Not knowing what is exactly in Pelishard and what part of the game may or may not include Cyan content or whether they distribute any of the MOUL or Cyan game files, I can't really know what the full story is.
If Pelishard was requiring one to have ABM/CC to play and only distributing fan created ages and using alcugs server, there would not be much to shut down. That probably would not be a problem for fans or Cyan. I just don't know what they were doing and I have not heard anyone say. Unless some one that was there steps out and says, it is just speculation and not evidence on which to base a burning at the stake.
The problem post is about endorsement... It claimed Cyan had 'OK'd' the shard, that is a claim of endorsement. IF Cyan had, they clearly did not, I would have been signing up, as I think many of us would have. Many are upset feeling it was an attempt to mislead fans.
I posted because the original post, which was a repost to the GoMa forum, did not ring true. It comes out that skepticism was valid. The reaction has shaken many in the Uru community that wonder about parts of replications and look-a-like builds in SL and THERE. I know some of those builders go to great lengths to make everything from scratch, other not so much. But some are rethinking that 'not so much'. And even if we make something totally from scratch, how much alike can we make it? Would a near exact replica of Ae'gura done in teal rather than browns with similar but different textures be legit? What if the building shapes were only vaguely similar and no Cyan textures were used? By law a recognizablely similar copy is still some measure of infringement in trademark and patent areas. At some point the similarity becomes a matter of copyright infriengement (one sees these lines of argument in the music industry all the time - how many notes per stanza have to change for it to be a new song?) This all gets very grey and makes for lots of arguments. Many of us avoid the whole thing and do Myst-Uru style building (Devokan is a good example with a Channelwood inspired age or the Riven inspired age in another).
I know many of us have looked at how to move the Cyan content to other platforms and game engines. The results are waiting on Cyan to issue the licenses. If we had the licenses, even without the source code, the community would know where the lines are and what they could do. Much of the confusion over where textures, sound files and other parts of the MOUL game can or cannot be used would end and remove some of the divisions within the community. The existing licenses some fans have make it even more confusing...
Even just having the license for Cyan content would reduce the problems, imo. Until then, most of the community has decided to respect Cyan's wishes and wait for the licenses. Hopefully we will see them soon and avoid seeing another fan go down in flames because of their impatience.
_________________
Nalates - GoC - 418 - MOULagain: Nal KI#00 083 543, Nalates 111451 - Second Life: Nalates Urriah
Guild of Cartographers 
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 9:53 pm — Post subject: Shard OK'd by Cyan?
People that are on that shard should ask themselves, do I really want to be on a shard that acts like that?
