Author Topic: Original Intermud 3 router source code  (Read 8708 times)

Offline donky

  • Acquaintance
  • *
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Original Intermud 3 router source code
« on: January 03, 2010, 04:46:55 PM »
Hi,

Many years ago when the Intermud-3 router first appeared on the scene, the MUD I developed for obtained client source code and joined the network.  However, we had the same name as another older MUD that wasn't on the network.  This was perceived to be a critical problem and the guy hosting the router (who wasn't a developer of it) hardcoded a ban for our IP address.  One of the actual developers of the router was mortified at the idea that such censorship was taking place and gave me a copy of the source code, with a loose request that he would prefer I not give it out in order to allow it to continue taking advantage of "security through obscurity".  Of course, you can still see the commented out clause with our IP address in the source code..

I often have hard drive crashes and have lost a lot of source code because of this.  As such, I am trying to release as much source code as possible that I have the legal right to do so, whether I wrote it or not.

If you are interested in obtaining the original Intermud-3 router source code, in exactly the same state as it was given to me, then you can obtain it from [CENSORED, edited by Cratylus].

Cheers.


[EDIT: I am really sorry to go insta-fascist but I need to find out of this is ok before I allow the link to remain. Please understand I am a big fan of informatiion being free, but I need to be sure it's free first. -Crat]
« Last Edit: January 03, 2010, 06:17:03 PM by cratylus »

Offline donky

  • Acquaintance
  • *
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2010, 08:01:16 PM »
Quote
[EDIT: I am really sorry to go insta-fascist but I need to find out of this is ok before I allow the link to remain. Please understand I am a big fan of informatiion being free, but I need to be sure it's free first. -Crat]

I fully expected you to do this, and it is your prerogative to do so.  It is however odd to experience, as the censoring of indirect information about direct information which lies elsewhere, is the typically unreasonable domain of comically over-reaching companies.  Given that you are only removing a link, IMO you are being overly protective about something without evidence that you have a reason to be.  Regardless, as I said above, I agree that it is your prerogative to do so.

Offline Adam

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 69
  • Adam@DeadSoulsDev
    • View Profile
    • TheMud.ORG
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2010, 04:55:04 AM »
Donky would you be so kind as to email it to me?
https://www.themud.org - MudList, Channel History, Channel History Search, i3 Dynamic DNS, Router Infomation

Offline Adam

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 69
  • Adam@DeadSoulsDev
    • View Profile
    • TheMud.ORG
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #3 on: January 05, 2010, 05:08:33 AM »
Quote
[EDIT: I am really sorry to go insta-fascist but I need to find out of this is ok before I allow the link to remain. Please understand I am a big fan of informatiion being free, but I need to be sure it's free first. -Crat]

True that so everyone just ask for it to be emailed instead  ;D
https://www.themud.org - MudList, Channel History, Channel History Search, i3 Dynamic DNS, Router Infomation

Offline quixadhal

  • BFF
  • ***
  • Posts: 642
    • View Profile
    • WileyMUD
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2010, 03:30:13 PM »
I guess my time in corporate America has made me sensitive to such things.  Crat is only doing what any competent sys-admin/webmaster would do for a company which doesn't want to be deal with law suits for helping distribute copyrighted materials without permission.

Ask any of the bit torrent sites that aren't in Sweden about how much it matters if the material is actually on their site vs. being a link to it...

Sure, in this case it's pretty unlikely anyone would care... and it's also very likely that donkey does indeed have permission to do this, but would those of you complaining help pay Crat's legal fees if it came to that?  No?  Ok then.

Offline Adam

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 69
  • Adam@DeadSoulsDev
    • View Profile
    • TheMud.ORG
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2010, 08:25:22 PM »
This conversation is losing its topic and should be locked

« Last Edit: January 05, 2010, 08:33:14 PM by Adam »
https://www.themud.org - MudList, Channel History, Channel History Search, i3 Dynamic DNS, Router Infomation

Offline Adam

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 69
  • Adam@DeadSoulsDev
    • View Profile
    • TheMud.ORG
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2010, 08:35:42 PM »
Donky if you would be so kind as to supply me with the apparent offending file, I Would appreciate it and i will verify within 2 weeks if the copyright if any is still valid.

