair use now under existing copyright laws, but many EULAs try to nullify it.
really? i don't know the american copyright laws that good, but isn't copying software or dvds always an infringement? in germany only copying of music cds is allowed. and under no circumstances you may break a copyprotection to get an otherwise legal copy.


When I say 'copying for personal use', I mean you take copyrighted material that you have purchased and make copies of it for yourself. For example, copying music from a CD to the computer to an IPod, or copying a game to multiple computers (which you own). Copying it and giving to to a friend is not fair use because you then both have a copy. If you were to give the original to your friend and not retain any copies yourself, that should be your right. Unfortunately, many software packages claim in the EULA that a software license is non-transferable, or can only be transferred with permission, or some other silly restriction. That's the problem with the concept of 'licsensing' software as opposed to buying it.
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #66 - Posted 2006-08-17 11:48:10 »

Actually, no - this is another of the RIAA/MPAA's evils - convincing people that "copy for friend" and "building a million dollar factory and churning out hundreds of thousands of copies a day" and "providing free copies to the entire internet, including being the source for masters for dozens of those multi-million-printing factories" are the same thing, and the same in the law's eyes. They are not. They never have been. But it helps their political agenda to pretend otherwise.

Hrrrm. It's just  common sense to me. If I copy a game and give it to a friend, and he copies it and gives it to another firend, and he copies it and gives it... How is that not different from posting it on the internet? It's smaller scale, sure, but it is still piracy. The result is a chain of friends who have copied a game and are all playing it for the price of one. And once again, I don't need the RIAA to brainwash me into thinking that. Some of us are capable of forming our own opinions  Wink

Quote
And I'll fiinsh on that note - the mechanics of this should be based on book sharing: no-one thinks anything wrong of lending a book to a friend, or even giving it away, where the friend pays nothing, and the original owner loses nothing because once read a book is consumed. The real problem with the digital age is that it's possible to clone and mass produce for no cost Sad. But people should *alwyas* be able to share.

I don't disagree with this at all. The difference is that when you let your friend borrow your book you don't retain a copy for yourself. If you want to give a friend your original game CD and delete it from your computer, you have that right as far as I'm concerned (no matter what the EULA says). But if you're going to copy it, give your friend the copy, and keep the original for yourself then no, that should not be considered fair use.
Offline blahblahblahh

JGO Coder


Medals: 1


http://t-machine.org


« Reply #67 - Posted 2006-08-17 12:32:14 »

Actually, no - this is another of the RIAA/MPAA's evils - convincing people that "copy for friend" and "building a million dollar factory and churning out hundreds of thousands of copies a day" and "providing free copies to the entire internet, including being the source for masters for dozens of those multi-million-printing factories" are the same thing, and the same in the law's eyes. They are not. They never have been. But it helps their political agenda to pretend otherwise.

Hrrrm. It's just  common sense to me. If I copy a game and give it to a friend, and he copies it and gives it to another firend, and he copies it and gives it... How is that not different from posting it on the internet? It's smaller scale, sure, but it is still piracy. The result is a chain of friends who have copied a game and are all playing it for the price of one. And once again, I don't need the RIAA to brainwash me into thinking that. Some of us are capable of forming our own opinions  Wink

So, I'm afraid you missed the point I was making Sad - legally, and morally, there is a difference. That same kind of difference pervades every aspect of our life. It's why we have both Assault (you attack someone and hit them) and Battery (you hit someone accidentally). It's why we have "damages limited to Actual Financial Loss". Intent, context, and outcomes are all factored into deciding what category any action falls into both legally and morally.

If you do away with that, you do away with morality and end up merely with pointless laws that serve no real value to society. That has never been the way it worked, and I desperately hope never will be.

Quote
Quote
And I'll fiinsh on that note - the mechanics of this should be based on book sharing: no-one thinks anything wrong of lending a book to a friend, or even giving it away, where the friend pays nothing, and the original owner loses nothing because once read a book is consumed. The real problem with the digital age is that it's possible to clone and mass produce for no cost Sad. But people should *alwyas* be able to share.

