This is what I had when I hit post seconds before you locked it.
I linked to two things in my last post, an article discussing specifically and technically how courts determine what a derivative work is and an article on derivative works by a law firm that specifically focuses on technology copyright issues. How could you possibly describe those as "linking to unrelated articles?"
And I completely disagree with what you said about rewriting sections one at a time. If what you were saying was true, a system like the AFC comparison test wouldn't have ever been needed in the first place. The portions of the test that deals with the code at multiple levels of abstractions is specifically set up to detect potential derivative properties that is obfuscated by re-writing individual portions one at a time.
While I'll grant you that it's theoretically possible to turn one piece of code into something else completely different, it's hardly anywhere near a likely scenerio. And, it's certainly not something that could be the basis of a site's plagiarism policy. It's already hard enough to detect plagiarizer -- if Benumbed was a smarter, I would have never noticed -- but if site admins consider the highly unlikely case as the default one, i.e. any case where you can't match it up section by section is a case where someone pulled off one of these transformations, you might as well throw author rights out the door. Every plagiarism case will quickly be dismissed after a bit of obfuscation.
Alright boys and squirrels, I'm stepping in and locking this down because I don't think Kael ever will, for fear of being branded as suppressing the truth or something. I'm sure any action he takes would be thrown into a negative light.
Quote from Mazzlefizz »
I'm confused. Didn't you say looking like a prick could be a positive thing? Anway, you should know better, Tekk. I have a valid point to make, and I don't care if it makes me look like a prick or not. I think all of my arguments are solid. The internets people can think whatever they want about me personally.
I said I liked dick... man you people are too damn easy to get confused.
Regardless, you wanted to make your point, the point has been made... and then stabbed repeatedly into what is now a long dead kodo. This thread wasn't *too* dramaful, but I'm gonna go ahead and enact the drama policy anyway. This discussion really is to the point of just going around in circles. If you have issues with the lock feel free to contact me or whatever.
If you wish to pursue the matter further, I'd suggest you find a copyright attorney. Otherwise, as it stands, Kael has said he's not going to pull the addon.
I think that's the first time Orion's actually said something smart... wow. But he's 100% right. If it matters that much, there's only one thing that has the authority to interpret copyright law, and that's the courts. Kael's made his decision, and he thinks the addon's been significantly changed. Take it there if the matter really bothers you that much... otherwise, seriously Mazz, stop making yourself look like a total prick :P
@tek: You know what I actually hate that "I can play that way stance". I wish people would just stop playing that way period. I'm reverting it. Let MazzleUI use Recount.
Oh I understand, but even if Mazz pissed me off (he hasn't personally, but thi bullshit is kinda... yea...) I still wouldn't go back on my "my code is open" stance. Kinda ruins the whole thing if I make a special case and decide to enact my copyright when I just said I don't believe in copyright at all.
Quote from Jinglehopper »
Oh really? The article feels nasty? That wasn't my intention. I agree that the article was biased towards protecting copyright but I felt strongly that the issue was being ignored.
I didn't mean to even attack Kaelten, but he said the things I quoted him as saying. I couldn't ignore his refusal to account for Benumbed's actions.
Yea, it did come across that way. I dunno, maybe you could have written it differently to be more neutral, but it does come across as if you're writing the article for Mazzle directly and not to bring light to a conflict/issue in the community.
Meh, I can't be assed to create an account just to post a comment that will get burned down, so I'll post shit here (not that anyone there will come here to read it anyway...)
I've dealt with Mazz on a few occasions. He uses (or is it past-tense used) a number of my addons in his compilation. I'm well aware he's a dick and he's well aware I'm an ass... yet we seem to have gotten along quite well. Kinda funny when he's pissed damn near every other dev out there off somehow.
However... "Copyrights are protected in all forms of art, but that hasn't stifled creativity in any way." That's total bullshit. Frankly that's exactly what copyrights have done. Now, the funny thing here... I was raised by an artist. Painting, photography, pottery, carpentry, masonry... my dad does it all. And ever since I was old enough to comprehend it, he taught me the importance of copyrights, how you get one, what rights it gives you... all that jazz. He pounded that shit into my brain.
And I think it's a broken system. It doesn't work, and it gives too much power to certain people. And those people are almost always NOT the original artist.
Anyway, my point here is that copyrights really don't do any good in the addon community. There is no profit to be had (and a few have tried) that would warrent the need to restrict distribution of addons. For that matter, every author out there that puts his works out WANTS them to be shared... OR THEY WOULD NEVER PUBLISH THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. It's not as if addon code must be shown to the public for an addon to work at all, an author can "protect" their code by simply keeping it private.
On the flip side, all the sites, including ace, have respected takedown requests in the past. But that really only applies to "original works" as far as I've seen. People rewrite other people's addons all the time, it should be taken as a complement really. All my code is wide open up for anyone to use, and it always has been. And why shouldn't it? Credit can be given if desired (I personally don't care)... but bringing copyright into the whole matter has one purpose and one purpose only, to stifle the addon that was spawned off of yours. There's no way I can interpret that except that the author crying copyright doesn't want anyone else to compete directly with him. Why? No money is involved. There's nothing here except ego and pride... and as I said before, I personally find it a complement when someone takes my code... it means I did well and they liked it, I just didn't hit their need exactly.
Well, meh, enough ramble. Mazz, if you do read this ever... just drop it. Really, it's not worth it, nothing good will come of it, and really you're just making yourself look like a prick. We already know you are, we've accepted it, ya don't need to drive home the point.
Besides, who wants stupid 3D frames anyway? That's just fluff that wastes resources!