Titanium DL

[Swish]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

False - the EQEmu source is a direct port of live server code and an infringing use of their intellectual property.

I don't see that. If you look at the state of the TLP servers there's nothing similar about the code at all.

Also the code isn't a replica of the code used during classic EQ, it's put together to be as similar as possible. The only similarities are the character models and zones, and even the zones in some respects have been changed.

It'd be a tangled web but I think ultimately P99 stands separate enough from anything the live servers are doing, using custom code based on a client that is ahead of the era we're playing in. A lot of us use addons that customize the experience further.

If P99 classic EQ was as popular as H1Z1 is for Daybreak I could see them wanting to trigger a shutdown, but it isn't...and if anything people who've played here might not have moved to try the TLP servers over the last 7-8 years.

If they wanted to cash in, they could give us a paid/legal version of Titanium we could download... right?

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't see that. If you look at the state of the TLP servers there's nothing similar about the code at all.

That wouldn't matter in the case of a C&D shutdown, and that's true across all emulated servers, not just P99. I mean, do you think Nostalrius would still be up if they said, "Wait! Our servers aren't anything at all like the current WoW servers!" It wouldn't matter. It doesn't matter how similar or dissimilar EQEmu server code is from either the current EQ live code or EQ live code as it existed from '99-'02 - using the brand name alone would be enough legal ground to end any emulated EverQuest server. This wasn't true when SoE owned the IP due to some ambiguous verbiage in their end-user license agreement, which granted a license to "all account subscribers in good standing" to use any of the brand's content.

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Also the code isn't a replica of the code used during classic EQ, it's put together to be as similar as possible.

Things get a bit complicated here, not that it changes anything legally, but the EQEmu source was originally a direct port from EQ live code, meaning they didn't start from scratch. They obtained an early version of EQ live server source code, changed it to their liking, and based their server software off that. So at some point the EQ server code was leaked and the founders of EQEmu took advantage of the opportunity - EQEmu has been around since as early as 2001, so this probably happened quite awhile ago.

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The only similarities are the character models and zones, and even the zones in some respects have been changed.

All of that stuff is client-side though, so that wouldn't affect P99's legality so long as they don't encourage pirating the client software.

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If P99 classic EQ was as popular as H1Z1 is for Daybreak I could see them wanting to trigger a shutdown, but it isn't...and if anything people who've played here might not have moved to try the TLP servers over the last 7-8 years.

If they wanted to cash in, they could give us a paid/legal version of Titanium we could download... right?

Yeah I mean, this is just a philosophical conversation at this point because, again, there is literally zero incentive for Daybreak to do anything. Winter's Roar was only shut down because the EverQuest brand was still generating some tangible amount of revenue. EverQuest isn't making Daybreak any money, so they have no reason to care about a few thousand nerds elf simming it up on P99 or anywhere else. Add onto that the fact that they've publicly endorsed P99, and the fact that they're no longer a subsidiary of the corporate giant Sony.

There's still value in protecting intellectual property though, even if there's a lawsuit (there wouldn't be) and it costs Daybreak money and earns them nothing - if you want your brands to retain value, you'll want people to take you seriously instead of just emulating free versions of whatever new games you release.

[mgellan]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Things get a bit complicated here, not that it changes anything legally, but the EQEmu source was originally a direct port from EQ live code, meaning they didn't start from scratch. They obtained an early version of EQ live server source code, changed it to their liking, and based their server software off that. So at some point the EQ server code was leaked and the founders of EQEmu took advantage of the opportunity - EQEmu has been around since as early as 2001, so this probably happened quite awhile ago.

Reference please? This is absolutely the first time I've ever heard this and it seems highly implausible versus just writing the code from scratch...

Regards,
Mg

[skipdog]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

P99 can't get shutdown because they don't use any of SoE or daybreaks code.

This is a silly statement. All it takes is a letter from daybreak to Rogean and then it's his decision whether he wants to deal with the legal hassle, no matter what the true legality really is.

