[Marphy Black]

MrFlibble, on 01 November 2013 - 05:07 AM, said:

I was wondering, would it be legal for whoever owns any beta builds to upload gameplay videos and screenshots of those? Would that be considered fair use or not?

I would imagine that distribution of any materials, even just screenshots or videos, of these betas might technically be illegal on some basis, maybe on the grounds of copyright infringement, but the real question is whether or not this fear is actually warranted. Is some copyright watchdog working for the owners of a 20 year old IP (that I doubt realize they even own or ever intend to do anything with) suddenly going to appear out of the woodwork to hand out a lawsuit against the person who posts some unfinished betas of said 20 year old titles, several of which have long been discontinued from sale or have even been freeware for years? I sincerely doubt this would happen. At the absolute worst, someone might send a halfhearted cease and desist e-mail, but even that little action being taken would be a stretch. Consider that the Duke 3D, Shadow Warrior, and Blood betas have been floating around the community here for ages, all relatively bigger names than most of the titles on that disc, and no one's doors have been kicked down yet (that I'm aware of, at least). However, the mere fact that it's technically illegal might be enough to deter anyone in possession of such ancient and harmless game builds to simply sit on them forever.

Granted, in Joe's case, some of the IPs on that disc are currently active, namely Duke and Doom, so if he ever was in a position to consider releasing anything about them, some copyright concerns may be justified. If nothing else, he certainly deserves credit for standing firm and remaining loyal to a company he no longer works for and doesn't really exist anymore in any significant capacity. But realistically speaking, it has been a near decade since Joe made this thread (has time really gone by that fast?), and some of those betas were probably near if not already a full decade old back then. Joe is free to do whatever he wants with the disc, whether it be use it as a coaster or drop it into a shredder, as he doesn't really have anything to gain by releasing anything from it. However, I would passionately argue that he also has nothing to lose, if that's his worry, by releasing any content on that disc. I would also argue that this content would pose absolutely no harm to anything, anyhow, or anywhere, especially 20 years after the fact, and their benefit is that they would offer a fascinating and unparalleled insight into the development of these games which would only appreciate more the efforts the developers had taken long ago in creating the titles many of us grew up with. These are one of a kind, ancient relics, as far as the digital age is concerned, and they possess a unique value that is utterly irreplaceable should they ever be lost to time.

But again, I admit I'm a preservationist that would really hate to see such content needlessly become lost, so my opinion may be terribly biased and ill-conceived.

[t800]

I bit understand legal point of view, but what is completely out of my comprehension is "humanistic" point of view of owners of IPs.

I mean motivation behind sending C&Ds, lawsuits, etc. Why do they feel urgent need to prevent any "leaking"? I would love to hear their reasoning behind this, let them explain to us how can it damage sales of current sold products of that specific IP or its value for future possible utilization. I understand they have legal right to attack anybody who would like to spread those betas, but they dont have to. Do they understand that they actually hurt communities of their most loyal fans, who are their best consumers?

Yeah, I know that my reasoning must sound uberly-naive to people who uphold law as sacred, but just please try to look on it from other perspective. Law is to protect (speaking theoretically), so I ask, if there is no damage caused, then why prohibit something?

[MrFlibble]

t800, on 01 November 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

Law is to protect (speaking theoretically), so I ask, if there is no damage caused, then why prohibit something?

Well, technically an owner of intellectual property has the right to do whatever they want with it, and the law protects this right. So if the owner doesn't want anyone to even know that this particular piece of intellectual property exists, much less watch/listen to/play etc., they are completely entitled to it and the law ensures that nothing prevents such a decision from being made true.

And RinyRed is right, fair use considerations might not apply to pre-release materials if they are made public - even in the form of screenshots, photographs, videos or such - without the owner's consent.

[MYHOUSE.MAP]

Honestly I can fully understand why Joe refuses to release his prototypes. 3DR has a well-documented history of issuing cease and desists over the smallest projects using their IPs and purging their forums of prototype information because it wasn't released with their blessing. Georgie B and Scott would see a huge and unauthorized prototype release featuring their IPs as free money for them via a lawsuit. Considering how cash-strapped they are, they'd probably go with a lawsuit.

Joe is a dick, but George and Scott are ridiculously protective of their IPs. I'd rather deflect emails from teenage "beta hunters" than have to go through a lawsuit from my former employers.

[Jblade]

Hendricks266, on 16 November 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

I am not your messenger, nor will your regards have any effect whatsoever on Joe. Sorry.

(Especially considering I have no special standing in his eyes.)

I don't mean disrespect here, but there's no such thing as special standing in a fan community. You don't have it, neither does anybody else (apart from the few people who actually worked at 3DR or wherever)

Anyways I think one other reason why most people don't release betas is because possibly they don't want people seeing shoddy/unfinished products, as well as the legal side of it. I think many artists would object to their unfinished works being opened up to the public (of course I'm sure there's many who have no such problems either)

[Hendricks266]

James, on 02 November 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:

I don't mean disrespect here, but there's no such thing as special standing in a fan community.

