Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post - Aardwolf commercially violating diku licence

Alastair · 11-07-2003, 12:40 PM

Mind you, when you buy packaged software, you buy exactly the same, which is the license to use the software, not the rights to the software itself. The tangible medium of the box and CD gives the illusion of a tangible product.

Now as far as I understand, by convention you'd still refer to downloaded software as "a product" - the moment when it becomes a service rather than a product being perhaps a bit more difficult to determine. There seems to be a (less-well established) convention which considers, eg, MUDs as a service, and in-game items moreso. This is quite evident for instance in all the paperwork involved in the BS vs. Mythic suit (which however never went into judgement, but I digress).

So I'd rather think we're in the realm of services than goods.

Quite obviously because we're in the grey realm of international law, and that the IRS definition might be moot, depending on where a potential lawsuit would actually take place. And this isn't necessarily the USA - the practice stating whether the default juridiction is the place of purchase rather than the place of sale actually varies from country to country, and in many cases, as far as I know, it's more of a common practice rather than set in stone.

The issue isn't donations per se, it's what is given in exchange, as you pointed out yourself. If it's recognition, I personally wouldn't mind one bit either (there was a poll up recently about that), and I'd go as far as saying that having a donator's name on a plaque or a helpfile _in_ the MUD remains perfectly acceptable. If however the reward is XP / QP / an item, and the donator expect it, it really becomes a sale.
That's where I draw the line. It ain't red, BTW. We're not at war as far as I know.
In the Aardwolf-specific case, though, we have this admission from Lasher, in the post which started this thread:

Yes there is a reward given,
but there is nothing given that cannot be gotten through just plain
working for it either - the only advantage donators have over non-donators
is a time saving. Also, what I am giving as a reward is nothing that
is part of stock Diku or ROM - trivia points/quest points. Don't get
me wrong, trying to justify it on those grounds would be very silly,
my point is that this is a very fine line.

A fine line which I believe is already being crossed - no matter, in the end effect, if it is really to pay expenses needed to keep the game up, or not. In the very specific case of Aardwolf, John has already pointed out the inconsistencies, but again, IMO, this doesn't even matter. Whether you can relate to why somebody does something doesn't make such an act right or wrong per se.

And yes, if we're considering the degree to which what I believe to be a transgression is taking place, in the specific case of Aardwolf, this remains a really minor sin by my standards. But the line has been crossed in my opinion, and I'd rather that as a conclusion of all this, Aardwolf reconsider their current practice.

Again, I think it speaks poorly for your game if you _have_ to resort to in-game buffs to recieve donations.

11-07-2003, 12:40 PM	#154
Alastair Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Switzerland Posts: 120	Mind you, when you buy packaged software, you buy exactly the same, which is the license to use the software, not the rights to the software itself. The tangible medium of the box and CD gives the illusion of a tangible product. Now as far as I understand, by convention you'd still refer to downloaded software as "a product" - the moment when it becomes a service rather than a product being perhaps a bit more difficult to determine. There seems to be a (less-well established) convention which considers, eg, MUDs as a service, and in-game items moreso. This is quite evident for instance in all the paperwork involved in the BS vs. Mythic suit (which however never went into judgement, but I digress). So I'd rather think we're in the realm of services than goods. Quite obviously because we're in the grey realm of international law, and that the IRS definition might be moot, depending on where a potential lawsuit would actually take place. And this isn't necessarily the USA - the practice stating whether the default juridiction is the place of purchase rather than the place of sale actually varies from country to country, and in many cases, as far as I know, it's more of a common practice rather than set in stone. The issue isn't donations per se, it's what is given in exchange, as you pointed out yourself. If it's recognition, I personally wouldn't mind one bit either (there was a poll up recently about that), and I'd go as far as saying that having a donator's name on a plaque or a helpfile _in_ the MUD remains perfectly acceptable. If however the reward is XP / QP / an item, and the donator expect it, it really becomes a sale. That's where I draw the line. It ain't red, BTW. We're not at war as far as I know. In the Aardwolf-specific case, though, we have this admission from Lasher, in the post which started this thread: Yes there is a reward given, but there is nothing given that cannot be gotten through just plain working for it either - the only advantage donators have over non-donators is a time saving. Also, what I am giving as a reward is nothing that is part of stock Diku or ROM - trivia points/quest points. Don't get me wrong, trying to justify it on those grounds would be very silly, my point is that this is a very fine line. A fine line which I believe is already being crossed - no matter, in the end effect, if it is really to pay expenses needed to keep the game up, or not. In the very specific case of Aardwolf, John has already pointed out the inconsistencies, but again, IMO, this doesn't even matter. Whether you can relate to why somebody does something doesn't make such an act right or wrong per se. And yes, if we're considering the degree to which what I believe to be a transgression is taking place, in the specific case of Aardwolf, this remains a really minor sin by my standards. But the line has been crossed in my opinion, and I'd rather that as a conclusion of all this, Aardwolf reconsider their current practice. Again, I think it speaks poorly for your game if you _have_ to resort to in-game buffs to recieve donations.