Information and freedom
|
https://youtu.be/sfgVS5mCLmk
So there is this law suit by a game company against a cheater... #1 i by no means condone or in anyway like cheating. But there is something wrong with a system in which you are mandated to process information on your computer in a specific manner, and face serious a serious law suit for failure to do so. I disagree with the legality of contracts which dictate how my computer processes information. My computer is an extension of who i am as a person, and it should inherit my rights as a citizen. To tell us what and how to process information is an afront to the sanctity of our own self determinism. I am not a robot of the system. This is the very essence of freedom, the primary principle upon which our country was founded. The transfer of information IS speech, regardless of if it is digital/ spoken/ or transmitted electronically. Am i vocal about this issue because i want to cheat or benefit from cheating? No. The freedom of "processing how you want to" is a fundamental concept which in the future (as computers are more integrated into ourselves) will become a very big deal. If we become accustomed to others taking that freedom away, the future citizens will never have that freedom to begin with. And there is the possibility of really REALLY nasty things which others can do (in the future) when they claim ownership of your processing. Are we really going to become a society in which the only freedoms we have are ones that others allow us to have? And the moment we say or do something which offends or makes someone uncomfortable, it becomes illegal? Just because i dont like what someone has to say doesnt mean such things should criminal. But on the other side, there should be limits to freedom of speech. Implanting falsehoods, flooding, and nonsense should all be limited for various reasons. As for the individual case in which the video i linked is concerned, one could make a case that the commands sent by the cheater are non factual... basically he is lying to the game about what actions he performed. But that is NOT illegal currently. Lies are not criminal behavior in and of themselves, it is only when they are used to slander or mislead an investigation that they become illegal. This is the problem with the law. For years i searched for deep truths. A thousand revelations. At the very edge...the ability to think itself dissolves away.Thinking in human language is the problem. Any separation from 'the whole truth' is incomplete.My incomplete concepts may add to your 'whole truth', accept it or think about it Last bumped on Oct 29, 2017, 4:34:51 AM
| |
" There's a big difference between cheating and "The Defendant is accused of using, distributing, and streaming use of the cheats.". Especially when we all well know that the distributing part is him selling the cheat or selling access to the cheat via a monthly subscription. Build of the week #9 - Breaking your face with style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_EcQDOUN9Y
IGN: Poltun | |
|
The issue is not the cheat. The issue is contracts which invalidate your liberties. I dont understand how you feel the distribution of the cheat is at all relevant to anything.
We dont ban chemistry classes and tools after someone brews up a perfectly legal chemical just because someone is getting sued for breach of contract for the use of that chemical. Lets say we are first graders playing tic tac toe. And i use my knowledge to win and someone gets mad and sues me. If i told you how to play a perfect game of tic tac toe, should that really be a big issue? Is getting mad at me more my problem or the problem of the game? And how could you possibly justify a contract for playing tic tac toe which mandates that you not think about the game. Do i really lose my freedom of thought because someone wrote it down and forced me accept it in order to play? No. The contract itself is illegal. You cant sign away your most basic liberties. For years i searched for deep truths. A thousand revelations. At the very edge...the ability to think itself dissolves away.Thinking in human language is the problem. Any separation from 'the whole truth' is incomplete.My incomplete concepts may add to your 'whole truth', accept it or think about it
| |
|
That the player cheated is not a copyright violation. Whether the player using additional code can be considered a copyright violation depends on if the code was active separately, or packaged as a modified version of the game. If it was the latter, it is a derivative work and covered under copyright law.
I doubt they will get very far with their complaints about the cheater streaming (unless they are charging players money to stream). I doubt they will get very far with complaints of him making numerous accounts (this has nothing to do with copyright laws) other than a legal injunction against him doing so again, and likely legal fee recovery. Where they probably can and should legally hit the cheater is for irreparable damage to the game's reputation. Otherwise, I agree with the basic sentiment of the post, which is EULA's shouldn't be telling people what they can do with their computers. Unfortunately, without some laws restricting EULA's, they will continue to grow in scope. One day, it might be illegal to play an online game without wearing shoes, or run map areas where Krillson can appear if you don't have a fishing rod IRL nearby. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
| |
" It is a copyright violation because the thing he's selling NEEDS the source code to be able to be ran. It's like making a play/movie/show based on a book. If that play/show/movie doesn't have the authorizaation of the author, it's illegal. Build of the week #9 - Breaking your face with style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_EcQDOUN9Y
IGN: Poltun | |
"Who decides what speech is false or otherwise nonsense? If those deciding decide poorly — say, due to corruption — then how do those unfairly deprived of speech seek redress? "  When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Oct 28, 2017, 11:21:16 PM
|
|
" He's making something to alter the code of a copyrighted file in order to make money out of it. I don't know how it could be clearer than that... His code can ONLY work on that one game. Build of the week #9 - Breaking your face with style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_EcQDOUN9Y
IGN: Poltun | |
" A review of a movie needs the movie to be relevant, but that doesn't make it a copyright violation. If his hack is a modified program, and not something that runs separately but actively in the background, then it is a violation. Median XL or a Skyrim mod would be an example of such. To make it clear - On the PC, Path of Exile NEEDS an operating system to run. Because it uses Windows to run, doesn't mean it is a violation of Microsoft's copyright. "Derivative works are different. A Skyrim mod would be a derivative work. If Poe.trade just indexed information from the game, it wouldn't be a derivative work. If it used any of their source code, or a fair amount of their graphics, sound etc, than it could be considered that. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910 Last edited by DalaiLama on Oct 29, 2017, 12:03:04 AM
| |
|
If the movie critic would somehow alter the movie, it would be. It would be like adding massive spoilers to the movie at the very start as a modification of the film.
A critic isn't even close to similar. Build of the week #9 - Breaking your face with style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_EcQDOUN9Y
IGN: Poltun | |
|
I think we should collectively agree faerwin is extremely wrong and avoid a derail over this.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
|
