Classic doom maps but with more difficulty [split]

[Mercury Spade]

3 hours ago, maxmanium said:

illegal

That's something that needs to change in the laws. Punishing people over what they do with their personal property is morally wrong.

[Redneckerz]

3 minutes ago, Mercury Spade said:

That's something that needs to change in the laws. Punishing people over what they do with their personal property is morally wrong.

But it becomes a problem when it is released in the public realm.

 

Which is what happened here.

 

Abuse your WAD all day long, but do so in private. I don't want to know what you are doing to Rocco the Caco.

[Mercury Spade]

No one got hurt or lost anything though

[D4NUK1]

7 minutes ago, Mercury Spade said:

No one got hurt or lost anything though

 

It's mostly to get this site free of getting illegals way to obtain the game that we want to preserve. 

 

Freedoom also works because it's different. 

[Mercury Spade]

But the game is only preserved with copies the community owns

 

I downloaded his edit

[Gregor]

35 minutes ago, Mercury Spade said:

No one got hurt or lost anything though

That is not how legality is defined (thankfully). At least it is not limited to that. This is about ownership. If i break into your house, even if i don't steal a thing and you don't even notice me, it is still a crime since i'm not allowed to enter your house without permission.

Edited July 8, 2022 by Gregor

[Mercury Spade]

No one hacked into another's desktop for those files though.

[Bauul]

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

Punishing people over what they do with their personal property is morally wrong.

 

When you buy a copy of a game, you buy the rights to just that copy.  You don't have the right to make more copies and distribute it for free, which is essentially what OP is doing with the Doom 2 iwad.

 

Doom editing has always skirted with some questionable technical legalities of copyright in terms of assets people use in their custom maps (e.g. textures, sounds, graphics etc. from other games). 

 

As such, with the more blatantly obvious stuff (like sharing iwads, or including copyrighted music in levels) generally the community takes a pretty firm stance against it.  Basically as long as we are vigilant with the big stuff, we can more easily get away with the little stuff.

[Gregor]

1 minute ago, Mercury Spade said:

No one hacked into another's desktop for those files though.

Yeah but you don't have to break or hack anything for it to count as a crime; not just legally but also morally:

 

If you don't own a property, you can't distribute it in any shape or form unless you have premission. If i give you a recording of a song for you to listen to that i wrote, and you upload it to the internet or share it with friends without my permission, even if you meant it as a favor, it would count as a crime and i could sue you. It's my song, i own the IP and it is not for you to decide what happens with it or how it is distributed. If i only give you permission to listen to it but not share it, you cannot alter that agreement; otherwise it is theft. It makes sense that i have that right since i created the song. I also have the right to sell my IP of the song to whoever i want.

 

The Doom iwads are commercial products that we the community do not own. You only own your copy. Buying it did not give you the right to distribute it. You can't upload or download them without breaking the law.

[Mercury Spade]

I understand the laws and I think they're unjust. They need to be changed. If I buy a copy of a game, that copy is my property and is housed only on my property (my machine) inside of my property (my house). If everything that was done up to the point of acquiring the copy was done legally then people should have the legal rights to do whatever they want with all their property acquired through legal work and tender. The grand majority of people don't even obey that law considering how much file sharing goes on in reality. The only thing that should be enforceable is when people are making a profit off of somebody else's work while claiming to be the creator(s) of said work. The law needs to change. They infringe on the rights of the majority for the sense of security of the minority. Then everybody else just plays along with it because it's "da law". It's on the level of churches punishing people for not believing. Majority just goes along with it until somebody in a government position does something about it. I personally believe copyright laws need to be abolished. The people who write up those kinds of laws would be the same people who would deny people food even if they had an unbreakable food replicator that cost no resources. They'd cite some meme about if you don't work you don't deserve food and let the majority of their population starve because governments are only so creative and can never create enough jobs for everyone. Especially when they take the credit of private enterprises employing people as job creation. Regardless, I'd like to see the laws changed when it comes to things like that because it's frankly ridiculous and unjust. It's why people react in fear over the basic operating capabilities of a personal computer and why online communities are forced to cannibalize their own or themselves. I have seen copyright issues be an issue so often across the spectrum of all life from amateurish stuff to professional stuff that it's wrong. These laws are more monopolistic than anything else.

[Mercury Spade]

6 minutes ago, Gregor said:

Yeah but you don't have to break or hack anything for it to count as a crime; not just legally but also morally:

 

If you don't own a property, you can't distribute it in any shape or form unless you have premission. If i give you a recording of a song for you to listen to that i wrote, and you upload it to the internet or share it with friends without my permission, even if you meant it as a favor, it would count as a crime and i could sue you. It's my song, i own the IP and it is not for you to decide what happens with it or how it is distributed. If i only give you permission to listen to it but not share it, you cannot alter that agreement; otherwise it is theft. It makes sense that i have that right since i created the song. I also have the right to sell my IP of the song to whoever i want.

