Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Setekh on November 05, 2003, 07:52:58 pm
-
Okay, guys. Some of you may be familiar with the work Fractux is doing on making a full install download available for FS2 Open - basically meaning not just the EXE, but the whole shebang required to run the SCP-version of FS2. I'm referring to this:
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,18454.0.html
Anyway, I emailed Dakota from FilePlanet to see if he was interested in making something of this. Here's his reply.
[q]To: "'Eddie Woo'"
Subject: RE: A feature: full download of FreeSpace 2 Open
Hi Setekh,
Thanks for your e-mail. I was actually not familiar with the efforts to update FreeSpace 2. This is an impressive and exciting project. I would be happy to host the file and promote it like crazy on the front page of FilePlanet and in our weekly newsletters. I'll do everything I can to make sure that the 8-10 million monthly visitors to FilePlanet know all about it. :-)
I do have a few questions for you. First, can you point me to the license agreement for the source code? I'm sure you guys have thought all this through, but I want to at least glance at the license to be sure that the distribution would be legal. Second, when do you think the final version will be ready for release? And third, would you be willing to let FilePlanet Subscribers beta test it before the final release? This would give me a reason to promote the release even more, and give a little perk to the guys who pay for the bandwidth. I can give you and your team complementary accounts, naturally.
Darren L. Tabor
Executive Director, Subscription Services[/q]
On the note of a 'final' version, I'm not sure how to break to him that this will remain an ongoing project for quite some time. As for the Subcribers deal, I think we owe it to them (ie. GameSpy), since they provide this all for us free and are about to give us a huge publicity smack, to let them do what they like with that. And the license agreement - well, that's where I need your help. Can someone dig it up for me? Cheers. :)
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Second, when do you think the final version will be ready for release?
LOL!!! :D
So, when if the final going to be ready?
Non joke, this is cool that he is will to put it up as long as everything is legal...
-
Interesting.
The licence agreement part is a bit "iffy" though. I don't know if there's any provision for distributing the actual content of the game with the source code, except for the clause on the EULA that says you can copy it to your friends, and I don't really think that this stuff would apply to it being mass distributed by a huge site like Gamespy.
-
That was my thought, Styxx.
-
This would be cool and get the project world exposure, and possibly lead to the "Project" that we all dream of. :)
-
even a more important reason to get a descent read me written. If we go ahead with this the SCP forum will be flooded with idiotic newbie questions like can we get the original movies to play or how do I get h T&L to work.
-
Indeed. Doesn't make things any better that neither V nor Interplay will really take responsibility for the rights. Bugger.
-
Originally posted by Liberator
This would be cool and get the project world exposure, and possibly lead to the "Project" that we all dream of. :)
Are you making reference to a Freespace 3: Another Great War
-
FreeSpace3: The Lost Legacy sounds cooler... make contact with the Ancients, blablalbah :p
-
We should ask the guys who own the rights.... if only we knew who that was...
-
FreeSpace3: Get our Collective Asses Handed to us by the Shivans Again
-
Hmmm, GE... did you get anywhere with your inquiries at Interplay? Or was that someone else? Have you tried email a proper V employee?
Originally posted by DragonClaw
FreeSpace3: The Lost Legacy sounds cooler... make contact with the Ancients, blablalbah :p
Nothing with the word 'Legacy' in it, if you please. :lol:
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Nothing with the word 'Legacy' in it, if you please. :lol:
Is there a specific reason for this that I'm not aware of at this current point in time?
-
Freespace3: The answer is 42.
and as for 'final version' :lol: :lol:
-
Originally posted by DragonClaw
Is there a specific reason for this that I'm not aware of at this current point in time?
You're better off not knowing, DC. ;)
Anyway, can anyone find the official legal statement that was issued with the FS2 source code when it was released by V? I need to have a gander at it...
-
Originally posted by Setekh
You're better off not knowing, DC. ;)
Anyway, can anyone find the official legal statement that was issued with the FS2 source code when it was released by V? I need to have a gander at it...
Actually I'm not better off.
They say, anticipation of knowing is half the fun of actually knowing, but I do not go by that, how should I say this, conception, of fun :p
Tell, even if by PM :p
-
Here's the thread that Todd paid attention to, over on VW.
http://www.hard-light.net/vwbb/showthread.php?threadid=9490
In response to the emails from Interplay, saying that they no longer had the rights:
Originally posted by Todd:
Anyone at Interplay who starts an email with "Dear Gamer" obviously has no idea what's going on :)
I don't either, though. But at least I'll admit it. I have no idea if Interplay really ditched the rights nor not. And if so who now has them.
So I guess it's a waiting game... we post what we can and see who mails the 'cease and desist' order. ;)
-
Well, this is pretty exciting to hear :)
I know I'm pretty new here, and the work I'm doing putting this together doesn't really rely on me at all.
Now that I've learnt all about the installer, and gotten it working and been testing it like mad, putting the whole package together is technically in this respect, very easy.
The two major things to sort out are:
1. the legal issues.
2. What content is actually going to go in to it to represent what you guys have been working so diligently at.
I'm pretty new around here, so i know you guys have a much better idea of what you want to see than I do.
What I need to do is know what's the best way of coordinating any of this.
Also, here's what I dug up. This is the readme from the source code release:
Copyright (C) Volition, Inc. 1999. All rights reserved.
All source code herein is the property of Volition, Inc. You may not sell
or otherwise commercially exploit the source or things you created based on the
source.
4/20/02 : Added very basic windowed D3D mode to help those who don't have access to 2 monitors
for Glide debugging. Hooked it in as the -window commandline parameter.
4/21/02 : Removed updatelauncher, stamper, movieplayer, autorun, fs2launch projects.
4/21/02 : Added some stubs to Pofview to get it compiling.
4/21/02 : Added stubs to Nebedit to get it compiling. Added Nebedit_running to ensure software mode startup.
4/21/02 : Added stubs to fonttool to get it compiling.
4/21/02 : Added stubs to AC to get it compiling.
4/21/02 : Hacked out movieplayer and all references to it.
4/21/02 : Hacked out amd 3d-now specific stuff.
4/21/02 : Hacked out PXO code.
4/22/02 : Removed stamper stuff. Cleaned out remaining unused files.
4/22/02 : Final pass checking all builds.
4/24/02 : Added word statistics for "hack" and "fixme" at the request of jefff.
4/24/02 : Added more notes to guided_tour.txt
Now, that doesn't tell us much at all, and it only relates to the source code.
The readme that comes with the game has a section called "Legal Stuff" but that won;t apply anymore since the rights have changed.
THis is a section from the original readme
The Software, including, without limitation, all code, data structures,
characters, images, sounds, text, screens, game play, derivative works and
all other elements of the Software may not be copied, resold, rented,
leased, distributed (electronically or otherwise), used on a pay-per-play,
coin-op or other for-charge basis, or for any commercial purpose. Any
permissions granted herein are provided on a temporary basis and can be
withdrawn by Interplay Productions at any time. All rights not expressly
granted are reserved.
then some blable about online play...
then
Acceptance of License Terms. By downloading or acquiring and then retaining
this Software, you assent to the terms and restrictions of this limited
license. If you acquired the Software and do not accept the terms of this
limited license, you must return the Software together with all packaging,
manuals and other material contained therein to the store where you acquired
the Software for a full refund and if you downloaded the Software, you must
delete it.
Copyright Information
---------------------
FreeSpace 2 (c) 1999 by Volition, Inc. All rights reserved.
Portions (c) 1999 Interplay Productions. All rights reserved.
FreeSpace 2, Interplay, the Interplay Logo, and "By Gamers. For Gamers." are
trademarks of Interplay Productions. Windows(r) 95 is a registered trademark
of Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Exclusively licensed and
distributed by Interplay Productions. All other trademarks are the property
of their respective owners.
