Well, I'm willing to go with the interpretation of our lawyers, and they -are- well-versed in IP law. The lead has over 15 years experience and IP law is his specialty. Now, that's not to say he's right. A lawyer's opinion is still just an opinion, albeit in his case a highly educated one.

Yes, they're fairly clearly uninterested in pursuing action. But is that any indication that they disapprove? No. The DIKU people are also clearly uninterested in pursuing action against Medievia but that doesn't make what the Medievia idiots are doing right.


I'm not on a witch hunt, and it's not just civil law. It's criminal law as well. Infringing on property worth more than $5000 (or maybe it's $2500. In this case, it's irrelevant since the value of the Tolkien IP is in the tens of millions.) can also be criminal.

Incidentally, were I on a witch hunt against you in particular I'd simply force Tolkien Enterprises hand. It'd be a reasonably simple matter to create a situation in which TE must either shut down all Tolkien-based muds or suffer devaluation of their IP because of it.

Well, first off, I have seen plenty of evidence that what you and other people like you are doing causes TE financial harm. We're in a position to buy IP and we would pay considerably less for the massively multiplayer text rights to the Tolkien IP because of the existence of muds like yours. Now, I'm not saying that the fact that muds like yours cause TE's IP to be worth less is necessarily not balanced out by extra indirect profits from people whom your mud convinced to buy more Tolkien products, but let's face it, fat chance. All your players are already Tolkien fans. People who play an RP-intensive Tolkien mud don't need convincing. Ii'm willing to simply concede this point though, as it's rather immaterial to my argument.

My point is simply this: You can't know, and so you're putting the Tolkien IP at risk. The only people that have the right to do that are the Tolkien people.




What's so f-ing difficult about getting permission first, and if you cannot, simply not running the mud? I just find myself baffled at this feeling that a lack of reply somehow constitutes permission. If you can't get permission, don't f-cking do it. I get the sense that you and the others posting in your defence mainly don't give a #### about the ethics involved. You just love the IP (justifiably so too) and feel like you have some right to use it as you will. That's fine, you can feel that way. I, however, feel you're stealing it, and I have yet to hear any defence that convinces me otherwise. They all come across as shallow justifications for taking the easy way out (too difficult to actually obtain permission, just want to play in a tolkien mud, etc. All incredibly lame excuses.)

--matt

Ah hah, that's exactly the point. You CANNOT know that. For instance, look at the infringing Tolkien muds. I can point out easily definable ways in which they blatantly reduce the value of the Tolkien IP. There are possible ways they may increase the value too. I believe that the people who have the right to decide which will do which are the IP holders and no one else.


The Holocaust had no direct effect on the majority of Americans. Not worth stopping then, is that what you're saying? (Incidentally, for the logically-impaired, that's an -analogy- not a comparison. Obviously the Holocaust dwarfs any possible IP violation by several orders of magnitude.) Whether a codebase's license is violated also has absolutely no effect on the majority of us (in fact, Medievia's existence doesn't even have a harmful effect on the DIKU license holders. I was interested in helping to fund action against Medievia purely on principle.).

--matt

I just wanted to apologize for this. It was over the top and prompted by my frustration with what I view as a self-righteous ethical nonchalance on the part of a few posters. Many mud administrators are highly imaginative people, as well as highly ethical. I didn't mean to give the impression that or even most mud owners are of the unethical, thieving variety. Having not looked at all or even most muds in existence, I wouldn't know.

--matt

Nothing "supposedly" about it - I have spoken to them.  If you don't believe me, email them yourself.

Of course it is - by using the "free" diku codebase, Vryce is not only avoiding purchasing the DikuII license, but also discouraging other people from buying it as well.  It is/was possible to get a free copy of the Borland C compiler, as long as it's not used for commercial purposes - by the same reasoning, Borland wouldn't be losing money if you decided to use their free compiler for commercial products...

Exactly - that's the very point I've been repeatedly making.  So why do you keep suggesting otherwise?

