SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the trusting-values-sent-from-the-client-is-an-Epic-fail dept.
Royale-lly Screwed: Epic Sues YouTubers Promoting Fortnite Cheats
Part of Fortnite's appeal is that it offers a level playing field. People can't unlock new weapons, start a match with equipment, or augment their abilities by grinding for in-game upgrades. Everyone drops out of the Battle Bus with the same tools, a glider and a pickaxe so their skill will determine whether they catch the 'dub or take an L. So it may not come as a surprise that Epic Games is suing two YouTubers for upsetting that balance with cheats.
TorrentFreak has reported that Epic's lawsuit targets Brandon "Golden Modz" Lucas, a cheat distributor and content creator whose YouTube channel has 1.7 million followers, and Colton "Exentric" Contor, who has over 7,000 followers. The cheat in question combined an aimbot with ESP features that offered information that players would otherwise have no way of knowing. It reportedly cost $55 (30 days) or $300 (unlimited) from the Golden Godz website.
[...] The suit appeared to have a quick impact. Golden Modz's last video was published on October 12, and the Golden Godz website currently says that "No packages exist at this time," even though a dialog box claims that "Payment systems are back up and new packages have been added!" The site claims to offer various "services" for several Call of Duty games and Grand Theft Auto: Online; all of them appear to have been pulled.
Also at Polygon.
Previously: Epic Games Sues 14-Year-Old after He Files a DMCA Counterclaim for a How-to-Cheat Video
U.S. Federal Judge Blocks Man From Selling GTA V Cheating Software
Related: Game About Net Neutrality Receives Grant from Epic Games
Epic Games (Developer of the Unreal Engine) Shows Off "Siren" Demo
Sony Faces Growing 'Fortnite' Backlash At E3
Fortnite's Android Version Bypasses Google Play to Avoid 30% "Store Tax"
Epic's first Fortnite Installer allowed hackers to download and install anything on your Android phone
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 19 2018, @01:38PM (7 children)
Guilty of what exactly? I honestly don't know. They didn't violate copyright, like you admitted to, they created their own tools that did not yet exist.
If Fortnite was a regulated sport you could argue that the cheaters are cheating. But that means the cheaters are guilty, the pharmacy inventing and selling drugs isn't guilty when athletes start abusing their medications. But this tool itself doesn't actually violate a law, nor do the cheaters violate a law. Yes, they violate some peoples ethics/decency standards. For that, fortnite can create a EULA or whatever to ban them from the servers, but no law is broken.
The 14yo's case the judge seemed to side with the game publisher more on terms close to 'slander' than anything else. E.g.: the publisher would lose money as cheaters turn away customers. That only stands when you make the assumption that corporations are entitled the right to claim imaginary profit at the cost of individuals rights. (in this case free speech)
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Friday October 19 2018, @04:10PM (1 child)
Under the laws of some countries, injecting your own executable code into the address space of a program created by somebody else creates an infringing derivative work unless a written license specifies otherwise.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 19 2018, @06:26PM
Those countries are authoritarian hellholes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 19 2018, @05:47PM (3 children)
any cheating program is a derivative work.
what I was trying to say is that it is wrong to profit from unauthorized derivative work.
I would have nothing against them giving away the cheating program for free.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 19 2018, @07:31PM (2 children)
Giving it away for free is okay, but profiting off of it is evil? Why? They did not use anyone else's resources in the making of the program, so no, it's not a derivative work.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 20 2018, @06:36AM (1 child)
intent matters. their tools are intended as addons to existing work, therefore they are derivative.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 23 2018, @12:22PM
A phone holder is an addon to my car. Even if the phone holder is designed to specifically fit a single model of car, do you think a car manufacturer should be able to prevent the phone holder from being sold?
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Friday October 19 2018, @07:26PM
They almost certainly violated the service agreement for playing on Fornite's servers, which may entitle the service provider to monetary compensation, hence the lawsuit.
Also, these tools would probably count as derivative works, so they may in fact violate copyright, but I don't think the case law is clear on the matter.
And the client software EULA may also entitle the publisher to monetary compensation.
This is a civil matter, and anyone can bring any civil lawsuit they want (of course, if it's frivolous it'll get thrown out and you may be fined for wasting court resources).
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!