Yes, it does.


Those acts are illegal, and those people are tracked down and thrown in prison.


No, I don't. Being able to do something and having the right to do something are two different things.

Well, for that particular case, we have http://www.staredit.net/files/696/, which was made in response to Blizzard's 1.14 patch. You don't even need to know hex editing.

1) No it doesn't.
2) My point exactly. Don't ban the unprotectors, just try to regulate it.
3) I'm not sure I understand you. It was an actual right for people back then to possess a human.

Terrible, horrible, unethical idea. This has already been explained by numerous people. It's also impossible to regulate.


You don't understand the difference between legal and moral rights? I guess that could explain this whole conversation.

What I am saying is that what we think are moral rights can be influenced by cultural background. Hence, what we think today is moral, might not be tomorrow.
And the legal rights are a reflection of the moral rights. Thus, legal rights are also affected by cultural background.
You think private property is moral, I do not. You say it's an inherent right, I say it's a culturally integrated one that is detrimental to the community.

In my opinion I think SEN should just allow any program that doesn't modify the StarCraft client maliciously, or allow unfair in-game advantages. Programs such as map editors, map protectors/unprotectors, modding tools and the like are all geared towards custom content creation that benefit the BW community as a whole.

As for the debate on unprotectors, there was a time and day in the past that made a lot of sense to have a hard decision to make. Nowadays however, it doesn't really matter. Having a few more tools on the site is probably better than holding up legacy rules and restrictions.

Read all the posts that weren't walls of texts.

I just gotta say Azrael "Mapper's Rights" figment is very amusing. He might have a point about it being morally wrong to unprotect, but he almost sounds like there's some thing legal about sc1 map protection.

Blizzard made the editor so that all maps could be opened, with no hint of protection. You have to use unofficial and technically disallowed (but not in practice) 3rd party programs to protect a map. There's no grey area to debate.

Protection (and unprotection) is sort of a meta game invented by the community.

Dont you dare cave in moose ;o

I'm glad someone looks at it that way because when I created Desert Strike I deliberately created it open source (aka unprotected). But now most versions out there are protected, which is against the open source license. According to the license (in whose spirit DS was created) you can do whatever you want with the map, even sell it, modify or whatever, but you have to publish all your modifications.

People arguing so adamantly against unprotectors should keep mind that intellectual property can not only be protected but also can be declared open for everyone's use.

I'm 99% certain I can unprotect any map. The idea of an unbeatable protection is just silly to me.

In my opinion I think SEN should just allow any program that doesn't modify anything maliciously. Map unprotectors are not allowed because they fall into this category.


Yes, it does. It matters more than ever. There are so few active mapmakers remaining that alienating some of them by saying "Anything you have released or will release here will no longer be yours, and we will help people steal your work" is not only disgusting and counterproductive to any constructive goal, but it's going to guarantee that mapping activity here drops even further. I know I would never upload another map here if the policy changed where the site was going to provide all the tools people need to steal your work.

I also know many of the protected maps uploaded here already were contributed because of the site's policy on not assisting with map unprotection, and 100% of them were protected to prevent unprotected versions from being distributed.

What you're suggesting is incredibly unethical and serves no possible benefits whatsoever. It will only hurt, if not destroy, what few remnants of the mapping community remain.


Despite being the one person to specifically state multiple times that we're not discussing legal rights.


This.


That's true, it does go both ways. A person shouldn't be unprotecting maps which were released with protection, the same way they shouldn't be protecting maps that were released as open source.

It has always been, and should remain, the map creator's decision how their work is released.


This.

This is a very simple situation. If you want more unprotected maps, make them yourself.

It is no more or less enforceable than our current policy; enforcement is identical but we just delete one less category of program from the DLDB when it shows up. Current policy is enforced by making sure that anyone who steals or or releases edits of protected maps without permission catches hell and that such maps are removed from SEN; nobody is proposing any changes to that policy. (Well, except maybe Payne. )

This is true, but my fix to Legacy of Haean predates that program.

Payne, what does it even mean to "regulate" them?

Indeed, times have changed.

As far as I know, only Payne is proposing anything like this.

I agree, which is why SEN would continue to actively prevent such distribution.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Nov 30 2012, 3:50 pm by Mini Moose 2707.

So, the topic summary is: Let's make the DLDB into an unofficial BW map DRM system.
sorry couldnt resist

I use map protectors to look at other maps, especially when I think I cannot progress due to a bug. Often I will use them to change things around in the game, eg. having a bound with unlimited lives so we can play it for longer.

I vote that map unprotection policy should be changed for SEN, but then again it isn't a serious issue for me because I have the unprotectors anyway.

Yes it is.

It's very easy to stop people from gaining access to unprotectors here. It's impossible to stop anyone from using unprotectors maliciously after you hand them out.

The analogy about handing out untraceable guns for the purpose of home protection specifically highlighted some of the serious problems with this idea.

Unprotectors are designed with a malicious intent: to circumvent the intentions of the mapmaker.

