3 ms·

As a videogame cheat developer myself, whoa. There's a thin line between the development of gameplay-enhancing mods, and advantageous cheats. Is there someone

As a videogame cheat developer myself, whoa. There's a thin line between the development of gameplay-enhancing mods, and advantageous cheats. Is there someone who can explain how this kind of thing falls under 'copyright infringement'?

dzek69 8y ago
If you reverse engineering the code somehow, then it could fall under it I think.
- cabaalis 8y ago
  Not in the US, at least. Reverse-engineering may be prohibited by EULA. Protocols may or may not be copywritten (there have been rulings recently that conflict with each other) But as long as the content is not encrypted, it is a perfectly legal activity to engage in--and perfectly legal for a company to say you're violating their terms. Legal as in "not criminal." If the content is encrypted, then circumventing or breaking the encryption is a violation of DMCA and a criminal activity. Edit: IANAL
  - celophi 8y ago
    I thought that reversing encryption is fine if it is for interoperability purposes and is non-infringing. The section describing this part is kind of confusing..
tantalor 8y ago
A cheat is a derivative work, so the game developer actually owns it. They do not give you permission to use it or sell it.
- tantalor 8y ago
  Not so fast: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galoob_v_Nintendo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galoob_v_Nintendo Smith compared usage of the Game Genie to "skipping portions of a book" or fast-forwarding through a purchased movie; thus the altered game content did not constitute the creation of a derivative work as Nintendo had argued. Smith wrote that "Having paid Nintendo a fair return, the consumer may experiment with the product and create new variations of play, for personal enjoyment, without creating a derivative work."
  - greymeister 8y ago
    Cheat tables were removed from the cheat engine forums because Bethesda et al sent them a threatening letter claiming similar things to what Nintendo claimed in that case. I doubt that they could have actually won a case, but most don't have lawyers on retainer and so essentially the game companies shut them down with the threat of legal action. It's a ridiculous claim, but game companies that want to sell things in game see it as a hindrance to further monetizing their customers I guess.
jerf 8y ago
Are your cheats something that work in multiplayer? A cheat that works only in singleplayer is less of a big deal, because it's going to be harder to show damages, and harder to collect evidence against you, or even know you exist necessarily. I'm not sure I'd recommend it as a vocation, but it's a risk/reward you can judge. Multiplayer cheating is another thing, as is horning in on what a company wants to use as a revenue stream. If you are doing either of those things, even accidentally (e.g., a cheat you intend to be used in single player but works in multiplayer), my non-lawyerly self advises you to cease immediately and turn those skills towards something more productive and lucrative without the risks, because the risk/reward payout matrix gets a lot more lopsided on the "risk" side, especially because of the opportunity costs of things that are as lucrative but much less risky.

dzek69 8y ago

If you reverse engineering the code somehow, then it could fall under it I think.

cabaalis 8y ago
Not in the US, at least. Reverse-engineering may be prohibited by EULA. Protocols may or may not be copywritten (there have been rulings recently that conflict with each other) But as long as the content is not encrypted, it is a perfectly legal activity to engage in--and perfectly legal for a company to say you're violating their terms. Legal as in "not criminal." If the content is encrypted, then circumventing or breaking the encryption is a violation of DMCA and a criminal activity. Edit: IANAL
- celophi 8y ago
  I thought that reversing encryption is fine if it is for interoperability purposes and is non-infringing. The section describing this part is kind of confusing..

tantalor 8y ago

A cheat is a derivative work, so the game developer actually owns it. They do not give you permission to use it or sell it.

tantalor 8y ago
Not so fast: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galoob_v_Nintendo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galoob_v_Nintendo Smith compared usage of the Game Genie to "skipping portions of a book" or fast-forwarding through a purchased movie; thus the altered game content did not constitute the creation of a derivative work as Nintendo had argued. Smith wrote that "Having paid Nintendo a fair return, the consumer may experiment with the product and create new variations of play, for personal enjoyment, without creating a derivative work."
- greymeister 8y ago
  Cheat tables were removed from the cheat engine forums because Bethesda et al sent them a threatening letter claiming similar things to what Nintendo claimed in that case. I doubt that they could have actually won a case, but most don't have lawyers on retainer and so essentially the game companies shut them down with the threat of legal action. It's a ridiculous claim, but game companies that want to sell things in game see it as a hindrance to further monetizing their customers I guess.

jerf 8y ago

Are your cheats something that work in multiplayer? A cheat that works only in singleplayer is less of a big deal, because it's going to be harder to show damages, and harder to collect evidence against you, or even know you exist necessarily. I'm not sure I'd recommend it as a vocation, but it's a risk/reward you can judge. Multiplayer cheating is another thing, as is horning in on what a company wants to use as a revenue stream. If you are doing either of those things, even accidentally (e.g., a cheat you intend to be used in single player but works in multiplayer), my non-lawyerly self advises you to cease immediately and turn those skills towards something more productive and lucrative without the risks, because the risk/reward payout matrix gets a lot more lopsided on the "risk" side, especially because of the opportunity costs of things that are as lucrative but much less risky.