Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
-
ScottB wrote: maxo-texas wrote: Given the many other sites reported in this thread and others, I think it's much more likely that the root cause is GW. It would be odd for retailers in france and other web sites and blogs to get in an uproar and remove pictures because of an isolated incident on BGG. Requiring their own vendors to remove photos was pretty over the top (and probably has to do with the fact that they only view their corporate stores as "true" vendors and other people selling their product are only begrudgely supported-- as reported by a retailer in another thread). The retail stores, from what I read, were told to stop deep linking to images on GW's website and to host their own. It had nothing to do with the fact that they were showing images of GW product and everything to do with the fact that they were using GW's bandwidth to do it - NOT that they're not the GW corporate store as you're trying to portray.
I don't see how that changes the underlying fact that this was some kind of general web jihad against many sites at the same time. This wasn't a random BGG only event so I don't see BGG as the source of the problem in anyway.
Having received a C&D order back in the 90's from a large corporation, you have one option- comply-- hell, over comply-- or risk being bankrupted.
-
William Hostman
United States
Eagle River
Alaska
Gaming in Greater Anchorage area, Alaska since 1978. Looking for Indy-willing RPG players in Eagle River (or willing to drive to Eagle River). Geekmail me if interested.
Yes, this really is what I looked like when I uploaded that avatar. Not that it's quite current anymore.
-
ScottB wrote: maxo-texas wrote: Quij, It's not the way hasbro does it (for one example). They enforce their IP selectively. If you are not selling their IP, they take a very light touch. For example... check out http://www.heroscapers.com/ and you'll find a rich community of which hasbro is fully aware. GW has a right to do what they are doing. But it is *really stupid* of them to do so. I'm a little unclear if they have the right to do this to the companies selling their games... but again.. man it is really stupid to do so. After being a GW customer on and off since SH1.0, I'm done with them. I'll recommend most of my gaming friends do the same and choose non-GW games in the future. But there are certain facts that don't really fit the view that you're endorsing. For one, BGG deleted files for games to which GW no longer owns rights, such as Cosmic Encounter. For another, they deleted files that were posted with GW's explicit permission, such as the Space Hulk 3ed FAQ. For another, they deleted files that are explicitly allowed by GW's IP policies, such as maps, scenarios, and house rules. For another, they deleted content created using mechanisms that GW provided for fans to add their own content to games, such as the Space Hulk Mission 13 template. For another, they reportedly deleted files that had no GW protected content whatsoever. For another, sites like dakkadakka and Bell of Lost Souls host similar content but received no letter. So I'm to assume that either: 1. GW believes it has the right to police content to which it no longer has ownership. 2. GW is so psychotic that they would give permission to post a file only to rescind it less than two months later. 3. GW is in violation of its own posted policies. 4. GW is playing a cruel joke on its fans by holding out the promise of user created content and then ripping it away. 5. GW believes that any content with any tangential relationship to one of its products is fair game for its IP protectionism. 6. GW doesn't know about dakkadakka and BoLS yet, but when they're found, they're in trouble. (Best I could come up with for the last one.) OR 1. BGG Admins responded overzealously to a vague C&D and deleted too much content. Hmmm. Mr. Occam, what option would you choose?
I'd say likely 2,3,5,6 and alternate 1...
Based upon prior actions, that is.
GW C&D letters "traditionally" assert erroneous claims, that is, blatantly misrepresent what the law actually protects, in hopes of quashing for no good reason legitimate content not submitted through their chosen house organs, and getting compliance by encountering the law-ignorant. They often have gone after sites with legitimate adherence to posted GW policy (thinking back to 1996 and several WFRP centered discussion boards, before policing of that aspect fell to Hogshead Publications). They have often posted policies and changed them within months.
It's also likely that the BGG staff overreacted, because the potential costs of non-compliance or even going to court could be sufficiently high as to render them bankrupt, even if they were found to be innocent of infringements.
-
Richard Dewsbery
United Kingdom
Sutton Coldfield
-
Who is allowed to get shirty over Chaos Marauders? FFG - as they currently hold the rights; GW - as they licensed the rights to FFG; or Rudi Hoffman - who for all intents and purposes actually designed the game in 1975? I do hope that nobody thinks that I am suggesting that GW might have played fast and loose with someone else's IP at some point in the past, by the way (at which point I would have to refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram). But a comparison of Ogalla with Chaos Marauders might suggest to some people a similarity that could suggest that one game was derived from the other. And the dates of publication make it hard to suggest that the orcs came before the Native Americans (though they were probably Red Indians back then). Oh, the irony.
