10 Dec, 2009, Koron wrote in the 41st comment:
Votes: 0
Right–the legal system for this stuff if like walking a tightrope web during a firefight in a nightclub after you've already had one or two. There may be educator exemptions to copyright outside of fair use that I'm not aware of. As I'm not a lawyer, this would not surprise me in the least. :cyclops:
10 Dec, 2009, Greyankh wrote in the 42nd comment:
Quote
There is no percentage in any statute of U.S. copyright law.
True.
Quote
It happens that most educational institutions have as a result of litigation adopted "safe" policies.
The following site is the "norm" as argued before congress and the senate. The findings have been reproduced here and other law institutions for educators and librarians.
Fair use policy for Teachers and Educato...
This has been adopted as the community norm. These guidelines suggest care when applying. But most are based off the size of the work, with 10% being the maximum one could "borrow" without incurring infringement.
Quote
While there are "educational games", they don't invoke "fair use" under copyright law.
Why don't they? If the movie, Seven, can invoke copyright litigation and be exonerated under the "Fair Use" standards, why then cannot a game?The De Minimis Defence
One could say, if a mud was successful and had 1000 active players, that even that large a number, by population standards is minimal, then muds could claim De Minimis Defence when using a theme that is copyrighted.
Once again, let me state that I will be seeking the proper permission from those who hold copyright over material I wish to use. I merely bring up these points since others wish to pick apart the literal sense of my words, instead of gleaning the intent.
Grey
10 Dec, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 43rd comment:
Greyankh said:
I merely bring up these points since others wish to pick apart the literal sense of my words, instead of gleaning the intent.
Welcome aboard! :rolleyes:
The legal section in particular is prone to all kinds of fun and games like this.
10 Dec, 2009, Tyche wrote in the 44th comment:
Greyankh said:
Why don't they? If the movie, Seven, can invoke copyright litigation and be exonerated under the "Fair Use" standards, why then cannot a game?
Quote
While there are "educational games", they don't invoke "fair use" under copyright law.
Why don't they? If the movie, Seven, can invoke copyright litigation and be exonerated under the "Fair Use" standards, why then cannot a game?
I meant it in exactly the same context that you used it, [publishing an educational game claiming educational "fair use"]. That ain't gonna fly, just because the word "educational" happens to be an apt adjective.
There are obviously other possible fair-use defenses that might apply.
Greyankh said:
The De Minimis Defence
One could say, if a mud was successful and had 1000 active players, that even that large a number, by population standards is minimal, then muds could claim De Minimis Defence when using a theme that is copyrighted.
One could say, if a mud was successful and had 1000 active players, that even that large a number, by population standards is minimal, then muds could claim De Minimis Defence when using a theme that is copyrighted.
No. "de minimis" has everything to do with the quality and quantity of the work being infringed, not that 1000 out of 6,000,000,000 people see it.
There's something similar going on here in both cases of (mis)comprehension.
11 Dec, 2009, Greyankh wrote in the 45th comment:
Quote
No. "de minimis" has everything to do with the quality and quantity of the work being infringed, not that 1000 out of 6,000,000,000 people see it.
I still believe it has some weight. I do agree, partly with the above statement, in that quality and quantity do play a major factor. But I think that because the mud community, as a whole, is a small fraction of the web users, that the quantity and quality that could be taken is "not worth" the effort to pursue legal litigation.
Let us theorize a moment. Let us presume that a mud developer has created a DragonBallZ mud. Now, this developer has used, verbatim, an entire core rulebook dealing with character creation, and setting. Both quality and quantity nearly reach 100% of this copyrighted book. Now, let us look at the mud as a whole, to include code and text. The copyrighted material makes up 45% of his creation, the rest is his interpretation and utility information, along with actual code.
At best, this is viewed, in the lifetime of the mud, thus far, 5000 times, with an active playerbase of 1000. I highly doubt that the offending administrator would be brought up on civil charges. If so, I do believe that given the above, this administrator could claim de minimis.
As I have been reading more on the laws, since I am the one who first posed the question, and I have taken everyone's response and evaluated it, I think that is why we hear of few, if any, legal actions against many of our themed muds. I do not condone the actions, especially now, as I am more informed of what "could" happen. Perhaps the giant corporations feel we are not worth the effort.
Grey
11 Dec, 2009, Runter wrote in the 46th comment:
Tyche said:
Hope you don't teach ethics.
Greyankh said:
Now, I fortunately, have an out. Since I am a licensed educator, highly qualified(Under the NCLB Act), I am allowed to reproduce, copy, and use 80% of any material as long as I maintain it as an educational use. Therefore, I shall be making my game as an educational game. All I need to do, is give credit to the source, which I plan to do anyway. I will have a command <credits> which will list all the materials and sources I use, along with special thanks to the people here, for offering your insights and help.
Hope you don't teach ethics.
Lawl.
11 Dec, 2009, Scandum wrote in the 47th comment:
Greyankh said:
Perhaps the giant corporations feel we are not worth the effort.
If it doesn't show up on google it may as well not exist as far as big corporations are concerned.
11 Dec, 2009, Runter wrote in the 48th comment:
11 Dec, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 49th comment:
They will go after activities that they feel are a threat to their business, with their image being of course a part of their business. Each company will have its own criteria for determining what is and isn't a threat to their business; some will be ok with fan works and others won't.
