key points to note: WoW version 1.12 is no longer available from blizzard at all in Legion.
I give up. . .
. . .I should have realized that I can't inform the willfully ignorant.
I wouldn't call that bit right there informing. I'd call it spinning using a very thin argument that carves out an old WOW patch and tries to portray it as an abandoned game.
First WoW 1.12 is not just "and old WoW patch" it is a version of the game that existed before paid expansions to the game and is no longer available to people that bought vanilla. the same can be said for every expansion through BC-WoD.
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
"where such activities are carried out without any
purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage and the video game is not distributed
or made available outside of the physical premises of the eligible library, archives or
museum."
So you going to go play over at Nost's sever site?
that just means that Nost cannot offer the unmodified WoW 1.12 client to play the game. It does not prohibit them from distributing any code modifications to the client to make it run off their servers.
It also prohibits them from renting servers from third parties to run the game.
so the answer would be no, because there would be no need. . .and also because I don't play on private servers, where you under the assumption that I did?
key points to note: WoW version 1.12 is no longer available from blizzard at all in Legion.
I give up. . .
. . .I should have realized that I can't inform the willfully ignorant.
I wouldn't call that bit right there informing. I'd call it spinning using a very thin argument that carves out an old WOW patch and tries to portray it as an abandoned game.
First WoW 1.12 is not just "and old WoW patch" it is a version of the game that existed before paid expansions to the game and is no longer available to people that bought vanilla. the same can be said for every expansion through BC-WoD.
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
It's a worthless, far-fetched argument because to this day you can play WOW on the official servers without ever having bought any expansions.
The fact that subsequent patches changed that base game is irrelevant since that was always potentially the case.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
key points to note: WoW version 1.12 is no longer available from blizzard at all in Legion.
I give up. . .
. . .I should have realized that I can't inform the willfully ignorant.
I wouldn't call that bit right there informing. I'd call it spinning using a very thin argument that carves out an old WOW patch and tries to portray it as an abandoned game.
First WoW 1.12 is not just "and old WoW patch" it is a version of the game that existed before paid expansions to the game and is no longer available to people that bought vanilla. the same can be said for every expansion through BC-WoD.
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
It's a worthless, far-fetched argument because to this day you can play WOW on the official servers without ever having bought any expansions.
The fact that subsequent patches changed that base game is irrelevant since that was always potentially the case.
That can be argued very easily IMO, nothing far fetched about it. There is very little that is the same, we can make a list of more differences today. Gameplay, talent trees, entire world remake, graphics, etc etc.
If I play current WoW I fall asleep. Vanilla WoW naps weren't allowed. I think that fact that we can point to other companies that have pulled it off, its spouting hot air.
Runescape, Project1999 We also have several others popping up, as we've read about them here the last year.
Happily playing Vanilla and BC WoW, again, since September 2016.
key points to note: WoW version 1.12 is no longer available from blizzard at all in Legion.
I give up. . .
. . .I should have realized that I can't inform the willfully ignorant.
I wouldn't call that bit right there informing. I'd call it spinning using a very thin argument that carves out an old WOW patch and tries to portray it as an abandoned game.
First WoW 1.12 is not just "and old WoW patch" it is a version of the game that existed before paid expansions to the game and is no longer available to people that bought vanilla. the same can be said for every expansion through BC-WoD.
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
It's a worthless, far-fetched argument because to this day you can play WOW on the official servers without ever having bought any expansions.
The fact that subsequent patches changed that base game is irrelevant since that was always potentially the case.
That can be argued very easily IMO, nothing far fetched about it. There is very little that is the same, we can make a list of more differences today. Gameplay, talent trees, entire world remake, graphics, etc etc.
If I play current WoW I fall asleep. Vanilla WoW naps weren't allowed. I think that fact that we can point to other companies that have pulled it off, its spouting hot air.
Runescape, Project1999 We also have several others popping up, as we've read about them here the last year.
Regardless of whether you enjoy it or don't enjoy it or whether other games have chosen to provide retro experiences or not, as a legal argument the mere fact that 1.12 came after 1.11, and 1.10, and 1.09 is what makes it worthless. Because from day 1, changes to that 1.0 were expected and part of the deal.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Project1999, as I haven't played it, but from what I understand it also includes the first 2 expansions. Updates to the existing game.. It's all fluff arguments. Many games released have version updates, even ones not online.
Sorry but Blizzard clearly looks like an ass and an idiot to me. Think you want and you don't.. They could have made a little $$ from it.. now the best they can do is give it a blessing and be done with it. Hundreds of servers running out there anyway, why not get behind one.. especially one that tries to honor the game and Blizzard to begin with. Oh yeah, and has never been about profit.
Happily playing Vanilla and BC WoW, again, since September 2016.
