Official Update

[Moon]

XPav - so you don't like your posts altered, but find nothing in messing around with other people's software? Funny. And reminds me of why I have to laugh whenever I see a warez website full with anti-leech measures. The people proclaiming "free for all" are the worst enemies of piracy when it comes to their OWN stuff.

Martin

[XPav]

I screw around with other people's software all the time. If you look around a bit, you'll see that many, many games have various unofficial hacks done by fans.

Examples:

Freespace 2:

http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/derelict/

Some of the user-created Freespace 2 missions resort to editing the built-in spacecraft. The fans spent lots of time on this.

Civilization 3: Despite the forthcoming scenario editor, there is an unoffical scenario editor created by reverse engineering the file formats. There's a nice and rabid community that thinks this is a great idea. Hacking the Civ file-formats is an old tradition going back to the beginning of the series!

In addition, I can think of scores of file-editing utilies, usually created to give piles of money or someasmuch for games like Simcity. Is everyone who uses these a "pirating leech?"

Moon, I think you missed my entire point. I am *NOT* condoning piracy, but the stance that "ALL FILE EDITING IS THE WORK OF EVIL PIRATES" is way off-base and completely unique to Battlefront.

Once again, do I deserve to be sued by Red Storm for deleting 4 lines from a text file and removing a time limit on the demo mission on Rainbow Six?

Lets say that I purchase Strategic Command, and hack the EXE to say, add in the Netherlands as a playable country. (Yes, that's a bit of a silly example, since it wouldn't change much.)

If this only works on the version that I shell out money for, and tell people where to download this, do I get throw into the "Pirate" and "Leech" category?

Overall, I think you guys at Battlefront have got to loosen up a bit when it comes to users playing with your toys. Yes, Hags was stupid for crowing about his time-limit hack on this forum, but you folks made a mistake when you didn't catch that in the first place, and then you overreacted.

[husky65]

Originally posted by XPav:

"I screw around with other people's software all the time. If you look around a bit, you'll see that many, many games have various unofficial hacks done by fans.

Examples:

Freespace 2:

Civilization 3:

etc"

So now the developmentally arrested XPav has moved from the 'its easy to steal so its OK to steal it' onto the 'lots of people steal stuff so its my right to steal too' justification.

As noted before, I expect that you will apply those ethics when your Car or VCR get lifted, simply shrug and say 'lots of stuff gets stolen, so its OK that my stuff got taken' and not call the police and waste their valuable time.

Or will you scream like a stuck pig and rant about those bastard thieves?

Guess which one I'm betting on?

"Moon, I think you missed my entire point. I am *NOT* condoning piracy, but the stance that "ALL FILE EDITING IS THE WORK OF EVIL PIRATES" is way off-base and completely unique to Battlefront. "

You are trying to generalise away from the specific instance, this little prat was happily distributing his 'hack' as a way of punishing Battlefront for not telling him an exact release date, he knew that his hack removed a specific protection of the demo, the consequences were clear.

"Once again, do I deserve to be sued by Red Storm for deleting 4 lines from a text file and removing a time limit on the demo mission on Rainbow Six? "

Yes you do, you interfered with someone elses IP rights.

Given that you are also a thief (by your own admission above), it is not hard to see why you agree with the other thieves is it?

"Lets say that I purchase Strategic Command, and hack the EXE to say, add in the Netherlands as a playable country. (Yes, that's a bit of a silly example, since it wouldn't change much.)"

That depends on if you have permission to do it or not.

"Overall, I think you guys at Battlefront have got to loosen up a bit when it comes to users playing with your toys."

Of course you do, you are a self admitted thief!

Your opinion on this is as valid as the collective opinions of the population of long bay jail on the socially damaging effects of door locks.

"Yes, Hags was stupid for crowing about his time-limit hack on this forum, but you folks made a mistake when you didn't catch that in the first place, and then you overreacted"

Once again, when your stuff gets stolen I really doubt that you will take this line.

[XPav]

Yes you do, you interfered with someone elses IP rights.

So lets break this down and figure out exactly when I break the law. Do I get any fair use? Am I allowed to hack Battlefront's software in the comfort of my own home, or do I get in trouble only when I distribute something?

Ever hear of "Fair Use?"

Of course you do, you are a self admitted thief!

Did you miss the part when I said that I bought Rainbow Six, bought Combat Mission, and didn't download Hag's hack for Strategic Command?

I think you did, but you're having too much fun sticking people up on poles because they disagree with you and Battlefront on this, so you chose to make things up.

