The ethics of converting levels from other games

[StormShadow]

Steal: To take (the property of another) without right or permission.

courtey of http://www.dictionary.com

So, if we go by this definition, the only issue is whether or not a level is someone elses ip. You say its not, I say it is. We are both right (and wrong) depending on which definition of ip you believe.

[pjw]

Courtesy is one word, respect is another that might fit. And I think the moral question is more basic than the legal one.

I agree 100%. When you get into legal territory, you're swimming in a big grey soup, but when you're talking about respect and courtesy, you're talking about important things like basic communication and genuine human interaction. It basically boils down to "Someone else made this--you didn't; don't casually fuck with it."

For me this applies to remix/remake/clone/whatever. The only time I've ever done this (pjw3tourney3, which was a remake of a great Q2 DM by Than), I was sure to get permission, and make it very clear that it was a remake every time I posted about it, and I also did it simply out of pure love for the original--maybe not the best reason rationally, but I think the translation worked out well.

If we were working on a major title, we wouldn't be chatting on this forum.

Hi.

[Foo]

Steal: To take (the property of another) without right or permission.

courtey of http://www.dictionary.com

So, if we go by this definition, the only issue is whether or not a level is someone elses ip. You say its not, I say it is. We are both right (and wrong) depending on which definition of ip you believe.

So your definition is to take someone's level and directly rip it into another game, changing nothing? Whereas you see my definition as where you change *something*?

I dont think I *have* a definition here. I'm asking for discussion about the whole gamut from clones to remixes to mild inspiration. In essence, 'what is the line and how can we draw it?'.

This is sorta the crux of the point isn't it? We'd have to define the differences here. You seem to be applying your opinion on someone who takes someone elses level and passes it off as their own... with someone who uses an existing level as a general base for a new level.

[ppp]

When you get into legal territory, you're swimming in a big grey soup, but when you're talking about respect and courtesy, you're talking about important things like basic communication and genuine human interaction. It basically boils down to "Someone else made this--you didn't; don't casually fuck with it."

Thread winning comment :icon14:

[StormShadow]

You seem to be applying your opinion on someone who takes someone elses level and passes it off as their own... with someone who uses an existing level as a general base for a new level.

No, im referring to a remake with credit but without permission.

If your using another map as inspiration for your level, I suppose it would depend on the extent to which you changed it. But I think that if you keep all the fundamentals of the original map, and just make a few alterations, the same rules would apply as would for a remake. But yes, this does create a big grey area.. how much of the original map is used, where do we draw the line, etc, which you already brought up (and we will probably never agree on).

Ive certainly been inspired by certain areas of maps and have incorporated something similar in levels of my own. For instance, the RA on a ledge thats only reachable by strafe jump was inspired by ztntourney1 and has actually been incorporated into a few of my maps. But once you start decompiling someone elses bsp, I think you really need to get permission.

[StormShadow]

Also, on another note..

Ive done some editing for wc3, and there is a program that scrambles your map files when people try to open them so no one can look at your work. You can play the map fine, you just cant look at it in the editor. That should tell you how many designers feel about other people yoinking their work. Like q4, in wc3, you distribute the equivalent of the .map file with your level in order for it to run.

[Foo]

Yeah I thinbk I can agree with a lot of that.

Here's a theoretical question: What if someone takes a level, rebuilds it into a new game (same layout, different textures and items by necessity) then releases the file *anonymously*?

[Hannibal]

Here's a theoretical question: What if someone takes a level, rebuilds it into a new game (same layout, different textures and items by necessity) then releases the file *anonymously*?

Theoretically, it's called hiding.

[dnky]

Just as ignorance of a law is not a valid defence, committing a crime (whether that be one that breaks a moral code or a legal one) anonymously is still wrong.

[Foo]

That just plain doesn't make any sense.

...and as for dkny's reply. Crime?

[Hannibal]

That just plain doesn't make any sense.

?

[Foo]

To answer others first: Stealing in the conventional physical sense... We can quickly disguard ANY comparison with this because stealing physical items tangibly impacts the owner of those items. That is to say, they can no longer make use of the item in question.

So lets put the absurd physical stealing comparisons to bed, eh? I'm genuinely amazed that there are otherwise quite intelligent people thinking this line of argument makes any logical sense. I think this peaked beautifully with 'Dirty Stinking Thief' and "committing a crime (whether that be one that breaks a moral code". Moral Crime. Brilliant.

To (hopefully, if this doesn't fall on deaf ears) put the final nail in this coffin, read this piece on the difference between IP theft and physical theft:

First, it says that (as we've asserted repeatedly here) not only is file sharing not theft, the Supreme Court has even said so. They clearly distinguished between copyright infringement and theft in a 1985 case, where they said, "(copyright infringement) does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud... The infringer invades a statutorily defined province guaranteed to the copyright holder alone. But he does not assume physical control over copyright; nor does he wholly deprive its owner of its use."

(src http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200309 ... 45_F.shtml)

Now on to your post han...