-
-
Octavian wrote: Though this situation is obviously an important one to many, I hate to see it dominating the site's attention and distracting from what should be the most joyous part of the year in the lead up to the holidays.
Are you mental? This is just about the most exciting thing to ever happen on BGG! I'm really quite enjoying sitting back and watching people work themselves into a frenzy. BGG will once again be a less exciting place when this has all died down.
-
Jeff Wood
United States
Davis
California
-
Octavian wrote: Though this situation is obviously an important one to many, I hate to see it dominating the site's attention and distracting from what should be the most joyous part of the year in the lead up to the holidays.
Yeah, that's part of the problem. If GW had done this just a few days earlier, most of the site would probably have stripped GW from their wishlists for the secret santa this year in an easy boycott.
Now, we're doomed to having helped GW make a profit this quarter!
-
Maaike
Netherlands
Nijmegen
-
joedogboy wrote: jgerman wrote:
GW has it's detractors, I'm one of them I guess, I'm not a fan of a lot of their actions. However, there's a difference between someone being realistic about GW's faults (and this action is not one of them IMO, BGG was clearly in the wrong) and those that have to bash the company for every move they make.
They are the equally bad opposite of fanboys, I don't even know if there's a term for it.
I think the word you are looking for is "haters". People whose hatred of something blinds them to rational thought about the subject. They are the opposite of "fanboys", whose love of something makes them blind to all rational thought about the subject. Oddly, both haters and fanboys will ally to take down anyone who dares to take a stand in the middle, and weigh both sides of the equation. Personally, I have been involved in the GW "hobby" for over 20 years, and owned GW games from back in the days before Warhammer and 40k. I've also owned Avalon Hill games for over 25 years, to give some context. I've worked at game stores, volunteered at cons, created house rules, scenarios, and fan fiction for games - including GW games. I even worked for GW for a while - but didn't really fit in with my regional management's cult style of top-down leadership - I was fired for being a "heretic" when I suggested ways to improve the way we did business (several of those suggestions actually were implemented after I left the company - either because someone else used my ideas, or because other people came up with the same ideas). I have seen GW do great things for their customers and independent retailers, and have seen them make some really stupid business moves that hurt themselves and angered their customers and retailers. I have also seen them make some gutsy business moves that have angered some customers and retailers, but benefited others. Sometimes I am really angry at GW's management, and at their decisions, because I am emotionally invested in their games, and care enough that I want them to continue to provide "toys" for their customers (including me). Even so, I do not hate GW, and am willing/able to look at their side in a business decision.
http://www.bbb.org/greater-san-francisco/business-reviews/ho...
-
Seth Owen
United States
Norwich
Connecticut
-
maaikefest wrote:
That's just one of the retail stores.
-
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
-
maaikefest wrote: joedogboy wrote: jgerman wrote:
GW has it's detractors, I'm one of them I guess, I'm not a fan of a lot of their actions. However, there's a difference between someone being realistic about GW's faults (and this action is not one of them IMO, BGG was clearly in the wrong) and those that have to bash the company for every move they make.
They are the equally bad opposite of fanboys, I don't even know if there's a term for it.
I think the word you are looking for is "haters". People whose hatred of something blinds them to rational thought about the subject. They are the opposite of "fanboys", whose love of something makes them blind to all rational thought about the subject. Oddly, both haters and fanboys will ally to take down anyone who dares to take a stand in the middle, and weigh both sides of the equation. Personally, I have been involved in the GW "hobby" for over 20 years, and owned GW games from back in the days before Warhammer and 40k. I've also owned Avalon Hill games for over 25 years, to give some context. I've worked at game stores, volunteered at cons, created house rules, scenarios, and fan fiction for games - including GW games. I even worked for GW for a while - but didn't really fit in with my regional management's cult style of top-down leadership - I was fired for being a "heretic" when I suggested ways to improve the way we did business (several of those suggestions actually were implemented after I left the company - either because someone else used my ideas, or because other people came up with the same ideas). I have seen GW do great things for their customers and independent retailers, and have seen them make some really stupid business moves that hurt themselves and angered their customers and retailers. I have also seen them make some gutsy business moves that have angered some customers and retailers, but benefited others. Sometimes I am really angry at GW's management, and at their decisions, because I am emotionally invested in their games, and care enough that I want them to continue to provide "toys" for their customers (including me). Even so, I do not hate GW, and am willing/able to look at their side in a business decision.