Gonna guess shutting off server would probably be his best option... but maybe he would fight tooth and nail for it. Guess we'll never know until it actually happens.

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by skipdog [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Guess we'll never know until it actually happens.

It won't, and (trigger warning: incoming assumption) even Rogean would be smart enough not to get tangled up in a lawsuit with DBG and just pull the plug.

[fastboy21]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'd just call it redistributing intellectual property, and when done without consent it's illegal, despite being a victimless crime - and when only downloading and not redistributing, one that you'd have to be a masochist not to commit. I'd still call that piracy, just for simplicity's sake if anything. Maybe pseudo-piracy would suffice.

Not sure what you mean. If it's victimless then there is no theft. There has to be some damages, or it isn't anything.

Originally Posted by skipdog [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is a silly statement. All it takes is a letter from daybreak to Rogean and then it's his decision whether he wants to deal with the legal hassle, no matter what the true legality really is.

Gonna guess shutting off server would probably be his best option... but maybe he would fight tooth and nail for it. Guess we'll never know until it actually happens.

^^^ This.

The legality of most lawsuits hardly matters at all. Someone with a lot of money can bully someone if they want using lawsuits. Considering the nature of this server I can't really imagine Rogean being willing to invest the type of money it would cost him to deal with this. Its a free emulator server the risk v. reward would be hardly worth it unless he had someone backing him up.

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by fastboy21 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Not sure what you mean. If it's victimless then there is no theft. There has to be some damages, or it isn't anything.

I never said it's theft, just that it's a crime according to the stipulations of copyright law. Copyright law is agnostic about whether intellectual property is still available through retail, meaning if it came to a lawsuit that wouldn't be a discriminating factor. Simplicity would apply: was copyrighted material acquired or redistributed illegally? If yes, a crime was committed.

I don't agree with that law, and I also suggest others ignore it because there are no real repercussions for breaking it. I'm merely suggesting that we probably don't want to turn the forums into a hotbed for torrenting the client, but apparently the owners of P99 are less concerned about that than I am.

[Swish]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I never said it's theft, just that it's a crime according to the stipulations of copyright law. Copyright law is agnostic about whether intellectual property is still available through retail, meaning if it came to a lawsuit that wouldn't be a discriminating factor. Simplicity would apply: was copyrighted material acquired or redistributed illegally? If yes, a crime was committed.

I don't agree with that law, and I also suggest others ignore it because there are no real repercussions for breaking it. I'm merely suggesting that we probably don't want to turn the forums into a hotbed for torrenting the client, but apparently the owners of P99 are less concerned about that than I am.

How do you legally prove 1000s of people here have an illegal copy? Case by case?

[fastboy21]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I never said it's theft, just that it's a crime according to the stipulations of copyright law. Copyright law is agnostic about whether intellectual property is still available through retail, meaning if it came to a lawsuit that wouldn't be a discriminating factor. Simplicity would apply: was copyrighted material acquired or redistributed illegally? If yes, a crime was committed.

I don't agree with that law, and I also suggest others ignore it because there are no real repercussions for breaking it. I'm merely suggesting that we probably don't want to turn the forums into a hotbed for torrenting the client, but apparently the owners of P99 are less concerned about that than I am.

Then it isn't victimless. You can't have it both ways in copyright law: either there is a victim or there is no crime. Wrapping pseudo-legal jargon around it doesn't change the essence of the issue at point.

Again, no clue what you mean when you say both of those things together. You seem to be arguing clearly on a particular side of the issue.

In any case, of more interest, why the sudden interest in illuminated the law on a server you've been playing on for years now...

[Swish]

Some good points there. I will say though that it would be quite hypocritical of them to call out protecting intellectual property when they shit canned EQ Next not too long ago.

I'd still like to see the EQ franchise sold to a company that will take it forwards and preserve it, not sure who would keep developing for it though. The irony if Brad McQuaid's studio did [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]