Our records show that you have outstanding author rewards points. Please confirm your latest payment information and redeem your points balance via the Author Reward Store.
If everyone is talking legal, would there not have to be sueing involved before anyone would *have* to take an addon down?
I would suppose wowi, curseforge etc. have those checkmarks for agreeing to only upload own data for exactly that purpose - not being the one that can be attacked for other peoples violences.
Edit: Oh well, I guess that depends on national law so the question is more academic i guess.
If everyone is talking legal, would there not have to be sueing involved before anyone would *have* to take an addon down?
Not really. You are obligated to drive within the speed limit even when cops aren't around. WoWAce is obligated to remove copyrighted works whether you sue them or not. Suing is simply a remedy for when they don't act the way they're supposed to.
I didn't remove DaPortrait because when reviewed, by myself and others, the only proof we found of any copyright infringement was based in the revision history, not in the current product.
If I had reviewed it earlier in the development, yes I would have removed it. But at the time it was reviewed it could have been uploaded again and wouldn't have been removed.
In regards to the cords data, benumbed removed mazzle's on Feb 27th, I didn't see the first email from mazzle or respond until the 28th.
In regards to the article, it does feel as if it fell on me pretty hard. I said a lot more in that interview than what was quoted. I was also told it would be an examination of copyrights in the context of wow addons. Instead it reads as a recounting of one man being wronged by another and powerless to stop it. There is also some blatantly wrong information in there, but I'm not saying that greg made up things.
Also of interest to some might be the fact that Mazzle solicited Greg to write the article. So yes, he's still been active in this.
When I was originally approached on this issue, I didn't have time to sit down and examine the code so I put it on my list. Between dealing with home, working massive amounts of hours, and moving across country it was some weeks before I could examine it. During this time, Mazzle first attempted to get Cairenn to pressure me to action, then my coworkers and boss, and now finally is trying to bring the court of public opinion against me.
It's obvious to me that Mazzle is hung up on this issue and finds my resolutions inadequate. However, the idea and method used in the two addons cannot, to my knowledge, be copyrighted.
This whole saga has already blown way out of proportion. I feel certain that benumbed didn't act from a place of malice, of course I could be wrong.
My stance on this issue by no means signifies that I don't value and respect authors rights to their addons. In fact have spent hundreds of man hours working towards making sure they are respected. At the same time, I do feel that over aggressive copyright enforcement such as what mazzle is attempting to do here ultimately hurts the addon community, and stifles things. Most, if not all, addons are derived works of others, and ultimately we figured all of this out by watching what blizzard did with the stock UI. Many of the early addons where copy-pasta of frameXML files that had been hacked or tweaked.
I think some people here need to realize that we are not in a court room. While the legal issues can be interesting and useful to know about, they are not the only relevant issues to debate. The moral, personal, social issues and opinions are just as relevant here. I don't know what's "right" and "wrong" legally in this particular case. If he truly believes that his legal rights have been violated and that he cannot get a satisfying solution, he can take it to court. Otherwise he and everyone else should accept that the issue will be debated both legally and based on opinions.
Yes. They would be able to sue each other if they started mining from each other, but they would have to show that the offending party did indeed copy the data from them rather than mining it themselves.
Actually, in this case they wouldn't. The original data source is publishing the exact same data that each client has, they wouldn't be able to sue based on the availability of the information. Remember we're talking about information here not the display.
Quote from Cogwheel »
Except you ignore my other posts that have said derivative works are equally covered. If you can show that the data was indeed copied and reformatted, then it would be judged a violation of copyright. If you can't prove it then... well... innocent until proven guilty prevails.
You seem to think I'm contradicting myself when I'm not.
I'm not ignoring your previous comments, and your right if the data was originally created by the author then he would have a case. I'm still pounding on the point that the original data source is still the public domain, as Blizzard has allowed it to be there, and that even if this addon author manipulates the data it's not his to copyright.
If Blizzard came by and said "Oh, this positioning is neat, we're going to use it when we start doing 3D models by default!", would they be subject to copyright infringement? I would hope not is it was their data to begin with only having someone, or many people, just moving their co-ordinates and changing their size values.
Quote from Cogwheel »
Not really. You are obligated to drive within the speed limit even when cops aren't around. WoWAce is obligated to remove copyrighted works whether you sue them or not. Suing is simply a remedy for when they don't act the way they're supposed to.
This is incorrect. If his copyrighted content were on the site (his addon package) and he requested his software to be removed, after confirming his identity, the site owners would be required to remove that content. In this case the author of the addon is not the person requesting content removal. In this case the copyright owner must present proof of ownership before the site owner is required to take down the content. That is, if the content is indeed protected under copyright which I do not believe it is.
