Yeah, it is pretty awesomely made 😀

impressive! thanks for the heads up!

Looks great. Better download it fast before the C&D letter arrives. I honestly don't understand why some programmers go to the trouble of programming remakes of classic games without getting consent of the copyright holders first. They have to know that as soon as a buzz is generated someone is going to take notice of what they are doing and tell them to stop. There was another game like this a while back that got hit with a C&D and the fans had the nerve to get mad at the copyright holders for protecting their IP instead of the developers for not getting permission first and getting their hopes up.

canadacow asked ronald about munt and we know what happened...

If the creator gets a C&D letter like the Chrono Trigger Resurrection got. Then it just shows fucking stupid and possible inbred some money grabbing fuckers are. And that makes me sad. Cause it is sad, that happy camping programmers making a giant tribute to a game. Gets screwed over, because they show their talent and progress in the way they make a remake of a great game.

WolverineDK wrote:

If the creator gets a C&D letter like the Chrono Trigger Resurrection got. Then it just shows fucking stupid and possible inbred some money grabbing fuckers are. And that makes me sad. Cause it is sad, that happy camping programmers making a giant tribute to a game. Gets screwed over, because they show their talent and progress in the way they make a remake of a great game.

The mod's complete anyway, so it won't really matter. Kinda like Streets of Rage Remake Rev 5.0. Why SEGA didn't choose to buy then and have it released on XBLA/PSN/Steam is beyond me.
But anyway, as soon as a complete game/mod is released it won't matter if it is taken down, it will always be uploaded somewhere. 😉

WolverineDK wrote:

If the creator gets a C&D letter like the Chrono Trigger Resurrection got. Then it just shows fucking stupid and possible inbred some money grabbing fuckers are. And that makes me sad. Cause it is sad, that happy camping programmers making a giant tribute to a game. Gets screwed over, because they show their talent and progress in the way they make a remake of a great game.

Welcome to the wide world of greed.

F2bnp wrote:

WolverineDK wrote:

If the creator gets a C&D letter like the Chrono Trigger Resurrection got. Then it just shows fucking stupid and possible inbred some money grabbing fuckers are. And that makes me sad. Cause it is sad, that happy camping programmers making a giant tribute to a game. Gets screwed over, because they show their talent and progress in the way they make a remake of a great game.

The mod's complete anyway, so it won't really matter. Kinda like Streets of Rage Remake Rev 5.0. Why SEGA didn't choose to buy then and have it released on XBLA/PSN/Steam is beyond me.
But anyway, as soon as a complete game/mod is released it won't matter if it is taken down, it will always be uploaded somewhere. 😉

True 😁

BigBodZod wrote:

Welcome to the wide world of greed.

Or the revival of CISPA/ACTA and what not. Pretty messed up.

WolverineDK wrote:

BigBodZod wrote:

Welcome to the wide world of greed.

Or the revival of CISPA/ACTA and what not. Pretty messed up.

Yeppers, it is messed up, but I guess the lawyers are the only ones making out in this kind of mess, especially here in the states 🙁

EDIT: already getting this from the Nexus site.

WolverineDK wrote:

If the creator gets a C&D letter like the Chrono Trigger Resurrection got. Then it just shows fucking stupid and possible inbred some money grabbing fuckers are. And that makes me sad. Cause it is sad, that happy camping programmers making a giant tribute to a game. Gets screwed over, because they show their talent and progress in the way they make a remake of a great game.

Why? Because they dared to protect their property? Where copyrighted, trademarked, and/or patented materials are concerned there are rules you have to follow if you want to use them in your own projects and those rules say that you get permission from the owners of the properties or else you don't use them. That someone put years of labor into a project only to get a C&D at the end of it all is their own fault for not getting permission first. Your argument is like a housebreaker who gets caught stealing arguing that it is the fault of the homeowner he attempted to steal from for having such nice stuff that he ended up in prison rather than his own for trying to take what didn't belong to him and is just an example of the entitlement mentality that people have that they can just take from people who create because they think they don't deserve to be compensated for their work and that everyone should have it for free.

sliderider wrote:

...just an example of the entitlement mentality that people have that they can just take from people who create...

