6 ms·

I really admire how much Notch seems to understand opposing viewpoints that most people would simply make inflammatory posts about. His diplomacy here, as well

by mcantor 15y ago

I really admire how much Notch seems to understand opposing viewpoints that most people would simply make inflammatory posts about. His diplomacy here, as well as with Bethesda, has been stellar: Not "Steam is a DRM-ridden mess that I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole, bwa ha ha!", but instead, "I understand why they'd want to control their platform." Not "Bethesda are an Orwellian corporate giant trying to crush the little guy, bwa ha ha!", but instead, "This is probably just lawyers being lawyers." Never a bridge burned. What respect and maturity! Hats off to you, Notch. I'm proud to be a part of the same community of developers as you.

streptomycin 15y ago
http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp > I'm not very happy with the draconian nature of (L)GPL
- culturestate 15y ago
  That you can point to that quote as the most inflammatory thing Notch has said just reinforces OP's point.
  - mcantor 15y ago
    Thanks for helpin' a brotha out!
  - streptomycin 15y ago
    I have no idea if it's the most inflammatory thing he's said. I don't know much about him other than he wrote a video game I've never played. I just saw http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2938141 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2938141 reference "openness" and was wondering if Minecraft was actually open source, as I didn't think it was. So I googled for license info, and the first thing I found was a quote that wouldn't be out of place in any typical Linux nerd flamewar. And then I saw the comment about Notch being so respectful and civil and whatnot, and I luled and posted the flame inducing quote. Not surprisingly, flames ensued.
    - ugh 15y ago
      Wait what? How could a reasonable person possibly be offended by what you quoted? There is entirely too little context there and the sentence is worded very politely. (L)GPL certainly is draconian (in the sense of strict) and all he is saying is that he personally is not very happy about that. How anyone could not see this as a reasonable statement boggles the mind. (I’m not saying that you have to agree with it.)
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - streptomycin 15y ago
        Oh please. Everyone knows the connotation of the word "draconian". And "too little context"? Did you read the context? What do you think of the part that says open source licenses just "boost the egos of the original authors"? If that's not top grade nerd flamebait, then I don't know what is. I'm just pointing out that it's fairly typical flamebait (as further evidenced by the response I got when I posted it here). I'm not offended by it, I'm amused by it.
- bugsy 15y ago
  He's right that GPL is draconian and limits freedom. But I am not sure your point because you didn't state it. You have a drive by post where you post some cryptic excerpt that seems unrelated to the topic with no commentary. Are you a posting bot, or are you a person with a point? Speak clearly. Explain yourself. If the intent is to be critical of notch, I can't see any fault in his saying he hopes to release source code eventually and that since the GPL is such an anti-freedom license (huh, actually my words not his, but my sincere interpretation and agreement with his 'draconian' term usage), he "might just possibly" release as public domain, which means completely unencumbered and free. That sounds pretty cool. He's not under any obligation to do so though, and I don't see that many other games sold on Steam are somehow better. Or perhaps you meant to indicate that you think his true reason not to release on Steam is not what he said, but he is lying and the secret real reason is that he intends to release public domain, and for some reason Steam would not allow that after signing their draconian and freedom limiting contracts, that are as freedom limiting as the GPL. Maybe. Don't know because your post was incoherent.
  - wmobit 15y ago
    Saying the GPL is draconian and limits freedom is like saying the 13th amendment limits freedom since it takes away your right to own slaves.
    - psykotic 15y ago
      That rhetorical stance you take is particularly irksome when someone is talking about giving away their own code. He isn't whining that library X isn't under the GPL/LGPL. He's saying that'd he'd rather just give away his code entirely with no legal strings attached whatsoever.
      - wmobit 15y ago
        Such is impossible under current copyright law
        psykotic 15y ago
- windsurfer 15y ago
  Not only is this out of context, but the (L)GPL is very draconian. Not that that's a bad thing, it is by design.
bena 15y ago
"His diplomacy here, as well as with Bethesda, has been stellar" I don't think his diplomacy regarding Bethesda has been all that great. Openly mocking their claims probably hasn't earned him any goodwill. The quiz was pretty bad, especially the insult at the end. The tweets and encouragement of people ironically getting the two products confused also hurts his case.
- wtallis 15y ago
  His handling of the Bethesda case is only bad if this really isn't a case of an overly-zealous legal department operating on autopilot. So far, there's no reason to suspect that: All the information that's public indicates that Bethesda's claims are weak or entirely baseless, and they are not interested in reaching a compromise or really any two-way communication prior to going to court. Any lawyer that starts a tenuous but high-profile suit without considering the PR aspects is simply crazy, but that seems to be what's happening. Notch has been trying to get someone at Bethesda with a human perspective to intervene, but so far, hasn't been successful.
  - bena 15y ago
    Bethesda is acting rationally and logically. Trademark is easily lost and Bethesda needs to be on top of any potentially infringing marks. Notch is handling this in the worst way possible. The first thing he should have done is go to his lawyers, have them set up a meeting with Bethesda and their lawyers, then hash out everything quietly. No, the first thing he did was fire up the internet hate machine in response to a Cease & Desist. Then he challenges them to a Quake match to settle it. Another bad move. Then he posts a quiz that mocks Bethesda and actually doesn't help him in the way he thought it would as some people actually got some of the questions wrong.
    - wtallis 15y ago
      From Notch's blog: A while later, out of the blue, we got contacted by Bethesda’s lawyers. They wanted to know more about the “Scrolls” trademark we were applying for, and claimed it conflicted with their existing trademark “The Elder Scrolls”. [...] We looked things up and realized they didn’t have much of a case, but we still took it seriously. Nothing about Scrolls is meant to in any way derive from or allude to their games. We suggested a compromise where we’d agree to never put any words in front of “Scrolls”, and instead call sequels and other things something along the lines of “Scrolls - The Banana Expansion”. I’m not sure if they ever got back to us with a reply to this. Today, I got a 15 page letter from some Swedish lawyer firm, saying they demand us to stop using the name Scrolls, that they will sue us (and have already paid the fee to the Swedish court), and that they demand a pile of money up front before the legal process has even started. Firing up the internet hate machine wasn't the first thing Notch did. He tried to open up a dialogue, before things got to the cease-and-desist stage. It didn't work. Bethesda's lawyers weren't interested in being reasonable. Maintaining a trademark doesn't require constantly trying to expand it.
MostAwesomeDude 15y ago
He has worked hard to torch the bridges between Mojang and the open-source communities surrounding Minecraft. He doesn't like people hacking his code, or creating tools which interoperate with his releases. You might have noticed that some mods have been pulled into the main Minecraft tree; the person doing that pulling is always jeb, another Mojang employee. Notch himself isn't very happy about it. Projects like Bravo and Bukkit don't have any official endorsement or acknowledgement. Our channels of communication keep getting narrower and narrower. It's to the point where I've personally given up on actually talking to Mojang at all.
- nkassis 15y ago
  That's what I admire about John Carmack. He wants people to hack his games and do stuff with them. He pushes to release old engines as GPL (soon the Doom 3 engine will be released, offering some real game code to study for people wanting to get into game development)
  - grey 15y ago
    Notch has a similar attitude, as expressed at http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp, specifically "once sales start dying and a minimum time has passed, I will release the game source code as some kind of open source."
    - 0x0x0x 15y ago
      The difference of course is that id has a track record.
      - atomicdog 15y ago
        The difference is id's sources aren't shitty Java applets that noone wants to look through ;) I kid, I kid...
      - piaskal 15y ago
        Id games have lot's of artwork, levels, etc. that is not released under GPL. In minecraft it's users that create the content. Id can release their engines under GPL without harming their sales.

