Guild of Writers

I agree, Cyan owns the URU:CC content . They don't own the [disc] publication. I don't understand why people find it so difficult to understand the distinction. A musician owns the music; not the album that studio/label xyz produced.

So you're arguing just for the sake of arguing at this point ...

I agree, Cyan owns the URU:CC content. They don't own the [disc] publication. I don't understand why people find it so difficult to understand the distinction. A musician owns the music; not the album that studio/label xyz produced.

G'day all, further evidence from today, that this is NOT because the big bad Ubi doesn't want people to alter U:CC, and, infact, Ubisoft has nothing to do with these policies at /all/.

m

Look at the publisher, again, no mention of Ubisoft at all. I think we can finally lay that bullshit to rest ...

Trylon wrote:... is bordering on the paranoid..

You obviously haven't seen some of the things that I have.

I don't see anybody blaming anything on "Big Bad UbI". I just see someone who appears too thick/bull headed to understand the difference between having the rights to content vs. having the rights to a package.

I also doubt Ubisoft is part of the issue here. Cyan obviously has the necessary rights for the content and the engine, or they could not use it in their own game.
Correct. What they don't have is the rights to URU:CC/ABM/TPoTS and as such cannot endorse, promote or condone hacking on that package ...

This must mean that I'm the only one seeing light gray on dark blue which is almost as bad as white on black.

Except ubisoft does not.

the GoG.com version of Uru:CC does not mention Ubisoft as a publisher, and I shall assume its video's inclusion in the files is just due to not changing the files in the install.
It's still the version that was published by UBI. Unless they've sold off the right to do so ...

So the question then is... If people ask "How can I test my age?", and we link them here, is that a violation of the terms?
No, as long as it only links to the site and not to a specific post.

Because the only way to test currently is using CC, I would say: "Yes, that link is bad according to ...

diafero wrote:Btw, does anyone know what that "unleash satan" thing *actually* does?

Somebody, somewhere hinted.. ...err, guessed that it called up the 'live' previewer that never worked correctly. Can't locate the reference 'tho.