The only people who should have any say in this matter are those who actually use map protectors. The handful of people who do use map protectors and are okay with someone unprotecting their map should release unprotected versions of their maps, and leave the rest of us alone.

You have absolutely no right to strip the protection off maps other people made, and the idea of the site helping people to do that is completely disgusting.


Yeah, for the worst, if that wasn't completely obvious. As already explained:

It matters more than ever. There are so few active mapmakers remaining that alienating some of them by saying "Anything you have released or will release here will no longer be yours, and we will help people steal your work" is not only disgusting and counterproductive to any constructive goal, but it's going to guarantee that mapping activity here drops even further. I know I would never upload another map here if the policy changed where the site was going to provide all the tools people need to steal your work.

I also know many of the protected maps uploaded here already were contributed because of the site's policy on not assisting with map unprotection, and 100% of them were protected to prevent unprotected versions from being distributed.

What you're suggesting is incredibly unethical and serves no possible benefits whatsoever. It will only hurt, if not destroy, what few remnants of the mapping community remain.

Let me reiterate an important point: This serves no possible benefits whatsoever.

Not sure if you understand the full implication of this. It also means that all work using parts of the original has to be released as open source or you cannot use that part. Did you recreate every trigger system from scratch? (Not going to argue against stealing ideas although I think some people would.)

Not necessarily. I'm sure many mapmakers protecting maps intend to prevent anyone from either stealing maps or releasing unsanctioned mods of their map, or both, but would be okay with people learning from their maps. Unfortunately both functions are the same so you can't tell which intention the creator of the unprotector had in mind when he created the program.
Not that it matters anyway. What matters is what the users are going to do with the program.
That being said, the ideal tool would be one that unprotects the map and lets you view its insides but won't save an unprotected version.

Not every still active mapper is paranoid like you. So yes, it would alienate a few, but at the same time it would encourage others to get into mapping. For the longest time I've never made a map from scratch.
Instead I took maps with a nice concept and tried to improve it but always made it a point to keep proper credits. Only this experience allowed me to create DS.

Which would put the safety of any future map of yours into jeopardy as posting a map on SEN pretty much guarantees that your map can't be stolen at all, no matter how many fake copies are being created. The added risk of another site offering unprotectors pales in comparison.

Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Nov 30 2012, 4:47 pm by NudeRaider. Reason: Replied to recently added argument

It is equally easy to stop them from being used maliciously after they are handed out because SEN already does this. SEN does that by removing the unprotected maps from the site and making those who post them face harsh consequences. This is what SEN currently does and will continue to do regardless of whether or not the policy is actually changed.

It is not only impossible to stop anyone from using unprotectors maliciously, but also impossible to stop anyone from using unprotectors, period.

Indeed, and nobody is planning to change SEN's policy on actively preventing such distribution.

I agree with everything Moose has said.

I've created every trigger I've ever used from scratch. There are plenty of freely available triggers

Not necessarily.[/quote]

Yes, necessarily. That is literally all they do.


Which can be done via Trigger Viewer which is already uploaded, or by asking the mapmaker themselves, or by asking anyone.

At this point in time everyone already knows how to do everything, so sanctioning map unprotection has no educational value whatsoever.

There are no benefits to this proposition whatsoever.

It only serves to aid map theft and map alteration, which is already enough of a problem without a site supposedly dedicated to mapmaking aiding in it.


Sure, sounds good. That's not what they're trying to sanction though.


Now you're talking about using a map unprotector for map theft.


No, it doesn't. Most of the population of bnet has never heard of SEN, and most of the members of SEN don't get on StarCraft regularly, if at all. The two communities have almost no overlap.

The only thing jeopardizing the future of mapping would be a formerly reputable site helping make map unprotectors freely available to the population at large.


No, they don't. They do as much as they can.

It is impossible for you to stop someone from using it maliciously after you hand it out. This is not the only place that uploads maps. You cannot stop them from distributing maps on bnet. You have absolutely zero control over what is done with that program after it's given out.

I don't understand how this is even up for debate.

If you want your maps to be unprotected, then release them as unprotected.

You have no right to decide this for other people.

Edit:


People unprotect, then edit, steal, and destroy maps on bnet all the time. What the fuck is SEN going to do about it after they gave them the means to do it? There is no penalty they can force on anyone, SEN has no power. They can't even stop bots from permanently flooding their own channel. How about penalizing whoever is responsible for that? Oh, right.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Nov 30 2012, 7:35 pm by Azrael.

Indeed, the map shouldn't be yours, but feel free to give yourself credits. ;D

It's a compromise I'm suggesting to make sure the unprotectors are made available.
We are trying to prevent the access to a program that can be used for good, and for bad (taking in account everyone's opinion in here). By "regulate it", I mean "don't ban the whole thing", but instead host the program and penalize the persons using it maliciously (according to your point of views).

So is there going to be a poll or something?
I'd propose a Portal News post.