Adventure: Crowther's original source code found; photos from inside the real Colossal Cave
denni...@gmail.com
slap something together for the 25th anniversary of Colossal Cave
Adventure. But writing it has turned out to be an addictive Babelfish
puzzle. The preliminary research I did turned into the IF
Bibliography, which also led to a glossary for the IF Theorybook. The
book is in cryonic sleep at the moment but the glossary thrives at the
IF WIki.
Reading the post Andrew Plotkin published several years ago about all
the cave research he did in preparation for writing Hunter, in
Darkness made me start daydreaming about an actual visit to the real
Colossal Cave was a possibility, and watching a library copy of
Raiders of the Lost Ark made me fantasize about finding Crowther's
original source code.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of Adventure, and I think the
article was worth the wait.
The full text (with about 40 photos from in and around the real
Colossal Cave) is available online. See the link after the abstract.
Somewhere Nearby is Colossal Cave: Examining Will Crowther's Original
"Adventure" in Code and in Kentucky
Digital Humanities Quarterly, 1.1 (2007)
Abstract
Because so little primary historical work has been done on the classic
text computer game "Colossal Cave Adventure", academic and popular
references to it frequently perpetuate inaccuracies. "Adventure" was
the first in a series of text-based games ("interactive fiction") that
emphasize exploring, puzzles, and story, typically in a fantasy
setting; these games had a significant cultural impact in the late
1970s and a significant commercial presence in the early 1980s. Will
Crowther based his program on a real cave in Kentucky; Don Woods
expanded this version significantly. The expanded work has been
examined as an occasion for narrative encounters (Buckles 1985) and as
an aesthetic masterpiece of logic and utility (Knuth 1998); however,
previous attempts to assess the significance of "Adventure" remain
incomplete without access to Crowther's original source code and
Crowther's original source cave. Accordingly, this paper analyzes
previously unpublished files recovered from a backup of Woods's
student account at Stanford, and documents an excursion to the real
Colossal Cave in Kentucky in 2005. In addition, new interviews with
Crowther, Woods, and their associates (particularly members of
Crowther's family) provide new insights on the precise nature of
Woods's significant contributions. Real locations in the cave and
several artifacts (such as an iron rod and an axe head) correspond to
their representation in Crowther's version; however, by May of 1977,
Woods had expanded the game to include numerous locations that he
invented, along with significant technical innovations (such as
scorekeeping and a player inventory). Sources that incorrectly date
Crowther's original to 1972 or 1974, or that identify it as a
cartographic data file with no game or fantasy elements, are sourced
thinly if at all. The new evidence establishes that Crowther wrote the
game during the 1975-76 academic year and probably abandoned it in
early 1976. The original game employed magic, humor, simple combat,
and basic puzzles, all of which Woods greatly expanded. While Crowther
remained largely faithful to the geography of the real cave, his
original did introduce subtle changes to the environment in order to
improve the gameplay.
Will Crowther's original FORTRAN source code
http://jerz.setonhill.edu/if/crowther/
Full Article
http://brain.lis.uiuc.edu:2323/opencms/export/sites/default/dhq/vol/001/2/000009.html
The above URL is a test site, but one of the journal editors has
posted this URL to his blog, so I'm considering the article officially
published now.
I imagine the article will eventually occur on the journal's main
site, at
dott.Piergiorgio
> Will Crowther's original FORTRAN source code
> http://jerz.setonhill.edu/if/crowther/
O_O
The original Adventure 0 ?????
Unbelievable !!! a true Relic of the history of gaming !
I'm without words... Now rummaging this ancient but very significant
piece of code, it's remarkable that is very tiny compared to Woods's
350, 13k code and 19k data.
I can suggest you to upload them in their proper place, that is, the
if-archive ?
My congrats, mr. Jerz !!
Dott. Piergiorgio.
David Librik
>Will Crowther's original FORTRAN source code
>http://jerz.setonhill.edu/if/crowther/
>The above URL is a test site, but one of the journal editors has
>posted this URL to his blog, so I'm considering the article officially
>published now.
