Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

blog.zarfhome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 163 posts

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#101

Post by dagw »

ethbr1 wrote: post #24
rgmerk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All copyright is way too long but authors go completely off-piste at anyone who suggests that it should be something more reasonable (I kinda like 21 years myself). Part of the issue is that the loudest voices are that 0.01% of authors whose work still has some commercial value decades after its creation.

There's an unexplored (to my knowledge) middleground where copyright expires more rapidly with regards to derivative works, but not the original. E.g. At x+10 anyone could make a new sequel to Zork, but the rights to the published Zork are retained for x+25 That feels fair.

At x+10 anyone could make a new sequel to Zork

Would the copyright holders of Zork get royalties in this scenario, like with cover versions of songs?

The other problem is that in this scenario people will just be slapping the names of things that were popular x+10 years ago on literally anything. People will just make the lowest effort loot box laden pay-to-win mobile games you can get onto the App Store, and advertise them as sequel or tie-in to that old popular game/book/movie.

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#102

Post by ethbr1 »

mlyle wrote: post #56
ethbr1 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an unexplored (to my knowledge) middleground where copyright expires more rapidly with regards to derivative works, but not the original. E.g. At x+10 anyone could make a new sequel to Zork, but the rights to the published Zork are retained for x+25 That feels fair.

And there's a sibling to your comment proposing the exact opposite https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37895648 I can think of arguments why derivatives should get more favorable and less favorable treatment than overall copying. To me it feels like a wash and they should probably be treated similarly-- though trademark can provide some limited protection beyond copyright terms if the work's use in commerce has been…

My reasoning is:

The original thing has already been created, and proceeds benefit whoever created it (or who they sold rights to).

Whether they choose to continue to actively market it or not, while under copyright, can't be influenced by copyright. Abandonware under copyright is still abandonware.

But! There's a class of derivative works, built on top of the original, that currently can't get made.

If they were, we'd all be better off.

Arguably, I can even see an aggressive sunsetting for derivative works being net positive for the original work's commercial value ("See the original").

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#103

Post by glimshe »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #25

Activision is also actively selling the Zork collection on Steam. I'd expect that to show up on Gamepass. It includes: Zork I, Zork II, Zork III, Beyond Zork, Zork Zero, and Planetfall https://store.steampowered.com/app/570580/Zork_Anthology/

They must barely make any money from them. When I read the title of this article, I thought "Gosh, I have a plea too... Can they free the Infocom games?" - and the article was exactly about that. We've been waiting for over a decade... Microsoft, if you are reading this... Pretty please? It would also send a good message to regulators that something good came out of this.

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#104

Post by glimshe »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #8
chewychewy wrote: post #2

Zork for XBOX in 4K coming to Game Pass.

I bet you could use some kind of generative AI to automatically render images of each scene from a text adventure.

I wonder if younger people would play these games if they were fully graphical, as in all rooms have graphics, animations, objects disappear when you get them etc.

I got my son to play the text adventures for some 30 minutes, but he lost interest and went to play Roblox... In another instance, I got him to type a full 100-200 command walkthrough while I read the commands, he enjoyed it but didn't want to do it again.

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#105

Post by glimshe »

nostromo wrote: post #34
nordsieck wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All copyright is way too long but authors go completely off-piste at anyone who suggests that it should be something more reasonable (I kinda like 21 years myself). > Part of the issue is that the loudest voices are that 0.01% of authors whose work still has some commercial value decades after its creation. My favorite scheme is that all copyright last for 10 years by default. You can register it for $100 for anoth…

This scheme seems to protect the largest companies with the largest bank accounts the most. Why would we want a system like that? I actually have the opposite view: I'm more worried about a small-time author that say, makes living on a low-volume text or training book, than I am protecting Mickey Mouse.

Large corporations won't bother to protect something that can't pay the 100x increase - Do you think Activision would have paid for Infocom rights if it cost 200K at this point? Maybe yes, but quite possibly not. But Harry Potter and Lord of Ring owners likely would, no matter whether they are small or large. This money could go to other services, such as education.

For small-time authors, why should they enjoy the intellectual property rights for the rest of their life? The vast majority of people need to keep working to keep generating money.

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#106

Post by amelius »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

We all know Microsoft bought Activision _for_ the Infocom IP. It’s clearly the most valuable asset.

I had to look it up:

> Infocom games are text adventures where users direct the action by entering short strings of words to give commands when prompted

Sounds to me these games will soon be made irrelevant by upcoming LLM tech. Am I missing something?

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#107

Post by glimshe »

robocat wrote: post #54
johnnyanmac wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Numbers can be tweaked but it adds up quickly. Protect for 40 years for a million? Sure. Probably worth it for mega IPs 50 years for $100m? Still doable but it really starts to hurt. 60 for $10B? Maybe Pokemon and Mikey mouse can justify it, but very very few. By 70 years it's simply not worth it. >This scheme seems to protect the largest companies with the largest bank accounts the most. Why would we want a system l…

My friend was getting royalty cheques 30 years after creating a song (slightly different from books) and the money mattered to him. The amounts were small and probably not worth any paperwork nor the risk of prepayment (paying for extension) which might not get back. Hard to find the right balance, but what we have now is asinine.

I'm sorry, but this isn't necessarily a good thing. Your friend takes this money and goes have a haircut, the person cutting their hair won't be making money for the haircut 30 years later. Okay, we can give some extra benefits for intellectual property, but 30 years is way too much.

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#108

Post by weeeeelp »

amelius wrote: post #106
ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

We all know Microsoft bought Activision _for_ the Infocom IP. It’s clearly the most valuable asset.

I had to look it up: > Infocom games are text adventures where users direct the action by entering short strings of words to give commands when prompted Sounds to me these games will soon be made irrelevant by upcoming LLM tech. Am I missing something?

Nerd nostalgia, these games are from the 80s/90s and it's about making them freely available under a Creative Commons or similar license.

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#109

Post by DoughnutHole »

amelius wrote: post #106
ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

We all know Microsoft bought Activision _for_ the Infocom IP. It’s clearly the most valuable asset.

I had to look it up: > Infocom games are text adventures where users direct the action by entering short strings of words to give commands when prompted Sounds to me these games will soon be made irrelevant by upcoming LLM tech. Am I missing something?

It was a joke.

Re: Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea

#110

Post by amelius »

DoughnutHole wrote: post #109
amelius wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to look it up: > Infocom games are text adventures where users direct the action by entering short strings of words to give commands when prompted Sounds to me these games will soon be made irrelevant by upcoming LLM tech. Am I missing something?

It was a joke.

Aha, as a non-gamer perhaps I should just stay out of this thread :)
Post reply on HN