[Anzerion]

Medievia has been around for years and is well known, but there's always players that haven't realized just how great this MUD is. I'm not a god on Medievia, I'm not part of the staff in any way - I'm just a player, and I've been playing for a few years now, and while I do pick up the occasional PC game (Half-Life 2, Dungeon Siege 2 soon! Medievia is there to hook me up again, because there is something truly great about this game, you have to experience it for yourself.

I don't think anyone is doing him or her self any favors by testing out other MUDs, when Medievia has everything you could want in a great gaming environment.

With that said, there are some things about Medievia that are changing rapidly - and it's only made the game more fun! If you've played in the past, you know all about trading. Trading is NOT what it used to be, it is truly an adventure now EVERY time. There is some amazing code going on with a DM that monitors your trade runs and keeps you on your toes, throwing mob factions at you to mess around with. Clan ships are coming very soon and have been in the testing phase for the past few weeks and everyone loves them, so if player killing is your thing, these will surely spark your interests.

I'd encourage you to drop by - whether you've played it in the past, play another MUD, or are just getting into MUDs. You can find everything you need to know on www.medievia.com.

Don't pass it up!

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Anzerion @ May 08 2005,20:48) You can find everything you need to know on www.medievia.com.

Not quite everything - for players who would rather avoid muds that steal the work of others and then try to pass it off as their own work, running it as pay-to-play mud, you should also read this information here.

[Wik]

It's certainly well-known.

Oh and as a sidenote. You might want to look up what it means to Cite Sources.

Take Armageddon for example, they have #### near nothing to do with Dune anymore, but ####! I'll be damned if I never see them say they got their grand plan from Dune.

[Traithe]

Not a particularly apt or even insightful analogy, Delstro.

In order for it to apply here they'd need to steal the entire setting, perhaps change a couple letters in a couple names, and then pass it off as their new, all-original gameworld.

[dragon master]

Medievia didn't just borrow ideas from somebody else. They used the Diku code, which is legal. Then they violated the agreement that all Diku users must make that says that the mud cannot be pay for play or pay for perks. So they aren't stealing ideas, they're coppying code that is available to everybody as long as they don't use it to make money. And then they are using that code to make money illegally.

So, anybody that plays Medievia is helping to support criminals.

Seriously, if you really want to fork out money to play a Mud, why not fork out money to play a Mud that spends such money to create it's own code rather than using code that is less developed from Diku than many free to play muds?

[prof1515]

Or take your money, burn it, and play one of the other MUDs out there that are superior to every pay-to-play.

Either way, Medievia sucks.

Take care,

Jason

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (dragon master @ May 08 2005,15:18) Then they violated the agreement that all Diku users must make that says that the mud cannot be pay for play or pay for perks.

Could you show me where in the license it says that a mud cannot be pay for play or pay for perks? Because I've read it. I've shown it to lawyers. I've read it again.

It doesn't say that. What it does say is open to interpretation, but it certainly doesn't come out and say what you allege it says. Have you even read it?

--matt

[GuruPlayer]

There's a link to the license at this site: http://slithytoves.sytes.net/~kurt/Medievia.html

Of course there's other info at that site that I found when I entered "Medievia code theft" in Google.

I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised the_logos is one of the few pro-Medievia voices. Why else would he have his lawyers looking for loopholes in licenses?? This from an owner who doesn't let any mud websites post reviews of his games, but has someone post a promotion thread every couple of weeks...why?...MONEY!

[Anzerion]

Medievia is not pay-to-play. It also did not steal code. It started out as a Diku MUD years and years ago, and that code has since been changed, rewritten, redone, deleted - however you'd like to look at it, it's not being used anymore.

Players send in donations out of their own free will, because Medievia is a great game and a great environment to be in. People are clearly envious of it and only put it down because they wish their own MUDs were in any way superior.

Medievia will always be the better MUD, and it's terrible really that some people are bent on spreading rumors about it's authenticity, not to mention the owner's morals, as if they would ever steal something. If there was any credit to be given, it would be given, but there is not.

[dragon master]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 08 2005,19:40) Originally Posted by (dragon master @ May 08 2005,15:18) Then they violated the agreement that all Diku users must make that says that the mud cannot be pay for play or pay for perks. Could you show me where in the license it says that a mud cannot be pay for play or pay for perks? Because I've read it. I've shown it to lawyers. I've read it again. It doesn't say that. What it does say is open to interpretation, but it certainly doesn't come out and say what you allege it says. Have you even read it? --matt

It's faq does say:

Originally Posted by "Do I need to follow the license agreement?" YES YES YES YES YES!! No matter how much you have or think you have changed in the code, you must included both the 'credits' file and the names of the authors in the initial logon screen. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about this.

They do not have credits either, the_logos. And they need them, even if as somebody else said, they are only 10% DIKU.