HOLY MOLY. This is amazing work. I especially love the photographs
illustrating all the famous places in Adventure: the cobble crawl,
the window on the pit, the hall of mists, the maze of twisty passages
all alike. (You got to cave with Roger Brucker, too -- I hope you
know how fortunate you are.) And you found the original Will Crowther
FORTRAN source code, long thought to be lost forever, and analyzed it.
Congratulations on a historical achievement and a great article!
- David Librik
lib...@panix.com
Graham Nelson
> Somewhere Nearby is Colossal Cave: Examining Will Crowther's Original
> "Adventure" in Code and in Kentucky
> Digital Humanities Quarterly, 1.1 (2007)
It is clear on a single reading that this is the most important single
paper ever written on the history of interactive fiction.
David Kinder
Crowther version running again ...
David
Eric Forgeot
yes, just out of curiosity, because I don't know anything about Fortran, is
it possible to compile those sources with for example g77 (gnu fortran), do
we have to edit / adapt / modify the source before ?
Stephen Gilbert
Rubes
> It is clear on a single reading that this is the most important single
> paper ever written on the history of interactive fiction.
I have to agree with you on this. This is jaw-dropping stuff.
Outstanding.
Glenn P.,
> Will Crowther's original FORTRAN source code
> http://jerz.setonhill.edu/if/crowther/
When I click on this link, I get the following:
Parent Directory -
advdat.77-03-11 08-Jun-2007 15:13 19K
advdat.77-03-31 08-Jun-2007 15:13 19K
advf4.77-03-11 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
advf4.77-03-23 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
advf4.77-03-31 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
...Which one of these files is the "Adventure" file??? I don't understand
why there are FIVE files (is this a feature of FORTRAN?)...
--_____ %%%%%%%%%%% "Glenn P.," <C128UserD...@FVI.Net> %%%%%%%%%%%
{~._.~} -----------------------------------------------------------------
_( Y )_ There was no path to follow through the wood. The branches of
(:_~*~_:) the trees hung low and thick, and the earth beneath them was damp
(_)-(_) and dark and dank, and no birds sang.
========= "This," said Katherine, "is what I would call a tulgey wood."
///////// "Don't!" cried Martha. "Suppose something came whiffling
========= through it!" --EAGER, Edward: "Half Magic" (Chapter IV).
:: Take Note Of The Spam Block On My E-Mail Address! ::
Dannii
article explains, there is a data file and a code file. The 77-03-11
files should be the last version by Crowther.
On Aug 12, 6:25 pm, "Glenn P.," <C128UserDELETE-T...@FVI.Net> wrote:
> On 10-Aug-07 at 9:32pm -0700, <dennis.j...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Will Crowther's original FORTRAN source code
> >http://jerz.setonhill.edu/if/crowther/
>
> When I click on this link, I get the following:
>
> Parent Directory -
> advdat.77-03-11 08-Jun-2007 15:13 19K
> advdat.77-03-31 08-Jun-2007 15:13 19K
> advf4.77-03-11 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
> advf4.77-03-23 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
> advf4.77-03-31 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
>
> ...Which one of these files is the "Adventure" file??? I don't understand
> why there are FIVE files (is this a feature of FORTRAN?)...
>
> --_____ %%%%%%%%%%% "Glenn P.," <C128UserDELETE-T...@FVI.Net> %%%%%%%%%%%
Adam Thornton
Glenn P., <C128UserD...@FVI.Net> wrote:
>When I click on this link, I get the following:
>
> Parent Directory -
> advdat.77-03-11 08-Jun-2007 15:13 19K
> advdat.77-03-31 08-Jun-2007 15:13 19K
> advf4.77-03-11 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
> advf4.77-03-23 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
> advf4.77-03-31 08-Jun-2007 15:13 13K
>
>...Which one of these files is the "Adventure" file??? I don't understand
>why there are FIVE files (is this a feature of FORTRAN?)...
Code is in advf4; there are three versions.
Data is in advdat, of which there are two versions.