I am actually reading posts about how having shire in your mud is illegal. It would be a pretty sad state of affairs to see every mud on the net forced to remove the shire. Though to be honest that area does suck. But anyway, I don't think they'll do much about Shadows of Isildur, because it isn't commercial is it? Hope you eventually get that permission confirmation you need, Traithe. If the worst happens, well, you can count me on the list of people who think that's unjust.. for what its worth.

Speaking briefly as moderator: In a topic like this, there will obviously be differences of opinion, which will result in heated debates (and often flames).  That's fine - this isn't the Advanced Mud Concepts forum, and I'm far more relaxed about the conduct here.

However when your post adds absolutely nothing to a huge debate like this other than to try and stir up more flames, I will delete it.  I have had to do this twice now - one post which was a personal attack on the_logos earlier on, and another just now which attacked pretty much everyone.  If you want to dispute or attack points that people have made, then that's great - but please make sure that your post adds at least a little to the discussion, otherwise things just get out of hand.

[EDIT: Just to clarify, this point was NOT aimed at Davairus]

(Moderator mode off)

I did. I offered them money to help them shut down Medievia. I got no response.

Ah hah! I was not aware that there's a commercial version of DIKU available. It's owned by the same license holders as DIKU I?

If this is in fact the case then I will definitely concede that Vyrce's trespasses exceed Traithe's in my eyes at least.

To my knowledge, Tolkien Enterprises has not requested that Traithe or any other mud admin assist them in increasing the value of their IP.

--matt

Yes. DikuII, aka Valhalla, has been around for some time and has a commercial license available for use.

"...that's not your determination to make. If the IP holder wanted help, he'd let you know."

Joke of the day: I just received a TMS PM which stated "...I take it Achaea pays quite a bit in advertising since you seem to keep defending the person who runs the game"

How odd, considering no advertising dollars would go to you anyway. Lot of idiots floating around I suppose. *shrug* (We've not yet paid to advertise here either.)

--matt

my god people! How much longer must we endure this debate? People are either going to side with Logos or with Traithe. They are not going to change their minds on the topic so why in #### are we still arguing over it?

Stryph

I don't look for trouble...I just seem to find it everywhere

I'd hope people are siding with the issues, not the people, but that may be too optimistic of me. Whether you like Traithe or me is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

I might suggest that if you find the debate tiresome, you don't read it. Simple solution.
--matt

What makes you think this is about Traithe? As far as I see it, this is about Logos attacking the position of those who actively defend mud licenses, such as myself. Traithe just had the misfortune of having his mud cited as an example, but it could just have easily have been someone else - this isn't the first time Logos has raised this very issue, and last time there was no mention of Traithe or his mud. Now, like then, it is my own position that I am defending.

Do you mind? While long winded, I'm finding this discussion quite fascinating. Shhh.

Well... So the copyright holder needs to approach you formally and demand things, for you to not rip off their work?

What if the copyright holders have no clue about what you are doing? And they probably have no clue at all about what is going on in particular muds, or in the mud community as a whole.

Its like your local gansta drug dealer works on your street selling drugs to your kids, without you knowing it. And his policy is "#### if their mom comes down and tell me not to sell drugs to their kids, sure i'l stop without discussion!".

But if someone else on the street walks up and says its illegal, he give a ****, and tell them to mind their own business.

I would like to formally dispute three parts of this assertion:

1. That there is, in fact, a bus. I've seen no bus.
2. That the bus has wheels. Perhaps the bus is a hover bus.
3. That EVEN if there is a bus and EVEN if the bus has wheels, there's no proof the wheels go round and round. Perhaps it is a short trip and the wheels just go around once instead of going "round and round."

Get your facts straight before posting, sir. There's no room for such irresponsible speculation here.

--matt

Probably

That's the entire point of copyright law.  Controlling when works enter the public domain.  You fail to make the distinction between public domain works and copy protected works in your post.  It doesn't become part of the public inheritence until it's public domain.  

So is a movie just as different from a book, yet you don't see Hollywood making unauthorized movies from copy protected books.