That just plain doesn't make any sense.

?

Sorry I should have clarified. Hiding from what? And once someone hides, isn't any potential benefit that person could have taken from using someone elses level also gone? Hiding is a loaded word in this context, and rhetoric doesn't have a place in sensible debate.

[dnky]

'twas a comparison, that's all. Sometimes a thing is not right, whether you are aware that it's not right is not the point. And to release work that is plagiarised from another source isnt right. Inspiration is acceptable, and as most people have said, the area between is somewhat grey. The bottom line for me is really the question why would a person want to remake a past level? Another comparison (sorry) is music. If I want to listen to The Beatles (for example), I'll listen to the Beatles, not some band doing a cover.

[Foo]

Yeah I hear you on that.

For my own interests, I find a lot of levels from older games don't get remade by their original author into levels for newer games, even though they're suitable and there is demand. On that note as mentioned earlier, I dont find going back to the original game (a common argument) to be ideal.

Good point on the gray area.

[Hannibal]

Sorry I should have clarified. Hiding from what? And once someone hides, isn't any potential benefit that person could have taken from using someone elses level also gone? Hiding is a loaded word in this context, and rhetoric doesn't have a place in sensible debate.

I thought using the faggoty tongue smiley was a dead give away I was only being half-serious.

I take it then that your primary decision criteria relate to consequences (what is gained or lost by releasing a remake without permission). In this case, anonymity is indeed irrelevant. I guess I'm seeing this whole scenario from a different perspective. Since we are generally dealing with 'amateur' hobbyists exchanging information and goods for 'free', I'm more inclined to focus on what WE (the hobbyists) owe each other. What principles of conduct should govern our activities, how we share info and materials, etc.? Why does there seem to be such a strong intuition to ask permission in the first place? Why does it seem proper and right for us to ask? And what justification could there be for setting aside this regulative ideal when Billy Bob the Mapping Fag from Doom 2 can't be contacted?

I'm just askin'. Maybe the intuition is wrong or at least not terribly fundamental. All I'm suggesting is another way to frame the issue so that the distinction between what's right and what's legal isn't lost.

[D3k61]

There is a guy over on the ESReality forums remaking ztn3tourney1 for Q4 without getting ztn's permission. You can read about it here.

My comments where as follows;

"Running around on this "remake" makes me ask the question "what's the point?" I'm really not getting why people want to recreate Q3 in Q4. Sure you got the map to play pretty close to how it plays in Q3, but to what end? I can understand wanting something familiar to play on but to spend so much time and effort to try to get the map to play *exactly* like the Q3 version is baffling to me. Do you think ztn spent as much effort trying to get the Q3 version to play *exactly* the same as the Q1 version? I doubt it.

Which brings up another point... remaking someone else's map without their permission is a no-no in my books. If ztn wants the map to be played in Q4, he should make a new version. You can give him a "Special Thanks" in the readme but in the end you are ripping him off. ztn's comment "there's no point of making a fuss about this" doesn't mean "I approve and support you remaking my map for Q4" it means "What's the point of trying to stop people, they'll rip me off anyways".

You have obviously grasped the basics of the Q4 editor so why not make an original map? My guess is you are looking for a "name" by being the guy to bring ztn3tourney1 to Q4."

If you read through the whole thread you'll see that at some point ztn made the comment about there not being any point in making a fuss but this "mapper" seems think that means ztn is "ok" with him remaking the map.

For me it's all about respect. If you didn't create the original and want it in a new game, ask the author to do it. If he doesn't want too, maybe offer to do it (assuming you have the skills to remake the map without butchering it). If he dosn't want you too, then DON'T. It's that simple really.

Decker

[Foo]

Don't butchered remakes become a failure in themselves anyway, thereby nullifying any negative effect on the original author?

If a maps shit, it gets ignored. I can't think of a *single* case where the community now has a lower opinion of a mapper due to a remake of their level someone else penned.

This notion of 'ripping off' still seems like rhetoric.

[Foo]

I dunno. For a community and hobby that's grown due to a culture of unconditional freedom (to create whatever you want and bolt it onto someone elses game) there seems to be a lot of emphasis on owning addons, and a culture which seems to encourage 'locking down' assets you create for a game where you may not even have the legal rights to do so.

[D3k61]

It's not about "locking down" anything in my mind. It's about having respect for the time and creativity that the original author put into the map you want to remake.

I'm not against remakes or remixes (I think I may have even coined the term remix when I did cpm1a) but I am against people having the attitude that they can recreate other people's work whether they like it or not.

If someone asks me if they can use some textures I have created I always say yes. It's the being asked part that's important to me.

Decker

[Foo]

It's not about "locking down" anything in my mind. It's about having respect for the time and creativity that the original author put into the map you want to remake.

See this I can't get my head around. How is it disrespectful to have someone dig your level so much they would actually spend the time and effort to use it as the basis for another level? How has the mapping community got its perception of reality *SO TWISTED* that it honestly sees the levels produced as a personal product, where an attempt to imitate could constitute a negative reflection on the existing work. It's so absurd when you step back that mappers would feel they 'should' be contacted for permission before hand.

but I am against people having the attitude that they can recreate other people's work whether they like it or not.

