[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 03 2006,23:30) It does seem hard to fathom that no one has ever done a thing about it with all the energy spent on the subject.

Hey, come on now. People have started all sorts of accusatory threads on the matter, ensuring that as many people as possible hear about Medievia. Honestly, I find Medievia's marketing to be quite inept (no offence Soleil) and I end up strongly suspecting that the reason they are one of the biggest text MUDs now is probably largely because of all the attention the forum threads have given Medievia over the years. It is probably -the- most discussed MUD on the MUD forums, and while the MUD forums on do not get much traffic (most of the MUD community doesn't use them), all that exposure, year-in, year-out, has likely been pretty good for them.

--matt

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by Let's hear what it is that people have in their craw, I say. Has the man stolen from any of you? Has he violated any laws, or do you know of any ethical grey areas he seems to play in? Because if not, this sort of innuendo is pretty offputting to me, honestly.

That would be off-topic. There have been entire threads discussing a variety of people's problems with Matt as a representative of the community and as a businessman - you can find them if you look back. I came to this forum in January and have already seen plenty of such threads since then. Beyond that - they exist in other MUD Forums too. I won't speak about them again here to be off-topic, but with a little research you can decide for yourself.

[Valg]

Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 03 2006,22:53) The point?  Professionals do not skirt licensing issues.  Professionls recognize and disdain those who do.   There is a lot of money to be made out there in communication and entertainment, not a little of it I imagine from advertising.  No one is going to advertise with, sign contracts with, or get into any close association with people who violate licensing and the law.  It is simply not accepted in the professional environment.  Advertising associated with a massive MUD would likely be game related.  How many game developers want to do business with someone who plays fast and loose with copyright?

Completely agreed. I'd be fired from my day job if my employer had this kind of evidence that I committed plagiarism, long before it went to court.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 03 2006,22:53) The point? Professionals do not skirt licensing issues. Professionls recognize and disdain those who do. There is a lot of money to be made out there in communication and entertainment, not a little of it I imagine from advertising. No one is going to advertise with, sign contracts with, or get into any close association with people who violate licensing and the law. It is simply not accepted in the professional environment. Advertising associated with a massive MUD would likely be game related. How many game developers want to do business with someone who plays fast and loose with copyright?

I see what you're saying, but that's not also how I see it. There is lots of room for legitimate disagreement. I mean, you don't see people shunning Research in Motion (Blackberry) even though it was pretty blatantly operating in violation of NTP's patent and ended up having to settle after a judge's ruling made it fairly clear that it was likely to lose.

I know tons of professionals who use Blackberries and lots of large organizations that signed contracts with Research in Motion even after NTP filed its initial lawsuit.

Professionals tend, in my experience, to recognize that IP issues are complicated issues and wait for the courts to sort them out. Not always, of course, but that's just what I tend to see. Companies like Microsoft frequently have IP issues and are relatively frequently sued for them. That doesn't stop people doing business with MS or a thousand companies like them.

I'm not defending IP violations, but business isn't about condemning companies for one issue while ignoring the rest of the picture.

--matt

[The_Disciple]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 03 2006,23:16) (Some of the same people also dislike that we advertise ourselves as free-to-play, but that's so off-topic that it probably shouldn't be discussesd here.)

Now that, sir, is trolling.

Please do not feed the troll.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by Now that, sir, is trolling.

Had I not brought it up, someone (we both know whom) would have posted accusing me of misrepresenting why I'm not liked by that person, and accusing me of "unethical behavior" for not including it.

