Take-Two filed a lawsuit against the reverse-engineered GTA III and Vice City developers

And to quote Papenhoff for the third time since you keep ignoring it: "So what we typically do is work with the output of the decompiler and massage it back into readable C++." - that is his own words - not mine - and it's from those that I base my comments on that it looks like they indeed did commit copyright infringement.

Isn't that basically the equivalent of taking the original Aramaic version of the Bible, that Rockstar had the King James Version, then dumping it into a translator, then cleaning up the code for modern English? (sorry been on a 'History' channel kick).

Sure, and if the bible was still in copyright that would almost certainly be illegal.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 7 September 2021 at 6:52 pm UTC

No one have claimed that "you can just decompile" and have a finished product, nor do I see how piracy can be any more rampant. Is there a game or application in history that isn't pirated?

Simple, if you could 'just decompile' (other wise translate the binary to source code that works in a compiler) than you could remove any copy protection checks easier than the current method of hacking the binary.

#1 that would required a build environment matching that of the original build, which for various reasons can be quite difficult to get hold of.

#2 actual copy protection is usually built with decompilers in mind so they apply various tricks and run the result through the existing decompilers to make sure that they have obfuscated their code enough.

#3 the manual cleanup needed is a far more labour intensive effort than hacking the binary. Note that GTA3 was a bit of a special case here since the binaries was not stripped so all the debugging symbols where present, but still the generated source code needed manual cleanup before it compiled, do take a look at that 1h video that I linked above, it shows the steps for the litter function in GTA3.

I wonder if the so called remake that TakeTwo / Rockstar are making is actually based on the reverse-engineered code from this repository.

I'd love to get a refund on every T2 game and pirate the hell out of it. Money not deserved.

I wonder if the so called remake that TakeTwo / Rockstar are making is actually based on the reverse-engineered code from this repository.

I was thinking the same. Though you would think if they had the source code they wouldn't need to.

I think they are like Bethesda, where Doom (2016?) Had an internal port working flawlessly on Linux, but they killed it so us neckbeards wouldn't get to play it. We showed them! Basically they want to be the only ones who get to say where / when their games are played. Any open source engine of that is capable of letting people play it where they damn well please should be shot down as soon as possible, right?

Amusing comment from Nightdive studios on the topic:

https://twitter.com/pripyatbeast/status/1433925671995068418

You do this to a game @NightdiveStudio is working on and you get offered a job.

Shame that Night Dive cannot release enhance edition of No One Lives Forever due to Warner and Activision's block despite already obtained its source code.


Last edited by rea987 on 13 September 2021 at 8:40 am UTC

Amusing comment from Nightdive studios on the topic:

https://twitter.com/pripyatbeast/status/1433925671995068418

You do this to a game @NightdiveStudio is working on and you get offered a job.

Shame that Night Dive cannot release enhance edition of No One Lives Forever due to Warner and Activision's block despite already obtained its source code.

Seriously? That is an awesome game that deserves a re-release, hard to find now.

Seriously? That is an awesome game that deserves a re-release, hard to find now.

https://www.thegamer.com/no-one-lives-forever-the-operative-legal-issues-explained/
https://www.thegamer.com/no-one-lives-forever-nightdive-update-interview/
https://www.kotaku.com.au/2021/04/the-sad-story-behind-a-dead-pc-game-that-cant-come-back/

Not a fan of linking Kotaku at all but afaik latter is the original article.


Last edited by rea987 on 14 September 2021 at 6:47 am UTC

[quote=rea987]

Amusing comment from Nightdive studios on the topic:

https://twitter.com/pripyatbeast/status/1433925671995068418

You do this to a game @NightdiveStudio is working on and you get offered a job.

So why isn't Doom64 supported on Linux? There's a Linux version of the engine already...

In the notice it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for

Am I missing something? I thought there was an exception in the DMCA for exactly this - making software more useful to end users.

"Defendants have sought to exploit a potential market that belongs exclusively to Take-Two"
A market is where you exchange value for value.
You can't exactly say that giving away for free something is exploiting a market, because then you do not understand capitalism. Exploiting means you gain something of monetary value. None of the hackers gained something.

Eh... there's a whole cesspool full of commerce clause case law about this. If you are giving something away that someone else intended to profit from, you are a participant in the market because you are reducing demand for the commercial product.

In the notice it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for

Am I missing something? I thought there was an exception in the DMCA for exactly this - making software more useful to end users.
[..]

I don't know about DMCA, but that exception is definitely valid in the EU. That's how it's legal to "circumvent" DVD and Blu-ray encryption on Linux - if a product cannot be used in the advertised manner on your system, you're allowed to make it work.

In the notice it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for

Am I missing something? I thought there was an exception in the DMCA for exactly this - making software more useful to end users.
[..]

I don't know about DMCA, but that exception is definitely valid in the EU. That's how it's legal to "circumvent" DVD and Blu-ray encryption on Linux - if a product cannot be used in the advertised manner on your system, you're allowed to make it work.

Bringing up the decryption for DVD reminds me of all the old shenanigans... like when Debian used to have a non-US repository because it wasn't allowed to install encryption software in the USA... anyone else remember that?

In the notice it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for

Am I missing something? I thought there was an exception in the DMCA for exactly this - making software more useful to end users.
[..]

I don't know about DMCA, but that exception is definitely valid in the EU. That's how it's legal to "circumvent" DVD and Blu-ray encryption on Linux - if a product cannot be used in the advertised manner on your system, you're allowed to make it work.