Adam
asdf
IF studies.
> Full Articlehttp://brain.lis.uiuc.edu:2323/opencms/export/sites/default/dhq/vol/0...
Urbatain
> all alike. (You got to cave with Roger Brucker, too -- I hope you
> know how fortunate you are.) And you found the original Will Crowther
> FORTRAN source code, long thought to be lost forever, and analyzed it.
> Congratulations on a historical achievement and a great article!
And what about to make a game about the achievement?! As the author
notes, he feels in a "Indiana" mood while making the article. It could
be a good idea to do that in an IF format that allow us to listen that
stories in the dark or the boring search for the original source
code :) yes I know, maybe you have no thrilling experiences for a
game, but just puting into some nazis and some savage animals and a
whip, you got it!
Thanks for the article!
Urbatain.
Stephen Granade
> Somewhere Nearby is Colossal Cave: Examining Will Crowther's Original
> "Adventure" in Code and in Kentucky
> Digital Humanities Quarterly, 1.1 (2007)
This is astounding stuff. Bravo!
Stephen
--
Stephen Granade
stephen...@granades.com
REH
Christmas! What a great find, and a priceless treasure to give to the
community.
Andreas Davour
Damn! This is so great! I can only think one one other thing that would
compare, and that's finally being able to compile the MDL source for
Zork to a running game. (and I have some small hope of that being done,
soon)
Congratulation! Dennis, this will get you famous. :-)
/andreas
--
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
mas...@gmail.com
Litestar
David Kinder
just a shade over 700 lines, and how few of the puzzles require special-case
logic in the code. It's not easy to do *anything* interesting in that short
a space, let alone invent a game genre ...
David
samwyse
> Accordingly, this paper analyzes
> previously unpublished files recovered from a backup of Woods's
> student account at Stanford, and documents an excursion to the real
> Colossal Cave in Kentucky in 2005.
Holy mother of Elron! This is enough to make me break two years or so
of silent lurking! Way to go!
mkam...@gmail.com
> Somewhere Nearby is Colossal Cave: Examining Will Crowther's Original
> "Adventure" in Code and in Kentucky
> Digital Humanities Quarterly, 1.1 (2007)
This is an amazing piece! Excellent detective work! Loved that early
PDP source code. I especially enjoyed the pictures paired with the
game text. I wonder if there are any photos from the original Cave
Research Foundation explorations in the early 1970s - it would be
great to see the original entrance as well as photos of Will and Pat
Crowther.
Rober...@gmail.com
WPI in 1974 and played 'Adventure' on their DEC-10, for at least a
year prior to gradualtion.
I believe that the date range of 1972-1973 is more accurate.
Bob Milk
On Aug 11, 12:32 am, dennis.j...@gmail.com wrote:
xonic
the actions the character could do lol.. i never played this myself
but i was into Zork when it came out.. i miss those games.
Matthew T. Russotto
Steve Wertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:
>
>The code cannot be copied from the FTP site as is. All the
>columns are out of whack. The line continuation characters are
>all shifted to the right one too many spaces, and all lines have
>2 extra spaces in the them. I've fixed all that, at least.
The code uses a feature of TOPS-10 FORTRAN which allows lines to begin
with a TAB. If they do, then if the next character is a digit, it's a
continuation line; if the next character is not a digit, it's a
regular line.
And you're too late :-)
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
Vardak
> O_O
Brilliant stuff! (especially the photos illustrating all the famous places
in the game)
--
Diolch,
Vardak the Minotaur Paladin.
Rich Alderson
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:53:26 -0500, Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
>> And you're too late :-)
> How many of us running TOPS? :-P
There's not such thing as "TOPS" as far as the PDP-10 goes. There's Tops-10
and TOPS-20, which share no code, no user interface, and no philosophy, only
the hardware architecture.
And besides the people who are running either of these OSes on Supnik's SimH or
Harrenstein's KLH10, there is real hardware running both at PDPplanet.
