Are computer games software?

[MainframeMouse]

As some of you may know a recent court case cast doubt on whether computer games should be considered (and as such covered by laws that govern) as software.

Now I'd like to keep this purely to the discussion of whether games are software, the reasons for and against rather than how companies are using this avoid certain situations.

[MainframeMouse]

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

You're thinking in Binary... Is there any rule that says Software can't be a multimedia product... or in this case cannot be used to generate, and allow user interface with a multimedia product.

the bit of code on a DVD menu allows access to multi-media content.

A computer games however takes input, processes it and its output is dependent on the input given. And it does continuously for the entire duration of this multimedia experience. With out that there is no experience.

Regardless of what percentage of the game is made up of audio and textures, that basic fundamental of a program is there.

Software can be a multimedia product, but it can't stop being software because the developers thought it would be fun to recreate 100 square miles of beautifully rendered city.

[Strygald]

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

Nguyên văn bởi cloven0angel:

I would say games are indeed Software..

However, if the government with their prisons and all their men with guns and handcuffs suddenly decree that games are multi-media products... well then I guess that's what they are :P

Cloven
BSc Software Engineering

You're thinking in Binary... Is there any rule that says Software can't be a multimedia product... or in this case cannot be used to generate, and allow user interface with a multimedia product.

Certainly, of course software can be a multimedia product - i'd imagine such elements would belong in a sub-set of the software set.

The main point of my cynical post though was that, we little people can all call games 'software' all we like but if the ones calling the shots(the government) make new laws classifying games as 'multimedia' only there's not a lot we can do about it. Well if enough people make a lot of noise, but they still don't have to listen. Break enough of those laws and you may still get dragged off to prison..

[MainframeMouse]

The people initially affecting whether games get considered software are:
On one hand a group of very expensive lawyers working for someone that stands to lose vast sums of money if it does get classified as software.
In the other hand a group of much cheaper lawyers working for a consumer rights group.

[Start_Running]

Nguyên văn bởi MainframeMouse:

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

You're thinking in Binary... Is there any rule that says Software can't be a multimedia product... or in this case cannot be used to generate, and allow user interface with a multimedia product.

the bit of code on a DVD menu allows access to multi-media content.

But it can be entirely bypassed with no penalty

A computer games however takes input, processes it and its output is dependent on the input given. And it does continuously for the entire duration of this multimedia experience. With out that there is no experience.

Regardless of what percentage of the game is made up of audio and textures, that basic fundamental of a program is there.

Software can be a multimedia product, but it can't stop being software because the developers thought it would be fun to recreate 100 square miles of beautifully rendered city.

What something i classified as is usually done to fascilitate proper regulation for both the consumer and the producer. Law is complicated that way and very slow to change due to the gravity of any changes. It's easier to group something in with something else than write up an entirely new law.

[MainframeMouse]

Indeed, which is why software was covered under the same copyright laws that protect books. However that led to misuse as companies tried to override parts of those laws with licensing agreements and clear new laws where made to stop such abuse.

Unfortunately there are companies that have an existing business model built around that exploitation, have have cast doubt over whether their particular variety of software should be considered software.

Unfortunately the legal system is rather linear, a court case around issue "A" does not normally allow issue "B" to be decided at the same time. Give enough evidence that issue "A" can not be resolved until issue "B" has been resolved and the original case gets dismissed.

[Aspalax]

Can the OP or anyone provide a link to said court case or to a news article about it. I was unable to find it.

[僕の名前 (仮)]

Yes, games is application software.

[Start_Running]

Nguyên văn bởi SomeGuy:

Yes, games is application software.

actuually the proper nomenclature is Software Application.

Basic idea is that it is an Application of the hardware resources., as in the hardware is being used to wards a specific end. Of course the same hardware that runs a spready sheet ap can run a word processor or graphics app it's just a matter of the instruction sets passed to the hardware. Hence the phrase application.

The purpose of Software is to Aply resources. Which is why nowadays the terms software and application or app have become interchangeable. In early computing however there was such a thing as HArdware application. As in the result was a function of the configuration of the hardware as opposed to instruction set. TYhis was back when COmputers used vacum tubes. IT still happens to some degree in modern compyuting but with the birth of things like firmnware and such the actual hardware application is becoming smaller and less relevant.

