WoW copyright judgment - Problem for P99?

[Lich]

Here is the story. I hope P99 is safe.

[guineapig]

Here's the key phrase:

The defendant in the case, Scapegaming, earned about $3 million in profits collecting micropayments from users on the unauthorized network.

They would have to prove that the person/people who own/run this server are making a profit off of it.

[Cogwell]

gpig beat me to it.

If you draw a picture of spiderman at home, you're not doing anything wrong.

If you sell that picture, you are.

[Itchybottom]

Originally Posted by Cogwell [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

gpig beat me to it.

If you draw a picture of spiderman at home, you're not doing anything wrong.

If you sell that picture, you are.

But if you write a story about Spiderman, and the original copyright holder for Spiderman decides to use your story ... there isn't a damned thing you can do about it. They can use your words verbatim and make money off of it.

[Elissa]

Server emulators that use Blizzard’s IP facilitate piracy and offer unauthorized, inconsistent gaming experiences that can damage Blizzard’s reputation and goodwill with players.

That is actually the only relevant phrase in the article as to why they lost the case, which unfortunately does not really discuss the judge's reasoning (or specific causes of action) at all and is more or less Blizzard propaganda anyway (though it does contain a couple terms of art). These cases involving software/code/art can be very complicated and involve many different causes of action. Profiting off the unauthorized use of another's Intellectual Property is usually a negative factor against the defense of Fair Use, but is still only a single factor in a much broader case of numerous IP claims and is not necessarily, by itself, a losing battle (depending on the targeted or potential markets and the actual market effects of the infringement). I doubt that the profits were, by themselves, determinative in the decision of the case.

The bigger issues always surround the unauthorized use of the software, code, art, music, etc. and violations of the license agreement for the software, and all sorts of crap.

Nonetheless, stop worrying about P99! There are a lot of things going for us, not the least of which is that nobody who matters really cares that we exist, but also some decent legal arguments. That being said, don't assume that because we're not charged to play (or that anyone is profiting off this) that we're safe. We're safe because, quite simply, we're just not that big of a deal to SOE.

[Elissa]

Originally Posted by Itchybottom [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But if you write a story about Spiderman, and the original copyright holder for Spiderman decides to use your story ... there isn't a damned thing you can do about it. They can use your words verbatim and make money off of it.

That's not entirely true. Copyright holders certainly have derivative use rights, but if the story also contained your own creations that have nothing to do with Spiderman (i.e. detailed characters you created), they wouldn't be able to simply steal those, as you would have a common law copyright on those characters simply by virtue of putting pen to paper. Most story elements are known as "scenes a faire", and are not copyrightable. Thats why you can see numerous stories about "a superhero fighting crime in a big city" and no one infringes. It's the specifics (characters, etc.) that you can protect.

[eqdruid76]

Supoose I draw a pitture of Spiderman having anal intercourse with Optimus Prime. Is it wrong, then?

[Messianic]

Originally Posted by eqdruid76 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Supoose I draw a pitture of Spiderman having anal intercourse with Optimus Prime. Is it wrong, then?

On many levels.

[Straif]

Originally Posted by eqdruid76 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Supoose I draw a pitture of Spiderman having anal intercourse with Optimus Prime. Is it wrong, then?

Rule 34.

Also, adding to the fact that no cash transactions are made here. Look at EQ's popularity these days. I don't think Sony would even waste the time to think about litigation let alone the money.

[wizigig]

Originally Posted by Straif [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Rule 34.

Also, adding to the fact that no cash transactions are made here. Look at EQ's popularity these days. I don't think Sony would even waste the time to think about litigation let alone the money.

Never underestimate the corperate mind. Considure, Macintosh ( a division of Apple Corp.) sued Apple Corp. (it's parent company) for infringment of it's legal rights because Apple produced a device that had a Mac look in it's apperance. Apple used it's corperate lawyers and Mac hired outside lawyers.
Also considure Oracles lawsuit aganst apple for patent infringement for using open source code in the Android. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BU2C1ETPL8.DTL They also sued Google. In short if a Corp gets a bur in it's bonnet or sniffs the potentual for money, legal action isn't far behind.