--
Rich Alderson | /"\ ASCII ribbon |
ne...@alderson.users.panix.com | \ / campaign against |
"You get what anybody gets. You get a lifetime." | x HTML mail and |
--Death, of the Endless | / \ postings |
Rich Alderson
> Damn! This is so great! I can only think one one other thing that would
> compare, and that's finally being able to compile the MDL source for
> Zork to a running game. (and I have some small hope of that being done,
> soon)
I'm still trying to find my MDL tape.
lorin.rowe
> On Aug 10, 9:32 pm, dennis.j...@gmail.com wrote:
> I started working on this article in 2000, thinking I'd be able to
> slap something together for the 25th anniversary of Colossal Cave
> .... stuff deleted
Interesting ... As many years ago I recall plainly that the original
Colossal Cave was written in a University language called Muddle
originally. Another person I believe translated Adventure into
Fortran.
Even latter I wrote it in C! My how times change.
I am not taking away from the article, but suggesting there is a
ways to go to get back to the original language. :-)
Andrew Plotkin
>
>
> > On Aug 10, 9:32 pm, dennis.j...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I started working on this article in 2000, thinking I'd be able to
> > slap something together for the 25th anniversary of Colossal Cave
> > .... stuff deleted
>
> Interesting ... As many years ago I recall plainly that the original
> Colossal Cave was written in a University language called Muddle
> originally.
No. Muddle (or MDL) was used by the MIT students who originally created
Zork. They were inspired by Colossal Cave, but they were writing a new
game.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
When Bush says "Stay the course," what he means is "I don't know what to
do next." He's been saying this for years now.
rpresser
> I started working on this article in 2000, thinking I'd be able to
> slap something together for the 25th anniversary of Colossal Cave
> puzzle. The preliminary research I did turned into the IF
> Bibliography, which also led to a glossary for the IF Theorybook. The
> book is in cryonic sleep at the moment but the glossary thrives at the
> IF WIki.
Congratulations on what apparently is a fantastic achievement.
> Will Crowther's original FORTRAN source codehttp://jerz.setonhill.edu/if/crowther/
>
> Full Articlehttp://brain.lis.uiuc.edu:2323/opencms/export/sites/default/dhq/vol/0...
>
> The above URL is a test site, but one of the journal editors has
> posted this URL to his blog, so I'm considering the article officially
> published now.
>
> I imagine the article will eventually occur on the journal's main
> site, at
>
> http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/001/2/000009.html
Unfortunately,although the FORTRAN code is still there, the test site
is now down but the article is not up at that main site link, either.
Any other links available?
mkam...@gmail.com
> On Aug 11, 12:32 am, dennis.j...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I started working on this article in 2000, thinking I'd be able to
> > slap something together for the 25th anniversary of Colossal Cave
>
> Unfortunately,although the FORTRAN code is still there, the test site
> is now down but the article is not up at that main site link, either.
> Any other links available?
I contacted the Digital Humanities Quarterly editor (Julia Flanders)
today and here is what she replied:
Thanks for asking--the link to the Jerz article was posted somewhat
prematurely, and links (linked) to an internal draft site, not to the
final publication. The actual published version of the article will
be available at the DHQ site by the end of this month, at
http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/001/2/000009.html
If you can spread this information around we'd be grateful! the
internal URL got widely disseminated before we could correct it.
Best wishes, Julia
Julia Flanders
Editor, DHQ
Brown University
denni...@gmail.com
David Kinder just e-mailed me to say he has placed a copy of the
article on the IF archive at
http://mirror.ifarchive.org/if-archive/articles/original_adventure.zip
(2.7M)
denni...@gmail.com
> I contacted the Digital Humanities Quarterly editor (Julia Flanders)
> today and here is what she replied:
>
> Thanks for asking--the link to the Jerz article was posted somewhat
> prematurely, and links (linked) to an internal draft site, not to the
> final publication. The actual published version of the article will
> be available at the DHQ site by the end of this month, athttp://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/001/2/000009.html
I have also asked the editors to forward the draft address to the
final site.