[lazycritic]

Originally Posted by You may under no circumstances make profit on *ANY* part of DikuMud in any possible way.

From here.

How is that open to interpretation?

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (lazycritic @ May 09 2005,01:17) Originally Posted by You may under no circumstances make profit on *ANY* part of DikuMud in any possible way. From here. How is that open to interpretation?

Good question, and since you seem to be honestly asking, I'll explain:

Profit is a specific term that is not the same thing as revenue. It's not difficult to simply not generate a profit. It used to be a joke in the movie business that no movie in history ever made a profit because it was practically standard practice for studios to ensure their movies didn't make a profit (massive salaries, huge contract fees, whatever) in order to avoid paying royalties to people who did a deal based on profit rather than revenue. That rarely happens these days, because profit is very easy to manipulate. But actually, in Medievia's case, I suspect they may not even need to do any manipulation. I don't know how much they make, but I'm in a position to make an educated guess, and it's quite possible that after the owners pay themselves reasonable salaries commensurate with their extensive professional experience, pay for servers, advertising, etc, there may be no profit left.

Some will argue that profit isn't what the license holders meant, but no one disputes that profit is what the license says. There's really no point in getting into an argument about it again either as it's all been said before.

--matt

[dragon master]

Let's look carefully at the liscense:

Originally Posted by You may under no circumstances make profit on *ANY* part of DikuMud in any possible way.

Okay, the_logos has already shown that although they may violate the spirit of the liscense here, they don't violate the letter of it. ASSUMING THEY DON'T MAKE A PROFIT, which I doubt.

Originally Posted by You may under no circumstances charge money for distributing any part of dikumud

Since the mud includes part of dikumud in it, I fail to see how charging money to players for playing the mud (or buying "donation items") is legit.

Originally Posted by By breaking these rules you violate the agreement between us and the University, and hence will be sued.

One could only wish DIKU had done this and put Medievia out of buisness.

Originally Posted by You may not remove any copyright notices from any of the documents or sources given to you.

UH OH! No way around this one!

Originally Posted by Any running version of DikuMud must include our names in the login sequence. Furthermore the "credits" command shall always cointain our name, addresses, and a notice which states we have created DikuMud.

Hmm, maybe Medievia has done this, let's do a check to see whether or not the people at Medievia are a bunch of thieves. When you type credits, it says:

Originally Posted by Medievia is a trademark ™ of Medievia.com, Inc. Copyright © 1992-2005 Medievia.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved Medievia has had over 400 people over the years help build zones and code new features. It would be impossible to list them all. Let's just say that Medievia is here because of the players who have over the years helped us in every way possible. For the latest list of developers please read WIZLIST in the game or read http://www.medievia.com/imps.html on our WWW site. -Vryce

Hmm, apparently Medthievia isn't so innocent after all. Not only do they steal somebody's mud but they take all the credit for themselves.

[Ashon]

Originally Posted by (Anzerion @ May 09 2005,00:59)  It started out as a Diku MUD years and years ago, and that code has since been changed, rewritten, redone, deleted - however you'd like to look at it, it's not being used anymore.

And Here's the fundamental flaw: No where in that long string of words did you say: scratched, dumped or started over from nothing. It's been changed (so they changed a couple of things), rewritten (probably rewritten some of the code to fix memory leaks), redone (because as we all know DIKU had some hellish DS in it), deleted (sure the credits!.

At no point has it been stated that the code has been written from scratch! At that point it is no longer DIKU.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Anzerion @ May 09 2005,06:59) It started out as a Diku MUD years and years ago,

And it still is one.

Originally Posted by Players send in donations out of their own free will, because Medievia is a great game and a great environment to be in.

Nothing to do with the fact that these so-called 'donations' are 'rewarded' with the best equipment in the game, then? No idea why you call that a 'donation', either - it's clearly a purchase. Or do you 'donate' money at the corner shop and receive a crate of beer as thanks?

Originally Posted by People are clearly envious of it and only put it down because they wish their own MUDs were in any way superior.

What a sense of humour! Next you'll be telling me that 5-star restaurants only put down McDonalds out of envy...

Originally Posted by Medievia will always be the better MUD,

You just can't beat that bigmac - the best burger money can buy!

Originally Posted by and it's terrible really that some people are bent on spreading rumors about it's authenticity,

Rumours? How about a line-by-line analysis of the code, along with a statement from Vryce - signed under penalty of perjury - in which he confirms the identity of the code I reviewed?

Not even Soleil bothers denying that the code is based on Diku, just that they can get away with it.

[l3gacy]

Originally Posted by (Anzerion @ May 09 2005,00:59) People are clearly envious of it and only put it down because they wish their own MUDs were in any way superior.

Why do stupid people always use the 'UR JUST JELOUS' argument?