In fairness to Joe, he did state in his post that he had worked for GW. BBB files can be out of date - the reference is from 2007. In any case, despite the fact that Joe has been kind of irritating in his strident defense of GW, I don't think it's helpful to go around to every thread "outing" him as a (possibly former) GW store manager. The guy is still a BGG member, and we shouldn't let our feelings on this matter get so inflamed that we start really hurting feelings and turning people off of the site entirely. FWIW - I've probably been guilty of a certain amount of overzealousness in making my points on this subject. For that, I'm sorry. But lay off the guy already, OK - this really isn't helping. Thanks.
-
J Mathews
United States
Kent
Washington
-
PedroNERV wrote: Why do I have to put myself in their shoes? They are a company that makes games and miniatures and sells them to the public. THEY're supposed to be bending over backwards to please ME, their customer, the one who gives them money.
Ugh. This is the type of attitude that is causing business schools to teach customer management now. Somewhere between 10% and 30% of customers of any given company are costing the company more than they are making it (per HBR) and it is attitudes of entitlement like this one that cause that phenomenon. Customers that like to rant about their rights are customers you can probably reasonably, and profitably, let alone (or better yet, send them to your competitor while you find more profitable ones- see the cell phone industry).
-
Chris Martin
England
London
-
Octavian wrote: what should be the most joyous part of the year in the lead up to the holidays.
What typical Amero-centrism.
-
Bob Wilson
United States
Northampton
Massachusetts
-
Steerpike wrote: I suspect part of GWs paranoia comes from their failure to protect their IP properly when Warcraft came out (the original RTS, not the MMO). By the time GW took notice it was too late. However, there's a big difference between protecting your IP from another company, and crushing user-created content on a site like BGG.
You're kidding, right? Almost everything in the GW universe is derivative of a long succession of fantasy writers and fantasy games.... Warcraft was no more a or less a "clone" of those earlier fantasy worlds than is or was GW's stuff...
-
Bob Wilson
United States
Northampton
Massachusetts
-
Octavian wrote:
- Games Workshop did what they felt was in the best interest for their company. We did what we felt was necessary in response. There are questions about the methods on both sides, but I don't think the motives of either side should be in question. Ultimately, everyone is just trying to do what is best.
And GW was in very serious error in said belief and the over-handed response they chose. What I'd like to see is a few words from Aldie himself over which files involved in the take-down were from the C&D letters, and which were BGG's or some admin's decisions, and why. That would go a long way to cooling heads around here Octavian.
You state that GW was just doing what they thought was best. Since you are telling us your own personal feelings in this post, do you think what they did was best for their company? Could you share that with us? You know, not as any official mouthpiece of BGG the LLC or whatever but as Octavian the guy...
-
Bob Wilson
United States
Northampton
Massachusetts
-
chrisjwmartin wrote: Octavian wrote: what should be the most joyous part of the year in the lead up to the holidays. What typical Amero-centrism.
Perhaps more like "typical Octavianism".... actually, I can't fault him for that statement. Octavian only made the same oversight that even the most well-traveled world-citizen soul would have a hard time avoiding here in the States.
It's HARD here to get away from all the hype and marketing, so our mental energies are often directed at trying to get a legitimate experience out of the holidays. As a result, it's easy to forget the rest of the world does not get hammered by the same holiday-buzz juggernaut.
The positive side to Thanksgiving and the religious holidays, that would be a wonderful thing to see exported to the rest of the world, but I hope the marketing monster never leaves our borders.... *shiver*
-
Glauco Micsik Roberti
Brazil
Sao Paulo
SP
Berserkr Jogos
-
Steerpike wrote: I suspect part of GWs paranoia comes from their failure to protect their IP properly when Warcraft came out (the original RTS, not the MMO). By the time GW took notice it was too late. However, there's a big difference between protecting your IP from another company, and crushing user-created content on a site like BGG.
By following the same logic, a person or company with the rights to Tolkien's work would be able to sue every Fantasy writer, publisher or gaming company in the world for everything they've got...
-
Bob Wilson
United States
Northampton
Massachusetts
-
zinho73 wrote:
...
