Freeshard

[Xest]

"No they're not, I've listed all the details in this thread you need to look into reverse engineering laws i.e. the precident set by the Sony vs. Accolade case. You can't prove someone wrong by claiming something with no evidence or justification whatsoever as much as you seem to think you can."......fyi in fact it is sega vs accolade ..and it was for an interim version of reverse engineering ..NOT for published and publicly used software

Please know what you're talking about so you at least make sense before posting.

I'm assuming by "It was for an interim version of reverse engineering" you mean the argument was over the fact that when you reverse engineer by inspection it creates an interim copy of the program then I think you'll find that's the same for all software, it was deemed that this was acceptable because when you run a program it also creates an interim copy in memory hence if that were to be made illegal it would also be illegal to run the program.

The case was about Accolade reverse engineering the Genesis (Megadrive) to produce games for it without license to do so. You're right though it was Sega, I made a typo The other case was Sony vs Connectix that I was thinking of at the time

[Majty]

For all you know this is someone else writing this, you cant ban people for something on a forum unless you have real evidence.

I thought GoA, could terminate an account whenever they want, according to the CoC..?

[Xest]

I thought GoA, could terminate an account whenever they want, according to the CoC..?

I think they can but they open themselves to being sued if they can't prove good grounding or reason. The reason companies need good reason is to protect consumers otherwise you could have say, a company offering an annual subscription of something for £200 which someone may pay for then they could simply terminate the account so that you've paid £200 and gained nothing.

[Lieva]

I thought GoA, could terminate an account whenever they want, according to the CoC..?

dont they need reasons though?
tis why they dont just ban peeps upon reporting theyre radar users without proof.

[Lairiodd]

dont they need reasons though?
tis why they dont just ban peeps upon reporting theyre radar users without proof.

If they banned people without proof, then they would get alot more reports for "radar" which had nothing to do with actual radar.

They need to be reasonable or they will get no new customers.

[Norcott]

Xest freeshards are not under license... ( and if they are then bloody well prove it get off that high horse your on and PROVE IT) they tell u to dl the game off the main webby and then patch it with one of there modded patches.. if it were under license they would supply there own copy with its own copyright rules.. so dont try and smoke screen it.. that section of EU law u posted has got nothing to do with YOU proving to everybody in this thread that freeshards is legal....

[Xest]

Er. lol WTF? you're still trying to argue it after I posted the relevant portions of EU law relating to it?

I think you've misunderstood the term license, license being a software license, the sort you get when you buy a peice of software, if you buy software (legally) you are licensed to use it. If you buy music, you are licensed to use it, if you buy a film you are licensed to watch it. This is a license for the client. The freeshard server software is written from scratch and they don't request people to have a license to use their server software.

As things seem a bit too confusing for you Norcott I'll resort to pictures, crappy pictures in ASCII art but pictures all the same.

[a) Someone running DAoC client] <------> [b) Freeshard server] <-> [c) Content scripts for freeshard server]

a) People are allowed to run the DAoC client if they've paid for it even if your subscription has run out you're allowed to run it because if you couldn't you'd be breaking the law trying to resubscribe, your license to run it comes when you purchase the game from a shop/online/whatever.

b) The freeshard server is a peice of software written completely from scratch with support for DAoC's networking protocol. DAoC's networking protocol is discovered by the process of reverse engineering the client which is completely legal as demonstrated by my last post including the EU directive relating to it.

c) The freeshard scripts determine the gameplay, again these scripts are written from scratch, if these scripts were made to emulate DAoC live as closely as possible then they'd be entering the area of intellectual property infringement, however as has been stated here they don't do that, they have their own rulesets for the game that are different to the live server scripts. If a freeshard server were to copy DAoC's ruleset then as I say this would be a potential case for a law suit but as they don't this isn't the case.

Can I make it anymore clear? Is this still really too difficult for you to understand?

[Thandruil]

Xest is prolly one of those people who think it's legal to chip a Playstation and run copied games on it as well. U do USE the playstation, but u changed the software, thus making it legal.....

Anyways Norc, dunno if u got warned so far for ur posts u made, but seems to me that when u don't agree with Stalin ur wrong and therefor ur opinion doesn't count. Apparently certain admin(s) can throw flames towards people and him being an admin makes it justified.

[Lieva]

ok reopening.

Obviously people have issues.
Please feel free to make them in the comments section.
Any more personal slagging off and peeps will be warned.
Also please stay on topic.

Thank you

[Norcott]

ok reopening.

Obviously people have issues.
Please feel free to make them in the comments section.
Any more personal slagging off and peeps will be warned.
Also please stay on topic.

Thank you

Does that included admins in that statement.