--matt

[Shane]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 04 2006,00:15) Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 03 2006,22:53) The point?  Professionals do not skirt licensing issues.  Professionls recognize and disdain those who do.   There is a lot of money to be made out there in communication and entertainment, not a little of it I imagine from advertising.  No one is going to advertise with, sign contracts with, or get into any close association with people who violate licensing and the law.  It is simply not accepted in the professional environment.  Advertising associated with a massive MUD would likely be game related.  How many game developers want to do business with someone who plays fast and loose with copyright? I see what you're saying, but that's not also how I see it. There is lots of room for legitimate disagreement. I mean, you don't see people shunning Research in Motion (Blackberry) even though it was pretty blatantly operating in violation of NTP's patent and ended up having to settle after a judge's ruling made it fairly clear that it was likely to lose. I know tons of professionals who use Blackberries and lots of large organizations that signed contracts with Research in Motion even after NTP filed its initial lawsuit. Professionals tend, in my experience, to recognize that IP issues are complicated issues and wait for the courts to sort them out. Not always, of course, but that's just what I tend to see. Companies like Microsoft frequently have IP issues and are relatively frequently sued for them. That doesn't stop people doing business with MS or a thousand companies like them. I'm not defending IP violations, but business isn't about condemning companies for one issue while ignoring the rest of the picture. --matt

Possibly the problem with this industry is its cash poor nature.

So much money floating around in high tech, and everyone going in every direction at once, it doesn't surprise me, the deals with Blackberry and Microsoft and all. But, what I am getting at is that mud's as a whole appear to be getting this reputation.

You didn't use existing mud architecture or violate any copyrights, real or imagined, but instead went with Rapture. I am not familiar with its development track, but no one here yet at least has busted out and accused Rapture of copyright violations.

Why go to all that trouble? Wasn't at least part of it because you wanted to put a pure and professional face on your games?

It's one thing to jostle for position, but transparent coopting of other's work is harder to defend in the grand marketing scheme of things, I would think.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by But, what I am getting at is that mud's as a whole appear to be getting this reputation.

I can't say I agree with that assessment, but even if so, well, it's not that undeserved. There are a profusion of Star Wars, Dragonball, etc etc MUDs all operating without license from the IP holders.

Originally Posted by You didn't use existing mud architecture or violate any copyrights, real or imagined, but instead went with Rapture. I am not familiar with its development track, but no one here yet at least has busted out and accused Rapture of copyright violations.

That might be an accusation too absurd even for TMS.

Originally Posted by Why go to all that trouble? Wasn't at least part of it because you wanted to put a pure and professional face on your games?

Nope. The need for Rapture was an evolution of needs. It's off-topic to go into it here. PM me if you want and I'd be happy to tell you.

Originally Posted by It's one thing to jostle for position, but transparent coopting of other's work is harder to defend in the grand marketing scheme of things, I would think.

Medievia's done pretty well given that other people (all of us having this discussion, for instance) spend a fair amount of time talking about them. I think they also recognize that their attackers are fundamentally toothless because they are third parties to the issue and that the DIKU authors don't care enough to spend any energy to do anything about it. To me, that's the key issue. If they don't care enough to do -anything-, then it's just not a big deal. They don't feel they're being harmed enough to take action, and no harm, no foul as far as I'm concerned.
--matt

[Shane]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 04 2006,01:10) I think they (Medievia) also recognize that their attackers are fundamentally toothless because they are third parties to the issue and that the DIKU authors don't care enough to spend any energy to do anything about it. To me, that's the key issue. If they don't care enough to do -anything-, then it's just not a big deal. They don't feel they're being harmed enough to take action, and no harm, no foul as far as I'm concerned. --matt

That's hard to argue with for me. I just am back to square one though. The cleanest solution to it all would be Medievia porting to a verifiably new codebase.

Well, the easiest cleanest solution would be for one or several of the Diku authors to do as Threshold suggests Lars did. I have heard it before, though in all fairness I am in proximity to Threshold enough that he may well be the person I actually heard it from both times, that Lars tried to get his team back together, and when there was no interest he made it public that he no longer was going to hold people to the LP license.

I have not tried to verify that at all, so... whatever that means. But I have heard it.

[DonathinFrye]

Many "small claims" offenses never go to court because of the amount of money and hassle it would take for a non-corperation(such as the few remaining active DIKU Team members) to try to take on a company who had made money off of them enough to make the court situation sticky, at-the-least.

As I said earlier - I think it would be absolutely hilarious to see Hans/DIKU versus Vryce on Judge Judy; but really, that would be about their only option considering the annoyance of international considerations to be made.

