Copywrite laws are they to vague?

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Will:
To me, it just seems wrong that something that is not a direct copy be a violation of copyright, the right of a creator/copyright holder to determine how his/her/its individual works are duplicated and distributed. It does not give the creator/copyright holder the right to prevent the creation of any similar works.

Simply saying no direct copies is insufficient; for example: what happens if someone changes the color on the menu for SEIV? It isn't a direct copy any longer, after all. However, it still has all the problems of a direct copy. Sure, something as independant as producing skins from Marvel characters as a mod for a game is far removed from simply changing a color on a menu. However, the main difference between the two is one of degree (granted, an extreme degree). Where do you draw the line between that which you would like to be acceptable (skins) and that which you would not (changing a menu color)? Any such line is arbitrary, and subject to interpertation.

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Pax:
I think the best thing to do would be to extend Trademark status to characters in continual, renewed use (that would protect Superman and Batman as continued sources of income for DC Comics, for example -- and keep Mickey Mouse et al solidly in Disney hands).

Individual products -- films, shorts, music, etc -- shoudl have a corporate life of 75 to 100 years, or a private life of "creator's life + 25 years" ... and that's it.

The corporation gets a solid entury of profit out of something; an individual author or artist can know that their profitable products (if any, ofc) will continue to support their family after they die, even supporting newborn children until after their expected college graduation.

But you don't end up with "mine in perpetuity" issues.

It might actually be possible to get enough corporate support for that solution to make it through legislation.

Wait, no - you still couldn't make skins - the characters you are making skins of would be trademarked in perpetuity.

Interesting suggestion though.

[Baron Grazic]

What I don't understand about this discussion is why Marvel or their 'reprentatives' sent the letter in the first place, when on their web site is "The Freedom Force Webkit contains awesome assets to help you build your own fan site".

So they will help you build your own fansite but acording to the letter Rojero received, he "is not permitted to copy or reproduce the copyrighted images or distinctive likenesses of Marvel's characters, nor use the registered trademarks associated with those characters such as Spider-Man, Wolverine, Nightcrawler, etc".

Why the hell do they have the fan site web kit, if you can not use their images on the web?
If they have tools avaiable for people to use, they can't then claim that their images are copyrighted, can they?

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Baron Grazic:
What I don't understand about this discussion is why Marvel or their 'reprentatives' sent the letter in the first place, when on their web site is "The Freedom Force Webkit contains awesome assets to help you build your own fan site".

So they will help you build your own fansite but acording to the letter Rojero received, he "is not permitted to copy or reproduce the copyrighted images or distinctive likenesses of Marvel's characters, nor use the registered trademarks associated with those characters such as Spider-Man, Wolverine, Nightcrawler, etc".

Why the hell do they have the fan site web kit, if you can not use their images on the web?
If they have tools avaiable for people to use, they can't then claim that their images are copyrighted, can they?

Many companies contract out to another company to protect their intellectual property, and that company is sometimes (often?) overzealous in protecting that IP; I suspect this is the case with Marvel.

[Erax]

Here's another real-life IP issue : the company I work for purchases machine parts from a certain supplier (the only one in the country for those specific parts).

Our maintenance people would like to have the supplier's drawings for a few critical parts so they could measure them on arrival, to ensure that they will assemble correctly when needed.

The problem is that the drawings are the supplier's IP and they might not want to hand them over, no matter how many non-disclosure agreemeents we sign. The reason is that if those drawings get out, the market may be flooded with pirate parts and the damage to their business will be so extensive that it isn't worth the risk.

We are essentially paying for other people's crimes. There may be a solution but it won't be easy.

[Pax]

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
I would agree that there is no action for which an argument cannot be made that there is some amount of greed behind the action; I would not agree that there are no actions completely unmotivated by greed. This isn't exactly something that can be argued; it's more of a philisophical position, I suppose.

I will restate: there is absolutely NO action which is wholly unmotivated by greed. IOW, greed is a component of the motivation behind every action of every human being on the planet, past present or future -- either an instinctive greed, or a conscious one.

Note, ofc, that greed doesn't have to reflect only material acquisitiveness. If you do something "because it makes you feel good to help people" ... that good feeling is what you're greedy for; the more you can manage to get it, the more you will, until the cost exceeds the gain (IOW, until you bump into some other element of greed in your life).

[Pax]

Originally posted by Baron Grazic:
What I don't understand about this discussion is why Marvel or their 'reprentatives' sent the letter in the first place, when on their web site is "The Freedom Force Webkit contains awesome assets to help you build your own fan site".

So they will help you build your own fansite but acording to the letter Rojero received, he "is not permitted to copy or reproduce the copyrighted images or distinctive likenesses of Marvel's characters, nor use the registered trademarks associated with those characters such as Spider-Man, Wolverine, Nightcrawler, etc".

Why the hell do they have the fan site web kit, if you can not use their images on the web?
If they have tools avaiable for people to use, they can't then claim that their images are copyrighted, can they?

I'm sure the SKINS wer enot in the fansite webkit, though. The webkit would contain a liscense -- at least implicit -- allowing the INCLUDED images to be used, without alterations beyond resizing to fit the website, as-is.

When you go beyond that liscense ... the whole thing can be revoked, and ALL your use of such images can become a problem -- even the ones used as-is from the website kit.