Back in February 19th, 2021, Take-Two sent DMCA notices to the reverse engineered projects re3 and reVC, (hosted on GitHub). After the takedowns, the project leaders filed a counter-claim, effectively restoring the projects and their whole repositories.

Today, September 2nd, 2021, Take-Two has taken legal action in the state of California, USA, claiming the projects and whole repositories are infringing on the copyrights of their games, Grad Theft Auto III & Grand Theft Auto: Vice City.
Not only is Take-Two suing the main repositories, but also against forks and derivative work (and the devs behind them) that sent the counter-claim back in February, like the PS Vita & Nintendo Switch forks.

The resolution of this case might be one of the biggest legal battles of recent years in terms of gaming, homebrew, hacking and reverse engineering, as other projects that have flourished under reverse engineered premises could be affected in the event of Take-Two winning the case.

Source

 

[EvilJagaGenius]

You can clearly see in the lawsuit that they don't do that.

Your opinion seems based on passion and feeling rather than facts, which the law works on.

Perhaps I am, but it remains to be seen. I reiterate that I hope this case is settled by facts and law, and not who slings the most money around.

 

[smf]

Copying, adapting, and distributing derivative and original source code does NOT fully and freely make the game available to public.

I guess that will depend on what evidence they have from the discord server.

Perhaps I am, but it remains to be seen. I reiterate that I hope this case is settled by facts and law, and not who slings the most money around.

It's likely to be the person who has the facts, law and most money, T2.

 

[Jacobh]

They probably reverse engineered the format by editing files, clicking save & looking at them in a hex viewer, not decompiling the binary.

PSD files are not compiled executable so you can’t “decompile” them. I’m not sure what you mean by “clicking save,” but reverse engineering then was more than just opening the files in a a hex editor.

You also can’t copyright a file format, so this is mostly irrelevant to the conversation anyway. You have some good points, this one isn’t strengthening your case.

 

[smf]

PSD files are not compiled executable so you can’t “decompile” them. I’m not sure what you mean by “clicking save,” but reverse engineering then was more than just opening the files in a a hex editor.

You also can’t copyright a file format, so this is mostly irrelevant to the conversation anyway. You have some good points, this one isn’t strengthening your case.

I know. I think you misunderstood my point

You certainly can reverse engineer a file format with examples of those files & creating those examples yourself is the easiest way to get the most examples, the file format isn't copyright & any information you gain from looking at files in a hex editor is fine.

But if you decompiled Photoshop and copied a lot of their PSD saving code, then it would be legally problematic for you (if they found out and cared). It wouldn't be enough that you copied their code for interoperability.

If you've never reverse engineered a file format by looking at examples using a hex editor then you may not understand how to do it.

 

[MORSHU8KRTXON]

I thought piracy wasn't involved in the projects.

 

[smf]

I thought piracy wasn't involved in the projects.

I think it's more complex than saying you don't support piracy and hoping that lawyers leave you alone.

It's the copyright holders decision whether to leave you alone and the court to decide if they have a case.

That DMCA counter claim is looking like a mistake

 

[MrHuu]

I guess that will depend on what evidence they have from the discord server.

Assuming full builds with the actual game included being distributed on discord, leads me to believe this wasn't done by the ones responsible for the Github repository.

In this case they also are being held responsible for what the community did with their provided software.

Shouldn't the available downloads offered on discord, held separate from the work distributed on the Github repository?

 

[chrisrlink]

The document reads that Take Two claims the builds that the people provide on the repos (if any... haven't actually checked the repo) are fully functional and can be played. I would assume this is gonna be the breaking point as it's most certaintly wrong (again, no clue cos I haven't checked), but there's also a bunch of other things that are just wrong outside of the classic "legally demonizing the people you're suing". Also apparently you can still buy GTA on the Playstation 1 and the original Xbox (epic 2011 rereleases) according to Take Two...
Lovely lovely copyright circus, never ceases to amaze me

sadly watch them bribe er persuade the judge to dismiss the fact their claim is wrong and still side with T2, money can buy justice now it seems

 

[Jacobh]

I know. I think you misunderstood my point

You certainly can reverse engineer a file format with examples of those files & creating those examples yourself is the easiest way to get the most examples, the file format isn't copyright & any information you gain from looking at files in a hex editor is fine.

