242 on 22/7/2007 at 12:06
Quote Posted by ToolFan2007
No, you don't. You and other people will only care about it when you're in trouble over it.
Again, the obnoxious and arrogant comment is in these people that post about how they are so sure they are above the law, and that's not always the case. My advice is go speak to someone who knows the law and has studied it.
You took it out of context. I'll repeat - no one here cares about that copyright bullshit,
I mean it was discussed to death As if there weren't more interesting and vital things about the mod.
As for me it's just a reason for DM haters to molest the team, nothing else.
Gestalt on 22/7/2007 at 12:19
Quote Posted by ToolFan2007
It sounds to me from the sources posted here, it's a grey area.
No. The assertion that museums somehow own the rights to images of centuries-old paintings in their collections (where no significant alteration has been made) is garbage. Even if it weren't garbage it would still be a reprehensible and disgusting misuse of copyright law.
OrbWeaver on 22/7/2007 at 13:12
Quote Posted by ToolFan2007
And besides, why not make your own textures?
Who says the Dark Mod textures are not original? Can you point to a single example of one which has been "plagiarised", or are you just making stuff up for the hell of it?
Quote Posted by ToolFan2007
Again, the obnoxious and arrogant comment is in these people that post about how they are so sure they are above the law
Nobody is above the law, the law just doesn't apply in the way that the "OMG COPYRIGHT" crowd like to pretend it does.
BrokenArts on 22/7/2007 at 14:06
Seems to me this is more about who is right, and pointing fingers. My god this has been beat to death enough, get over it people. Let them do their jobs for christ sake. They've been at this long enough, T2X didn't have a problem, darkmod doesn't have a problem either. They did their homework, drop this crap already, it won't solve a thing, they know what they are doing. Do you think they'd come this far with it, and not know what they are doing? Get over it. :tsktsk:
Muzman on 22/7/2007 at 15:01
Yeah, what the hell are these copyright mavens trying to do? If Eidos have a problem the team will hear about it.
(or someone will bring it up at the shareholder's AGM... man if that's not the funniest thing I've heard in a while. The Dark Mod is slicing into his dividend you thieving anarchist scum!)
JewelThief on 22/7/2007 at 15:40
Quote:
I have truly begun to HATE the internet lately.
Believe me, I know how you feel.
I think The Dark Mod is a 'tribute' rather than a 'copy' being stolen from the original. However that seems to be a standard tactic around here, if you don't like someone or what they are trying to do for the 'community' (and I use that term loosely :rolleyes:) you raise all kinds of 'legal' issues which usually have no basis in reality in order to throw dirt on what they do in the hopes some accusations will stick.
R Soul on 22/7/2007 at 15:49
Quote Posted by 242
No one here cares about that copyright bullshit
I think it's quite clear that the Dark Modders care quite a lot about it.
What I'd like to know is what will be the likely consequences if, after the DM is released, a fan releases a mission where Garrett, the Hammers etc
are used?
And just to be clear I'm not trying to throw any dirt around. I like what I've read of the Dark Mod and the team and after I've finished my current Thief 2 FM I will go to them.
*Zaccheus* on 22/7/2007 at 16:02
Quote Posted by R Soul
What I'd like to know is what will be the likely consequences if, after the DM is released, a fan releases a mission where Garrett, the Hammers etc
are used?
Probably the same as if someone makes a Lara Croft FM - that has nothing to do with the DM team.
R Soul on 22/7/2007 at 16:13
Well I don't think that's a good comparison because the number of Lara Croft FMs for Thief is tiny, whereas practically everyone making use of the Dark Mod will be a Thief fan. The temptation to use characters from Thief must therefore be quite high.
I don't dispute that such a thing is nothing to do with the Dark Mod itself, but would Eidos ask that a Thief based DM mission be withdrawn?
I have (in the last minute!) read on the DM site the copyright question in the FAQ. The wording is a bit vague as to whether or not Eidos would mind if lots of people based their FMs in the Thief world. I'm going to stop now in case I end up sounding like malau.
The_Raven on 22/7/2007 at 16:27
I'd suggest some reading material for all the doomsayers out there.
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright) Copyright
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark) Trademark
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent) Patents
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use) Fair Use
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain) Public Domain
I know it's wikipedia, but it's still a decent source for this material.
Here's some select quotes:
Quote:
For example, the copyright which subsists in relation to a Mickey Mouse cartoon prohibits unauthorized parties from distributing copies of the cartoon or creating derivative works which copy or mimic Disney's particular anthropomorphic mouse, but does not prohibit the creation of artistic works about anthropomorphic mice in general, so long as they are sufficiently different to not be deemed imitative of the original.
Quote:
While trademark law seeks to protect indications of the commercial source of products or services, patent law generally seeks to protect new and useful inventions, and registered designs law generally seeks to protect the look or appearance of a manufactured article. Trademarks, patents and designs collectively form a subset of intellectual property known as industrial property because they are often created and used in an industrial or commercial context.
By comparison, copyright law generally seeks to protect original literary, artistic and other creative works.
Although intellectual property laws such as these are theoretically distinct, more than one type may afford protection to the same article. For example, the particular design of a bottle may qualify for copyright protection as a nonutilitarian [sculpture], or for trademark protection based on its shape, or the 'trade dress' appearance of the bottle as a whole may be protectable. Titles and character names from books or movies may also be protectable as trademarks while the works from which they are drawn may qualify for copyright protection as a whole.
Quote:
A copyright covers the expression of an idea, not the idea itself — this is called the idea/expression or fact/expression dichotomy. For example, if a writer has a general concept or idea for a television program, a copyright of that "idea" does not prohibit other writers from creating the same general idea for a project. However, if the writer develops the idea to a point of detailed and specific aspects and storylines of the show, then that specific expression of the idea is copyrighted.
I'm certainly no lawyer, but I've done a technical report on this material as it applies to software for school, so I'm not talking completely out of my ass.
Generally, by the looks of it, The Dark Mod is in the clear. It's really a shame that more mod authors don't put thought into these things until after they've put years of work into a project: *cough*cough* Beyond the Red Line *cough*cough*.