 

The Doom iwads are commercial products that we the community do not own. You only own your copy. Buying it did not give you the right to distribute it. You can't upload or download them without breaking the law.

If you need permission to use something you call your property, it really isn't your property. You have the mentality of a slave owner. It's unnatural and inhuman. Thankfully, in real life, nobody thinks like this and people continue to file share online and offline including family and friends of countless people.

 

Just because something is law doesn't make it moral. What makes it moral is what the majority agree upon and nobody outside governments and the influence of private interests were involved in those laws. It's the kind of laws that create crime due to the ignorance people are born with and the fear it creates in the public stifles innovation and prosperity.

[Master O]

19 minutes ago, Mercury Spade said:

I understand the laws and I think they're unjust. They need to be changed.

 

Good luck with that one.  Maybe they'll change them, around the time pigs fly and world peace is achieved...

[maxmanium]

Honestly, regardless of how you feel about the laws or morality of it, we can’t do it here. As @Bauul said, we’re already kind of in a grey area with how the community uses some assets. Even including the iwad sprites for a new palette is somewhat questionable although thankfully id/Bethesda don’t seem to mind. 

[Unregistered User]

I can tell we're not a majority on this, but I have to agree, @Mercury Spade

 

       Copyright laws are absolute persecutory, illogical garbage. When I make some song, the song is not me. It contains my essence, (as I mentioned in another post,) but it is not not me, and therefore not my property. If the song were to benefit me, or for Doom to continue to benefit ID Software, that's great, but when people are punished for sharing these works, something is wrong. In this case, @RUBENEITOR just wanted to share with us something he thought we might enjoy. It was nothing more than a kind gesture.

 

       There would be no victim of art theft/sharing, if not for the fact we live without the privilege to create art without repercussions. Time is money, and art is time. To make art is to lose money, so naturally, money must be gained for the art in order for artists to exist. It is a miracle there is any art being created at all under these increasingly dire economic constraints. This is why we may observe, as the Inequality-Adjusted Human Development Index of the US continues to fall (Wikipedia), a downward trend in the availability and quality of artwork.

 

       This is of course, a subjective claim. But, in my lifetime I have definitely seen this. All art I see today is explicitly designed to make money. It is exclusively a business, rather than self-expression for the purpose of social or personal growth. It has been this way for some time, but at least when I was younger I personally knew more people who practiced art, and when they did, it was more passionate. Concerts were about community and music in contrast to today's events, which are still good, but err on the side of being avenues through which Ticketmaster profits and during which selfies are harvested for personal branding and influence. 

 

       We need to abolish copyright laws. Those who argue that artists will suffer are not wrong. But, really, are these would-be suffering artists really artists at all? Is art that which is created for the sole purpose of money worth anything anyway? I say, the answer to both these questions is a resounding, "no."

 

       That being said, I know Doomworld needs to abide by these laws, and I'm very happy this site is here. So nice catch, @maxmanium

 

 

[Gregor]

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

If you need permission to use something you call your property, it really isn't your property.

Who said the Doom iwads are your property? The were sold to you under license. Maybe you should check the fine print.

 

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

It's unnatural and inhuman. Thankfully, in real life, nobody thinks like this and people continue to file share online and offline including family and friends of countless people.

 

Wrong on both counts. It is a very human behavior. That's why everybody puts a fence around their property. And the overwhelming majority of people in our society obey the law. Sorry if that bothers you.

 

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

Just because something is law doesn't make it moral.

True. But just because you don't like and/or understand a law doesn't make it criminal either.

 

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

What makes it moral is what the majority agree upon and nobody outside governments and the influence of private interests were involved in those laws. It's the kind of laws that create crime due to the ignorance people are born with and the fear it creates in the public stifles innovation and prosperity.

Nope. Those are only customs and codes of conduct dressed up as morality. Proper morality is not based on consensus but logic. Reason.

Either it makes sense or it's nonsense.

 

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

You have the mentality of a slave owner. It's unnatural and inhuman.

And you talk like a religious fanatic that is about cut my head off if i don't embrace their "holy book" as the answer to all questions.

Edited July 8, 2022 by Gregor

[Redneckerz]

2 hours ago, Mercury Spade said:

No one got hurt or lost anything though

Tell Zenimax/Bethesda/id Soft that, considering this game is still sold.

 

Though the site has never seen rammifications for it, there can be legal issues if they were to pursue this.

2 hours ago, D4NUK1 said:

It's mostly to get this site free of getting illegals way to obtain the game that we want to preserve. 

 

Freedoom also works because it's different. 

Exactly. Everyone usually turns a slight blind eye but that does not mean one should upload an edited Doom2.wad.

 

That's a trick from the 90s. Its 2022 now.

2 hours ago, Mercury Spade said:

But the game is only preserved with copies the community owns

By copies sold. If push came to stove these arguments are literally irrelevant.