Completely illogical.  Tell me why Diku mud code and zones (or yours or mine) should enjoy greater copyright protection than Tolkien's LOTR or StarWars?  What's to stop me from saying Diku or your mud and zones are now part of the common cultural inheritence and appropriating them?  What makes you think it is right to do that to another author yet you think it's wrong for someone to do to you?

They shouldn't. If I went to some discussion forums for fiction authors, and saw some posts about someone who had made a few changes to a copy of LOTR, replaced Tolkien's name with his own, and started selling it, then I would expect to see the same sort of responses I see here concerning Medievia.

But if someone on that fiction authors discussion forum had written a non-commercial fan-fiction story based on a mud - a mud which had been used as the basis for dozens (if not hundreds) of other short stories over the last 30 years - and that author had contacted the mud owner to inform them that if it was a problem, they would delete their story, then I would be quite surprised if they got the same sort of response on that fiction authors discussion forum that Traithe has received here.

I made my post in good faith, as an example of a phenomenon that I think exists in a very large number of muds, namely references to well known things in our contemporary world, be it books, movies or comic strips. I was hoping for a serious discussion. Next I know, I get compered to a drug dealer.

If this is the level the argumentation will sink to, I will withdraw from the discussion again.

Sure, I plead guilty to having some planets named Endor and Hoth in my Mud, and also to using the phrase ‘May the Force be with you’ as a common greeting phrase in our Future Dimension. Personally, I don’t believe that things like that constitute a copyright infringement. If they do, we might just as well close down 90% of all existing muds, since I bet you could find similar things in most of them, even though they are more likely to be references to Dungeons and Dragons than StarWars. And even though their owners may not be quite as candid about it as I have been, for fear of being flamed by people like you.

You apparently believe otherwise, but why would I care about what you think? You are not a lawyer, you are not the copyright holder, you are not the FBI, you are just stating your opinion - (and doing it in a very rude way, I might add). So what makes your opinion more worth than mine?

If you cannot see the difference between using a few names from a commonly known book or film in a mud, and ripping off an entire codebase, zone - or book - and presenting it as your own work... then either your intelligence must be very limited, or you may have some ulterior motive for just picking a fight.

And if you cannot see the difference between ripping off IP of almost no value (stock areas in DIKU, for instance) and ripping off IP worth hundreds of millions of dollars, I question either your sanity or your desire to do anything but justify, however possible, ripping off that IP.

--matt

Everquest, UO, etc etc are all muds. They're just graphical muds. And an informal poll on our text muds showed that more than half the people also play or have played graphical muds.

--matt

I must say that I am very disappointed with you Molly. I was happily pottering about my holo-pad, in the year of no lord 2035, when I decided to take my first trip of nostalgia into the past. Without further ado I stepped upon my newly invented beam of light cell projector, copyright Mc Beam Technologies formerly Mc Donalds – our food tastes more like cardboard than our packaging.

Upon arrival, gasp, shock, horror, what do I find? A fantastic MUD that is identical to the one I have just finished creating. It can’t possibly be the case that my mud was copied from yours because the Mc Frothy Milkshake explosion of 2020 destroyed all past records. I can only assume that someone attached to the MUD journeyed into the future and stole my work, thus making illegal use of my IP. My Mc Money is on that deviant Soulstar and his Sicilian upstarts. I have consulted with my lawyers and you have been tried in your absence. The guilty verdict requires you to eat, without the addition of self-applied flavourings, 2 Mc Burgers and one portion of Mc Fries.  

On a separate note, my second trip took me to the region of Achaea. A lot of people where aghast to hear that the name of their beloved region is being used without their permission. As I left I saw a group of warriors gathering swords and shields and writing a missive to someone called Archemedies, requesting a big catapult to hurl them through time. By all accounts they are intent on some rigorous disembowelling activities, rowdy bunch.  

--------------------
Now I have to go and serve the graphical Tolkein game with a legal summon for Illegal Pumpkin use, those things are dangerous when used by little people with no adult supervision.

I was introduced to MUDs by graphical game players, and I myself come from a background of Console RPGs and fighting games, and now enjoy text based MUDs more than any other type of game (having played Diablo, EQ, Ultima Online and enjoyed them as well). Conversation on my MUD often includes other graphical as well as text games... I think this assumption is , respectfully, very far off the mark.