Note that you need to enforce copyright or run the risk of losing it, so even if the offender is "small fish" it might still be worth their time to challenge unauthorized copies of their work.
Also note that the first step in any legal process is extremely unlikely to be going to court; nobody wants to go to court (unless they feel they can get damages worth their time). It is far more likely that they'll ask/tell you to stop (cease & desist) and only if that fails will litigation become plausible.
Note that you need to enforce copyright or run the risk of losing it, so even if the offender is "small fish" it might still be worth their time to challenge unauthorized copies of their work.
Also note that the first step in any legal process is extremely unlikely to be going to court; nobody wants to go to court (unless they feel they can get damages worth their time). It is far more likely that they'll ask/tell you to stop (cease & desist) and only if that fails will litigation become plausible.
11 Dec, 2009, Tyche wrote in the 50th comment:
David Haley said:
Note that you need to enforce copyright or run the risk of losing it…
Wow. Copyright myth number 5.
11 Dec, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 51st comment:
I was thinking trademark when I wrote that; oftentimes when it comes to violations and corporations the two are linked anyhow.
11 Dec, 2009, Tyche wrote in the 52nd comment:
11 Dec, 2009, Mudder wrote in the 53rd comment:
Anyone wonder why legal threads always go on tangents, off topic, and people telling others what's wrong and what's right? Because it's all relative.
Am I mean by that is, ANYTHING is arguable. That's why lawyers exist. They exist to argue that what was going on wasn't actually against the law. So in the end, if the judge doesn't think you broke the law, then you didn't. Anything before that and after is just a bunch of talk.
People enjoy enforcing their own morals and rights/wrongs on others. As a society we have similar beliefs - but only barely.
I say he goes for it. If they deny him permission, I say he does it anyway. If they find him out and ask him to stop? Sure, then I'd stop. Personally, I wouldn't even ask because it could draw attention. He isn't making a profit. He isn't damaging the brand. He is just making a game that the majority of the people even familiar with the brand will never know exists. If anyone has a problem with that I say shut up. :P
Am I mean by that is, ANYTHING is arguable. That's why lawyers exist. They exist to argue that what was going on wasn't actually against the law. So in the end, if the judge doesn't think you broke the law, then you didn't. Anything before that and after is just a bunch of talk.
People enjoy enforcing their own morals and rights/wrongs on others. As a society we have similar beliefs - but only barely.
I say he goes for it. If they deny him permission, I say he does it anyway. If they find him out and ask him to stop? Sure, then I'd stop. Personally, I wouldn't even ask because it could draw attention. He isn't making a profit. He isn't damaging the brand. He is just making a game that the majority of the people even familiar with the brand will never know exists. If anyone has a problem with that I say shut up. :P
11 Dec, 2009, Orrin wrote in the 54th comment:
Mudder said:
I say he goes for it. If they deny him permission, I say he does it anyway.
In the unlikely event that you produce a MUD you might find yourself needing to collaborate with others on building, coding, web design etc. If you show that you have no respect for IP rights then you may find it difficult to persuade other people to contribute their IP to your project.
11 Dec, 2009, Dean wrote in the 55th comment:
I'd disagree Orrin. There are plenty of MUDs who have walked that path and not had trouble getting staff (beyond the usual). I've observed that those with a completely original setting seem to have more trouble than those who use a pre-existing theme.
11 Dec, 2009, Orrin wrote in the 56th comment:
Whether it's easier to attract staff to an established theme or not is a separate issue. If you'd rather, consider two MUDs both using the same IP where one has permission from the rights holder and one doesn't. If a MUD owner advocates using someone elses IP against their express wishes, then potential contributors should be rightly concerned how their IP may be used.
11 Dec, 2009, Greyankh wrote in the 57th comment:
11 Dec, 2009, Tyche wrote in the 58th comment:
David Haley said:
I think that is a fair observation. I think it is due to an "us" vs. "them" argument. It's ok to "use" (i.e. steal, technically speaking) a theme because we are not theme creators, we are code creators. It's not ok to "use" somebody's code without permission, because that means that somebody might use my code without permission. In other words, what is essentially theft is ok as long as it's not ok to steal something you create.
Do we not create themes?
OtherSpace
Achaea
Castle Marrach
The Greatest Generation
LegendMud
Legends of Karinth
…
etcetera
Maybe mud builders and writers just don't post here as often as programmers.
11 Dec, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 59th comment:
Tyche said:
Do we not create themes?
Yes we do, but the depth that goes into many themes is often not comparable to the depth that goes into the commonly adopted themes from professional authors.
Tyche said:
Maybe mud builders and writers just don't post here as often as programmers.
Yes, this is what I was saying. I'd be curious to know how many programmers did all the coding work while simultaneously being the driving creative force.
11 Dec, 2009, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 60th comment:
This is probably kind of a long shot, but didn't Diku base it's combat / level systems on 2nd
edition D&D? I'm not certain because I was a Battletech kid, but it seems to have all the base
classes, races, rolls and character dev of D&D. If so, wouldn't this be using at least a portion
of the old D&D system? And thus be releasing code based on the D&D system?
edition D&D? I'm not certain because I was a Battletech kid, but it seems to have all the base
classes, races, rolls and character dev of D&D. If so, wouldn't this be using at least a portion
of the old D&D system? And thus be releasing code based on the D&D system?
Random Picks