The moral, personal, social issues and opinions are just as relevant here. I don't know what's "right" and "wrong" legally in this particular case. If he truly believes that his legal rights have been violated and that he cannot get a satisfying solution, he can take it to court. Otherwise he and everyone else should accept that the issue will be debated both legally and based on opinions.
Morality is a completely separate issue, and I do 100% believe that copying anyone's data without prior consent is wrong.
My argument is based on the fact that copyright is a legal term and as such is not a moral issue.
Actually, in this case they wouldn't. The original data source is publishing the exact same data that each client has, they wouldn't be able to sue based on the availability of the information. Remember we're talking about information here not the display.
No we're not. We're talking source code. It was the copying of the contents of Mazzle's Lua file that's at issue.
I'm not ignoring your previous comments, and your right if the data was originally created by the author then he would have a case. I'm still pounding on the point that the original data source is still the public domain, as Blizzard has allowed it to be there, and that even if this addon author manipulates the data it's not his to copyright.
And you're still missing the point that it's not the data we're talking about. It's the source code.
This is incorrect. If his copyrighted content were on the site (his addon package) and he requested his software to be removed, after confirming his identity, the site owners would be required to remove that content. In this case the author of the addon is not the person requesting content removal. In this case the copyright owner must present proof of ownership before the site owner is required to take down the content. That is, if the content is indeed protected under copyright which I do not believe it is.
First off, the copyright owner has every right to request the mods remove his work. If you stole something from me and gave it to someone else, I would have the right to take it from them. Second, let me say this once more to make sure it doesn't get missed: it's NOT THE DATA that is copyrighted, it's the Lua files.
While at risk of being flamed, I step away from this thread for a few hours and THIS is what I come back to?
Holy macaroni ... It's an interesting conversation going on here, but all this legal talk brings me to one question? Which one of you guys is actually a lawyer who specifically deals with copyright infringement? Since everyone seems to have various defnitions of it (hell, I too have my own thoughts about what exactly it is.).
Holy macaroni ... It's an interesting conversation going on here, but all this legal talk brings me to one question? Which one of you guys is actually a lawyer who specifically deals with copyright infringement? Since everyone seems to have various defnitions of it (hell, I too have my own thoughts about what exactly it is.).
Your question is irrelevant (and is related to the Appeal to Authority logical fallacy). Lawyers disagree on things like this too. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand the law any more than you need to be a raider to understand a class' mechanics. All a law degree does is give you the privilege to take the bar exam.
I.e. you appeal to an authority as if appealing to that authority made the statement true. However statements are true or false independent of what a perceived authority says.
Rather there was a request for qualification, which is valid and not a fallacy. A qualified (and yes there are poor ones too) lawyer could point to prior cases, law paragraph etc. Knowledge and experience is relevant in an argument and not a rethorical fallacy. Statements are still true or false independent, but reference to actual facts (prior cases, law paragraphs) are evidence that is tangible in evaluating statements. :P
As an artist you really should understand copyrights, even if you don't believe in them or choose to enact yours.
We are artists? :P
Seriously, I have put little to no thought into licensing and copyrights in the context developing addons for WoW. My guess is that this is true for most addon developers. The whole concept of copyrights for something as insignificant as addons seems silly to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm aware of fair use. His statements didn't make any qualifications as to how much he was copying.
But i don't see the point in your post... you seemed to have missed the ";P" at the end of mine...
I would suppose wowi, curseforge etc. have those checkmarks for agreeing to only upload own data for exactly that purpose - not being the one that can be attacked for other peoples violences.
Edit: Oh well, I guess that depends on national law so the question is more academic i guess.
Actually you'll find that most libraries provide copy machines and don't regulate their use. It's not their job to enforce copyrights.
Damn those liberal libraries.
Not really. You are obligated to drive within the speed limit even when cops aren't around. WoWAce is obligated to remove copyrighted works whether you sue them or not. Suing is simply a remedy for when they don't act the way they're supposed to.
I didn't remove DaPortrait because when reviewed, by myself and others, the only proof we found of any copyright infringement was based in the revision history, not in the current product.
If I had reviewed it earlier in the development, yes I would have removed it. But at the time it was reviewed it could have been uploaded again and wouldn't have been removed.
In regards to the cords data, benumbed removed mazzle's on Feb 27th, I didn't see the first email from mazzle or respond until the 28th.