2) What we think doesn't make a difference, so there's no point in complaining about it.
I also disagree. This conversations are both interesting (because we all learn a bit more about IP) and enlightening (we all understand a bit more the GW positioning regarding costumer satisfaction and other little things). If they take notice about the noise, that's even better, it is a bonus......
This is so true. LET, ssssshhhiiiit, INVITE people to post stark raving mad anger, it's only words. Once I started reading more and more that's been posted, it helped me to calm down, see things a little more balanced.
Quijanoth, how can you honestly support your position when you are slaming others for having a conversation, or a heated debate? These debates CAN be productive. Much of what was posted during the Barnes fiasco actually wasn't hate-filled drivel, many of us actually learned something from participating in that discussion.
I think the MOST unproductive posts I've seen this time around are the "better-than-thou" posts from people telling others to essentially shut-up and grow-up. When did that become civil? I didn't read the entire thread, but your response Emivaldo seemed the equivalent to telling him to plug-it. Of course, you're free to say that too, but don't expect the rest of us to be quiet.
As for the effects we can expect from us voicing opinions, asking questions and so on? Is GW doesn't give a damn what we think, I know BGG sure does, they just started a fund drive.
I haven't yet found a post from Aldie (and I really hope Aldie would post this kind of stuff personally, not put an admin to the task), any post that gives us a sense of how of the "blanketing" quality of the file removal was written into the C&D letters, how much was done by BGG folks on legal advice, and how much may have been over-reaction or lack of specific game/file knowledge on the part of admins tasked with deleting files. If anyone does find an answer to all of that (providing Aldie ever feels he can tell us about it safely without getting sued), please link to it for all of us.
All this noise should at least lead to BGG telling us the Paul Harvey... i.e., the rest of the story.
-
Glauco Micsik Roberti
Brazil
Sao Paulo
SP
Berserkr Jogos
-
Octavian wrote:
I can say a few things which I personally believe:
- Games Workshop did what they felt was in the best interest for their company. We did what we felt was necessary in response. There are questions about the methods on both sides, but I don't think the motives of either side should be in question. Ultimately, everyone is just trying to do what is best.
I personally believe people should generally do a much better job when trying to do their best (and, at least for now, I mean GW).
If anyone manages to make that many people angry while trying to 'do their best', it should suffice as a sign they should start making better choices.
I believe GW's been playing with aggressive and damaging business strategies since the 80's... they are quite a bit outdated in their business practices and apparently will keep suffering from that.
I feel bad for FFG, though... a great company that ended up dealing with the devil.
-
Bob Wilson
United States
Northampton
Massachusetts
-
berserkr wrote: Steerpike wrote: I suspect part of GWs paranoia comes from their failure to protect their IP properly when Warcraft came out (the original RTS, not the MMO). By the time GW took notice it was too late. However, there's a big difference between protecting your IP from another company, and crushing user-created content on a site like BGG. By following the same logic, a person or company with the rights to Tolkien's work would be able to sue every Fantasy writer, publisher or gaming company in the world for everything they've got...
Exactly! If one considers GW to have had any merit at all in going after Warcraft, then Michael Moorcock could do the same to them, and Tolkien to him, and so-on down the line... GW's stuff came-out and "borrowed" heavily previous works, WELL WITHIN the "IP protection time frame" as we understand it today that says the original creator could sue them.
-
Glauco Micsik Roberti
Brazil
Sao Paulo
SP
Berserkr Jogos
-
Octavian wrote: Games Workshop did what they felt was in the best interest for their company.
Oh, and by the way, IBM did what they felt was best for their company when they sold equipment and technology to Nazi concentration camps... somehow I don't like that excuse...
-
Rick Vinyard
United States
Las Cruces
New Mexico
-
LordBobbio wrote: berserkr wrote: Steerpike wrote: I suspect part of GWs paranoia comes from their failure to protect their IP properly when Warcraft came out (the original RTS, not the MMO). By the time GW took notice it was too late. However, there's a big difference between protecting your IP from another company, and crushing user-created content on a site like BGG. By following the same logic, a person or company with the rights to Tolkien's work would be able to sue every Fantasy writer, publisher or gaming company in the world for everything they've got... Exactly! If one considers GW to have had any merit at all in going after Warcraft, then Michael Moorcock could do the same to them, and Tolkien to him, and so-on down the line... GW's stuff came-out and "borrowed" heavily previous works, WELL WITHIN the "IP protection time frame" as we understand it today that says the original creator could sue them.
