Dude this is straight up illegal.

[CammiePone]

My dude, first off Witchery was under All Rights Reserved, so even decompiling it and uploading the decompiled code elsewhere is illegal, but on top of that you set the license to LGPL-3.0, which is one of the most nonrestrictive licenses.

[Furry]

Oh what I'd give for Emoniph to come back and request this repo for removal.

[caspaas]

Oh what I'd give for Emoniph to come back and request this repo for removal.

yeah lol hopefully you can update it for 1.7.10 ;D

[CammiePone]

Oh what I'd give for Emoniph to come back and request this repo for removal.

yeah lol hopefully you can update it for 1.7.10 ;D

I like how you target that guy, and not the person who made the issue report. Is it because you took a look at my Github account and are aware that I make mods for Minecraft?

Here's the thing: many people could easily recreate Witchery 1:1 within the confines of the law. We don't because Witchery itself had many flaws, and most modders care about creating something unique, not what will get downloads. However, when you decompile a mod that is under ARR, and make it a public repository with a different license entirely, using assets and code from the previous mod, you violate copyright law.

If you want a Witchery-like experience, instead of supporting illegal ports that will never be permitted on CurseForge, and will just get taken down days after being uploaded, how about you support legal successors to Witchery that fix its flaws and are focused on creating a much more fun mod, like Bewitchment?

[caspaas]

Oh what I'd give for Emoniph to come back and request this repo for removal.

yeah lol hopefully you can update it for 1.7.10 ;D

I like how you target that guy, and not the person who made the issue report. Is it because you took a look at my Github account and are aware that I make mods for Minecraft?

Here's the thing: many people could easily recreate Witchery 1:1 within the confines of the law. We don't because Witchery itself had many flaws, and most modders care about creating something unique, not what will get downloads. However, when you decompile a mod that is under ARR, and make it a public repository with a different license entirely, using assets and code from the previous mod, you violate copyright law.

If you want a Witchery-like experience, instead of supporting illegal ports that will never be permitted on CurseForge, and will just get taken down days after being uploaded, how about you support legal successors to Witchery that fix its flaws and are focused on creating a much more fun mod, like Bewitchment?

I meant it sarcastically towards both actually.

if someone wants to pick up the torch for it. go let them Instead of letting the mod die out. Unofficial fixes would be nice.

the guy behind witchery said so himself on the mod page THIS WILL NOT BE UPDATED ANYMORE/ABANDONED. Plus you can also ask it on their discord, cuz im on there too and on there they said it as well.

[CammiePone]

Just because it's abandoned doesn't mean that it's public domain. The license is still All Rights Reserved, and there are legal ramifications for violating that license.

[CammiePone]

Also on the mod page is this:

[CammiePone]

Also also: there isn't even a Discord server for Emoniph's mods or creations. If you have one, please do share it with me, but in the literal years I've been scouring for information on the man because I at one point wanted to port Witchery, found nothing but dead ends.

[caspaas]

Also also: there isn't even a Discord server for Emoniph's mods or creations. If you have one, please do share it with me, but in the literal years I've been scouring for information on the man because I at one point wanted to port Witchery, found nothing but dead ends.

yeah there is, its just pretty much dead, Like him and his projects. Its all in Coven's Reborn, then it went to Bewitchment.

But they are ALL higher versions of MC.

People still play 1.7.10 and if projects like these Die. Why not update them. (Even his profile is dead on curse now)

[caspaas]

And if you really want to go over these semantics.

Change the code slightly. making sure its your own/ish. and you are in a gray area of "copying" someone's work.

Just redo is "slightly" different and voila. No one can "claim" a witch themed mod. It will be just your version of a witch themed mod.

[CammiePone]

yeah there is, its just pretty much dead, Like him and his projects. Its all in Coven's Reborn, then it went to Bewitchment.

But they are ALL higher versions of MC.

