Today's hidden megaton: Earthbound is coming

[outlawauron]

noname2200 said:

outlawauron said:

1. If I did make that song and someone released on the internet for free, and I made no efforts to copyright the material. I'm shit out of luck. Now, if someone was making money off of it by selling it online, then I agree you have a pretty strong case to shut the other parties down. Even then, there are several laws about free use, etc. that the mere distribution of it wouldn't be effected based on my permission (unless you argued it was done for defamation or other sinister reasons).

2. Every case I've ever read about in regards to piracy has mostly to do with distributors of content. I'd be worried if I owned or managed a site dedicated to the distribution of ROMs, but certainly being a consumer of one.

3. I believe it's true because I do it. I have a copy of Earthbound, but I'm not going to bring my SNES out of the closet to play it. I'll just download a convinent ROM and don't do with the hassle.

4. This can depend on a multitude of factors and semantics. Certain countries deal with these laws in different ways. I have first-hand knowledge that in some Asian countries that have no license or rights for the US, no effort they can make would be upheld or enforced in US courts.

 

I'll say, I'm no lawyer, but I've taken a few law classes and try to read up on cases and events regarding this sort of thing. Also, this is soooo off-topic.

For 1): My understanding is that the material in question here is, in fact, fully copyrighted in most (if not all) of the relevant places in Europe. The fact that they decided not to release the game does not alter this: they have the legal right to be dicks. More to the point, a copyright applies as soon as a work is created (at least under American law). Which makes perfect sense: you don't want a person to have to rush to register a copyright for every drawing, painting, website, or other common creation. A formal copyright merely gives you the right to sue violators, and this right can be retroactive to a degree.

Again though, the latter part is likely moot, because I would be absolutely floored if the extremely litigious Nintendo didn't register its copyrights in a timely manner.

For 2) Then you've missed a whole bunch. Google "RIAA sues" and start browsing the results in order. The first one regards a lawsuit against a 12-year old girl. Ah, those were good times for a news reader...

3) "I do it, therefore it's legal" is an interesting legal defense. I've actually advised more than one client to steer clear of it, though.

4) You're correct. From what I understand though, most of Europe is quite different than the Wild West that is most of Asia.

 

And yeah, we're off-topic, but I'd say this topic has pretty much run its course, so I vote we...

hijcak it.

1. Generally those in creative professions are apart of unions which tend to have guidelines and bylaws to prevent a lot of that from happening. There is a lot of necessary copyrights and trademarks though.

2. Only problem is that the RIAA is a pretty laughable organization (seriously, suing limewire for more cash than what exists in the world) and wouldn't be dealing with a lot of what we're talking about. They're biggest thing is movies and music.

3. Well, I wasn't from a legal advice stance. Just saying to otakugamer that you could own games and still download stuff. You don't have to be one or the other (although, I tend to buy way more than I should, check my backlog).

4. I'm fairly ignornant of Europe, but that's because each country has laws that are super different from others. It's much easier to learn about countries where they're far clearer and clean cut.