However, what I would say is that a RP-oriented game like Shadows of Isilidur wouldn't cut into the profits of MEO, but there is at least one Tolkien based MUD with a player base of 1000+ players that I think would be more than a little relevant in that respect...

In the end, though I do agree with Logos that it should be up to the copyright holder , I am far more sympathetic to builders/coders in your position than people that make a game completely based off of someone else's IP.

Actually I DON'T see any difference, from an ethical point of view. Using the same logic you could also claim that robbing a millionaire would be a bigger crime than doing the same to a beggar.

I don't share your definition about what constitutes  'ripping off' either, but that may be a semantic problem, so let's not dwell on it.

As for your final insult; If that were my 'desire', then why would I post about it on a discussion board, drawing as much attention as possible to my 'vile crimes'?

I guess I am not as obsessed with profit as you seem to be.
That appears to be what mainly worries you in this matter.

Tough questions weren't they?  Surely there are differences between petty theft, grand theft, and armed robbery.  As was pointed out if one were to measure the degree of theft by the value of the property, then stealing areas from your mud ranks about the level of shoplifting gum.  Clearly you're using a different measure in assigning value.  

I've already warned earlier on this thread for using conspiracy theories as arguments.  My motive for disagreeing with you is that you are just plain wrong.  As I pointed out, your previous post totally ignored the distinctions being public domain and copyrighted material.  Instead of making a smartass remark about your intelligence, I'll just put it down to ignorance.

Sure it is up to the adminstrators of that site. But does that make it right and lawful? I don't know.

-Del

First off let me say i think this argument is ridiculous.Every fantasy novel ever written has been based on Tolkien's works,dungeons and dragons,wheel of time,the list goes on and on and the basis for Tolkien's work is popular mythology Tolkien no more created elves than he did dwarves or humans.you wont find mentin of hobbits in any book other than Tolkien's but you do find numerous mentions of halflings so i guess we should round all the authors of every fantasy book weve ever read and put them all on trial for borrowing others ideas and adapting them to suit their stories.
i would imagine that the designers of middle earth online had a pretty easy time of convincing tolkiens estate of the marketin potential of that game by showing them the number of tolkien based muds that are out there thus making their job alot easier.

A common misconception - Tolkien actually drew inspiration from earlier fantasy authors such as George MacDonald, William Morris and Lord Dunsany. However the discussion was not about inspired work, but fan fiction.

if you dont think fan fiction is inspired work you should read more often,there are some truly talented writers out there in the realm of fanfiction and like they say imitation is the greatest form of flattery

i also should have qualified my statement about every fantasy writer borrowing from Tolkien's works, i intended to say everY modern fantasy writer.the whole point of my post is that it all builds on traditions and myths that have been lost to antiquity.

I read plenty, but you're still missing the point. Fan fiction is a form of inspired work, but inspired work is not necessarily fan fiction. Almost all authors, including Tolkien, drew ideas and inspiration from fantasy authors before them - and legally speaking there is nothing wrong with that. Fan Fiction, however, is the production of fiction based upon somebody else's work, and technically is almost always a breach of copyright.

Why just Tolkien? What makes you think they didn't draw upon the same inspiration as Tolkien did? Or maybe they took ideas from more recent novels (eg Terry Goodkind and Robert Jordan)? I just find it strange why you would draw the line at Tolkien, when (for example) one of his favourite childhood books was a fantasy novel written 20 years before he was born.

My goodness, 24 pages of this...

A few remarks:

Firt, regarding Matt's Nickame, "Logos" or "ho Logos" might be public domain in the same way "Apple" or "Computer" are.

Chances are that "The Logos" is a trademark infringement in the same way an unsername "Apple Computer" would be.

So, Matt, have you checked with The Logos (the band) and the The Logos companies whether you have the right to use that username?

According to your both legal and ethical standards, if the answer is no, you are a thief and should immediately change your Nickname until you do obtain permission.

Second, as has been pointed out several times already, talk is cheap.

