×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Urban Terror Code Stolen

timothy posted about 8 months ago | from the et-tu-b1nary-th1ef? dept.

Crime 264

New submitter herbalt writes "The code of the free FPS game Urban Terror (a standalone game based on a Quake 3 mod), has been stolen. The development team, Frozen Sand, at first stated their Git Repository had been hacked, but later issued an announcement stating the perpetrator of the leak was a member of the development team. Frozen Sand also states they have found chat logs indicating there had been 'a plot to get B1naryTh1ef to steal the code so they could sell Urban Terror under a different name on Steam.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

264 comments

Well what do you know.... (4, Insightful)

metrix007 (200091) | about 8 months ago | (#44617289)

I had thought it was open source all this time. Huh.

Re:Well what do you know.... (4, Insightful)

RobertLTux (260313) | about 8 months ago | (#44617341)

the CODE for the game could be open source but the ASSETS could not be. Plus its very skanky to jack somebodies code and then sell (for profit) the same game and not credit the original authors.

Re:Well what do you know.... (2)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 8 months ago | (#44617371)

Sounds like a good reason to change the assets to something they can ship under a free software license.

Re:Well what do you know.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617513)

Open source fanboys are all the same... "make it open source, make it open source."

Make your own stuff and put it out there for free first. Until you have made a solid commercial grade piece of software open source you need to STFU and do your own part. Stop crying for others to make their stuff open to you.

Re:Well what do you know.... (2)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 8 months ago | (#44617573)

It's not for me, I think it's they that will be better of by doing it.

Re:Well what do you know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617715)

In what fashion?

Re:Well what do you know.... (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 8 months ago | (#44618045)

Well for one they don't have to worry about someone stealing their source code. But over all the free software development methodology tends to lead to collaboration which in turn lead to innovation. I'm sure they have benefited from this since they based their own work on free software, which is a good first step toward fully embracing the free software methodology.

Re:Well what do you know.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618125)

> Well for one they don't have to worry about someone stealing their source code

If you give me your TV you don't have to worry about me (or anyone else) stealing it?!

> But over all the free software development methodology tends to lead to collaboration which in turn lead to innovation

{{citation needed}}

Re:Well what do you know.... (-1, Offtopic)

Americano (920576) | about 8 months ago | (#44617793)

And what if they don't want to open source their assets?

Your "desire" to see them "succeed" sounds eerily similar to blackmail: "That's some nice source code there, you should probably just make it open source, it'd be a real shame if something were to happen to it."

If you cannot fundamentally respect their rights to license their work as they see fit - even if you don't agree with their choices - then you have exactly zero standing to complain when somebody else disregards your wishes as to how source code YOU wrote will be released and licensed. If you don't agree with someone's choice to not open source their assets, you do not automatically gain the right to take a copy. Don't like their license? Do without, or write your own open source alternative.

I cannot wait to see the day when thugs who feel they have the right to take anything they want at any time they please are shunned out of any civilized company - as they should be.

Re:Well what do you know.... (3, Insightful)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 8 months ago | (#44617871)

And what if they don't want to open source their assets?

They don't have to. No one is forcing them to do that.

Your "desire" to see them "succeed" sounds eerily similar to blackmail: "That's some nice source code there, you should probably just make it open source, it'd be a real shame if something were to happen to it."

If you cannot fundamentally respect their rights to license their work as they see fit - even if you don't agree with their choices - then you have exactly zero standing to complain when somebody else disregards your wishes as to how source code YOU wrote will be released and licensed. If you don't agree with someone's choice to not open source their assets, you do not automatically gain the right to take a copy. Don't like their license? Do without, or write your own open source alternative.

I cannot wait to see the day when thugs who feel they have the right to take anything they want at any time they please are shunned out of any civilized company - as they should be.

I think it's better for them and for all other software developers to produce free software. I don't understand how you can think that's blackmail, it's not like I'm in a position to make them do anything.

Re:Well what do you know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618277)

Ohh, and here I thought culture and knowledge was a human right. Since not, stop speaking English please and you're not allowed to use any math.

