Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 91 to 100 of 100

Thread: Non DRM When ?

  1. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by Asmodai View Post
    The fact they've released the game with DRM to the general public but have not given the Kickstarter backers the DRM-free version they promised doesn't help their case.

    While I'd agree the cases are not identical they're also not as unrelated as you seem to think.
    I think it does help their case, if they eventually have to defend it. One of the most important things that I've heard people overlook when discussing accountability is that - certainly back when these two Kickstarters were launched - there was no obligation to timeliness. The creator obligations were to create a thing, but deadlines were not mentioned in the list of obligations except to say that creators had to make an effort to meet deadlines.

    They're intensely unrelated. The one referenced is a failure to produce and deliver a physical good. This game is a case of failure to provide an option for a produced digital good - one which, by the way, can still be done as a Steam exclusive. Steam is capable of running DRM-free games, and there are dozens of games on Steam which are completely DRM-free. EDIT: Forgot to mention that everyone who backed the Kickstarter had the option to convert to Steam, I think. I know I did.

    Quote Originally Posted by Asmodai View Post
    I'm not a lawyer and I suspect neither are you but if someone wanted to I think there probably is enough for them to at least bring a case to court.
    There's always enough to bring a case to court. If you're willing to pay attorney's fees and don't mind a potential small fine, "A can always sue B". That's literally the first thing almost every law student hears their first day of class. But you're right, I'm not a lawyer; I've just worked enough in the legal system to understand why we don't call it a justice system, yeah?

  2. #92
    Mage of the Inner Tower Endless Rain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    RPG.net
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by Asmodai View Post
    They don't have to be based out of Washington. The laws are to protect consumers in Washington so for this exact law to be used the case would have to be brought by a BACKER from Washington no matter where Wastelands is based. However it doesn't need to be this exact law either because this case established a legal precedent that could be followed by other states as well.
    I live in Washington, and I know there's at least one other Backer here. I'm not going to sue WI, but I don't know about any other Washingtonian backers.

  3. #93
    Moderator Asmodai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA (USA)
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by OneFiercePuppy View Post
    I think it does help their case, if they eventually have to defend it. One of the most important things that I've heard people overlook when discussing accountability is that - certainly back when these two Kickstarters were launched - there was no obligation to timeliness. The creator obligations were to create a thing, but deadlines were not mentioned in the list of obligations except to say that creators had to make an effort to meet deadlines.
    What does that have to do with anything? The case wouldn't be about how long it's taking. If the game were not released anywhere yet then you're right, there would be no case because kickstarter has no obligation to timeliness. The game IS released though on Steam so how long it took to reach release is irrelevant. It's released but the backers who funded it haven't gotten it, that's pretty strong evidence that the creators have NOT made a good faith effort to meet the DRM-free deadlines, in fact now they're working on mobile and console versions instead of the kickstarter version.
    Quote Originally Posted by OneFiercePuppy View Post
    They're intensely unrelated. The one referenced is a failure to produce and deliver a physical good. This game is a case of failure to provide an option for a produced digital good - one which, by the way, can still be done as a Steam exclusive. Steam is capable of running DRM-free games, and there are dozens of games on Steam which are completely DRM-free. EDIT: Forgot to mention that everyone who backed the Kickstarter had the option to convert to Steam, I think. I know I did.
    Offering to convert your pledge to Steam is irrelevant. All that means is anyone who took said option no longer has legal standing because they voluntarily gave up their rights to the DRM-free version. Now MAYBE they can make their Steam release DRM-free (I'm well aware it's possible) but as of now they aren't even trying to make that claim. They have in the past and continue to state that the GoG.com release is the DRM-free version and so by their own statements that's the case. I'm not the one saying Steam isn't it, THEY are. Also I'm not sure if it's changed in newer versions but I believe someone in these forums a while back did test to see if the game was DRM-free on steam and they stated it was not. I can't test that myself as I don't have the Steam version. Again though that's irrelevant since even Wastelands is saying the GoG.com version is the DRM-free one.
    Quote Originally Posted by OneFiercePuppy View Post
    There's always enough to bring a case to court. If you're willing to pay attorney's fees and don't mind a potential small fine, "A can always sue B". That's literally the first thing almost every law student hears their first day of class. But you're right, I'm not a lawyer; I've just worked enough in the legal system to understand why we don't call it a justice system, yeah?
    To bring a case to court means to actually have it tried. You can always file but they don't always make it to court. Cases get dismissed all of the time without getting their day in court, judges throw them out for any number of reasons. For example if someone who didn't even back the kickstarter tried to file it would get thrown out because they have no legal standing to make the case. If a backer who willingly accepted the Steam version instead of the DRM-free one tried to bring a case it would be thrown out because they voluntarily waived their right to the promised DRM-free version. Neither of those two cases would make it to court and those are just obvious ones off the top of my head. "There's always enough to bring a case to court" is flat wrong.