The remarkable thing about this discussion is that I'm usually biased towards the publishers and developers when it comes to user rights. People should buy the games that they play, no ifs ands or buts.

What's different about this situation? Its the idea of Battlefront (with the parroting of the people on this forum) that users and fans should in NO WAY ATTEMPT TO TAKE MATTERS INTO THEIR OWN HANDS.

You guys are just the strangest, company-line following fans I've ever seen! Its amazing how everyone gets this new "IP Rights" phrase into their lexicon, too.

SO -- ANOTHER RECAP:

Hags - Bad. What did you think would happen?

Hubert - CRC check the exe and scenarios next time. Still breakable, but impentrable to casual hacking.

Battlefront - Editing other people's posts is the reason that I spend my time on USENET.

Forum - go see how other companies handle user modifications of their games. Hint: They don't mind, as long as people buy the game.

Everyone - If you like the SC demo, buy the game.

That is all. Try the veal.

[Delta]

Uh, how is it STEALING when all your doing is editing? Jesus christ people! In the Fallout Tactics community, people made a sprite editor for the game, and ITS ACTUALLY LINKED TO ON THE OFFICIAL SITE. People also made hacks so that you could change your save game file, to make changes to your character (from adding some skills, to making them an unstopable god-like character). Is THAT stealing? Of course it isnt. But by your reasoning, and even though the person BOUGHT THE GAME, it IS stealing! How absurd is that?

I support Hubert in whatever action he takes against Hugs, and I believe hugs stole the game, basically. But to say that its stealing IP rights when all you do is change a file or two within the game WHEN YOU ACTUALLY BOUGHT THE GAME, IS TOTALLY BEYOND ME.

I dont understand why Battlefront is so strict against modding their games... i mean, they should encourage it! Its a way to keep the community alive and growing, with more new blood coming in as a result. Lets say someone mods the game so that the United States will be a playable country... that could possibly get more gamers wanting to download that mod, and more importantly, BUY THE GAME! Just like how people saw ads for Counterstrike and Day of Defeat, and other mods, and it made them want to go buy Half Life in order to download them.

Battlefront should allow, and support, people who want to mod their games. Sheesh, its going to happen either way, you might as well try to regulate it a bit. Like, maybe release developement tools a few months after the games release. Or maybe just some very simple tools. The scenario editor is a GREAT start. Modding game files like the map and stuff to add more hexes/countries shouldnt be outlawed, it should be ALLOWED. It means more playability! More fun! Maybe you could allow modding of most files, and not allow the modding of some. I dont know which, but outlawing them all seems Draconian, and also seems like its going to do nothing more than piss people off.... in which case, they are still going to do mods. Having such a strict policy on mods isnt really going to do much, like i said before. Mods are going to be done either way, you might as well make it easier for the people, and in turn, they might respect you more (instead of thinking "oh this is BS!! this big company isnt allowing the creation of mods! f*ck them! im gonna do it anyway".... they say "oh cool, they allow and support mods! thats awsome, maybe ill follow their their rules.").

I cant believe some of you guys think that modding a file or two, or all (like a total conversion) is wrong, and is stealing. Its not stealing if you pay for the game. Plain and simple.

Maybe Im wrong, but whats the chance of that happening twice

[Delta]

Forum - go see how other companies handle user modifications of their games. Hint: They don't mind, as long as people buy the game.

Bravo.

*applauds XPav*

[BloodyBucket]

I agree that altering someone's game without permission is wrong. But I also know that people do it, and it is unwise to pretend that they don't.

If changes have to be made to SC to protect it from hacking, then that is the way it is and we are going to just have to cool our jets and be patient.

As to the issue of editing posts, it is the decision of the people who own the board, and if you want to post instructions for hacking a game there are other places to do it, without you having to worry about the people whose work you are stealing editing your post.

For the record, I agree that there is a line between modding and hacking that is not always crystal clear. This particular instance is fairly free from ambiguity, the hacking was simple theft.

Once the game is purchased, user mods can and do extend the life of other games. If Hubert thinks that this is verbotten, I will abide by it, but I freely admit that if I came across a mod that allowed you to play the game with more than two players or added say, airborne units I would be very sorely tempted to download it.

Would this hurt SC, if those mods became available? Possibly, if there is a future edition planned that would include them. It also might lead others to buy the game who would not otherwise.

But hacking a demo is just simple theft, that has no other motive behind it than ripping off the designer.

[Delta]

I agree 100% Bloodybucket.

