The Dark Mod

[Jashin]

Keep up the good work

Thief can roughly be qualified through a series of locales:

-inn
-museum
-manor house
-streets/rooftops
-dock/ships
-hammer cathedral
-pagan santuary
-keeper compound
-ancient ruins
-prison
-woodsie realm
-etc.

How do you guys plan to do this, organized collections of theme sets or it is just as many props as possible in a given release?

[Schwaa2]

The props are adding up for sure.

I personally am trying to make things that have been listed as basic needed items, things I think we need, and things I want to include. Hopefully by release there won't be any basic items that taffers ask "why don't you have?"

Hopefully it will be more like T2 is now, "I would like this specialty item for my mission, anyone want to make one".

Our aim is to release a full package that FM's can be created with without having to resort to custom content. But I know this community well and it wouldn't suprise me at all if the first unofficially released mission has some kind of custom content in it, even if only a texture.

[sparhawk]

How do you guys plan to do this, organized collections of theme sets or it is just as many props as possible in a given release?

Rather simple. We have several mappers working on their own maps, where most of them are pretty different. Whatever is needed to finish these maps will be included. This should give us a good idea of a stable base.
Of course it woul dbe nice to create textures and models for themes, but then again this is pretty boring to work on. Working on a map gives at least a visible result instead of just saying "We have 20 models for dungeon scenarios, 35 textures for churche themes, etc. ..."
And if people miss something, they have to do the same that we have to do - create it. After all we want to finish some time.

[malau]

I've often wondered this, but do you have FULL WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Legal Department at EIDOS/SCi to use their intellectual property ?

Just changing the names and not calling the protaganist 'Garrett' doesn't make a difference to Lawyers. It would be like me writing a book about a wizard who's name is Larry Scotter who goes to school at Bogsports and hoping that the publisher's don't care.

[Fingernail]

If there was going to be a legal fuss it would've kicked off already. I think it's highly unlikely that someone at Eidos isn't aware of the project, and although they have no actual say in terms of copyright, a few of the Thief devs have said they don't envisage a problem with it IIRC.

Your example doesn't apply because the Dark Mod is not a game with characters (also because why would the publishers care unless you were actually selling your book?). It's just a toolset - a collection of code, art and sound effects. Unless Eidos thinks it owns the rights to certain gameplay mechanics (which haven't necessarily been copied exactly anyway, and which crop up in many games), or a certain style of art, or certain generic fantasy weapons and settings seen in many formats before and since Thief, then the mod will be fine.

If someone were to create a mission about Garrett, potentially Eidos could stop them. However, I don't see this as likely either, considering the abundance of fan art, fan fiction etc. that they implicitly allow.

[OrbWeaver]

I've often wondered this, but do you have FULL WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Legal Department at EIDOS/SCi to use their intellectual property ?

No, because we are not using their intellectual property. If you want you can search on the Dark Mod forums for the same endless discussions of this tired old subject.

Just changing the names and not calling the protaganist 'Garrett' doesn't make a difference to Lawyers. It would be like me writing a book about a wizard who's name is Larry Scotter who goes to school at Bogsports and hoping that the publisher's don't care.

Rubbish. There is no copyright on "Thief-like stealth games", any more than there is a copyright on "stories about teenage wizards". Copyright protects content (text, video, audio) not ideas.

[*Zaccheus*]

Copyright protects content (text, video, audio) not ideas.

Correct.

[Phantom0914]

What happened to Thievery is that dead?

[Yandros]

I think it's still around but not being updated any more. The last time I went online to play, I don't recall there being anyone else on any of the servers, but that may have been a fluke.

[adonly]

I've often wondered this, but do you have FULL WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Legal Department at EIDOS/SCi to use their intellectual property ?

Just changing the names and not calling the protaganist 'Garrett' doesn't make a difference to Lawyers. It would be like me writing a book about a wizard who's name is Larry Scotter who goes to school at Bogsports and hoping that the publisher's don't care.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJn_jC4FNDo

[BrokenArts]

What happened to Thievery is that dead?

People still play, not like we used to. There is version 1.6 of Thievery, that was released back in March. There is talk of some updated models, supposedly being worked on, a guard model by Gullenfox. I haven't played it in a long time, tournaments are still held. Yeah, it just won't die.

[malau]

No, because we are not using their intellectual property. If you want you can search on the Dark Mod forums for the same endless discussions of this tired old subject.

Rubbish. There is no copyright on "Thief-like stealth games", any more than there is a copyright on "stories about teenage wizards". Copyright protects content (text, video, audio) not ideas.

No need to take that attitude.
I thought it was just New Horizon, but it seems all of you DarkMod lot are really obnoxious and arrogant - not to mention totally uninformed about INTELLECTUAL copyright infringement (it was created to stop people like you saying exactly what you just said).

And let's not forget the fact that you are touting your wares on this forum, and there are pages of archived eidence scattered all over this site, more than proves that this software project is based upon Eidos intellectual property.


If not, then maybe Eidos will care, because:-

A> All of the Thief series is still on sale.
B> You are using another company's technology (Engine) to ape Eidos' property.
C> Eidos is notoriously litigious - and you bunch could not financially afford to defend yourself if they saw fit to send you a Summons.
D> Your software neither does anything for, nor benefits Eidos in any way shape or form, financial or otherwise - THE bottom line.


As an Eidos shareholder I have the right to submit these same questions (in writing) at the A.G.M. or to The Financial Director at any time prior to this.

If it wasn't that it would spoil other's fun then I would do this and get you shut down ASAP just because you are soooo rude and cocky.


