
Activision forced Al Lowe to cancel his Leisure Suit Larry source code auctions - peterkelly
https://www.pcgamer.com/activision-forced-al-lowe-to-cancel-his-leisure-suit-larry-source-code-auctions/
======
benologist
Same delightful company that baked gambling into games for young audiences,
for which they may yet face criminal charges.

[https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-05-10-belgian-
ga...](https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-05-10-belgian-gambling-
commission-lays-out-recommendations-over-illegal-loot-boxes)

Hopefully the EFF and Al Lowe can get them for violating _his_ copyright on
some decades old code re-used in "their" games.

~~~
WalterGR
_Hopefully the EFF and Al Lowe can get them for violating his copyright on
some decades old code re-used in "their" games._

I haven’t heard about this. Source?

~~~
benologist
I'm not saying it exists but their argument is Activision own other Sierra
titles like King's Quest, and the LSL code includes decades-old code copied
from those decades-old games.

It would make sense that the opposite is true and when Sierra made their many
sequels they copied from the LSL code as convenient too.

~~~
WalterGR
_It would make sense that the opposite is true and when Sierra made their many
sequels they copied from the LSL code as convenient too._

How does that mean that Activism violated his copyright? Since Sierra sold
Leisure Suite Larry, they acquired at least _some_ rights to it.

Without looking at the paperwork, a claim that Activism violated his copyright
is pure, unadulterated FUD.

So it seems like the following.

 _Same delightful company that baked gambling into games for young audiences,
for which they may yet face criminal charges._

 _[https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-05-10-belgian-
ga...](https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-05-10-belgian-gambling-
commission-lays-out-recommendations-over-illegal-loot-boxes) _

Off-topic ad hominem.

 _Hopefully the EFF and Al Lowe can get them for violating his copyright on
some decades old code re-used in "their" games._

FUD.

------
afpx
Copyright laws seem really out of date.

They were originally established to protect individual authors from theft from
publishers. In fact, here’s the first line of the US copyright office’s
description of the laws: “It is a principle of American law that an _author of
a work_ may reap the fruits of _his or her_ intellectual creativity for a
limited period of time.”

The irony is that the publishers have since bypassed the intent of the laws by
just buying all the author’s rights before being published.

Yes, I know. Activision owns the copyrights. But, the principle intent of the
laws was to reward individuals, not huge corporations.

~~~
MrMember
In this instance Activision doesn't even know if they own the copyright to
anything in the auction. They think they might and forced him to take it down
just in case.

~~~
phendrenad2
Not quite. There could be "shared code", in which case the publisher has...

and here you're expecting me to say "every right". But I won't.

Because what the publisher has, is in fact, an obligation.

You see, if you think someone is infringing on your copyright, and you ignore
it, you open yourself up to more egregious infirngement by others. Of course,
I'm not a lawyer, but that's my understanding of the situation.

------
melevittfl
If he owns a legally made copy of the source code, and I accept that’s a big
if, then he is perfectly within his rights to sell that single copy under the
first sale doctrine.

It’s a shame that this bit of history will likely end up lost.

~~~
userbinator
Or it'll surface in a torrent or file sharing site...

