SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

JScones · 09-08-06, 11:48 PM

Exactly Jay, the Holy Grail of this whole topic is the citation of a precedential court case. Until then, it's untested and the whole debate is open to anyone and everyone's interpretation.

At the end of the day it's up to a court to decide on a case-by-case basis whether copyright has been infringed, and they do so based on much more than just a licence agreement.

I am aware of more conventional software copyright infringement cases in Australia where the courts have ruled both for and against plaintiffs based simply on how the files in question formed part of the overall package (ie integral to the running of the software or not) and this is despite any agreements or claims the developers may have made. At least the two cases I am aware of provide nice guidance when it comes to determining what files can or can not be used by others despite a developer's claim to copyright, but I'd be loathed to apply the findings of those cases to this scenario. I can though, apply them to the use of SH3Cmdr, just as a highlight.

Basically Ubisoft can assert their interpretation of their rights as they choose, but they won't be the one finding anyone guilty, regardless of what they write. But I think modders will find that as long as they release ONLY their modified files for FREE and do not negatively impact on the current or future earnings of Ubisoft, Ubisoft will be happy. Hell, they're getting greater exposure hence potential increased income from sales for no effort in return! But create a new "Subs in the Pacific" mod and expect to get into trouble pretty fast. That's quite black and white as it impacts on Ubisoft's future earnings.

Re who owns what files, there's lots of valid points mentioned by CWorth and a few others that courts would take into account and indeed do take into account when considering copyright infringement cases. But unless I saw a precedential case specific to this scenario, I wouldn't know which way a court would ultimately decide whether my cloned X class which I released for free as a new SH3 inclusion was mine or Ubisoft's, considering what they need to take into account to make a decision. I can guess, but as Jay says, what weight would it carry?

09-08-06, 11:48 PM	#8
JScones Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 5,501 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	Exactly Jay, the Holy Grail of this whole topic is the citation of a precedential court case. Until then, it's untested and the whole debate is open to anyone and everyone's interpretation. At the end of the day it's up to a court to decide on a case-by-case basis whether copyright has been infringed, and they do so based on much more than just a licence agreement. I am aware of more conventional software copyright infringement cases in Australia where the courts have ruled both for and against plaintiffs based simply on how the files in question formed part of the overall package (ie integral to the running of the software or not) and this is despite any agreements or claims the developers may have made. At least the two cases I am aware of provide nice guidance when it comes to determining what files can or can not be used by others despite a developer's claim to copyright, but I'd be loathed to apply the findings of those cases to this scenario. I can though, apply them to the use of SH3Cmdr, just as a highlight. Basically Ubisoft can assert their interpretation of their rights as they choose, but they won't be the one finding anyone guilty, regardless of what they write. But I think modders will find that as long as they release ONLY their modified files for FREE and do not negatively impact on the current or future earnings of Ubisoft, Ubisoft will be happy. Hell, they're getting greater exposure hence potential increased income from sales for no effort in return! But create a new "Subs in the Pacific" mod and expect to get into trouble pretty fast. That's quite black and white as it impacts on Ubisoft's future earnings. Re who owns what files, there's lots of valid points mentioned by CWorth and a few others that courts would take into account and indeed do take into account when considering copyright infringement cases. But unless I saw a precedential case specific to this scenario, I wouldn't know which way a court would ultimately decide whether my cloned X class which I released for free as a new SH3 inclusion was mine or Ubisoft's, considering what they need to take into account to make a decision. I can guess, but as Jay says, what weight would it carry? Last edited by JScones; 09-09-06 at 12:01 AM.