Ultimately, them not wanting to spend the money to defend their license does not mean that they don't care about their work and their license. And even still, the many MUDs who do adhere to the DIKU's teams wishes do apparently care about the license.

While Medievia's plagiarism may not bother them, it does bother others. If their attitude is "tough luck, we plagariaze, but feel we've done a hell of a lot of work. Screw anyone in the community who can't deal with our ungrateful attitudes", then that is their choice. It certainly should be no suprise when people denounce their ethics and professionalism, though - they brought it on themselves.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Threshold @ May 04 2006,02:29) I honestly wonder if TMS has EVER had a more biased and horribly corrupt moderator.

If you have a problem with me moderating the forum, take it up with Synozeer. But - and I will warn you only once - if you continue your highly unprofessional ranting and personal attacks, without adding anything of value to the discussion, I will just remove your posts.

[Anitra]

Threshold: May 03 2006,20:29

Originally Posted by What a crock. A post that you wrote on May 03 2006,11:56 in the real DIKU License thread got moderated slightly, and then lo' and behold, you start a new thread (about the same issue) a few hours later (May 03 2006,14:49) in a forum moderated by KaVir. The very fact that this forum is moderated by KaVir makes it the complete WRONG place to discuss anything related to Medievia. He has shown himself to be totally irrational when it comes to the issue. His 10 year foaming at the mouth crusade proves that. Most reasonable people, even those who agreed with him 10 years ago (including myself, and apparently the DIKU creators as well), have moved on with their lives. That is the only reason you created this thread in this forum which is discussing the exact same issues as The DIKU License. I honestly wonder if TMS has EVER had a more biased and horribly corrupt moderator.

You know it's funny that you should bring this issue up again.
I got a post deleted on that other thread myself. (It wasn't the first time either).

It was a fairly polite one-line request that the moderator there should do some moderating to deal with your repeated personal attacks. His response was to delete my post and apparently a couple of others too, while at the same time keeping most of your insults in the thread.

I'll repost it here, for others to judge whether it was necessary to remove it or not, and whether or not it is an example of the 'unbiased' moderating that Threshold is asking for:

Originally Posted by Anitra, May 03 2006,03:46, (in the Diku Licence thread) Why, given this declaration at the front of the thread, is Threshold allowed to keep up his repeated personal insults against KaVir and Valg?

[Soleil]

Originally Posted by Honestly, I find Medievia's marketing to be quite inept (no offence Soleil) and I end up strongly suspecting that the reason they are one of the biggest text MUDs now is probably largely because of all the attention the forum threads have given Medievia over the years.

No offence taken. We know our marketing is inept but we are waiting for Med 5.1 to be done before we really start our marketing campaign for Med V. Give us 6 months or so

Matt is right btw, all this free publicity is nice. As I said in my first post of this thread.. yay we're on the front page again! Now there's a thread started on Mudconnector too. Again, more free publicity. You may think that its all bad and the threads are so negative that no one would ever log into our game after seeing this. Think again. We get a lot more players from these sites during these 'flame wars'.

I know you think I'm smug and callous but come on, I've been through this same conversation for 10 years now. It does get quite old. Look, we are on page 5 of this thread and page 23 of the other. I think those numbers could quite well go into the hundreds if you folks push it there. Again I ask, to what end? To what purpose do you continue this discussion year after year? It changes nothing.

[Soleil]

Originally Posted by It certainly should be no suprise when people denounce their ethics and professionalism, though - they brought it on themselves.

Where do you see that we are surprised? No surprise here Don, Medievia's ethics have been denounced for the past 10 years now. Bottom line is that we have bigger fish to fry and really do not care that the 'mud community' (in my mind small potatoes, in your mind a HUGE group of people) thinks we are unethical.

Matt did sum it up nicely ...

Originally Posted by Medievia's done pretty well given that other people (all of us having this discussion, for instance) spend a fair amount of time talking about them. I think they also recognize that their attackers are fundamentally toothless because they are third parties to the issue and that the DIKU authors don't care enough to spend any energy to do anything about it. To me, that's the key issue. If they don't care enough to do -anything-, then it's just not a big deal. They don't feel they're being harmed enough to take action, and no harm, no foul as far as I'm concerned.

