Official is always nice 
An NDA seems highly unlikely given how open Radiant Entertainment has been with the development of Stonehearth. However, if they do decided to release an alpha version, an NDA is a good possibility.
1 Like
An Alpha with NDA and a Beta without would be the best overall solution i guess. But I kinda understand why bringing a Stonehearth Alpha might be difficult.
Its true it seems like an NDA might not be Radiant Entertainments style but, there are a few reasons do do NDA anyway, most important would be quality management. Sure, we know what alpha/beta means and therefore are not bothered by bugs, others might not understand that and spread the rumors stonehearth is a buggy “shitty” game. Such reputation loss is hard to gain back, whether the claims are true or not.
Lets wait and see 
1 Like
@Bailung Tom said in their first Livestream that they want the game to be essentially done by the time the beta is released. Although I feel that this is a tad ambitious, I’m not expecting too many bugs in the beta because of Radiant’s determined attitude.
The only issue is that with little outside testing the beta may in fact have a lot of bugs as different hardware responds differently. Fingers crossed they seem to be going about development in a great way but getting some simple bugs fixed before beta launch is a good plan but proper bug fixing surely can’t start until the beta is live.
@flich221 thats what i was talking about hardware compatibility bugs,
@Lvl0User essentially done by time of beta yes, thats why beta without NDA and alpha with NDA makes sense, since alpha is much more like to have bugs.
OOT:
//
But again, the way Stonehearth is coded and designed makes it hard to release an alpha in the first place. The alpha would be missing so many (core) mechanics that the alpha would not be that great(not as great as tony and tom might which an alpha to be), and with all those mechanics, its already a beta^^. Thats actually something good, nothing will be release, thats not approved by Tom and Tony, and therefore is as good as they thing it needs to be. If they feel they can bring an alpha that feels right, they will bring it.
//
Any NDA is only as good as your ability to enforce it.
With a large “tester” base where all you have is an email address, you can’t enforce it.
Since an NDA in this situation would be either a failure or a source of embarrassment, I don’t expect there to be one. =P
I could write an enforceable NDA. It’s not hard to have an Alpha build require registration, and all of the NDAs I draft include provisions ensuring that anyone breaching the NDA is required to pay all related Court and Counsel fees. All you have to do is make it so you have to log in to download the Alpha, and each Alpha can have an individual identifier. Any leak is attached, and Court proceedings can begin immediately =3
You should never assume that such things are unenforceable just because they generally aren’t.
1 Like
It is completely enforceable without legal action, you do what the game industry already does on review embargoes:
If you break the embargo, no more updates for you!
Why do they do this?
There is a very good reason for this and Extra Credits sums it up better than I could in this video.
But for Radiant Entertainment to do so would be borderline stupid. Not only would it betray the open and community driven focus of the game, it would be detrimental to the overall marketing and exposure that YouTube brings to games like this.
If they are prepared to have a livestream showing an old, defunct, pre-alpha, crash-happy version of the game then it seems unlikely that the game will have an NDA or embargo placed upon the beta.
On the more pessimistic side saying that it is possible still means that it can happen. It’s just that it would take a lot of resources to enforce the NDA or embargo.
That would be time wasted in the community’s opinion and the gains for Radiant would be insignificant given the marketing strategy they are using. I’m sure that they know that.
Just because it is possible doesn’t mean it is plausible.
It wouldn’t take any additional resources to enforce a properly written NDA; prosecution fees are waived until completion of the litigation, and on conclusion the responsible party pays all costs involved =3
Wow… please tell me you are not doing a classic America is the only country in the world. What about people outside the USA? You cant prosecute them under US Law (well not unless you think that breaking an NDA justifies extradition).
lol
“America is the only country in the world.” its an expression, blame Hollywood… please don’t be offended by my use of it.
We are not planning an NDA at beta. And we also can’t wait to watch all the youtube videos that result. Extra brownie points for blogs and youtube videos that tell dramatic stories.
3 Likes
@wraithbone aithbone, this is not a venue for racism, please refrain from blanket judgements of cultures and/or people. Now, despite being British, and drafting contracts in accordance with English Law, I have successfully enforced such locals as mainland China, Pakistan and Russia. While most governance might include a staple: “(b) This Agreement is governed by, and is to be construed in accordance with, English law. The English Courts will have non-exclusive jurisdiction to deal with any dispute which has arisen or may arise out of, or in connection with, this Agreement.” this is worded specifically to emphasis non-exclusive.
The thing about a contract between individual parties, is that it is in no way similar to IP Law in how other countries view it. You would be hard pressed to find any governed country that doesn’t have an enforceable contract law, and I have yet to find a third party legal practice that declines free currency.
