Wolvereness Got Letter from Mojang's Attorney

Discussion in 'Bukkit Discussion' started by rcade, Oct 10, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Offline


    Whether or not Mojang "owned" bukkit has little to do with whether anybody is in a position to make the project's license valid.

    Also, he was OK with the state it was in for years, before he finally decides that he's going to block the entire project in order to "force" their hand? That makes little sense. The idea that Mojang would open source their code is also fairly ridiculous.

    I still think the whole GPL thing is just a convenient excuse.
  2. Really? I'd definitely say Mojang are more responsible for a project they own than one they do not.
  3. Harm has been done though, so asking "why harm" is a legitimate action. Though the intention can't be read from anything, because it's about legal stuff, which may have many potential sources and reason behind it.
  4. Offline


    Of course this is aimed at Mojang. Who else would it be aimed at? Wolfe is angry as a direct result of something Mojang did, so obviously they are who he is targeting. I would hope he's not attacking the community or other developers.
  5. ZanderMan9 That's the problem with your argument there. Your question of "Who else would it be aimed at?" hinges on the assumption that it's aimed at anyone. This is not a case that necessarily has to be aimed at anyone. While it may seem an obvious assumption to you, to others it may not seem like that's the case. The only thing people can agree on for certain is that the only reason he has actually provided is simply the desire to enforce his copyright.

    Whether or not there is a deeper reason or motivation is largely irrelevant in the point I'm trying to make - I'm simply pointing out that there doesn't necessarily need to be such a thing, so arguments such as "who else would it be aimed at" are fundamentally flawed.
    pookeythekid likes this.
  6. Offline


    AdamQpzm That's true. But if nothing else, Mojang is the cause of his strife. Maybe not the object of it, but the cause.

    "Is this all for the sake of some sort of proof that you have certain rights?"
    So then I guess it's this. It's to prove he has certain rights.

    But my other point remains: What he's doing only hurts the community he worked so hard to help. Why suddenly change from making this great software to restricting it? Purely to prove a point? I mean I guess that's honorable in a way, but still it adversely affects a lot of people.
  7. Offline


    ZanderMan9 Indeed it would seem a bit strange if Mojang were not the cause of--or at least associated with--Wolfe's DMCA. But as LokiChaos said, Wolvereness has only said he intends for enforce his copyright. As far as I'm personally concerned, that's all that really matters.

    Although, I do have this one ridiculous theory in mind. It's almost plausible, but still crazy: perhaps this Bukkit collapse was intentional. From how I look at it, EvilSeph tried shutting down the project, but Dinnerbone (Dinnerbone? Someone else? I'm sure it was someone from Mojang... Correct me if I'm wrong.) stopped him. As he was pretty much the head of the project, since Mojang didn't have anything to do with it except for owning it, he may have still had the intention to shut it down. So he would have then contacted Wolvereness and asked him to issue the DMCA, since that would definitely shut down the project for at least a while (as it has already), and even if it survived, the community would have been thrown into so much chaos that it wouldn't recover.

    And let's not forget that the entire development team and BukkitDev staff resigned at such a convenient (<-- sarcasm) time; some of those BukkitDev staff claim that they and other staff members did not resign due to the DMCA, just that it was bad timing.

    But anyway, just an insane theory. I don't recommend thinking that any of that is correct.
  8. Offline

    Wolvereness Bukkit Team Member

    EvilSeph did not ask me to do any of this. I also cannot speak for the now former DBO staff on their intentions, but I'd implore you to look at any of their farewells or first-hand responses.

    On a different note, I have a second letter from Alex Chapman on behalf of Mojang AB and Mojang Synergies AB. Concerning that letter, I'm going to be very careful about what I say, but I'd like to give an actual statement soon™ (spoiler, it's NOT a resolution to downloads being taken offline).
    AdamQpzm likes this.
  9. Dinnerbone is one of the original few who made Bukkit in the first place, and also happens to be employed by Mojang.

    Concerning reasons, you can't know and it'll be hard to know/believe with potential legal cases around. We just can't really know from the given information. Of course you can assume anything from Microsoft not feeling comfortable with a GPL mod to a custom scripted kill-switch that accidentally got triggered by someone tapping onto a the tail of a cat and so on.
  10. Offline


    That's completely absurd. He sent the takedown to the Bukkit Project, which is owned by Mojang, after engaging in email discussions with Mojang. He's been in further discussions with Mojang's attorney. Of course it's aimed at Mojang.
    ZanderMan9 likes this.
  11. rcade I'm not saying he's not communicating with Mojang, I'm saying that he doesn't have to be doing this to "get at Mojang", I'm saying doing it to protect his rights is a completely valid motivation.
  12. Offline


    I suppose it wasn't exactly the most relevant thing to say publicly; it was just something I felt like saying.

    I guess I shouldn't speak for them, either, but I have seen a fair amount of them say that their reasons for resignation were not due to the DMCA. A few of them mentioned this specifically because they were tired of people blaming them and/or being suspicious about the timing (and I confess, I'm one of those who thinks all of their timing is a little odd).

    Anyway, I look forward to reading your statement.
  13. Offline


    Personally, the resignation of the DBO staff and Sysadmins seemed more in the vein of not really wanting to have to fill the giant hole that EvilSeph left. Notice how they all happened at the same time. I know they said they had various reasons, but it's just what seems most likely to me, at least.

