Stating the obvious, because somebody has to loot ratings.
Also france's system is cool. After 10 years, it becoems abandonware and is free and legal to download/use.
2005... 141 posts...
I can agree, but as far as I am aware, I don't think those creatures can be copyrighted because clearly it's not disney's creation.
DELETE
Well that's your opinion, OP. Without copyrights The Internet would fall into pirating chaos.
DELETE
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171403]Sure I can imagine being the creator of something and worrying about someone ripping me off, but do companies take it too far?[B] Does the mighty iron fist of copyrights go too far?[/B] I think so.[/QUOTE]
I cracked up at this point.
To be completely honest, the overall idea of intellectual property and copyright is right, but it needs some regulation here and there.
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171403]Sure I can imagine being the creator of something and worrying about someone ripping me off, but do companies take it too far? Does the mighty iron fist of copyrights go too far? I think so.
Many modern works have their ideas/influence from folklore that predates our modern copyrights.
Take the fantasy realm for instance. Pixies, unicorns, magic (spells and that sort). Imagine if these three things and many others were copyrighted by Disney, say in an alternate reality, they came up with the idea. Copyright laws have changed at least a few times, so depending on the era, the result would be different, but imagine if no one could use examples like that because Disney owned them.
Think of all the modern works that would be lost. Could be Lord of the Rings, The Legend of Zelda, Ridley Scott's Legend, Harry Potter, some aspects of Mario, and there are probably hundreds more bad and good works that could not have been, or maybe would have but either by sucking Disney off and paying them lots of greenbacks, or by releasing as a Disney IP, giving them further ownership of ideas.
I hate copyrights, and their expiration is WAY too long. You have to wait till you're dead or elderly and suffering from dementia to even begin using something that should be public domain, or you can use it anyway and fight it out in court; you might win or you might not.[/QUOTE]
Well your Disney owning fantasy example is kind of misleading...even if they had originally come up with the idea of elves/dwarves/magic you can't copyright a genre. That's why you see multiple examples of stories in a fantasy setting, such as Lord of the Rings, Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Dragon Age, etc. And you think a creator having his work protected for the duration of his life is taking it too far? Imagine if you'd come up with The Wizard of Oz when you were 30. Now imagine if the copyright to it had worn off when you hit 45 or 50 and suddenly everyone else is duplicating your work and at best you're making zip, and at worst they're somehow profiting off of it now. You see nothing wrong with this?
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171548]That is just because much of the basis from the fantasy genre, predates copyrights. At the latest, some may be Victorian era, but majority is much older folklore, some being ancient mythology or biblical (religious based).
[/QUOTE]
No I was going along with your "what if" idea that Disney invented fantasy elements. I was saying they can't copyright an entire genre. If they had somehow come up with Lord of the Rings and everything in it, elves, magic rings, effeminate hobbits, whatever, they still couldn't stop someone from doing a story with a similar setup because you can't copyright a genre. That would be like someone copyrighting Science Fiction and forcing everyone who writes a story with faster than light travel to pay them. There is a bit of a gray area when it comes to how similar one work can be to another, but you can't stop imitators.
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171548]
No I do not. Seems a bit selfish don't you think, that you can own it forever or until death just because you happened to come up with the idea first, when someone would have eventually come up with it regardless? And copyrights can be passed down can they not?
Sure a direct copy of Wizard of Oz would be unfair, but what about someone who makes something inspired by Wizard of Oz, or too similar, but keeps things relatively original? They can't do that 30 years later, or 50 years later, because you haven't croaked? Some lawsuits are over the smallest supposed infringements. Not every enforcement of copyright is a fair one, but the law is overreaching so it is only as fair as the copyright holder is willing to be.
With the help of mother government at its side.
Look, if I took Link from Zelda and put it into a game and sold it, that is wrong. It is when companies attack others or individuals for doing something "similar". The similarity can vary, but if the company is huge and the person their attack is not, who do you think will win?
And I'm not claiming that people are getting sued all the time because of this; what is happening far more and maybe less obvious is that people are fearful of using certain elements and completely avoid them. Sometimes you can do this and still make a great product, but sometimes this takes away from what could have been much better.[/QUOTE]
Well I kind of responded to this already but like I said, there's a gray area with how similar you can get. But a story "inspired by" another is still different from a story that's "ripping off" another. That's decided on a case by case basis, and there is some arbitrariness to it, but that's because you can't put them to some sort of test to tell whether it's a rip-off or simply inspired by something else. Yes it will make people wary of making something too similar but that's just letting a creator of an original work have his due. And I personally think if someone creates a work that people are willing to buy, they should be able to enjoy the benefits of that as long as they can. If they weren't able to do that, they would have much less incentive to try to create a wonderful story, or song, or whatever. Why write a book if someone else is just going to make money off of it instead of you?
Copyrights are okay, the way they're enforced is terrible, and some of the copyrighted stuff shouldn't be copyrighted at all
DELETE
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;25171689]Copyrights are okay, the way they're enforced is terrible, and some of the copyrighted stuff shouldn't be copyrighted at all[/QUOTE]
Definitely. The system's not perfect, but then no system is.
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171403]Sure I can imagine being the creator of something and worrying about someone ripping me off, but do companies take it too far? Does the mighty iron fist of copyrights go too far? I think so.
Many modern works have their ideas/influence from folklore that predates our modern copyrights.
Take the fantasy realm for instance. Pixies, unicorns, magic (spells and that sort). Imagine if these three things and many others were copyrighted by Disney, say in an alternate reality, they came up with the idea. Copyright laws have changed at least a few times, so depending on the era, the result would be different, but imagine if no one could use examples like that because Disney owned them.
