Akalistos said:
If your talking about MOD and MODING the game, i understand. But that code was make to steal and therefore isn't the same. Try to see that my way. You create something and sell it. One day a guy tell you that it like it better with something he done. It wouldn't piss you off. But if another one came and take everything just for the sake of not paying for it. Wouldn't that piss you off. Today, laws are more for criminal than victims. A thief cut himself at your house, not only would he walk free but he would sue your ass for everything he couldn't take.
Beside, that intellectual property was use to stole the intellectual property of another. And...Wait, wait... Speaking of freeware! Didn't that code end up being one? It made for hacking but Myth or whatever didn't charge anything for it. It was free for everyone. How come they can't use it? Their work was acknowledge right? Ergo, they could use it. Beside, it what i call Poetic Justice. You can't be against it without being against hackers.
The code, apparently, was a NoCD crack. I use NoCD cracks all the time, on my legally bought games; the code is made to circumvent a critical flaw of the software, not "to steal". But that's another debate. Anyway, the crack is not freeware unless it is licensed as such. A fair analogy might be a user creating a video and uploading it to YouTube. Granted, it's free for people to look at all they want, but if someone takes that video, puts it on a CD and sells it, he is still violating the law.
sabbat said:
This is Myth we are talking about. So I'm gonna go with they don't publish under a liscence.
In that case, it's simple. The code of the crack is property of Myth.
KingPiccolOwned said:
Well Blizzard and Square Enix apparently do, so why not Rockstar?
I don't know about Square Enix, but with Blizzard, no. Blizzard often incorporate fan works and mods into their games, but they still have to CREATE said themselves, using said works as inspiration. The exception is contests and competition where the submitted works are specifically said to become the property of the contest holder.
If I write a small program that opens the game's executable, flips every 0 to 1 and every 1 to 0, I've created a program that modifies the executable. Who owns that program? I'll tell you who owns it. ME. What Myth did is make a program that does selective, targeted changes. They own it. They may not have any right to use it, but legally the DO OWN IT.
Silver Patriot said:
So what are they going to do, sue? It's was not only illegal in the first place but they were distibuting it for free. If they want to complain Rockstar could just sue them to hell, right?
I already said that I don't fancy it being particularly enforceable. Rockstar could sue all they want, but like it or not, they wouldn't be likely to get very far with it; it'd be an excruciatingly long and horrid case with no useful end result. Myth's case is better, in that regard, because unless a license exists that ALLOWS Rockstar to use the code commercially, they are not allowed to do it.
However, if Rockstar were to ask Myth if they could use the code, the only appropriate response from Myth would be "Yes, you can use it, we appreciate you asking, just put us in the end credits of it".