Hi fellow gamers & GOG friends, I wanted to make a Request to Add the Classic Game "Emperor Battle for Dune" to GOG. If memory serves me right there was a reason it didn't have an Expansion or a Sequel because of Licensing Issues with who Owned the Rights to the Dune Franchise at the time. But maybe that is no longer an issue since Warner Bros purchased it. Anyway I think it would be a welcome addition to GOG so hopefully someday it can happen.

Add your vote to the community wishlist entry for Emperor Battle For Dune

The IP was licensed from the Frank Herbert Estate, so any re-release would need their permission as I don't think that Westwood (EA) have the rights to re-release at this point. Although I can't find the source for it, I understand that Brian Herbert (who is in control of the Frank Herbert Estate) doesn't want any of the old games re-released and would rather licence new games.

I'd love to see Dune (not Westwood), Dune II, Dune 2000 and Emperor Battle For Dune here, but I can't see it happening while Brian is in control of the Estate.

I'm not sure about its legality but, since i'm also pretty interested to give this game another try ((though i only remember boring skirmish maps). I started search expecting only to find pirate sites but found this very interesting looking site.

All my security measures stayed quiet, so who knows. I'm downloading now ;)

https://...

[Modded by Sarafan]

As Mortius1, add your voice to the wishlist and hope for the best. Note, however, that licensed games are a messy business and a deal could be cancelled at the whims of the licensor.

And no, Warner Bros didn't buy Dune, but are merely distributing the new films. The rights still reside with Brian Herbert, who has the final word on whether anything Dune will resurface (and it took 20 years for new Dune games to be released).

???

The game that had 3 distinct main factions.
The game that had several distinct minor factions.
The game that had Westwood Studios real acting cutscenes.
Kickass soundtrack. Kickass unit sounds. A changing map where you may had to defend territory you had just conquered.
Some things I might have even forgoten.

And the only thing you remember is... the skirmish maps??

You should delete that link; abandonware is still legally considered to be piracy and not allowed on the forum.

I'd also point out that the Dune IP isn't abandoned, so even if you consider abandonware to be okay, I don't think that site should be hosting it.

Right, as has been said countless times before; the Grumpy Estate has ZERO interest in the 4 old Dune games. GOG's own words from them was something like if it's old it should stay buried so don't expect them to come here. We're talking about the game(s) here, not the IP, and the games are actually abandoned at this point. Besides, one of the links is on Archive.org which is perfectly legal. Or gray depending on how you want it.

The old games should be re-released just to keep their legacy (and it should be free if they have no intention of getting royalties off of it), but I suspect they don't want the old games just because House Ordos is non-canon and rights holders really get stingy with how their IP is depicted. Which is a shame because the music in those games is kick ass.

Does it mean that "interesting" (for you) looking website with illegally provided software is not considered to be a piracy? I guess the link you posted will last for the whole weekend and all Monday morning. Good job!

It was not for nothing that it was their, Westwood, last rts release I'm not certain. It seems to be a bit like Hentai not being porn or Softdrugs sold legally when it is actually illegal

Firstly, I'd say that the key thing here is that the links shouldn't be shared. Having a discussion about it is fine (even "Oh, I found that there are abandonware sites that host it"; people can search themselves at their own risk), but providing a link to a site where the game can be downloaded is over the line.

I draw a distinction between IP that is genuinely abandoned (i.e. it's gone to companies that just aren't doing anything with it) and IP that is active, owned by someone and that company or entity has said that it doesn't want the game released. I don't like either situation, but I do respect the IP holder's wish when he clearly expresses it.

As for Archive.org, I'd characterise it as grey. While they call themselves a library, allowing free downloads of property with no restrictions feels like it's a little bit abusive. Real libraries require you to go to a reading room to access information in situ or have borrowing limits (e.g. return in x days)

If I were to use the same logic I'd say that if a 30 year old Toyota Camry is left in a shack in the woods it's not only the car that's been abandoned, but also the brand name Camry? Or something like a Braun toothbrush (now I wouldn't recommend touching it but you never know, many people are hoarders...)

I on the other hand don't respect people's/companies wish when product is already released to the public and then abandon it. We have yard or garage sales and sometimes we just give away things for free. And by law we can resell and take apart digital goods. Should we seriously care what the previous owners or what the original creator think about that? If someone or a company don't want people to use things they've created the way they want - they shouldn't have release it in the first place.

Though, I do agree about the links themselves, but that was not what I refereed to.

(In last line I think we ultimately can't put physical and digital warez side by side. Digital is abstract so doing a literal comparison falls a little thin.)

I respect your opinion, but I'd say that you can't equate a single Camry with all Camrys ever released. I also would say that there's nothing wrong with selling an existing copy of a game - after all, there are plenty of copies on ebay (not putting a link up as it may breach rules on linking to other stores). The problem with abandonware is that it "creates" new copies. I do agree that the fault lies with the IP holders - after all, they could quite easily allow it to be released and gain a cut of sales so it seems like a no-brainer. However, when the IP rests with the estate of the deceased original creator, I have to respect that more than when it has been sold (or distributed) to people who don't really want it.

I hate to say it (and on here of all places), but on the Archive.org point, they actually need some sort of DRM in place to allow the "lending" or the software on a limited basis for research purposes that then removes or deactivates it after a certain date. That actually feels like a reasonable use of DRM (and I know people will pile on to me here, but ultimately, libraries are for research and education, not for giving people unlimited free copies of old video games)

No, I'm not in the mood for another DRM discourse here, at least not now, but you might as well burn books and put DRM into peoples head at the same time because thoughts can be duplicated in much the same manner... ;)

But I all I will say is that in general, limiting access is a depraved and a cynical way of doing it. All too many libraries with research articles and books are needlessly locked behind some kind of a control wall while they by definition are public information that anyone should have free access to. If it wasn't for FLOSS types of movements and people pushing it we'd most likely have a digital dark ages (and we all know how much history, knowledge and literature we lost in the real dark ages. We've had many before and some shorter ones after too).

Yes, it's pretty much shades of grey areas regardless of which camp one sit in.