  4. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by Asmodai View Post
    To bring a case to court means to actually have it tried. You can always file but they don't always make it to court. Cases get dismissed all of the time without getting their day in court, judges throw them out for any number of reasons. For example if someone who didn't even back the kickstarter tried to file it would get thrown out because they have no legal standing to make the case. If a backer who willingly accepted the Steam version instead of the DRM-free one tried to bring a case it would be thrown out because they voluntarily waived their right to the promised DRM-free version. Neither of those two cases would make it to court and those are just obvious ones off the top of my head. "There's always enough to bring a case to court" is flat wrong.
    A good point. I've heard this assertion before, usually from people who have read about the law and know how it's supposed to work, but haven't sat in the courts through the cases and seen how it actually works. You're flat wrong, to use your phrase, that to bring a case to court means to bring it to trial. Bringing a case to trial and bringing it to court are very different, and that's an important part of litigant strategy. It's also why moderators make a consistent living. I think you're almost certainly correct in your example about standing for this case, but if you think bringing a case to trial is the same as bringing it to court, that's not a matter of opinion; it's one of facts, and rather than win that argument I'd prefer we discuss and see here we're talking about two different things. But lastly, you're of course right that I was wrong to deal in absolutes. That's right behind land wars in Asia and going up against a Sicilian in the classic blunders. But it takes very, very little to bring a civil case to a state court. Demonstrating a non-injurious tort for, say, fraud, is so straightforward that almost any experienced tort lawyer should be able to take a complaint and bring a non-frivolous case to docket. There are so many laws - so very many - that it's quite easy to get a court to accept a case at first. That's why if you've taken even one business or civil law class, read a text, or chatted up a real lawyer, you'll have heard stories about professors starting class with, "Can A sue B?" It's to demonstrate both the ease of bringing a case to court and, later, the importance of not getting carried away with how easy it all is.

    The first two paragraphs in my last post aren't absolutes, but your arguments haven't beaten me down yet. I mentioned the timeliness part, as you noted, as a thought for why Kickstarter wouldn't be involved, but as to why Wastelands wouldn't - and why I said it's apples and antelopes - that's my second paragraph, and I don't think your claim that "Offering to convert your pledge to Steam is irrelevant" is valid. If the publisher has offered their product, and people have, despite that offer, declined to accept the product, then that changes the whole situation. I think that would be construed as a good faith effort by the publisher to provide the product. I mention that because civil courts aren't like the sensationalized stuff on shows like Judge Judy or whatever's current. They don't usually bring down the hammer as a first option. The rule of thumb, the general opinion, is that things are best served when business can continue apace and people can be compensated fairly for harms, economic or otherwise. This would essentially be specific performance, I believe, not damages; and the devs have even said it wouldn't be hard to do.

