Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Award
14 
No problem. Please let me know if there is a problem.
I'm just a dirty end user and my opinion is worth exactly less than sewage blocks but DMCA abuse is not good. Cheers and good luck.
Lastly, my apologies to Girzu and his mod for being the area where this gets dropped and curse steam for their 1000 character limit. Neutral ground at least means it has a lower chance of getting scrubbed out to pretend there's no dissenting opinions.
People would have been a lot more receptive to a split in GiC (or whatever had happened) if you didn't make all the worst choices, and now you're backpedaling to do damage control for your image. Moving forward, try being honest and and stop trying to attack everything that doesn't conform to your desired narrative and maybe you'll earn some trust back with your actions.
Not to mention " "I don't want to cause a split in the community" while effectively holding peoples save files hostage unless they subscribed to your version of the mod for a little over two weeks or whatever it was.
All the while your "team" doesn't want any acknowledgement for their efforts? Is it because they fear backlash from the GiC community or because they would have to openly show that they're associated with you and all the things you've said and done over this whole debacle?
"I didn't take anything away" doesn't really hold up with "-after having successfully struck down the previous iteration of the mod" as well as "As I have documentation that stipulates proof of ownership over the IP." Are we just pretending the whole DMCA thing didn't happen?
"I am no longer pursuing legal action" screams "We couldn't actually win so we're backing down to save face." This is likely why you've now pivoted to "preserving the work you did" instead of that whole manifesto about yanking it from Med which thankfully has been deleted from the comments. Sounds a lot better to the mildly informed than openly admitting your own actions and mistakes, right?
The other version of GiC (not my 2.8 branch) is still available.
I am no longer pursuing legal action.
Med is the one who is still threatening to do so.
He is the one claiming that his version is the only legitimate one.
People get us (Med and Mawd) confused very often.
And it has always been like this back when I used to act and speak on his behalf as a development team member.
I thank you for your neutrality and I don't expect you to support me on this issue.
You already espouse that I am not some simple out-of-the-blue fraud that Med wants to claim that I am.
And that is enough for me.
My team of old and new developers just want to develop our branch in peace.
We are not concerned with popularity like Med is, since he needs to exploit that popularity to make a profit.
Had you released a ‘different version’ of GIC with the sprites and questlines you worked on, without a DMCA attack, it would have been welcomed.
But taking things away from people’s hands through a DMCA and claiming that your version is the only legitimate one was probably not the best approach.
Perhaps saying that I liked the old version of GIC might be considered a betrayal by the current developers, but I wanted to say it.
I’m someone who was drawn to the old GIC because of the old art style and the Tarkov-like elements.
Personally, I was hoping you would upload the old version of the sprites, just like I released my own reskin patch. It would simply be another option, allowing people to choose for themselves.
But if those conflicts prevent people from enjoying the content, people will get angry.
Yes. Using a DMCA to attack with copyright was the worst decision you could have made.
Up until then, it was a 'personal' conflict between developers, but now, because of that conflict, people can no longer enjoy the content they love.
And as you might have felt, the DMCA is both highly effective and extremely tricky.
If there is indeed a copyright violation, the DMCA will ensure that the content is taken down, but it’s very difficult to get that ruling that copyright has truly been infringed.
Even 'Dark and Darker', which was widely deemed to have plagiarized most of the code, survived the DMCA.