I agree 98% XPav

[husky65]

Originally posted by XPav:

[QB]

"So lets break this down and figure out exactly when I break the law. Do I get any fair use? Am I allowed to hack Battlefront's software in the comfort of my own home, or do I get in trouble only when I distribute something?"

Ever hear of "Fair Use?"

Yes, but it doesn't apply - you admit uploading it for distribution and you don't have the right to interfere with someone elses IP anywhere.

You also don't have the right to fiddle with the code, hence the term 'fair use' rather than 'open slather'.

Try not to use legal terms if you don't undertstand them.

However if you want some detailed instruction in the way 'fair use' works why not hack MS Office, widely distribute the hack and then inform MS of it claiming 'fair use' or are you all mouth and not prepared to take on a company that is big enough to protect its rights vigorously?

"Did you miss the part when I said that I bought Rainbow Six, bought Combat Mission, and didn't download Hag's hack for Strategic Command?"

No, I noted the bit where you said you hacked the demo and used it beyond the terms of the demo and then uploaded it for distribution - you know, the theft.

"I think you did, but you're having too much fun sticking people up on poles because they disagree with you and Battlefront on this"

Disagree with me, Battlefront and the law on this, try to be accurate if you can't be educated.

", so you chose to make things up. "

Oh, I apologise then - I take it you didn't actually hack the demo and then put the hack up for distribution - buying the game does not justify the earlier IP infringement and obeying the law later does not erase the earlier infringement.

If I steal your car and then buy your replacement car from you later I am not obeying the law.

"The remarkable thing about this discussion is that I'm usually biased towards the publishers and developers when it comes to user rights."

Except when you infringe others IP, then you are stealing - uploading the hack just compounds the problem and helps reduce sales.

" People should buy the games that they play, no ifs ands or buts."

Then why do you infringe IP rights?

"What's different about this situation? Its the idea of Battlefront (with the parroting of the people on this forum) that users and fans should in NO WAY ATTEMPT TO TAKE MATTERS INTO THEIR OWN HANDS. "

Delete "TAKE MATTERS INTO THEIR OWN HANDS" insert, "steal someone elses property".

Battlefront have supported a number of Mods, this is not a 'mod', this is a straightforward theft that deprives Battlefront of future sales.

"You guys are just the strangest, company-line following fans I've ever seen! Its amazing how everyone gets this new "IP Rights" phrase into their lexicon, too."

Perhaps if you had read something other than comics in the last decade or so you'd have heard of IP rights before?

But, yes it is amazing how some people have this strange idea that stealing someone elses property - intellectual or otherwise (let alone helping others to do it) is wrong.

"SO -- ANOTHER RECAP:"

Delete 'RECAP' insert 'self justifying rant by a self admitted thief in support of another thief'

[Delta]

Husky I used to have respect for you but now your just trying to defend your previous statements. It isnt being a thief if you buy the game, and then mod it.

[Desert Dave]

FWIW, a few thoughts on this issue:

When you go to a strange country, you abide by the customs, laws, taboos, and are respectful of the culture.

Same is true for how you act in your State, City or Village.

When you go to someone's house, you don't kick their dog or steal the silverware.

I don't really care what the legal intricacies are, I care what Hubert wishes.

He has commented on this, and perhaps, will again. That is the final word.

Now, well over 95% of us do not have the remotest idea of how to do what that other cipher of a hacker did. We only want a decent game, at a decent price.

As someone has said, he will eventually stumble and fall, and next time -- and the way it sounds, there surely will be a next time, the landing may be a bit more brutal.

There is an old expression -- just go with the flow. Fit in with your environment. Less stress, worry, anxiety, and soon you are whole and healthy.

I will abide by Hubert's requests. Simple. There is no such thing as -- being a little bit pregnant, or a little bit of a Thief. Morals and ethics are not something where you do a little of this, but cheat just a little, at that. They are what makes you... at peace with yourself. Integrity is a personal choice, made every day, in every small way.

I am absolutely certain that this will be resolved. Then, we can get back to talking about tactics and strategy and what it is about this game that gives us a common enjoyment.

[husky65]

Originally posted by Delta:

Husky I used to have respect for you but now your just trying to defend your previous statements. It isnt being a thief if you buy the game, and then mod it.

Not trying to defend (as that implies that I am wrong, I'm not), I'm simply explaining the law.

It is being a thief if you mod it unless the mods are allowed by the maker, you buy a licence to run the program - you don't buy a licence to change it to your liking.