Bringing up the decryption for DVD reminds me of all the old shenanigans... like when Debian used to have a non-US repository because it wasn't allowed to install encryption software in the USA... anyone else remember that?

Yup.

Bringing up the decryption for DVD reminds me of all the old shenanigans... like when Debian used to have a non-US repository because it wasn't allowed to install encryption software in the USA... anyone else remember that?

Ah, the old "munitions export without a license" shenanigans!

it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for where the "Defendants have sought to exploit a potential market that belongs exclusively to Take-Two"

I am fluent in tyrant speak. The English translation of this line is: "We want to continue to exclusively deny access to our games to punish users who use platforms that we don't like".

The complaint states something about exploiting markets, but the key thing to note here is that THEY HAVE FAILED TO 'EXPLOIT' THIS MARKET so they have no grounds to be upset when somebody else comes along and does the job instead.

I have saved the repo to my own storage just to be sure any take down requests amount to a game of slashy hydra head.

it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for where the "Defendants have sought to exploit a potential market that belongs exclusively to Take-Two"

I am fluent in tyrant speak. The English translation of this line is: "We want to continue to exclusively deny access to our games to punish users who use platforms that we don't like".

The complaint states something about exploiting markets, but the key thing to note here is that THEY HAVE FAILED TO 'EXPLOIT' THIS MARKET so they have no grounds to be upset when somebody else comes along and does the job instead.

I have saved the repo to my own storage just to be sure any take down requests amount to a game of slashy hydra head.

So I'm curious what people would start thinking if things like this were Linux (or Mac) exclusive. Basically when an open source engine comes along for a commercial game that was normally available only on Windows, if the engine port didn't run on Windows, if it'd 'hide' better from such dipshittery.

But yeah, 'OMG, those dirty Linux neckbeards are able to play our game now!' sounds like some reactions I've read on Steam discussions...

it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for where the "Defendants have sought to exploit a potential market that belongs exclusively to Take-Two"

I am fluent in tyrant speak. The English translation of this line is: "We want to continue to exclusively deny access to our games to punish users who use platforms that we don't like".

The complaint states something about exploiting markets, but the key thing to note here is that THEY HAVE FAILED TO 'EXPLOIT' THIS MARKET so they have no grounds to be upset when somebody else comes along and does the job instead.

I have saved the repo to my own storage just to be sure any take down requests amount to a game of slashy hydra head.

So I'm curious what people would start thinking if things like this were Linux (or Mac) exclusive. Basically when an open source engine comes along for a commercial game that was normally available only on Windows, if the engine port didn't run on Windows, if it'd 'hide' better from such dipshittery.

But yeah, 'OMG, those dirty Linux neckbeards are able to play our game now!' sounds like some reactions I've read on Steam discussions...

I remember shit storms every time some game which was console-exclusive gets published on Steam. People are really that strange. So people get mad when games work on Linux. And some such people are in establishment and work on high positions in big corporations. But I really hope these people will lose this time.

it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for where the "Defendants have sought to exploit a potential market that belongs exclusively to Take-Two"

I am fluent in tyrant speak. The English translation of this line is: "We want to continue to exclusively deny access to our games to punish users who use platforms that we don't like".

The complaint states something about exploiting markets, but the key thing to note here is that THEY HAVE FAILED TO 'EXPLOIT' THIS MARKET so they have no grounds to be upset when somebody else comes along and does the job instead.

I have saved the repo to my own storage just to be sure any take down requests amount to a game of slashy hydra head.

So I'm curious what people would start thinking if things like this were Linux (or Mac) exclusive. Basically when an open source engine comes along for a commercial game that was normally available only on Windows, if the engine port didn't run on Windows, if it'd 'hide' better from such dipshittery.

But yeah, 'OMG, those dirty Linux neckbeards are able to play our game now!' sounds like some reactions I've read on Steam discussions...

I remember shit storms every time some game which was console-exclusive gets published on Steam. People are really that strange. So people get mad when games work on Linux. And some such people are in establishment and work on high positions in big corporations. But I really hope these people will lose this time.

You know what's funny? The psychology behind that exclusivity is the same kind of psychology around why Flat-Earthers are a thing.

Very much has to do with "I know some secret knowledge that others do not." And there is that same thing of "I can play this game because I bought the 'superior' platform." Exclusivity only happens because $Company pays $Publisher enough to not let others play their game. At least back in the day there was some sort of 'well this platform is more capable and that's why we published it there, as the experience of the game will be crap on other systems...' We no longer have that barrier at all!

Exclusivity only happens because $Company pays $Publisher enough to not let others play their game. At least back in the day there was some sort of 'well this platform is more capable and that's why we published it there, as the experience of the game will be crap on other systems...' We no longer have that barrier at all!

Nowadays the only excuse they should have for exclusives is if X company owns the studio, but they'll continue to do it as long as studios accept the deals.

Exclusivity only happens because $Company pays $Publisher enough to not let others play their game. At least back in the day there was some sort of 'well this platform is more capable and that's why we published it there, as the experience of the game will be crap on other systems...' We no longer have that barrier at all!

Nowadays the only excuse they should have for exclusives is if X company owns the studio, but they'll continue to do it as long as studios accept the deals.

Exclusivity deals are easy money now, while game itself might or might not be successful. You can't get all the money they say, so lets go a safe route... Zero-risks opportunity...