I understand your reasoning and all as I've been hearing it for years.
#MEDIEVIA SOURCE CODE FULL#
Only according to a license that is full of holes, that could never stand up in court and that none of the original authors care about anymore.įighting this fight for years on end when the people who wrote the code and license don't care about it anymore is useless. Medievia must display the authorship of the code which their game is based on. (No "clean-room" implementation from scratch has been claimed by any party.)ģ) Therefore, subject to both the license and copyright law, Medievia must display the authorship of the code which their game is based on. Previous to this evidence surfacing, the ownership of Medievia claimed the code was entirely original.Ģ) Medievia V is a derivative of Medievia IV, per their own documentation, and therefore a DIKU derivative. Has anyone found evidence to dispute any of the following?ġ) Medievia IV was a derivative of Merc 1.0 (itself a derivative of DIKU), as shown by code audit. One of their own staff (who resigned after becoming aware of the plagiarism) outlines this in more detail. Outside of the DIKU license issue, Medievia remains a derivative of DIKU ( definition under US law here), yet does not credit the authors anywhere inside their game or in their copyrights. (Moved here from the Tavern as it was deemed worthy of careful excision, presumably for not dealing with the DIKU license itself.
0 kommentar(er)