Pre-1923 (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#44618451)

In my country, pre-1923 culture and knowledge is a human right. English from 2013, apart from jargon related to the calculating machines of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, would probably be comprehensible to somebody from 1922.

Re:Well what do you know.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617699)

Open source fanboys are all the same... "make it open source, make it open source."

People who advocate open source advocate open source. A subset of them are who you might refer to as fanboys. Your statement is nothing but empty tautology.

Re:Well what do you know.... (1, Funny)

schneidafunk (795759) | about 8 months ago | (#44617503)

Agreed. That's the real kicker, the "hacker's" note that he left behind said it was to open source it, but in reality he was just trying to sell it. FTA:

umad?
turns out u guys dont own us
the community fights back
we wont take your s***
u ban us from ur game
u hide your codes
u run
stop
its time for the community to take over
you let idiots like elf and raider run your servers and you expect security
you expect me to run away from a home ipd box
i lold.
you wont figure out how i got in
you wont rid yourselfs of me
guess what happens next
you loose control
no more dictatorship
no more closed source
only community
only success
no more fs
goodbye fs
we wont miss you

Re:Well what do you know.... (5, Funny)

operagost (62405) | about 8 months ago | (#44617587)

Well, that was literate. Any attempt to match wits with such an individual would be foolhardy.

Re:Well what do you know.... (4, Funny)

Captain Sarcastic (109765) | about 8 months ago | (#44617691)

Well, that was literate. Any attempt to match wits with such an individual would be foolhardy.

"Clearly, he has a dizzying intellect."

Re:Well what do you know.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617531)

Well, it's also pretty skanky to pirate media other people have paid to develop. You can't condemn B1naryTh1ef with one breath while pirating material with the other breath.

It's always gets me - the hypocrisy of some people and on top of that, their arrogance to deny it.

Re:Well what do you know.... (2)

malkavian (9512) | about 8 months ago | (#44617917)

Yes you can.
"Pirating" something on the personal scale would be to take a copy of the program for your use without permission.
Taking the source to sell elsewhere is commercial piracy, which is rightfully pilloried everywhere (I don't think I've seen many, if any, posts here defending commercial pirates; most of the replies I've read have flat out called for a lynch mob. They're in the same social category as spammers).

What you're effectively saying in your post is "You can't commit theft while with the same breath defend copyright infringement". Which, being completely separate things, you can do without the slightest hint of hypocrisy.

Re:Well what do you know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618181)

For a 4-digit, you seem pretty new. Slashdot will in fact defend anything because they desire the Internet to be a lawless libertarian utopia. That includes commercial piracy, hacking, child pornography, extortion, and (if open source developers are involved) murder.

Re:Well what do you know.... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617365)

even weirder is that B1naryTh1ef would be stealing the source code.

Re:Well what do you know.... (5, Funny)

rwise2112 (648849) | about 8 months ago | (#44617613)

even weirder is that B1naryTh1ef would be stealing the source code.

Yeah, that's clearly a job for S0urceTh1ef!

Re:Well what do you know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617941)

Like Sabertooth to Wolverine, there's always a S0urceTh1ef somewhere in the origin story of every B1naryTh1ef.

Re: Well what do you know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618109)

Not necessarily. The machine code might have been hand toggled in at the main panel. I've known people who could do that.

Re:Well what do you know.... (2, Insightful)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 8 months ago | (#44617511)

This all sounds a lot like a publicity stunt, to garner attention for the game, to me.

Re:Well what do you know.... (5, Interesting)

GoatCheez (1226876) | about 8 months ago | (#44617861)

I have to agree. Stealing the source to sell the game on Steam? In what world does anyone think that they could get away with that? Even major corporations aren't that stupid. It's literally the dumbest idea I've ever heard. When a thief steals something that isn't money, they have to sell it "underground" or just keep it for their own personal treasure. They don't sell it in an auction or through an ad in the paper because it would be obvious they stole it and the stolen goods would be returned, and the thief would gain nothing. How would the thief in this case think that they would never get caught? Change the color of some textures? Fucking asinine.