Glenn P.,
:> GPL It? :-P
<<Scratches under the chin>> ...The person who located the code cannot do
either one, as only the original author (or one to whom he had explicity
given the rights) -- Crowther, in this case -- would have the authority
to do so. And the person who has located this code for us is, alas,
neither Crowther himself, nor a holder of assigned rights.
But having said that, isn't the thing in the public domain already? I
mean, "I Am Not A Lawyer, BUT..." -- wasn't this code written prior to
1976, when (so far as I understand it) copyright required BOTH an
explicit registration, AND affixation of copyright notice; lasted only
28 years at a time; and had to be regularly renewed???
Since Crowther (at least, to the best of my knowledge!) never did ANY
of these things, it seems to me that he never possessed ANY copyright
on the code to begin with, and therefore it would seem to have fallen
into the Public Domain long ago.
-- _____ %%%%%%% "Glenn P.," <C128UserD...@FVI.Net> %%%%%%
{~._.~} ----------------------------------------------------------
_( Y )_ "Surrender, varlet! Thou art the prisoner of me lance!"
(:_~*~_:) "I art? And whomsoever art thou, in thy cast-iron tuxedo?"
(_)-(_) --The Knight & Bugs Bunny, respectively:
========= "A Connecticut Rabbit In King Arthur's Court".
:: Take Note Of The Spam Block On My E-Mail Address! ::
REH
> But having said that, isn't the thing in the public domain already? I
> mean, "I Am Not A Lawyer, BUT..." -- wasn't this code written prior to
> 1976, when (so far as I understand it) copyright required BOTH an
> explicit registration, AND affixation of copyright notice; lasted only
> 28 years at a time; and had to be regularly renewed???
>
> Since Crowther (at least, to the best of my knowledge!) never did ANY
> of these things, it seems to me that he never possessed ANY copyright
> on the code to begin with, and therefore it would seem to have fallen
> into the Public Domain long ago.
>
I don't know about the requirement for the notice (which starts the
"clock" ticking down), but explicit registration is not required.
Registration just makes proving copyright easier. The poor man's form
of this was just to mail the documents to yourself, and use the
unopened, postmarked package as proof, if necessary.
Andrew Plotkin
>
> But having said that, isn't the thing in the public domain already? I
> mean, "I Am Not A Lawyer, BUT..." -- wasn't this code written prior to
> 1976, when (so far as I understand it) copyright required BOTH an
> explicit registration, AND affixation of copyright notice; lasted only
> 28 years at a time; and had to be regularly renewed???
No, yes, yes, and renewal would have been automatic. See
<http://library.dts.edu/Pages/RM/Helps/copyright.shtml>
"All books initially copyrighted in the US from 1964 through 1977 have
had their copyrights automatically renewed (by law) and the copyrights
are still in force."
<http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/training/Hirtle_Public_Domain.htm>
has a very detailed and useful chart.
The lack of notice, however, is a killer. Through 1977, no notice ->
no copyright.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
Just because you vote for the Republicans, doesn't mean they let you be one.
Glenn P.,
> I don't know about the requirement for the notice (which starts the "clock"
> ticking down), but explicit registration is not required. Registration just
> makes proving copyright easier.
My understanding -- and I could be wrong -- is that, prior to 1976, you didn't
acquire copyright until you had registered it. The modern copyright, which is
automatic and doesn't require registration, only came into being with the
amendments to the copyright law that were adopted in 1976.
-- >>>>> "Glenn P.," <C128UserD...@FVI.Net> <<<<<
-----------------------------------------
"Memoria tenete hanc esse Fabulam et omnino per Iocum et per Simulationem,
itaque te esse non credere verbum solum etsi verum est." [Infantes Aquarum]
Glenn P.,
> In rec.games.int-fiction, Glenn P., <C128UserD...@fvi.net> wrote:
>> But having said that, isn't the thing in the public domain already? I
>> mean, "I Am Not A Lawyer, BUT..." -- wasn't this code written prior to
>> 1976, when (so far as I understand it) copyright required BOTH an
>> explicit registration, AND affixation of copyright notice; lasted only
>> 28 years at a time; and had to be regularly renewed???
