Copyright issues

[zulu9812]

After the latest sebsage cerfuffle, I would like some clarification over CFC's policy on the modification, interpretation and ultimate posting of such works. See Chieftess's recent post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=711501#post711501):

originally posted by Chieftess
Moderator Action: The problem is, The Simpsons is copyrighted material, and is against CFC policy ask for any units for such a mod. Sebsage, email the creators of The Simpsons asking for permission to use their characters first, before using others work.

Sebsage, please read the forum rules about copyrighted works. You have also stolen other people's works in the past. Consider this your final warning. One more, and you'll be restricted from the forums indefinately. I will have to close this thread.

Please contact the creators of The Simpsons, and post their reply, and their email so that the CFC staff can verify that you have done so.

How does this affect all the Star Wars and Age of Empires units that have been posted?

 

[BeBro]

Doesn´t the copyright issue only play a role when it comes to making money? I thought since civ3 mods and gfx are all for non-commercial use it is ok?

Oh and maybe this would be better in the "Feedback" forum?

 

[Chieftess]

Yes, it should be in Site Feedback.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Seems to me we shld also need to get permission for all those fine Star Wars and AoE units created...

 

[floppa21]

But doesn't the created work belong to the creator unless a contract saying otherwise is signed beforehand? I agree on the profit part though...

 

[Chieftess]

The multiple units modpack can't use the Civ3 images until Infogrames gives permission.

 

[anarchywrksbest]

As long as you aren't selling anything for commercial gains then what is the problem? Infogrammes or any other company won't want to alienate its loyal customers (us) by filing lawsuits against them

 

[Chieftess]

That's about the same argument the software piracy (and multimedia piracy) advocates give.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Even if you're not selling it, you're distributing it (for free). Which will make it a concern to the co which owns the rights.

At the very least, the creator-fans shld put in some legalese like "Star Wars is fully copyrighted by so-and-so" in print in their posts.

 

[anarchywrksbest]

Originally posted by Chieftess
That's about the same argument the software piracy (and multimedia piracy) advocates give.

#

Indeed

 

[zulu9812]

So can we get a statement on the legality of posting units based on Age of Empires and Star Wars?

 

[BeBro]

Originally posted by Chieftess
That's about the same argument the software piracy (and multimedia piracy) advocates give.

Well maybe, but here in our case people don´t pirate stuff in the sense that they use other´s work. They do their own work (create units or whatever), they just use known "brands" for it. For example the 3d models which are needed for unit creation are often from official model sites (not piracy sites) who have a lot stuff from StarWars, StarTrek and what not available as freeware. I must admit that I do not know it, but I can´t imagine that this is all illegal. Then also the most fan sites about games or movies would be illegal.

 

[Chimtot]

Okay, I know Sebsage has done some things that have drawn less than favorable attention to him and that has tarnished his reputation a bit. I also understand the copyright issued at question here. My only question is why has he been singled out when there are other mods and units that appear to do the same. Zulu mentioned AoE units and star wars units. What about the Magic the Gathering mod? XCom, LOTR and others. I gladly support the moderators and thier decisions, but I would like an explination or clarification of the difference so that I in the future am not put through the same thing Sebsage is going through now. Thanks in advance to whomever can help me to understand this concept.

Chimtot

 

[WillJ]

Also, what is breaking copyright laws on the Internet and what isn't? For example, Octavian X has had a Homer Simpson avatar. AFAIK Homer Simpson is copyrighted, so why didn't he have to get permission from the creators of the Simpsons? Why is creating Simpsons units any different? Can someone clear this up for me, as I am terribly confused. I would have never thought that making a Simpsons scenario would be breaking copyright laws; in fact, wouldn't it be good for the makers of the Simpsons, since it might attract attention to their show?

 

[Archer 007]

Exactly! The thing is, software pirates are disturbed the actual copies of the work. The producers could lose money off of this. But make a mod is really different. It's not profit, so their no making money off anothers work. And unless the company has stated they plan on making it, they have no vested interest in the creation as such.

 

[Syrus_Knife]

yeah! :d

Uh oh, CT, TF, hold down the revolution....

 

[zulu9812]

To be honest, I think Chieftess's comments in sebsage's thread (see 1st post) are simply a vendetta against that poster. If it's okay for JimmyH and tpasmall to post AoK and Stat Wars units, but it's not okay for sebsage to request Simpsons units - well, that smacks of a vendetta. I might not like the guy, but he deserves the same treatment as everyone else.

 

[Chimtot]

Originally posted by zulu9812
To be honest, I think Chieftess's comments in sebsage's thread (see 1st post) are simly a vendetta against that poster. If it's okay for JimmyH and tpasmall to post AoK and Stat Wars units, but it's not okay for sebsage to request Simpsons units - well, that smacks of a vendetta. I might not like the guy, but he deserves the same treatment as everyone else.

I totally agree Zulu. I know you don't like him, but he does deserve equal treatment. It is nice to see everyone here rally around the guy even though the majority don't care for him. I would hope that this is not just a grudge against Sebsage, but untill I see an explaination of the reason he is at fault and the others are not, I am going to assume that it is just a vendetta. (for whatever that may be worth)

 

[cracker]

Originally posted by anarchywrksbest
As long as you aren't selling anything for commercial gains then what is the problem? Infogrammes or any other company won't want to alienate its loyal customers (us) by filing lawsuits against them

Anarchy,

This is one of the mistakes that many people make in understanding why copyright protections exist. Ultimately the right to use the material in any way belongs to the copyright holder and not to you.

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."

This is the same as the Napster argument which has clearly been shown to be illegal. Making free copies of something to share with your friends for free is absolutely illegal.

The AOE and AOK units that are stolen from those games are illegal on this site and have just been ignored in the past. If someone had created a similar unit on their own by using their talents and skills that would have been different, but just copying the original artwork because you want to convert the assets from AOK/AOE to play in the Civ3 games is a clear violation of the copyright laws if you do not obtain permission first.

Some of this is the den of theirves environment that it creates. There are many units, graphics, and other features in the civ games that we do not have because the environment of piracy and free exchange is taken as the default and tolerated insted of being taken as one of the options for distibuting third part expansion graphics.

The cartoon character copyrights are particularly sensitive as demonstrated by the Disney approach that prohibits any use of their characters. You cannot even paint Mickey mouse or Pocahontas on the wall of your Daycare Center withour violating the Disney rights. Matt Groenig's rights to his Simpsons characters are really no different. The creator ultimately has exclusive control over the environments where his/her characters/property will appear.

There is an exception of newsreporting and satire but the uses are very narrow.

 

[cracker]

zulu and Chimtot,

Do not look to sebage as being abused or picked on in this issue. In the past several months, he has done things in the forums, chatrooms, emails, and PMs that would have resulted in permanent banning if I had been the one making the decision. SO ultimately Chieftess is cutting him significant latitude when you consider the ongoing behavior pattern.

Ultimately many of the issues come down to weighing the ongoing costs of dealing with the behavior of a participant that is over the line into unacceptable behavior at least once or twice each week. It is a personal choice to always choose the least appropriate, most off color, most offensive, and least related to Civ3 topics and behaviors. These have no place here but it seems that Chieftess is constantly put into the tough position of having to decide where the line is for Sebsage. This is just not a wise or mature position for any user to continually force the moderators to try and decide what shade of redflag applies to the current situation.

If I were sebsage, I would use this example as clear indication that a severe upgrade in behavior is required and that may require a shift in focus to becoming at least some form of a minimal player instead of trying to be or just accidently turning into a constant carbunkle on the backside of the Civ3 world.