You're only looking at it from the point of view of the retail consumer. The court is going to look at it from both sides, and more importantly, is going to look at the law. When you do that, there is nothing to laugh about. There are going to be two issues that come up. First, does the creation of the mod violate SCS's rights? Unless you can make an argument that the mod in question is not a derivative product, the plain text of the law makes it clear that SCS has the exclusive right to create derivative products of DW. SCS is going to win that round, and then you get to round 2...what remedy does SCS have?

This is harder for SCS because they're probably going to have to prove some sort of damages. I suppose I could do some research and provide a more definite answer to this, but I don't have any background in intellectual property law so doing so is going to be a lot of work, so I won't do it. What I will say is that it might be the case that there are some sort of damages presumed by statute, or there might not be. If there is, then SCS wins again. If there aren't, then they have to prove damages which will be hard for them. If the mod got into circulation and caused their miltary sales to suffer, however, the creator of the mod is really, really screwed. Possibly to the tune of millions.

That's nothing to laugh out of court.

I'm about 99% sure SCS announced here and in interviews prior to DW's release that a PCU would not be allowed. (DWX would have been allowed, just as LW/Ami has been allowed). I'm 100% sure you had to accept this...
...before you were able to install DW.

For what exactly? Not that it matters, I probably lost the right to bring any such action by becoming a beta tester.

The point is that if someone wants to discuss adding drivable units to DW he will not be allowed to do it here.
Just put up a new forum some where else on the web to discuss this mod.
Second, even if you have an scx type mod for dw you still need a comunity to use it if you want to enjoy a multiplayer experience. Its going to be quite difficult.
Third, scs will not be pleased by this turn of affairs, and even if a successor to dw was pretty low on the horizon,with these kinds of mods we are actually putting a coffin over dw 2.
As to whether people using non approved mods will be prosecuted by scs i have my doubts but you never know. :hmm:

Looks like Molon Labe has done a first rate job addressing your comments, but I would like to add a few non-legal ones myself. Firstly, I think SCS-DW is one of the finest naval simulations ever released. If not the best. What embarrassment by SCS are you talking about?!?!? As far as I know, they are genuinely proud of the work they've done, and the simulations they've created that many have enjoyed for many long years. They have also been fully supportive of community mods. Including SCX. They've said that all along. They also said at the time SCX was created that they liked the mod very much. Are the Romanian developers from UBIsoft embarrassed and upstaged by the GWX project? You do know how stock SH3 and GWX compares don't you? I don't think they are, and they shouldn't be either. As SH3 was a fine game on it's own merits as well. As far as SCS add-ons go, the add-ons were never "promised and not delivered" like what you're saying. They have always stood by their words that any add-ons or future releases would depend on sales. And that they reserve the rights to build add-on units for their games. DW is their intellectual property created in house at Sonalysts. The code does not belong to you. I don't understand all the fuss.

Linton bought the product in england therefore he is govend by english law if sonalasys is an american company they cant do squat unless they have at least one outlet in the uk and seeing as they dont they can do very little.

Changing something that is copy right to make profit is illigal in this country however chaning something that is copy right for nothing is not, UKTRAINSIM is one very good example of this and so is flightsim!

"The point is that if someone wants to discuss adding drivable units to DW he will not be allowed to do it here.
Just put up a new forum some where else on the web to discuss this mod."

Goldorak why cannot this be discused here.Obviously everybody has a different opinion and exectation of DW.I was massively disappointed with it.It was sold with the expectation of future expansion packs and continuing patches.Neither have appeared.
I have been deceived and sold a sows ear and not a silk purse.:down::down::down:

I myself am dissapointed with it because of the same reason, however if your trying to say we cant repaint we cant make new drivables we cant do anything to it, then i suggest this.

Take off all the LWAMI mods and shut him down
Take away the X modss from xabbarus
Shut down DW mod room

are these not illigal too as they do alter the game?

Linton you misunderstood me.
When I said that you are not allowed to discuss here the issue I was just stating a fact. As in the past similar threads have been closed without discussion. It has nothing to do with my views on the subject.
So the only real alternative is to put up a new forum that doesn't depend on subsim and start discussing the modding of DW.

I have my own opinion on these kinds of mods, but I will not express them on this forum.

Just try comparing SHIV with DW.There is no comparison in graphics and interaction with the crew.Ubisoft should be encouraged to produce a modern submarine add on.If they did DW would be rapidly forgotten.

Mods are OK. And SCS has always encouraged them. Added playables are not. SCS made that very clear before the product was even released. Nobody was deceived about anything. It's common knowledge that added units would be released DEPENDING on sales. SCS never made the promises you say they made. You don't like DW, that's you're right. But many of us love this game and truly do hope for future releases.

And I agree that the UK would uphold US patents in their country. And UK laws would protect US copyrights. And vice versa. Isn't there some sort of FAQ that explains all of this anyway? At any rate, I don't support this homemade project or anything that breaks the agreement in the EULA.

The UK and USA dont support each others patents if it was UK Euro then yes but they dont, why do you think when artists who write songs take copy right out they do it in UK and USA ? because it covers them for both europe and US. (copyright differs greatly in both countries)

Look modding is at the heart of modern pc gaming.
We all give it for granted, and when once in a while a developer comes that says no, you can't mod the game well it doesn't go down well for the community. Look at F4 AF so much potential wasted, Dw is the same thing.
Its a very good game but that is not allowed to become a great game.
A pity if you ask me.
Every time a poll comes on the Sh III or SH IV forums asking what kind of SH V we want I always vote a cold war subsim.
Not many people agree though they just prefer WW II. :damn: :damn:

Then why should we bother selling you people anything? If you're just going to steal the intellectual property with no consequences that is? I think you guys are completely wrong.

I'm no lawyer but maybe the right words are copyright infringment or breach of contract (in the case that EULA are to be considered contracts between the end user and the developper).
I don't think that modifying the dll's amount to stealing.

i have red the black bean manual (english side) and it is copywrited in england, i also have the origional DW i got when it first come out from america it doesnt have the same copy right i dont think i will have a look!

Does blackbean own the code in DW? No they don't.