But if you decompiled Photoshop and copied a lot of their PSD saving code, then it would be legally problematic for you (if they found out and cared).

If you've never reverse engineered a file format using a hex editor then you may not understand how to do it.

I have reversed engineered file formats before. The PSD file format was not reverse engineered only by opening a file with a hex editor, and it's more complicated than bitmapped images or the types of assets typically included in a game rom.

Decompiling Photoshop code and implementing something to save PSD files may or may not be legally problematic depending on the specifics. Adobe publishes the specification for PSD, so for this specific example it wouldn't be necessary, but it also would not be legally problematic: https://www.adobe.com/devnet-apps/photoshop/fileformatashtml

Anyway, none of this has anything to do with the Take Two case.

 

[smashbro596]

Back in February 19th, 2021, Take-Two sent DMCA notices to the reverse engineered projects re3 and reVC, (hosted on GitHub). After the takedowns, the project leaders filed a counter-claim, effectively restoring the projects and their whole repositories.

Today, September 2nd, 2021, Take-Two has taken legal action in the state of California, USA, claiming the projects and whole repositories are infringing on the copyrights of their games, Grad Theft Auto III & Grand Theft Auto: Vice City.
Not only is Take-Two suing the main repositories, but also against forks and derivative work (and the devs behind them) that sent the counter-claim back in February, like the PS Vita & Nintendo Switch forks.

The resolution of this case might be one of the biggest legal battles of this decade in terms of gaming, homebrew, hacking and reverse engineering, as other projects that have flourished under reverse engineered premises could be affected in the event of Take-Two winning the case.

Source

i sincerely hope this rules in favor of the modders.
it's not infringing on copyright. we should be allowed to fix and improve games that are nearly 2 decades old.
besides, you still need the game purchased already (if you want the best experience, don't pirate... that shits unstable as hell with reverse engineering), so take-two STILL has money from the purchases.

 

[Spider_Man]

A script/program that takes an executable and turns it into source code would be completely legal (as long as you don't distribute the generated source), but that isn't what mario64 or gta is.



It isn't particularly important what the impact is, except on the award of damages.



Like stealing parts of a car can't be used unless you have the rest of a legally purchased car?



Some companies do, but it's easier to go after something hosted on github than trying to track down people all round the world.



That isn't illegal.



I am pretty sure they have broken copyright law. Courts don't just give verdicts based on how much money you spend.



That isn't relevant, if a company wants to hamper their own sales then legally as the copyright holder they are allowed to do that. You don't have a legal right to increase their sales.



If they didn't have the source code themselves then they should probably hire them, but we'll see. They might not need any help.

wow you took the time to quote snippets of my post.

sorry pal, but this is the problem with the justice system, and the likes of nintendo that can sue any fucker they want.

this forwarder project regardless, is not breaking any copyright laws, they do not provide anything relating to GTA3 or VC game.

the user has to source the required game and its files in order to play the game on the PSV/SWITCH.

unless these projects provided the games and its files, then sure, thats breach of copyright.

but the project and files they provide are completely useless on their own and cant be used.

now, if i legally purchase the game, i own it, if i want to copy the game files off my computer onto an sd card then use this project to then play the game i legally purchased on a switch, then no law has been broken by the team.

if i illegally download the games that there is where they can take legal action, but against the source providing GTa3/VC game files.

Not the project, as again, it contains nothing, 0 of their code/game files what ever.

all theyre doing is trying to claim damages as they now decided to port these over and pretend to remaster them.

trying to maximise sales, when its not really going to be a block buster, as we already have these games, regardless if i can now copy the game i already own and play on a psv or switch.

its not going to damage their sales at all, but this is likely the angle theyre trying to pull off.