Re:Well what do you know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617885)

As far as I remember it's not open source. They use a modified version of Quake3 engine, but not the open source version. Carmack gave for free the permission to be able to do it.

Re:Well what do you know.... (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | about 8 months ago | (#44618469)

Yep. It used to be Open Source and used a modified open source Quake 2 fork, but the new version is closed source. The licensed the commercial version of Quake 3 so they could use anti-cheat and such.

Stolen or copied (0, Troll)

ardmhacha (192482) | about 8 months ago | (#44617321)

If Frozen Sand no longer have the code for Urban Terror then it has been stolen. If they still have the code then it has been copied.

Re:Stolen or copied (4, Insightful)

Nukenbar (215420) | about 8 months ago | (#44617489)

Until someone comes up with a single word that means "copied against the will of the code's owner", people will use the word stolen. Get over it.

Re:Stolen or copied (1)

91degrees (207121) | about 8 months ago | (#44617677)

"Pirate" works pretty well, and it's been used in this context for at least 4 centuries

Re: Stolen or copied (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618135)

So the Somali pirates board ships to make copies of the cargo?

Re: Stolen or copied (2)

ScentCone (795499) | about 8 months ago | (#44618271)

Gee, it's almost like sometimes people use the same word in different contexts or something. Like, "jerk" can be both a noun and a verb. And as a noun, it can be used to describe an action, or to describe someone who pretends they don't understand what pirating (of intellectual property) is. The word has been used for centuries to describe the ripping off of another's creative work.

Re: Stolen or copied (1)

91degrees (207121) | about 8 months ago | (#44618293)

Some words have more than one meaning.

For example, Somali pirates don't cover ships in wooden boards, nor do they offer them a food and lodging.

Re:Stolen or copied (1)

ardmhacha (192482) | about 8 months ago | (#44617879)

As Frozen Sand have admitted that the culprit was someone on their own team then "leaked" or "pirated" would work well.

Re:Stolen or copied (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 8 months ago | (#44617933)

Until someone comes up with a single word that means "copied against the will of the code's owner", people will use the word stolen. Get over it.

"copywronged"?

Re:Stolen or copied (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618151)

Until someone comes up with a single word that means "copied against the will of the code's owner", people will use the word stolen. Get over it.

Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Amthink. The Newspeak word is leaked, Citizen!

Re:Stolen or copied (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618225)

"Forgery"

I've got this crossword puzzle (0)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#44618521)

Until someone comes up with a single word that means "copied against the will of the code's owner"

I've got this crossword puzzle, and I'm looking for a nine-letter word meaning "Copied without author's permission". What I have are
I _ F _ _ _ G _ D

Oh, I get it: INFRINGED

Re:Stolen or copied (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 8 months ago | (#44618523)

While I agree to a point, I have to... point out... another phrase you should probably be up-in-arms about: "You stole my idea!"

Kind of hard to -take- an idea from someone, after all...

Stolen? Steam? (0, Troll)

Seumas (6865) | about 8 months ago | (#44617327)

1) It sounds like the code was copied. Still wrong, but "stolen" makes it sound like they can't possibly go on with their project, because they don't have the code they wrote anymore.

2) I'm sure it would be easy to work with Steam and say "don't accept any games that come through based on XYZ code" in this case. On the other hand, Steam has given very few shits about extremely iffy projects in the past.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617419)

Of course it's not wrong to copy code. It's wrong to prevent anyone from copy code. It's unethical. Instead you should share the code with anyone, preferably under an FSF approved free software license.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617549)

It's wrong to prevent anyone from copy code. It's unethical. Instead you should share the code with anyone, preferably under an FSF approved free software license.

No, it's not "wrong" or unethical to prevent anyone from copying code. Free software licenses require copyrights. Asserting that the owner of source code has no right to control copying of their work via copyright carries with it the assertion that the terms of ALL software licenses - even those 'approved by the FSF' - may be safely disregarded at will.

