Based on disassembly of the PC DOS version, this port runs on PC, Mac and Linux and features many enhancements such as quick saving and the ability to mod the game including level design.
I sometimes watch ZX Spectrum playthroughs on YouTube. I know they’re edited but seeing the games I played for hours being completed in twenty minutes blows my mind!
I tried this some time ago. It’s basically the same game, just with some QoL improvement like widescreen support, and also dynamic lighting which is cool.
I’ve been playing this on Vita and Switch for some while now. There’s probably a port of this for anything, at this point. I think there even was a JS version that runs in web browser.
I remember this one. I don’t know why they haven’t been DMCA-ed yet because you can’t make open-source programs based on the disassembly of proprietary projects (unless they have acquired the rights somehow which I doubt).
It reminds of those stupid calculations that the music industry did back in the old days of Napster and other P2P sharing about how much money they lose.
When in actuality, I suspect that an actuary or accountant can estimate that this open sourcing of a 20+ year old game probably brings in new revenue in terms of consumers being interested in the franchise.
Once upon a time, you had to show an actual financial loss, to make a claim for damages. At least where I live (Denmark).
Maybe they’ve made copyright offense serious enough to not require that anymore. But without financial damages I would hope a copyright case would be frivolous. Apart from being a form of treason in the eyes of many lawmakers. Except when it’s Trump, then it’s just an honest mistake.
You cannot change the license of a derivative work. That part is clear cut.
I cannot take a Harry Potter book, use Google Translate to translate it into another language, polish up the result by hand, and then claim it as my work at slap whatever license I like on it.
If you read the linked document, it outlines how reverse engineering may fall under a certain level of fair use, e.g. for reasearch and/or backup/archival purposes.
It really isn’t as clear-cut as it seems at first.
I’ve been in the open source software world for multiple decades. I am well aware of the gpl and what it has to say about derivative works.
You seem a little confused however, though I feel like you are just desperately trying to wrangle an angle where you can totes win and you were never wrong. It’s really annoying to get into a conversation online like that.
Anyway, incase anyone else gets here, this guy is just endlessly wrong. Ignore.
This is not a separately distributed patch set as LAME was in the beginning. That’s GPL slapped on the combined work. Not really that hard to understand.
Add comment