I am sure Blizzard would take it calmly and let it happen without legal action.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Guy finds Starcraft source code and returns it to Blizzard
- Thread starter dmr87
- Start date
I am sure Blizzard would take it calmly and let it happen without legal action.
GhostsBummer that the source code wasn't released. Who wouldn't want Starcraft ports on Vita, 3DS, Android, etc.? Also there's a chance that parts of the beta that looked like Warcraft 2 are in there somewhere.
Gives me hope that Starcraft Ghost is out there somewhere and will be revealed to the public in time.
You breaking my heart here😭
capitalCORN
Member
The OG game is fucking free now. What the hell are you all angry about anyways? And drinks with Morhaime sounds good to me!
PastorOfMuppets
Banned
I don't ever recall reading that Blizzard had lost the source code to the Original Starcraft so this really isn't an issue of preservation IMO.
A game that has had it's source code lost is the original Age of Empires. That's why we've never see a re-master or re-release of it like Age of Empires II or Age of Mythology.
A game that has had it's source code lost is the original Age of Empires. That's why we've never see a re-master or re-release of it like Age of Empires II or Age of Mythology.
You know what really could've sealed the deal is a genuine Morhaime bowling shirt
Priceless
FZeroRacer
Neo Member
What matters isn't what action they'd take right now but what benefits we gain 5, 10, 15+ years down the line.
Doom for example is practically a rite of passage for any system and the only reason that's possible is because we have the source code.
And that was given way by the actual devs and company.
not sold off the black market.
In summary, source code would allow third parties to do far more than a rerelease of the original game.
On one hand, it'd result in a lot of cool shit.
On the other, it'd probably open a whole can of worms w.r.t. tools giving people unfair advantage in multiplayer. Granted, while this has always been an arms race and there's already historically been a shit ton of maphacks etc. throughout Starcraft/BW's history, we're looking at potentially new exploits people haven't even thought of.
Ultimately I feel like the guy was driven more with not wanting to get tangled with corporate legal matters moreso than doing the right thing, but who knows what he was thinking. Defo must have been under a shit ton of pressure.
Rickenslacker
Banned
I'll be real here if I were in his shoes I wouldn't feel that the weight I'd be shouldering would be worth seeing StarCraft being able to run on a future waffle iron.
megarockexe
Member
I'm all for collecting and examining things like that for private reasons, but when legal gets involved, believe me you don't want to choose incorrectly.
Throw away your life, or gain internet fame? The answer is simple.
Throw away your life, or gain internet fame? The answer is simple.
I'm baffled by the people who have said he is selfish and he could've sent it to a collector for lots of cash. A collector. Someone who will keep it in a collection and brag about it. What?
I don't think many people would refuse to send it back to Blizzard after their legal threat anyways.
I don't think many people would refuse to send it back to Blizzard after their legal threat anyways.
Joyful, did you really just pull out the "theres tons of variables but lets not pretend its 'impossible'" card
because you realize that's not really a persuasive case for someone to potentially put themselves in the legal crosshairs of a multibillion-dollar corporation, right
But the negative precedent of a company like Disney doesn't act as a blanket justification for the defying of companies' IP rights in general.
Like I said, I don't see much evidence that returning the source code to Blizzard is a preservation risk, while that source code happens to relate to a currently active IP. There isn't really much more imperative to share the source code with the world now than there was when the game was released all those years and years ago.
FZeroRacer
Neo Member
Starcraft being open source opens the can of worms, then drains it and tosses it aside. It would be possible for groups to maintain it and fix any exploits that pop up, making it more secure than closed-source software.
That's one of the biggest benefits to open source software in general is that exploits are quickly locked down and even more quickly noticed. So for a while it would be the wild west of hacking until a group steps in and creates SecureStarcraft or something as the new de-facto source.
jetsetnickradio
Member
That's why Blizzard is taking him out for drinks. They're going to get him drunk and then find out if he made copies
And in your world, Blizzard is just going to let all of these people develop one of their active IPs on their own and distribute it?
As if the source code being released against their will means that Blizzard forfeits their rights over the code and will just let it happen?
theaffection
Member
Once its out there, its out there.
Ghosts
You breaking my heart here😭
Its gotta happen eventually!
He did a smart thing but not the definitive smart thing. Could've made alot of $$$ from a private collector that wouldn't think twice about releasing it
FZeroRacer
Neo Member
There'll pretty much always be a preservation risk as long as the source is not released. Blizzard could go under in 5-10 years and never release the source or discard the original source after completing Starcraft Remastered.
We've already seen this happen with multiple games before because companies have proven remarkably inept at maintaining and storing original copies of the source code. The imperative is to release it before anything happens because once it's in the public sphere it's more likely to stick around.
Maintenance
Member
Blizzard gave him shit compared to what's inside of it, but I can't judge because I wouldn't sell nor give it back.
He didn't do the right thing and their reward to him cost them far less than the value of securing the source code.
I at least thought they were going to pay him some cash.
Were I in that position, I'd have anonymously released it in return for the fanbase paying me a chunk of money.
