Jump to content
Veln

Copy Right Infringment

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, jmorrison51 said:

 

You can steal master blueprints. 

 

Correct, as stated during the interview we did with him last year:


http://dualuniverse.gamepedia.com/Archive:DU_Explorers_Interview_(Sep_17,_2016)#Blueprint_Details

Quote

(1:04:30) What will blueprints look like? Will it tell us details about the resources needed in the blueprint, kind of like it does in EVE? Is it a physical item that can be stored and stolen? Will there be any way to protect our blueprints from being stolen?

 

Okay, so yes, yes, yes.  The blueprints are physical items, you will be able to actually display the materials that are required for them.  {?} need to know what is required to operate it.  We may if we have time, add a preview, sort of a 3D view of what is the blueprint about.  We will see if we have time to do this, but yes, definitely the materials and things that are important will be displayed.  And, protecting your blueprints, there is no, it is something that somebody can steal from you, so you have to be very careful.  In blueprints, you can have, like in EVE Online, master blueprints, that are the source of every copy you can make, and copy blueprints with a limited set of runs.  That you can actually do them in series and sell on the markets.  So moving around with your master blueprint in your pocket is a very dangerous  {?}. You could lose it, be killed, it could be stolen.  {?} Even if all of your constructs are destroyed  {?} you can have these things called snapshots, that will allow you to rebuild your constructs, just your constructs, that will allow you to rebuild  {?} if it is destroyed.  It is never the end of the wall, but getting your master blueprint stolen is something you don’t want to happen.  It’s something that you have to be responsible, if there is something you have to hide it or protect it, or make sure nobody knows it exists, things like that. So, this is the answer, there will be a lot of things to say to that, blueprints are going to be used in factories that are basically factory units that come with containers and you can actually sort of a slot where you can insert your blueprint, things like that. We could talk a lot about this aspect of the game, the blueprint factory thing, but I think it will have several  {?}

Interesting thing also is that you can have specialization between people having blueprints, you can be good at designing stuff, but they don’t know how to mass produce them.  They don’t have the infrastructure or the logistics of people to provide them with the materials.  So those people just sell blueprint copies, and some of the guys just buy them, they don’t know how to design things, but they know how to produce them.  {?}This is very exciting to have this idea of specialization between players.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So throw your master blueprints in a bunker somewhere deep underground on a planet 10000's LY's away. Wait we can build stations? So hell even a station in deep space randomly. Maybe if it's small enough it can't be detected by probes and such?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kane Hart said:

So throw your master blueprints in a bunker somewhere deep underground on a planet 10000's LY's away. Wait we can build stations? So hell even a station in deep space randomly. Maybe if it's small enough it can't be detected by probes and such?

Or put all your blueprints in a single data center surrounded by a forcefield where the people there can copy the blueprints when needed (like Scarif from Rogue One)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh, thank you for correcting that. Just went through some hundred pages to find my mistake and looks like my mind recalls the wrong interpretation (though well argued) from another user instead of the truth lol

 

I like that more anyway :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2017 at 4:25 PM, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

The same algorithm that works for identifying photos can be used to identify a voxel construct.

 

If you copy a shape that is already registered as owned by a person in the game - like a whole ship - you will trigger the alert. How NQ wants to proceed with that, depends to be seen.

 

In Landamrk, if you copied the voxel construct of another person and tried to resell it, you would send much of your income on the Blueprint to that person you copied.

 

So, if a person figures out the "best" ship shape, people will pay them for the "patent". However, NQ should put a "patent fee" for keeping this going, so if a person leaves the game with a huge patent, they don't end up being a money sink.

Yes but in Landmark there was a way around voxel claims and though i do get the concerns I think episodes of theivery will be few and far between at least I hope so. I would like to think that people would rather buy a design than steal it. Glad to see a fellow LMer here... See you in Alpha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Munney the Landmark system didn't work at 100%, cause of the 'way voxelomancy ''features'' were procurred, aka the algorithm could not compensate for glitched voxels. NQ does not rely on glitched geometries for contours on shapes, so they are solid imho.

 

Cheerios o7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh. I think the idea of having some advanced copyright protection mechanism in the game would be a bit dumb. Once the game starts people are going to start creating a wide variety of designs and after a year or two, many of the most common designs will already be 'taken'. Anyone who joined after would be at a disadvantage since they have to try and create something new or lose most of their income to someone else. 

