Skip to content

Intro without Nietzsche

Greetings,
I have a question, which is quite important to me.

Why did you remove the Nietzsche quote from the intro?

What was the reason to do that? Same could go for removing the baalspawn_goes_snitch line.

Thanks for an honest answer.

Karet
«1

Comments

  • ElizabethSterlingElizabethSterling Member Posts: 39
    Just a guess without a dev around to confirm but they probably had to trim a whole load of fat for the Ipad versions.
  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    Contract issues, I'm sure. Nietzsche and his quotes are copyrighted, and while the Black Isle managed to acquire the use of this one quote - for a hefty sum, certainly - it wasn't included in the package deal that was BG:EE, forcing Overhaul to leave it out.
  • MichailMichail Member Posts: 196
    Too bad, it was an accurate description of the game... ;-)
    Btw, is the "you must gather your party before venturing forth" phrase missing or is it just me?
  • KurumiKurumi Member Posts: 520
    Michail said:

    ..
    Btw, is the "you must gather your party before venturing forth" phrase missing or is it just me?

    Nope.. it's there.

  • KomarrKomarr Member Posts: 80
    The contract issues @Chow said are probably true, tho I do agree it's a shame it's gone. It really did sum up the moral/ethical aspect if the game well.
  • Space_hamsterSpace_hamster Member Posts: 950
    So Nietzsche great great grandchildren wanted to get their payoff? Oh well.
  • NukeninNukenin Member Posts: 327
    Chow said:

    Contract issues, I'm sure. Nietzsche and his quotes are copyrighted, and while the Black Isle managed to acquire the use of this one quote - for a hefty sum, certainly - it wasn't included in the package deal that was BG:EE, forcing Overhaul to leave it out.

    No. Nietzsche has been dead for 112 years. The quote is from Beyond Good and Evil (Jenseits von Gut und Böse), first published in 1886, which is no longer in copyright.

    It's possible the quote was lifted from a recent translation, which may be governed by a copyright issued to the translator.

    However, Helen Zimmern's 1906 English translation of Beyond Good and Evil is in the public domain, and thus is her translation of the quote:

    146. He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby
    become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will
    also gaze into thee.


  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    Yes, I was being sarcastic, or perhaps satirical. That Komarr and Space_hamster thought it really was so speaks a lot about our situation today, how bleak it really is.
  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    I read previously that they thought it didn't fit with the new style of the intro video (can't confirm that for sure). I would install a mod that put this back in, though. I thought that quote couldn't have been more perfect.
  • kilroy_was_herekilroy_was_here Member Posts: 455
    @Chow Given the prevalence of pseudo-legal advice and wannabe lawyers on the internet it's better to be safe than sorry. :)
  • Space_hamsterSpace_hamster Member Posts: 950
    Chow said:

    Yes, I was being sarcastic, or perhaps satirical. That Komarr and Space_hamster thought it really was so speaks a lot about our situation today, how bleak it really is.


    I'm just a gullible hamster. ;(
  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    Chow said:

    Yes, I was being sarcastic, or perhaps satirical. That Komarr and Space_hamster thought it really was so speaks a lot about our situation today, how bleak it really is.

    I'm not sure what way to read that comment. Bleak because there is so much piracy of intellectual property today (music, games, movies, etc.) or because society is so hyper-litigious that someone might not realize that the works of Nietzsche are well past any kind of copyright protection?


    I'm just a gullible hamster. ;(

    I wouldn't feel bad about that at all. Most people don't have a good understanding of IP basics.
  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    AHF said:

    I'm not sure what way to read that comment. Bleak because there is so much piracy of intellectual property today (music, games, movies, etc.) or because society is so hyper-litigious that someone might not realize that the works of Nietzsche are well past any kind of copyright protection?

    The latter. Or rather, that people are more and more willing to keep everything under protection, so that they could make profit out of it and be the only ones to do so. Think about the birthday song.

    Or the Hobbit. It came out in 1937, so unless laws have already changed, it should be public domain this year, or the next. But do you really think it will be?

    I don't remember exactly how many works passed into public domain this year, but it was depressingly few.
  • NukeninNukenin Member Posts: 327
    Tolkien's U.S. publisher asked him to revise the text of The Hobbit slightly in the late 60's after Ace Books published an unauthorized edition, thus was the copyright renewed in 1966.

    All sorts of loopholes and gimmicks to prolong copyright nowadays. According to my edition of The Annotated Hobbit, The Hobbit had its copyright renewed again in 1994 by Christopher Tolkien and his siblings, then in 1997 it was assigned to "The J.R.R. Tolkien Copyright Trust".

    Good fun!
  • nietzschelivesnietzschelives Member Posts: 36
    Back on topic, I personally was very disappointed that they left out the quote. A sad day indeed.
  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    Copyright renewals should be illegal. Pardon my Klingon, but fuck that shit.
  • ButtercheeseButtercheese Member Posts: 3,766
    How can there be a copyright on his stuff? the guy died over a hundret years ago and usually the copyright declines after about 70 years or so for intellectual property (I don't remember the exact amount of years). At least that's what I learned in school.
  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376

    How can there be a copyright on his stuff? the guy died over a hundret years ago and usually the copyright declines after about 70 years or so for intellectual property (I don't remember the exact amount of years). At least that's what I learned in school.

    There is no copyright on the Nietzsche quote. It was a content choice by the developers.

    Like I said, if anyone comes up with a mod to add it back in, I will definitely install that mod.
  • NukeninNukenin Member Posts: 327
    Just fire up the video editor of your choice and roll the quote back into the intro movie.

