[superxpro12]

This is about as much as you can hope for tbh. More than a fair compromise.

Society has become quite 'entitled' to 'free' things. As popular as they are, torrents and free streams and emulation and clones of games in an open source lib are all stealing something. I know thats an unpopular thing to say but it a fact.

Now, those rights violations viewed in a larger context may change one's opinion on the whole, and I'm not jumping into that debate today.

Atari did a cool thing. That's rare in the corporate world today. Give praise where it's deserved.

[II2II]

> Society has become quite 'entitled' to 'free' things. As popular as they are, torrents and free streams and emulation and clones of games in an open source lib are all stealing something. I know thats an unpopular thing to say but it a fact.

Emulators and game engine clones may encourage "stealing", but they are also unique creations. The people who develop said software are typically careful about keeping their software separate from copyrighted materials. In the case of OpenTTD, they did so by creating their own graphics and sound assets to accompany the game engine.

If you are claiming that creating an independent clone of the game engine is stealing, you are entitled to your own opinion. But do understand that it is an opinion and not a fact.

I would also ask you to consider the consequences if that opinion were codified into law. It would make all forms of progress (e.g. literary and technical) nearly impossible since nearly all ideas are derivative. To give an example: the computing landscape would be very different. IBM compatibles would not have been a thing, leaving the market either fragmented or consolidated in the hands of a single company. Oh sure, there were companies that did steal by producing verbatim copies of the IBM PC ROM or the mainboard layout ... but we are talking about a reimplementation in the case of IBM compatibles and OpenTTD, not copies.

Come to think of it, the entire computer industry would have been set back by decades with an excessively strong IP regime. No one seriously classifies the ABC as the first computer, yet the courts used it to strike down patents on early computers. In the early days, IBM played games with IP licensing to try to restrict their competition, something the courts shot down. AT&T didn't give away Unix, nor did they license patents on transistors out of the goodness of their heart. They did so because regulators and the courts recognized that IP could be used to stifle competition (and, by extension, it would have inhibited progress). So I doubt that the courts would agree on emulation or game engine clones being stealing either.

[somat]

Ehh, it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. And in the case of openttd, it's not the engine that has the legal problem, it's the graphics and the sound. Openttd is an engine to play transport tycoon content. If openttd distributes transport tycoon's graphics and sound, (which they were) they are infringing on the owners right to distribute.

Update, I got openTTD confused with openRCT, It looks like openttd did redo the graphics and sound, so I think the parent post is correct and atari has little to no legal ground to stand on, the only thing they could reasonably claim is trademark, that is, it is them using the name transport tycoon that is the problem. And that is still not theft, it is trademark infringement.

At this point I would like to plug Simutrans a transport tycoon clone that actually took the effort to make their own graphics and sound. But really, as much as I enjoy simutrans any normal transport tycoon connoisseur will hate it, a bit too different and clunky for them.

https://www.simutrans.com but steam is probably the easiest way to play.

[anthk]

>which they were)

1) No, is not the case, stop the FUD.

2) Simutrans it's half propietary and a good atempt of SPAM, dear friend.

3) Ok, fair, you corrected yourself. But on OpenTTD the OpenSFX and the rest are actually a way to create both compatible graphics and sounds with the existing MODs and stand out as themselves, kinda like FreeDoom: it's obviously made to be compatible with the Doom assets for walls and the like, but the artwork it's closer to a modern HL than Doom. FreeDoom needs to be like a weird Doom in a parallel universe for floors, walls and the like because PWADs demand it so the art looks like compatible (texturing, tiling, lightning) while not being an obvious Doom rip off. And yet it does, I played lots of classic Doom2 compatible PWADs and TC's and the FreeDoom assets perfectly blend ingame. Strain.wad looks even greater.

Look: https://freedoom.github.io/

[AuthAuth]

Are they really stealing it though? They only brought the IP 30 years later they didnt make it or put any work towards it. The openTTD community has easily done 100x the work to extend the game.

[ThunderSizzle]

This makes me wonder why squatter's rights are not a thing here...but I don't know much about the current and previous legal status of the open genres like OpenTTD.

[matheusmoreira]

> clones of games in an open source lib are all stealing something

It's not illegal to create a compatible game engine. The functional ideas inside the games are not protected by copyright. So long as games are clean room reverse engineered there should be no problem.

Actually, even if the reverse engineering was not clean room, it might not be a problem.

Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp.

