ID:277372
 Feb 18 2007, 11:36 am
|
|
Am I allowed to make one, I have no plan on releasing it. I have been working on one in C# and was able to pull 3(working icons) out of over 40 icons out of my games resource file. I was just wondering if this is allowed.
| |
|
Feb 18 2007, 11:40 am
|
|
Flame Sage
 |
Your allowed to, not like the BYOND staff can do anything about it anyway. Though, it is frowed upon.
|
As long as there is no protection on the RSC, it's totally alright. If BYOND were to put some token encryption on it and put in the EULA that you're not allowed to access it, then it would be in violation of the DMCA to use a RSC reader/extractor/editor. I think.
| |
PirateHead wrote:
If BYOND were to put some token encryption on it and put in the EULA that you're not allowed to access it, then it would be in violation of the DMCA to use a RSC reader/extractor/editor. I think. This should happen then, RSC extractors kind of scare people away from BYOND. | |
You are allowed to have it, but people can take legal action if you steal their art, provided that they can prove it was made by them.
| |
Flame Sage wrote:
PirateHead wrote: Frankly I doubt that, and I could think of no faster way to scare people away than idiotic EULA's and relying on the faulty unconstitutional mess that is the DMCA. Lummox JR | |
Flame Sage wrote:
Then why not simply put... You may have a point there. BYOND Staff is in a unique position: pretty much anyone that breaks one of their rules can be banned from the hub, which pretty much bans them from BYOND entirely rendering the resources they've stolen from other games useless to use. There aren't many people willing to join up with a banned BYONDer to make a game (known by experience). If the whole system could be improved upon, such as perhaps the ability to only ban from publishing games and stuff like that, perhaps BYOND would be a better place for all. Then again, I may just be speaking gibberish and nonsense. | |
Android Data wrote:
If the whole system could be improved upon, such as perhaps the ability to only ban from publishing games and stuff like that, perhaps BYOND would be a better place for all. I've wanted to have that option for a long time now. Only problem is, someone who's proven they're willing to abuse the hub tends to be willing to do it on multiple keys, so we'd basically need a new type of ban that's very similar to the one we have now, that just applies a set of restrictions rather than denying hub access outright. It'd be pretty complicated to do. Lummox JR | |
Flame Sage wrote:
Then why not simply put... Because RSC extractors really aren't the problem. Targeting those is like those goofy posts we get every week suggesting we lock down the PrintScreen key. It's bogus. I don't use an RSC extractor yet I can get at any resource I want with a hex editor. I've done this, too, for certain cases like creating new icons for Darke Dungeon, using existing icons as a template. If anything I'd find an RSC extractor helpful. Lummox JR | |
Miran94 wrote:
Wouldn't that make ripping easier? Any number of things make ripping easier. The real problem with ripping is when people foolishly give out their source code, not nearly so much when someone grabs your icons. Lummox JR | |
Lummox JR wrote:
Any number of things make ripping easier. The real problem with ripping is when people foolishly give out their source code, not nearly so much when someone grabs your icons. Lummox JR I agree. The problem with most rips is that they have pretty much the same game play. It's not cool to have 10 games of pacman that all do the same thing but with different names for the creator filling the hub. | |
Well, it is also kinda hard to put something as silly as "No RSC extractors" in the BYOND EULA, being that there is no way nor reason to check for them. Also, there are perfectly valid reasons(As you have pointed out) to use them.
On top of that, EULA are hardly binding contracts(If they were, I'm sure more than one company would slip something about signing away your house when you accept). The most it would do for the staff is give them a clean right to ban anyone they suspect is using one, even still, how would they know it wasn't just a "print screen" job? To summarize: EULAs mean nothing. | |
Danial.Beta wrote:
The most it would do for the staff is give them a clean right to ban anyone they suspect is using one, even still, how would they know it wasn't just a "print screen" job? And more to the point, why would we care? We don't police games with ripped icons as it is because it's simply not feasible to do so. With ripped resources there'd be no way to tell if the file was taken via an extractor program or a simple hex editor. Lummox JR | |
Lummox JR wrote:
And more to the point, why would we care? We don't police games with ripped icons as it is because it's simply not feasible to do so. With ripped resources there'd be no way to tell if the file was taken via an extractor program or a simple hex editor. Perhaps we could lobby for a law that would require the PrintScreen command to insert invisible dots into the image, like photocopiers do...:) | |
