One Hour One Life Forums

Yes, I suggested this months ago, despite all the nay-sayers and theoretical "but if nonsense" in this thread. It works very well example for for ToadyOne (dwarf fortress) adding up to quite stable euros a month in the 4 digit range. Enough to make a decent living. Dunno why Jason doesn't want to get this road, at the end it's his decision tough.

PS: One misunderstanding I see, I wouldn't sell it as a service, like stop paying no more access, but providing access to the servers for free (or stay with the 20 bucks for life time), the patreon would just be people gifting it, because they consider this something awesome they want to support.

*Selling* the game has it's natural barrier anyway anywhere, at some point you saturated the market in people interested in this type of game.

Only 2 stories I can tell to this:

Back the day I was developing embedded devices, with a linux kernel, where the OOM-killer would sometimes kick in on heavy usage of the web interface and it's scoring algorithm would kill the "central control daemon" which put the device into unusable mode and least since it stopped servicing the watchdog, it would reboot soon after. I replaced the default scoring algorithm in the kernel to a) always hit the web stuff first, since it's least essential, and whatever it does, hit the control deamon last (well last before init).  (conclusion: you can make custom scorings to the OOM-killer)

Second story, I once had a server that kept oom-killing the backup daemon... and I spent quite some time digging into it, since the RAM strangely wasn't actually depleted. What I learned that (at least on this architecture) there are actually different kinds of RAM and only one of these went down. I never fully understood what was going on there. I believe it was due to being a very old machine, modern ones seem to have an easier RAM built. I fiddled around with some kernel parameters, like swappiness, OOM-killer sensitivity etc. and it stopped killing the daemon mostly. It still does every other month, but I put it on auto-restart so the damage is minimal. As I only have this behavior on that old machine, it will go once it is swapped out as a whole and I stopped wanting to invest more time into that. (conclusion: RAM is more complicated that one might believe, there are some parameters fiddle with it)

You're confusingly mingling things. First you talk of copyright then suddenly you switch over to trademarks. Yes you're right, you can't "copyright" an idea, but you can "trademark" naming it in a a certain way.

If you infringe the copyright of the music (by having it too similar) yeah, but it's just that.

become a parrot. become a parrot. gark!

It's your fair view to disregard "shameless clones" but even if the original author reserves all rights, no public domain or OpenSource License or anything, legally the is nothing wrong with copying a "game idea". Ideas is not copyright, it would be patents. And as far I know you cannot patent a "game idea" and I heavily oppose anybody suggesting so.

So many games have been the mother of a whole generation, putting this idea forward would heavily impede the game industry and harm public as a whole. If Doom wouldn't have """shameless copied""" the idea of Wolfenstein 3D and nobody would have copied the idea of Doom, we wouldn't have *any* FPS, hundreds of thousands of games nowadays.

And as Jason rightly said, nothing is ever truly original. We always base our ideas on ideas before us. And always somebody comes and complains this might be too similar to that and a "shameless ripp-off".

This notion is not helpful, neither for humanity at large nor of the discussion that had been going on here.

Wait what DF gets graphical? Awkward

I suppose much like every Steam release? Nice sales on the first days or even weeks then exponential decay when the new age short attention span group moves on.

Anyway in Toady's case this is additional to the ~6k a month he gets from patreon.

Since this has turned into a philosophical just another 2 cents.. While I do see that intensive lobbying has smudged copyright (foremost some comic enterprise to keep a mousy character in protection -- that is the most problematic area is likely it's very extensive period) the original idea was good. Before copyright people were extremely protective of their stuff, as to physically hinder anyone to make a copy of it? "You want to take that book home? Surely not, you may only read this, in this protected hall with a guard watching you..." The original idea was to liberate it, so people feel more secure sharing their stuff. To some degree this kind of protection is returning with big film, as to control you cannot make a physically make a copy until the box office paid off.

At least so I read, dunno if this was that historical correct or a a marketing pitch for copyright.

SImilar with patents, the core idea was well intended, again encouraging people to share their ideas, some developments turned problematic tough...

Ja, I believe the release of Seven Kingoms 1 as OpenSource was considered an advertisement move for their new, closed source variants.

Otherwise, nothing I know of. At least through the list of games I skimmed through that are OpenSource in and out, I suppose there might be quite a bunch with OpenSource engine but protected content.

Well humans generally don't go light on change. Whatever it may be.

I'm certainly not an an expert on trademarks, but I don't think that trademarks work as deep as that. A trademark would protect for calling an adaption "One Hour One Life", or potentially something too similarly (dunno if 2HOL would be considered to similar or different enough) and the Eve icon used to market the game.

But it wouldn't cover adaptions where just screenshots would seem to similar, of a game marketed for example as "60 minutes, 60 years".

The concept of "I place it into the public domain." is not something that works across the globe. There are a bunch of countries where this sentence has no legal meaning. So you need fallback options for those countries.

Consider using CC0:
Human version: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
Legal version: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomai … /legalcode

Generally there are so many licenses of free already around, the cacophony is worse enough for people that want to combine stuff from different projects in their "remix". So if by any means possible. Don't make the cacaphony worse by drafting yet another license, which for example, if someone would want to combine it with a GPL product, would have need the FSF to check your license on compatibility.

So as far I see it, it gets pretty close to what you want, but is already better developed in some potential problematic areas and builds fail-safe mechanisms.

PS: The usual "no warranty for any purpose" thing may also be a sensible add-on to protect yourself. One can argue if it is necessary, but it surely doesn't hurt either.

Where is this any worse than your no_copyright waiver? One may assume that copyright is no an issue... yet there may other laws come into effect. You use the stuff as "One Hour One Life"... than the original author claims a trademark on it and asks you to write "unofficial" in big letters all over the place.

Yes, if we can't agree on what reasonable is, we got to have an impartial party decide it. I mean this is the way law from start to buttom, you can't specify everything in the latest  detail. Albeit I certainly do agree that lawmakers (or licenses writers) should be as concrete as possible. I remember the classical examples from my philosphy of law courses. "If a shop forbids dogs, does this apply to trained dance bears?" or "If architectural control forbids you windows at a certain place, does this apply to transparent bricks?". etc.

There is certainly a green area of okay, there is certainly a red area of not okay (say font size="1pt" textcolor="#fef" on #fff background, there is a gray area.