First WoW 1.12 is not just "and old WoW patch" it is a version of the game that existed before paid expansions to the game and is no longer available to people that bought vanilla. the same can be said for every expansion through BC-WoD.
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
Interesting.
All (created) products from cars to lightbulbs to software - OK not handcrafted one offs but in general I do mean ALL created products - will be modified and updated all the time. And version controlled.
And the product protection that will have been filed on <<insert product here e.g a toaster>> extends (in simple terms) to subsequent modified versions. So no question Blizzard own the copyright.
Your question though is have Blizzard "abandoned" vanilla 1.12 WoW when they released BC.
I think the answer - in two parts - is no. It is a question though.
First part - if it is accepted that patches up to 1.12 were "OK" - then, it would be argued, all other baseline "non-content" patches would also have to be accepted as OK. So everything not released in a paid expansion. Second the content available with 1.1 ... 1.12 is still available - at least it was when I last played. Ergo 1.12 content - as modified by "accepted" baseline patches - is still available.
Which would - I think - be a problem for the vanilla server argument since I suspect that its not new content that the people who want vanilla servers have a problem with but the baseline "mechanics" patches.
And the conclusion of the argument would be that in-game patches would have been expected and were accepted by virtue of wanting to play 1.12 (say).
(What @Iselin said above but in a more pedantic way.)
First WoW 1.12 is not just "and old WoW patch" it is a version of the game that existed before paid expansions to the game and is no longer available to people that bought vanilla. the same can be said for every expansion through BC-WoD.
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
Interesting.
All (created) products from cars to lightbulbs to software - OK not handcrafted one offs but in general I do mean ALL created products - will be modified and updated all the time. And version controlled.
And the product protection that will have been filed on <<insert product here e.g a toaster>> extends (in simple terms) to subsequent modified versions. So no question Blizzard own the copyright.
Your question though is have Blizzard "abandoned" vanilla 1.12 WoW when they released BC.
I think the answer - in two parts - is no. It is a question though.
First part - if it is accepted that patches up to 1.12 were "OK" - then, it would be argued, all other baseline "non-content" patches would also have to be accepted as OK. So everything not released in a paid expansion. Second the content available with 1.1 ... 1.12 is still available - at least it was when I last played. Ergo 1.12 content - as modified by "accepted" baseline patches - is still available.
Which would - I think - be a problem for the vanilla server argument since I suspect that its not new content that the people who want vanilla servers have a problem with but the baseline "mechanics" patches.
And the conclusion of the argument would be that in-game patches would have been expected and were accepted by virtue of wanting to play 1.12 (say).
(What @Iselin said above but in a more pedantic way.)
first off I'm not arguing that Blizz does not have Copyright of their IP they clearly do in regards to the services they still actively support such as WoW: Legion.
as to your two points, one cannot play the game as it was in 1.12 As Blizzard over the years has made changes to the core systems of the game such as talents and class abilities. And when did you last play? after Cataclysm? because much of the content in 1.12 was removed in the Cataclysm expansion remake of the base games Azeroth zones, Naxxramas in no longer available as a level 60 raid 40 man raid as it was repurposed in WotLK. many of the base games instanced battlegrounds and core dungeons have also been replaced. so no, one cannot play the content available in 1.12. it has been removed.
and yes incremental patches are/were expected,but again I'm not talking about incremental patches but rather the game versions no longer available (such as 1.x 2.x ect. . .)( i've just been using 1.12 because that is what version Nost plans to run, as well as being the last meaningful patch before Burning Crusade) and whether fans are allowed to run these versions as a non-profit for fans who originally owned those versions due to Blizz no longer supporting them.
all I've been saying is that there is no legal precedent either way on to the legality of Nost's service and that it needs to go to court with one of two outcomes:
1.) Nost is not allowed to run the server because "abandoned games" does not apply to older versions of a game still in service.
2.) Nost is allowed to operate the server as a non-profit because "abandoned games" does mean older versions of a game still in service.
and maybe people misconstrued my intent because I was mainly explaining Nost's side of the legal issue, but only because Blizzard's side should require no explanation.
key points to note: WoW version 1.12 is no longer available from blizzard at all in Legion.
I give up. . .
. . .I should have realized that I can't inform the willfully ignorant.
I wouldn't call that bit right there informing. I'd call it spinning using a very thin argument that carves out an old WOW patch and tries to portray it as an abandoned game.
First WoW 1.12 is not just "and old WoW patch" it is a version of the game that existed before paid expansions to the game and is no longer available to people that bought vanilla. the same can be said for every expansion through BC-WoD.
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
It's a worthless, far-fetched argument because to this day you can play WOW on the official servers without ever having bought any expansions.