by mcantor 15y ago

streptomycin 15y ago

http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp > I'm not very happy with the draconian nature of (L)GPL

culturestate 15y ago
That you can point to that quote as the most inflammatory thing Notch has said just reinforces OP's point.
- mcantor 15y ago
  Thanks for helpin' a brotha out!
- streptomycin 15y ago
  I have no idea if it's the most inflammatory thing he's said. I don't know much about him other than he wrote a video game I've never played. I just saw http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2938141 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2938141 reference "openness" and was wondering if Minecraft was actually open source, as I didn't think it was. So I googled for license info, and the first thing I found was a quote that wouldn't be out of place in any typical Linux nerd flamewar. And then I saw the comment about Notch being so respectful and civil and whatnot, and I luled and posted the flame inducing quote. Not surprisingly, flames ensued.
  - ugh 15y ago
    Wait what? How could a reasonable person possibly be offended by what you quoted? There is entirely too little context there and the sentence is worded very politely. (L)GPL certainly is draconian (in the sense of strict) and all he is saying is that he personally is not very happy about that. How anyone could not see this as a reasonable statement boggles the mind. (I’m not saying that you have to agree with it.)
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - streptomycin 15y ago
      Oh please. Everyone knows the connotation of the word "draconian". And "too little context"? Did you read the context? What do you think of the part that says open source licenses just "boost the egos of the original authors"? If that's not top grade nerd flamebait, then I don't know what is. I'm just pointing out that it's fairly typical flamebait (as further evidenced by the response I got when I posted it here). I'm not offended by it, I'm amused by it.
bugsy 15y ago
He's right that GPL is draconian and limits freedom. But I am not sure your point because you didn't state it. You have a drive by post where you post some cryptic excerpt that seems unrelated to the topic with no commentary. Are you a posting bot, or are you a person with a point? Speak clearly. Explain yourself. If the intent is to be critical of notch, I can't see any fault in his saying he hopes to release source code eventually and that since the GPL is such an anti-freedom license (huh, actually my words not his, but my sincere interpretation and agreement with his 'draconian' term usage), he "might just possibly" release as public domain, which means completely unencumbered and free. That sounds pretty cool. He's not under any obligation to do so though, and I don't see that many other games sold on Steam are somehow better. Or perhaps you meant to indicate that you think his true reason not to release on Steam is not what he said, but he is lying and the secret real reason is that he intends to release public domain, and for some reason Steam would not allow that after signing their draconian and freedom limiting contracts, that are as freedom limiting as the GPL. Maybe. Don't know because your post was incoherent.
- wmobit 15y ago
  Saying the GPL is draconian and limits freedom is like saying the 13th amendment limits freedom since it takes away your right to own slaves.
  - psykotic 15y ago
    That rhetorical stance you take is particularly irksome when someone is talking about giving away their own code. He isn't whining that library X isn't under the GPL/LGPL. He's saying that'd he'd rather just give away his code entirely with no legal strings attached whatsoever.
    - wmobit 15y ago
      Such is impossible under current copyright law
      - psykotic 15y ago
windsurfer 15y ago
Not only is this out of context, but the (L)GPL is very draconian. Not that that's a bad thing, it is by design.