Fair enough.. At the end of the day? If I wanted to use an existing level in a different game, and I contacted the mapper and they said no, I would still remake that level for the game. As for whether I'd release it publically, probably not. But I'd still make, it because I dont think a level author who makes levels on top of a commercial game has the 'right' to decide what everyone does with that creation, after the fact. It's up to them. No money is involved, so all's fair.

If someone asks me if they can use some textures I have created I always say yes. It's the being asked part that's important to me.

To each their own on this one. I seem to remember my readmes released with levels are copied straight from someone elses readme, with the 'license' information intact and everything. I never put much thought into it, back then.

[Foo]

To throw another possible situation into the works here.. this time a real situation.

The Warsow project has a feature now where it can load a Quake III level into the game and it automatically replaces the Q3 items with WsW items, and so on.

This means you can take lots of the levels made for Q3 and transfer them into a different game wholesale. It doesn't even require decompiling/recompiling (like this is some kind of 'magical' process that constitutes the boundary of ethical acceptability)... yet you end up with a level in a different game where it may or may not work half as well (and in a lot of cases, Q3 maps suck hard in WsW).

So the end result is the same as actually recompiling a map for a new game, but the process is a bit different. WsW players should presumably be obliged to contact the mappers on each and every level they play in WsW or risk moral damnation and the hands of the mapping community?

[D3k61]

See this I can't get my head around. How is it disrespectful to have someone dig your level so much they would actually spend the time and effort to use it as the basis for another level? How has the mapping community got its perception of reality *SO TWISTED* that it honestly sees the levels produced as a personal product, where an attempt to imitate could constitute a negative reflection on the existing work. It's so absurd when you step back that mappers would feel they 'should' be contacted for permission before hand.

Let's imagine for a minute that the game engine is the HyperText Markup Language (HTML), the level editor is Dreamweaver and the map is the website. You use Dreamweaver to create a website that is displayed by HTML. Now let's modify your statement above in this context...

"See this I can't get my head around. How is it disrespectful to have someone dig your website so much they would actually spend the time and effort to use it as the basis for another website? How has the web design community got its perception of reality *SO TWISTED* that it honestly sees the websites produced as a personal product, where an attempt to imitate could constitute a negative reflection on the existing work. It's so absurd when you step back that web designers would feel they 'should' be contacted for permission before hand."


I could just as easily say that it's your view that is a twisted perception of reality.

[Foo]

Except that your analogy is not compatable.

For a start, the benefit of transferring a level to another game is not the same as transferring a website to another web server. That much is obvious.

Second, websites aren't created off the back of *and dependant upon* a common commercial product which everyone has bought into.

Third, what are we defining as getting copied in your 'adaptation'? The entire website? No work involved in porting the site there. The visual appearance? Textures are a seperate issue.

Lastly... you ARE aware of archive.org, right? Google cache familiar to you? Somehow, I dont think they've got a department sending out nicely written letters to randomguy12434@aol.com

Your analogy actually draws one closer to the conclusion that a direct 'rip' (decompile/recompile) of a level into a different game may be more acceptable than an adaptation. But the reality seems different since I think most here would agree that directly ripping a level is less preferable to recreating the essense of a level in a new form.

[D3k61]

Except that your analogy is not compatable.

For a start, the benefit of transferring a level to another game is not the same as transferring a website to another web server. That much is obvious.

Second, websites aren't created off the back of *and dependant upon* a common commercial product which everyone has bought into.

Third, what are we defining as getting copied in your 'adaptation'? The entire website? No work involved in porting the site there. The visual appearance? Textures are a seperate issue.

Lastly... you ARE aware of archive.org, right? Google cache familiar to you? How about Somehow, I dont think they've got a department sending out nicely written letters to randomguy12434@aol.com

Websites are created off the back of *and dependant upon* a common markup language called HTML which everyone has bought into.

I'm talking about someone copying the "look and feel" of your website.. not just downloading the site and putting it on another server or having the entire site archived or cached on archive.org and google cache.

Maybe I'm wrong but I get the impression you don't see the level design process as a creative one. We may just have to agree to disagree

Decker

[Foo]

Yeah it was always going to end that way, I wasn't out to change anyone's perceptions.

I do see level design as a creative process, I think I'm more dissapointed at what I see as an underlying culture of self-importance which is accepted in the modding circles of PC gaming as the 'normal' attitude. I think a more laid-back attitude would benefit everyone as a whole and indeed I would say it's the attitude that built the modding scene up into the huge thing it now is. Modding communism, if you like

But that's an argument in and of itself and it is solely an opinion. I started the thread to see if there was just some underlying critical issues I'd missed which might change my viewpoint on this. I'm sorry to say I haven't found one yet, but that's not to say this discussion hasn't been informative and rewarding to me.