Reply to thread
GBAtemp.net - The Independent Video Game Community
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
GBAtemp.net - The Independent Video Game Community
Home
Log in
Terms & Rules
Donate
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Groups
Public Events
New
New posts
New resources
New blog entries
New profile posts
New blog entry comments
New threadmarks
Latest activity
Cheats
Cheat Codes Add and Request group
The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom cheat codes
Pokémon Legends: Arceus cheat codes
Xenoblade Chronicles 3 cheat codes
Fire Emblem Engage cheat codes
Request a cheat...
Tutorials
Nintendo Switch tutorials
Nintendo 3DS tutorials
Nintendo Wii U tutorials
Reviews
Overview
Official reviews
User reviews
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Chat
Top chatters
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
New posts
Search forums
Log in
Register
Home
Forums
GBAtemp News & Featured Content
GBAtemp & Scene News
Konami temporarily delisting all digital releases of Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3 due to historical footage licensing
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FAST6191" data-source="post: 9652792" data-attributes="member: 32303"><p>During the cold war the DMCA *spits* did not exist but the basic principles of everything else remains unchanged really, and even as awful as the DMCA is it is mostly clarification for the computery world we find ourselves in.</p><p></p><p>I am still nowhere near someone that did not make something being able to charge for it is wrong.</p><p>A copyrighted work is a good like any other. You can lend it, lease it, rent it out, do some kind of reciprocal barter...</p><p>If at some point someone decided something was better off sold for a lump sum while the work continues on being a copyrighted work a bit like the time I sold my old car as it was not being used then so it goes. Money now or smaller income stream, and aggravations associated with collecting it, is a tradeoff people make all the time, indeed if you want to consider credit/debt as this then arguably the basis of the financial system as a whole.</p><p>If you preclude that you pretty much ensure only songs (or books, or films, or games) someone wrote themselves, performed themselves (possibly on instruments out of patent or that they themselves own the patent to), recorded/mixed themselves... which is ridiculous as nothing ever gets done if you go for that. By allowing collaborations, assigning of copyrights, work for hire and more besides we get things far more than any one man can do.</p><p>It is not a magical new right that was cooked up. It is baked into the very idea of ownership of goods.</p><p></p><p>Your ancestry lookup example. It is basically the phone book problem.</p><p>Lists of numbers are tricky to copyright. That someone took the time to collate all the numbers to areas, and possibly names, format the text to sit on a page (a tedious job if ever you have done it)... means they can sell that result if they so desire.</p><p>You would be free to go to local cities (or churches depending upon where you are -- births, marriages, deaths being their domain a lot of the time), consult their nice paper records from the 1800s, decipher things (many things were written in older languages, and in handwriting that makes the average doctor look like a typewriter), rinse and repeat for as far back up the family tree as records exist for.</p><p>However it seems this company decided to do the grunt work of digitising records, collating that into a database and is now selling access to that work. Because a computer does it for a lot more people and far more efficiently than a genealogist or other records specialist does not change the fundamental of it being a service you are paying for rather than rights to data itself. Indeed you would be free to digitise all the records yourself and create a competing service if you wanted to -- they don't have the rights to the data underpinning it as much as their database built from it.</p><p></p><p>"Free for public education"</p><p>Education is usually an exception to copyright concerns. This however is also not education as much as fictional entertainment. Unless you are further arguing that all videos of things of historical significance (if ever a nightmare term to have in a legal test), or for a drastic shortening of copyright lengths maybe in these specific cases (personally I would be quite content to go back to statute of queen anne lengths, or least just pre various extension lengths in which case works from the 1960s would be coming up into the public domain).</p><p></p><p>"lets revoke licensing rights"</p><p>This would be a matter of contract law rather than copyright, and arguably only applies to the creation of new works (which these downloadable games tend to function as -- if Steam or whatever wanted they could drop the money for effectively a run of the game and sell that "stock" onwards). Trivially solved really by allowing resale of goods, which theoretically should already be the case (right of first sale if you want a term to search for there).