Hi all, I was thinking about modding games and its legal issues. As far as I know, file formats do not fall under IP and most games do not patent their file formats. So, creating tools to view/modify these files seems legal to me. Although the actual modifying might be illegal, the tool itself is not. Furthermore, many games encourage modding to some extend (distributing modding tools like level editors etc.) Now, exactly rebuilding the game in such a way that it directly uses the content of the original game is probably not legal (Am I right?), so my question is, how far can one go? A simple model viewer seems legal, but what about a viewer for complete levels? And what if the 'viewer' also executes the game scripts? Does anyone have any idea or experience in this area? Regards, Dietepiet

Quote: Original post by dietepiet
As far as I know, file formats do not fall under IP and most games do not patent their file formats.

Yes, they have some protection.

They are intangible assets. They might be considered trade secrets. They might be considered corporate knowhow or procedural knowledge. They might be covered under database rights, under many countries. (Neither your post or your profile say where you live.)

How did you figure out the file format? Reverse engineering can become an issue if the software license prohibits it.

Quote: So, creating tools to view/modify these files seems legal to me. Although the actual modifying might be illegal, the tool itself is not.

How do you know that? Has it been through the courts? Are you a lawyer?

Quote: Furthermore, many games encourage modding to some extend (distributing modding tools like level editors etc.)

Yes,a few do encourage modding. Those authors will usually specifically allow it, and provide tools for it.

Many other games forbid it, and their authors and publishers will send attack lawyers to those who they think may be breaching their rights. You don't need to be ACTUALLY breaking the law in order to get sued.

Quote: how far can one go? A simple model viewer seems legal, but what about a viewer for complete levels? And what if the 'viewer' also executes the game scripts?

How fast do you need to speed before you get pulled over by police? How much do you need to steal before you get caught for shoplifting? How badly can you harm somebody before they take you to court?

Don't do it. Avoid the grey area completely.

If you are so uncreative that you feel you must work with other people's stuff rather than creating your own, then retain a good lawyer who can help you stay on the legal side, and also help you with the inevitable legal nastygrams, C&D orders, and possible eventual lawsuits.

Quote: Original post by frob
If you are so uncreative that you feel you must work with other people's stuff

This is considered uncreative?

Quote: Original post by mattd

Quote: Original post by frob
If you are so uncreative that you feel you must work with other people's stuff

This is considered uncreative?

Don't take the quote out of context: frob is specifically talking about taking the artwork and other assets out of someone else's game and using it in your own.

The OP is apparently not going so far as to suggest that he wants to do that, though, just to create file viewers and stuff. But that does seem like a legal gray area to me, and since I'm not a lawyer and not inclined to hire one just to answer this question, it would seem easiest to me to simply stay away from it altogether (of course, what you do on your own in your spare time is your own business, but I assume we're talking about releasing something here).

Quote: Original post by Codeka

Quote: Original post by mattd

Quote: Original post by frob
If you are so uncreative that you feel you must work with other people's stuff

This is considered uncreative?

Don't take the quote out of context: frob is specifically talking about taking the artwork and other assets out of someone else's game and using it in your own.

Upon re-reading the post, I see that I did take that horribly out of context. Apologies, and ignore my post :)

Quote: Original post by dietepiet
Now, exactly rebuilding the game in such a way that it directly uses the content of the original game is probably not legal (Am I right?)

Actually this can be legal aswell and has been done successfully in the past.

ScummVM is a very good example here of a tool that loads game data and handles scripts for games based on the SCUMM and SCI engines (+ a few other engines).

There was a court case involving ScummVM fairly recently though:
http://sev-notes.blogspot.com/2009/06/gpl-scummvm-and-violations.html

It basically started out with Atari violating the GPL and since they were unable or unwilling to release the code to their ScummVM port (appearantly due to the rules surrounding Nintendos SDK) they decided to attack ScummVM instead to try to invalidate its copyright claims, They ended up settling with Atari agreeing to pay all legal fees, stop selling the games, and making some donation to the FSF.

Basically Atari didn't consider their chances to win in court good enough to fight ScummVM properly at that time so i'd guess its fairly safe legally.

(That ofcourse doesn't mean that doing something similar is safe, even if you stay on the right side of the law someone might drag you to court)

Hi all, thanks for your useful replays!

Quote:

Quote:
As far as I know, file formats do not fall under IP and most games do not patent their file formats.

Yes, they have some protection.

I realize that even non-patented file formats might be protected, so lets give an example of something is have seen quite a few times:

Quote:
Yes,a few do encourage modding. Those authors will usually specifically allow it, and provide tools for it.