People still play 1.7.10 and if projects like these Die. Why not update them. (Even his profile is dead on curse now)

... you know I'm friends with Zabi and MoriyaShiine, the owners of Covens Reborn and Bewitchment respectively, right? Neither are ports of Witchery, they are recreations done through legal means, and don't use any of Witchery's code or assets. They are full on redos of the mod using nothing but testing the mod out. They have never once looked at Witchery's code to get an idea for what was being done. Any and all values not disclosed in the wiki were fabricated through trial and error, not through perusing Witchery's code.

And if you really want to go over these semantics.

Change the code slightly. making sure its your own/ish. and you are in a gray area of "copying" someone's work.

Just redo is "slightly" different and voila. No one can "claim" a witch themed mod. It will be just your version of a witch themed mod.

That's not how it works. If I used a minor part of code in one of my mods from an ARR mod, my entire mod is now in jeopardy because I willingly used code that didn't belong to me. It's not the idea that's copyrighted, it's the code and assets themselves. You would have to be able to prove that every last bit of it was either your creation, or someone else's code under an open source license. That's like saying you can't plagiarize if you just changed things to be synonyms of the original wording.

[caspaas]

Yeah it may not by legal means. its still a full recreation! but in their own way.(altho they do seem so similar and better too)

Whats to stop someone from typing the same line/an improved version of it too and calling it your own. And still not have looked at the original code.

you are just "recreating the mod" but with a few better lines. and the assets, well.... plenty of open source to drag that from and use it.(or create your own kinda similar but entirely the same)

I would encourage this. Maybe he has some pointers, better lines of code, better ideas. As creator reach out to these people so they could perhaps help or continue.

But no, The witchery dev straight up ghosts and dies out.

Is it immoral ? no. Is it legal? ofcourse not, altho you can make it legal like bewitchment and coven's reborn.

Slightly altering the code and making it your own.(Just make sure its different for the most part).

Im against the completely stealing of mods and their work, but if the owner doesn't respond after 7 years, no pm's no messages anymore, nothing. It should be picked up again(and I mean for 1.7.10) - If he would do it for 1.12.2 and higher its a different story.(Due to bewitchment filling that role very nicely.

[CammiePone]

Yeah it may not by legal means. its still a full recreation! but in their own way.(altho they do seem so similar and better too)

Yes! That's what makes them legal! And the reason Covens seems so similar is because Zabi used to be on Bewitchment's team, until he decided to split off. Now both mods are going their own ways, with Bewitchment moving to Fabric and having yet another rewrite and redesign, and it looks significantly less like Witchery than it did in 1.12.

Whats to stop someone from typing the same line/an improved version of it too and calling it your own. And still not have looked at the original code.

you are just "recreating the mod" but with a few better lines. and the assets, well.... plenty of open source to drag that from and use it.(or create your own kinda similar but entirely the same)

And no, it has been ruled several times in court that just changing a few lines in something does not make it your own work. If you wrote a book, and someone else came by and changed even as much as 90% of the lines in the book, the court would still rule in favour of you because they stole your work without your permission.

That is how copyright works. Even using something as small as a single song lyric you don't own the rights to in a book is enough to get you sued and lose in court, so long as it was willful use of someone else's work. Unless you redo 100% of the mod, assets and code, you are doing it illegally.

[caspaas]

Under the Fair Use Clause, you can pretty much use anyone else's "anything" without their permission legally. Do not forget the mods do not make money for most and especially not for "witchery".

Also the EULA of MC states. Modders receive permission to play the game and distribute mods from Mojang, just like other players, through the terms of use. They do not get to dictate their own terms of use for content that is created for Minecraft.

And the mod license also states Other people are allowed to replicate your mod's functionality, even if your mod is copyrighted, unless they use your code or assets directly in doing so.

In the end, unless they licensed their work from the IP holder, which would be Mojang/Microsoft, they have zero legal claim to their work. Mojang or Microsoft can at any time appropriate their work and incorporate it into the source game without even giving credit.