 

I think some people overestimate exactly how creative they can be as well. You're not going to create some innovative design that will change the face of the game and no one else thought of so everyone will want to copy :o its not rocket science to figure out that reducing mass makes the ship faster, or adding more thrusters makes in more maneuverable. No one is going to 'discover a way to make engines perform 30% better that no one else thought of'. The game may not have predefined ship types but general ship classes will emerge anyways. The point of blueprints is less about protecting you intellectual property than it is about facilitating production.

 

Succeeding at industry will be less about 'having amazing designs that no one else has ever thought of' and more about delivering the right quantity ships to the right locations at the right price. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that reverse engineering a ship shouldn't be possible. ie breaking the ship down piece by piece. 

 

For example sections of the ship could be edit protected like the hull for example. Where the interior of the ship wouldn't be edit protected allowing owners of the ship to modify interior spaces.

 

It would be as simple as selecting 'edit protect' on the brush while you are building your original ship blueprint.

 

Ships could also emit a unique randomly generated and locked signature (HMS Thunder Child-XFDW-1-34)- allowing you to quickly find out which ships are original and not copies. 

 

(name-randomly generated-copy/master-buildnumber)

 

Not sure where I'm going with the unique signature but basically it would work a bit like a serial code which would tell you the name of the blueprint/ship when it was built, date and time, which number it is in the production line etc.

 

Would be cool owning an original first production of a ship. Museums would end up being built. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mazillus said:

I'd say that reverse engineering a ship shouldn't be possible. ie breaking the ship down piece by piece. 

 

For example sections of the ship could be edit protected like the hull for example. Where the interior of the ship wouldn't be edit protected allowing owners of the ship to modify interior spaces.

 

It would be as simple as selecting 'edit protect' on the brush while you are building your original ship blueprint.

 

Problem I see with this is that stealing wouldn't be viable anymore. You have a superior concept of a ship? All the more reason to protect it. 

2 hours ago, Mazillus said:

Ships could also emit a unique randomly generated and locked signature (HMS Thunder Child-XFDW-1-34)- allowing you to quickly find out which ships are original and not copies. 

 

(name-randomly generated-copy/master-buildnumber)

 

Not sure where I'm going with the unique signature but basically it would work a bit like a serial code which would tell you the name of the blueprint/ship when it was built, date and time, which number it is in the production line etc.

 

Would be cool owning an original first production of a ship. Museums would end up being built. 

This on the other hand would be cool. These two ideas don't necessarily exclude each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your best bet in this is community protection against copyright. I think doing anything that will specifically limit stealing of designs, reverse engineering, etc is a poor choice. The Master/Copy blueprints do a decent job of allowing people to create a copy of your work without giving them the original copy. The master blueprint adds an awesome concept for corporate warfare/espionage. 

 

But in terms of dealing with stolen designs/ideas, I think you will be mostly out of luck. I think the only way to enforce this would be something community driven, popularity, or branding (in the design/blueprint). For instance have a sprayed logo on the side of your ships to mark them as the proper brand.

 

I also like Mazillus idea of having unique generated ship numbers to showcase both the name of the ship, an ID, and possibly what blueprint it was generated from. It gives some accountability to the whole system but also does not try to hard-enforce a system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i figure this since this thread has popped up several times before i'll throw in my idea from those threads.

 

Quote

Would be cool if a blueprint kept a log of builders, and when it is sold the profit is split according to how much work was done to the blueprint. So if someone buys a blueprint and changes 1% then resells it, they only get 1% of the profit while the original blueprint "inventor" gets the other 99%.

 

There can also be a cap, like maybe the split stops at 1/2 profit for the first "innovator", to keep someone from just trying to edit out the "inventor" entirely. If another "innovator" wants to edit the edited blueprint then the max that person can get is 1/3 profit and so on and so forth. That way the "inventor" always has an equal or larger slice plus some free marketing and distribution.

 

If cap is there, then, most likely, in the case of the re-sellers, the blueprints closest to the original would probably have more value. At that point, the "inventor" can build to its heart's content since it has a constant influx of currency with little effort, beyond making new blueprints that have to be popular to continue the cycle.

 

The only downside i can see to this i when another can of worms is added to the mix. Like you make a whole ship from scratch but use a blueprint of ,say for example, a small painting to decorate it. Maybe the the cap would be applied to the sum of the material to make the blueprint. So if the painting, unedited, was 100 voxels and the ship is 10000 the inventor of the painting only gets 1% of the profit since it only accounts for 1% of the total build.

