SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the how-many-copies-of-each-will-he-sell? dept.
Al Lowe reveals his Sierra source code collection—then puts it on eBay
Al Lowe, one of Sierra On-Line's seminal game creators and programmers, has been sitting on a pile of his original games' source code files for over 30 years, fully convinced that they are worthless.
Gallery: Taking a look back at some choice Sierra gaming moments"I’m 72 years old, and none of my kids want this junk!" Lowe said in an interview with YouTube personality MetalJesusRocks (aka Jason Lindsey, himself an ex-Sierra developer and a friend of Ars). "Does anybody?"
Lowe is about to find out, as the developer has begun posting eBay listings for his entire source-code collection. (You read that correctly. The whole shebang.) The sale's opening has been accompanied by a MetalJesusRocks video (embedded below), which offers a 12-minute tour of backed-up files, original game boxes, original hint books, and more.
As of press time, Lowe has listed auctions for the first two Leisure Suit Larry games' source code, with bids already climbing (both well above the $400 mark after they went live). Lowe indicated to Lindsey that more games' code will follow on eBay, and this will likely include a stunning treasure trove: Lowe's other Leisure Suit Larry games, King's Quest III, Police Quest I, and Lowe's games based on Disney franchises Winnie The Pooh and Black Cauldron.A truly graphic adventure: the 25-year rise and fall of a beloved genre
What's more, Lowe also has original backups of his complete programming pipeline, including the Sierra utilities that converted plain-text, ASCII commands to interpreted code. When pressed about how curious users could peruse these disks' files, Lowe plainly responds, "It's a text file! Put it in Notepad."
[...] Lowe's listings clarify a few things: first, he has not tested any of these disks, and second, owning these disks is not the same as owning the legal rights to freely or commercially distribute their contents. "Realize that, while you’ll have my data as of the day of Larry 1’s creation, you will not own the intellectual property rights to the game, the code, the art, or anything else," Lowe says in the LSL1 listing. "Nor do I. The IP rights were sold over and over again, until they are now owned by a German game company."
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday December 01 2018, @04:42PM (5 children)
Why?
It's certainly possible it might represent a breach of contract for him to sell it, for which someone might sue the seller, but even if that turned out to be the case it shouldn't affect the buyer.
"it's almost certain that the copyright was assigned to and owned by Sierra Online. "
OK, so?
Copyright prohibits distributing unauthorized copies.
As long as he is the owner of the physical object he is selling, the fact that someone else owns copyright does not prohibit resale. Look up 'first sale doctrine.'
"So, it's likely you wouldn't be allowed to share this code with others."
Agreed, wholesale sharing would probably be a copyright violation.
"You wouldn't be able to post excerpts online."
Nonsense. Posting of excerpts for purposes of criticism and/or education is something else for you to look up, "fair use."
"You wouldn't be able to edit this code to "remix" the games involved."
Not quite correct - it's not the remixing itself where copyright law kicks in, but at the point of distributing the remix. However, for most people, this would probably make it not worth doing.
"The fact that it's a cool part of gaming history doesn't necessarily make it legal to sell."
No, but apparently he owns it, and that does make it legal to sell.
Seriously, do you think used books are illegal too?
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 5, Informative) by MrGuy on Saturday December 01 2018, @05:06PM (4 children)
I suggest YOU look up the first sale doctrine, at least before you decide to be smarmy about it.
The first sale doctrine is called as such because it requires there to first be a sale. If I sell an item (even one covered by copyright), I'm not allowed to restrict the buyer from reselling that specific copy of that item. I've been paid once, and I can't meddle in the resale market.
That does not apply here. Because this source code has never been sold, the copyright owner did not offer it for sale, and the copyright owner has never been paid for this copy.
First sale doctrine:
Al buys a book, then sells the book to me.
Al buys a copy of a videogame, then sells that same copy of the videogame to me.
Al buys a blank floppy disk, then sells that blank floppy disk to me.
But Al buys a blank floppy disk, copies his employer's IP onto it, then privately offers it to sale without his employer's knowledge or consent? Um...no. That's not how first sale works, because there is not "sale" to be the "first" that everyone else is shielded by.
I go any buy a USB hard drive, then copy my employer's code onto it, then sell that hard drive on eBay. The fact that I owned the hard drive, or even that I wrote some of the code on my employer's behalf, doesn't make the transaction legal. The fact that I bought and paid for the blank USB drive doesn't make the transaction legal. Copyrighted material is being sold by someone who doesn't own it to a third party without the owner's consent. The buyer does not magically acquire the right to that copyrighted work just because they paid someone for it.
This is not CLOSE to selling a used book.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Saturday December 01 2018, @11:02PM
Don't get angry. People are confused because they have been intentionally confused, mislead, and lied to by people with a vested interest in perverting and smashing our basic rights to what we own.
Well said though.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday December 02 2018, @09:01AM (2 children)
It's very close to selling the original manuscript for a book however.
If the author was not specifically required to surrender the original manuscript, it's his property, and if the book becomes (in)famous enough to make it worth his while then he's well within his rights to auction it off, under the first sale doctrine. It doesn't actually require a sale, sorry if the title confused you I didn't name it.
(Of course it goes without saying that purchasing the original manuscript for 'the Shining' would not entitle you to distribute copies or derivatives, but I'll mention that anyway, because you seem particularly dense.)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday December 03 2018, @06:20PM (1 child)
Right. If you write a book, you generally do that on your own, and sell the rights once it's complete. So you can retain ownership of the originals if that's not specified in the contract. You're selling the IP rights to produce new copies, but most people wouldn't sell the original copy which already exists. So it exists, you own it, you didn't sell it already, so you can still sell it.
But when writing software like this, when working directly for a company, it's a work for hire. You *never* owned the software which you wrote to begin with, therefore you have no right to sell it to anyone else. You already sold your rights to that copy before you even wrote it. You can't sell it again to someone else.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday December 03 2018, @11:05PM
It's unlikely they could make anything criminal out of it due to statute of limitations but maybe a clever lawyer would argue and ongoing conspiracy to conceal it and manage to make it work.
Most contractual issues would probably also be 'expired' in one way or another after all this time, but you'd have to pay a lawyer to go through all the original documents carefully to be anything like certain of the matter.
Regardless, I don't see much worry for the buyer here. (IANYL TINLA)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?