What I meant is that I don't have the kind of rapport with Joe that TX or Nacho do, being 3DR mods.

[Nacho]

MrFlibble, on 01 November 2013 - 05:07 AM, said:

I was wondering, would it be legal for whoever owns any beta builds to upload gameplay videos and screenshots of those? Would that be considered fair use or not? If yes, such video and screenshot material would certainly be much better than nothing.

It is my understanding that exactly this sort of thing allowed some glimpses into the cancelled Duke Nukem Forever side-scroller game.

Again, releasing screens, videos, or the content itself is not illegal if proper permission is granted. In the case of those DNF screenshots those were given with consent to do so from 3DR. Yet, even stuff like this has hurdles. For instance those DNF screens were taken while running it on dosbox and it didn't accurately show what the game looked like since the settings and resolution were all off. Time and resources would have to be put into getting everything running properly to really show off some of the older stuff and even than most developers don't like showing their unfinished stuff.

[Mikko Pekkola]

There is something I noticed at 3D Realms forums. jet_nick was asking to see the early version of Shadow Warrior.

Quote

Joe Siegler good evening, I wanted to ask if in the future there 'was the chance of it being released sometime early version or beta version of shadow warrior, we would all be happy, best wishes

And then the user known as "Kennerado" said

Quote

First of all, Joe does not work for 3DR anymore and secondly, this has been brought up many times in the past and George has NEVER had any plans to release a "lame shadow warrior" so stop asking!

Then jet_nick said this one

Quote

quiet, I realized after sending the mex, I noticed all these questions and I'm sorry, I was just interested in the sprites of the enemies lost

Then Joe showed up in the forums and said

Quote

It's not happening. Even if I had the materials, there's zero chance of me ever releasing anything. I'd get sued by several people. Talk to George.

You see that? We've got told to talk to George about it or something like that, but i've suppose, that the early version of Shadow Warrior looked like this



Or maybe this, i guess

[necroslut]

I don't think talking to George will get you very far. He could've released it already if he wanted to.

[Mikko Pekkola]

But Joe said so in "3D Realms forums" and i've heard him saying so.

[necroslut]

Mikko Pekkola, on 10 November 2013 - 03:02 AM, said:

But Joe said so in "3D Realms forums" and i've heard him saying so.

He means that it's not up to him (Joe) to release betas, it's George's call.

[Mikko Pekkola]

necroslut, on 10 November 2013 - 03:16 AM, said:

He means that it's not up to him (Joe) to release betas, it's George's call.

What does that "George's call" mean?

[Micky C]

George's decision.

[Mikko Pekkola]

Now i get it, Thanks

[Mikko Pekkola]

Quote

Talk to George.

This one's exactly what Joe said in 3D Realms forums.

[MrFlibble]

Is there any evidence that the beta version of Shadow Warrior that Joe Siegler allegedly is in possession of isn't the same thing as the leaked v0.90 beta?

[Person of Color]

I don't know, let's ask Bryan.

[Sangman]

Mikko Pekkola, on 10 November 2013 - 06:00 AM, said:

This one's exactly what Joe said in 3D Realms forums.

So ask George, jeez. How hard can it be? The man's got a Twitter.

[Mikko Pekkola]

Sangman, on 10 November 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

So ask George, jeez. How hard can it be? The man's got a Twitter.

Yup, we need to ask George, or something I guess.

[Hool]

With Warren Spector's recent presentation about games being lost to time, do you think that there is a possibility that the E3 2001 version of DNF has been lost to time due how long it has been showed off to the public? Or could it be that Gearbox own a backup of this because of those "new" screenshots appearing in Duke Nukem Forever (2011)?

It would be pretty upsetting to find out that it has infact been lost possibly due to hard-drive failures or wear and tear.

[Radar]

What if those folders are just mockups Joe made so he can laugh at all of us for years to come.

[The Commander]

I am sure Bryan will recreate all them betas for us in good time.

[Jimmy]

2001 E3 DNF never really existed anyway. Most of it was made specifically for the trailer.

[Mikko Pekkola]

Radar, on 20 November 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

What if those folders are just mockups Joe made so he can laugh at all of us for years to come.

Hmmm.... I don't think so.

[Radar]

How does only Joe have those and no other past employee from 3DR has leaked them or expressed possession of such betas? They could be real, but logistically it's just as likely they are fakes.

[leilei]

[Radar]

OMG, haha. Brian's gonna have that on his Facebook so fast and you know it.

[MrFlibble]

leilei, on 21 November 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Haha, nice! Is that Win95's Explorer on the screenie, or Win98's?

BTW, was Blood's working title Horror 3D at some point, or am I making this up?

[Person of Color]

lol zapper stein, catacomb 4-D

[Hendricks266]

leilei, on 21 November 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

by "jay leno" version do you mean "Jace Hall version"?

Radar, on 21 November 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

How does only Joe have those and no other past employee from 3DR has leaked them or expressed possession of such betas? They could be real, but logistically it's just as likely they are fakes.

LAMEDUKE.TXT:

Quote

A big thanks to Joe Siegler for having the foresight to keep this file for
a year and half so it can be released to you!