Also technically by people writing alternate intermud 3 routers will also be in violation to the copyright holders of the original I3 router code according to current Copyright Laws in the US which supper-cede previous laws
https://www.themud.org - MudList, Channel History, Channel History Search, i3 Dynamic DNS, Router Infomation

Offline cratylus

  • Your favorite and best
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1020
  • Cratylus@Dead Souls <ds> np
    • View Profile
    • About Cratylus
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2010, 08:58:14 PM »
You guys might know that a while back I took on as a side project the
resurrection of mudos libs other than Dead Souls. I packaged up
things like TMI-2 and Nightmare IV with FluffOS, modified and slightly
updated so they'd be usable on modern computers. It seemed like a nice
thing to do. It seemed, in fact, so unambiguously nice and altruistic
that I might have been tempted to do it without asking.

But I did ask.

In each case where maintainers were identifiable and the license
seemed to indicate it, I contacted the authors and secured permission
to modify and redistribute the fixed up libs. So, for example, for
TMI-2 I tracked down Leto, Blue, and Rust and each gave their blessing.
For NM I actually got Descartes to agree...after his old fatwa
against it (remember those days? Sigh...old).

Bear with me, I'm almost to my point.

I had fun bundling them up and making them into a collection of
Golden Oldies people could play around with again. Like pokemans,
I wanted to getto da ze. But one of them...Lima...I had a super
hard time getting a hold of one of the authors. Beek and Rust
weren't a problem...but Deathblade...oh man. Weeks of cyberstalking
turned into months of sleuthing which turned into almost two years
of waiting and hoping for a response. And the whole time, rather
than distribute a fixed bundle, I instead distributed the original
Lima package and a secondary package that included lib patches
and FluffOS. Incredibly awkward and unsatisfying, but the way I
read the license, the right thing to do:

Quote from: USAGE
License:

Permission to use or modify the files provided with this software
distribution is granted for any non-commercial uses, so long as
the following conditions are met:

1) nothing is removed from the headers of the files. 

2) Commercial use of any part of this lib is prohibited, without prior
   consent from the authors of this software.

3) The name of the mudlib is displayed on your title screen and in any
   relevant intermud communications, unless you have permission
   from the authors.

4) Written consent from each author must be provided to use this
   software in ways otherwise contrary to this licence.

The authors of this software are:

John Viega (rust@virginia.edu)
Greg Stein (gstein@svpal.org)
Tim Hollebeek (tim@wfn-shop.princeton.edu)


Until...at last...Deathblade contacted me, to chat about router stuff,
of all things. So I said omagawd I been trying to talk to you forever,
listen can I get your ok on distributing fixed up Lima? But he forgot about me.

And then months passed...and the wait, from starting the search for
permission to finally eventually getting it, took over 2 years. But eventually
he did get back to me and gave me the green light.

Now, of course, Lima is happily bundled up into a convenient
package you can even run on Windows, and man, that whole time I
knew DB wouldn't really care if I did it. But I waited until I had permission
because it seemed like it was the thing to do.

Note please that my story contains no elements of legal fears.

It is about courtesy and protocol that, as an oldbie, I feel compelled
to honor and extend to those that went before me.

I think that a discussion of the legalities involved misses the point of
what I was up to.

Either way you're all free to discuss it. I don't expect you gentlemen
to really become uncivil.

-Crat

Offline donky

  • Acquaintance
  • *
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #8 on: January 06, 2010, 02:18:31 AM »
It is about courtesy and protocol that, as an oldbie, I feel compelled to honor and extend to those that went before me.

There is no license in my case and I claim that it was made clear that it was acceptable for me to redistribute the source code I was given.  There is a license in your case and you were required to obtain permission to distribute Lima as you wished, and you claim you did so.

Your censorship was expected and perfectly acceptable, given you had expressed a personal need to be sure you really had a legal right to have the source code before you were to examine it, when I originally offered it to you a year or two ago.  I made the post with this in mind.  And Adam, this is why I do not feel comfortable acting on any posts made to this forum, aimed at working around the censorship.