 

And i don't even want to think about frankenstein-ing a ship together from the pieces of several other ship blueprints. Best i can come up with is determining the percentage of each blueprint is part of the whole then adjusting for the innovator cap. So if someone used 6 blueprints, ownership of the 6 would be split accordingly and the innovator's share could go up to 1/7th of the total profit.

To sum it up, if i were a copier why would i put in 100% work for 100% profit, when i can put in 50% work for 50% profit without fear of reprisal, while giving the original creator their cut plus advertising and also giving dual a new profession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Xenoform101 said:

i figure this since this thread has popped up several times before i'll throw in my idea from those threads.

 

To sum it up, if i were a copier why would i put in 100% work for 100% profit, when i can put in 50% work for 50% profit without fear of reprisal, while giving the original creator their cut plus advertising and also giving dual a new profession.

I like this idea in theory - it definitely seems like an interesting idea to allow builders to credit their work to previous owners. However I think this system might also be a little concerning. Imagine some scenarios:

 

1. The original builder quit, and now someone new has to take up his creations (for the guild, corp, etc). Money is still effectively being sent to someone and wasted. One way around it might be the ability to cede rights to a master blueprint.

2. Nothing is stopping me from taking a blueprint, reverse engineering it and creating the same blueprint separately (new blueprint). If you try to enforce a "similar design" algorithm across all blueprints we are going to have duplicates very quickly (people will spam simple ships to have copyright).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I would not mind seeing - now that I think about it would be a "credibility" system. Assuming I was a builder and made multiple ship designs I would have a known credibility in blueprints. However someone who only copies might have a known/shown history of copying designs or flat out stealing. Perhaps even a rating system for builders (that can be broken into different sections such as overall skill, environmental, copyright, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't the real problem going to be the all the ripoff ships that look like xwings etc.. from whatever sci-fi is popular.  Or the giant flying dick shaped space ships, you know that is coming.    I don't think people in general will care enough to want to steal someones original designs.   

 

Here is a thought, can you get banned from the game for making something inappropriate?  Who gets to decide what is inappropriate?  How do you go about reporting other people, how do you know who is flying that fugly ship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, eberkain said:

isn't the real problem going to be the all the ripoff ships that look like xwings etc.. from whatever sci-fi is popular.  Or the giant flying dick shaped space ships, you know that is coming.    I don't think people in general will care enough to want to steal someones original designs.   

 

Here is a thought, can you get banned from the game for making something inappropriate?  Who gets to decide what is inappropriate?  How do you go about reporting other people, how do you know who is flying that fugly ship?

Copies of trademarked things in the real world shouldn't be too big of an issue unless it looks like a very convincing replica, even then someone would have to report it.

NQ decides what is appropriate, and they also take the reports. Also players, some orgs might even have a policy to "destroy all ugly ships on sight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

36 minutes ago, eberkain said:

Here is a thought, can you get banned from the game for making something inappropriate?  Who gets to decide what is inappropriate?  How do you go about reporting other people, how do you know who is flying that fugly ship?

I'm sorry, I don't want NQ wasting its limited resources on people who get offended by the perceived shapes or aesthetics of a ship design. It is also not NQ's job, nor should it be.

 

Voxel On! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Copyright Infringement only kicks in if the person who is making a copy of a trademarked property makes money off of it, NQ does not make money off of it, they didn't develope the X-Wing Ripoff, and they do not directly profit off of it. People buy DACs, NQ is not responsible  for what people do with their DACs' money in-game.

In this case, NQ is not making money out of the intellectual property of said copyrighted concepts, like the X-Wing.

For easy referrence, NQ can easily point out to the Marvel Comics VS City of Heroes case, where it's obvious thE creators of the MMORPG City of Heroes were not to be held accountable for their users' creations - Captain USA , Steel Man, The Incredible Bulk, White Widow, Hawksight, Rick Furry , etcetera.

 

Also, NQ can easily make a database of copyrighted names that can't be appointed onto constructs, like X-Wing , USS Enterprise, (Super) Star Destroyer or Battlestar Galactica. As long as people don't name them these names, NQ has no need to deal with the issue itself.

 

So, it's time to make the Hee(greek X)-Wing Fighter, the AstroCombatant Galaxia, the USS Enterpreneur and the (UIltra) Interstellar Destroyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Copyright Infringement only kicks in if the person who is making a copy of a trademarked property makes money off of it, NQ does not make money off of it, they didn't develope the X-Wing Ripoff, and they do not directly profit off of it. People buy DACs, NQ is not responsible  for what people do with their DACs' money in-game.