But once again, this is from 1999, and if interplay doesn't hold the rights to any of this, then...
:confused:
-
Oh yeah, and considering the statement
"All source code herein is the property of Volition, Inc. You may not sell
or otherwise commercially exploit the source or things you created based on the
source."
would that not allow FIleplanet to keep the original release for subscribers only since they are, in a way, profiting from it?
Man, where's a cheap lawyer when you need one.. :D
-
Thanks very much, Fractux. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. :)
It's time for me to go on an email spree... get to the bottom of this, who's got the rights and what we can do with FreeSpace. Volition and Interplay, here I come. :drevil:
-
Originally posted by Styxx
Interesting.
The licence agreement part is a bit "iffy" though. I don't know if there's any provision for distributing the actual content of the game with the source code, except for the clause on the EULA that says you can copy it to your friends, and I don't really think that this stuff would apply to it being mass distributed by a huge site like Gamespy.
Well technically because of FS2's availability at the Underdogs it is under mass distribution at this moment.
The only problem I see is the fileplanet subscriber's getting a beta version when you're not supposed to commercially exploit the source code. The subscription servers is under a definate legal grey area...
-
Yeah, I think the Subscriber thing would fall under "otherwise commercially exploit". :doubt:
-
Sandwich posted about this back several months ago... the "make copies to give to your friends" phrase appeared in the game installation but not the readme. I'll have to go dig something up.
-
I'm fully aware of that clause - in fact, here it is:
[q]You may make copies of the Software for your personal noncommercial home entertainment use and to give to friends and acquaintances on a no cost noncommercial basis. This limited right to copy the Software expressly excludes any copying or distribution of the Software on a commercial basis, including, without limitation, bundling the product with any other product or service and any give away of the Software in connection with another product or service.[/q]
But note that last bit...
[q]This limited right to copy the Software expressly excludes... any give away of the Software in connection with another product or service.[/q]
That definitely excludes the Fileplanet subscribers, because they pay for that. I don't know if it excludes Fileplanet altogether.
-
Originally posted by Fractux
Oh yeah, and considering the statement
"All source code herein is the property of Volition, Inc. You may not sell
or otherwise commercially exploit the source or things you created based on the
source."
This comment is at the top of every source code file in the freespace project.
-
just, explaine that we are constantly giveing out beta copys at the forums, I supose just giveing out a email to those subscribed when ever we have a new beta redy for testing would be OK wouldn't it?
we may have to do something like, make all of our own interface art, ships weapon effects and campaine, if this is our only recorse we can do it, and there is nothing Interplay can do to stop us, if its all our origonal artwork becase were not distributing there material and were not distributeing there game, if we were to make FSO somehow incompatable with origonal FS (as in changed the names of a few key peices of interface art) then we could distribute our own set of art without haveing to wory about Interplay saying we were distributeing a crack for FS
-
Make all of our own art... holy crap, now that would be something to be reckoned with. :eek2: Good point on the crack thing, but damn man, that is huge. That would take us years.
-
there is something like 1178 peices of interface art, we have at least 100 artist on this board capable of makeing something equivilent to 90% of the exsisting interface art, that means everyone would just have to make little over 10 peices of art, most of it insainly simple things like a red line runing half way down a 32X32 pcx file, actualy if we saved it all in jpeg or targa that would make it incompatable with origonal FS but playable with FSopen (and actualy looking better)
the bigger problems I think we'd have would be something like the FS logo itself, how can we have FS without the FS logo, but if interplay owns the FS logo, we won't be able to distribute anything with the FS logo in it, therefore we'd need to come up with a new logo, maybe the HLP logo :D it is cool enough
-
That is quite true, and I would crack up for the HLP logo replacing the GTVA. :lol: But, dude... the missions, the models... wouldn't we logically have to replace those too?
-
in order to convince anyone to make a freespace 3 you would have to prove this to be insanly popular. NO GET AHEAD OF THEM SELVES.
-
Why don't we just call up Volition? They have a support line.
-
becase there responce will be, and I quote
"d'know"
-
really? Whats there number, I will call them tomorrow just to hear that.
-
i seem to remember it being quite easy to get V guys on the phone - but this was before THQ bought them
-
Well, since it can't be distributed commerically, make sure it remains a free download. We can't distribute the main campaign, so let's get s good fan-made campaign instead.
If they are really anal, then replace everything in there like it was mentioned above (but only as last resort) :D
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
just, explaine that we are constantly giveing out beta copys at the forums, I supose just giveing out a email to those subscribed when ever we have a new beta redy for testing would be OK wouldn't it?
we may have to do something like, make all of our own interface art, ships weapon effects and campaine, if this is our only recorse we can do it, and there is nothing Interplay can do to stop us, if its all our origonal artwork becase were not distributing there material and were not distributeing there game, if we were to make FSO somehow incompatable with origonal FS (as in changed the names of a few key peices of interface art) then we could distribute our own set of art without haveing to wory about Interplay saying we were distributeing a crack for FS
It doesn't matter if there is all original artwork or not, if it is based on the FS sourcecode the liscense agreement applies.
As stated before since FS2 is already on the Underdogs, the SCP being on Fileplanet for download should not be an issue except for Gamespy's wanting beta versions for subscribers only. Since that is commercially exploiting the code, it is in violation of the sourcecode liscense agreement.
-
V owns the rights to the game engine, Interplay owns rights to the media
new media == not FS, therefore Interplay can't say ****
however I doubt Interplay will even remember they own (or once owned) any rights on FS, unless we get like 2,000,000 hits a day or something and make national news, ect...
-
So what if Fileplanet keeps this as a free download? Would it still be commercial distribution?
-
no more than any other file they host, but then again hosting files is a busness to them
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Nothing with the word 'Legacy' in it, if you please. :lol:
Freespace: The Lost Leg, I See. :D
Originally posted by Setekh
[q]This limited right to copy the Software expressly excludes... any give away of the Software in connection with another product or service.[/q]
That definitely excludes the Fileplanet subscribers, because they pay for that. I don't know if it excludes Fileplanet altogether.
All that means, though, is that we cannot allow GS/FP to provide the FULL GAME "ISO" (or whatever) to the FilePlanet subscribers preferentially. Nothing about the source code.
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Freespace: The Lost Leg, I See. :D
Well, that's better... I guess... :p
[q]Daniel Jackson: Well, I've completed the translation... the inscription says "Place of our Legacy". Either that, or "A Piece of our Leg", but the first... makes more sense.[/q]
Originally posted by Sandwich
All that means, though, is that we cannot allow GS/FP to provide the FULL GAME "ISO" (or whatever) to the FilePlanet subscribers preferentially. Nothing about the source code.
Hmm, that's what I'm inclined to believe also. I'll have to have email him back and tell him this.
-
I think a definitive clarification could come only from :v:
maybe if they don't replay you could try to send a mail to daveb?
-
Originally posted by Ace
As stated before since FS2 is already on the Underdogs, the SCP being on Fileplanet for download should not be an issue except for Gamespy's wanting beta versions for subscribers only. Since that is commercially exploiting the code, it is in violation of the sourcecode liscense agreement.
I don't think that even that would apply. The source code isn't being commercially exploited. It's still available for download here for free.
The game itself may be available for subscribers only at first but again that is available on HotU and has recieved no complaints either.
All GS are offering is an easy way for their subscribers to download something that is available elsewhere. If that counts as commercial exploitation GS would probably have to pull all the demos from their subscriber servers too since they would also be commercially exploited.
Besides we do have an e-mail from an Interplay employee who states that they don't own the rights. If Interplay do complain we can always use that to say that we tried to contact them about this and got told that it was nothing to do with them.
-
As far as the "exclusive code for subscribers" thing goes, I'm inclined to tell them where they can stick their subscribers. The BF1942 or HL communities may be so large that they have to conform to that kind of thing - but we're about reaching people and spreading FS2 around the world, not selling out to FilePlanet simply because they've taken notice of us.