But you are going out on a limb to require that the legitimacy of my actions are proven.  In your post, you address being restricted from doing what you wish and being required to obtain permission before you can proceed.  You claim you obtained permission.  There is no proof that I am restricted from doing what I have.  And I claim I obtained permission.  It might be said that even despite the fact there are restrictions for your actions, and none known for mine, I am held to a higher standard of proof than you provide others.

Offline cratylus

  • Your favorite and best
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1020
  • Cratylus@Dead Souls <ds> np
    • View Profile
    • About Cratylus
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #9 on: January 06, 2010, 07:59:46 AM »
Quote
you had expressed a personal need to be sure you really had a legal right to have the source code before you were to examine it, when I originally offered it to you a year or two ago

January 19, 2007...almost three years ago! Time flies, man. Anyway, this
made me curious, since it seemed unlikely I'd be worried about the
legal aspects. I checked the mail and in fact I made no mention of
legal concerns.

Quote
It might be said that even despite the fact there are restrictions for your actions, and none known for mine, I am held to a higher standard of proof than you provide others.

Actually my standard of "courtesy rather than legalism" is far looser than
"legalism rather than courtesy".

If you want to apply a strictly legalistic standard to distribution, then
you absolutely lack right to do so, as no explicit license was provided
you for that purpose.

That is, however, somewhat extreme in many cases of casual hobbyist
sharing, and that is why I'm not trying to apply that standard in
this case. As with the Imaginary Realities archive you mirror, there
is a "common sense" understanding of what can be reasonably inferred
to have been meant-to-be-publicly-shared. While distributing the IR
archive is probably a technical violation of copyright law, I approve
of it because it is consistent with the spirit in which the content
was submitted: it was meant-to-be-publicly-shared.

In the absence of a license to distribute *gjs, I am left only
with interpreting what the authors meant to happen with the code.
The only inference I can make, based on the 15 or so years they
had to release it and did not do so, is that they were disinclined
to make the code public. It's less of a legalistic position and
more of a straight face position. If I were to meet Deathblade
in person and he said wtf were you thinking helping distribute
gjs without permission, I would not be able to defend the action
with a straight face.

If I am out on a limb it is because that standard is an arbitrary
one, and I accept the appearance of unfairness this generates. I
argue that the absence of a license forces us into arbitrary
judgment calls, and both our positions are on far out limbs,
albeit different ones.

-Crat

Offline cratylus

  • Your favorite and best
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1020
  • Cratylus@Dead Souls <ds> np
    • View Profile
    • About Cratylus
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #10 on: January 06, 2010, 09:02:39 AM »
Admin note:

I moved this topic from "intermud" to "licensing" because it doesn't
really have much to do with intermud things.

-Crat

Offline donky

  • Acquaintance
  • *
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #11 on: January 06, 2010, 12:28:18 PM »
If I am out on a limb it is because that standard is an arbitrary
one, and I accept the appearance of unfairness this generates. I
argue that the absence of a license forces us into arbitrary
judgment calls, and both our positions are on far out limbs,
albeit different ones.

-Crat

Imaginary Realities is not the same.  The legal right to mirror existing content on the internet, as practiced for instance by the Internet Archive, is well established.  In any case, it is a red herring with regard to this subject.   Pinkfish is aware that I was doing that, and if he hadn't give me permission (had he not at the time), there is no reason to believe he would not.  That dude is cool as a cucumber.

Over and above licenses and restrictions, what you have left out of your post is the value of one's word.  As far as I am aware, all the proof you provide that you have been given permission to distribute Lima, or anything else you chased up permission for, is your word.  And here, there is only my word that I was not restricted from distributing the router source code, when I was given it.  You hold your word as good enough for anyone who comes here and downloads what you make available, yet you will not accept my word as good enough.

Why is it good enough for others to have to take your word?  But not good enough for you to have to take mine?  And surely, by disregarding my word, this at some level implicates dishonesty on my part?

Offline cratylus

  • Your favorite and best
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1020
  • Cratylus@Dead Souls <ds> np
    • View Profile
    • About Cratylus
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2010, 12:57:38 PM »
Quote
Imaginary Realities is not the same.

It is a good example of the difference between content that was meant
to be shared and content that was not meant to be shared. You appear
to be agreeing with me.

Quote
As far as I am aware, all the proof you provide that you have been given permission to distribute Lima, or anything else you chased up permission for, is your word.