In this case, NQ is not making money out of the intellectual property of said copyrighted concepts, like the X-Wing.

For easy referrence, NQ can easily point out to the Marvel Comics VS City of Heroes case, where it's obvious thE creators of the MMORPG City of Heroes were not to be held accountable for their users' creations - Captain USA , Steel Man, The Incredible Bulk, White Widow, Hawksight, Rick Furry , etcetera.

 

Also, NQ can easily make a database of copyrighted names that can't be appointed onto constructs, like X-Wing , USS Enterprise, (Super) Star Destroyer or Battlestar Galactica. As long as people don't name them these names, NQ has no need to deal with the issue itself.

 

So, it's time to make the Hee(greek X)-Wing Fighter, the AstroCombatant Galaxia, the USS Enterpreneur and the (UIltra) Interstellar Destroyer.

Nintendo has a long history of successfully shutting down fan made freeware projects that are too similar to their characters/software.  I'm not sure where one draws the line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eberkain said:

Nintendo has a long history of successfully shutting down fan made freeware projects that are too similar to their characters/software.  I'm not sure where one draws the line. 

Yes, and a freeware is not what DU is, it is its own Intellectual Property. People can make all the look-alike Mario castles they want, Nintendo does not own the concept of castles or plumbers or dragons for that matter.

Not the same thing to begin with :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Yes, and a freeware is not what DU is, it is its own Intellectual Property. People can make all the look-alike Mario castles they want, Nintendo does not own the concept of castles or plumbers or dragons for that matter.

Not the same thing to begin with :P

Your nitpicking, its a valid question.   People are dicks, in every creative game like this there are always those people that go out of their way to make things that are offensive and rude to others, in DU they will be paying subscribers and are enjoying the game the way they want to.   My question is where will the line be drawn?  I'd like to know specifics if they exist.  Also, what happens to the person that makes something others think crosses that line?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, eberkain said:

Your nitpicking, its a valid question.   People are dicks, in every creative game like this there are always those people that go out of their way to make things that are offensive and rude to others, in DU they will be paying subscribers and are enjoying the game the way they want to.   My question is where will the line be drawn?  I'd like to know specifics if they exist.  Also, what happens to the person that makes something others think crosses that line?   

I don't think it has been laid out yet and we won't know until the final terms of service is released. In the past, NQ has alluded to looking at reports on a case by case basis. I'd expect first offenses to just be warnings, and repeat offenses getting more harsh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/11/2017 at 8:10 PM, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Copyright Infringement only kicks in if the person who is making a copy of a trademarked property makes money off of it, NQ does not make money off of it, they didn't develope the X-Wing Ripoff, and they do not directly profit off of it. People buy DACs, NQ is not responsible  for what people do with their DACs' money in-game.

In this case, NQ is not making money out of the intellectual property of said copyrighted concepts, like the X-Wing.

For easy referrence, NQ can easily point out to the Marvel Comics VS City of Heroes case, where it's obvious thE creators of the MMORPG City of Heroes were not to be held accountable for their users' creations - Captain USA , Steel Man, The Incredible Bulk, White Widow, Hawksight, Rick Furry , etcetera.

 

Also, NQ can easily make a database of copyrighted names that can't be appointed onto constructs, like X-Wing , USS Enterprise, (Super) Star Destroyer or Battlestar Galactica. As long as people don't name them these names, NQ has no need to deal with the issue itself.

 

So, it's time to make the Hee(greek X)-Wing Fighter, the AstroCombatant Galaxia, the USS Enterpreneur and the (UIltra) Interstellar Destroyer.

I love the sound of making "replicas". I could make some Star Citizen "Antique Spaceships" : The perfect way to razzle and dazzle your dinner party guests with, along with complementary free mints to suck on while enjoying the viewing!" All within your underground Dr. No inspired secret fortress replica, away from prying eyes, of course. With price tags of real money also replicating the actual $ values on the website perhaps with a 50% price one-time only price discount... Of course resplendent with a mini-army of Mooks (services and very affordable pricing schemes: Please pick-up a leaflet) for additional effect, lounging around to complete the day's entertainment (and promote sales of course between dealers, should force be necessary).

 

Another project that I'm sure will see the light of day: Wipeout racing tracks! Whoever creates this can charge fees for racers and place bets for further entertainment: Planet Wiped Out! Weapons disabled until the final lap!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe you could enlist one of the “righteous good” orgs to put out bounties on bootleg ships, id take the bounty personally. sounds fun “hunt down any ships that copy this design 1000 credit per ship”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×