This is essentially why we don't care. DIKU doesn't care, only 5 or so MUD admins care enough to bring it up over and over on these forums. Keep bringing it up if you like. I will again repeat my mantra: It does nothing to change the situation.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by This is essentially why we don't care. DIKU doesn't care, only 5 or so MUD admins care enough to bring it up over and over on these forums. Keep bringing it up if you like. I will again repeat my mantra: It does nothing to change the situation.

I don't start Medievia-based threads - I merely throw my support in a conversation where support is due. These threads flamed more often before I started using MUD forums at all, so it is only in my personal benefit to add in my two cents to an issue that probably will not die until either DIKU announces that they no longer care, or Medievia at least tries to make some attempt to repair the insult-to-injury they have done.

As far as how big the MUD community is - it is not the forum posters themselves that creates a large community. It is the fact that those who frequent the forums tend to be admins. Their opinions and ideas and ethics are naturally passed through them and into the MUDs they admin. This is easily traceable, sociologically. A group of 15-20 successful admins can effect the opinions of thousands and thousands of potential players. While that may not stop Medievia(I actually would never wish for any MUD to be shut-down, I only wish you would show some decency and respect), it certainly creates an awareness of the issue amongst MUDers both new and old.

That's my personal goal. If any of the other admins who happen to side with me(Anitra, Valq, KaVir, etc) on this issue have different goals, I cannot personally speak for their motives, though I assume that they are similar.

[cron0s]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 04 2006,01:10) There are a profusion of Star Wars, Dragonball, etc etc MUDs all operating without license from the IP holders.

I see you mentioned this in the other thread too, and while I take the point you are making I just wanted to correct you on one thing. Lucasfilm allows and even encourages works of non commercial fan fiction. Here's their Head of Fan Relations Steve Sansweet, quoted in an article on wired.

Originally Posted by We believe our core fans are responsible for the continuing popularity of the series, and we want to encourage them. Our intellectual properties are there for you to play with, but we expect you won't try and make a profit or use our characters in a salacious way.

I found that quoted on the Star Wars Revelations site. If you haven't seen it I recommend the download. It is very impressive for an amateur film.

Fortunately I don't know anything about Dragonball.

[Valg]

Originally Posted by (Soleil @ May 04 2006,06:43) Keep bringing it up if you like.

I, for one, intend to make sure the issue doesn't fade. I wanted to give you a chance to at least refute the charges of plagiarism, because I didn't see how you could. I've seen you try to dance around the license issue (I think you're guilty there too, but at least there's room for debate), but this is so much more clear cut.

As another poster pointed out, if you're going to commit a crime, at least commit one for a purpose. You'll still be moral roadkill for doing it, but at least you'd have more spending money. Refusing to acknowledge the DIKU team's contribution is analogous to your decision to deride Synozeer's voting rules and refuse to comply with them. You gain nothing, lose the respect of community, and open yourself up to legitimate criticism for the foreseeable future.

[Anitra]

Originally Posted by Posted: May 03 2006,187 Again I ask, why should we, a moderatly successful game company, bow down to the demands of a few people on these forums? Just to please you? For the good of the 'community'? Demand away my friend. Have fun. Nothing is going to change.

Why would you give proper credit to the Diku code that your Mud developed from?

Simple answer:
Because it's the right and proper thing to do.

But you obiously don't care enough about right and wrong to be bothered about that, so I'll provide you with some other reasons:

- Because for the first time in 10 years that might give Medievia some positive publicity on the Mud boards.

- Because it might save you some awkward explanations the day your children get old enough to go on the net, and ask you why the family firm is referred to as 'Mercthievia' there.

- Because having to constantly defend Vryce's actions in the past is corrupting your soul. (I case you wonder, I am talking about the same process that you yourself refer to as 'developing a tough skin'.)