While the initial prosecution takes place in your domicile Courts, and non-attendance on the other party lends itself very well for your initial Judgment; simply making a contact in another country who will be paid for prosecution? Unsurprisingly, bringing the case to someone in their native jurisdiction and providing that Judgment carries a lot of weight.
But indeed, I am telling you I am not doing any offensive stereotyping of other cultures, nor am I implying that only one country’s legal system applies. I would be happy to discuss the matter of legality and enforcement with you in private messages.
I would point out that I certainly don’t anticipate this sort of action on the part of Radiant Entertainment, I am simply offering insight from someone who has dealt with some of the issues broached and found the comments made to be contrary to my professional experience.
Whoa…I meant no offence there nor was I (, I hope,) being racist, just implying that a contractual agreement by an american (just an example country) company is only feasibly enforceable in the US (example country, please don’t think im racist). I apologise for any offence given.
As you point out yourself your local courts handle the case and a company cant justify representing themselves in foreign court cases, making the process much harder for them. As for contract law, the enforceability comes in to question for exactly that reason, its difficult for a company to represent itself in [you name the country, sorry for using the US as an example].
This has been a proverbial thorn in the gaming industries side where piracy is rampant in foreign nations, and the ability to prosecute is diminished by the international nature of the offence.
That being said you make a good point with the
[quote=“Spiku, post:20, topic:372, full:true”]
While most governance might include a staple: “(b) This Agreement is governed by, and is to be construed in accordance with, English law. The English Courts will have non-exclusive jurisdiction to deal with any dispute which has arisen or may arise out of, or in connection with, this Agreement.”[/quote]
But does that make it enforceable? I dont know. You said that you have had success.
The media seems to suggest that the opposite is true, that international politics make international law a veritable minefield of grey and uncertainty.
I am a legal layman, though, so your opinion is much appreciated @Spiku.
Just again for clarification a “America is the only country in the world”, is not racist or blanket generalising.
What it is, is a failure to recognise international consequence.It is born of pop-culture and has no racial sub-text what so ever. Its origin is a reflection of Hollywood’s films to remark upon world events as if America was representative of the entire planet (see, almost any Hollywood disaster film).
Its actually quite a funny phenomenon.
AAANNYway…
That is awesome I look forward to many awesome vids on Stonehearth. Don’t know that I will make any as the internet where I live is kind of rubbish which sucks because I love brownie points. Especially if they come with real brownies.
Brownies?
Gah! Now I’m hungry 
Seriously, though: I am also looking forward to not only playing until my fingers bleed, but also watching youtube vids until my eyes… well, you get the picture
Thanks for the post (=.
Since i would call this official, this thread might be closed (=
classic America is the only country in the world.
It is not about me misconstruing your example, this is just an offensive stereotype which translates to racism; that you do not see it does not change what the statement is. Suggesting the reason I am stuffy or have a rod up my ass is because I am British, for example, would still be racist, despite being an accepted trope.
I’m going to explain what I already stated one last time before abandoning the thread, because a lot of what you said in this recent post doesn’t seem to understand what I already stated:
A) Local Courts handle case, they pass Judgment.
B) Legal Representatives in other country are contracted, and waive their fees because they will be paid at the conclusion of the trail
C) Because of the Judgment in Local Courts, and the evidenced contracts, this is shown as supporting evidence in other country
D) Company does not represent itself, ever. You always have Legal Counsel acting on your behalf. This is the same in foreign jurisdictions.
E) The Media ™ is not a suitable source for educating yourself; you should examine reports that include their sources, this is especially true in Law where you can always get copies of Judgments and Precedent
F) Enforceability is not an issue with NDAs, and it really isn’t hard.
G) International Politics and International Law are hugely different beasts; you would find it near impossible to find a Government that doesn’t allow a individual contract (such as an NDA, or commissioning work) to be enforced, regardless of issuing country. I cannot think of a single location that does not support the binding of a covenance in law and recognise an agreement, despite the original language it was drafted in.
H) The only time there is an issue, is when different laws apply. Tax, Import, Copyright, Criminal Law, Rights, and Family Law, just to name a few, are individual to each Country and unless something like the Hague Convention is agreed, they are unenforceable if the host country does not support the same laws, and often not enforceable unless the local Courts officiate any agreement. This is not the case with private contracts.
The different Disciplines of law have -very- different governing, and just because we can’t extradite a US citizen to Pakistan because he was hacking their network, this has no baring on a subject like an agreement to provide a service or to act in a certain way.
Aaand spamming this thread is rather why I suggested that if you wanted to continue, to take it to PMs =3 I agree with @Bailung; the thread has run its course~