    Finally, you - and others - keep saying "the backers who funded it haven't gotten it" or things to that effect. I backed both Kickstarters, and have it. I empathize with your frustration, but that doesn't change the details of the project. It isn't alone convincing argument that what's good for the Washington goose is good for the South Carolina gander. And it doesn't make the presentation of mostly unrelated lawsuits look much less passive-aggressive.
    EDIT: That last sentence looked like a dig at Greybriar. I didn't mean it as such. This is hardly the only place that people have linked to court cases in an effort to persuade action of some sort. I do apologize for that poor wording.
    Last edited by OneFiercePuppy; 09-16-2015 at 01:59 AM.

  5. #95
    Moderator Asmodai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA (USA)
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by OneFiercePuppy View Post
    The first two paragraphs in my last post aren't absolutes, but your arguments haven't beaten me down yet. I mentioned the timeliness part, as you noted, as a thought for why Kickstarter wouldn't be involved, but as to why Wastelands wouldn't - and why I said it's apples and antelopes - that's my second paragraph, and I don't think your claim that "Offering to convert your pledge to Steam is irrelevant" is valid. If the publisher has offered their product, and people have, despite that offer, declined to accept the product, then that changes the whole situation. I think that would be construed as a good faith effort by the publisher to provide the product. I mention that because civil courts aren't like the sensationalized stuff on shows like Judge Judy or whatever's current. They don't usually bring down the hammer as a first option. The rule of thumb, the general opinion, is that things are best served when business can continue apace and people can be compensated fairly for harms, economic or otherwise. This would essentially be specific performance, I believe, not damages; and the devs have even said it wouldn't be hard to do.
    The product they offered via Kickstarter was a DRM-free version of the game not simply the game in general, your point completely ignores that fact. Now I've already agreed they may be able to fulfill the commitment by releasing a DRM-free version on Steam but it is my understanding the current version is not and more importantly not even they are claiming it is, they still contend the gog.com version is the DRM free one. Offering a DRM Steam version IS irrelevant when the kickstarter was for a DRM-free game, that would be a bait and switch. You can't pitch a product as DRM-free, take the money, and then say here's the DRM version, that's absolutely not acting in good faith. They can make that OFFER and backers can CHOOSE to accept it thereby giving up their claim to the DRM-free version but unless every backer accepts the DRM version they are still required to release a DRM-free one because that was the product they sold (they charged our credit cards years ago). Alternately they can refund all the backers who don't want a DRM version.
    Quote Originally Posted by OneFiercePuppy View Post
    Finally, you - and others - keep saying "the backers who funded it haven't gotten it" or things to that effect I backed both Kickstarters, and have it. I empathize with your frustration, but that doesn't change the details of the project.
    First, to my knowledge NO backer has received the product the Kickstarter was for. AGAIN, the kickstarter was clearly labeled as a DRM-free game, that's the product that was sold, not just any version of the game. For someone citing "the details of the project" you seem to conveniently ignore that but it's a significant detail. So you have NOT gotten it, you have accepted a DRM version of the game instead and thereby waived your claim to a DRM-free one.
    Furthermore "backers who funded it haven't gotten it" is a true statement. We aren't dealing in absolutes as you seem to be so allow me to rephrase to perhaps make it a bit more clear what is being said:
    There exist backers who funded it that have not received it.
    That's a true statement even if you set aside the earlier point that no one has received what the kickstarter was actually for... a DRM-free game... some people have just chosen to accept a substitute.

  6. #96
    Mage of the Inner Tower Endless Rain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    RPG.net
    Posts
    532
    The Relaunch will probably be in Q1 2016. Wastelands was planning to have GOG distribute the game when it reached 1.2.5, but GOG rejected the game due to poor reception and Wastelands hasn't found a new distributor for the DRM-free version. GOG is considering selling the relaunch if it has good enough reception though.
    I am waiting for the relaunch before playing Worlds of Magic, so I don't check the forums as often as I used to. In the meantime, the main forum I post at is RPG.net, if anyone here needs to contact me.

  7. #97
    Caster of the Inner Tower
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    France
    Posts
    735
    Thanks for the update.

    There is a "community wishlist" on GOG to get WoM : http://www.gog.com/wishlist/games/worlds_of_magic you can vote here and hope it'll increase the odds of GOG having it.