My opinion? The support would be fantastic, but we shouldn't compromise ourselves for that support alone.
-
Good opinion. If the allow it to be downloaded by everybody go for it, if not we are going to have to stick to what we have now.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
As far as the "exclusive code for subscribers" thing goes, I'm inclined to tell them where they can stick their subscribers. The BF1942 or HL communities may be so large that they have to conform to that kind of thing - but we're about reaching people and spreading FS2 around the world, not selling out to FilePlanet simply because they've taken notice of us.
My opinion? The support would be fantastic, but we shouldn't compromise ourselves for that support alone.
If I've understood things correctly it sounds like they are mearly asking that the subscribers get exclusive access to the Full FS2 + Source Code package for a couple of months before they throw it open to all the people who haven't paid.
It wouldn't affect anyone in the established community at all and would only mean a short delay between us getting an influx of newbies from GS subscribers and a second influx from everyone else. Having it on GS would also mean we would hit a much wider userbase than if we simply put it up somewhere else and pimped it.
Originally posted by ubermetroid
Good opinion. If the allow it to be downloaded by everybody go for it, if not we are going to have to stick to what we have now.
Ask yourself how many people came here cause of the HotU download?
If we for instance put up the download on Swooh and pimped it quite heavily we probably wouldn't get many more people than the HotU release got us. A full release on GS on the other hand could get us hundreds of new members. I don't consider a wait of a couple of weeks or months between the subscriber and public release to high a price to pay for that.
-
to be honest, i don't care what gamespy does. i'd give them all we've got on the liscence, and then just let them get on with it. we should however, make a newbie forum or two before the release, just to be sure. also, be sure to note the Linux and Mac releases.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
If I've understood things correctly it sounds like they are mearly asking that the subscribers get exclusive access to the Full FS2 + Source Code package for a couple of months before they throw it open to all the people who haven't paid.
It wouldn't affect anyone in the established community at all and would only mean a short delay between us getting an influx of newbies from GS subscribers and a second influx from everyone else. Having it on GS would also mean we would hit a much wider userbase than if we simply put it up somewhere else and pimped it.
True, the trouble is the SCP is highly interactive at this stage. People make changes, release the beta builds and the rest of us try it and say what we think. I've no idea if this is the case but GS might suddenly say "no releasing ***t to the public untill you give it to subscribers first" which would mean none of us could test it unless we were actually working on the project.... effectively all the community would have to be signed up as beta testers so they could get around having to wait for official releases.
Of course, I've no idea if that's the case - it just might happen.
-
I doubt very much that is what they mean. If it is we tell them it's far too high a price.
Much more likely is that they want the download of Fractux's version with the installer to be theirs only for a couple of months. I can understand their reasoning for that and it seems reasonable if we're going to ask for 1.5Gig of their server and the bandwidth for people to download it that GS can make some hay from it too.
Besides if they try it we simply explain that the SCP need community interaction in this way to squash bugs. Limiting the SCP would only serve to hurt their own subscribers as much as everyone else.
Besides how could they stop anyone releasing builds on VWBB? :D
-
I skimmed through the thread, here's what I think...
Get to 3.6 (with multiplayer), finish the media VP for that release, and then put it up for download. Multiplayer MUST be included in the GS release, or else most people will just play it and forget about it.
My $.02 :)
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
Get to 3.6 (with multiplayer), finish the media VP for that release, and then put it up for download. Multiplayer MUST be included in the GS release, or else most people will just play it and forget about it.
second!
But you have to get HT&L working too! HT&L would be a godsend for ppl with slower pcs. :nod:
and simplifyting the command line functions...
-
You may make copies of the Software for your personal noncommercial home entertainment use and to give to friends and acquaintances on a no cost noncommercial basis. [/i]This limited right to copy the Software expressly excludes any copying or distribution of the Software on a commercial basis, including, without limitation, bundling the product with any other product or service and any give away of the Software in connection with another product or service.
The bit highlighted is the key, as long as there is a way to obtain it from the same source for no cost it should be okay. Thusly, it would have to made available simultaneously to both subscribers and non-subscribers. If they grouse about it, we'll explain it to them, failing that I dunno.
-
Actually, guys, I think the whole argument over compromising to FP's subscribers is moot. I don't think it is legal at all - it can't be made available to people through a paid service, no matter what. I'm writing an email now highlighting that point and I'll send it off to GS.
-
Sweet, all my points were just idle worrying for the sake of it (you can't be to careful)...
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Actually, guys, I think the whole argument over compromising to FP's subscribers is moot. I don't think it is legal at all - it can't be made available to people through a paid service, no matter what. I'm writing an email now highlighting that point and I'll send it off to GS.
Actually, the question is whether the FP subscribers pay money for the unlimited bandwidth in downloading, or in special and early perks, such as getting files a week before everyone else - or both. I think it's both.
Therefore, if that is the case, there should be no problem in allowing FP subscribers to download the file, just as long as it was available to non-subscribers at the same time. This way the only advantage of being a subscriber (as far as FS downloads is concerned) would be the extra bandwidth, not early and exclusive access.
-
It's definitely both, and you're spot on with your second point. Exclusive access is the sticking point.
-
was there press reales before Source code was released? or anything about lisence
because i could check them and think would it be legal
because well i know lot about how licenses work etc.bla bla
-
Yeah... I wasn't properly present when the actual code release happened. Anyone else give a hand?
-
there were a press release, IIRC. dunno where I saw it, tho.
-
This is great news. Will the 'full' installation include the MVE->AVI converted movies as well?
I'm definitely in agreement with WMCoolmon. As great as FS2's single player is, it's the multiplayer that people who'll be downloading this (think... broadband users who like games) will want. And the current bugs with HT&L need stomping as well. The amount of new blood to the community could be huge if this succeeds.
Have you guys also considered using GSI's newsletters and so on to advertise for programmers willing to contribute to the SCP?
-
Also, make sure you know what GS are going to do once they get it, cause you never know, they may **** us over
-
So what about us??? Will WE, the Freespace community, that has given so much time to the game, be able to still download the new exes, as soon as they're released?
I don't think it would be fair to screw us over, and make us get everything a week or a month later. What's the situation with that? Will we still be able to download the EXEs as soon as they're released, from the HLP forum?
-
Of course we will. Steak already said that putting up stuff on the subscriber servers first wouldn't work.
-
and if they're like "you can only release builds when 'blah blah blah'" then they'll get the middle finger from us
-
Exactly.
-
look, if gamespy ****s us up, will migrate to the VWBB, and just keep some **** here, and make it look like we're active.
-
Noyou just make sure you know exactly what they plan to do about every thing before you give them a single thing.
Its common sense really
-
well, you can never be to sure. and for hosting, i wouldn't mind mygrating, really.
-
Im a bit late, but what if the subscribers got the initial release early, but after that, the new EXEs were just released publically?
-
You may make copies of the Software for your personal noncommercial home entertainment use and to give to friends and acquaintances on a
[glow=red]no cost noncommercial basis[/i][/u][/glow].
This limited right to copy the Software expressly excludes any copying or distribution of the Software on a commercial basis, including, without limitation, bundling the product with any other product or service and any give away of the Software in connection with another product or service.
-
Indeed. Even if public users will get the downloads later, part of what the subscribers pay for is early exclusives. I am certain that this would be a breach of the copyright license.
-
we don't know if that many people are going to interested in FS2 much less FS2_OPEN or I should say the SCP.
-
There will be quite a few people, methinks. There aren't all that many free space-sims available (legally :p) online.
-
Considering that I've seen posts from 30-40 people using the hobbled HotU version I'm sure we'd see more for a full install. And that's just posts. More people would be downloading the game but not saying anything for months if ever.
