Why? Blizzard could simply stomp them into the ground legally both in the US and in other parts of the world.
But if their major tool was taken away…
Then you’re saying it’s just coincidence that the announcement was made at BlizzCon after proposals had been submitted to the Library of Congress calling for “abandoned” games to have all DMCA protections removed for play-ability for buyers as well as archival purposes? And only after articles discussing the proposals cited Vanilla WoW by name as potentially being affected by this as well? And it was coincidence that it was announced half-way through one of its better expansions if not second best?
this isnt about protections. this is about the fallacy that blizzard agreeing (outside of protections) was because of the retail crowd- that could give a rats behind about it to start with.
here is what i find the most hilarious about such an incorrect claim-
apparently, it was agreed on for the retail crowd- while blizzard tells said same crowd to piss off. because their demands are NOT going to be met.
how about that? shrug weird.
it was somehow for the retail crowd and possible BY them but yet you arent getting ANY retail advancements or QOL changes.
its almost like…its possible BY the vanilla crowd…for a vanilla recreation.
Yes it is. Without an active product from Blizzard, private WoW servers had the potential to fall under “Fair Use”.
Keep in mind Blizzard really likes DMCA protections. They even became the target of the Electronic Frontier Foundation who criticized them for using the DMCA to go after MDY, who made the now-defunct “WoWGlider” bot.
If WoW shut down it would not be exempt. Star Wars Galaxies, which shut down at the launch of SWTOR, was one specifically listed in another article on the subject. Vanilla WoW is different because the vast majority of its content was removed when 4.0 hit.
Not to mention the Entertainment Software Association cited Blizzard bringing back Classic as justification for not giving any DMCA exceptions for the 2018 Section 1201 review. They claim those games could be brought back at any time by developers and that removing such protections interferes with developers’ ability to compete in the retro games market.
But this exclusion brings the following scenario to the forefront of copyright headaches: even if rightsholders of online games have no intention of re-releasing an abandoned title from its vaults, Section 1201 prohibits other users from accessing it.
The new exemption, as with the 2015 exemption, allows both individual users and archival institutions to modify games to remove the need for verification by an external server in order to make games playable again after a verification server has shut down. However, this part of the exemption is still limited to games that don’t depend on any game content stored on an external server.
Last month marked the end of the Seventh Triennial Rulemaking. As the DMCA currently requires, activists needed to repeat the exemption battle again in 2018 to maintain what was already granted and also to include online games. In January, MADE proposed an expansion to further expand the existing exemption to 1) include online gameplay; and 2) widen the class of users of the exemption to include “affiliate archivists,” a group of supervised individuals who would contribute to the preservation cause. However, restoring online servers in abandoned video games would likely require access to and reproduction of copyrighted content that was previously stored on an external computer server. And broadening the users of the exemption could also mean loosening the current requirement that such games are not made available beyond a qualified institution’s physical property.
Here is another article that is short and quickly explained in case you don’t feel like reading my articles again.
h ttps://techraptor.net/content/library-of-congress-expanding-video-game-preservation-protections
This also extended the 2015 ruling by the LOC which stated that museums or archives, for fair use purposes, could legally crack the online authentication for single player games if it was a basic authentication which was just “ET phone home” and required connection with the servers.
There are, however, additional caveats for this preservation**. The preservation work must be done by actual archivists or preservationists, ie. not average citizens who want to get an old World of Warcraft server up just for fun.** Also, the server code must be obtained legally and has to be the original code.Any emulation or recreation of the server code does not fall under this exemption. Unfortunately, by this point, many original server codes have been lost to past systems, as many were discarded when the servers themselves were shut down.
Further complicating matters, this new DMCA rule only offers fair use exemptions for games that have both the server code and the game’s local code. While local code or a copy of the program is easy enough to obtain, as mentioned above it is much more difficult getting a copy of the original server code. Unfortunately, without both, it is not considered under DMCA’s fair use. Any libraries, archives or museums that get these games working will also only be allowed to operate them on the physical premises, further putting a kibosh on hopes to legally recreate EverQuest .
You’re looking at things in hindsight. The Section 1201 review happened in October of 2018. When was Classic Announced? Blizzcon 2017. Between the 2015 review’s conclusion and the 2018 review.
