Why no Steam, Notch? (opens in new tab)

All the information that's public indicates that Bethesda's claims are weak or entirely baseless, and they are not interested in reaching a compromise or really any two-way communication prior to going to court.

Any lawyer that starts a tenuous but high-profile suit without considering the PR aspects is simply crazy, but that seems to be what's happening. Notch has been trying to get someone at Bethesda with a human perspective to intervene, but so far, hasn't been successful.

Actually, it's here : http://notch.tumblr.com/post/4955141617/the-plan-for-mods

Also, I'd be curious to know your sources regarding these infos (particularly the "notch isn't very happy about it" part). You say "our channels of communication", are you somehow involved with Bukkit or Bravo ?

I appreciate RMS and the Four Freedoms and what it's done for software, but I think we'd see a lot more code and a lot more relative freedom out there if someone set up a precedent and a pattern for other developers to follow in releasing source while maintaining revenue stream. It's not realistic to GPL everything, as the main developer can't make any money at that point. However, it is reasonable to release the source and say either "distribution must be limited to persons with a valid Minecraft license" or go totally non-commercial and only allow freeware derivatives (without separate license).

In this age, nothing is lost by doing this; people who aren't going to abide the license are not going to abide the license anyway, and the object code is copied around and traded on pirate networks freely. So, what more is lost by providing the source to all paying customers under legal terms that forbid activity that could threaten Mojang's revenue stream? I can't say I know of anything, but the benefit would be huge.

The only protection left against any digitized good is purely legal. If something gets online and a substantial portion of people have an interest in it, expect it to be irrevocably and freely traded in violation of any terms you establish. However, anything significant enough to be a threat to Mojang's profit stream will be vulnerable to legal remedies, and no major player (i.e., no one who'd have the money to pay Mojang) will run that risk when they know they will be sued and lose. It's just easier and cheaper to pay in the first place.

If they're planning on releasing the source to the mod community they might as well just open it straight up because it's bound to get leaked anyway.

I understand modifying/augmenting open source - because it's a community effort and the result belongs to all of us. But creating modifications for commercial products you will never have any real rights on and then being angry with the owner when he tries to protect his baby/vision - that's just behind my horizon.

If the intent is to be critical of notch, I can't see any fault in his saying he hopes to release source code eventually and that since the GPL is such an anti-freedom license (huh, actually my words not his, but my sincere interpretation and agreement with his 'draconian' term usage), he "might just possibly" release as public domain, which means completely unencumbered and free. That sounds pretty cool. He's not under any obligation to do so though, and I don't see that many other games sold on Steam are somehow better.

Or perhaps you meant to indicate that you think his true reason not to release on Steam is not what he said, but he is lying and the secret real reason is that he intends to release public domain, and for some reason Steam would not allow that after signing their draconian and freedom limiting contracts, that are as freedom limiting as the GPL.

Maybe. Don't know because your post was incoherent.

I do very little PC gaming these days, 100% of it via titles bought on Steam -- people can argue about the DRM issues with it all day long, but the cloud features of it that allow me to access my game library from whichever of my computers I am currently logged into is huge as is the centralized updating, etc. I realize I'm hardly representative of the entire PC gaming world (since I'm barely a PC gamer anymore), but if it isn't on Steam it doesn't really exist for me and I'd love to pay for and play a slightly dumbed down Minecraft.. looks like I'll have to do that on the 360 instead of on the PC.

To clarify my original comment, I was referring to the open playground approach of Minecraft, but making an unfounded assumption that the open playground model extended to the code. I made that assumption because of second-hand knowledge that mods were making it into the game. Mea culpa.

Walled Garden != Monopoly

    I have yet to hear a story about a game being
    booted from Steam.

It's still the first time I've seen anyone say that physical goods based on the game were a problem. I really can't quite believe that.

In-game stuff, yeah, I can see it. Ratings and whatnot. But I don't think Mojang/Notch would have a problem on the ratings end of things, unless the ratings board was out of control. Still, I could see him not taking the chance.

Steam sell a couple of hundreds indie games (out of many thousands currently on the market) throughout the year.

I think the HIB is by design not a service that the average indie (or even the exceptionally good indie) can get on.

As a developer and a player, that's what I want. A package manager with a payment system and a store front, basically. You can add achievements and friend lists and the rest later.