261–270 of 307 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what that CD was worth in sheer value to the community of hackers and gamers and modders $0?
Value isn't always pricable. This was priceless.
Any modder utilizing the source code would most likely receive a swift Cease & Desist for using their code without permission.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Selfish for following the law and respecting the wishes of the authors of a work? Jesus, people are really performing some mental gymnastics to justify the hypothetical theft of property in this case in order to arrive at the conclusion that the finder is somehow being selfish.
> Selfish for following the law and respecting the wishes of the authors of a work? Shit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Fox_vault_fire Happens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_MGM_vault_fire If something is truly culturally significant then it should be preserved regardless of the wish(es) of its author(s) and these two hyperlinks rather easily make the case that preservation requires distribution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I highly doubt it's going to be removed from circulation forever. My guess is it'll be archived internally, the disc itself will end up in their campus museum, and at some point legal will sign off on releasing it to the public. SC1 is coming up on its 20th anniversary next year, who knows what they'll do for the occasion.
> I highly doubt it's going to be removed from circulation forever. Agreed, but sometimes… Shit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Fox_vault_fire Happens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_MGM_vault_fire Preservation requires distribution.
The disc would die in a fire certainly, but so would it if it were at the Archive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you? :) Starcraft influenced the culture and politics of an entire nation and became a national sport. It pioneered "e-sports". It's a piece of history, and this disc is standalone a piece of history as well. I think I know right from wrong, but I would still have absolutely no idea what to do if that disc landed on my doorstep. Edit: I cannot believe this is such a controversial thing to say. Shame on the people…
It's an absolutely simple decision for me to make. It is not mine, therefore I give it back. It's like I taught my children... even if you don't know whose it is, you know it isn't yours. And in this case it is even known. The amount of moral flexibility in these comments astounds me, although it probably shouldn't.
I would say it astounds me to find people who are as rigid as you are, but truthfully, it doesn't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is to say this guy didn't do the same :)
At that point that would be really stupid of him, since now they know who he is. Instead creating posts and teasing other people (for karma?) he should just leak it. People are saying that it would be wrong etc. For goodness sake this thing is older than half of people on HN. Everything there is outdated and piracy-wise is not much worth. Instead, preserving it to study and learn things about game development at that…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IP is different that physical property. If someone takes something physical from anther person, the original owner loses that object. But if someone "takes" (copies) source code from someone, the original owner still has it . Now two people have it instead of one. By the way, I'm not making any arguments about morality. I'm just pointing out that IP is different from physical property in important ways.
It's an unimportant distinction for the purposes of this discussion. Under the law, damages have occurred, especially if someone then takes that source code and makes it public. So whether you have 2 copies or 1 copy or umpteen copies, if you've economically affected someone, you will lose that fight in court. But this is not relevant to this discussion and I think we should keep on topic. The point is this: Dylan168…
First, I never argued that it was or wasn't against the law.
Second, it's not clear that releasing the source would economically affect Blizzard. It's not like someone could start releasing competing StarCraft games. They still don't own the brand etc.
> (and thank you for having the arrogance to explain that on board full of developers, btw...).
I mentioned it because of your argument about a house being 20+ years old.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not arguing against the existence of all IP rights. I just think some of the inclusions and durations are wrong. I don't know why you're trying to strawman me into being anti-property and making this so personal. Would you be this rude if I was insisting on 28 years, the original limit? You act like the current copyright lengths are objectively correct, and anyone who disagrees is deluding themselves. Why? And fo…
> That's like saying that robbing Bill Gates and distributing the money to millions of poor people is morally good because it's good for many people. - FooBarWidget > That degrades property rights, so it's bad for the many. - Dylan16807 Straight out of the horses mouth, that's not a strawman, it's literally what you said. We shouldn't take money from the rich and give to the poor because property rights, but we shoul…
>We shouldn't take money from the rich and give to the poor
You're ignoring the part where I said twice that taking money from all the rich with a tax would be okay. So "we shouldn't take money from the rich" is not my stance at all.
But sure I should explain a bit better.
Levying taxes on all the rich and giving to the poor is fine.
Taking money arbitrarily from one rich guy can degrade ownership-of-money, which is a bad thing.
Taking copyright away from all old code is fine.
Taking old code arbitrarily from one company can degrade ownership-of-old-code, but that's not really a bad thing, because that type of ownership is unimportant to society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But in this case, that's Blizzard's right. They own it whether you like it or not. Just because something is important doesn't mean they should lose property rights to it. Abandonware is a thing and I remember there being some legal headway made recently in that respect, but Starcraft isn't abandoned. They just released a compatibility patch and made it free to download.
It's their right now, but in "life + 70 years" it could have been an incredibly valuable cultural heritage in the hands of the public. Now the game will die when Blizzard chooses to stop adapting the game to new platforms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why are people upset about this? It seems like the right thing to do to my mind. Shit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Fox_vault_fire Happens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_MGM_vault_fire If something is culturally significant then it should be preserved and these two hyperlinks should easily make the case that preservation requires distribution.
You keep posting this as if it's relevant. Shit does happen, but it doesn't change the facts that Blizzard owns that code. Also, many in this thread are acting as if Starcraft itself is going to be destroyed thanks to this guy returning the code. You can download Starcraft for free from Blizzard [1] and they're releasing a remastered version soon [2]. It isn't going anywhere, so even by your own assertion there is no…
This would be relevant if we were discussing US law, but myself and others in this thread are posting replies derived from reasoning beyond Kohlberg's fourth stage of moral development, so please forgive me for saying that the significance of your point here is lost on me.
The preservation of culturally-significant works of art is considerably more important than any definition of ownership found in any law from any country in any time period that you can cite.
> It isn't going anywhere, so even by your own assertion there is no moral right to preserve the source, which isn't needed to enjoy the cultural artifact it creates.
You make an excellent point here, but I'm not convinced that there is no moral obligation to preserve the source code. Granted, it isn't the product, but I don't believe that its preservation value can be easily dismissed given that the product is well-preserved. I will have to think more on this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Value isn't always pricable. This was priceless.
How? Has anyone actually said how this source code could have been used? Any modder utilizing the source code would most likely receive a swift Cease & Desist for using their code without permission.