Potentially such mods deprive the makers of further sales opportunities, it is up to the maker to allow or disallow such mods.

[Moon]

My last comment on this issue, can't waste more time:

Guys, do NOT take a CLEAR incident of piracy and drag this discussion into "Battlefront doesn't allow modding".

Xpav - I didn't say - or mean - that "all editing is the work of evil pirates". I said that the copyright law does not care about the reasons for editing copyright protected stuff. It's the application of that law where some things are and will be tolerated, and some won't. But as soon as you are editing someone else's copyright protected work, you are walking on a thin red line. When you're a fan and you want to mod the game, ask us first before making it public. It doesn't matter if you edited one line of text or 4.

When you purchase SC and add Netherlands as playable country, or airborne units, or... - ask us first before making this public. You might just find out that we are very loose about this kind of things. Good mods add to the value of the game, no doubt about it, and we're widely open for this. It's funny that you guys would think Battlefront.com was tight about it, when one look at the mods for CM should tell you otherwise.

You say we made "a mistake when (we) didn't catch that in the first place". As I said, when you steal a car, it is NOT an excuse that "it was easy to steal it".

As a comment, I am always amazed by how some people justify their double morale standards.

- "Oh cool, they allow and support mods! Thats awesome, MAYBE I'll follow their rules"... Maybe?!

- Don't edit my posts on the message board, but how can editing a file or two be illegal?

To reiterate the legal situation, which is crystal clear - you edit existing and copyrighted stuff AND MAKE IT PUBLIC, you break the law. It doesn't matter why you do it. It's the application of the law and its legal consequences where the line gets a little fuzzy as nobody will go after true modding work, but when you change a demo to extend playable time which was restricted on purpose, then you're on the wrong side of the law. You do it at home, nobody will care. You distribute it, you're a criminal.

BTW, Hags didn't buy the game.

To make this clear - nobody here has anything against modding. This whole discussion here isn't about modding! Already now there are mods for SC out there, which is GREAT!

Make new graphics for the game and distribute them, excellent - the game is using BMPs and WAVs for a reason! But - when you touch the game code, no matter what the file extension is, you should at least ask Hubert for permission before making these public.

Martin

[Delta]

Potentially such mods deprive the makers of further sales opportunities, it is up to the maker to allow or disallow such mods.

No they dont, they add to the fun, and it makes the mod long lasting. Many mods in other communities attract sales! What about Team Fortress? Day of Defeat? Counterstrike? Tac Ops? See where Im going with this? Many mods will just make the game fun, and add a bit more depth that the developers didnt have time to put in (like airborne units), but some ACTUALLY GET MORE PEOPLE TO BUY THE GAME!!! And even if that werent true (but it is), would it really matter if all it did was add more fun and depth to already paying customers?

Guys, do NOT take a CLEAR incident of piracy and drag this discussion into "Battlefront doesn't allow modding".

Sorry Moon... I kinda felt that the piracy incident brought up the modding issue, but I know that they are separate issues and one is clear cut (what hags did was wrong), and the other now resolved, because of your last post, Moon.

Moon, I agree 100%. I think that all there was, was a misunderstanding on my part, at least. I didnt know that there are a lot of mods for CM, cause Ive never played it and Im new to your game community (FYI, the adds in some PC games mags do work! Good job on your ads in PC Games!). If all you have to do is ask before you do it, and most of the time you get permission, then theres really no issue here. I am glad to hear that, because, at least IMO, a strong mod community means extra lasting fun for the buyers! Shiat, maybe with custom scenarios and mods we will be able to last till SC2?

Thanks Hubert, and Moon, and the rest of the Battlefront people. You've made a great game here and I wish you all a successful career! Good luck with future games. I for one am going to advertise this game as a great game, by word of mouth and through other forums. I think we all should do the same. Its the least we can do because they created this masterpiece!

[ July 07, 2002, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: Delta ]

[husky65]

Originally posted by Delta:

[QB]

"No they dont, they add to the fun, and it makes the mod long lasting."

But not neccessarily make the game company long lasting (the whole point of writing a game), rather than sell a game later that does what the mod does the company has lost that sale already - the fact that people may be playing the same copy of half-life 3 years after buying it (because of mods) returns not one extra brass razoo to Valve (who wrote it).

" Many mods in other communities attract sales! What about Team Fortress? Day of Defeat? Counterstrike?"

Really? what about them?, they are all played on the one game (not sure about day of defeat) - valve did not get an extra sale out of it, had they written new games that did what those mods do they would have quite a larger income stream.