The fact that subsequent patches changed that base game is irrelevant since that was always potentially the case.
you cannot play version 1.12.
the zones in 1.12 were removed for new zones in cataclysm
the Naxx level 60 40 man version raid was removed for the level 80 25 man raid in WotLK
the 10 world bosses that had been released at that time and subsequently removed in later expansions.
if I could still log in and play with these three things then your argument might have merit in my opinion, but I can't so it doesn't. . .
Comments
No One is ever wrong on the Internet.
"My Fantasy is having two men at once...
One Cooking and One Cleaning!"
---------------------------
"A good man can make you feel sexy,
strong and able to take on the whole world...
oh sorry...that's wine...wine does that..."
which is why I believe that Nost and Blizz need to hash it out in court. As there is no legal precedent either way on exactly what equates an "Abandoned game." does the term only have meaning when the game in question shuts down entirely? Or can an argument be made that customers have a right to have access to versions of games they can no longer play?
Indeed, like I said in my original post in this thread the argument is not as cut and dried as some people claim, due to the changes made to the DMCA in 2015.
I never made nor "spun" an argument for Nost, merely tried to inform people of the facts that they were argueing under false pretences due to ignorance.
It also prohibits them from renting servers from third parties to run the game.
so the answer would be no, because there would be no need. . .and also because I don't play on private servers, where you under the assumption that I did?
The fact that subsequent patches changed that base game is irrelevant since that was always potentially the case.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Gameplay, talent trees, entire world remake, graphics, etc etc.
If I play current WoW I fall asleep. Vanilla WoW naps weren't allowed. I think that fact that we can point to other companies that have pulled it off, its spouting hot air.
Runescape, Project1999
We also have several others popping up, as we've read about them here the last year.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Sorry but Blizzard clearly looks like an ass and an idiot to me. Think you want and you don't.. They could have made a little $$ from it.. now the best they can do is give it a blessing and be done with it. Hundreds of servers running out there anyway, why not get behind one.. especially one that tries to honor the game and Blizzard to begin with. Oh yeah, and has never been about profit.
All (created) products from cars to lightbulbs to software - OK not handcrafted one offs but in general I do mean ALL created products - will be modified and updated all the time. And version controlled.
And the product protection that will have been filed on <<insert product here e.g a toaster>> extends (in simple terms) to subsequent modified versions. So no question Blizzard own the copyright.
Your question though is have Blizzard "abandoned" vanilla 1.12 WoW when they released BC.
I think the answer - in two parts - is no. It is a question though.
First part - if it is accepted that patches up to 1.12 were "OK" - then, it would be argued, all other baseline "non-content" patches would also have to be accepted as OK. So everything not released in a paid expansion.
Second the content available with 1.1 ... 1.12 is still available - at least it was when I last played.
Ergo 1.12 content - as modified by "accepted" baseline patches - is still available.
Which would - I think - be a problem for the vanilla server argument since I suspect that its not new content that the people who want vanilla servers have a problem with but the baseline "mechanics" patches.
And the conclusion of the argument would be that in-game patches would have been expected and were accepted by virtue of wanting to play 1.12 (say).
(What @Iselin said above but in a more pedantic way.)
first off I'm not arguing that Blizz does not have Copyright of their IP they clearly do in regards to the services they still actively support such as WoW: Legion.
as to your two points, one cannot play the game as it was in 1.12 As Blizzard over the years has made changes to the core systems of the game such as talents and class abilities. And when did you last play? after Cataclysm? because much of the content in 1.12 was removed in the Cataclysm expansion remake of the base games Azeroth zones, Naxxramas in no longer available as a level 60 raid 40 man raid as it was repurposed in WotLK. many of the base games instanced battlegrounds and core dungeons have also been replaced. so no, one cannot play the content available in 1.12. it has been removed.
and yes incremental patches are/were expected,but again I'm not talking about incremental patches but rather the game versions no longer available (such as 1.x 2.x ect. . .)( i've just been using 1.12 because that is what version Nost plans to run, as well as being the last meaningful patch before Burning Crusade) and whether fans are allowed to run these versions as a non-profit for fans who originally owned those versions due to Blizz no longer supporting them.
all I've been saying is that there is no legal precedent either way on to the legality of Nost's service and that it needs to go to court with one of two outcomes:
1.) Nost is not allowed to run the server because "abandoned games" does not apply to older versions of a game still in service.
2.) Nost is allowed to operate the server as a non-profit because "abandoned games" does mean older versions of a game still in service.
and maybe people misconstrued my intent because I was mainly explaining Nost's side of the legal issue, but only because Blizzard's side should require no explanation.
the zones in 1.12 were removed for new zones in cataclysm
the Naxx level 60 40 man version raid was removed for the level 80 25 man raid in WotLK
the 10 world bosses that had been released at that time and subsequently removed in later expansions.
if I could still log in and play with these three things then your argument might have merit in my opinion, but I can't so it doesn't. . .