If you really want to go down that road, then you have no basis to complain when a company takes your GPLv3 code and does whatever they want with it, and contributes nothing back to the community. After all - if you would assert your right to take a copy and do whatever you want with it, they can do the same thing: and they have a MUCH bigger legal team.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#44618557)

you have no basis to complain when a company takes your GPLv3 code and does whatever they want with it, and contributes nothing back to the community.

On the other hand, without copyright, the company would have no basis to complain when someone disassembles the company's modified version, comments it, and distributes it.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617605)

Fuck off.

It's wrong to copy something you don't have a right to copy. End of story. Go back to the sixties, hippie.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (2, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 8 months ago | (#44617429)

MPAA officially changed the definition of "stolen."

Re:Stolen? Steam? (0)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 8 months ago | (#44617453)

Not to mention the definition of pirate.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (1)

91degrees (207121) | about 8 months ago | (#44617735)

The term "Pirate", in the sense of copying without consent, predates the MPAA. Or movies. It even predates modern copyright (first recorded in 1701, whereas the first copyright act was 9 years later).

Re:Stolen? Steam? (1)

Shados (741919) | about 8 months ago | (#44617565)

All the people using the expression "You stole my idea!" changed the meaning of it long, long, LONG before that.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618107)

I'm sure the NSA is working on that as we speak in order to correct some small PR problems.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (1, Informative)

mmcxii (1707574) | about 8 months ago | (#44617779)

Stolen [reference.com] does not mean to deprive another of ownership, it means to take without permission. That's what it has meant for generations.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617953)

Well that clears that up!

Re:Stolen? Steam? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618103)

stolen
the past participle of steal

steal
1. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, [...]

That's not exactly what you've claimed.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 8 months ago | (#44618213)

Stolen [reference.com] does not mean to deprive another of ownership, it means to take without permission. That's what it has meant for generations.

I'd wager they know that, but are actively denying said knowledge in an act of mental gymnastics, purely for the sake of attempting justification of their unjustifiable positions.

Re:Stolen? Steam? (0)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 8 months ago | (#44618203)

No they didn't - the definition has always been, "taking something that doesn't belong to you, without permission."

Unless you want to try and argue that sneaking into Stephen King's study and making an unauthorized copy of his latest, unreleased novel is somehow not theft?

Regardless of what label you want to stick on, it's morally wrong to take something, even a copy of it, without the rightful owner's permission.

I doubt it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617343)

Sell? Really? Last time I checked, urban terror wasn't the most advanced of games. And how does a member of the development team steal the code? It's in a git repo, everyone has a copy of it already.

Re:I doubt it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617639)

You really can't see the difference between these two scenarios?

1) I let you come use my garage workshop where I have all kinds of tools and materials for mechanical repair; You use my tools and materials to repair your lawn mower, and then leave the garage without taking anything but your own property with you.

2) I let you come use my garage workshop; when you finish repairing your lawnmower, you also load half my tools into your truck and drive off with them.

Piracy. Just say no. (1)

mandark1967 (630856) | about 8 months ago | (#44618081)

You wouldn't download a crescent wrench, would you?!

Re:Piracy. Just say no. (1)

chill (34294) | about 8 months ago | (#44618285)

Crescent ROLLS, maybe. But a crescent wrench, probably not. I'd torrent some butter while I was at it, just to make it complete.

Loved this game (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617363)

Played it for a few months back in the day, very fun! Hope they get their day in court.

Poor choice of name (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617369)

If you call yourself "B1naryTh1ef", and then steal the source, that just indicates a general sloppiness of character. Sheesh.

Re:Poor choice of name (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617433)

That's why he chose that name. Nobody would expect B1naryTh1ef of planning to steal source code.

Re:Poor choice of name (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617921)

Well he either is a thief or he isn't and he gave you two hints in his name about the truth state value...

Re:Poor choice of name (4, Funny)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 8 months ago | (#44618227)

That's why he chose that name. Nobody would expect B1naryTh1ef of planning to steal source code.

In that case, maybe he should have called himself TheSpan1sh1nqu1s1t1on...

To catch a thief. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617385)

Frozen Sand also states they have found chat logs indicating there had been 'a plot to get B1naryTh1ef to steal the code so they could sell Urban Terror under a different name on Steam.'"