[CammiePone]

Everything you have so far stated has been incorrect, both about copyright law, and about other mods doing something similar to Witchery. It's clear you don't really know what you're talking about, and that's fine, but you shouldn't be stating it as fact. I've had to take a look into copyright law to figure out how to protect my own projects how I want them protected. You'll often see, however, that all my mods are under open source licenses, but are not in public domain. That's because I want the protections those licenses grant.

I get it, you think you know everything about it, because you have a perfectly logical idea of how it should work. Copyright law isn't logical in the slightest. I agree that if a creation has been officially abandoned, it should go straight to public domain, but that's not how that works. Unless it is explicitly put in the public domain, or the creator dies and 70 more years have passed after their death, it is still protected under the original license. It's stupid, it's illogical, and it benefits companies more than it benefits individuals.

However, it is still the law that we are forced to abide by, and it's something you just have to learn to accept. It's not going away any time soon. If you want a Witchery-like experience, prop up the mods that are doing it through legal channels because the authors took their time to learn what is and isn't legal, not some decompiled mess that has been dead for 3 years of a mod that has been dead for longer. Even if this wasn't dead, CurseForge would still not allow it on their site, and you would end up with a completed mod with no where to share it where anyone will see it. 1.12 itself is already a dead version. Many modders have moved on to 1.15 (if they're on Forge) or 1.16 (if they're on Fabric). Some modders still support legacy versions, but most don't, even larger mods such as Botania.

[CammiePone]

Under the Fair Use Clause, you can pretty much use anyone else's "anything" without their permission legally. Do not forget the mods do not make money for most and especially not for "witchery".

That's not how fair use works. Fair use is extremely limited, and this would not fall under it.

Also the EULA of MC states. Modders receive permission to play the game and distribute mods from Mojang, just like other players, through the terms of use. They do not get to dictate their own terms of use for content that is created for Minecraft.

And the mod license also states Other people are allowed to replicate your mod's functionality, even if your mod is copyrighted, unless they use your code or assets directly in doing so.

That doesn't exist in the EULA in the slightest (https://account.mojang.com/documents/minecraft_eula). And the other bit literally is against your whole argument. It's saying that mods are allowed to replicate functionality of your mod, no matter your license, so long as they don't use your assets or code.

In the end, unless they licensed their work from the IP holder, which would be Mojang/Microsoft, they have zero legal claim to their work. Mojang or Microsoft can at any time appropriate their work and incorporate it into the source game without even giving credit.

The license holder is the creator of the mod, not Microsoft or Mojang. Mojang has 0 grounds to strip someone of their licenses with a EULA, which is not a legally binding contract in that regard.

[CammiePone]

You know what? Nope, we're done here. You can't be assed to fact check yourself, and state things that are wildly incorrect. This is a stupid argument to be having with someone who doesn't even understand the basics of copyright law.

[caspaas]

Any Mods you create for the Game from scratch belong to you (including pre-run Mods and in-memory Mods) and you can do whatever you want with them, as long as you don't sell them for money / try to make money from them and so long as you don't distribute Modded Versions of the Game. Remember that a Mod means something that is your original work and that does not contain a substantial part of our code or content. You only own what you created; you do not own our code or content.

If you make any content available on or through our Game, you agree to give us permission to use, copy, modify, adapt, distribute, and publicly display that content. This permission is irrevocable, and you also agree to let us permit other people to use, copy, modify, adapt, distribute, and publicly display your content. You are not giving up your ownership rights in your content, you are just giving us and other users permission to use it.

Technically my argument again is correct they are allowed to dictate your mod/content and use it any way they like and even take your content down.

Yes they can and they probably won't due to minecraft/mojang being generous.

Will a mod creator do the same? will the dev of witchery do it? 0.1 chance they won't.