It's been one month since Matt has flamboyantly claimed that he would contact TE himself. I think it is quite reasonable to assume that TE is now doubly aware of SoI's violations, so you'd be wise to let them, who have the means to do so, pursue the matter themselves.

Third, "elves" are neither copyrighted nor trademarked by Tolkien. So if someone writes about sex-crazy elves, he's not violating anyones rights. When using stupid examples like this, it is generally a good idea to make sure they apply to the subject discussed.

Fourth, however, I'd like to point out that all the legal arguments made to support the fact that SoI has a line of defense because TE has ignored the MUDs' violation for two decades will agressively pursuing other types of infringement applies to Medieva as well, much to my personal chagrin.
Indeed, the Diku team has demonstrated a willingness to pursue a case of alleged copyright violation - while chosing to ignore all others. That was the Diku vs. Everquest drama which unfolded a few (4? 5? Too lazy to look up) years ago.

Bottomline: both TE and the Diku teams have the means to take action themselves againt copyright violators - yet they choose not to do it in the case of quite a lot of MUDs. I suggest that the righteous crusaders, if they are absolutely unable to mind their own business as they should, conduct it directly with the interested parties and not through a proxy war on any number of message boards.

No, they do not. I've already covered this point repeatedly. The two issues are completely different. Please have the courtesy to read the posts before posting - yes, I know there's a lot of them, but it's not fair to expect everyone else to keep posting the same points for those who didn't bother to read them the first time.

The violation of mud licenses is my business - and indeed that of anyone who contributes into (or cares about) the mud community.

I did. I confess I might have skimmed through some of them and missed it.

However, I am pretty sure you never made the case how, DIKU actually HAVING decided to actively pursue the EverQuest matter while letting slide all others is different from TE HAVING pursued some type of violations while ignoring others, as far as the "defense line" of respectively SoI and Med was concerned.

Yes, you talked about Diku's _wishes_. We all know of them. The EQ matter also demonstrated that they were perfectly willing to take action themselves against an alleged and commercial infrigement. Again, I ask, how is that different from the Tolkien case?

Until further notice, I seem to remember that your modus operandi was to ask questions first, then act. It appears you weren't really concerned by my statement...

Actually no. A trademark is only protected within the trade for which it is registered. This is what makes it possbile for a band to be named "The Logos" while there exist companies of the same name.

Also, generic words or terms cannot be trademarked. This is why you see Windows® instead of Windows™. Microsoft was denied a trademark on the word Windows due to the fact that it is a single, generic word (though the ® serves as a notice that they will probably vigorously defend their exclusive use of the word in the relevant industry anyway (probably by charging you with fraud or something similar)). Not all company names are trademarked, and in some cases of those whose names are followed by a ™, the trademark only applies to the graphical presentation of the name and not the words themselves.

The Logos contains only generic words presented in a form that is consistent with the standard usage for those words. Apple Computer would stand a better chance at getting a trademark because the juxtaposition of "Apple" and "Computer" is not found in common usage except in reference to that particular company.

Even if a company named The Logos was somehow granted a trademark on that name, it would probably be invalidated if ever competently contested in court. Even if it was upheld, it would need to be given in the industry covering forum posts to affect MM here. So far I cannot find a company named The Logos that marks their name as a trademark that is in the computing/electronics industry.

Also, since the degree of protection granted varies based on how well-known your trade mark is and how likely it is that your use of the mark is diluting the brand recognition value of the mark (in this case, not bloody likely), I'd feel confident in stating that MM is not violating any laws by using The Logos as his screen name here.

With regard to the main topic, the only thing that TE's lack of action against SoI even when notified affects is the potential damages awarded to them should they ever choose to litigate. It does not make it more or less legal. It is absolutely illegal. Period.

Do I have a problem with it? No, and neither does TE, apparently, but that's irrelevant with respect to the legality of SoI's actions. All it means is that while what SoI is doing is illegal, they probably will not be sued.

Diku have persued others as well, including Medievia (Michael Seifert said to me in an email on 1st August 2000 "I have spent many hours having futile conversations with Mike"). They have made their intentions and wishes very clear to the public. What they've not done is actually take legal action - against anyone (no, not even EverQuest).

