Copyright issues
- Thread starter zulu9812
- Start date
Cartouche Bee
Appropriations Consultant
cracker,
Based on your own post, maybe you should perhaps reconsider making Mods to games so that people don't need PTW to play PTW type games. These laws do not strictly only relate to graphic images as you know.
"One of the first tests to apply is not "did the thief make any money", but is actually "did the thief deprive the copyright holder of ANY rights or income that they were entitled to."
Seems like your coming from a different angle than the last time I brought this issue up with you. I guess we will just have to wait and see how these types of mods, if published on this site are received by the publisher.
CB
Based on your own post, maybe you should perhaps reconsider making Mods to games so that people don't need PTW to play PTW type games. These laws do not strictly only relate to graphic images as you know.
"One of the first tests to apply is not "did the thief make any money", but is actually "did the thief deprive the copyright holder of ANY rights or income that they were entitled to."
Seems like your coming from a different angle than the last time I brought this issue up with you. I guess we will just have to wait and see how these types of mods, if published on this site are received by the publisher.
CB
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
CB,
Your previous reaction and this discussion here again indicates that you did not understand what was being proposed or how it would be implemented.
Producing a copy of Carthage with a copy of the Numidian mercenary would be violating the copyright rules. Including a civilization that has the same traits as another civ is clearly in the designed intent of the game manufacturer. Including a Unique Unit has the same A/D/M statistics as the Numidian Mercenary is also clrealy within the designed intent of the manufacturer. The only reason for providing equivalent civs in the transition between civ3 and PTW is to support our broad international player base to continue participating in the GOTM community.
This is a management decision that has been made and will be implemented. You will have the same choices as all other players:
Play on in Civ3v1.29 while the bugs and distribution issues continue to be worked out with PTW or you can play with the version of PTW that you have already purchased if it is patched to eliminate a number of the severe in game exploits that might result in invalid or incomplete games.
There is absolutely no relationship between mdoifications that the game manufacturer has encouraged to their existing products and issues of stealing the artwork/property of another person. And FYI, we already have written permission from the authors for the artwork that will be used for the equivalent civilizations in upcoming GOTM games.
Your previous reaction and this discussion here again indicates that you did not understand what was being proposed or how it would be implemented.
Producing a copy of Carthage with a copy of the Numidian mercenary would be violating the copyright rules. Including a civilization that has the same traits as another civ is clearly in the designed intent of the game manufacturer. Including a Unique Unit has the same A/D/M statistics as the Numidian Mercenary is also clrealy within the designed intent of the manufacturer. The only reason for providing equivalent civs in the transition between civ3 and PTW is to support our broad international player base to continue participating in the GOTM community.
This is a management decision that has been made and will be implemented. You will have the same choices as all other players:
Play on in Civ3v1.29 while the bugs and distribution issues continue to be worked out with PTW or you can play with the version of PTW that you have already purchased if it is patched to eliminate a number of the severe in game exploits that might result in invalid or incomplete games.
There is absolutely no relationship between mdoifications that the game manufacturer has encouraged to their existing products and issues of stealing the artwork/property of another person. And FYI, we already have written permission from the authors for the artwork that will be used for the equivalent civilizations in upcoming GOTM games.
zulu9812
The Newbie Nightmare
So far, no one has answered my question from the first post
Cartouche Bee
Appropriations Consultant
cracker, you make alot of assumptions.
Your intent, as a replacement, while the bugs are worked out, does not mean that such modifications and intended use do not cross the line of copyright infringement. Yes, I know how you are getting around the graphics issue but I brushed that aside in my first post. Your changes do permit the user from side stepping the purchase of PTW by providing access to those game traits/situations that they may or may not have access to on their own initiative. It is conceivable that the publisher may view the publication of those mods in Civ3 format as undermining their PTW economic investment.