</p><p></p><p>"because the families dont get a penny off tue royalties or profit made"</p><p>If I am to take your logic then the families in all likelihood did not create/contribute to the work either. If I am continuing to follow that logic then why do they get to benefit any more than the neighbours of the person or some random on the street?</p><p>I am not sure where the rest of the David Bowie thing comes in though. So some chancers decided after he is dead that they would try to buy up the rights because they think they can make a profit in the future, or allow them to dodge issues later. OK. We could also talk about how said cold war (and earlier) artists were largely between a rock and a hard place when it came to recording contracts (don't work for the majors, no radio will play no, no concert hall will book you, they knew this so offered a fairly small cut), publishers for books much the same (up until the whole desktop publishing revolution there really, maybe with a small reprieve for vanity presses a bit before then)... fun stuff there but still does not fundamentally change the idea of work for hire being a possibility, and copyrights to a works themselves being able to be bought and sold like items.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FAST6191, post: 9652792, member: 32303"] During the cold war the DMCA *spits* did not exist but the basic principles of everything else remains unchanged really, and even as awful as the DMCA is it is mostly clarification for the computery world we find ourselves in. I am still nowhere near someone that did not make something being able to charge for it is wrong. A copyrighted work is a good like any other. You can lend it, lease it, rent it out, do some kind of reciprocal barter... If at some point someone decided something was better off sold for a lump sum while the work continues on being a copyrighted work a bit like the time I sold my old car as it was not being used then so it goes. Money now or smaller income stream, and aggravations associated with collecting it, is a tradeoff people make all the time, indeed if you want to consider credit/debt as this then arguably the basis of the financial system as a whole. If you preclude that you pretty much ensure only songs (or books, or films, or games) someone wrote themselves, performed themselves (possibly on instruments out of patent or that they themselves own the patent to), recorded/mixed themselves... which is ridiculous as nothing ever gets done if you go for that. By allowing collaborations, assigning of copyrights, work for hire and more besides we get things far more than any one man can do. It is not a magical new right that was cooked up. It is baked into the very idea of ownership of goods. Your ancestry lookup example. It is basically the phone book problem. Lists of numbers are tricky to copyright. That someone took the time to collate all the numbers to areas, and possibly names, format the text to sit on a page (a tedious job if ever you have done it)... means they can sell that result if they so desire. You would be free to go to local cities (or churches depending upon where you are -- births, marriages, deaths being their domain a lot of the time), consult their nice paper records from the 1800s, decipher things (many things were written in older languages, and in handwriting that makes the average doctor look like a typewriter), rinse and repeat for as far back up the family tree as records exist for. However it seems this company decided to do the grunt work of digitising records, collating that into a database and is now selling access to that work. Because a computer does it for a lot more people and far more efficiently than a genealogist or other records specialist does not change the fundamental of it being a service you are paying for rather than rights to data itself. Indeed you would be free to digitise all the records yourself and create a competing service if you wanted to -- they don't have the rights to the data underpinning it as much as their database built from it. "Free for public education" Education is usually an exception to copyright concerns. This however is also not education as much as fictional entertainment. Unless you are further arguing that all videos of things of historical significance (if ever a nightmare term to have in a legal test), or for a drastic shortening of copyright lengths maybe in these specific cases (personally I would be quite content to go back to statute of queen anne lengths, or least just pre various extension lengths in which case works from the 1960s would be coming up into the public domain). "lets revoke licensing rights" This would be a matter of contract law rather than copyright, and arguably only applies to the creation of new works (which these downloadable games tend to function as -- if Steam or whatever wanted they