If you would do it to witchery ofcourse they will take action (or atleast contact the code stealer/user first) But why would you steal that or use it entirely. No reason, they are still developing and alive. (And not abandoning the community)

And your argument about the 70 years is incorrect. After 70 years, starting from Januari they are NOT protected under the law of copyright any longer.

[CammiePone]

Dude, quit it. Just fact check a claim you want to make. You're making yourself look stupid.

[caspaas]

I'm not having this argument. You can't be assed to read the EULA (modders CAN make money off their mods, they just can't directly sell their mods. CurseForge has a reward point system). You can't be assed to get copyright law right. You can't be assed to learn about what is and isn't fair use. It's an argument not worth having with someone who can't be assed to even check if what they're saying is true, no matter how much they think it is. Everything I have listed has been stuff that I have extensively studied because guess who would like to keep their works safe, and has looked into how to make money off their work without violating the rules we've been given? I've spent over 3 years doing this, and have made sure I never once broke a law or violated Mojang's EULA. I have consulted other modders and community members for their input, to make sure I was interpreting it correctly, and if I wasn't, I would use their interpretation. I'm very willing to change my mind on things, but when you make claims that a simple Google search can disprove, it's not worth even arguing with you about it. You're literally using Alt-Right political "debate tactics" and it's not worth having. Feel free to downvote it all, feel free to port Witchery to 1.12. The moment it gets put up, just like the OreSpawn ports that tried to get added to CurseForge, it will be taken down by their moderation team.

If you want to be petty over being factually incorrect, I too can be petty.

Dude the point i was making early on was to update it, not port it. Updating it for the 1.7.10 Don't make users stuck with a buggy mod that's incomplete.

And you cannot make money at all with your mods, it may be a derivative but you still cannot make money of it. Here in the EU its 70 years. and thats our law.

[CammiePone]

I'm not having this argument. You can't be assed to read the EULA (modders CAN make money off their mods, they just can't directly sell their mods. CurseForge has a reward point system). You can't be assed to get copyright law right. You can't be assed to learn about what is and isn't fair use. It's an argument not worth having with someone who can't be assed to even check if what they're saying is true, no matter how much they think it is. Everything I have listed has been stuff that I have extensively studied because guess who would like to keep their works safe, and has looked into how to make money off their work without violating the rules we've been given? I've spent over 3 years doing this, and have made sure I never once broke a law or violated Mojang's EULA. I have consulted other modders and community members for their input, to make sure I was interpreting it correctly, and if I wasn't, I would use their interpretation. I'm very willing to change my mind on things, but when you make claims that a simple Google search can disprove, it's not worth even arguing with you about it. You're literally using Alt-Right political "debate tactics" and it's not worth having. Feel free to downvote it all, feel free to port Witchery to 1.12. The moment it gets put up, just like the OreSpawn ports that tried to get added to CurseForge, it will be taken down by their moderation team.

If you want to be petty over being factually incorrect, I too can be petty.

[caspaas]

I'm not having this argument. You can't be assed to read the EULA (modders CAN make money off their mods, they just can't directly sell their mods. CurseForge has a reward point system). You can't be assed to get copyright law right. You can't be assed to learn about what is and isn't fair use. It's an argument not worth having with someone who can't be assed to even check if what they're saying is true, no matter how much they think it is. Everything I have listed has been stuff that I have extensively studied because guess who would like to keep their works safe, and has looked into how to make money off their work without violating the rules we've been given? I've spent over 3 years doing this, and have made sure I never once broke a law or violated Mojang's EULA. I have consulted other modders and community members for their input, to make sure I was interpreting it correctly, and if I wasn't, I would use their interpretation. I'm very willing to change my mind on things, but when you make claims that a simple Google search can disprove, it's not worth even arguing with you about it. You're literally using Alt-Right political "debate tactics" and it's not worth having. Feel free to downvote it all, feel free to port Witchery to 1.12. The moment it gets put up, just like the OreSpawn ports that tried to get added to CurseForge, it will be taken down by their moderation team.

If you want to be petty over being factually incorrect, I too can be petty.