I don't disagree with this at all. The difference is that when you let your friend borrow your book you don't retain a copy for yourself. If you want to give a friend your original game CD and delete it from your computer, you have that right as far as I'm concerned (no matter what the EULA says). But if you're going to copy it, give your friend the copy, and keep the original for yourself then no, that should not be considered fair use.

Stop looking at the difference, and think about the parallels. Don't be so logical, think emotionally as well. Thinking logically is what the RIAA depend upon, because they're arguments don't make sense, they merely compute, according to a very small-minded limited set of criteria (logic). You're human, not a borg Tongue.

malloc will be first against the wall when the revolution comes...
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 15
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #68 - Posted 2006-08-17 12:49:51 »

Thinking logically is what the RIAA depend upon

As if.

"piracy is theft because both of them can cause monetary loss" is not exactly what I'd call stellar use of logic..

Play Minecraft!
Offline Breakfast

Senior Member




for great justice!


« Reply #69 - Posted 2006-08-17 14:18:44 »

Quote
"piracy is theft because both of them can cause monetary loss" is not exactly what I'd call stellar use of logic..

It is entirely logical and indeed if you continue to follow that logical approach then accidentally washing some five pound notes in the laundry or dropping a coin and not noticing it or picking it up are also theft.

Of course, believing such a thing is clearly insane, but the lovely thing about logic is that it just needs to be internally coherent - it doesn' t need to actually relate to the real world.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline blahblahblahh

JGO Coder


Medals: 1


http://t-machine.org


« Reply #70 - Posted 2006-08-17 15:23:02 »

Of course, believing such a thing is clearly insane, but the lovely thing about logic is that it just needs to be internally coherent - it doesn' t need to actually relate to the real world.

Ah, yeah, a much more concise way of putting what I was saying Smiley. Ta.

malloc will be first against the wall when the revolution comes...
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 15
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #71 - Posted 2006-08-17 16:33:56 »

ah, true.

Play Minecraft!
Offline PavelJ

Senior Newbie





« Reply #72 - Posted 2006-08-17 21:50:36 »

When I say 'copying for personal use', I mean you take copyrighted material that you have purchased and make copies of it for yourself. For example, copying music from a CD to the computer to an IPod, or copying a game to multiple computers (which you own). Copying it and giving to to a friend is not fair use because you then both have a copy. If you were to give the original to your friend and not retain any copies yourself, that should be your right. Unfortunately, many software packages claim in the EULA that a software license is non-transferable, or can only be transferred with permission, or some other silly restriction. That's the problem with the concept of 'licsensing' software as opposed to buying it.
ok, maybe fair use is the wrong term. in germany it's called privatkopie, private/personal copy. and it's legal for music, as long as no drm is broken, but not legal for movies and software. i think it should be ok to give my friend a copy of something i have and the other way around. i don't see a moral problem here, why shouldn't i be able to do a friend of mine a favour without any direct loss for anybody?

on the eula/licensing thing:
eulas are null and void here in germany. and you are allowed to resell your software licenses, as long as they are not specially bound to a specific piece of hardware. that's why we almost always just get windows "recovery" cds in germany instead of a real windows cd. on the other hand, some courts currently argue about the sale of used oracle licences.
Pages: 1 2 [3]
  ignore  |  Print  
 
 
You cannot reply to this message, because it is very, very old.

 

Add your game by posting it in the WIP section,
or publish it in Showcase.

The first screenshot will be displayed as a thumbnail.

Dwinin (19 views)
2014-09-12 09:08:26

Norakomi (54 views)
2014-09-10 13:57:51

TehJavaDev (63 views)
2014-09-10 06:39:09

Tekkerue (31 views)
2014-09-09 02:24:56

mitcheeb (53 views)
2014-09-08 06:06:29

BurntPizza (37 views)
2014-09-07 01:13:42

Longarmx (23 views)
2014-09-07 01:12:14

Longarmx (27 views)
2014-09-07 01:11:22

Longarmx (26 views)
2014-09-07 01:10:19

mitcheeb (34 views)
2014-09-04 23:08:59
List of Learning Resources
by Longor1996
2014-08-16 10:40:00

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-08-05 19:33:27

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:20:17

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:19:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:29:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:26:06

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 11:54:12

HotSpot Options
by dleskov
2014-07-08 01:59:08
java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!