View Single Post
  #52  
Old December 14th, 2010, 07:23 PM
Soyweiser's Avatar

Soyweiser Soyweiser is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,735
Thanks: 272
Thanked 120 Times in 93 Posts
Soyweiser is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Should banned user mods/maps/etc be deleted from these boards?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muse View Post
Public Domain is literally and shortly defined as: "That which is not covered by Intellectual Property rights."
For the United States: http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-definitions.html
Yeah, and the faq doesn't really answer the question what is covered by intellectual property rights. It does nicely show when something is in the public domain.

" “public domain” if it is no longer under copyright protection or if it failed to meet the requirements for copyright protection. "

But it fails to list these requirements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muse View Post
The data on the fantasy nation itself is copyrighted as original work.
The mod itself is not. The mod is public domain, and may be freely distributed.
Actually the mod is programming code. So in that way all the normal rules for software code apply. And software can be copyrighted. Sure it isn't software in the strictest sense. But I think you could argue that it is a form of computer code. And in this sense the creation of these mods is a creative act.

Sure if Sombre had used sprites released in a games workshop game for his mods, and perhaps edited them a little bit it would not have been creative. But in this case I think it is.

Sprites are also an important part of the mods. Are they not original work? The statistics abilities and the description of the different units are also data. And thus original work. And while rules of games cannot be copyrighted, the specific expressions of these can. Which I think would also consider the different statistics and abilities given to the different mods.

Ps: did you just really call mod creators uncreative? So the creation of the different Warhammer mods by Sombre is a "uncreative variation on the earlier, underlying work." And not a creative reinterpretation of earlier work in a new environment?

And sure L. Batlin & Son, Inc. v. Snyder show that a copy that clearly looks a lot alike doesn't fall under copyright. But that doesn't apply in this case. Lets take the example of the Sombre warhammer mods again. The creation of these sprites is a variation of the physical models and drawings that Games Workshop has made. But not an uncreative one. As Sombre has used a new medium, sprites. Instead of the traditional ways games workshop shows their different fantasy models (pewter, and normal drawings). So I don't even think that in the case of the creations by Sombre it constitutes as uncreative.

See Alfred Bell & Co. v. Catalda Fine Arts, Inc. for example.
Reply With Quote