The least riskiest path for them to take would be to do Classic since an active product would remove the “abandoned” label regardless of how the LoC ruled. Especially considering they just had another reason handed to them to not release Classic… the Worlds Inc lawsuit. The potential loss of
I know the Classic Cultist like to think they screamed and stamped their feet back into making Blizzard capitulate. But the decision didn’t happen in a vacuum like you think…
Looking at things in hindsight? The 2018 section 1201 review added even MORE leeway for games like these to be preserved. Back in 2015-2017 they had even LESS to work with. I just gave you every inch you could and got the most updated, lenient ruling of the exemption in order to show you that even at the best case scenario of the exemption WoW would STILL be excluded from this rule.
Also, lets not change your argument here. You said WoW would have fallen under this exemption if retail wasn’t still going. I proved you wrong. I was not discussing whether or not blizzard saw this as a threat, and you know this.
You are calling me out for strawmen and you keep bringing up a game that has literally nothing to do with Warcraft. Star Wars Galaxies could still have their source code that can be obtained legally and maybe that’s why it is under this category. I gave you the facts, even in plain writing that said “Vanilla wow is not under this exemption” and you still bring up a games that have nothing to do with WoW and thinking that just because they did it, that somehow WoW would have been able to.
Bud you clearly got proven wrong here and now you are just embarrassing yourself. In the future when someone lays out everything for you and there is no doubt that you are wrong, the best action is to just say “Wow I didn’t know that thank you for showing me!” or something similar.
So once again, retail has nothing to do with classic being brought back. And even if WoW was shut down the day after it was created, it still wouldn’t have fallen into this category. Sorry bud.
Okay so just for your sake I decided to look into starwars galaxies even though it has nothing to do with this conversation, but I like proving people wrong so wth.
h ttps://www.pcgamesn.com/dmca-mmo
Welp it seems that Starwars is in the same exact boat as warcraft. And in fact, does not fall into the exemption as well. So thank you for letting me make a fool out of you it has been a blast.
However, all these new rules apply specifically to museums and other such historical efforts. “These decisions don’t help amatuer preservation, sadly,” Handy says. But that is something preservationists will continue to push for moving into the next 1201 exemption process. “This is a long process that moves in steps not leaps.”
Nope. Hate to disabuse you of that notion, but once again you’re quoting an article about the ultimate 2018 ruling when Classic was announced most likely in reponse to proposals submitted for the 2018 review.
See, in case you’ve forgotten how years work, they go up. So 2018 comes after 2017.
Now, I’ll give you credit in actually comprehending what the Library of Congress ultimately ruled. However that was not the original proposal(s) that had been filed for that review. The original proposals were for 100% non-commerical use allowance. Meaning as long as a private server earned no money they could feasibly have operated a Vanilla server under the motive of “preservation” and potentially been free and clear.
The LoC added the conditions that it had to be in a place like a museum, restricted access to the game(s) to only inside the facility, and have legally obtained the code for the server portion.
If you think Blizzard caves to temper tantrums, I direct you over to the High Elf fight.
There is no much wrong here I could pick it apart endlessly but if I did that would be letting you change the argument and quite frankly I am going to force you to stay on topic.
The argument here was, that because wow retail is still going, it make the WoW franchise safe from this exemption. Those were your words. This is the argument I am debating with you. I am not discussing whether or not blizzard feared this ruling would allow for private servers.
Do you understand how wrong you are on this specific topic yes or no? Don’t bring up strawmen like starswars because that’s not what the argument was. Do you or do you not understand that retail wow being alive today, has nothing to do with the safety of vanilla servers being apart of the exemption as of right now.
Yes… AFTER the 2018 ruling. You do know that Classic was announced in 2017, right? This was when people were proposing that games that were abandoned be removed from DMCA under Fair Use to restore play. Vanilla WoW could have potentially been included depending on how one defined “abandoned”. If you talk a purely preservation stance, then yes, Vanilla WoW would abandoned because virtually all that content is gone now when 4.0 rolled
The easiest way Blizzard could avoid any problems whatsoever would be to release Classic itself. Active Product means not abandoned in any sense of the word.
Ok stop there, that’s all you needed to say. So you are wrong. Period. You asked for it so I am going to really go into detail so you stop bringing up nonsense.
Look at what I bolded. This was not our argument. You said that it WAS included in this and that the only reason it was protected was because blizzard still had an ‘active product’. Both of which I told you were wrong. I showed you why it’s wrong. You have even admitted that it is wrong, but now you are trying to switch the argument from that to “Well it could have been”. We are not arguing for what could have been. We are arguing for what actually happened. How do you not understand?
And this is a completely different argument. As of right now, even if wow died day one of vanilla, and they haven’t released classic. Vanilla WoW still would not be in this exemption as of right now. Which makes the claim that the ‘active product being the only reason classic is coming out’ even more nonsense.
I legit do not know if you are trying to troll or not.