It is so much involved it is barely can be considered derived work; also their process using incremental code replacement using dll injection means that no decompiled code is used in the code base, so the claim of that is totally pointless.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.UltraClaim 28 is quite damaging to the reverse-engineering team:

28. Papenhoff has admitted that the source code developed via the re3 and reVC
projects is not original, but rather is (and was intended to be) a copy of the original. In fact,
Defendants have bragged that their derivative source code was created by working backwards
from Take-Two’s final “machine” code to re-create the human-readable code in which GTA was
programmed:

“GTA 3 and Vice City were originally written in [programming
language] C++ . . . The compiled executables that are shipped are in
machine code. So the general task is to go from machine code back to
C++. . . . To go back to C++ is by no means a simple 1:1 mapping, but
over the last 10 or so years decompilers have appeared that help with this
process. . . . So what we typically do is work with the output of the
decompiler and massage it back into readable C++.” Id.

If this is true and it appears to be so, then this is in fact copyright infringement and not something that any of us really can defend.

This shows that plaintif and you did not understand what reverse engineers say:
1. GTA code was written in C++
2. They managed to create their own code in C++ working in the same way as GTA code.
If you read they took original GTA code, you need to check your sight.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

These are expensive jokes bro, expecially if judge decides no attoney fees gets paid. Which is frequent in copyright cases.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

BTW have somebody poked Leonard French about this one? I wonder what his opinion is.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I wonder why they ask for Jury Trial in copyright case too? What do they expect?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

As I understand new world, corporations split the "markets" between them and became upset someone got to their territory. The claims is so anti-market and anti-capitalistic as whole so I wonder what is going on.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Also I wonder how some "market" can belong to Take-Two exclisively. That is kind of funny as even in car parts business you can produce car "enhancers"/mods and not pay any royalties. They try to stop that but they can't and they never claim "market" belongs to them. Something really strange is going on. Need to buy a full truck of pop corn for the show...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Well, either Take-Two lawyers are extremely unprofessional or it is total fraud/freevolious.

"irreparable harm" means it can't be fixed by money, which is totally not
the case here even in worst case scenario. Unless they will bribe judge I don't see
how this claim won't get dismissed.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

There is quite different problem here - no OpenGL support which eans it runs on future and top devices (except for PC support). Which is quite limiting.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I don't care, any Linux games lately?

View this comment - View article - View full comments