| |
Perff
Administrator
Posts: 1677 |
Rules and behaviour on CSDb.
Over the years that CSDb have existed, there have been some unsertanty what kind of behaviour is allowed at CSDb.
Because of this we have now written down some rules. As it says at the bottom, the rules can be updates/changed at any point, and if this happens it will be posted in this thread.
Any comments to the rules are welcome.
The rules can be found here: http://noname.c64.org/csdb/help.php?section=rules
Read it! :) |
|
... 23 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Wanderer
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 478 |
Also what about uploading of previews. I used to upload these under Game Preview but was advised that it should be under Cracks. I notice a lot of previews go under "c64 cracks".
To further muddle the issue, if you read the scroll text of many previews it says it was "cracked". I can't imagine someone releasing a non-working game with any sort of copy-protection.
I just follow the lead and use c64 cracks but in hindsight, I wonder is it not better left as a game preview??
Opinions/
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
if the preview was released by a cracker group, then it goes under cracks. if it was released by the producer themselves (like eg protovision does) then it goes under previews. just my 10ct. |
| |
V-12
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 206 |
Well it's really hard to describe again. Something what wasn't cracked it's wrongly called "crack". But then how to call these releases? Morever, alot of groups in the 80's was importing cracked games to their countries, linked only intros and released again. And how to call those games? C64 Import ? ;-)
I think that for those hard to describe releases we should add just "C64 Release" option.
|
| |
Scout
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 1570 |
Quote: if the preview was released by a cracker group, then it goes under cracks. if it was released by the producer themselves (like eg protovision does) then it goes under previews. just my 10ct.
Yeah, what Groepaz said.
---
-= Silicon Ltd. =-
http://forum.siliconlimited.com
Commodore 64 Scenemusic Podcast
http://8bitmayhem.blogspot.com/ |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
@murdock: if its a game and has an intro infront, its a "crack". doesnt really make sense to discuss wether it had a copyprotection or not or if any cracking was involved at all. ofcourse in the v2 version of csdb it would be nice to drop those few cathegories alltogether and instead tag each release with one or more cathegories ([x]game [x]crack [x]import [x]preview) |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
Also, what exactly IS a copy protection? This is not always clear. Are hidden files a copy protection? Is V-Max a copy protection? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
hehe good point :) most so called "copy protections" strictly speaking arent, since they only prevent the copied program from running, not copying itself. that said, i think vmax actually IS a copy protection :=P |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
The author of V-Max said it is no copy protection, just a fastloader :) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
yeah, but one thats hard to copy :=P |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1085 |
Quote:3. If any person who "owns" information doesn't want the information in CSDb it is totally their rights to remove it, and should be respected. This means that if you have any doubts that the person who owns the information does not want it in CSDb, you must not add it, and also that this person have the right to delete the information at any time.
I disagree, information cannot be handled like that, only the copyrighted data itself. For example, if a software company doesnt want their game on here, only the downloads (and possibly screenshot) should be removed, not the information about who did the actual release. Nobody owns the rights to that type of info.
Burglar |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