    As for the quote, it's possible (I'm not sure) that the specific translation they use is from a more recent translation that might be under copyright belonging to the translator, as can be the case for translations of a public domain source. (Translations of a source still under copyright protection are derivative works and must be authorized by the copyright holder, and the translation's copyright would be assigned to the original copyright holder as a work-for-hire.)

    I don't claim to be a copyright lawyer or expert.

    I think they shouldn't not only retained the quote, but expanded upon it by turning the entire Baldur's Gate intro into a six-minute long death metal power ballad about monsters and abysses and the staring into thereof, filmed from a live stage performance by Sarevok and the Iron Throne.
  • MichailMichail Member Posts: 196
    edited December 2012
    Copyright usually expires 70 years after the death of the creator. But it could be less or more. It depends on national laws. In the European Union it's 70 years after death. It's been more than a 100 years, so i doubt there is copyright on Nietze's original works. The 1906 english translation could still be in copyright, if the translator passed away less than 70 years ago. But i think it may be a developers choice, in the same way they took out the videos of the old cut-scenes.

    PS. In the USA the copyright expires in some cases within 28 years after death unless renewed. If renewed or in other cases it may last up to 90 years if not expired before 1998. Tolkiens works will be in copyright until 2063 in the USA, and 2043 in the EU.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    edited December 2012
    Not that it matters, but in Canada's case its 50 years after the death of the creator.
  • ButtercheeseButtercheese Member Posts: 3,766
    Well, what law goes for Nieztsche? He was stateless when he died. Does the prussian (so nowadays german) law kicks in because he used to be prussian? Or the swiss one because he lived in Bern when he died?
    Or is there maybe even an extra law for that?
  • NukeninNukenin Member Posts: 327
    50 years after the death of the creator is the Berne Convention, which came about in the same year that Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil was first published (coincidentally)—1886.

    It took the U.S. 102 years to get around to joining the Convention.

    The 50 year figure is a minimum, by the by. Longer terms can be agreed upon.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    edited December 2012

    Well, what law goes for Nieztsche? He was stateless when he died. Does the prussian (so nowadays german) law kicks in because he used to be prussian? Or the swiss one because he lived in Bern when he died?
    Or is there maybe even an extra law for that?

    Prussian one would probably kick in.
  • MichailMichail Member Posts: 196
    edited December 2012
    The applicable law in intellectual property as far as existence, extent and duration of said right is usually the law of the state where protection is demanded (careful, national law also tells you how to choose the applicable law).

    So a German (or Prussian) work may be under copyright in Germany and not in China or vice versa. A creator may be protected under USA law, but his copyright may have expired in the EU, and so on.

    The law is similar in most countries because of the Bern Convention (and other treaties that followed, which provides minimum protection, but not identical. If you sell via inernet, which means internationally, you risk being found in breach of this national legislation or the other. So it makes good sense to include as few references to other works as possible.

    It is an extremely complex situation, and I hesitate to give any specific answers. Even the meaning and content of "copyright" differs from one legal tradition to the other. And this is not a legal forum.
  • BerconBercon Member Posts: 485
    @Michail Its not really a complex situation. There is a single word definition for it. Bullshit.
  • MichailMichail Member Posts: 196
    @Bercon
    I understand the sentiment, although id' put it more mildly. Intelectual property law (and that includes patents as well as copyright) was meant to protect creators and fuel innovation. Nowadays it has begun to be a hindrance. I' m all for creative commons.
  • AristilliusAristillius Member Posts: 873
    Perhaps they were afraid of alienating new players with what might seem to be pseudo-intellectualism. I guess I can understand that, but I disagree. I think the quote was awesome, made the game stick out of the crowd, and set the mood very well. It should be there (and it doesnt fit neither less or more than with the original movie IMO).
  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    Michail said:

    The applicable law in intellectual property as far as existence, extent and duration of said right is usually the law of the state where protection is demanded (careful, national law also tells you how to choose the applicable law).

    So a German (or Prussian) work may be under copyright in Germany and not in China or vice versa. A creator may be protected under USA law, but his copyright may have expired in the EU, and so on.

    The law is similar in most countries because of the Bern Convention (and other treaties that followed, which provides minimum protection, but not identical. If you sell via inernet, which means internationally, you risk being found in breach of this national legislation or the other. So it makes good sense to include as few references to other works as possible.

    It is an extremely complex situation, and I hesitate to give any specific answers. Even the meaning and content of "copyright" differs from one legal tradition to the other. And this is not a legal forum.

    I agree with 99% of this, but no one has ever claimed that there is an IP issue with use of the quote as far as I know. It seems like this is a bit of a red herring.
  • MichailMichail Member Posts: 196
    AHF said:

    Michail said:

    The applicable law in intellectual property as far as existence, extent and duration of said right is usually the law of the state where protection is demanded (careful, national law also tells you how to choose the applicable law).

    So a German (or Prussian) work may be under copyright in Germany and not in China or vice versa. A creator may be protected under USA law, but his copyright may have expired in the EU, and so on.

    The law is similar in most countries because of the Bern Convention (and other treaties that followed, which provides minimum protection, but not identical. If you sell via inernet, which means internationally, you risk being found in breach of this national legislation or the other. So it makes good sense to include as few references to other works as possible.

    It is an extremely complex situation, and I hesitate to give any specific answers. Even the meaning and content of "copyright" differs from one legal tradition to the other. And this is not a legal forum.

    I agree with 99% of this, but no one has ever claimed that there is an IP issue with use of the quote as far as I know. It seems like this is a bit of a red herring.
    Actually, somebody asked exactly that, and somehow i got carried away. But i also think removing the quote was a matter of preference, not law.
Sign In or Register to comment.