You know, when you first came to these boards, you sounded like a pretty nice person, and I felt genuinely sorry for you. Now you sound like an echo of Vryce, and I don't feel sorry for you at all.

Keep telling us that we should direct the flames at Vryce instead of you. He doesn't come to these boards. You do. And although you consistantly point out that he, not you, is responsible, you also obviously support his actions. That makes you as responsible as he is.

[Fern]

Even though the legal issue in question is that of license violation, it feels as if the topic continues to circle back to the game mentioned in the topic title. As has been pointed out several times, this merely serves to shine the spotlight on the aforementioned MUD.

If this debate is going to continue, perhaps it should be moved to a new thread, discussed as a legitimate topic of concern, and the use of the specific game's name minimized or even entirely avoided.  I for one do not feel like providing any continued publicity to the particular game itself, but I would definitely contribute more into an objectively discussed thread.

This is a subject that is regurgitated every few months, with precious little new fuel added to the fire.  Let's treat it with the seriousness it deserves, the professionalism it warrants and the decorum that I hope we're capable of... and for a change without providing even more publicity and listening to even more rhetoric regarding the unnamed specific game's lack of proper credits, its owners' ethics, its departing players' chastisements, or its remaining players' chest-thumpings.

[Soleil]

Originally Posted by If this debate is going to continue, perhaps it should be moved to a new thread, discussed as a legitimate topic of concern, and the use of the specific game's name minimized or even entirely avoided.  I for one do not feel like providing any continued publicity to the particular game itself, but I would definitely contribute more into an objectively discussed thread.

This was done first, in the The Diku License thread.  Valg felt it necessary to create a new thread just for us, and therefore HE is the one responsible for giving Medievia the added publicity.  Thanks Valg.

[Soleil]

Originally Posted by Keep telling us that we should direct the flames at Vryce instead of you. He doesn't come to these boards. You do. And although you consistantly point out that he, not you, is responsible, you also obviously support his actions. That makes you as responsible as he is.

Of course I support him, he is my husband.   However, I really can't speak with all honestly about what happened before 1995 because I wasn't around.  For that information I rely on what Vryce tells me.  I'll leave it at that.

Originally Posted by Because it might save you some awkward explanations the day your children get old enough to go on the net, and ask you why the family firm is referred to as 'Mercthievia' there.

Nothing awkward at all about explaining how a bunch of other jealous and zealous MUD admins stoop to namecalling and ethics arguments over an issue that should only be decided by a judge in a courtroom.  The fact alone that anyone calls us that nickname is proof enough that this whole issue is juvenile.

[John]

Originally Posted by (Soleil @ May 04 2006,20:07) Nothing awkward at all about explaining how a bunch of other jealous and zealous MUD admins stoop to namecalling and ethics arguments over an issue that should only be decided by a judge in a courtroom. The fact alone that anyone calls us that nickname is proof enough that this whole issue is juvenile.

Could you please not lobby insults at people please? If you feel that someone has insulted you in this thread then at the very least PM the moderator for this subforum.

Also, do you believe all legal issues should only be decided in the courtroom?

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by (Soleil @ May 04 2006,10:07) Originally Posted by Keep telling us that we should direct the flames at Vryce instead of you. He doesn't come to these boards. You do. And although you consistantly point out that he, not you, is responsible, you also obviously support his actions. That makes you as responsible as he is. Of course I support him, he is my husband.   However, I really can't speak with all honestly about what happened before 1995 because I wasn't around.  For that information I rely on what Vryce tells me.  I'll leave it at that. Originally Posted by Because it might save you some awkward explanations the day your children get old enough to go on the net, and ask you why the family firm is referred to as 'Mercthievia' there. Nothing awkward at all about explaining how a bunch of other jealous and zealous MUD admins stoop to namecalling and ethics arguments over an issue that should only be decided by a judge in a courtroom.  The fact alone that anyone calls us that nickname is proof enough that this whole issue is juvenile.

Perhaps you should divorce him then. I mean, he's an unethical asshole. If he's got no conscience about stealing, what's to say he has any concern about beating you or any children you may have?

