| |
Slartibartfast
Account closed
Registered: Jul 2002
Posts: 230 |
** Link removed by CSDb staff due to copyright. Please do not provide download links to this **
Well, there has been a few of these notices today, on certain Protovision releases that have been cracked and released by some people on CSDb.
Cracking has always been a large part of the scene, arguably the biggest and also what has ultimately ensured the scene to exist today.
If it weren't for cracking, piracy if you will, many games simply wouldn't be available on the web today. The C64dtv wouldn't have much of a lineup, all the games on it were cracks from the scene.
Now this issue has come to CSDb again, over old releases of Protovision games. Download links removed, to files which are definitely a part of the scene.
I can understand the policy on this, it's a way to protect CSDb against legal action. Other sites, for instance GB64, have tackled this by not hosting the files and just providing links to them.
But CSDb won't allow even that, if someone has an issue with their copyrighted work being available, the links will be removed. Even links provided by the user in their comment to the entry, will be censored and removed.
There is nothing regarding this policy in the CSDb FAQ, yet there is this disclaimer:
"Who's responsible for this?
We cannot take responsibility for the content of this database as all information is submitted by users."
So, that says straight out that CSDb is not responsible for the content.
It can be said that this is a way to protect CSDb in future, but from whom exactly? Can anyone honestly see Chronosoft or Protovision sueing anyone? Or if this is a measure to protect CSDb, could it go further and remove all cracks from the site?
On the other hand, CSDb are just trying to protect themselves, from Protovision apparently. Should we take the old debate over piracy directly to Protovision? As sceners themselves, they should know better than to be taking on this issue against sceners. Don't we all know by now that the people who would download these cracks, are not the same people that would buy it? That some of the people that get the game for free may even consider buying it at a later point?
One of the Protovision founders was a cracker himself, other members have been crackers, swappers or undoubtedly recipients of pirated software themselves.
This seemed to start with Macgyver altering a release of a PTV game here yesterday. A member of Protovision and also a CSDb admin. He was a swapper in the past.
Is this censorship really necessary? Do Protovision really think they would lose sales of these games, does CSDb really think there is any threat of legalities from an admin of this site?
This is an issue that strikes deep with many in the scene, and this site is an essential part of the scene today.
Surely there must be a better way to deal with this.
So let's discuss it here rather than in comments on these censored releases ;) |
|
... 209 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1927 |
Since many people repeat the same shit here over and over, I'd like to make this short:
What 90% of the people here apparently want is MacGyver's "trusted" status removed and to get informed whenever their contributions to the database are modified.
Also a more transparent user level view would be a matter in the long run I guess.
It is out of question that the admins and hosters of the project have the RIGHT to add and remove anything they want from the database and to keep the system running I'd do just the same - a note towards the contributor is a strict requirement here though.
All we want are clear statements to be able to handle the situation in a way the scene always used to handle things.
Simple as that.
Sidenote: MANY of the "arguments" here made me laugh indeed ... people *I* trust answer my questions e.g. :)
Btw, Metal Dust PREVIEW will be only available by P2P due to it's unbelievable long cracking intro.
Groups who want to participate on the FINAL release please pass their intro (INCL. all the samples, scrolltexts, credits and other specialties) as archive to the release team. Please do not exceed 15 megs per intro.
l8r
Count Zero/CyberpunX/SCS*TRC
|
| |
Stan
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 187 |
Oh boys... |
| |
Seven
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 202 |
This isn't Spankerz Heaven, you don't have to do meaningless cock avoider posts, Stan =) |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
Hahaha.
Nicely worded Count0.
Some simple communication and common-sense would be nice. I hope Perff is reading. :) |
| |
fade
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 290 |
wow what a load of old crap here.. Now's a good time to suggest a "Buy a Demo" policy. Cause todays games are pretty crap and the only real awe inspiring thing left on the 64 is a demo. Such hard efforts should be rewarded.
Fade - I cracked, packed, trained & fixed yamum!
|
| |
Stan
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 187 |
After crawling through I don't know how many messages, just some quick remarks:
1) PTV is the copyright owner, so in legal terms they can do with their releases what they want. I assume from reading the posts that almost none really doubts that legal aspect.
2) Yet the big picture of the PTV policy irritates me a lot: If I remember right, the group or at least some core members were actively cracking/pirating in the past. Thus most of the moral arguments do not sound too convincing to me. For that reason, I do not understand the hostility towards the cracking scene expressed by Mac Gyver.
3) The "downvoting"- issue violates my idea of a transparent voting system, because Street Tuff (Moin Tuffi!) could assume that his votes are secretly hidden to non-admins. This violates some essential and crucial ideas of voting in democratically organized communities, guys. And to me it doesn't matter for whatever reason Street Tuff voted someone down. It is his right to do so. Just like others before, I do not feel comfortable with this - NOT AR ALL. YET: If you like, make all votes public, I would still vote the same. But it is fucking ridiculous to see that people check votes if I could assume it is hidden.
Have a good afternoon.
Stan Hitmen |
| |
Stryyker
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 468 |
Wow.
If copyright is wished ot be protected then I guess the admins want to protect themselves. Disclaimers don't always legally rpotect yourself. I know I'm now in a minority and have no friends now. It is obvious - this site is not a suitable medium for keeping records of crack scene releases.
This was much easier when his database was seen as a legal scene database and not for cracks etc.
Some people are very passionate which is nice to see.
Some people have odd ideas about copyright. Copyright does not mean commercial just your work is protected so people don't commercially use your work without your permission and much more.
Protovision is commercial. It sells the stuff. Motivations and costs don't matter. Profits are not a measure of commercialism - only a measure of success. Look at recent news AMD loses money on its memory devices. It can't cover the full costs but it is commercial.
See early point - with that I have no problem with Mac removing the link to the download but I do have issues with his abuse of power like checking down voting. Suck it in Mac - work harder on the thing you are down voted on if it is important to you.
Nice to see civility is still dead. |
| |
Mermaid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 338 |
Quote: It is plain silly really. I agree with H.O's views completely. The scene started with cracking, in the beginning there was no such thing as a demo group or even a demo. There was cracking only, and it IS the basis of the scene. And it continues to be
a large part of the scene today.
TheBlueNinja: Obviously you know squat about cracking, and are biased against it in some way. So you should just keep your mouth shut on such subjects as you don't have any clue what your speaking of.
Mermaid: Are you whining again? Oh for pete sake... grow up yourself.
I love you too Fungus :-) |
| |
Crossfire
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 221 |
Oh for crying outloud, this is the same discussion thats been going on the centuries - ex-crackers getting pissed off because they suddently turned legal and apparently by that also became keepers of the double-standard-grail...there is the copyright aspect, sure, now you keep it sacred, years ago you could give a toss...
Nice..
Grow up...wanna make money, find another machine - the fact alone that you whine over people pirating your games on the C64 for a reason I can only asume is financial is ridicolous in itself....was this 15-20 years ago I could understand your argument, but this is fucking 2005..
The discussion remain over the years, only the debaters change....sigh |
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1927 |
Holla,
nice to see that Kim didn't read anything here or tried to understand it.
The ongoing discussions that creeps into the ACTUAL topic - the reliability and credibility of csdb - are completely to DISMISS.
Concentrate - after 150 posts - on the solution, dammit.
l8r
Count Zero/CyberpunX/SCS*TRC |
| Previous - 1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 22 - Next |