    Else, did WI offer the game to Humble Store too ? It's another DRM-free (even if they also sell Steam keys) distributor, and they are a bit less picky about what they accept than GOG.

  8. #98
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    27
    Thanks for letting us know, even though WI couldn't be bothered to make a proper announcement themselves.

    GOG rejecting the game is a pretty thin excuse. If WI wanted to get the game to us, they could. They don't need GOG or any other distributor to do that. But even if they did, it's not like it'd be hard to find one. I can just about guarantee that smaller stores like Gamersgate, Shinyloot, Fireflower, Indie Game Stand and more would all be thrilled to sell DRM-free Worlds of Magic. I bet Humble would take it, too. Their failure to find a distributor means they aren't looking for one. If they want to wait for the relaunch to shop it around again, that's fine. What's not fine is their refusal to deliver anything to the DRM-free backers - not a stopgap Steam key, not a download straight from their servers, not even an acknowledgment or a real status update. "Yeah you'll get your backer copy sometime I guess, meanwhile MOBILE VERSION YAY!!! :D"

    I doubt we'll be seeing it in Q1, though. October has come and gone with no further news on the useless mobile port that is taking up all their time. After mobile, console is the next priority, then the relaunch (on Steam), then the DRM-free Kickstarter backers. I'd be surprised to have the game before this time next year. And if GOG rejects it again, I'd bet on WI just throwing in the towel on the DRM-free version, and either giving us all Steam keys or just continuing to pretend we're not here.

  9. #99
    Acolyte AlBQuirky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Mentalepsy View Post
    Thanks for letting us know, even though WI couldn't be bothered to make a proper announcement themselves.

    GOG rejecting the game is a pretty thin excuse. If WI wanted to get the game to us, they could. They don't need GOG or any other distributor to do that. But even if they did, it's not like it'd be hard to find one. I can just about guarantee that smaller stores like Gamersgate, Shinyloot, Fireflower, Indie Game Stand and more would all be thrilled to sell DRM-free Worlds of Magic. I bet Humble would take it, too. Their failure to find a distributor means they aren't looking for one. If they want to wait for the relaunch to shop it around again, that's fine. What's not fine is their refusal to deliver anything to the DRM-free backers - not a stopgap Steam key, not a download straight from their servers, not even an acknowledgment or a real status update. "Yeah you'll get your backer copy sometime I guess, meanwhile MOBILE VERSION YAY!!! "

    I doubt we'll be seeing it in Q1, though. October has come and gone with no further news on the useless mobile port that is taking up all their time. After mobile, console is the next priority, then the relaunch (on Steam), then the DRM-free Kickstarter backers. I'd be surprised to have the game before this time next year. And if GOG rejects it again, I'd bet on WI just throwing in the towel on the DRM-free version, and either giving us all Steam keys or just continuing to pretend we're not here.
    Agreed that announcing on Steam about non-steam versions is kind of lame.

    The kickstarter I supported said "physical disc." Why do they need to have digital downloads?
    - Al

  10. #100
    Moderator Asmodai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA (USA)
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by Mentalepsy View Post
    Thanks for letting us know
    +1 Yeah, thanks Endless Rain, I don't follow the Steam comments so hadn't seen that myself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mentalepsy View Post
    I doubt we'll be seeing it in Q1, though. October has come and gone with no further news on the useless mobile port that is taking up all their time. After mobile, console is the next priority, then the relaunch (on Steam), then the DRM-free Kickstarter backers.
    There has been news on the mobile port. If you follow the Worlds of Magic facebook page they post updated screenshots and stuff every two weeks or so and even reply to some comments on them. The latest one is from Dec. 9th so it's only a few days old at the time I'm writing this.

    One thing I did find interesting is someone asked what "Planar Conquest" was (they renamed the mobile version) and the response was:
    "That is the sequel for mobile devices" (emphasis mine)
    I'm not sure if that was just a slip up or they consider it a sequel now or what but I had not seen it referred to like that before.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
footer