Base ganymede being sold with FreeDoom on ITunes store

[qoncept]

Vordakk said:

If I'm gonna be spending money, I might as well buy the real thing. Why would I purchase FreeDOOM when I can just buy the original id Software product?

Was it v1.9 that ran on IOS?

Marcaek said:

So what you're saying is that people are going to have to start adding no-commercial use clauses to their wads? Isn't this a violation of SOME copyright law? If not, why the hell has it taken this long for someone to try selling another's work?

I don't get all the apprehension. This guy spent whatever amount of time (and money) it costs to get Doom on the iTunes store. People now have the option to pay a negligible amount of money to play it on their iPhones. If you don't want it or you know of some other way to make this happen, you don't buy the game.

If you created a wad someone is selling along with their app and don't like it, you can easily get it removed. But why? Isn't the point of making and distributing a wad for people to play it?

[Gez]

Khorus said:

For my part, the guy contacted me a day after I released the wad and after a few emails he obtained my permission.

Then I don't think anyone should have any problem with this.

The Doom port code is GPL, allowing commercial use; Freedoom is BSD, allowing commercial use; and Base Ganymede's creator confirmed that he gave permission.

The whole thing is therefore entirely legit and people trying to cause problems at the iTunes shop level are the ones being douchey.

[Marcaek]

qoncept said:

Isn't the point of making and distributing a wad for people to play it?

Well, yeah. But that fact that BG is a free release made me doubt it's legitimacy, considering it was never mentioned by Khorus(except in this thread) and there's been cases recently where copyrighted work was being sold on similar situations illegitimately.

people trying to cause problems at the iTunes shop level are the ones being douchey.

Hardly.

[printz]

Yes, but does Khorus get a share, or is he just generous like that?

[qoncept]

What's the difference?

[Phml]

Do you not get the concept of money as a means to trade goods and services, or the way people work, for that matter? There is no extra work, no added value, no intent to provide anything to the customer here. This is a mere repackaging of available resources, throwing in some whitewashing in an attempt to make a few bucks.

What's the difference between this and tax evasion, rape in countries where it is legal, or any other unethical loophole abuse, save for the scale? And the scale, precisely, is what makes this particularly abject. If someone is going to stoop that low, at least do it for more than that.

...And now I'm thinking with the kind of fetishistic moonlogic displayed in this topic, some will read that as me supposedly saying people should rape rather than make iOS apps.

[kristus]

printz said:

Yes, but does Khorus get a share, or is he just generous like that?

That's really of no concern to you.

Phml said:

What's the difference between this and tax evasion, rape in countries where it is legal, or any other unethical loophole abuse, save for the scale?

Are you fucking serious?

[Vordakk]

kristus said:

Are you fucking serious?

Well, he did say "save for the scale."

[qoncept]

Phml said:

Do you not get the concept of money as a means to trade goods and services, or the way people work, for that matter? There is no extra work, no added value, no intent to provide anything to the customer here. This is a mere repackaging of available resources, throwing in some whitewashing in an attempt to make a few bucks.

Do you not understand that the repackaging you refer to is the service? I'm not going to take the time to look at the app and I don't have an iOS device at all, but at the very least this guy had to own a Mac, compile the source, package the binaries and content and PAY to list it in the app store. All things that aren't practical for the overwhelming number of iOS users.

What's the difference between this and tax evasion,

Legal.

rape in countries where it is legal,

Not rape.

or any other unethical loophole abuse,

Ethical. Or, if you're not in to the whole brevity thing: he's packaged binaries built from source with content with explicit permission to use commercially. The price for this convenience? A DOLLAR.

[fraggle]

Phml said:

Do you not get the concept of money as a means to trade goods and services, or the way people work, for that matter? There is no extra work, no added value, no intent to provide anything to the customer here. This is a mere repackaging of available resources, throwing in some whitewashing in an attempt to make a few bucks.

What's the difference between this and tax evasion, rape in countries where it is legal, or any other unethical loophole abuse, save for the scale? And the scale, precisely, is what makes this particularly abject. If someone is going to stoop that low, at least do it for more than that.

I strongly disagree with this assessment. The crimes you are talking about are wrong because they are ethically objectionable - rape harms someone, for example. It's more complicated and subtle to explain why tax evasion is wrong, but it can be explained in terms of a violation of the social contract - the overall idea of tax is that a society of people can combine their wealth in such a way that all benefit. A tax avoider takes the benefits of that society without contributing their share. It's conceptually similar to stealing.