You should really look up the history between Blizzard and Games Workshop. It's not as simple as you're portraying.
As for the legal doctrine you're referring to it is called scènes à faire. However, Blizzard and Games Workshop had a different relationship... i.e. working jointly on the early versions of the product that would become Warcraft. A business relationship working together on a project complicates things quite a bit more, legally, than simply both claiming a fantasy world.
Obviously, Blizzard felt comfortable enough going it alone under the scènes à faire doctrine to release Warcraft after their joint project with GW dissolved.
-
Joe Baptist
United States
California
-
desertfox2004 wrote: maaikefest wrote: joedogboy wrote:
Personally, I have been involved in the GW "hobby" for over 20 years, and owned GW games from back in the days before Warhammer and 40k. I've also owned Avalon Hill games for over 25 years, to give some context.
I've worked at game stores, volunteered at cons, created house rules, scenarios, and fan fiction for games - including GW games. I even worked for GW for a while - but didn't really fit in with my regional management's cult style of top-down leadership - I was fired for being a "heretic" when I suggested ways to improve the way we did business (several of those suggestions actually were implemented after I left the company - either because someone else used my ideas, or because other people came up with the same ideas).
I have seen GW do great things for their customers and independent retailers, and have seen them make some really stupid business moves that hurt themselves and angered their customers and retailers. I have also seen them make some gutsy business moves that have angered some customers and retailers, but benefited others.
Sometimes I am really angry at GW's management, and at their decisions, because I am emotionally invested in their games, and care enough that I want them to continue to provide "toys" for their customers (including me). Even so, I do not hate GW, and am willing/able to look at their side in a business decision.
http://www.bbb.org/greater-san-francisco/business-reviews/ho...In fairness to Joe, he did state in his post that he had worked for GW. BBB files can be out of date - the reference is from 2007. In any case, despite the fact that Joe has been kind of irritating in his strident defense of GW, I don't think it's helpful to go around to every thread "outing" him as a (possibly former) GW store manager. The guy is still a BGG member, and we shouldn't let our feelings on this matter get so inflamed that we start really hurting feelings and turning people off of the site entirely. FWIW - I've probably been guilty of a certain amount of overzealousness in making my points on this subject. For that, I'm sorry. But lay off the guy already, OK - this really isn't helping. Thanks.
Thanks for the support, desertfox.
I had to send the local BBB a "Cease & Desist" email, asking them not to list my name as "owner" of a store that I worked at for a few months in 2003/4. They removed the incorrect information regarding me, and apologized - something that maaikefest has yet to do.
I do wonder how they decided - in 2007 - to put my name there. Was it a gross error at the mall office, or was it perhaps a joke by some of my former coworkers?
I have also had to point out in at least one of the other threads where maaikefest posted this link that I would prefer to think of BGG as a community where I can actually post my real name in my profile.
As to any implication that I am somehow not worthy of participating in this discussion, or that I am a GW "shill" (as some have suggested), take a look at my profile here at BGG, and check to see if I actually am a site member, or if I'm just here to defend GW.
-
Matija Han
Serbia
Belgrade
-
I would like to provide a gamers and BGG users perspective on the GW C&D.
We all know that IP protection laws exist, and that they can and sometimes will be enforced by the companies owning the IP. This is neither good nor bad by itself, it is a necessity of the current system we live in.
What made me angry about GW action is the following:
BGG is a growing site, and had been a source of fan-made material for GW as well as non-GW games for years now - and this was more or less ignored on behalf of GW. During this time, BGG has developed a growing community of it's own - growing both in numbers and in the influence it has on the marketing of board games. This is beneficial for both gamers and game publishers alike.
Then Space Hulk appears, and as expected, being such a good game, it makes a big success here on BGG. Suddenly, GW starts taking big interest in what happens on BGG! The fact that this has happend only a couple of months after SH's big success here tells me that GW has reckognized the advertising potential that BGG rating board has on the global gaming market, and has decided to remodel BGG to suit it's needs.
Next thing we know, GW takes an exceedingly aggressive step in this direction, with total disrespect for the community that is behind BGG, and which provides the power that BGG is starting to acquire in the board game market. They request indiscriminate file removal, but not the game entry removal!
