That isn't derivative. That's a plugin. At that point if OpenRCT2 is calling into the original, intact binary, there can be no infringement. You're just running the executable as provided and your computer just so happens to have another program running in the same memory space.
Tagging on I really recommend everyone read up on groups like the Com, 764, or O9A. It's impossible to describe these groups without sounding like an insane conspiracy theorist and yet they're all real.
"The Com" is not a distinct entity as medias like to describe it. These days it generally just refers to the anglosphere cybercrime community at large.
> When Deutsche Telekom customers want to watch YouTube, that traffic flows directly from Google's network to Deutsche Telekom's network at a Frankfurt exchange point—maybe four or five router hops, minimal latency, no intermediaries. It's elegant. It's efficient. And it's exactly what Vodafone is abandoning.
After using Deutsche Telekom as an example of how great direct peering is, a few paragraphs later the article uses Deutsche Telekom as an example of the dangers of using peering provider intermediaries.
Your first example I was referring to - which you've now edited out of the article[0] to be more generic - stated:
> When Deutsche Telekom customers want to watch YouTube, that traffic flows directly from Google's network to Deutsche Telekom's network at a Frankfurt exchange point—maybe four or five router hops, minimal latency, no intermediaries. It's elegant. It's efficient. And it's exactly what Vodafone is abandoning.
Later:
> Deutsche Telekom pioneered this model in Germany, and the results have been catastrophic for customers. Not "slightly annoying" or "a bit slower"—genuinely, documentably terrible.
See e.g: https://github.com/OpenRCT2/OpenRCT2/commit/643db7ae017e04d1...
reply