> The object code of a program may be copyrighted as expression, 17 U.S.C. § 102(a), but it also contains ideas and performs functions that are not entitled to copyright protection. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(b).

> Object code cannot, however, be read by humans.

> The unprotected ideas and functions of the code therefore are frequently undiscoverable in the absence of investigation and translation that may require copying the copyrighted material.

> We conclude that, under the facts of this case and our precedent, Connectix's intermediate copying and use of Sony's copyrighted BIOS was a fair use for the purpose of gaining access to the unprotected elements of Sony's software.

[Scaevolus]

That's a narrow fair use exception. Many of these open game engines are effectively 1:1 decompilations of the original games, and it would be shocking if they were not effectively copyrighted the same as the original.

I don't think this has been tested in court, but the recent flood of Nintendo game decompilations is likely to change that.

[anthk]

Pre BSD's (386BSD) where in the same case with AT&T Unix and after a few years of rewritting code under BSD licenses they were perfectly ok to ship, from NetBSD 0.9 to FreeBSD, OpenBSD was a NetBSD fork.

Current OpenTTD has no former TTD code since decades ago. I remember Solene@ from OpenBSD (now ex-user) playing OpenTTD for MacPPC (PowerPC G4) a few years ago as she had in issue with mouse input.

Good luck running decompiled X86 code as is.

[jscd]

First, I agree it's cool that Atari, with all its ability to completely screw small projects over, didn't do that in this case.

But, at the same time, I find it interesting that "emulations and clones" are considered entitlement (in a derogatory sense), but copyright protection is not. Before 1976 in the US, the _maximum_ copyright term was 56 years, and that would require filing for an extension from the default of _only 28 years_.

I think it's easy to forget that copyright as we know it is not set in stone. Historically, after 28 years, most works became public domain and that meant you could do literally whatever you want with it and it would not be legally stealing at all. I think we as a society have forgotten what it means to have a public domain.

[matheusmoreira]

There is in fact legal precedent showing that it is not entitlement.

Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp.

> The object code of a program may be copyrighted as expression, 17 U.S.C. § 102(a), but it also contains ideas and performs functions that are not entitled to copyright protection. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(b).

These corporations have actually gone to court over this and lost. It's just that they technically won by bankrupting their opponents via legal costs.

[thaumasiotes]

> Historically, after 28 years, most works became public domain and that meant you could do literally whatever you want with it

Historically, all works were public domain at all times.

[bigyabai]

> clones of games in an open source lib are all stealing something

If you're going that far, aren't proprietary games and software "stealing" open source libs too? I think your definition is a bit wonky.

[anthk]

Stealing what? I own my legal copy of Ars Fatalis which came as a free with a PC gaming magazine from Spain. Now I just use the game data with Arx Libertatis. No one was ripped.

If Ars Libertatis was complete they should have to create their own complete underground story replacing every asset and lore by hand, kinda like FreeDoom/Blasphemer and so on.

An actual libre engine reusing propietary data in a illegal way would be uMario, as it has literal ripped off BMP images pixel per pixel depicting SMB for the NES. And yet the game engine being GPL or MIT would be legal but the bundled game data is not; the creator would just have to use (and state the clear CC licenses) the copyleft artwork from Secret Maryo Chronicles or whatever it's being called today and everything would work as is.

Instead of Mario you would reuse SMC sprites being adapted for the contraints (pixel perfect for feet for instance) and so and the only issue would be that the levels themselves would be copyrighted.

A single level as Supertux2 does is not a copyright issue because well, it's just a single one and a clear homage to the first level of SMB and even the level is named like that. It might fall under fair use, if I were Nintendo I woudn't sue them because unlike uMario, Supertux2 did things in a respectful manner.

Bear in mind that OpenTTD never did what uMario it's doing. When it had no open content you had to point to the copyrighted data yourself, be from the demo, be from the full game. Later OpenGFX and OpenSFX were created to replace every commercial asset and now OpenTTD has a downloader to get all the CC assets yourself without needing no commercial data at all.

The open content doesn't even have the original levels from TTD as uMario does.

[Aeolun]

Atari could have done nothing but re-release transport tycoon and have it stand on its own merits. This is more like they’re leeching off of an IP they’ve more or less not paid any attention to for 20 years.

[arvid-lind]

> ...all stealing something. I know thats an unpopular thing to say but it a fact.

This is an unpopular opinion because it is not, in fact, a fact.