[Stingray2000]

I have read various posts on this forum, including the administrator.  I have a question.  How can you justify your avide policing of the ranks of people wishing to facilitate the download of FS2 for users of a windows based PC when you seemingly do absolutely nothing to interdict the numerous sites on the internet that offer the full version of FS2, for free, to Mac and Linux OS users.  The double standard is not justified.  This is your site and I am not suggesting that you can be or should be forced into offering FS2 for free download, but please stop with the gibberish about license holders, what is right, what is fair, etc when many of you pioneered release of the full discs to windows system users for free. 

Since it is widely available for free to MAC OS users and Linux OS users, it should also be freely available to Windows users.  Adapting the game it to run on a different operating system would not operate to void the rights of a valid license holder, if there was one.  Even the name would be included in those rights -- if they were for real.  Of course, the other choice is to begin policing the MAC and Linux download sites. 

This is a serious question and issue in my mind.  I do not want to run a MAC OS or Linux but I want access to the same free software as they have access to --- particularly since it was originally designed for Windows.  Respectful comments are appreciated. 

[The E]

First, what other sites do or don't do is frankly none of HLP's business.
Second, once GoG started offering FS2 for cheap, legally, and without DRM, the download links HLP provided directly or indirectly were yanked pretty quickly.
Third, All licenses that apply to FS2, like Interplay's EULA, and the license under which the source code was released STILL APPLY. Offering it for download without license from Interplay is still a copyright violation, no matter what.
Fourth, It is relatively simple to get the GoG package extracted on Macs and Linux boxes.
Fifth, Whining about "I want to have it for free" will get you nowhere, when the legal offer will cost you just 6$.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

One other thing worth noting: the Linux and Mac versions of FreeSpace 2 are run using executables built by members of the community. However, in order for them to function, you must copy the vp files from a patched Windows installation of FreeSpace 2 over to your Linux or Mac in order for the executables to function. If you do not do this, the executables provided by the community will not function at all.

[Stingray2000]

@ The E:
   Your fifth bullet point is a personal attack, is not appreciated, and I request an apology.  Your use of the word "whining" is intended to present a counter position to my position/argument through demeaning the person advancing the issue with which you disagree.  This is known as an ad hominem  fallacy and is generally found to be distasteful an ineffective by most adults.  
    As for your point that this site does not care what others do, you seem to miss the point.  The point is not that this site should slavishly follow what others do, the point is that there seems to be a significant amount information on the net (i.e. on other websites) that would seem to support the counter the proposition that FS2 has not been abandonned or that it is not freeware.  For example, there is another site offering it for download if you pay the site a download fee.  They are  NOT selling the game.  You pay a fee of 5.95 for one day of unlimited downloads or 8.95 for 30 days of unlimited downloads.  The fee is specifically tied to the costs of site upkeep.  Since this site operates openly and is a top 'Google'  search hit, I offer this information as further evidence that there is a bona fide issue regarding whether this title is freeware.

@ Androgeos Exeunt
  Not all Linux/Mac versions require additional files, although it was an oversight on my part to have not pointed this out, you are correct that many do.  Still, the point is valid that these offerings claim that the license is "freeware".  If that is not the case, then I do not care what GOG says or has threatened in the past to the owners/administrators of this site.

[The E]

i would also refer you to this.

Also, HLP will not tolerate the posting of pornography or warez files anywhere on the site. However the discussion of a pornography or warez related topic is still allowed. The difference being that the former contains content or links to said content - the latter does not. If you're unsure about what you want to post and are worried may breach this rule then please contact a staff member for advice first. Ignorance of this rule does not mitigate breaking it.

When discussing topics that involve illegal activities, please keep in mind that HLP is not the place for confession and absolution. This includes piracy no matter how common it is. Any activity that could threaten current or future affiliations with any company in business, either developer or publisher will have consequences.

[General Battuta]

What other websites do isn't HLP's business. We're not FreeSpace police.

And Androgeos Exeunt is correct: getting FreeSpace working on Mac or Linux requires files from the retail Windows copy, which should be legally purchased.

[Stingray2000]

Again, @ The E:

Your last comment/quote was not germane to any point that I have raised.  I am not advertising the file for sale or distribution nor am I asking in the post for any person to provide me with the file.  I am advancing a serious question regarding whether the title is freeware.  

@ General Battula:

    As I said earlier,  not all MAC/Linux distros require additional files -- some appear to be complete.   They advertise the game by it's Copyrighted name (Freespace 2) and claim that the license is freeware.  Are they correct?  That is my question.  I am not attempting to suggest that this site do anything, by the way.  It is a location frequented by many fans of the game and a logical place to have a discussion about the status of the FS2 license, particularly since GOG wrote  to the site in the past regarding their position on whether it was proper to freely distribute the game.  As an administrator, perhaps you could share salient points from that communication that would contribute to this discussion.  Surely, attempting to gather information in a lawful manner on the topic of the FS2 license is not a violation of forum policy - is it?