However, Valve CHOSE to authorise modding, it is THEIR right and nobody elses to choose to do that - don't argue the point with me, its the law - look it up.

" Tac Ops? See where Im going with this?"

Yes, nowhere.

You don't seem to understand IP law, I would suggest that you do some reading - it is up to the owner to choose if their product can be modded and to what extent it can be modded, they can choose to do this on a case by case basis or give guidelines, or simply say no.

" Many mods will just make the game fun, and add a bit more depth that the developers didnt have time to put in (like airborne units)"

It doesn't matter what they do, read up on the law.

BTW at this scale airborne units are not feasible - nobody had the airlift to move that many troops in one or two lifts and whilst some turns (Winter) last as long as a month, nobody had the airlift to supply a badly understrength unit of this size behind enemy lines, let alone do so AND reinforce it up to full strength.

" but some ACTUALLY GET MORE PEOPLE TO BUY THE GAME!!!"

Some actual figures to support this might be nice?

Either way it has no effect on the law and isn't the case at issue here, at issue is one idiot who has probably deprived battlefront and hubert of well deserved sales - he has given an unknown number of people an ability to play the beta demo to 1946 or so, some of those people will no doubt settle for 80% of the game for free rather than pay full price for all of it.

" And even if that werent true (but it is), would it really matter if all it did was add more fun and depth to already paying customers? "

Yes it would, its a crime and it violates the IP rights of the owner and once again the point you are arguing has nothing to do with what actually happened.

[Delta]

But not neccessarily make the game company long lasting (the whole point of writing a game), rather than sell a game later that does what the mod does the company has lost that sale already - the fact that people may be playing the same copy of half-life 3 years after buying it (because of mods) returns not one extra brass razoo to Valve (who wrote it).

Yes it did, it got people to buy the game. How many people bought Half Life because of Day of Defeat, TFC, or Counter Strike? WHO KNOWS! But it obviously attracted sales, because when CS got really popular, sales for Half Life went up (I forgot where I read that, I think it was Planet HalfLife, several months back).

Really? what about them?, they are all played on the one game (not sure about day of defeat) - valve did not get an extra sale out of it, had they written new games that did what those mods do they would have quite a larger income stream.

However, Valve CHOSE to authorise modding, it is THEIR right and nobody elses to choose to do that - don't argue the point with me, its the law - look it up.

Whatever. They didnt write the mods, they didnt and couldnt because their resources were tied up in other games. So were Sierras.

Yes, nowhere.

Obviously you have no clue about mod communities.

You don't seem to understand IP law, I would suggest that you do some reading - it is up to the owner to choose if their product can be modded and to what extent it can be modded, they can choose to do this on a case by case basis or give guidelines, or simply say no.

Yes, I know that. It is their right. But its not like thats going to stop many people from modding. It will happen either way. If there are less strict guidlines to follow, or less guidelines to follow, than a lot more people would be willing to follow them because they dont have the sense of the company being draconian-esque. Or, with a case by case basis, its even better (given that the companies arent really strict about it).

[Hubert Cater]

Just wanted to follow up Moon's clarification by letting everyone know that there is already a very nice SC fansite that includes some modded material. You can check it out here:

StratComm HQ

[Delta]

Cool link Thanks hubert!

[waltero]

Looks to me like the hackers have won already.

Was this something new?

sounds like you have a War on right now.

'Hacker hags' ruined It for us?

Dont understand how that is possible?

Are you looking for respect from the hackers, or just understanding?

Looks to me like everybody loves your game, even the hackers, Now you just declared war on them.

Now it is a matter of who can out compute who?

How did Hags come into this forum and set it on a diff. course?

I was told that this is what you guys are not about!

I am sure plnty of people will love your game and buy It.

Well I do hope it all works out for you.

[Priest]

Right XPAV = Idiot

Check!

One more down, many more to go.

[Lars]

If hackers are such nice people how come they never hack into our mortgage bankers or credit card companies and wipe the slate clean?

Don't let the peckerheads get you down Hubert and keep up the good work!

[husky65]

Originally posted by Delta:

"Yes it did, it got people to buy the game. How many people bought Half Life because of Day of Defeat, TFC, or Counter Strike? WHO KNOWS! But it obviously attracted sales, because when CS got really popular, sales for Half Life went up (I forgot where I read that, I think it was Planet HalfLife, several months back)."

You offer no proof to support this, just keep stating it to be true and "I think I read it on a fansite".