> No, yes, yes, and renewal would have been automatic. See
> <http://library.dts.edu/Pages/RM/Helps/copyright.shtml>
> "All books initially copyrighted in the US from 1964 through 1977 have
> had their copyrights automatically renewed (by law) and the copyrights
> are still in force."
> <http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/training/Hirtle_Public_Domain.htm>
> has a very detailed and useful chart.
> The lack of notice, however, is a killer. Through 1977, no notice ->
> no copyright.
I am obliged to point out that the matter is not quite as clear-cut as you
make it sound, because until the revisions of 1976, copyright law did not
explicitly recognize computer programs. (Even in the above quote, you can
only mention "books".) I very distinctly recall -- I was there, you know! --
that there was a serious debate at the time as to whether computer programs
fell within the purview of copyright at all, or whether, as methods of
procedure, they fell more appropriately under patent law.
I am also obliged to point out the two words you have (perhaps intentionally,
and perhaps not) glossed over: "initially copyrighted". The question of whether
"Colossal Cave" was EVER copyrighted, whether between 1964 and 1977, or at any
other time, still remains open.
My own considered opinion (for whatever that is worth, given that "I Am Not
A Lawyer, BUT...") is that "Colossal Cave" is not now, nor has it ever been,
copyrighted, and that it therefore lies within the Public Domain.
I add also that it is crystal clear those in charge of the IFArchive share
this viewpoint, in that their action of putting it up within the Archive
itself is, absent explicit permission, utterly inconsistent with the view
that it lies under copyright.
-- >>>>> "Glenn P.," <C128UserD...@FVI.Net> <<<<<
-----------------------------------------
"Memoria tenete hanc esse Fabulam et omnino per Iocum et per Simulationem,
itaque te esse non credere verbum solum etsi verum est." [Infantes Aquarum]
:: Take Note Of The Spam Block On My E-Mail Address! ::
Zylon
"Glenn P.," <C128UserD...@FVI.Net> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.61.07...@Bfjrtb.SbkInyyrl.arg...
> My understanding -- and I could be wrong -- is that, prior to 1976, you
> didn't
> acquire copyright until you had registered it. The modern copyright, which
> is
> automatic and doesn't require registration, only came into being with the
> amendments to the copyright law that were adopted in 1976.
I think that's right. The original copyright acts conditioned the grant of
federal copyright upon specific formalities, like a registration. The 1976
additions then said that registration was not a prerequisite to copyright
protection. (This, by the way, is why "Night of the Living Dead" -- made in
1968 -- fell into the public domain where it remains today.) The 1976
provision didn't eliminate the requirement that copyright notice be placed
all published copies of a work BUT it does provide three clauses that
protect against some of the cases where copyrights weren't placed on the
work.
As far as this "Adventure" ("Colossal Cave"?), if the original authors are
still around I suppose they could be asked. But, on the other hand, whether
or not it's public domain, does it really matter? Is someone going to want
to recreate the game exactly as it was? I doubt those games would do as well
today as they did back in the 70s.
dott.Piergiorgio
> On 14-Aug-07 at 2:27pm -0000, <lite...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 14, 9:42 am, mast...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> :> GPL It? :-P
>
> > Why not just put it in the public domain?
>
> <<Scratches under the chin>> ...The person who located the code cannot do
> either one, as only the original author (or one to whom he had explicity
> given the rights) -- Crowther, in this case -- would have the authority
> to do so. And the person who has located this code for us is, alas,
> neither Crowther himself, nor a holder of assigned rights.
>
> But having said that, isn't the thing in the public domain already? I
> mean, "I Am Not A Lawyer, BUT..." -- wasn't this code written prior to
> 1976, when (so far as I understand it) copyright required BOTH an
> explicit registration, AND affixation of copyright notice; lasted only
> 28 years at a time; and had to be regularly renewed???