[Anzerion]

I'm pretty sure people are just jealous.  They don't want to see Medievia succeed, because they are holding a grudge against it, under the assumption that someone's bad code was stolen and assuming that code is still being used.

Either let it go and move on, or do something about it and try to prove everyone wrong.  Because clearly if someone is violating some law, you could do something about it.

It's actually not the best equipment in the game.  The best equipment in the game is whatever gods choose to put into the game.  For some people, the best items are from quests, which they purchase with quest points.  For some the best items are in hero battles, because that's all they do.  For some, the best items are from sea slugs (a ring of twisted slug hide Lev(0) Loc(fing) noegg fragile dr(5) hps(40) SKL/SPL: dodge (success +10%) Cond(pristine - 9 Days).)

Object: the Mystical Talisman of Medievia [talisman medievia mystical hp100]
Item Type: ARMOR   Effects: GLOW DONATION
Equipable Location(s): NECK
Weight: 0     Value: 10000     Level Restriction: 0
This object has been blessed by the Gods and seems indestructible.
Days Left: Infinity
AC-apply of 20
Affects:
   +100 to HIT_POINTS
   +7 to DAMROLL

Pretty good right?  Here's how you can get one:

-donate $50
-write for the MUDSlinger
-pay someone else in-game currency (gold) to donate for you
-become a god and write zones, autoquests, etc.

There are several players who have hundreds of dollars worth of this donation equipment, and they haven't sent in a penny.

Honestly, who's the side here starting some kind of war?  I've just said why I think Medievia is a great game, and suddenly a number of people think it's their duty in life to denounce it.

[Avernus]

Originally Posted by (Anzerion @ May 09 2005,17:18) I'm pretty sure people are just jealous.  They don't want to see Medievia succeed, because they are holding a grudge against it, under the assumption that someone's bad code was stolen and assuming that code is still being used. Honestly, who's the side here starting some kind of war?  I've just said why I think Medievia is a great game, and suddenly a number of people think it's their duty in life to denounce it.

But it all pours down to the fact that Medievia is a diku-derivative. You can slap whatever code you want on it, but as long as it IS based on the DIKU, that's the way it will stay. And thus, credits are due to the diku-team and the license must be followed. I am especially thankful that KaVir and the others brought up this subject. Being an long-term mudder (12 years of playing varios muds), I do find the behaviour of Medievia abominable and a very bad example for the others.

Jealous? Nothing would make me more happy than to actually see more mudders throughout the community. But when one of the larger muds is run by deception and credit is not given to those who deserve it .. no, I'm not jealous. More like frustrated,angry and extremely disappointed.

And as a sidenote: I played Medievia for a while and it wasn't a game for me - I didn't like the character interaction nor the game itself. Those are the reasons why I didn't like it back then, and this was before I heard of this incident.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Anzerion @ May 09 2005,23:18) I'm pretty sure people are just jealous.

Then you're sadly mistaken - Medievia has nothing to offer that other muds don't do better.

Originally Posted by They don't want to see Medievia succeed, because they are holding a grudge against it, under the assumption that someone's bad code was stolen and assuming that code is still being used.

There is no 'assumption' - it's a proven fact. Why would you continue to deny something that even the owners admit?

Originally Posted by Honestly, who's the side here starting some kind of war? I've just said why I think Medievia is a great game, and suddenly a number of people think it's their duty in life to denounce it.

I think it's the right of potential players to know the truth about the mud you're promoting.

If I stole something you'd spent years developing, ripped out the credits, and claimed it as my own, wouldn't you want other people to know about it?

[Delerak]

In my opinion any mud that is in it for "profit" is no longer a mud. My definition of a mud is a text-based game that is free to play with no profit involved, that's the way it started and I think that's the way it should be. It does not take extensive amounts of money to run a mud, and even when you get up there in huge amounts of players like Aardwolf or Medieva or any of those Iron Realms games, it's still not that expensive to run.. that is unless you are in it for profit.

To gain profit you must spend money, which is why it costs money to run all those oh so wonderful pay-to-play muds out there that we all love. I can't even imagine paying to play a text-based game.. or giving any real life money at all for an item (which is nothing more then text and code) it sounds so wrong, I think someone should have to earn that item just like in a tabletop dungeons and dragons game. Did we ever charge people to play D&D with us? I never heard of the almighty DungeonMaster of the Iron Realm.. anyway that's my rant about Pay to Play muds, I think it's just wrong for the mud-world.

-D

[Delerak]

Double-posted... Bah.

[Shao_Long]

Originally Posted by Pretty good right? Here's how you can get one: -donate $50 -write for the MUDSlinger -pay someone else in-game currency (gold) to donate for you -become a god and write zones, autoquests, etc.

... yet none on this list include actual "playing the game"... Aside from becoming a god but that's not exactly "playing", not as a "regular" mortal, anyway.

