Hasbro shuts down Cockatrice

[Twaun007]

A buddy of mine pointed this out to me just a bit ago.  

http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/19bkiz/cockatrice_down_due_to_a_legal_dispute/

Who knows, it could have an effect on proxies?

[President Skroob]

[tito del monte]

Noooo!! I'd only just got used to using it... Well that is a massive slap in the face for Vintage players with non-existent local scenes. It's fine though right? Wizards are going to sell us digital power cards on top of the paper ones we already own, all good...

Having just completed my paper power I've been feeling so psyched about Magic recently and desperately wanting to play more (and specifically prepare for BOM if I can make it) - the only way for me to really do that was Cockatrice. And now... gone. The thing that big content companies never seem to appreciate is that illegal services flourish when they provide the consumer with something they can't actually get any other way. If WOTC won't scrap the bloody reserved list and let us have a flourishing format in real life AND they take down Cockatrice, what the hell are we supposed to do? Essentially, in their thinking: pay again for MODO or sod off. When you've been playing the game and buying their product for close on two decades, that doesn't exactly feel like much of a reward for customer loyalty....

[Prospero]

I think that they probably viewed it as more of a threat to MODO than they did as a response to proxies. 

[rbtabris]

One of the draws of Cockatrice, for me, was the fact that it had clients for more operating systems than just Windows. I use OS X for my personal computing, and the fact that MODO still only has a Windows client is just astounding. They're leaving money on the table. But I guess if they're able to strong-arm other projects like Cockatrice, it doesn't matter much to them.

[tito del monte]

One of the draws of Cockatrice, for me, was the fact that it had clients for more operating systems than just Windows. I use OS X for my personal computing, and the fact that MODO still only has a Windows client is just astounding. They're leaving money on the table. But I guess if they're able to strong-arm other projects like Cockatrice, it doesn't matter much to them.

QFT. Mac compatibility was huge part of its appeal.

[quicksilvervii]

I'm not convinced that Hasbro is worried about how much you like it as much as they are worried about how it is taking money out of their pockets.

Full disclosure: I am not on MODO and have no intention of starting anytime soon.

[A.-1.]

The link in the OP does not work.

[quicksilvervii]

The link in the OP does not work.

Try this one:

http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/19bkiz/cockatrice_down_due_to_a_legal_dispute/

[AmbivalentDuck]

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to end well. The cockatrice code just scrapes cards off WotC's servers and therefore contains no infringing anything outside of the turn structure and tapping. Regardless, Hasbro can tie him up in endless and costly legal battles.

How did the libmp3lame people handle this? Their software cannot be compiled and used (legally) without a license. By contrast, Cockatrice and Servatrice pull all of their infringing material direct from WotC servers. WotC can't conceivably have a copyright on any applicable methods. Even if they did, distribution of Cockatrice as source uses all of LAME's loopholes.

[boggyb]

Sucks.

Ironic for me, though -- I just edited my DNS settings two days ago to make it impossible for me to play on Cockatrice without going through some serious hassle. Was spending too much time on it!

[A.-1.]

I feel sorry for the creator(s) of Cockatrice and everyone that uses it to test that wouldn't be able to otherwise. I guess I can still goldfish. Weeee  .

[rpf5029]

I think that they probably viewed it as more of a threat to MODO than they did as a response to proxies. 

It's probably closer to say that it correlates to the elimination of proxies as a way to push people towards MODO. Bah.

[AmbivalentDuck]

I think that they probably viewed it as more of a threat to MODO than they did as a response to proxies. 

It's probably closer to say that it correlates to the elimination of proxies as a way to push people towards MODO. Bah.

Proxies are incredibly hard to eliminate because their function is to share a MEANING with a copyrighted object and no individual feature or group of features presently copyrightable is sufficient to accomplish that. It's the like the creator of the die trying to C&D every other method of generating random numbers.

I support their copyright claims to card image/names/text/trademarks. They couldn't produce MTG if anyone could just knock off a new set the minute it hit the shelves. I even support the lawsuits to protect themselves against leaks. I can't support any attempt to lay claim to emergent properties.

Ie. What if Monsanto's roundup ready genetic sequence patent was extended to ANY genetic sequence that had the same biological effect?

[John Cox]

Ie. What if Monsanto's roundup ready genetic sequence patent was extended to ANY genetic sequence that had the same biological effect?

Don't give them ideas. They will probably do that.

[psyburat]

I agree with their decision and don't in any way use the program.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Ie. What if Monsanto's roundup ready genetic sequence patent was extended to ANY genetic sequence that had the same biological effect?

Don't give them ideas. They will probably do that.

That's the point, though. It's too monstrous to conceive of: a copyright on the stuff of thought or the stuff of life.

So long as we as a group can understand that the Ace of Spades is functionally equivalent to Tarmogoyf, Wizards can't prevent us from duplicating its meaning and functionality. By pursuing a claim against a piece of software designed to recreate the meaning of their copyrighted objects (without itself containing any copyrighted material or doing any more infringing than a web browser MUST do by reproducing copyrighted material on a screen), Wizards is really trying to lay claim to a copyright on the emergent meaning of their cards.