-
there is way to release it legaly but that one is very hard to cross
-
What's that, HIG?
-
i dig more because if i say it now it could more harm than good
so i searching more so when i say that way it's legaly fine release FS2
-
Hmmmmm... it seems to me that what subscribers are paying for is membership of GameSpy, early access to software is a 'perk' as well as higher download speeds. I would have suspected the main problem would be if the download was only available to members on an exclusive basis, which it wouldn't be, simply earlier. I just wish there was a way we could get [V]'s opinion on this.
Flipside :D
-
just go to VWBB and make stupid thread what [V] is doing and someone answers;)
-
I'm pretty sure the Subscribers thing falls under the 'packaging with another service' clause.
But all of this is irrelevant unless we find out who owns the rights. THEY will be the ones to raise a fuss. If we can find out, we should talk it over with them, and get the lowdown on all this. At the very least we may be able to convince them to re-release a white label 'bargain bin' edition, with maybe an inside-cover insert advertising the SCP, like they did with PXO on the original game box.
-
Originally posted by Galemp
But all of this is irrelevant unless we find out who owns the rights. THEY will be the ones to raise a fuss.
I say we just do whatever the heck we see the Liscence Agreement as saying, and screw the detailed uber-legalese. We've made efforts to find out who has the rights... Interplay, V, Titus - nobody seems to give a hoot about our puny little irrelevant questions enough to bother to answer.
Who knows, putting FS up on GS may actually bring the owner of the rights out of the woodwork finally. :D
-
Well at that, we can just take it all down and try and reach an agreement. Kinda hard to randomly fire off requests if we don't know who's supposed recieve them. If they're not interested it's not our fault.
-
Originally posted by Todd Miller over at the VWBB
As for the FS rights, its a mixed bag. The way I understand it, Interplay owns the rights to publish FreeSpace games. Volition owns the rights to most of the remaining stuff you'd want to own rights to. So, if Volition makes an FS game, it _must_ be published by Interplay. That ain't gonna happen, because Volition is owned by THQ and _all_ Volition games will be published by THQ. Its not an uncommon situation, but certainly a confusing one. Basically Interplay can't do a real FS game without V, and V can't do a real FS game without Interplay. Unless of course one of the parties buys the other's rights, but who knows if that'll ever happen - I wouldn't count on it tho.
Dunno about the actual legality of the release, but I think that the highlighted bit will be significant in the "Rebuild everything" argument. As far as I understand from this post, if we want to use Deimoses and Orions and FS Interface, we need to secure Vs permission, which, I'd say, would be easier than securing interplays...
-
Well, after mulling over this thread, I've finally written up and sent off this mammoth of an email.
[q]To: Darren Tabor
Subject: RE: A feature: full download of FreeSpace 2 Open
Darren,
I'm overjoyed that you'd like to support our humble little project. We really think that once people will have a fast and easy way to download FreeSpace 2 Open, things will really take off (they're already kinda doing that right now, but everyone second member who's registered recently has asked "Where can I download FS2, I want to play FS2!").
Okay, answers for you. The source code itself doesn't have much of a license agreement, but there are two important legal texts that you will want to look at. The first is from the EULA agreement of FreeSpace 2, which covers the release of all the game data (eg. missions, models, textures, etc.):
You may make copies of the Software for your personal noncommercial home entertainment use and to give to friends and acquaintances on a no cost noncommercial basis. This limited right to copy the Software expressly excludes any copying or distribution of the Software on a commercial basis, including, without limitation, bundling the product with any other product or service and any give away of the Software in connection with another product or service.
The second chunk prefaces each file in the source code release, and covers the release of the code itself.. If you'd like to download the code release (to verify this), you can grab it from the Descent Developer Network (http://www.freespace-2.com/ddn/sources/freespace2, at the bottom of the page). Here's the text:
Copyright (C) Volition, Inc. 1999. All rights reserved.
All source code herein is the property of Volition, Inc. You may not sell or otherwise commercially exploit the source or things you created based on the source.
Now, this concerns me because it addresses your third question. I've bolded the important parts. I'm willing to let Subscribers beta test before final release, but on inspection of these texts, I'm not sure that's possible. I understand that everyone will be able to download our package after the Subscibers have had their initial exclusive period, but I gather that this exclusive period is one of the privileges for which Subscribers pay. If that is so, then I think that would constitute "give away of the Software in connection with another product or service" - that being FilePlanet Subscription. So I'm going to have to reluctantly answer that I do not think such an arrangement would conform to the licensing agreement.
As for the second question of yours: when will a final version be ready for release? Well, with regards to the game data (as aforementioned, meaning missions, models, textures, etc.), the final version is ready. No more alterations will be made to that. With regards to the code, however, we plan to continue working on it for as long as we have ideas for what we want to add to the engine. We offer milestone builds for download at HLP, so if anyone downloads the package and wants to keep up to date with the latest releases, they need only visit HLP occasionally and download them as they're released.
Thanks again for your kind offer, I hope we can still work something out.
Cheers,
Eddie 'Setekh' Woo
Hard Light Productions - http://3dap.com/hlp - Bringing Modders Together[/q]
-
I've just thought - are we allowed to package the original [V] launcher into this (or can we build a new one that does all the stuff that the original's did, plus have the SCP features in)? A friendly interface is still essential if we want to market this to newbies...
-
You're definitely right about the friendly interface being essential. But I don't think the original [V] launcher can be stuck in - wasn't the code for that excluded from the release?
-
well, then we have some work for RT.
-
What does RT need to include still? The Joystick code is already being tested. What's left?
-
In the launcher? Something to actually *save* the settings instead of having to set them every time manually would be high on my list.
A front end isn't necessary, I don't think, although it'd be a nice touch.
-
I believe that is also on the cards too :D
-
I can't find it on FilePlanet. o.o'
-
Because it's not there:)
-
Originally posted by SadisticSid
In the launcher? Something to actually *save* the settings instead of having to set them every time manually would be high on my list.
The settings are saved for me. Are you using the latest version of the launcher (3.0 - with joystick support)? I remember a build that didn't save my settings and that was annoying.
-
I think u should have also mentioned to gamespy that currently there is a gray area on who actually owns the rights to the game. As such, there could be a more recent liscense or copyright agreement that would null and void any previous agreements.
Gamespy is a big boy, you could request from them some help in finding the ultimate owner of the rights to FS2. Let them use their million dollar company to do the research and find answers. They will definitely have more pull on finding the information than some kids on a website who love the game (I don't mean offense, just that's how they'll take us as serious when compared to a company).
This is one opportunity for FS2 and SCP that you can't miss out on, guys. It sounds like you basically gave up on the fileplanet idea. I say you write back to him and explain it to them and see if they can help in getting answers so they can both benefit from this.
-
Originally posted by J3Vr6
It sounds like you basically gave up on the fileplanet idea. I say you write back to him and explain it to them and see if they can help in getting answers so they can both benefit from this.
Dude... go have a look at my big quote a few posts up. :)
-
Dude, I did and that's why I posted. You really don't know if there's a revised liscensing or copyright agreement when the copyrights exchanged hands to whoever has them now, so most of what you wrote to him could be wrong in regards to the items you referenced, from 1999.
I still say you write back to him and ask for help in finding the ultimate owner of FS2, so you can finally get to the bottom of EVERYTHING (like the copyright info). Once you finally have a contact for the actual copyright owners, then there's so many different avenues you can take (by contacting the company who own's the rights of FS2 directly, you can get more information on the copyright agreement or see if they can release anything to you).
Either way, it wouldn't hurt and potentially is a win-win situation. If Gamespy is interesting in hosting FS2 and think they can get a boost promoting it, then it would be in their best interest in getting to the bottom of it. They don't want to host something that could get them into legal trouble. And we want that info cuz there's a million things we can do w/ knowing the owners of Fs2's rights.