The Game "Men of War" allow modding. On the official Men of War forum, there is even a separate section for modding. They however did not publish much useful official information on their file formats. So, it is obvious that all modders have been figuring out the file formats trough trail and error (most files are plain text).

In such a context, the file formats themselves seem not protected. My question is, if a file format is not actively protected, can it still be illegal to build tools that can handle these formats?

BTW, SimonForsmanm, that ScummVM story sounds interesting, I did not expect that to be legal.

Quote: Original post by dietepiet
The Game "Men of War" allow modding. On the official Men of War forum, there is even a separate section for modding. They however did not publish much useful official information on their file formats. So, it is obvious that all modders have been figuring out the file formats trough trail and error (most files are plain text).

Just because one developer doesn't mind you reverse engineering their stuff, doesn't mean it's "legal". Remember, you're trying to avoid being sued in the first place - it doesn't actually matter whether what you do is technically legal or not. That is, it doesn't matter if you'd win a lawsuit if you can't afford to go to court in the first place.

The game code (including tools) is protected by copyright. The Game's End User License Agreement might prohibit reverse engineering and the DMCA prohibits anti-circumvention of DRM. So if the game comes with the standard DRM then its possible the viewer might be considered an anti-circumvention tool. Arguably you have a fair use defense for creating such a tool to review game code, but that is a defense to a lawsuit and does not grant you immunity from the law suit.

Without explicit permission from the developers, you are better off sticking with the tools that are released by the developers to allow modders to create derivatives.

Quote: Original post by SimonForsman

Quote: Original post by dietepiet
Now, exactly rebuilding the game in such a way that it directly uses the content of the original game is probably not legal (Am I right?)

Actually this can be legal aswell and has been done successfully in the past.

ScummVM is a very good example here of a tool that loads game data and handles scripts for games based on the SCUMM and SCI engines (+ a few other engines).

There was a court case involving ScummVM fairly recently though:
http://sev-notes.blogspot.com/2009/06/gpl-scummvm-and-violations.html

It basically started out with Atari violating the GPL and since they were unable or unwilling to release the code to their ScummVM port (appearantly due to the rules surrounding Nintendos SDK) they decided to attack ScummVM instead to try to invalidate its copyright claims, They ended up settling with Atari agreeing to pay all legal fees, stop selling the games, and making some donation to the FSF.

Basically Atari didn't consider their chances to win in court good enough to fight ScummVM properly at that time so i'd guess its fairly safe legally.

(That ofcourse doesn't mean that doing something similar is safe, even if you stay on the right side of the law someone might drag you to court)

Short response: the Atari case has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.

Long response:

1) Atari has 0 standing to raise a DMCA violation against ScummVM, so there's no way Atari would be in a position to challenge the legality of the ScummVM project. The only companies with standing to sue on those grounds are Sierra, LucasArts, and other IP owners who have games ported through ScummVM. And the only way they could hope to win on those grounds is if a) their EULA prohibited reverse engineering or b) they can show that ScummVM can be used to play pirated copies of games or to otherwise modify the game files outside of the interoperability scope.

2) the body of law concerning invalidation of an otherwise legitimate copyright on the basis of "illegal content" weighs against a finding of invalidation. In other words it is almost impossible to invalidate a software's copyright on the basis of its content, even if that content is potentially in violation of the DMCA. This doesn't mean those companies mentioned in #3 wouldn't be able to bring a DMCA anti-circumvention action against the ScummVM project, it just means that even if ScummVM is technically "illegal" under the DMCA its code would likely still be protected.

As for why ScummVM is a bad example: it's not modding software.

1) ScummVM's sole purpose is interoperability. It converts old DOS game .exe files so they're playable on Windows or other operaring systems. It doesn't provide game data files and the end user still has to own a legal version of the game. As you'll see in several other threads on this forum, that's the ONLY way you can legally reverse engineer DRM'd or otherwise protected software under the DMCA.

2) ScummVM is pretty clear on that point; they explicitly state that you need to purchase a legal copy of the game file (and to get around the very old school DRM used back then, a copy of the user manual). Copyright FAQ


ScummVM isn't used to modify or otherwise alter game files for any other purpose than to allow those files to run on other OS's. That's WITHIN the DMCA safe harbor for reverse engineering. "Modding" or developing tools that allow you to modify/change game files for reasons besides interoperability would technically fall outside the definition of legal reverse engineering.

So back to the OP: The determining factor as far as legality in reverse engineering is the actual and potential purpose of the tool you're creating. If you're doing it solely to make the program operational with other legal software, you're usually covered, although you should still consult an attorney if this is a big project. If you're developing a tool that can be used to modify game files for a purpose other than interoperability, you'll run afoul of the DMCA.

Also: if an EULA prohibits reverse engineering, don't do it.