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 .

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.

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.

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?

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

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

There's a link to the license at this site:

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!

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.

It's faq does say:

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

From .

How is that open to interpretation?

Let's look carefully at the liscense:
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.

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.

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

UH OH! No way around this one!

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:
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.

And it still is one.

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?

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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?

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

Double-posted... Bah.

... 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.

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

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

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

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.

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?

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

Stilton

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.

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.

Even if their code would be 100% original now, they still did start from Diku code, and evolved from there. That doesn't mean anything?...

Like wanting to look at the scene of an accident, I guess.

Think of a Diku/Merc with some snippets, lots of players and no credits, and that's basically what you can expect.

To Mikey, the latest "reviewer" of Medievia:

In your "review" you find it amusing that people would think that the game is based on Diku, and that you know the real truth...

Have you considered maybe climbing out of the cave and taking a look at the evidence? Such as - code information directly from Ozy, the head coder you insist would know that the game is NOT diku based... you can find it right here:



Where he converts DIKU structs to classes. And that wasn't 13 years ago for just a week. That was just under 5 years ago. The purpose of his struct task was to rename DIKU code so that it wouldn't look like DIKU code anymore. It was done intentionally, with the understanding of Ozy himself, that he was doing nothing more than masking DIKU code.

I just thought I'd point that out.

All this fuss about Medievia has been huge publicity for them. In this case, yeah, I think even bad publicity is good for them. Especially when it's noted that, despite all the old news being rehashed about their alleged violations and the "documented evidence" often cited and linked, the owners haven't been successfully sued nor have they been convicted as thieves. Yet many people seem comfortable slapping the "criminal" label on them.

That's the sort of thing that takes a good debate about misuse of intellectual property and turns it into little more than hair-pulling and histrionics.

It's like we all want to pretend to be lawyers - or villagers with torches and pitchforks. Or, hey, forget that: Let's be the judge, jury and executioner too.

Have Medievia's owners behaved questionably over the years? Sure seems like it. Are they criminals? No - they haven't been sued or convicted in civil or criminal court, respectively. So, until then, it's fine to rail about the unfairness of it all and continue sending hits to their site. But stop throwing the criminal label around, please, unless you're going to pony up cash so the developers of DIKU can successfully bring civil suit against Medievia - if they even ever intend to do so.

You need to cool all this hate towards Medievia down. Try to picture yourself in their situation for a while. When I pondered on these issues some I realized that it might be a tragedy.

If I remember it correctly there were flames towards Aardwolf for accepting donations. It was this entire mess with people threatening that they "broke" the license. Still why did they accept donations? Because without them Aardwolf would cease to exist! It is really that simple. People can't afford the bandwidth cost they get when their MUD gets very popular.

I am going to make a lot of assumptions here to show that Medievia might not be that evil that you think. First remember that Aardwolf accepted donations after the Medievia issues. To be the first to accept "donations" made Medievia look really bad. In fact I believe this was the reason they removed the credits to start with. They couldn't accept donations as a Diku MUD - or they were made to believe that was the case. Assume Vryce had written 200.000 lines of code and consider how you would feel to trash that amount of work. You know you would have to if you couldnt afford to run the game. How certain posters acted at this time would make anyone go crazy. In my opinion Vryce had only one chose and that was to shutdown the MUD and leave the community when he understood he couldnt afford the bandwidth costs. To actually do that though isn't as easily done as said.

I always, sadly, recommend people to stay away from DIKU to avoid issues like these.

What, ripping the credits out of someone else's work and claiming it as my own, then making a living from it? I'd rather not.

Yet I don't see Realms of Despair asking donations - despite having been around for over a decade and regularly peaking at over 500 players.

I trashed 173,410 lines of code when I dumped my Diku derivative, after working on it for five years, and I have to say it didn't bother me. The knowledge and experience I gained allowed me to create a far superior scratch-written mud, which (after three years work) is now up to 128,117 lines and growing every day.