Maybe he does beat you and you're one of those wives in denial of the fact that she's married to an asshole (the former may not be true, but the latter certainly seems the case). Hard to say without actually observation. You certainly don't seem to have the reasoning skills to ascertain right and wrong very well and seem to be overly-dependant upon his interpretation of things as a guideline for what is and isn't correct. Sounds like a classic doormat-wife to me.

One thing though, please. Don't have children. With your attitude about ethics, I seriously hope you never have any. If so, they'll end up being a pathetic lot of criminals if you intend to teach them ethics by example: "It's not really a crime, son, if it never comes to court. Just look at daddy."

Take care,

Jason

[Soleil]

Originally Posted by If he's got no conscience about stealing, what's to say he has any concern about beating you or any children you may have?

This is when I bow out of the conversation because I do not wish to stoop THIS low.  Once my family is insulted and threatened, it's just not worth it.  Have fun judging me and my family based on this inane issue.

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by (prof1515 @ May 04 2006,11:19) Perhaps you should divorce him then. I mean, he's an unethical asshole. If he's got no conscience about stealing, what's to say he has any concern about beating you or any children you may have? Maybe he does beat you and you're one of those wives in denial of the fact that she's married to an asshole (the former may not be true, but the latter certainly seems the case). Hard to say without actually observation. You certainly don't seem to have the reasoning skills to ascertain right and wrong very well and seem to be overly-dependant upon his interpretation of things as a guideline for what is and isn't correct. Sounds like a classic doormat-wife to me. One thing though, please. Don't have children. With your attitude about ethics, I seriously hope you never have any. If so, they'll end up being a pathetic lot of criminals if you intend to teach them ethics by example: "It's not really a crime, son, if it never comes to court. Just look at daddy."

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha. Oh man, that is rich.

That post is a perfect example of the morals and ethics that are at the core of the Anti-Medievia crowd as well.

That is a perfect example of why this issue should be buried FOREVER and never, ever talked about on any MUD community forum.

That post is also, quite possibly, the most disgusting thing ever posted on TMS.

Congratulations Prof. I'd recommend a new handle for any future posts here.

[Valg]

Originally Posted by (Threshold @ May 04 2006,11:30) That post is a perfect example of the morals and ethics that are at the core of the Anti-Medievia crowd as well.

No, that post is prof1515's. He speaks for himself, just like I speak for myself and you speak for yourself. Please cease the sweeping insults.

I think it is disingenuous of Soleil to claim ignorance of any of the case's details (pre-1995 or otherwise), however, given her official capacity as Medievia's PR director. She could find them out rather readily.

[Anitra]

prof1515, that post of yours was way out of line.
Nobody deserves a low blow like that.

You should apologise to Soleil, and to the board.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Valg @ May 04 2006,12:07) No, that post is prof1515's. He speaks for himself, just like I speak for myself and you speak for yourself. Please cease the sweeping insults.

Then I assume we can dispense with claims that "the community" is against Medievia, since it's only a few individuals speaking out against them and they don't, as you say, represent anyone but themselves.

--matt

[Valg]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 04 2006,14:01) Then I assume we can dispense with claims that "the community" is against Medievia, since it's only a few individuals speaking out against them and they don't, as you say, represent anyone but themselves.

Please re-read the thread. Where am I saying that?

I was advised not to feed the trolls. If you have anything to say about the topic of plagiarism, feel free to pipe up. Otherwise, don't add to the problems that prof1515 and Threshold have been causing.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Valg @ May 04 2006,15[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img])] Originally Posted by the_logos,May 04 2006,14<!--emo&<!--emo&[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]]Then I assume we can dispense with claims that "the community" is against Medievia, since it's only a few individuals speaking out against them and they don't, as you say, represent anyone but themselves. Please re-read the thread. Where am I saying that?

Valg wrote:

Originally Posted by You gain nothing, lose the respect of community, and open yourself up to legitimate criticism for the foreseeable future.

Right there. Previous page in this thread. You only represent yourself when it's convenient, and then claim to inform us what "the community" will do when it's convenient.

--matt