Anyway, just my 2 cents.
-
Originally posted by J3Vr6
I still say you write back to him and ask for help in finding the ultimate owner of FS2, so you can finally get to the bottom of EVERYTHING (like the copyright info). Once you finally have a contact for the actual copyright owners, then there's so many different avenues you can take (by contacting the company who own's the rights of FS2 directly, you can get more information on the copyright agreement or see if they can release anything to you).
Oops, I understand now. That's the wrong email I pointed you to. My point is, I've already done just as you described - I want to get to the bottom of this as much as you do, and I think that GS is as good a way as any that's come along in the past couple of years to do so. :nod:
-
Oh, ok, sweet. Hopefully they'll get to the bottom of it.
-
I say we announce the free distribution of Freespace 2 on CNN, Fox News, and BBC, no strings attached. The owners of the rights are sure to come out of the woodwork like that. :D
-
Heh, they surely will. And their next breath would be used to take down every little thing you guys have done here I think.
-
Originally posted by J3Vr6
Heh, they surely will. And their next breath would be used to take down every little thing you guys have done here I think.
then we'll just say they misunderstood.
"we didn't say we were going to distribute it for free, we said we wanted to distribute it for free."
-
lol, that excuse probably worked in elementary school, but not in big business. All they have to do is read the boards or subpeona whatever site holds these boards to see the jokes as true intentions.
-
the idea for finding out who owns the rights is simple, start selling the game, and see who sues your ass.
now, we need a target drone to start selling. please step forward.
/steps backward.
seriously though, what is the status on this?
-
wait a second.. there is something in the law about if the owner of the copyright cannot be located.... *scurries off to check some things*
-
I think we can declair the Copyright in a state of adandonment
an article dealing with trademark and copyright abandonment (speciallly radio here, but it's general copyright/trademark info)
http://www22.brinkster.com/paradio/pages1/abandon.htm
Since there have been some dogmatic assertions that copyrights cannot be abandoned, the following excerpt from Nimmer on Copyright, a favorite authority used by the courts, is given:
§13.06 The Defense of Abandonment of Copyright
Abandonment1 of the copyright by the plaintiff or his predecessor in interest obviously constitutes an effective defense in an infringement action. The plaintiff's claim of ownership2 is thereby countered. Despite imprecise usage in some of the cases, abandonment must be distinguished from forfeiture of copyright.2.1 The latter may occur as a consequence of publication without proper copyrignt notice3 and is effectuated by operation of law regardless of the intent of the copyright owner.4
Abandonment occurs only if there is an intent by the copyright proprietor to surrender rights in his work.5 There is, moreover, strong authority holding that an overt act evidencing such an intent is necessary to establish abandonment.6 Such an overt act was held to have occurred by reason of the plaintiff's having destroyed its only copy of the work.7 (Pacific & S. Co. v. Duncan, 572 F. Supp 1186 (ND Ga. 1983), affirmed 744 F. 2d. 1490 (11th Cir., 1989), cert. denied 471 US 1004 (1983))
Nimmer does not support the idea that merely failing to object to unauthorized use constitutes abandonment, but it appears to be a part of the thinking of corporation law departments.
........
Corpus Juris Secundum, a legal encyclopedia found in many of the larger public libraries, and case citations are given in the footnotes referred to.
1. Abandonment of property or of a right necessitates the concurrence of two elements; an intention to relinquish or give up such property or right, and an external act, or an omission to act, by which such intention is carried into effect (1 CJS §4, n.52)
2. If the thing alleged to have been abandoned is shown to have been considered worthless by its owner and by the general opinion of the community, the presumption that the owner did not intend to abandon it cannot arise, and conduct on the part of the owner inconsistent with an intention to continue to the claim the property or right may in fact raise a presumption or inference of abandonment (1 CJS §9a, n. 35, 36)
3. A abandonment of property or a right divests the title and ownership of the owner as fully and completely as would a conveyance (1 CJS §12, n. 71)
The FreeSpace trademark is considered abandoned under US Law as it has not been used comercically for three years
http://www.wyattfirm.com/useit.html
(more to follow)
-
Interesting.... if FS2 with SCP build could be legally downloaded, I would surely advertise it on every single forum I visit :nod:
-
me too, and i'd start bruning even more FS2 disks. i can fit all of it on one disk though, just without mve cutscenes. and perhaps missing hi res art.
-
Oh.. interplay is so burned
this information directly from the USPTO combined with their email saying they dont have the rights
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=hejtuv.2.3
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc&state=hejtuv.2.2
that puts them in de facto abandonment of the copyright!
-
so, :V: is free to make FS3?
and we are free to sell FS2, as long as we get permision from :V:?
-
But the fact that volition and interplay continue to have freespace websites open still indicates that it still has the trademark towards the public:
A corporate name may become abandoned through long nonuse even if the corporation still uses the name for payment of taxes, declaring dividends, etc., and still holds corporate papers under that name. If the corporate name is not used before the buying public, it is not being used in such a way that furnishes a basis for preventing similar use by others.
Since the name is still used "before the buying public" means that it technically isn't abandoned.
Plus, someone here mentioned a while back that schools were able to buy freespace 2 (cuz the company he works for was burning them), so that alone tells me that it's still not abandoned.
-
Plus the fact that you're mentioning trademarks (The freespace logo, etc) and not the intellectual property of what makes up the game, textures, etc.
-
IIRC :V: owns the rights to the data, Interplay only own(ed/s) the name.
-
J3Vr6: give documentation of that FreeSpace 2 purchase
yes they have them on the webpages - but unmaintained - as one legal site put it "simply locking a trademark in safety deposit box doesn't protect it" just like burrying it on Interplay's website, and an unmaintained [V] website
---
We do have permission from [V] to distribute the source code and anything derived as long as we don't charge, and Interplay says THEY DON'T OWN THE RIGHTS. If the copyright holder (according to the USPTO) says they don't own the copyrights that is clear intent to abandon the copyright.
no matter what other things they've done
-
kasperl is right - and we have V's permission, and the origional TaC clickthrough's distribution conditions are still the valid ones
interplay no longer owns the trademark, and we have permission from V to distribute.
I say we're ok to go -- i'd defer to professional lawyers opinions before doing it though, just to make sure i'm right
-
Yeah, I'd definitely consult an attorney before doing anything. A couple of kids behind their computers playing legal aid isn't going to hold up in court if something goes wrong.
Hopefully we'll be able to distribute freespace 2 to everyone and post it where ever we want.
Btw, Kazan, here's the link to that post Start Dragon said about his company burning the games for schools:
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,18491.0.html
-
Wait a minute, wait a minute.
Let me get this straight.
You are saying that...
After 5 years, the ONLY thing opposing the ENTIRE Freespace community from publishing their works, and getting real publicity for their stuff, has just been brushed aside?
Does anyone remember all the UT mods that went official? I can see Inferno and BWO doing that :D
Hell, if we got :V: on board, we could do FS3!
*is happy*
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Wait a minute, wait a minute.
Let me get this straight.
You are saying that...
After 5 years, the ONLY thing opposing the ENTIRE Freespace community from publishing their works, and getting real publicity for their stuff, has just been brushed aside?
Does anyone remember all the UT mods that went official? I can see Inferno and BWO doing that :D
Hell, if we got :V: on board, we could do FS3!
*is happy*
Not true. Legal gobbeldigook aside, the real rules still apply -
"If it's not by [V], it's not FS3."
Learn it. Know it. Live it.
-
10-29-2003?! that's well after interplay said they no longer had the rights! WTF
maybe someone else knows what we know! mwahahaha
-
That link u posted about USPTO still showed that interplay had the rights and that it was still "live." Maybe I read that wrong, but it still showed they had it.
