One Hour One Life Forums

So obviously writing text is an analogue for talking. I assumed that was obvious.

But F is an abbreviation. Why don't you just abbreviate numbers if that's what you want? A=1, B=2, ... J=0

"I NEED CF ADOBE AND AD LIMESTONE"

That would be quite fun.

So weeks translates to seconds in game, so that's about right. Unless you meant literal weeks in which case you are engaging in hyperbole.

Overcoming the difficulties of communication in the game is an important part of success. Clearly you feel the game should grant you more latitude, but you wouldn't be playing the same game if it did. Is that good or bad? I like it the way it is. If I was a slower typist I might feel differently, hard to say.

"I NEED THIRTY SIX ADOBE"
"AND FOURTEEN LIMESTONE"

A bit long for what? Convenience?

The point stands: to say numbers you say the numbers, that's realistic; people don't talk in numerals.

Because why not let people comment? People like to share opinions on things. They like to speculate and they like to vent sometimes too.

But you're right that it is what it is right now. Nothing to be done.

I researched! Turns out that trademark registration is optional. Trademarks exist as a result of commercial activity first and are registered separately. Lack of a registration means you have to be able to prove that you are the original owner of a mark, and if it came to suit that the infringing party was aware of the mark. There's also something about registration applying across the entire US rather than simply where you do business but I guess that doesn't apply for goods sold through and provided over the Internet in the same way. But perhaps most interestingly is that in the US you need to register a trademark for it to be internationally enforceable.

This was my source: https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-gettin … ark-basics

I was also slightly concerned about the wording of the take down notices. But I can see why Jason has done it, "looking for the right levers" as he said. And shouldn't the take down notice only provide the basis for *your* argument, the developers will surely get to have their say in the process too, I actually don't know how that goes. So in that regards maybe its fine and all points of view will be heard. All the same because it will come to that anyway maybe it would've been better to highlight that you aren't concerned  about copyright.

That said, maybe copyright should be the issue. Does the no_copyright.txt actually constitute a license? Isn't the difficulty of putting things in the public domain the very reason for the existence of CC0? Man, licensing is tricky business.

They seem updated to me.

1. Google Translate: "This is an unofficial extension of Jason Rohrer's desktop game "One Hour One Life" for the Android market. We've added additional game modes and changes that give them a better gaming experience on the touch screen. We are independent developers, and the mobile game world is on our servers."

2. "This is the unofficial expanded version of Jason Rohrer's desktop game "One Hour One Life", adapted for Android. We have added additional play modes as well as changes to make it play better on touchscreens. We are independent developers and the mobile game world resides on our servers."

3. "#1 RPG in 17 countries so far for iPhone, and in 9 countries for iPad!

This is the unofficial expanded version of Jason Rohrer's desktop game "One Hour One Life", adapted for iOS. We have added additional play modes as well as changes to make it play better on touchscreens. We are independent developers and the mobile game world resides on our servers."

I suppose I could argue that such dialectic is how people form rationally supported points of view and that changing one's view is part of that process. But honestly I'm not seeing it, the core of Jason's reasoning has been reasonably consistent, never straying far from the perception of affiliation or endorsement and the potential damage to his creative legacy. This is based on my recollections at the moment; I don't have time to reread the entire thread to see if that is supported or not.

I understand you are a fan of the game and that's wonderful but Jason is a lot more than a fan, it has personal meaning to him beyond merely playing it, it has been three or four years of his life. I try to bear that in mind when he talks about it. I don't have anything in my life that has lasted so long, I can't imagine what it feels like to put so much of myself into something.

That post is here: https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … 001#p48001.

I interpreted him to be referring to the commercial release of One Hour One Life for Mobile in China. Beyond the free demo version.

Jason's value proposition includes more than access to the main servers though. It's hard to pin down exactly I suppose but I reckon the key thing Jason has to offer is authenticity. Fans of the game will want to support Jason and the ongoing development, perhaps even if they already bought the $10 version. Then of course there's getting to hang out with the lovely people on the forums, can't ignore the draw of that. I'm not certain how this would shake out, would be interesting.

If someone destroyed a pen without cause that would almost certainly be griefing. It is hard to imagine anyone not understanding the results of that action. Of course they could just be enlarging the pen, we don't know unless we talk to them. If you stabbed them over this incident you might also be a griefer. Griefing is about honest intent, not actions.  But we're not talking about your "pen destroying" strawman here, we're talking about shearing sheep.

Now it seems pein might disagree with that last statement and that gets into who has moral authority and whence they derive it. If I was to shear sheep because I knew our town needed wool clothes and you were to stab because you knew the town needed mutton then who was right? Does it depend on whether the town needed clothes or mutton? It my opinion it does not, if we all acted authentically to try and bring about the outcome we thought was best then what happened was a failure to communicate. This is something we are all responsible for. But the stabbing, that was all you. You could've done more, you didn't, you just wanted them gone. If they were a griefer, fine. You admitted yourself you didn't know. And how can we know? From such a small pattern of justifiable events it would be impossible. But if they weren't a griefer then you probably ruined their game and whatever it was that they wanted to do, to their best understanding, for the good of the town.

If you think you were justified, if you think they were deliberately trying to destroy the town, good. Maybe you were hard done by. Ultimately the person with the knife gets to decide, it is the final veto. But they also bear the responsibility of deciding. In this case that responsibility sent you to donkey town. Does that make you question your actions? I can't give you the answers but from everything I've heard you acted rashly (perhaps arrogantly) and are unrepentent.

I'm sorry this happened to you. But really?! You have an opinion, they have an opinion. They choose their opinion over yours so you stab them? Why didn't you just curse them? Or try and explain again your reasoning? Maybe I don't know all the facts here but based on what you've told me I'd say you were a griefer. You don't stab people for this kind of thing. One warning, then stab them? Is that what it has come to?

This text you quote says "This work is not copyrighted." Establish copyright as the scope of the declaration. Furthermore it is in a file called "no_copyright.txt" just in case you didn't read the first line. But the issue surrounding the name is nothing to do with copyright. You can't copyright a name, ergo you can't relinquish a copyright on a name. You can have trademarks on names, in many places (including the USA) you have trademarks on names regardless of whether you register that mark with any kind of state office.

In conclusion, don't conflate copyright with trademark protections.