Dude the point i was making early on was to update it, not port it. Updating it for the 1.7.10 Make a unofficial update. do something. be proactive with it.

Even if it means sharing it on discord with people and sharing it otherwise. Don't make users stuck with a buggy mod that's incomplete.

And you cannot make money at all with your mods, it may be a derivative but you still cannot make money of it. Here in the EU its 70 years. and thats our law. I wouldn't steal/use it like that. But I mean if you would be dead for like 4-7 years and no one would've picked it up. Wouldn't you love to have your work be picked up and be carried on and updated?

[Furry]

Ladies, may I point out there's an already deep-in development port of witchery to 1.12.2?

[caspaas]

Ladies, may I point out there's an already deep-in development port of witchery to 1.12.2?

wait when? (Sidenote our playerbase still plays 1.7.10) Till Thaumcraft gets fixxed.

[Furry]

Ladies, may I point out there's an already deep-in development port of witchery to 1.12.2?

wait when? (Sidenote our playerbase still plays 1.7.10) Till Thaumcraft gets fixxed.

Since around 7 months ago, it's in a pretty good stage so far. https://discord.gg/y2EN7Uy

[zabi94]

I wanna clarify two things: first, Cam is right in everything said in this discussion, from the fact that this is illegal, to the fact that you can in fact make money out of your own mods.

Second, the version of the witchery mod for 1.12 is not illegal because it is a complete rewrite in a different language (it's in kotlin, not java), even though it also started as an illegal port. The assets are the original ones, but again, no legal issue here because it requires the original jar file to fetch them, they are not technically breaking the eula.

[Furry]

I wanna clarify two things: first, Cam is right in everything said in this discussion, from the fact that this is illegal, to the fact that you can in fact make money out of your own mods.

Second, the version of the witchery mod for 1.12 is not illegal because it is a complete rewrite in a different language (it's in kotlin, not java), even though it also started as an illegal port. The assets are the original ones, but again, no legal issue here because it requires the original jar file to fetch them, they are not technically breaking the eula.

The original jar is still decompiled and reverse engineered to make the port, but that wasn't my point. My point was, a port IS being worked on, so if you two want to contribute on it, go ahead! But don't bicker here about the legality of it. It's filling up my email

[zabi94]

The project owner says it's original code. We spoke about it when it was announced.

Anyways, I can't find time to tend to my own mods, let alone helping others...

[Furry]

The project owner says it's original code. We spoke about it when it was announced.

Anyways, I can't find time to tend to my own mods, let alone helping others...

Honestly, I'd love to be hit with a copy right notice by Emoniph because it would mean I'd have a way to contact him lol. He dropped off the face of the earth, sure there's still a copyright on it, but there's no one to enforce the copyright unless he comes back into existence, and if he did come back, that would be good!

Also yes, the code is original, but it is still a reverse engineered version of the original witchery, still a blurry line for Copyright, but eh.

[zabi94]

Fortunately the whole community is pretty nice, so copyright enforcement won't be needed. The backlash from the users is usually enough to stop people from wasting time porting it. It also won't be allowed on curseforge, which is also a strong plus.

Reverse engineering is fine, since this is not a pantent, it's intellectual property. As long as the code is original (it is) and just mimicking the original behaviour the port is legit.

[ghost]

Fuck Amazon and fuck Curse. Emoniph might be dead, if he reclaims his works somehow, just move onto a private instance of gitlab. Intellectual property sucks

[Stevanr21]

I'm looking at this post a few years later and it seems incredible to me that the source code was released.... and you... FUCK YOU and stop citing copyright and various stupidities, the author of the mod died and until he appears and complains Well, that's another story... I'm basically doing whatever I want with this code... and you can't do anything to prevent me or other people from doing it... I just wanted to add this little comment after a few years... it serves to release stress :)) greetings

[Furry]

Damn what a necropost.. 1710's dead now past the few hobby packs