>
> Since Crowther (at least, to the best of my knowledge!) never did ANY
> of these things, it seems to me that he never possessed ANY copyright
> on the code to begin with, and therefore it would seem to have fallen
> into the Public Domain long ago.
I'm wrong or Crowther himself has a web page with also his e-mail
address ? I think will be nice e-mailing him asking nicely about the
code and I guess he will gladly give permission to redistribuite... And
his commentary on the code will be very appreciated by all of us :)
ISTR that also Woods has webpage & public e-mail address
Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.
johnm...@yahoo.com
> On 26-Aug-07 at 8:28am -0400, <nospamfo...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't know about the requirement for the notice (which starts the "clock"
> > ticking down), but explicit registration is not required. Registration just
> > makes proving copyright easier.
>
> My understanding -- and I could be wrong -- is that, prior to 1976, you didn't
> acquire copyright until you had registered it. The modern copyright, which is
> automatic and doesn't require registration, only came into being with the
> amendments to the copyright law that were adopted in 1976.
>
Prior to 1976, publication with a notice secured copyright, and
unpublished works were not copyrighted, but had limited protection
under other provisions, and under so-called "common-law
copyright" (which the 1976 act abolished). Through 1977 (the 1976 act
took effect in 1978) *publication* without a notice lost all
copyright, *provided* that the publication was by the author or under
the author's authority. An *unauthorized* publication had no effect,
although proving that it was unauthorized could be tricky. (there was
also an exception for the publication of a "strictly limited number of
copies" where the absence of a notice was not fatal). "Publication" in
that time required that the work be "made available to the general
public".
But it is not at all clear that prior to 1978 placing a program on a
computer where several people could run it constituted publication of
the source code. Unpublished manuscripts (which includes all
unpublished works that would now be copyrighted if newly created)
written in the period 1964-1977 are still under copyright -- I would
need to double check their exact terms, but I think it is something
like 100 years from date of creation, or 70 years from date of
authorized publication (if published after 2001), whichever is later.
So it is far from clear that this code is not under copyright. The
question is what would now count as "publication" under the pre-1976
law. And of course, inf any author is not a US national, a whole
additional set of rules come in.
-John Marks
johnm...@yahoo.com
> On 26-Aug-07 at 2:28pm -0000, <erkyr...@eblong.com> wrote:
I am also not a lawyer, but I have a fair amount of copyright
experience.. It is true that computer programs were not clearly
subject to copyright protection in the early 1970s, because no cases
had yet been decided on the subject. No court, as far as I know, ever
ruled that they were not subject to copyright. Since later decisions
have clearly held that programs are copyrightable, i suspect that a
case now, dealing with a program written in the 1970s, would treat it
much like a book written at that time.
Copyright, prior to 1978, attached on valid publication with notice.
Registration was strongly encouraged, but not required. Deposit of a
copy with the Library of congress was in theory required, but was not
a condition of copyright, unless the library of congress wrote to the
author or publisher demanding a copy and one was not provided -- in
that case, copyright could be voided, but this was almost never done.
In practice, the LoC almost never exercised its right to demand
copies. Copies had to be provided with registration, which was
required before an infringement suit could be filed.
Unpublished works, prior to 1978, did not need a copyright notice, and
the later publication of such a work would be fully protected.
Under the current rules (see >http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/
training/Hirtle_Public_Domain.htm>) "Unpublished works created before
1978 that were published after 1977 but before 2003" come into the
public domain in 2048 or 70 years after the author's death, whichever
is alter; "Unpublished works created before 1978 that were published
after 31 December 2002" as well as works never published by the
authority of the author or copyright holder are protected for the life
of the author plus 70 years. "Unpublished anonymous and pseudonymous
works," and works where the author's death date is unknown, are
protected for 120 years from creation.
Works published before 1978 without a notice are in the public domain.
Works published before 1978 (but after 1963) with a notice are
protected for 95 years from the date of publication.
So unless you can show that this source code was PUBLISHED, prior to
1978, by the author or with his permission, without a copyright
notice, it would be subject to copyright. (in the case of a suit for
infringement, the defendant would need to prove publication, as being
PD would be an affirmative defense) Note that *unauthorized*
publication would not place the work into the PD.