-
yes it shows that it's "live" -- the thing is someone has to tell the USPTO that interplay has abandonded the rights
but that's only really neccesarry if interplay tried to sue us/gamespy for posting the game -- their intent to abandon is more than enough defense in court
-
Su-Tehp's a lawyer...
*goes to PM him*
-
nice :D
-
wow... I just read the whole thread and there's some pretty exciting stuff going down. :yes: to Kazan for finding that (c) abandonment loophole thing.
-
Originally posted by Galemp
Su-tehp's a lawyer...
*goes to PM him*
Um... gleep!
Ok, I just read the entire thread (well, most of it, anyway, but I did read just about everything on the legal issues on this thread), but I want to remind all of you (especially Galemp) of some reasons of why I am hesitant to provide legal advice here: 1) I JUST graduated from law school; 2) I didn't study Intellectual Property law, except in only the most rudimentary of methods (i.e. just the VERY basics as part of my first-year Property law class, and that was almost three years ago) and I have absolutely NO experience whatsover in practicing Intellectual property law; and 3) I barely understand the the goals of the SCP project but have absolutely NO idea how it works.
*imitates Dr. McCoy's voice: "Dammit, Jim, I'm a lawyer, not a computer programmer!"*
All that being said, it DOES seem on the face of it that Kazan has a point: you might be able to make a good case that Interplay has abandoned the trademark. HOWEVER, keep in mind, that is not coming from ANY sort of legal analysis on my part; it's just what my legal instincts are telling me. (And in the law, the skill of slinging bullsh!t counts more than either analysis or instincts.)
The next step that I would recommend would be for someone who is involved and/or understands how the SCP project works to consult an IP (Intellectual Property) lawyer and explain the situation as detailed as possible. Since Steak seems to know the situation better than anyone, I would normally recommed him to do this. However, IIRC, Steak lives in Australia, not the USA, which makes any lawyer he consults at his home outside the jurisdiction of the USA, so said lawyer will also have to be well-versed in International IP law that is probably well outside his normal field of jurisdiction. This wouldn't make Steak's consultation useless by any means, just that it might be a bigger headache for him to consult a lawyer than it would for someone else involved in SCP who lives here in the USA.
Thus, I think Kazan would be a better choice to consult a lawyer. He lives here in the States, he came up with the idea that Interplay may have (deliberately or inadvertently) abandoned the trademark so he seems to have a good grasp of the legal issues involved, and he knows alot about the SCP and how it works.
As a result, I think Kazan would be our best candidate to consult an Intellectual property lawyer about the issues we're coming up against. However, I don't know if asking a lawyer about our situation is going to cost any money; I don't know if a prospective client is supposed to pay anything for the first consultation session he has with a lawyer. (That's how clueless I am about this biz. It's not like I'm going to become a solo practitioner anytime soon, for crissakes'. And only the most bizarre and unforseen whims of capricious fate could get me into IP law...)
Kazan, here is a website for looking up lawyers in the United States (look here (http://www.attorneylocate.com/)). Just select which state you live in (Iowa, right?) from the USA pull-down menu and look up the Intellectual Property lawyers. You're going to find a list of several IP lawyers, I expect.
I don't know if any of them will charge for a first consultation session, but at least this will give us a place to start.
EDIT: Okay, Kazan lives in Cedar rapids, Iowa. There's no IP lawyer selection for Cedar Rapids, so my next suggestion would be to look up the Products Liability lawyers; they might know about Intellectual Property disputes. Kazan, at the very least, you can e-mail one of them, explain the situation and ask if we might encounter any legal problems down the road. If they can't answer your question, ask them for a referral to another lawyer who can. Your talking/e-mailing themshouldn't cost anything, but ask if it does before you say anything, just in case.
The last thing I want to do is inadvertently stick you with a $200 consulting fee bill...:nervous:
-
actually i live in ames, i could theorectically ask the law department here ... /me hmms
good to know a lawyer thinks i have a case :D (even if it's not his speciality)
i've been watching legal issues for a long time now, and my older brother wanted to be a lawyer for a while so he got well versed, and him and I talk about intellectual stuff quite alot when we're around e/o so what one knows the other ends up knowing a lot about.
-
Originally posted by Su-tehp
*snip* This wouldn't make Steak's consultation useless by any means, just that it might be a bigger headache...
Woo... hoo! ;)
Thanks for your thoughts on the matter, Su. You found a lawyer yet, Kazan?
-
Last time I consulted a lawyer the initial consultation was free. Basically just heard the case and saw if I had a shot or not. Then he told me his fee if he was to take the case and we took it from there. And always try to negotiate, just cuz he's a lawyer doesn't mean he'll give u his lowest fee up front. My two cousins are lawyers, but criminal and immigration, not intellectual :(
Kazan: If you're in college, i'd say try going to the business department and ask one of the professor's that teaches business law, he might know something. If your school has a law school, even better :) professor's won't charge to give a student advice and he'll prob be able to give u a beter grasp of the law and even recommend one to you.
In any event, good luck and keep us posted on what you find out!
-
i could try to get a friend to ask his parents (one judge and one lawyer, IIRC) about this, but IIRC both of them are specialised in small cases like people sueing over garden fences placed wrong. if someone else has a better idea, i won;t bother him, since i don;t know him that well. but if you guys can;t find anything else, tell me, and i'll ask him.
-
mayby the fsf will help
They have at least good knowlage about IP low thanks the SCO v IBM case
www.gnu.org
-
Originally posted by kasperl
...but IIRC both of them are specialised in small cases like people sueing over garden fences placed wrong...
and i thought we sued like crazy.. unless this is a matter of feet/meters.
-
yeah, it's meters.
and i think damaga cases like people crashing into parked cars and stuff. basic civil ****, but all AFAIK and IIRC. i'll ask him monday if his parents know anything about that.
-
Originally posted by kasperl
yeah, it's meters.
and i think damaga cases like people crashing into parked cars and stuff. basic civil ****, but all AFAIK and IIRC. i'll ask him monday if his parents know anything about that.
This sounds like small claims law, the law's version of nickel and dime stuff, really. I'm just saying, is all.
-
that's what i mean, i'm just not so good in english law terms, or law terms in general.
-
Okay, an important update. Dakota replied me.
[q]To: "'Eddie Woo'"
Subject: RE: A feature: full download of FreeSpace 2 Open
Hi Eddie,
Thanks for taking the time to do all of that research. The information that you found answers almost all of my questions.
Based on the highlighted text, I honestly do not think there is an issue with offering the beta to a group of subscribers. The EULA prohibits users from selling the software or making the software a value-add for a larger retail product or service. It really doesn't address the situation where a group of subscribers is given the opportunity to beta test software before its free, public release. The beta test is not bundled with the subscription itself.
That being said, I don't want to try to talk you into something that you are not comfortable with. I'm happy to help you with the public release of FreeSpace 2 Open. We can post it to FilePlanet whenever you are ready. I would just ask that you give it to the FilePlanet team directly so we can add it to the main system. I try to keep a Zero Wait-Time on the hosted site system, and an 800 MB release would be too much for it to handle without creating wait-times.
BTW, one of our customer service team members sent me a link to the thread in your forums about possibly moving off the network. It would be a shame to see your team leave, but you are naturally free to leave at any time. We strive to make the network a good home for everyone. It is impossible to satisfy everyone's individual needs, however, so it is not uncommon for sites to move on and off the network. I would just take exception to the idea that GameSpy is a faceless corporate entity that is entirely consumed with profit. We do a ton of things that are purely for the benefit of gamers, from free website hosting to free mirroring of every gaming file submitted. J
Darren L. Tabor
Executive Director, Subscription Services
-------------------------------------------------------
Tel: 1 949 798 4206 Play Games - GameSpy.com
Fax: 1 949 798 4299 Technology - GameSpy.net
E: [email protected] Corporate - GameSpy.org
-------------------------------------------------------
GameSpy Industries - your gaming service provider.