I at least thought they were going to pay him some cash.
Were I in that position, I'd have anonymously released it in return for the fanbase paying me a chunk of money.
SchrodingerC
Member
Those people on Reddit should stay salty as fuck, the guy got a way better deal.
Okay let's put aside all the corporate defense or homebrew cheerleading or whatever, and look at this practically.
Starcraft is an active Blizzard IP. Starcraft (the original game) is a product Blizzard continues to leverage on. Starcraft (the original game) being made free is a specific Blizzard promotional deal meant to excite the fanbase for the upcoming remastered Starcraft game which they will be selling.
Dude finds Starcraft source code in a pile of Blizzard junk he bought from some whatever. Dude posts that he found it, hence making Blizzard aware. Dude is advised by Blizzard's legal team to return the disc. Dude thinks about it and consults with lawyers, decides to return the disc. Blizzard is relieved and gives the dude some free credit and their latest game. Blizzard thinks about it a bit more and sees the opportunity to do more the make the guy a lifetime fan of the company or spin positive PR or just hang out with a dude who didn't sabotage all their plans for the upcoming Starcraft release in any way. Everyone is happy.
Dude absolutely did the right thing as far as making his life easier, getting a pat on the back for it, and operating within the boundaries of social acceptability.
Starcraft is an active Blizzard IP. Starcraft (the original game) is a product Blizzard continues to leverage on. Starcraft (the original game) being made free is a specific Blizzard promotional deal meant to excite the fanbase for the upcoming remastered Starcraft game which they will be selling.
Dude finds Starcraft source code in a pile of Blizzard junk he bought from some whatever. Dude posts that he found it, hence making Blizzard aware. Dude is advised by Blizzard's legal team to return the disc. Dude thinks about it and consults with lawyers, decides to return the disc. Blizzard is relieved and gives the dude some free credit and their latest game. Blizzard thinks about it a bit more and sees the opportunity to do more the make the guy a lifetime fan of the company or spin positive PR or just hang out with a dude who didn't sabotage all their plans for the upcoming Starcraft release in any way. Everyone is happy.
Dude absolutely did the right thing as far as making his life easier, getting a pat on the back for it, and operating within the boundaries of social acceptability.
Inviusx
Member
If you released it anonymously how would anyone pay you.
FZeroRacer
Neo Member
In the same way that people crack open games and reverse engineer to create mods? Yes. Once it's in the public blizzard can't take a hammer to every single person forking a copy of the source. Not only is it absolutely impossible from a legal standpoint but it's also bad from a PR perspective.
WaterAstro
Member
Yeah, the game is old.
If it was a game that hasn't been released or a part of a huge franchise where future games would be affected, losing a master disc is going to cost hundred millions or even billions in damages.
If it was a game that hasn't been released or a part of a huge franchise where future games would be affected, losing a master disc is going to cost hundred millions or even billions in damages.
So how does your SecureStarcraft work then, if it gets taken down off of every major DL site and only can be distributed in seedy download agents and in the back alleys of the internet because Starcraft is still an active property for Blizzard?
Inviusx
Member
/thread
Drillary Clinton
Banned
What if he kept the original and sent Blizzard a copy?
Almost as big of a finesse as John Lynch finessing the Bears
Sure, but those people aren't the ones selling a remaster and needing to ensure a level playing field for customers purchasing the product.
theaffection
Member
What else was in that pile of "Blizzard stuff"?!?!
That's genius !
Demigod Mac
Member
If the retail software is a finished car, the source code is its original blueprint.
capitalCORN
Member
It's not like the game hasn't seen a bunch of reverse engineering to begin with. And any ground made would be invalidated once the the re-release happens, which will probably sell millions again. This time with Blizzard.net integration a still saddled with all the micro fuckery you could possibly ever want to deal with.
Joyful
Member
no let me fantasize about hypothetical perfect crimes
FZeroRacer
Neo Member
You're falsely assuming that releasing the source code sabotages a remaster. Well, assuming that the remaster isn't a lazy one, at least.
Any additional work blizzard did to create Starcraft Remastered still would add a lot of value and would be closed source as well. It benefits the consumers because it means if Blizzard does a particularly shitty job they have to answer to the community picking up the slack. Which I suppose could constitute sabotage in a way.
mikezilla2
Member
As I mentioned in the post you are replying to, it's already always been an arms race. That being said, the source code enables to people to do a lot more than that.
I totally get the Doom analogies, but something like Doom, as much as it is a piece of gaming history, wouldn't have everything from esports sponsors to cable tv to the South Korean government* yelling at you to do something about things.
*only half joking here. Probably.
Yeah, releasing something into the public sphere will always be a net gain for preservation. That doesn't then mean, though, that not doing so is resulting in a preservation risk. To say the preservation of something is at risk, you'd have to make a case that it's uniquely or specifically in a position to be lost. I don't think ""it's in the hands of a company, and companies sometimes lose the 'something' in question" makes a good enough case for undermining IP rights.
Now consider that we're talking about source code that relates to an active IP, and that case looks even more inadequate.