You know full well that "copyright holders" does not necessarily equal the "people who create". Don't pretend that greed and entitlement don't exist on both sides of the fence - it's just that IP owners have more power to subvert and modify the law according to their greed and entitlement. Perhaps if they didn't, copyright laws would still be serving their original purpose - protecting the rights of original authors by allowing them to reasonably profit from their own work.

As things are, the laws have mutated into something completely different. The length of copyright terms has progressively increased by a factor of 7, and all limitations on term extensions and transfer of rights have been thrown out the window. Current laws are hardly about protecting the rights of authors anymore, if at all - more about enabling the hoarding of intellectual properties by third parties and turning them into profiteering tools; the erosion of Fair Use; depriving culture of intellectual contributions; and turning the concept of "rights" into a means of bullying and intimidation, where random individuals are "made and example of" and threatened with prosecution for astronomical (and completely spurious) damages.

This doesn't justify illegal activity, but it DOES merit a re-examination of the *spirit* of the law. As a capitalist, you should realize that the public's ability to build upon the works of others would not be a detriment to business, but a boon. Those who first defined the concept of copyright, and enacted the original laws with careful attention to sensible limits, were certainly no commies.

VileRancour wrote:

Those who first defined the concept of copyright, and enacted the original laws with careful attention to sensible limits, were certainly no commies.

Fucking a man ! 😀 It is no wonder, why I love Open Source 😀

VileRancour wrote:

You know full well that "copyright holders" does not necessarily equal the "people who create". Don't pretend that greed and en […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

...just an example of the entitlement mentality that people have that they can just take from people who create...

You know full well that "copyright holders" does not necessarily equal the "people who create". Don't pretend that greed and entitlement don't exist on both sides of the fence - it's just that IP owners have more power to subvert and modify the law according to their greed and entitlement. Perhaps if they didn't, copyright laws would still be serving their original purpose - protecting the rights of original authors by allowing them to reasonably profit from their own work.

As things are, the laws have mutated into something completely different. The length of copyright terms has progressively increased by a factor of 7, and all limitations on term extensions and transfer of rights have been thrown out the window. Current laws are hardly about protecting the rights of authors anymore, if at all - more about enabling the hoarding of intellectual properties by third parties and turning them into profiteering tools; the erosion of Fair Use; depriving culture of intellectual contributions; and turning the concept of "rights" into a means of bullying and intimidation, where random individuals are "made and example of" and threatened with prosecution for astronomical (and completely spurious) damages.

This doesn't justify illegal activity, but it DOES merit a re-examination of the *spirit* of the law. As a capitalist, you should realize that the public's ability to build upon the works of others would not be a detriment to business, but a boon. Those who first defined the concept of copyright, and enacted the original laws with careful attention to sensible limits, were certainly no commies.

Ever heard of "works for hire"? The law says that when you are working for someone else, anything that you create while in their employ belongs to them, not you. So if you are a game programmer working for John Carmack or Gabe Newell, your games belong to them, not you and if you or anyone else infringes on their IP, they can sue to protect what they own.

Of course, but what of it? it contradicts nothing I've written. When you work for someone else, author's rights belong to your employer but that is something both sides are aware of when the agreement is signed. No problem there.

What I was referring to is the original authors (be they Joe Hiredhacker or Carmack/Newell) losing ownership of their rights due to circumstances beyond their control. Go through a good round of legal or financial troubles, and suddenly a business entity that's a dozen degrees removed from said original authors has sole ownership of their intellectual assets for a timespan extending far beyond their life expectancy. Said party often has no intention of capitalizing on this property, nor even a complete certainty of exclusive ownership, but under current law it would still be compelled to litigate its way into locking down the rights in legal limbo, just to ensure that nobody else gets access to it, ever.

Sure, it's "legal", but quite a ways removed from the intent behind the concept of copyright, and in the long run nobody wins.