I don't see that this case is similar in any way. As you point out, this is a repackaging of resources that have already been made freely available by their authors. In fact, all of the authors have explicitly granted anyone the right to do this via the licenses used.

This concept is made use of all the time. For example, every time you buy a commercial Linux distribution, an Amazon Kindle, or an Android phone, you're paying - directly or indirectly - for something that includes free software that you can download for no cost.

Of course, you're usually paying for some additional benefit that isn't available for free. That's the case here, as well - the author of the app has gone to the trouble of contacting Khorus to gain permission to use his levels, and has done the work to put a complete package together and make it available on the App store. In the grand scheme that's not really a huge amount of effort, but it's effort nonetheless. If you don't want to reward the author for doing it, don't buy the app.

[Gez]

How can one even think of comparing this to rape? Rape makes a victim. This doesn't.

You don't like it? Don't buy it. Simple.

Yes, the same content can be obtained for free. And as long as this doesn't change, nobody really has a reason to complain, do they? It's not like you have to buy this now.

In essence, all the guy does is sell to Apple iFans an app that's infinitely more expensive than if they got the exact same set of features and functionality outside of an Apple store. Which, in essence, is exactly what the iCustomers want. It's the iBusiness iPlan of Apple, and it's what made them one of the companies that could just buy off the entire USA federal debt with just a couple years' profit.

[TimeOfDeath]

Semi Off-Topic Question: assuming there's no new textures, music, sprites, etc., is it legal for a mapper to sell their wad file if the wad just contains the map data? Obviously you'd need an iwad and exe to play it with, but I'm just talking about a mapper selling their bare-bones pwad.

[Marcaek]

I don't think rocketjumping is that popular ToD :P

[TimeOfDeath]

lols, burn. I'm just curious more than anything. :)

[printz]

TimeOfDeath said:

Semi Off-Topic Question: assuming there's no new textures, music, sprites, etc., is it legal for a mapper to sell their wad file if the wad just contains the map data? Obviously you'd need an iwad and exe to play it with, but I'm just talking about a mapper selling their bare-bones pwad.

At least, you need to avoid using the Doom or anything related trademarks.

[Fluffles]

I make you textures very cheap price 1 dollar pack buy pack get pack free very cheap china price

[b0rsuk]

NaturalTvventy said:

So he just nabs a bunch of WADs and sells 'em?

Genius!

Welcome to 1996.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shovelware
Does anyone remember Doomsday Collection CD ?

[myk]

Marcaek said:
So what you're saying is that people are going to have to start adding no-commercial use clauses to their wads? Isn't this a violation of SOME copyright law? If not, why the hell has it taken this long for someone to try selling another's work?

Id has always claimed PWADs can't be sold commercially. This is clearcut in any PWAD that has lumps that are derivative from the IWADs, such as modified patches and flats or map edits, but less so in a PWAD that just has maps from scratch plus any independent and free resources. In the latter case it would depend on whether PWADs are interpreted as independent works related to the games or as something that falls under their license (which claims any add-on is derivative and thus bound to it.) That is, it depends on the legal stance on the validity of product licenses against general copyrights.

Phml said:
There is no extra work, no added value, no intent to provide anything to the customer here. This is a mere repackaging of available resources, throwing in some whitewashing in an attempt to make a few bucks.

Even warez and "piracy" include some extra work, much like picking berries in a field, without mentioning the possible costs or risks of avoiding potential legal repercussions. Cheaper software/media or greater availability give people an incentive to pay for it, which is a form of recognition for the service rendered. You may be able to claim that it "damages more creative commercial activity" but not that there is no (distribution) work or service.

Since Base Ganymede and Freedoom can be obtained for free, this could be considered somewhat of a scam, but even then, it does extend the accessibility of both items (especially in a combined form) and if there really is nothing prohibiting their sale it's not a crime. Even it it might be more ethical to just stick links to the two works in some popular place, those would not equal the extra venue of iTunes.

I wish the lesson people would learn from this comic is that extremism doesn't work, regardless of the side you pick.

But that would miss the point, as it's saying free software defenders were treated as deluded nerds until the effects of what they were warning against bit their detractors in the ass.

Middle grounds are mainly compromises between extremes, where extremes are the general principles of differing points of view. Extremism would be out of place only if we all had the same interests, but that is not the case.

[Dr. Durr]

They could get sued by id.
It uses MBF's guard dogs, which are Wolf3D sprites.