Urban Thief.

I guess that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617405)

he got tired of stealing binaries.

Whoa. /keanu (1)

vistapwns (1103935) | about 8 months ago | (#44617435)

I know this is off-topic, but I hadn't played this game in like a decade, and never think about it, but just last night I was sitting thinking about the times I used to play it. Didn't even know it was still around, might have to check out what their doing with it..

Re:Whoa. /keanu (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617523)

they're/their?

Re:Whoa. /keanu (2)

herbalt (3025077) | about 8 months ago | (#44617643)

If you haven't played it since the Q3 mod days, there's a bunch of new features and a rather lively competition community. The game is currently in version 4.2 with new game modes (e.g. a trickjump mode), animations and weapons, and most notably a cheat detection system which players have been awaiting for ever since Punkbuster was no longer supported. From what I read in the forums, the anti-cheat system is a good reason to be worried about the code leak because it will again give leeway to developers of wallhacks and whatnot, when the the dev team had just started getting a grip on the cheating issues.

Re:Whoa. /keanu (1)

MachineShedFred (621896) | about 8 months ago | (#44618223)

I was just thinking when I read the headline "Wait, that game still exists and servers weren't left to rot years ago?"

I remember playing it like a decade ago, and thinking that it was a slightly "edgier" version of Counterstrike, except that anyone with Half Life could already play Counterstrike.

Maybe it's gained something in the last decade, but if it's still based on Q3, I doubt it has gained much.

Don't worry, brahs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617437)

Information wants to be free!

It wasn't stolen, they just helped themselves to a copy, nobody lost anything!

Re:Don't worry, brahs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618475)

And yet when the NSA think the same about your emails it is a bad thing!

War Z II ? (1)

guru42101 (851700) | about 8 months ago | (#44617501)

They gotta get a stolen sequel for their stolen first game. Don't worry Frozen Sand, they'll screw up any changes they make so bad that it won't effect your bottom line.

So what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617507)

Since when does slashdot care about copyright infringement?

Re:So what? (1)

epyT-R (613989) | about 8 months ago | (#44618095)

since when do copyright holders care about things like first sale doctrine, right of ownership, or privacy of their customers? You can whine about lack of morality all you want, but these guys are no better than the most ardent richard stallman supporter. In fact, the latter at least has a legit argument for their stance: control over their hardware and property...real property, not fantasy control schemes.

Quake 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617579)

I believe the standalone Urban Terror is based on the GPL'd Quake 3 code. For them to *not* make the code available was likely a license violation.

Re:Quake 3 (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 8 months ago | (#44618279)

I believe the standalone Urban Terror is based on the GPL'd Quake 3 code. For them to *not* make the code available was likely a license violation.

Point? Two wrongs don't make a right.

what am i missing? (2, Informative)

Gravis Zero (934156) | about 8 months ago | (#44617623)

quick google of the name and i found a github repo that's been up for years. [github.com]

The officially supported ioquake3 engine by the Frozen Sand Development Team for the game Urban Terror 4.x

so what's the deal?

Re:what am i missing? (-1)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 8 months ago | (#44617697)

Reportedly Linus Torvalds is hopping mad because five minutes after this game was stolen, someone downloaded the complete source code to the Linux kernel!

Re:what am i missing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617883)

Licence stuff from their website:

Urban Terror is a mod for Quake 3 Arena. Urban Terror can be freely distributed over the internet, unmodified, without charging for the product. Urban Terror uses the Quake 3 SDK license. This means the game code (the .qvm's in zpak000.pk3) are closed source and can only be distributed electronically over the internet, not on cd or dvd. The non-code data files of Urban Terror (zpak000-assets.pk3) can go on any medium however. The full license texts come with the installer, they outweigh the information provided here.