[Spoon]

The source engine was given out as Freeware a while ago but apparantly the assets (ships, missions, textures etc.) are not freeware. So eeh yeah, (don't ask me how that works, just sounds like a bunch of lawyer bull**** to me. )

Thing is, as long as GoG is selling FS2, HLP is not going to put it up for download again. Since it's technically not *freeware*

[General Battuta]

GoG never threatened HLP at all. I believe that all takedown activity with regards to complete copies of FS2 was voluntarily initiated by HLP itself, without communication from GoG. GoG has been extraordinarily cooperative, even going so far as to plug HLP in their publicity materials.

Mac/Linux distros that distribute game assets for free (not simply the code itself) are illegal, yes, and qualify as piracy.

GoG currently has the legal right to sell the game.

FS2 is not Freeware, nor is it Abandonware.

[The E]

@ The E:
   Your fifth bullet point is a personal attack, is not appreciated, and I request an apology.  Your use of the word "whining" is intended to present a counter position to my position/argument through demeaning the person advancing the issue with which you disagree.  This is known as an ad hominem  fallacy and is generally found to be distasteful an ineffective by most adults.

No. If you can't handle harshness, tough. You are demanding to be accorded privileges that this community does not want to, can not, and will not provide. Thus, whining.
Hint: Read the stuff under my postcount. It is usually accurate.

For example, there is another site offering it for download if you pay the site a download fee.  They are  NOT selling the game.  You pay a fee of 5.95 for one day of unlimited downloads or 8.95 for 30 days of unlimited downloads.  The fee is specifically tied to the costs of site upkeep.  Since this site operates openly and is a top 'Google'  search hit, I offer this information as further evidence that there is a bona fide issue regarding whether this title is freeware.

FS2 is NOT freeware in any sense of the word. At no point was the FS2 intellectual property released to the public domain. In a legal sense, Interplay is still well within their rights to sue each and everyone who offers FS2 for download without prior consent. GoG is currently the only company allowed to do so.
Everything else is beside the point.
Had you taken the time to read wikipedia on the subject, or the pages on the HLP wiki pertaining to the FS2 EULA, this would be clear.

[General Battuta]

Aw, jeez, The_E, be nice.

[Stingray2000]

@The E

That you are rude is self evident, though not a quality that most adults would be proud of.  With respect to your claim of being condescending, it is obvious also that you intend to appear condescending.  With reference to your being sarcastic, I have yet to see you display the requiste level of intelligence that would help to transform a merely mean-spirited remark or gutter-spawned insult into a truly sarcastic observation.  I will not be responding further to you, however, in any event, as these comments are not advancing the discussion.  

One point that you reference is well taken.  "Yes", I have read the Wiki.  The Wiki is far from clear on the point of the license.  I agree that that GOG claims to be the only licensed distribution point but that is not referenced on the new Interplay site that has appeared following their reorganization.  The stronger information in support of your position is that the license is not freeware is the fact that Interplay continues to list Freespace as part of their collection --- while not listing Starfleet Academy, Klingon Academy, and some others.

@ General Battuta

I appreciate your direct comments.  This question becomes more interesting - particularly with respect to the other site I referenced that offers the game along with any other title they have for a nominal fee that is limited by time and not by the title you seek to download.  (BTW, I request that no persont ask in this thread or in a PM for me to link you to that site)

[The E]

Hmmm.

This is known as an ad hominem  fallacy and is generally found to be distasteful an ineffective by most adults.

@The E

That you are rude is self evident, though not a quality that most adults would be proud of.  With respect to your claim of being condescending, it is obvious also that you intend to appear condescending.  With reference to your being sarcastic, I have yet to see you display the requiste level of intelligence that would help to transform a merely mean-spirited remark or gutter-spawned insult into a truly sarcastic observation.  I will not be responding further to you, however, in any event, as these comments are not advancing the discussion. 

Interesting.

I see you misunderstood this. I never said that all qualities apply automatically to anything I post, nor that I am proud of them. It is just a warning.
Now, insulting my intelligence....Well, I could take this further, but I won't. Suffice it to say that I have no particular interest in playing nice in a discussion where the opposite side refuses to accept objective realities.

If you check Interplay's site, you will note that none of the games listed (except for Fallout, which is the only major product Interplay has right now) has a direct link to a place where you can get it.
If you are really interested in the legalities, consult GoG directly. They have deals with nearly all major publishers to keep their back catalogues available, and they are certainly cheaper than ebay, while still paying royalties for those games. This means that there is a straight revenue flow from you, to them, to the people who hold the rights, which keeps everyone happy.