And don't waste your time flaming me, I will not get involved. I will not even read this thread again.

[*Zaccheus*]

You should consider Pixar vs Dreamworks, eg. "Finding Nemo" vs "Shark Tale" and "A Bugs Life" vs "Ants" etc.

As an Eidos shareholder I have the right to submit these same questions (in writing) at the A.G.M. or to The Financial Director at any time prior to this.

I will not even read this thread again.

I find that unlikely.

[DeargDoom]

What is thievery?

[Briareos H]

No need to take that attitude.
I thought it was just New Horizon, but it seems all of you DarkMod lot are really obnoxious and arrogant - not to mention totally uninformed about INTELLECTUAL copyright infringement (it was created to stop people like you saying exactly what you just said).

And let's not forget the fact that you are touting your wares on this forum, and there are pages of archived eidence scattered all over this site, more than proves that this software project is based upon Eidos intellectual property.


If not, then maybe Eidos will care, because:-

A> All of the Thief series is still on sale.
B> You are using another company's technology (Engine) to ape Eidos' property.
C> Eidos is notoriously litigious - and you bunch could not financially afford to defend yourself if they saw fit to send you a Summons.
D> Your software neither does anything for, nor benefits Eidos in any way shape or form, financial or otherwise - THE bottom line.


As an Eidos shareholder I have the right to submit these same questions (in writing) at the A.G.M. or to The Financial Director at any time prior to this.

If it wasn't that it would spoil other's fun then I would do this and get you shut down ASAP just because you are soooo rude and cocky.


And don't waste your time flaming me, I will not get involved. I will not even read this thread again.

great job losing all your credibility on those forums man

[Springheel]

Perhaps the cause of all the "obnoxious and arrogant" comments (seriously? you must live a sheltered life in these forums) is people posting this as if we've never considered it. Surprising as it may seem, we *did* think a little bit about this three years ago when we started this venture. Not only did we *think* about it, we actually did a little homework.

So thanks very much for your concern.

[OrbWeaver]

Some utterly inane and ignorant garbage, pointless ranting and a few hypocritical ad-homs thrown in for good measure.

Are you related to that Time Cube guy, by any chance?

[mazzortock]

ROTFL! LOL!

Very very funny

This is the envy, guys, don't mind about it. This means that you are supergrowing and the project TDM it's cool.

So go ahead!

[*Zaccheus*]

Check out this thread:
http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthr...light=dark+mod

[Fingernail]

The fact they allowed Thievery, whose name is even suspiciously closer to Thief than the Dark Mod, to an indiscriminate legal department the fact that it was only multiplayer would have made very little difference if they were intent on protecting their IP to that extent.

[ToolFan2007]

I've often wondered this, but do you have FULL WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Legal Department at EIDOS/SCi to use their intellectual property ?

Just changing the names and not calling the protaganist 'Garrett' doesn't make a difference to Lawyers. It would be like me writing a book about a wizard who's name is Larry Scotter who goes to school at Bogsports and hoping that the publisher's don't care.

So why is Thievery allowed to get away then? But that could be just because the game was just so small and bugged to death no one gave a damn. Thievery in fact had very little to do with Thief and played almost entirely differently.

As for the Dark Mod, they are using copyrighted paintings from museums to add textures to the game. That above anything could be used against them IF Dark Mod is ever released in 2010.

[OrbWeaver]

So why is Thievery allowed to get away then?

Presumably because they, like the Dark Mod, are not using Eidos' copyrighted assets. How many times does it have to be said?

As for the Dark Mod, they are using copyrighted paintings from museums to add textures to the game.

Care to cite an example? You realise that 16th-century oil paintings are not actually copyrighted, don't you?

[Fingernail]

he means the copyright in the photograph of said painting, which failed to stand up to defense in this hearing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgem...el_Corporation

So I'd assume there won't be a problem there, either.

[demagogue]

I'm thinking you (toolfan) are being ironic in that ^ post (oops 2 posts in the way) ... but you can never tell these days.

Anyway, a few points coming from a lawyer:

Classic paintings are quintessentially in the public domain. No Copyright. Placement, organization, photos of the paintings (or of their placement) don't add anything original, so no "authorship", so no copyright there either.

Gameplay, like any "application functionality", can't be copyrighted; nor for the same reason can the basic functional elements of gameplay (even "published" elements) like a lightgem, frob-highlighting, health bar/potion, etc, just like you can't copyright a "recycle" icon or "File" button. Computer law would seriously be completely upended and rioting would take place in the streets if this were overturned!

Generic medieval setting or characters certainly can't be copyrighted.

Plot can only be copyrighted if it is incredibly parallel, practically by the page, but that's not even an issue here. Characters might conceivably get protection, but only if the copy's "personality" is depicted in great detail and in obvious, displacing overlap to the published version, so it cannot reasonably be distinguished as another character. There is no detail as to the personality of the avatar or any AI in DM. A "generic" character is a guaranteed safe harbor. So no issue here.

"Look and feel" might conceivably get protection, but again it has to be so obviously parallel that you can't reasonably imagine the look coming from another source. "Real world" looking is a safe harbor, and FPS's generally are especially safe for similar reasons, esp in this era of FPS clones ... once you aren't talking about plot or character. But anyway it isn't even an issue here, as DM is merely an authors' package.

Direct assets can definitely be copyrighted, but all of the assets here are either custom made or are from explicitly public sources.

Really, they have their bases covered.

[Schwaa2]

Well since we are all obnoxious and arrogant I will add:

Garrett had a mechanical eye, our thief doesn't so HA! Not even close to character infringement.

sorry, just had to do it.