Urban Terror does not use any Quake 3 data, only its engine (on windows: quake3.exe) to run on. It therefor can also run on other executables created from the GPL'ed Quake 3 code. ioUrbanTerror.exe is such an executable and is distributed together with Urban Terror, but is a seperate product. Quake 3 can still be used to run Urban Terror on if the end-user prefers it. ioUrbanTerror uses the GPL license and its source code is openly available. ioUrbanTerror does not depend on Urban Terror, it can be used to run any Quake 3 mod or even baseq3, by setting the appropriate fs_game. When running Urban Terror on ioUrbanTerror, Urban Terror's close sourced .qvm's (quake virtual machine) are interprated by the open source engine (ioUrbanTerror).

Re:what am i missing? (2)

herbalt (3025077) | about 8 months ago | (#44617975)

That's the source for the ioquake3 engine, which Urban Terror uses and which was released under a GPL licence by ID Software. The actual game is released in a separate package (and they've been getting some hate for that, eg on the ioquake message boards [ioquake3.org] )

Re:what am i missing? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617981)

That's just the open source Q3 engine though.

UT is a closed source mod to the engine developed seperately (under the Q3 SDK licence)

From http://www.urbanterror.info/support/196-misc/#1.1 [urbanterror.info]

"Urban Terror uses the Quake 3 SDK license. This means the game code (the .qvm's in zpak000.pk3) are closed source."

"Urban Terror's close sourced .qvm's (quake virtual machine) are interprated by the open source engine"

So basically there are three bits: engine, mod and assets. The engine can be the open source Q3 (but could be the closed source version, and doesn't really care). The magic bits of the mod are closed source, and presumably the bits that have been "stolen".

(no expert, just reading the FAQ's)

Sounds Like... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617635)

Seriously...this was a conspiracy with the perpetrator's handle being "B1naryTh1ef"? This sounds too dramatic and a bit suspicious to me. This sounds like a publicity stunt to draw attention to a game many of us wouldn't otherwise even give a passing thought. Furthermore, considering that we are talking about it on Slashdot means it must have paid off.

B1naryTh1ef (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617823)

a plot to get B1naryTh1ef to steal the code

and no one ever wondered about this name? talk about hiding in plain sight.

Happened to me about 10 years ago (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617829)

About 10 years ago I worked on a group startup project and we worked on it for a good 3-years. It was a huge investment but we were all different people from around the world, not stationary in a cozy office. We had an alpha on a new game engine and toolkit that had features that wasn't seen (and some that are still not seen) in today's mmorpgs. It was to become a 3D version of Ultima Online basically. Unfortunately the code was stolen from someone living in Sweden and our computers all got jacked. I had a backup on a few CDs but I had horrible luck when I dropped coke on them, causing permanent damage (impossible to recover). We all hated each other because we were blaming each other for this and that, so there was a big internal conflict but managed to find out who it was but couldn't find out where that person was living since we weren't doing anything on contract. We were all young at the time and didn't know better. It's a damn shame because the timing was perfect, it was even before WoW. Incidentally some of the technology we had placed into the game was found in various games that came out a year or two later. We presume that the technology was sold to studios.

Oxymoron (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44617919)

"Free" program "stolen"? One of these words doesn't mean what you think it means.

Re:Oxymoron (1)

neminem (561346) | about 8 months ago | (#44618353)

If you drive around town in an ice cream truck giving out free ice cream, and someone jacks your truck, you would presumably still go to the cops, right?

But... if the game is free... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44618093)

Who honestly cares about stolen source code?

You're giving the game away. For free. The game is free.

THE GAME IS FREE.

Spooky subject line if you don't have italics (1)

boguslinks (1117203) | about 8 months ago | (#44618389)

My RSS reader doesn't italicize, so I see "Urban Terror Code Stolen"... I was like, "NOOOOO.... uh... what's an Urban Terror Code?"

Publicity stunt? (0)

flimflammer (956759) | about 8 months ago | (#44618423)

This sounds too much like a publicity stunt... Stealing the code so they could sell the game on Steam? Leaving literally all traces to point specifically to someone on the team? What kind of wacky idea is that, really? All that was left was naming the archive "leaked by B1naryTh1ef.zip"

Never actually heard of this game before now. I'm sure they could use the attention.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...