TE have repeatedly persued and taken legal action against many people. But they have ignored all muds completely, even when specifically informed of the situation, and haven't even so much as given their view on the situation.

Correct, but that doesn't mean it's not my business.

Actually the "®" means it's a federally registered trademark, under U.S. trademark law. The "™" however can be used used freely, without having to register your mark.

Which is hardly surprising, given that the situation was resolved to Michael Seifert's entire satisfaction before it ever came to that.


I can't help but note, however, that while the EQ dispute was very public _and_ publicized by Michael Seifert himself on the Diku website, the Medieva affair remains completely out of the spotlight, the same Diku team apparently content to relying on AxL and yourself to fight their cause in their stead.

Worse, the EQ allegations were based on hearsay from an uninformed person making a bad PR line which backfired, while there is plenty of documentary evidence against Medieva.

Now don't take this wrongly, but I think that at any stage, the Diku folks making a public statement directly would lend a lot more weight especially to the Med situation. And speaking of the community, the situation of a Vryce stealing your code and running a healthy profit on it is quite a bit more replicable (and occurs a lot more often) than the next EverQuest.

What I mean by that is not that the fight against Med should be stopped. Or that it is meaningless. Or that we shouldn't care. Or that _you_ should care less.
What I mean is that at some point, it would be very much appreciated that the Diku team, having had other people devote themselves to defend them in public, ought to pay that effort back by being more present themselves on the issue.

If you feel I implied that in any way, my English must be getting a lot worse lately.

EDIT - First quote was too long and my reply didn't make any sense...

Ahh right, I misread my notes from an IP seminar. MS has registered, but the mark is (or was, at the time of the seminar) on the supplemental register rather than the principle one due to the fact that Windows is classified as a descriptive mark (the least legally defensible classification). What this does is simply allow them to sue in federal court, and have minor benefits if attempting to register the mark overseas. It does not provide the other benefits of a mark on the principle register--most importantly it does not serve as prima facie evidence of the validity of the mark. In fact, the fact that the mark is on the supplemental register is, in and of itself, a strong indication that the USPTO doubts the validity of the mark.

*edit*

Btw, Alastair, I seem to remember the members of the DIKU team releasing some very strong public statements re: Vryce/Medivia, up to and including something along the lines of "I left the MUD community because of him".

The reason you don't see any more of those is probably because it all happened what.. the better part of a decade ago?

I see them - private e-mails reposted on KaVir's site. Not public statements on the Diku site.

What point is there in fighting for someone who, to the vast majority, doesn't seem to care at all (anymore)? At some point or another, Diku has to take an open and public stance. At least an endorsement of those of their most vocal advocates.

If the story of Matt contacting them and offering money for them to conduct a legal action is true, the sad part here is not whether they accepted or refused, but whether they bothered to even reply with Thanks but No.

I'd go even further - yes, the overall positive support the community has given the Diku team in helping protect their IP is certainly both deserved and owed (both to the Diku team and the community itself).

However, I think that the case of _any_ single derivative (starting with Merc and Godwars) which has been ripped off would be immensely helped by Diku deciding to speak up themselves. And on a certain level, the moral obligation the dikurative community has to also defend Diku's own IP also creates, in my eyes, a reciprocal moral obligation towards all of those who have spent countless years defending them.

And if nowadays they can't be bothered anymore, it would be at least decent of them to donate the original Diku code to public domain, so that the derivative coders who still feel enough motivation may finally efficiently defend their own copyrights, and not remain with tied hands because the original copyright isn't being defended by the IP holders.

'Nuff said.

That would have absolutely zero impact on the legal implications of violating the license of a DIKU derivative. Either way, the creators of the derivative only own the modifications they made. Placing DIKU in the public domain would, if anything, actually weaken the overall case that can be made against Medivia.

Since I commented on the Achaea area that sounded a lot like a Wheel of Time phrase ("Aran'rhiod" or similar):

"Arianrhod" (note the movement of the "i") is a British isles goddess (moon/stars/night).

Stilton