18,000,000 installs, 18,000,000 monthly readers.
[/q]
-
Wohoo! :D If this is true, things are looking very good for FS2 and SCP.
My only problem is the fact that only subscribers get their hands on it. I hope this will chance sometime in the future?
-
Seems to me he doesn't comprehend that FSO will, essentially, always be a beta release. :p Yeah, we have EXE's being released every few months, but they aren't part of some package that Joe Nobody can download, run the install, and enjoy the FSO goodness. :-/
-
Originally posted by Lt.Cannonfodder
My only problem is the fact that only subscribers get their hands on it. I hope this will chance sometime in the future?
Dude? Subscribers aren't the only ones who get their hands on it - it's a delayed full-public release. Go read a few pages back if you haven't already. :)
Originally posted by Sandwich
Seems to me he doesn't comprehend that FSO will, essentially, always be a beta release. :p Yeah, we have EXE's being released every few months, but they aren't part of some package that Joe Nobody can download, run the install, and enjoy the FSO goodness. :-/
The whole reason I started this was because of Fractux's work a few weeks ago to make that exact thing possible... :) Remember? (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,18454.0.html)
-
Originally posted by Setekh
The whole reason I started this was because of Fractux's work a few weeks ago to make that exact thing possible... :) Remember? (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,18454.0.html)
Remember? How many times do you see me having posted in that thread, hmm? ;)
-
Hah, I looked at the wrong thread. Keep up, Mike. :D
-
Basically the subscribers get the beta of Fractux's work not the SCP's. Sounds reasonable to me.
They still get access to Fractux's FS2 Install before everyone else does and the SCP still gets to carry on their work unimpeded. They also get the latest stable build as part of the overall package. The rest of us still get to download it seperately.
Personally I think that Fractux's install alone is enough to keep the subscribers happy. Although it won't contain anything new the way he's working to bring everything together into one easy to use package is something worth having.
-
I think that having it available as a beta to subscribers, where they are aware that they should be reporting bug reports back to us, would be fine... same thing as if someone downloaded the beta from HLP. But once v1.0 is ready, it should be made available to both subscibers and non-subscribers simultaneously.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Basically the subscribers get the beta of Fractux's work not the SCP's. Sounds reasonable to me.
They still get access to Fractux's FS2 Install before everyone else does and the SCP still gets to carry on their work unimpeded. They also get the latest stable build as part of the overall package. The rest of us still get to download it seperately.
Personally I think that Fractux's install alone is enough to keep the subscribers happy. Although it won't contain anything new the way he's working to bring everything together into one easy to use package is something worth having.
I concur. What we really need to have is a very stable build to put into the Fractux version. 3.6, I guess. ;)
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Dude? Subscribers aren't the only ones who get their hands on it - it's a delayed full-public release. Go read a few pages back if you haven't already. :)
I'm not sure if I get this right. So GameSpy would host Fractux's version (for subscribers). When will everyone else get their hands on it?
-
About a week, maybe a fortnight after the subscibers have beta-tested it. The same as with all the other 'subscriber exclusives' at FP, which are available on the public servers soon after the beta period.
-
Originally posted by Setekh
About a week, maybe a fortnight after the subscibers have beta-tested it. The same as with all the other 'subscriber exclusives' at FP, which are available on the public servers soon after the beta period.
Great!:D
I was dreading it would take much longer, but a week sounds reasonable. Now, get this thing going. I want to go and pimp FS2 everywhere :D
-
Indeed. Pending the thoughts of Fractux and the coders, I think we have some hard work ahead of us in terms of bug-squashing, content finalisation (what to package with the full-install) and polishing the release package - and then we'll be good to go. :)
-
Well this is good news!!! I feel that things are really gonna pick up for the SCP!
-
we still can circulate beta exes within the community? if so, then it would be a good idea
-
Originally posted by PhReAk
we still can circulate beta exes within the community? if so, then it would be a good idea
Yes, of course. :) This is nothing but an addition to the system we already have in place, not a replacement download location. :nod:
-
ok. sounds like a nice plan. but before we do anything, we have to have an FAQ that everyone should be able to comprehend
-
Well this is a very nice develpment!
I'm going to breifly outline what I have done up to this point and what needs to be done:
- I have the installer script working perfectly. It will install FS2 with the avi movies as optional (currently sparky-hi is listed as a removable option for the minimum install, but I'm going to change that).
- What I need to work on, and what I set up the Yahoo group for, was to be able to work on the documentation. I'm going to change the settings so that any member can upload files so that changes can be submitted.
- My thoughts were of waiting on releasing this to FP untill the SCP is able to get out version 3.6. I also wanted to include FRED_Open as well.
I will include the original exe files, however. [That way, in the documentation we can say that if the FS2_OPEN build is not working, you can just set the Launcher to launch the original FS2.exe
The major thing I'm concerned about right now was the bug that prevented .avi cutscene playback in the 3.5.5 build. i know Random Tiger is working on this issue, and this is one thing that I hope will get fixed. (I know cutscenes are just a small part of a game, but a lot of people like the glitter, and they really give you a good sense of the story behind it all).
This release really only hinges on two major factors:
1- when the documentation is ready
2- when we have an FS2_Open/Fred2_Open release that the SCP says they are willing to have included in this.
I know that FS2_Open is always under development, and that's why in the install there is a shorcut lik to the FSSCP website that will be placed on their destop to get them to click on the darn thing when they install and see if there are any updates. (also a link in the star menu folder.)
During the install there will be a notice for them to go to the website and check if there's an updated version.
Anyways, props to eeryone for putting their time in.
Also, if you want to help coordinate the documentation, go to the yahoo group. I'm going to change it so that any member can uplod files.
I have to jet, but I'll check back tonight.
Cheers!
-
Heheheh, once it's hosted its about time to p1mp FS2 everywhere we can... Imagine all the people we'd get :) :)
-
This is going to be cool, but we'd better get ready for lots of inane questions from all the newbies this is going to bring.
-
hey this is cool:)
i gonna pimp this every forum i know
and send message to few friends about this so they can post new's about this when it's Hosted
-
Originally posted by Liberator
This is going to be cool, but we'd better get ready for lots of inane questions from all the newbies this is going to bring.
yes.. there'll prolly some |337 haXX0rZ too "whastup! since i InsatalleZored FSO it CraShZoreS U sUkC!"... but who cares :lol:
-
I'm emailling him to say that we are _not_ moving
Hello,
I am Derek Meek (aka "Kazan") - I was the one that started the thread about the possible migration away from GameSpy's network. That was in respone to the recent use of the DMCA by GameSpy, which initialially looked like a bogus abuse of the DMCA. After several emails between myself and another member of gamespy, and closer inspection of the person served with the DMCA violation I decided that GameSpy had a legitimate reason to invoke the DMCA and decided that we didn't need to censure them and move away. I am happy that GameSpy did not irresponsibly and abusively invoke the DMCA - responsible usage of an irresponsible law is forgiveable.
I look forward to the FilePlanet release of FS2:SCP and getting my multiplayer tracking system up for FS2:SCP multiplayer.
Also, the discussion of release beta's to subscribers has come up constantly, and the community thinks perhaps you're missing something about the way we work. Between "stable builds" such as FS2Open 3.5.5 there are constantly released versions of the exec to have members of the community test features and have updated artwork, etc ready for the next stable release. An example of this are the shinemaps that are coming out with FS2Open 3.6 -- the shinemap code was developed between 3.5.5 and 3.6, and we released "developement builds" that allowed people to test and use features. So we are kinda in a constant beta-cycle. If by Betas for subscribers you mean Betas of the packaged FS2Open stable releases with all the files then we should find a term to call these.. perhaps package releases, or something similar.
-
This is all great news.