 

[pedro702]

this is just becuase they are releasing the remaster trilogy and dont want people running around with free recompilations with hd textures and mods while they will sell them soon lol

 

[smf]

Assuming full builds with the actual game included being distributed on discord, leads me to believe this wasn't done by the ones responsible for the Github repository.

In this case they also are being held responsible for what the community did with their provided software.

According to the suit, it was their discord that they invited people to. Contributory copyright infringement is a way more complicated subject. I don't actually know if there discord did have any links, but in any case

Defendants have made the Games fully and freely available to the public

could be argued that the games are available fully playable on the wiiu because of the defendants.

Without the defendants it was not available.

Shouldn't the available downloads offered on discord, held separate from the work distributed on the Github repository?

If there was any discussion of assets being downloaded then I'm not sure that would help.

Regardless the engine itself is a copyright infringement, so their case still works.

 

[linuxares]

this is just becuase they are releasing the remaster trilogy and dont want people running around with free recompilations with hd textures and mods while they will sell them soon lol

That's PCGamer's take on it as well

 

[pcwizard7]

my guess is this is due to them re-releasing the trilogy again on all platforms soon including the switch

 

[pedro702]

That's PCGamer's take on it as well

in all honesty i hope they are released, i would love some gta trilogy remastered for old times sake and i will buy it if the rumors are true.

 

[smf]

and the likes of nintendo that can sue any fucker they want.

Well obviously you need to be able to sue anyone you want, because it's only when you get to court that they decide who is right or not. I certainly don't think it's frivilous.

this forwarder project regardless, is not breaking any copyright laws, they do not provide anything relating to GTA3 or VC game.

It's not a "forwarder project", it's a copy of copyright code.

unless these projects provided the games and its files, then sure, thats breach of copyright.

It's a breach anyway, it's a copy of copyright code of the engine.

but the project and files they provide are completely useless on their own and cant be used.

In terms of copyright that doesn't matter. If you created your own assets to go with the engine, then you're still violating their copyright on the engine.

now, if i legally purchase the game, i own it, if i want to copy the game files off my computer onto an sd card then use this project to then play the game i legally purchased on a switch, then no law has been broken by the team

You've violated the copyright of the engine, buying a copy of the game doesn't really do anything to help that.

Not the project, as again, it contains nothing, 0 of their code/game files what ever.

It contains the copyright code of their engine.

its not going to damage their sales at all, but this is likely the angle theyre trying to pull off.

I doubt they care about the opinion of people who violate their copyright. I don't care at all what it does to their sales.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

this is just becuase they are releasing the remaster trilogy and dont want people running around with free recompilations with hd textures and mods while they will sell them soon lol

If that is true then that is understandable, legally it doesn't make much difference apart from damages. We'll see how it plays out anyway.

 

[VashTS]

this is like composing a song and then some other song writer suing you because you used the same chords and notes. melody/rhythm/lyrics/everything else all different, just same notes/chords.

 

[LeyendaV]

I better see everybody throwing shit at this the same way they do at Nintendo, especially those who always name this project as example of companies not messing with fan made ports.

 

[Dungeonseeker]

PSA: This lawsuit was always inevitable, R* issued a DMCA which is a legal proceeding, the coders filed counter claims, R* only then had 2 options...

1) Admit they were wrong in filing the suit and open themselves up to potential legal action for doing so
2) Make the matter official and sue in court

Since option 1 was never going to happen they chose option 2 which (IMO) was the VERY wrong choice.

Remember earlier when I said potential legal action? Option 1 had a chance of them getting away scot free, if my understanding of the project is correct then option 2 is almost a certain lose for R*.

Its already well established that clean room reverse engineering is not illegal and has been since IBM sued Compaq in the 70s for reverse engineering the IBM PC Bios and creating their own clone of it, IBM lost, badly. So badly it almost caused them to collapse.