So what you just said youself, is that one of the best items in your mud can only be obtained by either donating, paying someone who donated (which isn't really any different), or doing something completely unrelated to regular gameplay.

You said it yourself.

[Jaregarde]

Originally Posted by (Delerak @ May 09 2005,20:14) In my opinion any mud that is in it for "profit" is no longer a mud. My definition of a mud is a text-based game that is free to play with no profit involved, that's the way it started and I think that's the way it should be.  It does not take extensive amounts of money to run a mud, and even when you get up there in huge amounts of players like Aardwolf or Medieva or any of those Iron Realms games, it's still not that expensive to run.. that is unless you are in it for profit. To gain profit you must spend money, which is why it costs money to run all those oh so wonderful pay-to-play muds out there that we all love.  I can't even imagine paying to play a text-based game.. or giving any real life money at all for an item (which is nothing more then text and code) it sounds so wrong, I think someone should have to earn that item just like in a tabletop dungeons and dragons game.  Did we ever charge people to play D&D with us? I never heard of the almighty DungeonMaster of the Iron Realm.. anyway that's my rant about Pay to Play muds, I think it's just wrong for the mud-world. -D

Well...I'm pretty sure this argument has already been stated before, but I'll repeat it here.

Running a good MUD does cost a lot of money, because everyone who runs a MUD must pay the bills in real life. So, thus, MUD developers need jobs like everyone else, and having a job leaves less time for developing MUDs. The most obvious solution that presents itself is to find a way to make a living  from the MUD, so that the developer can spend all of his/her time on it, and yet still make a decent living. So, commercialism isn't necessarily a bad thing, because it essentially makes for better MUDs, since  the developers have more time on their hands to run the MUD, whereas hobbyists must spend a good deal of their time working at a different job. That said, however, I'm not a huge fan of Pay-for-Perks; I'd much rather see flat monthly rates instead. But, in my opinion its not really an ethical issue. Commercial MUDs need revenue to survive and how to do it is just an issue that they must grapple with.

-Jaregarde

[Keriwena]

If what you say is true, then logically the best muds would be written by kept women.

[AC1]

Medievia could easily end the controversy at any time.

Have a few reputable people review the current code and report on it, like the comparison of Medevia 4 that is already out there. I would recomend members of the original DIKU team because they are famiar with the code, they have credibility with the pro-license faction, they have never been accused of unethical behavior by either side, and they have some intrest is finding the truth. There could be a fairly simple non-disclosure agreement that the reviewers would not keep or publish copies of the code after the review.

Easy, and it could end the controversy forever. If someone reputable, especially members of the DIKU team, said "nope, this code is nothing like DIKU, it is completely original and we have no problem with it at all" there wouldn't be much point in anyone complaining ever again, would there?


Angela Christine

[Wik]

Originally Posted by Honestly, who's the side here starting some kind of war? I've just said why I think Medievia is a great game, and suddenly a number of people think it's their duty in life to denounce it.

Suddenly? Some of us have been denouncing it since we started gaming. In my case, since about a year after the issue came to the forefront the first time. In others, it's been since the violation occurred.

[Stilton]

Originally Posted by (Anzerion @ May 09 2005,17:18) Either let it go and move on, or do something about it and try to prove everyone wrong.  Because clearly if someone is violating some law, you could do something about it.

You do understand that random people off the street can't generally pursue claims for copyright violations over content they don't have any rights to, I hope?

Originally Posted by suddenly a number of people think it's their duty in life to denounce it.

Poke around the web and usenet.  This argument is older than some of Vryce's customers.

Stilton

[Traithe]

Originally Posted by (AC1 @ May 10 2005,01:08) Medievia could easily end the controversy at any time. <snip re: code audit idea>

I'd love to see this as well, personally.

However, it's highly unlikely; put simply, at present time Medievia would derive no advantage whatsoever from a public audit of their code, as these infringement claims are doing nothing to hurt their bottom line, and they seem to care little enough about integrity or the moral high road.

If Synozeer and Icculus would do the right thing and require such an audit as a condition for their continued participation on their sites that might change. Obviously it would change as well if a lawsuit were filed, but I'm certainly not holding my breath there either, sadly enough.

Granted, it certainly isn't their responsibility to babysit and ensure the children play nicely by any stretch of the imagination, but this is a pretty egregious case; I really doubt it would set a particularly time-consuming precedent for them to take a more active role here.

But, maybe that's just me.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Delerak @ May 10 2005,02:14) In my opinion any mud that is in it for "profit" is no longer a mud.

You realise that by that definition, the original MUD wouldn't be a MUD?

Personally I wouldn't play a pay-to-play (or pay-for-perks) mud, but I have no problem with those who do, nor with muds that are run this way - that's their choice. All I have an issue with are muds that (1) make money by ripping off other people's work, and/or (2) try to mislead potential players with hidden costs.