Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Not only that, but I believe the "lovers from waring factions" concept was done before Romeo & Juliet.

Wasn't it the Greek play in Midsummer's Night Dream?

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well then, here's something to send the account into the red -- while not bothering to check if it's stepping on anyone else's toes, Sony through the RIAA is simultaneously 'defending its intellectual property rights' like the proverbial bull in the china shop:

RIAA sues 71-year-old grandfather for downloads by his teenager grandchildren
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3092854.stm

RIAA sues 12-year-old girl
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96797,00.html

But this is not new, or even the worst example. Corporations have been on the copyright warpath for many years now.

1996: ASCAP threatens to sue girlscouts for singing without paying

http://www.s-t.com/daily/08-96/08-23-96/b02li056.htm

Quote:
"They buy paper, twine and glue for their crafts - they can pay for the music, too," says John Lo Frumento, ASCAP's chief operating officer. If offenders keep singing without paying, he says, we will sue them if necessary."

Yep, gotta stop those thieving girlscouts from damaging those corporate profits.

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, all of Shakespeare's works are in the public domain. Copyright only Lasts some 70 years (depending on country and what exactly is copyrighted of course).

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Un-F-ing believable!

I can almost understand going after people downloading music on the internet. Although I do believe that the heavy handed approach is going to cost them more in the long run then they recoup. I support people's right to make galactically stupid business decisions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

But are you telling me that people can't sit around in a group and sing a copyrighted song? What logic is that based on? That's freaking ridiculous.

[ September 09, 2003, 18:14: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Outside article:

The Music Industry Needs Hackers, Not Lawyers

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Its no joke if your name is on the list. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Yes, they really do want to control your every breath, twitch, fart, or blink and extract profit from it.

Indiana Karaoke clubs sued for copyright infringement.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97043,00.html

I can just see the secret RIAA labs where they are researching the detection of what songs you are thinking about by your brainwaves. Soon there will be scanners all over listening for tell-tale signs that you've got one of their copyrighted works stuck in your head & they'll send you a bill.

[ September 11, 2003, 17:23: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Back on topic, check this out. I especially like this part. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">o_O

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Not so oddly enough, Loser, I was going to mention that bit of information. It might be a detail that gives White Wolf a little bit of (if you will) credibility to their case, since one large corporation acknowledged White Wolf's rights. The WWF (now WWE) had a wrestler with a vampire gimmick called Gangrel. Any time you saw his name mentioned in print (like on their website or on the wrestler's figures), you saw a trademark for White Wolf. I don't know if there are any other instances. Marvel Comics has a similar copyright for "Hulk" Hogan. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

I finally got around to actually looking through the brief and I've got to say that I'm quite disappointed with white wolf. About 80% of those similarities can be applied to Blade, Dracula 2000, Vampires, and just about every other vamp flick that has been made in the Last decade.

Some of the similarities being cited were that silver is used to kill werewolves, that vampires are sensual, and that vampires and werewolves have an ancient rivalry. These are all things that have been in folklore for centuries, not creations of white wolf.

If WW thinks that it has a case then only cite the unique variations on the myths that were originated solely by WW. Not things like,'werewolves have a half form that is bigger than their human form' (that was first really done in 'The Howling' back in the early eighties).

As far as similarities with the characters... they aren't very original in the first place. Trying to say that you have cornered the market on femme fatales is an excercise in stupidity. You can also find correllations between the structure of vampire societies in WW products and just about any vampire movie. Why? Because WW drew upon existing vamp lore to create its books, they just did some reshuffling and polarized it a bit (having each clan personify a different aspect of the vamp myth).

I have been a long-time fan of WW and am quite familiar with the body of work that they have accumulated, but when I see them claiming responsibility for ideas older than dirt, and even lying about their own mythos, it really pisses me off. Pretentious swine.