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

No one hacked into another's desktop for those files though.

I know, you are one of those law chasers that feel differently on certain subjects because you interprete them differently. But like the point above, this argument is weak and holds no candle.

 

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

I understand the laws and I think they're unjust. They need to be changed.

The law does not care about your thoughts or feelings. This is discussionworthy for another day, or id suggest making an effort at changing the law if you feel so strongly.

 

Typing its unjust on a Doom forum won't change it.

1 hour ago, Mercury Spade said:

It's why people react in fear over the basic operating capabilities of a personal computer.

People react in fear because people think they know how a machine works until it doesn't. One can excuse the older generation somewhat because they weren't raisee with it, but the younger generation is equally inept at interpreting their device.

 

They are just better at socials through these devices, but know as little of the machine as their older predecessors. Both will squeak when bleep does not do bloop.

[Gregor]

11 minutes ago, Cacodreamin' said:

       We need to abolish copyright laws. Those who argue that artists will suffer are not wrong. But, really, are these would-be suffering artists really artists at all? Is art that which is created for the sole purpose of money worth anything anyway? I say, the answer to both these questions is a resounding, "no."

 

       That being said, I know Doomworld needs to abide by these laws, and I'm very happy this site is here. So nice catch, @maxmanium

 

 

Mozart, Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Picasso, Beethoven, etc... they all created masterpeices as a means of making profit. Didn't diminish their art in the slightest. On the contrary, they would have never created much of anything without the monetary incentive. I know you want things to be black and white but people don't work that way. They want to earn a living at the least and if possible get rich. Artists are no exception whether you like it or not. Btw, id Software would have never made Doom either or released anything at all if they couldn't make money that way.

[kalensar]

Copyright owners enjoy the copyright laws, like myself. It takes absolutely nothing to get one these days thanks to some platforms. Don't even need to make money on it either, nor does it go to public  domain by default either. You can literally just sit on it in the open for free perusing, or hide it or whatever, and still have a valid copyright. IE, Free Amazon books and Deviant Art.

 

In the case of Doom, the Doom Engine itself is Open Source, but that does not mean Doom the Game itself is open source; though, its very hard to distinguish that at first glance because of it's proliferated nature. That's why FreeDoom and Blasphemer are really cool, because they can be used as Mod IWAD base and are whole separate games at the same time. 

 

The vast majority of Modding falls under Non-commercial use, meaning zero monetary value can be applied. There are many GZDoom indie Iwads that are both Commercial and Non-Commercial. Ion Fury is a Build Engine Commercial game made in like 2017. Blade of Agony is a Wolfenstein non-commercial Iwad that blows many current gen console games out of the water in its ability and scope.

[Doomkid]

Copyright laws are useful, but they are also VERY excessive. Hell, I think copyrights should last about 20 years and should not be eligible for extensions, personally - Shortening it to a reasonable length like that that would also crush most of the bullshit that results from the obvious unjustness of the copyright laws as they otherwise stand.

 

...but you know what's really morally reprehensible? Fucking up someone's wad thread just to debate your pet issue :(

[Unregistered User]

23 minutes ago, Gregor said:

Mozart, Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Picasso, Beethoven, etc... they all created masterpeices as a means of making profit. 

 

I think you misconstrued my argument as implying that the origin of real art must be mutually exclusive from financial incentive, but that the best art depends on a general cultural wellbeing to be conceived. 

 

The Renaissance comes to mind, where after the bubonic plagued killed off a large percentage of the population and effective trades routes brought about prosperity, Florence, one of the hubs of these routes, had the resources for art to flourish. Commissions were still made, and the honor and status was still on the line creators during this time, but there was enough social mobility and economic cushion for them to focus on the process of their work instead of the outcome. That's essentially what the Inequality-Adjusted Human Development Index tries to measure.

 

30 minutes ago, Gregor said:

id Software would have never made Doom either or released anything at all if they couldn't make money that way.

 

I agree with you. But I also disagree, in that it would not have been the same Doom today. I can only speculate, but I doubt Doom's developers back in the day were solely motivated by money. I think they were much more motivated by what they though Doom would contribute those those who played it.

 

I hate to say it, but if it had been made today, it might have had a few less gameplay allures, and a few more microtransactions, DLCs or seasons. And that's because of economics. 

[Gregor]

@Cacodreamin' This discussion has been split from this tread and, unfortuantely, the split thread has been shut down rather quickly by someone annoyed. Basically, art, like most things in human society, is a grey area and artists want to both create and make money at the same time. Have a nice a day. ;)

[Doomkid]

It had nothing to do with "someone annoyed" and everything to do with being a derail, which most functional forums will split.. The old policy was to just send unrelated stuff to Post Hell outright, but in the interest of transparency I try not to do that.

 

If you guys want to argue copyright til blue in the face, be my guest and start a new thread about it in EE, but derailing a wad thread is not the way to do it.