Now, unless you can obtain proof that the site you keep mentioning has a similar agreement with Interplay (which I doubt), then what they are offering is illegal.

[Sushi]

So, Stringray, what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Are you saying that HLP is being unjust for not allowing people to post free download links to FS2? Good reasons have been posted as to why this is the case. Is HLP being overly cautious? Maybe, although I think the policy is right on. But even if they are, what's wrong with being cautious?

If you want to download FS2 as warez... go elsewhere. I don't see why you should be so affronted that HLP doesn't.

I guess what I'm trying to politely say is that you come across as someone picking a fight over nothing worth fighting for. There's an internet term for that.

[karajorma]

@ The E:
   Your fifth bullet point is a personal attack, is not appreciated, and I request an apology.  Your use of the word "whining" is intended to present a counter position to my position/argument through demeaning the person advancing the issue with which you disagree.  This is known as an ad hominem  fallacy and is generally found to be distasteful an ineffective by most adults.  

Unfortunately for you, you were whining. And since you've now moved on to flaming I'm telling you now to stop or you'll be banned.

[Hero_Swe]

Unfortunately for you, you were whining. And since you've now moved on to flaming I'm telling you now to stop or you'll be banned.

So it's true...People do fear intelligence.

[karajorma]

eh?

I have read various posts on this forum, including the administrator.  I have a question.  How can you justify your avide policing of the ranks of people wishing to facilitate the download of FS2 for users of a windows based PC when you seemingly do absolutely nothing to interdict the numerous sites on the internet that offer the full version of FS2, for free, to Mac and Linux OS users.

What other sites do is, quite frankly, absolutely none of our business. Freespace can be legally downloaded from Good Old Games. They paid Interplay for the right to do that. If other websites want to break the law and offer the game for free that is up to them. We do not want to break the law as there is a legal alternative. If I remember correctly GameTap also made a similar deal with Interplay but due to the the fact that their version of the game couldn't be modded it wasn't of much interest to us.

The double standard is not justified.

What double standard? The one where we refuse to break the law?

This is your site and I am not suggesting that you can be or should be forced into offering FS2 for free download, but please stop with the gibberish about license holders, what is right, what is fair, etc when many of you pioneered release of the full discs to windows system users for free.  

At the time there was no alternative. It was a case of either letting the FS2 community die out or illegally putting it up for download. That is no longer the case.

Since it is widely available for free to MAC OS users and Linux OS users, it should also be freely available to Windows users.  Adapting the game it to run on a different operating system would not operate to void the rights of a valid license holder, if there was one.  Even the name would be included in those rights -- if they were for real.  Of course, the other choice is to begin policing the MAC and Linux download sites.  

If the same sites illegally hosting Mac and Linux downloads want to put up a Windows one that's up to them. Their decision has no effect on us.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

So it's true...People do fear intelligence.

As if. Stingray's just broken one HLP rule by flaming The E, so kara's just following the rules that the HLP admins have set for us.

[karajorma]

It may be that there is a language issue going on here but pretty much every post Stingray has made has come off as pretty rude.

However that's not the problem. It's his complaint about The E's ad hominem almost immediately followed by one of his own that's gonna get him in trouble.

[Stingray2000]

Now hold on here.  I made a post that was meant to challenge the point that there is a valid license restricting the distribution of FS2.  I advanced that I was not interested in giberish or regurgitation of previously stated conclusions.  I was interested in facts.  There seemed to be a continuing frre distribution of the product in some circles and a restricted distribution for Windows.  Members posting on this site previously participated in distribution of the software for free but now seem to accept that there is an active and valid license.  This is curious to me.  I have PM'd Karajorma suggesting to him why I am interested and I do not feel compelled to share that here --- but it is not because I want to obtain a warez copy of the software.  As for the proposition that my posts seem rude to you, Karajorma.  Look again, please.  I advance a proposition and quickly found myself the target of numerous personal insults --- only to be chided for flaming when I defended myself in response - and threatened with a ban for doing so.  Someone had the temerity to disagree with you, Karajorma, and you took off on a diatribe in defense of your attack on me -- concluding that I was rude (and making it clear that disagreement with you was not something that you appreciated). I would like to continue to have an adult discussion on the substance of my question.  Your diatribe actually has a few kernals of information to add to a quality discussion
-- not the least of which is the fact that you and others may have not benn comfortable with the free distribution of the game even while you were doing so or assisting others in doing so. Why, however were you uncomfortable - the "why" referencing an assumption that you were unsure of the license status and requesting you to provide the facts that led to this uncertainty.