That is true. Feel free to report me to the appropriate authors
if you doubt my word on that point.

Quote
And here, there is only my word that I was not restricted from distributing the router source code, when I was given it.

I think this is key to the misunderstanding we are having.

You appear to be under the impression that "not being told not to distribute"
is equivalent to having the right to distribute.

That is mistaken.

It works the other way.

For example, suppose I am a writer, and I email you a chapter of
one of my manuscripts to proofread. My failure to tell you that
right to distribution is mine alone does not give you the right
to forward it to everyone you know. I am the sole possessor of
that right of distribution, and unless I grant you license to
distribute it, you lack the right to do so.

I happen to think that, if asked, DB would probably be ok
with distributing gjs. What I do not know is that this
is definitely true, and I do not know if there are other
people whose permission needs to be asked.

All I am asking of you is to secure permission for distribution
of code you did not write, if you plan to use my forum for
advertising your distribution of it, and if you lack a license to do so.

Quote
by disregarding my word, this at some level implicates dishonesty on my part?

I do not doubt that you did not receive an explicit request
not to distribute. This is not the same as receiving permission to do so.

While it may seem "unreasonable" and "comically over-reaching",
I think it's perfectly reasonable to have as my position:

Code: [Select]
It is hard for me to say with a straight face that the gjs guys
wanted the code distributed, and there is no license for doing so.
Facilitating that distribution on my site is therefore something
I'm uncomfortable with and I am happy to defend the decision to
remove that link long as you'd like me to.

Having said that, I'm curious as to why you posted it, if you
were so sure my response would be its removal. Were you looking
for a licensing debate?

-Crat

Offline Adam

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 69
  • Adam@DeadSoulsDev
    • View Profile
    • TheMud.ORG
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #13 on: January 07, 2010, 01:42:40 AM »
It is about courtesy and protocol that, as an oldbie, I feel compelled to honor and extend to those that went before me.

There is no license in my case and I claim that it was made clear that it was acceptable for me to redistribute the source code I was given.  There is a license in your case and you were required to obtain permission to distribute Lima as you wished, and you claim you did so.

Your censorship was expected and perfectly acceptable, given you had expressed a personal need to be sure you really had a legal right to have the source code before you were to examine it, when I originally offered it to you a year or two ago.  I made the post with this in mind.  And Adam, this is why I do not feel comfortable acting on any posts made to this forum, aimed at working around the censorship.

But you are going out on a limb to require that the legitimacy of my actions are proven.  In your post, you address being restricted from doing what you wish and being required to obtain permission before you can proceed.  You claim you obtained permission.  There is no proof that I am restricted from doing what I have.  And I claim I obtained permission.  It might be said that even despite the fact there are restrictions for your actions, and none known for mine, I am held to a higher standard of proof than you provide others.

Sorry I did not notice that my address was restricted so I will happily provide it: adam AT themud.org

I have no doubt in my mind that you do have permission to redistribute this code and with both yours and crats permission as your original post was censored, I would like to still be able to get a copy of the code for my historical purposes, so that I may document and store the code for future purpose and if possible would like to make it publicly accessible on my server.

https://www.themud.org - MudList, Channel History, Channel History Search, i3 Dynamic DNS, Router Infomation

Offline donky

  • Acquaintance
  • *
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Re: Original Intermud 3 router source code
« Reply #14 on: January 07, 2010, 05:24:12 PM »
You appear to be under the impression that "not being told not to distribute" is equivalent to having the right to distribute.

That would make my previous statements that I have permission a lie.  I was not told that in any way that I could not distribute it.  I was not explicitly told that I could.  But I was instructed that if I chose to distribute it, it would not be preferable due to the problems it could cause.  Given that these problems are no longer a factor, I consider that implicit permission.  This is in no way the same as "not being told not to distribute."  I consider it implicit permission.

Having said that, I'm curious as to why you posted it, if you were so sure my response would be its removal. Were you looking for a licensing debate?

I had no idea this would evolve into a licensing debate.  I simply posted here because it was the most relevant place to do so.  I fully expected you would do something, based on our previous discussion.  That you would engage in link censorship was unexpected, but not really surprising to me.