Your intent, as a replacement, while the bugs are worked out, does not mean that such modifications and intended use do not cross the line of copyright infringement. Yes, I know how you are getting around the graphics issue but I brushed that aside in my first post. Your changes do permit the user from side stepping the purchase of PTW by providing access to those game traits/situations that they may or may not have access to on their own initiative. It is conceivable that the publisher may view the publication of those mods in Civ3 format as undermining their PTW economic investment.
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
CB,
That perspective is so absolutely unlikely as to border into the asinine range of concern. You have made your extreme perspective on this issue clearly known and I recognize that your felt so strongly about this modification issue that you have been willing to do anything to make it more of a challenge to implement.
Ultimately the issue is supporting the players in transition and not providing them with a permanent substitute. Some players may delay acquiring PTW until it is legally available through distribution in their region of the world and other players may take advantage of the transition support for both PTW and Civ3v1.29 to begin playing the GOTM and to better understand the differences that may have been introduced into the game.
In the end, the decision to support a transition period was based on not deliberately excluding as many players as possible so that the community would be larger and more informed. The choices you advocated would have inconvienced the maximum number of players and would have excluded and discouraged the maximum number of existing and new particpants possible.
Again, this has nothing to do with copyright issues and is more a new product implementation issue that you clearly disagreed with. You are just trolling the other discussions to look for a platform to restate your general concerns about modifications that have already been heard. Right, wrong, or indifferent I hope you will put this issue behind us and publicly move to help make the GOTM transition process as easy as possible.
That perspective is so absolutely unlikely as to border into the asinine range of concern. You have made your extreme perspective on this issue clearly known and I recognize that your felt so strongly about this modification issue that you have been willing to do anything to make it more of a challenge to implement.
Ultimately the issue is supporting the players in transition and not providing them with a permanent substitute. Some players may delay acquiring PTW until it is legally available through distribution in their region of the world and other players may take advantage of the transition support for both PTW and Civ3v1.29 to begin playing the GOTM and to better understand the differences that may have been introduced into the game.
In the end, the decision to support a transition period was based on not deliberately excluding as many players as possible so that the community would be larger and more informed. The choices you advocated would have inconvienced the maximum number of players and would have excluded and discouraged the maximum number of existing and new particpants possible.
Again, this has nothing to do with copyright issues and is more a new product implementation issue that you clearly disagreed with. You are just trolling the other discussions to look for a platform to restate your general concerns about modifications that have already been heard. Right, wrong, or indifferent I hope you will put this issue behind us and publicly move to help make the GOTM transition process as easy as possible.
Cartouche Bee
Appropriations Consultant
cracker,
I thought this thread is about copyrights, not GOTM.
In some professions, squirming, may imply subconscious guilt.
I thought this thread is about copyrights, not GOTM.
In some professions, squirming, may imply subconscious guilt.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2000
- Messages
- 12,624
Woohoo! Fox just renewed Simpsons through 2005! 
http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/01/17/television.simpsons.reut/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/01/17/television.simpsons.reut/index.html
Syrus_Knife
Sifted Silaphi
Hmm, see guys, the moderators know their flaw, they won't change their minds, Look as Thunderfall tries to take some heat off by changing the subject. And Chieftess as well. I know I have done some stupid things, and if I spoke the truth, the majority would never believe me. And because of my past, the moderators are tired of me and wish to keep me hidden by deleting, closing or randomly banning me for the sake of simplicity.
Kryten
Smeee heeeeed
And who should we blame for that?
Losing a bad reputation is a long, hard, uphill struggle.....but it can be done.
With two or three months of 'sensible posting', we will all one day look back at these old posts and laugh at the past......
Well, I´d say it is not the best idea to turn this thread into a complaint about the mods.
Zulu has IMO a point when he asks for clarification about the units. We have...
1 - units directly taken from other games like AoK
2 - units made by various creators including me which base on copyrighted stuff (movies, games) like StarWars, X-COM etc.