Ie. Consider that so long as the meaning of the cards is understood, you can "encrypt" the cards to an arbitrary degree and still play MtG with them. As a common example, the mere recognizability of Korean MtG cards' art is sufficient to use them in tourney play without their name or text being immediately readable.

Cockatrice scrapes Hasbro's own servers to use the data found there for its intended purpose: display by 3rd party software on a user's screen. Their objection isn't to its ability to replicate a browser's functionality. Their objection is to the fact that the game can be played using it. But the game is an emergent property and not a property of any individual card. To protect themselves against other platforms that can also be used to play the game online, they'd have to copyright the meaning of their cards. I can't imagine that it's possible to copyright the meaning of a game piece?

[AmbivalentDuck]

And because I need to stop editing that post, I'll double post...

Consider the situation where I buy a 400x set of every MtG card ever printed. I then charge users a subscription fee to be able manipulate the cards remotely via a web interface and watch the results on video. In effect, I'm letting them play Magic remotely using cards I physically own. Since WotC doesn't include a licensing agreement with the sale of the card, am I not correct in saying that I'm free to do whatever I want with them and that I could effectively legally undermine MODO by offering this service for free?

[John Cox]

This is more like a digital copyright though. We think magic as cardboard but they start out as digital creations (like music). This is a terrible place to be these days (what with the internet and all) and anyone can come along and duplicate the cockatrice/mws code, and wizards would have to hire more lawyers.
I don't think it's worth their time to do this, and if this succeeds it sets terrible precedent for sites like deckcheck.de, and deckstats.net.

[The Atog Lord]

I'm sure WotC has something in the TOS of MODO that prevents you from letting a third party use them.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

^this

[nataz]

That it's really unfortunate.

[AmbivalentDuck]

I'm sure WotC has something in the TOS of MODO that prevents you from letting a third party use them.

MODO maybe, but PHYSICAL cards? They can't stop me from moving my cardboard around or showing video of it.

[John Cox]

MODO maybe, but PHYSICAL cards? They can't stop me from moving my cardboard around or showing video of it.

That wouldn't be a bad idea to throw in kickstarter. A special web cam, image recognition software (to know which card is which), and a set of rules as to how the board should be arranged (IE creatures, the stack, graveyard etc) then play virtually with paper cards.

[AmbivalentDuck]

You don't need a special cam. You can just rfid the sleeves. More to the point, you can CLAIM that the underlying process is low-pay workers in a 3rd world country manipulating physical cardboard while simply passing servatrice through a black box located in a 3rd world country. The outcome is identical.

[John Cox]

No I'm saying I sell a boxed product to the consumer that contains those things. Then they go online and play paper magic with real people with their own cards. No out of date MODO interface. No rogue decks that don't make sense (unless people actually own the cards), and you can speak vocally to your opponent, something I think is really lacking in online MTG. This could be adapted to out of circulation games, so if you wanted to play L5R or V:TES you could get in a game even if theres no scene in your area. The best part is I can play vintage with real people 24/7/365 with real cards. 

[nedleeds]

Well ... you could accomplish that with some kind of generic PVC harness for holding a webcam / phone, a printed playmat with boundaries and then a pretty basic video chat app. So the PVC would be designed along with a special playmat which is measured out to be the average camera viewport (at the height the harness hangs the camera). The software would then just put the opponents playmat up in a video window and you'd have some basic ticks and counters (life total, mana, phase, storm count etc.).

[Ten-Ten]

^this

wtf!

I was just starting to get the hang of it !!
this was my only method available to me for testing before obtaining paper cards.
 since the local scene is standard and Legacy, testing would not be optimal

I have a few expletives for Hasbro 

i mean, why keep supporting a company who doesn't care for our format and it's growth?

[John Cox]

Well ... you could accomplish that with some kind of generic PVC harness for holding a webcam / phone, a printed playmat with boundaries and then a pretty basic video chat app. So the PVC would be designed along with a special playmat which is measured out to be the average camera viewport (at the height the harness hangs the camera). The software would then just put the opponents playmat up in a video window and you'd have some basic ticks and counters (life total, mana, phase, storm count etc.).

Exactly! From concept to shelves it would take very little (money) to do, -and I would probably end up selling the whole business to Hasbro LOL. I'm actually sorta considering doing this.

[TheWhiteDragon]

Hasbro doesn't just have the copyright to the cards though (their meaning, likeness, etc).  they also have a copyright to the GAME.  So if you were using a deck of bicycle cards to play magic, then you are making an illegitimate copy of their intellectual property.  Tapping for mana, tapping to attack, etc. are all parts of their copyrighted game.  If you tap an ace of spades or a tarmgoyf to do the same thing in an identical copy of a Magic:the Gathering game, then it is copyright infringement.  Cockatrice just gave people the playing cards in a format designed specifically to copy the functions of the game - the functions, not the cards themselves, are the bigger issue.  It's copying the game that WotC does and should have issue with.