Think of all the modern works that would be lost. Could be Lord of the Rings, The Legend of Zelda, Ridley Scott's Legend, Harry Potter, some aspects of Mario, and there are probably hundreds more bad and good works that could not have been, or maybe would have but either by sucking Disney off and paying them lots of greenbacks, or by releasing as a Disney IP, giving them further ownership of ideas.
I hate copyrights, and their expiration is WAY too long. You have to wait till you're dead or elderly and suffering from dementia to even begin using something that should be public domain, or you can use it anyway and fight it out in court; you might win or you might not.[/QUOTE]
Hey, I don't know about you, but I don't want some little asshole stealing my work after my death. Their expiration is fine, you're being fucking ridiculous.
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;25171689]Copyrights are okay, the way they're enforced is terrible, and some of the copyrighted stuff shouldn't be copyrighted at all[/QUOTE]
Can't argue with that, they put the weirdest copyrights on things sometimes
DELETE
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171816]It is one thing for the copyright to stay in place till you death, but to expect it to remain indefinitely till the end of time is what is "fucking ridiculous". :P
Take a remake for example. If someone wants to remake or retell your story 200 years from now, they can credit you for the original story (that is only honorable and fair), but should have the right to make it.
I mean, you're dead anyway, why care? Who you going to give the rights to, a major corporation?[/QUOTE]
Well maybe I have children that would like to inherit the family business, then what? Oh, no, wait, some fucking twat waited for the expiration and renewed it JUST before they could. Family = ruined. And besides, I created it. I should have full rights to what people do with it whether they like it or not.
DELETE
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171816]
With a mentality like that, you must think you're God's gift to Earth, blessed with ideas and imagination that no one has ever and will ever think of in all space-time.[/QUOTE]
Stop being such an intolerant fuck. These are my views. I couldn't give a fuck if you like them or not, and I don't. In MY OPINION, copyrights for the specific thing should extend forever, but modifications can be made with consent from the creator or his/her offspring, and any modifications should accredit the original creator.
There.
[editline]10:52AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171904]No one is saying an expired copyright should be re-copyrighted. The whole benefit of a copyright becoming expired would be that it could be treated the same way as folklore is.
So the whole worry about someone renewing your copyright under their name wouldn't exist. It would be like Disney trying to copyright folklore.
That is what I'm saying.
And once again, you're dead. You can't supervise what your family does. They might sell it off to a company that turns it into soft-core porn.[/QUOTE]
:frog:
I'm talking in the 'invention' sense. How are they going to turn a FTL drive into softcore porn?
FASTER FA-A-A-ASTHURRRRRRRrRASJasdajhsgdasdasdaf
DELETE
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25171952]Well then there goes 50% of every novel, film, and game ever made.
And you can kiss independent artists goodbye.[/QUOTE]
Invention sense. INVENTION SENSE.
IN-VEN-TION SENSE.
DELETE
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25172074]So what you're saying is that AT&T should be the only telephone company in the world?
I mean, Alexander Graham Bell has the majority consensus for inventing the telephone. So him and his company should be the only one's allowed to make them?
If it wasn't for the freedom or intervention to allow people to make telephones and not just Mr. Bell and his company, you'd only be able to buy his phones and his phone service.
Next you'll be telling me that only Ford can use the assembly line to make cars.
If Alexander Graham Bell was never born, we'd still have a telephone or something similar. It is inevitable through our technological evolution.
Alexander Graham Bell stood on the shoulders of geniuses before him, believe it. If not for the prior brilliant minds that discovered things such as, electricity.. Mr. Bell would have never made the phone or thought about it.
He himself is not so special that he should be able to own what we do with the phone for eternity, nor his heir. It might seem fair and be fair if he invented the telephone today, but over 100 years later, would it be?
Would you give up your choice of phones and service that you have now to go back to what we had prior to competition entering the market?
This would be the telephone today if AT&T was the only company.
[URL]http://fusionanomaly.net/mabellubiquitousgreentelephone.jpg[/URL]
Forget cell-phones or maybe even internet service. What incentive would they have to provide better service if no one else can challenge them at their own game?[/QUOTE]
Inventions should follow my prior suggestion, that you didn't read, and discoveries should be just the same.
[editline]11:23AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;25172074]
This would be the telephone today if AT&T was the only company.
[URL]http://fusionanomaly.net/mabellubiquitousgreentelephone.jpg[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
Wow, you are silly.
DELETE
"Your under arrest for copying our game/movies that entertain people".
DELETE
Fuck creativity. If I made it, I should have the rights to it, no matter what. Besides, nothing you say will influence the laws around copyrights at all. So your 'points' are invalid.
[QUOTE=RayDark;25172664]Fuck creativity. If I made it, I should have the rights to it, no matter what. Besides, nothing you say will influence the laws around copyrights at all. So your 'points' are invalid.[/QUOTE]
Somehow you seem to think your opinion is the right one, and that everyone else should just go fuck themselves.
If that is the case, then what are you still doing in this thread? You are obviously just ignoring all of the points OP makes and insisting on the same argument that your opinion is correct and all others are useless. So why are you still here?
A better example of the copyright law in work is Vanilla ice vs David Bowie and Queen
However the copyright law needs to be tweaked in regards to digital material such as games and music. The new trend of calling software sold "Licensed software" is retarded. I do not want to "rent" my data. The courts even upheld that you have no right to the data even after purchase due to the face that most EULAS now a days consider software to be licensed. I know MGM and a few record companies are looking into doing the same with music and movies.
Otherwise the current law sits fine on most things.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