What´s legal? Does it play a role that this is all done for non-commercial use?
Zulu has IMO a point when he asks for clarification about the units. We have...
1 - units directly taken from other games like AoK
2 - units made by various creators including me which base on copyrighted stuff (movies, games) like StarWars, X-COM etc.
What´s legal? Does it play a role that this is all done for non-commercial use?
Alcibiaties of Athenae
Imperator
Bernd, I think it only matters if the owner of the copy right complains or threatens leagal action.
I saw this happen once, somedody did a scenario about some Japanese robots, gundar or something like that, and was threatened with a law suit.
Other then that, I don't know if it matters since all of this is non-profit.
I saw this happen once, somedody did a scenario about some Japanese robots, gundar or something like that, and was threatened with a law suit.
Other then that, I don't know if it matters since all of this is non-profit.
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
you mean gundamn wing
AOA
and about losing a bad reputation take a example at juize and me
I once was almost banned for being a jurk,my first post was pure spam and ive would be permbanned if it wasnt in the humor and jokes forum...
Now most of the elder posters respect me because in the past ive made some sensible posts who deald with the subject and well writen with a clear opinion. you can do it do,im sure you do
AOA
and about losing a bad reputation take a example at juize and me
I once was almost banned for being a jurk,my first post was pure spam and ive would be permbanned if it wasnt in the humor and jokes forum...
Now most of the elder posters respect me because in the past ive made some sensible posts who deald with the subject and well writen with a clear opinion.
you can do it do,im sure you do
zulu9812
The Newbie Nightmare
*the issues I raised casually ignored by the moderators in the hope that this will be quietly forgotten about because they know that Chieftess made the wrong call*
Cartouche Bee
Appropriations Consultant
Either that
or there was a complaint from the copyright holder
or there are letters of permission from the copyright holders of all of the other trademarked names on file
or someone took offense to the offensive weaponry
or for reasons of morality
or Fox wants to make an episode where Bart takes over the world playing Civ3 with the Simpson mod and squashing it now saves them paying royalties to the creator of the idea
or ....
MadScot
Brandy's back!
This may not be directly related, but bear with me, it sheds some light on how keen some companies are to protect their copyright material.
Garfield
Some years ago, the plastic kit company ESCI (Italian I think) released a model of an M-1 Abrams tank. That tank had been painted with a 'Garfield' character on the turret, and so they included a decal of Garfield so that you could make the tank properly. The copyright owners of the strip objected to the model, and they had to change the markings in the kit. They didn't complain about the tank itself....
Caterpillar
In the movie Aliens, when Ripley is fighting the Alien Queen with the power loader, you can clearly see the 'CAT' logo on the side of the loader. When a plastic model was released of the power loader there was no 'CAT' logo. However there were two unidentified extra markings on the decal sheet; these were not mentioned at all by the kit instructions. However you could put these together in such a way as to end up with the CAT logo - very sneaky.
The issue appears to be publication of/reproduction of the trademark item, not use of it. Either that or having a 105mm gun to back up your side of the argument....
Garfield
Some years ago, the plastic kit company ESCI (Italian I think) released a model of an M-1 Abrams tank. That tank had been painted with a 'Garfield' character on the turret, and so they included a decal of Garfield so that you could make the tank properly. The copyright owners of the strip objected to the model, and they had to change the markings in the kit. They didn't complain about the tank itself....
Caterpillar
In the movie Aliens, when Ripley is fighting the Alien Queen with the power loader, you can clearly see the 'CAT' logo on the side of the loader. When a plastic model was released of the power loader there was no 'CAT' logo. However there were two unidentified extra markings on the decal sheet; these were not mentioned at all by the kit instructions. However you could put these together in such a way as to end up with the CAT logo - very sneaky.
The issue appears to be publication of/reproduction of the trademark item, not use of it. Either that or having a 105mm gun to back up your side of the argument....
Similar threads