I know other mud developers (such as Hephos?) have continued running their old muds in parallel with scratch-build developments, in each case using their prior experience to avoid the limitations and pitfalls of their first muds. Now that is something to be proud of.

So yes, people deal with this, and yes, they manage to do so without just ripping the credits from someone else's work and claiming it as 'scratch-written'. Developing a mud from scratch is certainly something to be proud of - but claiming credit for someone else's work on the basis that your lawyers have told you you can get away with it is not.

And as for arguing that people should be able to violate the licence because the mud costs money to run...well, a car costs money to run as well - do you think that makes it acceptable to steal petrol/gas?

I can safely call anyone a criminal, that's the beauty of the internet. And they can safely break the law. That's the beauty of the internet..

-D

Bleh. Double post.

It doesn't make it right, nothing makes it right, but they did it, no one can deny that anymore, there's too much showing that they DID use the code to make profit, I'd put my money on the prosecution if it did go to court, not only because I know what I'm talking about but because my dad was on a legal counsel for 25 years. I really don't want to argue about it though, it's not my battle, and I really could care less.

I think it's absolutely crystal clear they used the code to make money. However, it's not so cut and dry that they used it to make a profit. That's the fine line that lawyers could bicker about to pad their expensive suits with cash in a real live court of law, rather than a bunch of armchair lawyers like us on a message board.

Making money isn't the same thing as making a profit. All Medievia's owners have to do to prove they didn't make a profit is to show they've broken even or *lost* money over the years while running this enterprise.

I'm not a lawyer. My dad wasn't a lawyer. My stepdad wasn't a lawyer. My mom worked for lawyers as a paralegal. I covered court cases for a metro newspaper for the better part of a decade. And I've watched lots of Law & Order. None of that means I know what I'm talking about with any real expertise. But I'm fairly sure the jury's not even seated yet on whether they've made a profit.

Actually Brody, Vryce and Soleil have stated here recently, and often in the past, that they -have- made profit off their game. Enough profit in fact that Vryce is able to do this as his full time income-producing job.

Please note also - that at the present time I am only regurgitating what I've read, that I've already stated my opinions regarding this issue, and have no interest in restating them. The paragraph above is merely to point out a fact, without any judgement one way or another. I'd rather everyone else offer their opinions. It's more entertaining to me than to get involved in the battle again.

As the_logos already pointed out, they could make money off the mud without making a 'profit' in the legal sense of the word by simply paying themselves reasonable salaries. But it seems to be pretty much undisputed that they did violate the license in at least one way, and that is by removing the credits.

I'm not defending Medievia in any way. Don't get me wrong. I certainly believe they've violated the license in the past and may well be doing so now, even if they've so modified the code that it's barely recognizable as DIKU anymore.

I'm just saying we shouldn't call them criminals unless they're convicted of a crime. That's all. License breakers? Seems like it. Wrongdoers? Hmm - that seems a valid assertion, yep. Dirty, filthy, sneaky Hobbitses? Quite possibly. However, I have no solid evidence of hair on their feet.

Evidence Scmevidence, hang 'em all on the gallows! Medieval style! Har!

Hmm...I don't quite understand what you mean. Would you care to explain?

Well, to clarify, I hadn't thought you were defending Medievia; I was just replying to what you had said about how unclear it is whether or not they made a profit.

Anyway, since it is so difficult to prove and the DikuMud license is so poorly written with regards to the profit restriction, the main issue for me is that they removed the DikuMud credits. I mean, even if (and this is a big 'if' ) they run a mud that is no longer DikuMud derivative, it's pretty pathetic to commit a crime and hide behind it later as 'something of the past', without even apologizing for it. Its just a slap in the face to the DikuMud developers, who designed for free probably the single most influential codebase of today (at least among hobbyists).

(Note: Er..sorry for the smilies in the quotes; I have yet to learn to quote correctly.)