"Whatever. They didnt write the mods, they didnt and couldnt because their resources were tied up in other games. So were Sierras."

Exactly which other games have Valve been writing?

Re IP Law

"Yes, I know that. It is their right."

Good, then you admit that you have been posting nonsense, my work here is done.

"The thing is, it really doesnt matter if its on the scale or not. People can do it, sure most people will follow the guidelines and rules regardless, but some people will do a mod anyway. Besides, whos to say that someone wont make a huge mod/total conversion and make a bigger map with more hexes? Hmmm? If Hubert allows it, than it could be on the scale."

Yes, I can see why Hubert would want to shoot himself in the foot that badly.

Why do you keep trying to move this into discussion about approved mods? is it because you've done so badly discussing IP theft?

"How can you have figures about what people bought the game because? Its not like surveys done by 1000 people are very accurate."

Its called market research, there is an entire industry that does this, you have just admitted that you have absolutely no evidence for your assertion that people buy games to play mods.

" I thought the issue here was modding."

Then you need to work on your reading comprehension.

"And BTW, your argueing a moot point, because Moon just said that you can do mods, all you have to do is ask first."

Exactly what I have said a number of times, modding without permission is illegal.

" You can continue argueing with a rock, however, if you like. Seems like in some of your posts you spoke as though I had the intelligence of a rock."

Perceptive indeed.

[husky65]

Originally posted by waltero:

Looks to me like everybody loves your game, even the hackers, Now you just declared war on them.

Now it is a matter of who can out compute who?

I am sure plnty of people will love your game and buy It.

Its pretty simple, Hags has made available a game that is about 75-80% as good as the full version (estimate) for free by hacking the demo.

A number of people are going to be satisfied with that rather than buy the game.

Now do you see why people are peeved? it has real world financial consequences.

[Carl G. E. von Mannerheim]

If you want i have many sources in the hacking world, i can keep an eye out for it, give you the name of the site, and basically be your eyes and ears?

[Delta]

You offer no proof to support this, just keep stating it to be true and "I think I read it on a fansite".

Whatever. If you dont believe me than thats fine. You can just keep on believing your truth, and I will keep on believing mine.

Exactly which other games have Valve been writing?

Hmmmm... I dont know..... Team Fortress II.... CounterStrike: Condition Zero... do they ring ANY bells? Apparently you do not follow the industry or only follow the wargame part of the industry. Therefore you can not know how many people bought Half Life just for the mods. I just asked people in 5 games of defeat games and the total amount of people were 86. Out of that 86 people, 14 said they bought Half Life just to play the mods. Now, that may be a lot comparitively, but I think you can get the drift of the mod community from that. What I mean is, the percentage in that survey is high, but it may be higher or lower in the mod community - but you get the general flow of things.

Good, then you admit that you have been posting nonsense, my work here is done.

Good, then you can read Moons post and see that Hubert allows modding, and that all you have to do is ask first. Then maybe we can stop this argueing and get back to being friends

Yes, I can see why Hubert would want to shoot himself in the foot that badly.

That was just an example dude. And besides, it would be pretty cool. If someone did that I would be hardpressed to turn my head away. But if Hubert DIDNT allow we would know that something along those lines is in developement and we just got free info

Why do you keep trying to move this into discussion about approved mods? is it because you've done so badly discussing IP theft?

No, actually MODS IS THE ISSUE I AM ARGUEING ABOUT. NOT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (Well, I was argueing about that before, but I read up on some laws like you suggested, and I was proved wrong in that aspect. At least I am man enough to admit when I am wrong.)

RE: Figures

Its called market research, there is an entire industry that does this, you have just admitted that you have absolutely no evidence for your assertion that people buy games to play mods.

I have personal experience with people I know online and offline that have said they bought Half Life because they wanted to play the mods. Some said the mods were just icing on the cake, but some said the mods were the cake, and that the single player game was icing.

Then you need to work on your reading comprehension.

Uh, not really. The only thing I am argueing about is modding. That is what I am talking about here. Obviously this thread was originally about hacking and hags, but, in my mind, it turned into a thread about modding. Thats why I said its an offshoot issue.

Exactly what I have said a number of times, modding without permission is illegal.

Yeah, but modding is going to be done either way. You MUST realize that! Just because its illigal doesnt mean its going to stop. Outlaw ice cream and people will still get it one way or another.

Perceptive indeed.

LMAO. Your an alright guy, you stick to your morals. I admire that. Now lets stop this silly argueing once and for all

Ok then, now we can get back to being our old grognard selves.