bena 15y ago

"His diplomacy here, as well as with Bethesda, has been stellar" I don't think his diplomacy regarding Bethesda has been all that great. Openly mocking their claims probably hasn't earned him any goodwill. The quiz was pretty bad, especially the insult at the end. The tweets and encouragement of people ironically getting the two products confused also hurts his case.

wtallis 15y ago
His handling of the Bethesda case is only bad if this really isn't a case of an overly-zealous legal department operating on autopilot. So far, there's no reason to suspect that: All the information that's public indicates that Bethesda's claims are weak or entirely baseless, and they are not interested in reaching a compromise or really any two-way communication prior to going to court. Any lawyer that starts a tenuous but high-profile suit without considering the PR aspects is simply crazy, but that seems to be what's happening. Notch has been trying to get someone at Bethesda with a human perspective to intervene, but so far, hasn't been successful.
- bena 15y ago
  Bethesda is acting rationally and logically. Trademark is easily lost and Bethesda needs to be on top of any potentially infringing marks. Notch is handling this in the worst way possible. The first thing he should have done is go to his lawyers, have them set up a meeting with Bethesda and their lawyers, then hash out everything quietly. No, the first thing he did was fire up the internet hate machine in response to a Cease & Desist. Then he challenges them to a Quake match to settle it. Another bad move. Then he posts a quiz that mocks Bethesda and actually doesn't help him in the way he thought it would as some people actually got some of the questions wrong.
  - wtallis 15y ago
    From Notch's blog: A while later, out of the blue, we got contacted by Bethesda’s lawyers. They wanted to know more about the “Scrolls” trademark we were applying for, and claimed it conflicted with their existing trademark “The Elder Scrolls”. [...] We looked things up and realized they didn’t have much of a case, but we still took it seriously. Nothing about Scrolls is meant to in any way derive from or allude to their games. We suggested a compromise where we’d agree to never put any words in front of “Scrolls”, and instead call sequels and other things something along the lines of “Scrolls - The Banana Expansion”. I’m not sure if they ever got back to us with a reply to this. Today, I got a 15 page letter from some Swedish lawyer firm, saying they demand us to stop using the name Scrolls, that they will sue us (and have already paid the fee to the Swedish court), and that they demand a pile of money up front before the legal process has even started. Firing up the internet hate machine wasn't the first thing Notch did. He tried to open up a dialogue, before things got to the cease-and-desist stage. It didn't work. Bethesda's lawyers weren't interested in being reasonable. Maintaining a trademark doesn't require constantly trying to expand it.

MostAwesomeDude 15y ago

He has worked hard to torch the bridges between Mojang and the open-source communities surrounding Minecraft. He doesn't like people hacking his code, or creating tools which interoperate with his releases. You might have noticed that some mods have been pulled into the main Minecraft tree; the person doing that pulling is always jeb, another Mojang employee. Notch himself isn't very happy about it. Projects like Bravo and Bukkit don't have any official endorsement or acknowledgement. Our channels of communication keep getting narrower and narrower. It's to the point where I've personally given up on actually talking to Mojang at all.

nkassis 15y ago
That's what I admire about John Carmack. He wants people to hack his games and do stuff with them. He pushes to release old engines as GPL (soon the Doom 3 engine will be released, offering some real game code to study for people wanting to get into game development)
- grey 15y ago
  Notch has a similar attitude, as expressed at http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp http://www.minecraft.net/about.jsp, specifically "once sales start dying and a minimum time has passed, I will release the game source code as some kind of open source."
  - 0x0x0x 15y ago
    The difference of course is that id has a track record.
    - atomicdog 15y ago
      The difference is id's sources aren't shitty Java applets that noone wants to look through ;) I kid, I kid...
    - piaskal 15y ago
      Id games have lot's of artwork, levels, etc. that is not released under GPL. In minecraft it's users that create the content. Id can release their engines under GPL without harming their sales.