DoomRL or 'DRL' as it's now called has gone open source

@Guppy: I know Hell is a later invention or import into the Christian faith (as if that matters, all "living" religions change all the time), but that Hel/Hell connection seems a bit far fetched. There's a "hell" of some sort in many if not most ancient religions and mythologies.

I should probably stay out of this as I'm not the least bit religious, but I'm genuinely interested in the psychology of religion and superstition in general. No offense intended!


Last edited by tuubi on 9 December 2016 at 10:11 am UTC

Not far fetched - Christmas has a similar origin ( the winter solstice festival of jul - later renamed to mask the pagan connection).

Hell still is not officially post of Christianity, you can say a priest of you like. The main difference is duration as I understand it (hell being permanent)

Disclaimer: I am not a true believer, I just find the inconsistencies amusing

Quoting: GuppyNot far fetched - Christmas has a similar origin ( the winter solstice festival of jul - later renamed to mask the pagan connection).

What I thought far fetched was that particular Norse/Germanic myth as the most likely original source for the Christian concept of hell.

Quoting: GuppyHell still is not officially post of Christianity, you can say a priest of you like. The main difference is duration as I understand it (hell being permanent)

It certainly seems to be part of modern Roman Catholic doctrine. No use asking a priest for a definitive answer as none of them can speak for more than their own denomination or sect. A non-partisan theologian is a better source if you can find one.

Quoting: GuppyDisclaimer: I am not a true believer, I just find the inconsistencies amusing

It wouldn't be religion at all if it was purely scientific.

Quoting: MyeulCAs @liamdawe and @m2mg2 pointed it out, they don't have to. But it's well within their rights to do so.

I will repost the Eff link I put in the comments last time :

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/trademark-law-does-not-require-companies-tirelessly-censor-internet

It's an interesting and not too long read, especially by lawyers' standards.

Disclaimer: IANAL

That's nice to see them going open source, I could see myself contributing some day (So many open source projects... :D)

While your link is at least on the correct area of legislation -- this is *not* about copyright law, it's about trademark law -- using a trademark of a video game brand for your own derivative video game is simply not the same thing as including a trademark in an article critizing the holder of that trademark. The latter falls below fair use while the first does not. Failing to defend your copyright doesn't cause you any issues when later seeking to defend it in another case but failing to enforce your trademark might. I believe the reason is that in the case of trademarks you are able to defend yourself on the basis of laches. Genericization of a trademark is also a real threat although I'd say it's a real concern only in very few cases.

That said, it's true that you're still not exactly "forced" to defend it and you're also free to grant an explicit permission which I think would've been a good thing to do in a case like this one. With "Doom" you could also talk about whether or not the trademark has been granted on a word that's too generic like we saw with Wasteland earlier but in the case of DoomRL that line of argument isn't so convincing because the game is obviously referencing the Doom brand.