could drop the money for effectively a run of the game and sell that "stock" onwards). Trivially solved really by allowing resale of goods, which theoretically should already be the case (right of first sale if you want a term to search for there). "because the families dont get a penny off tue royalties or profit made" If I am to take your logic then the families in all likelihood did not create/contribute to the work either. If I am continuing to follow that logic then why do they get to benefit any more than the neighbours of the person or some random on the street? I am not sure where the rest of the David Bowie thing comes in though. So some chancers decided after he is dead that they would try to buy up the rights because they think they can make a profit in the future, or allow them to dodge issues later. OK. We could also talk about how said cold war (and earlier) artists were largely between a rock and a hard place when it came to recording contracts (don't work for the majors, no radio will play no, no concert hall will book you, they knew this so offered a fairly small cut), publishers for books much the same (up until the whole desktop publishing revolution there really, maybe with a small reprieve for vanity presses a bit before then)... fun stuff there but still does not fundamentally change the idea of work for hire being a possibility, and copyrights to a works themselves being able to be bought and sold like items. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
GBAtemp News & Featured Content
GBAtemp & Scene News
Konami temporarily delisting all digital releases of Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3 due to historical footage licensing
General chit-chat
Help
Users
Settings
Notifications
Miscellaneous
Inverse message direction
Display editor on top
Enable maximized mode
Display images as links
Hide bot messages
Hide statuses
Hide chatter list
Show messages from ignored users
Temporarily disable chat
Receive mention alerts
Sound notifications
Normal messages
Private messages
Whisper messages
Mention messages
Bot messages
Desktop notifications
Normal messages
Private messages
Whisper messages
Mention messages
Bot messages
Options
Options
View top chatters
No one is chatting at the moment.
@
BakerMan
:
you go bro
+1
Today at 2:59 AM
@
BakerMan
:
i know, i know, i'm late
Today at 2:59 AM
@
Sicklyboy
:
@BigOnYa
, I'll rip a bag off my Volcano to that, brother
+2
Today at 3:01 AM
@
a_username_that_is_cool
:
DDDS . Dual Developer Dedede System
+1
Today at 3:02 AM
@
BakerMan
:
also happy birthday
@Xdqwerty
+1
Today at 4:13 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
Hello
Today at 5:30 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
Is it me you're looking for?
Today at 5:32 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
'Cause I wonder where you are
Today at 5:34 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
wait I got the lyrics mixed up
+1
Today at 5:35 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
And I wonder what you do...Lol
Today at 5:35 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
Its all good, I'm here to talk to you.
Today at 5:37 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
Hello
Today at 5:39 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
It's me
+1
Today at 5:43 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
I've been playing fallout4 all day, I went into a elevator and it kept going, never stopped, waited 5 minutes, must of been a bug. How bout you, whatcha do today?
+1
Today at 5:43 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
I'm wondering why a stray tuxedo cat has a cloudy eye
Today at 5:45 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
I've been playing TOTK all day also
+1
Today at 5:46 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
Oh you reminded me of those elevator nightmares
Today at 5:47 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
Awesome game, fun how they force you to build, but you can build as you want
Today at 5:47 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
It is super fun, I actually prefer it over BoTW
+1
Today at 5:48 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
The guy holding the sign always cracked me up, esp when you fail, and it falls
Today at 5:48 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
Ah yes, that guy lol. I still need to find all his signs. The game has a lot to do though so I don't know what to finish first
Today at 5:50 AM
@
MysticStarlight
:
I'm 120 hours in and am still like 44.4% done
+1
Today at 5:51 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
Good times. Building is starting to get good around now for you. You making me want to make run thru again.
Today at 5:52 AM
@
BigOnYa
:
Ok good chatting, enjoy your gaming, and avoid the lightning, or put your sword away. Good night.
Today at 6:02 AM
@
Veho
:
https://i.imgur.com/E1U7Nlt.mp4
+1
Today at 6:22 AM
Submit
@
Veho
:
https://i.imgur.com/E1U7Nlt.mp4
+1
Today at 6:22 AM
Chat
0