Fact is, there are people (and I think there's many of them) who come to BGG to check the highest rating games in order to consider buying some of them. So, BGG clearly has a big advertising potential. But, BGG is also a place for gamers to meet in goodwill and exchange fan-made material, photos, stories and such...
GW has acted with a moto: take what you want, sue what you don't. Very ruthlessly, efficiently and indiscriminately.
Yes, some of the removed files could have been illegal (not in a criminal way, but only due to people not caring to read the small print), but if GW is not happy with BGG policies which seem to be ok with every other gaming company which has it's entries here, than I say: let GW stay clear of BGG altogether.
Yes, we all would lose by that because we would not be able to exchange our ideas and what we like about their games (which are in my opinion mostly gorgeous), but I think that like this we risk even more!
I want BGG to remain what it is. I don't want to see other game publishing companies one by one following suit because this has come to pass. I want to say how I feel about this in order to try to prevent that.
If GW is aggressively weilding it's power against what we stand for, than I feel it is entirely ok to cut down the free advertising we have provided for them. In my comment I have written what I really think about Space Hulk - that it is an awesome game, but I don't want for our community to become a part of a corporate marketing machinery which has to put up with lawsuit threats for posting playeraids online.
If GW comes to our party, it is not entitled to play it's own music. If it threatens with lawyers, it can very well leave for all I care. I don't like powergamers in real life any more than I do in Warhammer 40K.
-
Quijanoth
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
-
Moorman wrote:
Yes, some of the removed files could have been illegal (not in a criminal way...)
Sorry, I know I said I wasn't going to pester anyone with my opinion any more, but I have to speak up here...illegal = criminally prosecutable. If you're arguing natural law versus positive law...much larger debate probably outside the scope of discussion, but I love the topic, so, if you'd like to switch gears...
-
Matija Han
Serbia
Belgrade
-
Quijanoth wrote: Moorman wrote:
Yes, some of the removed files could have been illegal (not in a criminal way...)
Sorry, I know I said I wasn't going to pester anyone with my opinion any more, but I have to speak up here...illegal = criminally prosecutable. If you're arguing natural law versus positive law...much larger debate probably outside the scope of discussion, but I love the topic, so, if you'd like to switch gears...
You are right. Action on part of GW is legitimate as much as it is crude.
Another important part of that sentence is:
Moorman wrote: ...Yes, some of the removed files could have been illegal (not in a criminal way, but only due to people not caring to read the small print)...
Some of them could have been perfectly legal as well, but now we'll just never know, as GW has jumped in with a threat of a lawsuit with a lawyer they can afford for themselves.
All this could have been done in a nicer way - as is currently taking place with the new feature of BGG in development which would enable users to defend their files as legitimate in case they are accused of infringement. Like this, noone stood the chance.
If someone sits on your spot in the theatre, you have two options:
1. you can first try to remind them kindly that they might be sitting in the wrong spot and that they should check their ticket
or
2. you can call the manager right away and demand that this person be thrown out!
I know that for you, being a lawyer (or of some other vocation providing you insight into law) it seems impossible for someone to not check their ticket before sitting somewhere in a theatre, but for me who has very little such knowledge it is a very probable situation.
As a long-time customer of GW, I am angered by the way GW has done this, not with what they have done.
-
William Hostman
United States
Eagle River
Alaska
Gaming in Greater Anchorage area, Alaska since 1978. Looking for Indy-willing RPG players in Eagle River (or willing to drive to Eagle River). Geekmail me if interested.
Yes, this really is what I looked like when I uploaded that avatar. Not that it's quite current anymore.
-
Quijanoth wrote: Moorman wrote:
Yes, some of the removed files could have been illegal (not in a criminal way...)
Sorry, I know I said I wasn't going to pester anyone with my opinion any more, but I have to speak up here...illegal = criminally prosecutable. If you're arguing natural law versus positive law...much larger debate probably outside the scope of discussion, but I love the topic, so, if you'd like to switch gears...
Not quite. Illegal means prohibited by law. Criminal, in the US at least, has the additional denotation of being tried in criminal courts with a (outside of Louisianna) standard of reasonable doubt and innocent until proven guilty.
All copyright infringement is illegal; only certain forms are criminal.
-
Michael Leuchtenburg
United States
Sunderland
Massachusetts
-
Your comment that "they're require to protect them in order to maintan them" doesn't fit with my understanding of copyright law. Citation?
-
|
|
