| |||||||||||||
Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoningInteroperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoningPosted Aug 25, 2005 7:41 UTC (Thu) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998)In reply to: Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning by FlorianMueller Parent article: On the defense of piracy enablers
If $foo doesn't create $bar, then there's no need for anyone to interoperate with $bar. That's not just true for games.
Not only does your phrasing of "anti-IP fundamentalism" speak to your personal bias, I think you're wrong about it being a political impossibility. In the US, Congress hass passed laws permitting home users to edit movies to suit their tastes, no matter what Spielberg thinks about it, to install and use a program without requiring a copyright license, and to make copies of audio tapes for personal use. The attitude that the IP owner has complete control does not rule even in the political world; there are no laws in the US that would let the architect of a building stop the owner from making whatever changes the owner wanted to.
(Log in to post comments)
Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning Posted Aug 25, 2005 7:47 UTC (Thu) by FlorianMueller (guest, #32048) [Link] All of the examples that you give relate to "fair use", and fair use is a different story when you do something in the privacy of your home vs. when a server software is made available for public use.I never said that consumers have no rights.
Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning Posted Aug 25, 2005 8:19 UTC (Thu) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] If it is fair use is an interesting question, one which hasn't been discussed much. However your description is too narrow. Fair use can and does encompass public uses of copyrighted works.
For example in reviewing, studying, and commenting on a work, you are permitted to make and distribute quotes from it. If the work is short you can distribute the whole thing. If a work is the subject of public inquiry fair use has been found to go beyond that (things like the memos from electronic voting company). Fair use also applies to software, even wholesale copying, in cases where it is required for interoperability and there is no other way to accomplish the task. This would usually mean that the software wasn't very expressive (otherwise there would probably be alternate ways of obtaining the same result).
Oh, and nice deflection BTW Posted Aug 25, 2005 8:22 UTC (Thu) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] I actually responded without noticing you shifted the discussion back to piracy. But in this case we aren't talking about infringement on any of the rights granted under US copyright law so the topic is really mute with respect to bnetd, though it is an interesting discussion on its own.
Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning Posted Aug 25, 2005 19:48 UTC (Thu) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998) [Link] I don't see the fundamental difference between selling a DVD player that enables the user to play the DVDs how they want over the interests of the copyright holder, and providing a BNet server that enables the user to play Blizzard games how they want over the interests of the copyright holder.
|
|||||||||||||