In regards to the article, it does feel as if it fell on me pretty hard. I said a lot more in that interview than what was quoted. I was also told it would be an examination of copyrights in the context of wow addons. Instead it reads as a recounting of one man being wronged by another and powerless to stop it. There is also some blatantly wrong information in there, but I'm not saying that greg made up things.
Also of interest to some might be the fact that Mazzle solicited Greg to write the article. So yes, he's still been active in this.
When I was originally approached on this issue, I didn't have time to sit down and examine the code so I put it on my list. Between dealing with home, working massive amounts of hours, and moving across country it was some weeks before I could examine it. During this time, Mazzle first attempted to get Cairenn to pressure me to action, then my coworkers and boss, and now finally is trying to bring the court of public opinion against me.
It's obvious to me that Mazzle is hung up on this issue and finds my resolutions inadequate. However, the idea and method used in the two addons cannot, to my knowledge, be copyrighted.
This whole saga has already blown way out of proportion. I feel certain that benumbed didn't act from a place of malice, of course I could be wrong.
My stance on this issue by no means signifies that I don't value and respect authors rights to their addons. In fact have spent hundreds of man hours working towards making sure they are respected. At the same time, I do feel that over aggressive copyright enforcement such as what mazzle is attempting to do here ultimately hurts the addon community, and stifles things. Most, if not all, addons are derived works of others, and ultimately we figured all of this out by watching what blizzard did with the stock UI. Many of the early addons where copy-pasta of frameXML files that had been hacked or tweaked.
Actually, in this case they wouldn't. The original data source is publishing the exact same data that each client has, they wouldn't be able to sue based on the availability of the information. Remember we're talking about information here not the display.
I'm not ignoring your previous comments, and your right if the data was originally created by the author then he would have a case. I'm still pounding on the point that the original data source is still the public domain, as Blizzard has allowed it to be there, and that even if this addon author manipulates the data it's not his to copyright.
If Blizzard came by and said "Oh, this positioning is neat, we're going to use it when we start doing 3D models by default!", would they be subject to copyright infringement? I would hope not is it was their data to begin with only having someone, or many people, just moving their co-ordinates and changing their size values.
This is incorrect. If his copyrighted content were on the site (his addon package) and he requested his software to be removed, after confirming his identity, the site owners would be required to remove that content. In this case the author of the addon is not the person requesting content removal. In this case the copyright owner must present proof of ownership before the site owner is required to take down the content. That is, if the content is indeed protected under copyright which I do not believe it is.
edit: grammer
Morality is a completely separate issue, and I do 100% believe that copying anyone's data without prior consent is wrong.
My argument is based on the fact that copyright is a legal term and as such is not a moral issue.
GOLDSELLER!
No we're not. We're talking source code. It was the copying of the contents of Mazzle's Lua file that's at issue.
And you're still missing the point that it's not the data we're talking about. It's the source code.
First off, the copyright owner has every right to request the mods remove his work. If you stole something from me and gave it to someone else, I would have the right to take it from them. Second, let me say this once more to make sure it doesn't get missed: it's NOT THE DATA that is copyrighted, it's the Lua files.
Holy macaroni ... It's an interesting conversation going on here, but all this legal talk brings me to one question? Which one of you guys is actually a lawyer who specifically deals with copyright infringement? Since everyone seems to have various defnitions of it (hell, I too have my own thoughts about what exactly it is.).
Your question is irrelevant (and is related to the Appeal to Authority logical fallacy). Lawyers disagree on things like this too. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand the law any more than you need to be a raider to understand a class' mechanics. All a law degree does is give you the privilege to take the bar exam.
Appeal to authority is:
"As Einstein said, all refrigerators are hot."
I.e. you appeal to an authority as if appealing to that authority made the statement true. However statements are true or false independent of what a perceived authority says.
Rather there was a request for qualification, which is valid and not a fallacy. A qualified (and yes there are poor ones too) lawyer could point to prior cases, law paragraph etc. Knowledge and experience is relevant in an argument and not a rethorical fallacy. Statements are still true or false independent, but reference to actual facts (prior cases, law paragraphs) are evidence that is tangible in evaluating statements. :P
Appeal to authority tries to prove a point by using the status of someone else who has made an argument.
Asking if any of us is a lawyer is an underhanded attempt to remove credibility because we aren't "authorities."
They're two sides of the same coin.
We are artists? :P
Seriously, I have put little to no thought into licensing and copyrights in the context developing addons for WoW. My guess is that this is true for most addon developers. The whole concept of copyrights for something as insignificant as addons seems silly to me.