However the SCP does have some serious bugs in it at the moment.
As long as we can get these sorted out before any big release thats OK.
-
Originally posted by Fractux
- What I need to work on, and what I set up the Yahoo group for, was to be able to work on the documentation. I'm going to change the settings so that any member can upload files so that changes can be submitted.
....
Also, if you want to help coordinate the documentation, go to the yahoo group. I'm going to change it so that any member can uplod files.
Feel free to make use of the Freespace Documentation Wiki (http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/fsdoc/) if you'd like - I think people are more used to it than they would be to a Yahoo group (I tried setting one of those up years ago, and it sucked). Make a new category, subcategory, whetever you need. It's primary purpose there is for collaborative documentation, after all. :)
Originally posted by Kazan
...responsible usage of an irresponsible law is forgiveable...
:lol:
-
sandwich: i think you get what i mean
IE DMCA = abuseable law
person it was used against deserved being gone after (And also was not only under DMCA) so = justified/responsible usage
-
Originally posted by Kazan
sandwich: i think you get what i mean
IE DMCA = abuseable law
person it was used against deserved being gone after (And also was not only under DMCA) so = justified/responsible usage
No, I understood exactly what you were trying to say, I was laughing at the brilliance of the way you put it. Insulting the law while complimenting those who upheld it, all in one sentence. :D
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Feel free to make use of the Freespace Documentation Wiki (http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/fsdoc/) if you'd like - I think people are more used to it than they would be to a Yahoo group (I tried setting one of those up years ago, and it sucked). Make a new category, subcategory, whetever you need. It's primary purpose there is for collaborative documentation, after all. :)
:lol:
Cool, I was actually thinking about asking about that. Thanks Sandwich.
Cheers!
-
Originally posted by Fractux
This release really only hinges on two major factors:
1- when the documentation is ready
2- when we have an FS2_Open/Fred2_Open release that the SCP says they are willing to have included in this.
3.6 is coming along. Documentation looks like it'll need some work. :)
Kazan, that's appreciated. Righto, I think this is getting quite serious now. I'd like to go ahead with us - inform Dakota that FS Open Full Install will be hosted at FilePlanet, pending only the release of a rock-solid build and the finalisation of documentation. That sound okay?
-
Assuming that the FSO version numbers work the same way as other software products, can I strongly suggest that since 3.5 -> 3.6 includes the huge monster of HT&L, we give FP 3.6.1? Test the final build of 3.6 here, and deal with any and all bugs that are reported within a week or so.
-
Yeah, that sounds good. It would be ridiculous to have to upload 3.6 to FP, have its subscribers tell us it was buggy as heck, and then upload 3.6.1 again - keeping in mind it'll all be in the 800mb package.
-
Unless we provide it a 2 seperate downloads - one would be the big media files, and the other would be the minimum required exe updates and stuff.
-
That could also be do-able... but I think it would be better just to wait and provide it as one. Just easier. :)
-
Why don't you call it 3.5.9 and when it's ready to be released to Fileplanet, after everyone has squashed the bugs in it, call it 3.6? It looks a lot cleaner to release with just 3.6 than having 3.6.1, in my opinion.
-
i agree with J3Vr6, but i wouldn't call it 3.5.9, but i'd just go from 3.5.6 to 3.5.7, because i'd expect more then one version change between what you think is bug free, and what is bug free.
-
Yeah, he's right. Keep the double digit releases as the big ones, like 3.6 is going to be the big momma with HTL and stuff. So continue w/ 3.5.7 and if you happen to get all the bugs out by that one, you can just jump up to 3.6 :)
-
I'd advise keeping the FSO download in a seperate (but linked) install so that it can be updated whenever a new stable build comes along.
-
I think we can do 3.6 as a subscriber Beta, then 3.6.1 as a wide-release
-
x.x.1 revisions are virtually always bug-fixes, and are therefore virtually always more reliable. There should not be any sort of tom-foolery messing around with version numbers - big changes are 0.1 increments, bug fixes are 0.0.1 increments.
-
just give subscribers (and the community of course) 3.5.x and then give 3.6 to everyone
-
we may need a newbie forum
and I think we should have a full install relese, as FS2 to FSO patch relese, and just the executable, all future releses will consist of a full instal, just the executable, and a patch from the previus version (new media and the exe)
and the pre-relese beta build why don't we just call it 3.6b
-
Sandwich is right on this one. 3.6 has to be the big one - think of the huge updates going into it. 3.6.1 can be packaged into the full install and uploaded to FP.
-
We DON'T need a Newbie forum. Just keep the FAQ page on the main site maintained, and have an Announcement linking to it with the title 'Attention! All new users!' Judicious deletion of n00b threads with gentle shoves toward the FAQ pages should alleviate things. Additionally, send a new member the link to the FAQ in his/her Confirm Registration email.
-
I don't know about deletion of n00b threads - I have a gut feeling that it would just lead to more threads of the same nature in addition to "where did my thread go?" threads. ;) If they deserve the treatment, I think a swift answer (eg. "check out the faq") and having a thread locked would be sufficient. Apart from that, the rest of your pointers are pretty sound. :)
-
Only lock them if people spam them. Not much more of a turn off a communbity than having your first ever thread locked, no= matter how inane the question...
-
I'm of the same opinion. That happened to me when I registered at a StarCraft community site once. "That's a n00b question", and locked without another thought. :doubt: That's not HLP.
-
Originally posted by Galemp
We DON'T need a Newbie forum. Just keep the FAQ page on the main site maintained, and have an Announcement linking to it with the title 'Attention! All new users!' Judicious deletion of n00b threads with gentle shoves toward the FAQ pages should alleviate things. Additionally, send a new member the link to the FAQ in his/her Confirm Registration email.
Agreed. Even the dumbest newbies should see the thread subject is written with big friendly letters :)
Getting more people can't be bad thing, some of them might be willing to start modding and help the community even more. We just have to make sure everyone who downloads FS2 gets a link to HLP.
-
what about one thread for newbies where they can ask Q's and are welcomed just idea:)
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
we may need a newbie forum
and I think we should have a full install relese, as FS2 to FSO patch relese, and just the executable, all future releses will consist of a full instal, just the executable, and a patch from the previus version (new media and the exe)
and the pre-relese beta build why don't we just call it 3.6b
How much of a learning curve do we want people to have to go through. I mean currently the releases require you to have some knowledge of freespace modding. I mean how easy do we want it. I mean the simple problems people have often keep them posting. If we are courteous and kind and answer the question no matter how annoying, people will stay and keep posting here. additionally. maybe a designated help staff might help, like a support side of the team. Say like part of the team writing the readme could handle all support questions. There must be a way to tone down the "n00b" threads and the like and still keep people from being insulted.
-
Agreed. Designated help staff.... hmmm.
Time to open up the email again.
-
i wouldn't mind helping out in a newbie forum by giving links to answers, or answering directly. i don't have much time, but i think i can handle a thread or 5 a day, more if it is a really FAQ. i suggest a forum specificly for this, so noobs don't get irritated answers from veterans trying to get a feature request through to the SCP team, with this forum being swamped by "i can't get m sinempas too w0rk, there wa to briht OMG, WTF hlp me plz."
-
I too would really like to help any way I can. Too bad there seem's to be nothing I can do :(
-
Anything you can think of that could be asked about, write down in the appropriate place in the FS Doc Wiki (http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/fsdoc/).
Now, regarding technical support: Personally, while I consider myself to be quite above average on the "Be A Good Newbie And Read The FAQ Before Asking Questions"-o-meter when I'm checking something new out, I still think it'd be worth it to have static pages with Q&A in a primary position, with the FAQ forum as the sescondary and interactive help center. I'd much rather read an organized list of frequently asked questions to see if any are relevant to my problem than sift through some forum's search function or "READ ME FIRST!!!" thread.