[Phml]

But that would miss the point, as it's saying free software defenders were treated as deluded nerds until the effects of what they were warning against bit their detractors in the ass.

The point I am making is that the author, while trying to make another point, inavertently touched on why this happens.

Group #1 - deluded nerds, lost in their personal crusade, unwilling to learn to communicate.

Group #2 - "cool guys", willing to give control of their social life to an entity and then cry about that entity having control over their social life.

Group #3 - the majority, who might use both free software and Facebook but doesn't obsess about either of these things.

#1 and #2 take extreme stances, are unwilling to even try to find some middle ground and in the end, neither of them get what they want. Stuck in their bubble, they start to believe because they're the only vocal ones no other point of view exists, and they forget about #3. This leads them to be out of touch with reality and ends up with inevitable frustration when that reality comes back to smack them in the face every now and then.

Life in any kind of community is about compromises and finding some common middle ground. You cannot just hold onto your ideas and dismiss what everyone else has to say forever, it's just not sustainable in the long run.

[myk]

Phml said:
The point I am making is that the author, while trying to make another point, inavertently touched on why this happens.

Nah, nah, that "inadvertent touching" was the expression of your "extremism". Language is partially empty, with the rest filled by us readers, which come with a baggage of social relations, senses and meanings that filter anything we touch with our powers of discernment.

Group #1 - deluded nerds, lost in their personal crusade, unwilling to learn to communicate.

Group #2 - "cool guys", willing to give control of their social life to an entity and then cry about that entity having control over their social life.

Group #3 - the majority, who might use both free software and Facebook but doesn't obsess about either of these things.

#1 and #2 take extreme stances, are unwilling to even try to find some middle ground and in the end, neither of them get what they want. Stuck in their bubble, they start to believe because they're the only vocal ones no other point of view exists, and they forget about #3.

Talking about extremes, #1 and #2 are certain types of people who have certain walks of life which give them strong stances on particular issues. Some business man may be a strong supporter of proprietary software while some people involved in guaranteeing the availability of a universal encyclopedia would garner around the idea of free software, for example. And "#3" is actually a simplification of types #3 to #1,987,345, many of which aren't as concerned in the issue in question, but will take different sorts of stances depending on the situation and their type, often supporting or rejecting #1 or #2 to different degrees because these two are heavily involved in the issue and very familiar with it.

By the way, from your description versus the comic, #2 is probably not really a #2 (the opposite extreme of the free software nerd) but someone from the #3+ grouping. The strict Stallman-opponent that you implied in the last quoted paragraph and I mentioned, or a #2 type required for there to be a clash of extremes, would likely not care much whether Facebook applies invasive practices. The beardless guy in the comic and the one you identified as "#2" seems like a middle ground guy that didn't care much about the argument and thought things would work out without going through it, and this fits more with how you described "#3", and not some "intellectual property zealot".

Don't forget that "middle-ground" supporters can themselves be as adamant and extreme in their "middleness" as the extremes they interpose. The position you described above more or less segregates interest groups as weirdos, so it suffers from intolerance or the inability to reach compromises with them.

Extremes, after all, refer to the ways and opinions of others (in the sense of "aliens") and are a mental shortcut making their "odd and partially incomprehensible character" easier to deal with from our established ways. They are out there in "the extreme" because they are distanced from our values, habits and interests. Since those values are different, we see them as warped, because we tend to feel they have too much of this, too little of that, and the like. It's easy to get an idea of "regular", "middle-ground" or "practical" ways when these surround us and create a psychological and social environment for us, but if you go elsewhere where other values prevail, you suddenly find yourself in the land of the extreme, where in turn those "extremists" think you're weird and extreme in other ways.

[Reisal]

Why buy it from iTunes when you can download it from /idgames for no cost? :)

[Graf Zahl]

Maybe because it goes beyond the capabilities of the average iUser to make that work?

[qoncept]

Mr. Chris said:

Why buy it from iTunes when you can download it from /idgames for no cost? :)

How many times does it have to be said that you can't play any of those versions on iOS?

[printz]

Mr. Chris said:

Why buy it from iTunes when you can download it from /idgames for no cost? :)

Do you even get to support Khorus by buying it?

[Marcaek]

printz said:

Do you even get to support Khorus by buying it?

I don't think he minds judging from his post in this thread, but yeah it's pointless unless you specifically only want to play on your phone or are unfamiliar with or unwilling to pay for Doom.