    Actual statement here on the forums? Or elsewhere?
    pookeythekid likes this.
  14. Offline


    Given the history of the project, I think it's fairly naive to think that's all this is about.
  15. Offline


    The problem with your theory:

    Wolvereness joined the Bukkit Project when it was already a year in progress and made contributions for 30 months. During those 30 months, net.minecraft.server code was ALWAYS part of the project.

    If he thought the net.minecraft.server code was an infringement of his rights, why did he first contribute to that code?

    Why did he keep contributing after one month? One year? Two years?

    It wasn't until a lot of contributors were REALLY MAD at Mojang that he suddenly decided his rights were being infringed.

    My theory is simpler than yours: He aimed his actions at Mojang because he was mad at Mojang. At that point he thought his code could be a poison pill he could use to kill the project, or at least damage it long enough for alternatives to become popular.
  16. Offline


    Like rcade says above, commit knowing and then later claim rights violation? Where is the logic and common sense in that? We all understand there are laws, rights, etc but it's the whole principle of sense here, wtf! I'm still yet to see any response that makes it all make sense.
    Also wonder why the takedown wasn't challenged immediately.
    Fishy stuff. :D

    Thanks for all your contributions Wolv but wtf man, looks like a spite or sellout issue. :)
    Feel like you're hiding something...

    Either way, good luck Wolvereness. ;)
  17. Offline


  18. Interesting to read, can't judge how much weight their words will have, nor if it would change much for the licensing question of CraftBukkit (CB license invalid => contributors hold CB code copyright and can DMCA). Despite quite sound explanations by some people, i am still not even 100 % sure the DMCA would survive "serious court", even as it stands now, but that's not about stating probabilities.

    Another reader concerning the GPL: http://copyleft.org/guide/
  19. Offline


    Remember that Bukkit is the API. Craftbukkit is not the API (well, I mean, you could use it as the API), it is the server implementation.
  20. Offline


    Right, the DMCA was issued against Craftbukkit (Implementation) for violating the license of Bukkit (API). If Bukkit (API) can't actually be copyrighted, then the Bukkit license is moot.
  21. Offline


    A big issue I see here is simply the lack of transparency. I congratulate the Spigot team on being extremely open about this whole matter. However, Mojang (Microsoft) and Wolfe have been exceedingly dodgy and selectively responsive.

    1. public void statementHandler(StatementEvent e) {
    2. if (e.hasAnyRealMeaning()) {
    3. e.cancel();
    4. }
    5. }
  22. Offline

    Wolvereness Bukkit Team Member

    Sure, I'm selectively responsive, but I don't think dodgy is the term you want. No, for the thousandth time, the question "why" isn't going to get the type of answer everyone wants, or at least not in the immediate future. For almost everything else, I don't mind responding, and I did sum up my sentiments in a response on reddit.

    To show an example of what I'm referring to:
    You aren't asking a question; you're venting. I'm human. I still frequent these forums. I haven't written a goodbye letter. I haven't actively avoided interacting with people; I actively search for good-for-the-community opportunities to interact. This really isn't a good opportunity except to point out the lack of purpose in your discussion(s). Perhaps this function's recursive behavior should be examined:
    Wingzzz and AdamQpzm like this.
  23. I wouldn't blame anyone too much for that, because they are all involved in potentially legalist encounters including community-back-flaps, both of which are not necessarily easy to deal with. That might also apply for Mojangstas, concerning Microsoft buying Mojang and legalist encounters. I myself would make "legalist encounters" a video game.

    By some people "why?" is considered to be a fundamental question, often aiming at revealing the purpose of things.
    ZanderMan9 likes this.
  24. asofold The part you quoted isn't relevant there. Fundamental or not, "why?" is the only thing he is refusing to answer above:
  25. Offline


    Wolvereness asofold

    "...potentially legalist encounters including community-back-flaps, both of which are not necessarily easy to deal with."
    "'why' isn't going to get the type of answer everyone wants"

    And yeah I do understand that stating anything too opinionated or revealing would cause severe legal issue. What I said was more so pointed at Mojang, but still does apply to Wolfe.

    "On a different note, I have a second letter from Alex Chapman on behalf of Mojang AB and Mojang Synergies AB. Concerning that letter, I'm going to be very careful about what I say, but I'd like to give an actual statement soon™ (spoiler, it's NOT a resolution to downloads being taken offline)."
    Even though this is thousands of times more open and less politically twisted than how Mojang has been, it still gives us little real information of value. It sort of leaves us half-expecting :/

    AdamQpzm True.

    P.S. And being human, I so want to put my backing entirely behind one party or the other. But in this situation, that simply isn't possible without being in the wrong.
  26. ZanderMan9 I agree. It can be frustrating that we don't know all the information, I'd certainly like to know it all :p I think that some of the posts Wolvereness has made suggests he'd like to share more but is concerned about the possible legal implications it could have. Maybe that's what he's trying to do - not give us information, just show that he'd like to but isn't able to.
  27. Offline


    It seems like a perfectly fair question to me. Why would you participate in Bukkit for 30 months, knowing the whole time where net.minecraft.server code came from, and then claim that code as such an infringement of your rights the project must be taken offline?

    You have a right not to answer it, of course, but attacking the question is a dodge. Many people have a lot invested in Bukkit and would like to see it returned to distribution.
    Shaggy67 likes this.
  28. Offline

    Wolvereness Bukkit Team Member

  29. Offline


    I think you avoid questions you don't have a good answer for.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page