Given that the author seems to be reachable, it seems to me that the
safest legal step, and the most morally proper step, would be to
contact him, and ask for permission. It is unlikely that this work has
significant commercial value, so he will probably not object. And IMO
it would be the *right thing* to do, even if the code is legally in
the public domain.
-John Marks
johnm...@yahoo.com
> "Glenn P.," <C128UserDELETE-T...@FVI.Net> wrote in message
>
> news:Pine.LNX.4.61.07...@Bfjrtb.SbkInyyrl.arg...
>
> > My understanding -- and I could be wrong -- is that, prior to 1976, you
> > didn't
> > acquire copyright until you had registered it. The modern copyright, which
> > is
> > automatic and doesn't require registration, only came into being with the
> > amendments to the copyright law that were adopted in 1976.
>
> I think that's right. The original copyright acts conditioned the grant of
> federal copyright upon specific formalities, like a registration. The 1976
> additions then said that registration was not a prerequisite to copyright
> protection. (This, by the way, is why "Night of the Living Dead" -- made in
> 1968 -- fell into the public domain where it remains today.) The 1976
> provision didn't eliminate the requirement that copyright notice be placed
> all published copies of a work BUT it does provide three clauses that
> protect against some of the cases where copyrights weren't placed on the
> work.
>
(authorized publication without notice put the work in the public
domain), but registration was optional. Registration granted
additional rights, and was required before an infringement suit could
be filed.
After 1978 (effective date of 76 act) notice was strongly encouraged,
indeed in theory required, but absence of notice did *not* lose
copyright protection, so notice was in practice optional. After the
Berne Copyright Convention was signed (around 1980 I think, but I'd
have to check), notice became formally optional, and no formalities of
any kind could be required. (I have a copy of the annotated 1976 act
available, if anyone wants more details)
The "exceptions" in the 1976 act providing for copyright to be
retained if a "small number" of copies were published without notice
merely codified court decisions made under the prior law.
-John Marks
Tim Mann
> On Aug 11, 12:32 am, dennis.j...@gmail.com wrote:.
> > Somewhere Nearby is Colossal Cave: Examining Will Crowther's Original
> > "Adventure" in Code and in Kentucky
> > Digital Humanities Quarterly, 1.1 (2007)
>
> This is an amazing piece! Excellent detective work! Loved that early
> PDP source code. I especially enjoyed the pictures paired with the
> game text. I wonder if there are any photos from the original Cave
> Research Foundation explorations in the early 1970s - it would be
> great to see the original entrance as well as photos of Will and Pat
> Crowther.
Pat appears in a couple of pictures in "The Longest Cave" by Roger W.
Brucker and Richard A. Watson. This is an excellent book that I highly
recommend reading. I just checked, and I don't see Will in any of the
pictures.
(Also, I concur about what a great piece of work Dennis did here. I
sent him a private email about that but want to mention it here too!)
--
Tim Mann use...@tim-mann.org http://tim-mann.org/
Glenn P.,
> Given that the author seems to be reachable, it seems to me that the
> safest legal step, and the most morally proper step, would be to
> contact him, and ask for permission.
I have always assumed that both Woods and Crowther died, since I have
never seen or read anything by them since "Colossal Cave", not even
commentary. But if Crowther is ALIVE, then by all and every means,
contact him! I agree, 10,000%, that this is the proper ethical, moral,
and legal procedure. Indeed, if permission can be secured, it would
render the whole debate moot, because oftentimes what cannot be Taken
may be Given instead, and Permission cures -- even, retroactively
cures -- a nearly endless host of faults under copyright. :)
The best thing (for us) would be for him to explicitly release it into
the Public Domain, but even retaining rights but GPL'ing it would be a
major point gained!
-- >>>>> "Glenn P.," <C128UserD...@FVI.Net> <<<<<
-----------------------------------------
"Hoc in loco praecantato summa in Silva sito Puellus
et Ursus suus semper ludent."