[MainframeMouse]

Here is one article of the court case, though it does say the case was dismissed (rather than won)
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/02/10/german-court-rules-against-rights-to-resell-steam-games/

This one mentions is was dismissed but is disturbingly sycophantic and almost revels in the continued errosion of consumer right.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132104-Valve-Triumphs-Over-German-Consumer-Group

[Start_Running]

In short it has efine, if games are closer to traditional software, or akin to multi-media (i.e Art)

[[AU] Tabris:DarkPeace]

The music in a game is art, but the game has an input, a process and an output that is dynamic based on the inputs --- so basically it is software that DISPLAYS or PLAYS BACK artwork.

Much like how Windows Media Player plays MP3 and WMA files... WMP is software, the MP3 and WMA files are artworks.

IMHO anyway...

[Start_Running]

There is such a thing as 'Interactive Art' where by the art is responsive to the person viewing it. YOu play a song 10 times and it's the same song. Play a game of Street Fighter or DOta and it's a different experience every time. Heck even a game like COntra can be different each time? Fire ball or spread gun? Jump and shoot or Duck and shoot?

In short it's an entertainment experience that is facilitated by the software which allows for the user to interact and create thier own experience. IT's one of those weird concepts that is truly a modern thing.

[MainframeMouse]

Interactive art tends to be a collection of bespoke hardware, control software and the artistic content (which could be either physical or digital). Interactive Art is normally a single installation rather than a licenced product that is copied multiple times.

Where Interactive Art exists as a licensed product then is it most likely a software based solution should be covered by software laws.

Now it is posible to argue that the small percentage of code in a game like GTA is there to enable the playback of the vast amount of multi-media content as such its purpose is secondary, like mediaplayer is to the AVI file. However if you recorded the sound and audio from Film played via MediaPlayer with the clarity it was presented, the content of that output when viewed again would be a complete representation of the experience of said Movie.

Record the multimedia aspect of a game via its "playback" software, its play back would only represent a small part of the experience of playing a game.

[Start_Running]

Nguyên văn bởi MainframeMouse:

Interactive art tends to be a collection of bespoke hardware, control software and the artistic content (which could be either physical or digital). Interactive Art is normally a single installation rather than a licenced product that is copied multiple times.

Usually. Key word there. In an evolving (and rapidly so) medium classifications can shift quite quickly. IT wasn't until 10 years or so ago that the idea of video games being a form of artistic expression started being taken seriously.

Remember at one point all vehicles were usually drawn by horses or oxen :p. That is no longer the case is it.

The definition as art comes from defininbg when value is extracted by the consumer and how. The value of a Word PRocessor is an on going utility. It's a tool, in the same ay a hammer or saw is and is used by thise wo require such.

A game, much like a movie, book orpicture is entirely different in when the utility is extracted. One does not need to even have ownership to gain utility. When you go to the theatre to watch a play or movie, you don't own anything but you have consumed value. That value once consumed need not be revisited again.

Hence the description as multi-media. Multimedia is essentially just art whereby several mediums are used at once, Static, images, motion images, music, sounds, etc. The software in this case is just the means of interacting and creating the experience. I.e You interact with the medium and thuus each time change the art in a manner unique to you. Do you jump or slide tackle? Who knows.

BUt from the stand point of laws and how the producers need to be protected and what they need protection from... the rules of Multimedia more suffice.

[Aspalax]

@MainframeMouse

Thanks for the links. Now that I know what I ' m looking for I'll try to make some sense out of it.

From what I gather the idea that the German Courts ruled games are not sofrware started from the fact that they seem to go against a European Union Court ruling (UsedSoft Case) that said that users should be able to resell software (the Germans basically said you cannot resell your steam games).

It appears, however that the German courts focused on the composite nature of games. Namely, that yes, they are made of code, but also of music and graphics and story that are themselves protected by intellectual property law. So it seems they didn't actually say that games are not software, but that their audiovisual nature is stronger and deserving of protection by Intellectual Property law. And the idea that this may be the case allready existed in said 2012 EU Court ruling.

I will study this further. I do expect there will be an EU court ruling at some point.