|
Members in Shoutbox
None.
Shoutbox Search
Shoutbox Commands
/w [name] > Whisper
/r > Reply to last whisper /me > Marks as action Shoutbox Information
Moderators may delete any and all shouts at will.
|
Global Shoutbox
Please log in to shout.
[2017-8-03. : 11:08 pm]  Ashamed -- If said company brought you to court to prove the legality of what you did... if you did not profit from it nor use their services to distribute said software... I see you winning[2017-8-03. : 11:08 pm]  Voyager7456 -- But you're not covered under first sale because there was no sale[2017-8-03. : 11:07 pm] Ashamed -- Eula are civil cases meaning its not illegal until taking to court and proven.....[2017-8-03. : 11:06 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed I think they would argue that creating a mod is a derivative work. Which is fine as long as you dont attempt to sell. This is covered under first sale.[2017-8-03. : 11:05 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Ashamed I would argue that breaking licsense risk your copy of the said program... but still not against any laws. I think they would argue that creating a mod is a derivative work.[2017-8-03. : 11:02 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 I would still like to see a case where a company took back software from a personal moddification lol Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed As I've repeatedly said, just because something is illegal doesn't mean that it goes to court. Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed No it wouldn't. It's not worth the time and legal fees to prosecute someone over it. [2017-8-03. : 11:02 pm] Ashamed -- unless you then turn around and try to make money - That agreement is between you and the company at that point.[2017-8-03. : 11:01 pm] Ashamed -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 I would still like to see a case where a company took back software from a personal moddification lol I would argue that breaking licsense risk your copy of the said program... but still not against any laws.[2017-8-03. : 11:00 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: I think Blizzard would have a hard time arguing that anything past "you violated our license, give up your copy of the software" I would still like to see a case where a company took back software from a personal moddification lol[2017-8-03. : 10:59 pm] Voyager7456 -- I think Blizzard would have a hard time arguing that anything past "you violated our license, give up your copy of the software"[2017-8-03. : 10:58 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: You don't just get to sue for an arbitrary amount of money LMAO Software company I am sure put it in their EULAs.. its quite easy to get a consumer to agree on said action[2017-8-03. : 10:58 pm] Voyager7456 -- You don't just get to sue for an arbitrary amount of money LMAO[2017-8-03. : 10:57 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 If said peson had money its always worth it... You can always sue people for legal fees for taking them to court. Actually in the US, that's not usually the case.[2017-8-03. : 10:56 pm] Ashamed -- There is written proof people have done this on this very site.. Would be super easy to prove.[2017-8-03. : 10:55 pm] Ashamed -- I mean they could just scan sites like this and look for people with good money and start sueing[2017-8-03. : 10:55 pm] Ashamed -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 If said peson had money its always worth it... You can always sue people for legal fees for taking them to court. Now would it happen very often... most likely not.. but statistically you don't think it would of happened at least once by now if it truly was something illegal?[2017-8-03. : 10:54 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed No it wouldn't. It's not worth the time and legal fees to prosecute someone over it. If said peson had money its always worth it... You can always sue people for legal fees for taking them to court.[2017-8-03. : 10:53 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: You wont change my mind until you show me an example.. I find it hard you are trying to argue something that has never happened... If it was indeed illegal someone would of been taken to court by now. No it wouldn't. It's not worth the time and legal fees to prosecute someone over it.[2017-8-03. : 10:51 pm] Ashamed -- You wont change my mind until you show me an example.. I find it hard you are trying to argue something that has never happened... If it was indeed illegal someone would of been taken to court by now.[2017-8-03. : 10:51 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed As I've repeatedly said, just because something is illegal doesn't mean that it goes to court. I find it hard to believe out of 40+ years of software copy right not a single company has tried this. I am sorry I dont see any company having any legal grounds.[2017-8-03. : 10:48 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 I am not I am still waiting for that court case about personal use and not profit.... As I've repeatedly said, just because something is illegal doesn't mean that it goes to court.[2017-8-03. : 10:48 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed You're just asserting this though. I am not I am still waiting for that court case about personal use and not profit....[2017-8-03. : 10:47 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Thee is no way in hell any company can go after you no matter the eula. I just dont see it holding up. You're just asserting this though.[2017-8-03. : 10:43 pm] Ashamed -- reselling software no matter how you do it.. is hard to say they are modding something for personal use ha..[2017-8-03. : 10:41 pm] Ashamed -- Thee is no way in hell any company can go after you no matter the eula. I just dont see it holding up.[2017-8-03. : 10:41 pm] Ashamed -- I am talking about buying software editing the code and perhaps showing your friend said code... Not selling it at all.[2017-8-03. : 10:41 pm] Voyager7456 -- Vernor didn't claim to have modified the software at all? They claimed it was completely unopened.[2017-8-03. : 10:40 pm] Ashamed -- Now with a picture you can put a black box over something and then call it your own.. because the orginal artwork isn't really there... but with software its prob hard to prove something like this[2017-8-03. : 10:39 pm] Ashamed -- That case the person pretty much was trying to say he changed the orginal product enough so they could sell it.. With software that is prob hard to prove..[2017-8-03. : 10:39 pm] Voyager7456 -- The court's ruling didn't say anything about money needing to be involved. In fact they specifically mentioned how it could impact non-profit organizations like libraries.[2017-8-03. : 10:38 pm] Ashamed -- That case the person was redistrubiting it.. Which I can see being sticky with software.. Its not like a satire - You could change code and still have it functinally the same.[2017-8-03. : 10:37 pm] Ashamed -- Where there is no money involved and a company sued someone for editing software they bought.[2017-8-03. : 10:37 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 it wont I assure you. Liek I said show me one court case and I will say you are right. I already linked a case where the court ruled that the first sale doctrine didn't apply to software licensing.[2017-8-03. : 10:36 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed A company is definitely more likely to go after you if you're commercializing it. But that doesn't change the fact that if you're modding for personal use, you're still violating the EULA and there's precedent to suggest it will hold up in court... it wont I assure you. Liek I said show me one court case and I will say you are right.[2017-8-03. : 10:36 pm] Voyager7456 -- Obviously given that I'm a fervent advocate for modding, idgaf[2017-8-03. : 10:35 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: I keep saying personal use on purpose.. Yeah you start trying to commercialize something that then of course company will come after you. A company is definitely more likely to go after you if you're commercializing it. But that doesn't change the fact that if you're modding for personal use, you're still violating the EULA and there's precedent to suggest it will hold up in court...[2017-8-03. : 10:33 pm] Ashamed -- Suicidal InsanitySuicidal Insanity shouted: Ashamed In theory you could have stored the entire mod in EUD triggers. The Koreans did some amazing shit with those This would be a case where technically I could see some copyright law holding in court - but is it worth it to blizzard prob not.[2017-8-03. : 10:32 pm] Voyager7456 -- Suicidal InsanitySuicidal Insanity shouted: Ashamed In theory you could have stored the entire mod in EUD triggers. The Koreans did some amazing shit with those There was also Shadowflare's SCMLoader that would load mod files from a map.[2017-8-03. : 10:32 pm] Ashamed -- I keep saying personal use on purpose.. Yeah you start trying to commercialize something that then of course company will come after you.[2017-8-03. : 10:32 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Yeah most likely the person that was brought to court made personal gains out of the case. AshamedAshamed shouted: yeah that person for sure sold the software after editing Sure, but their ruling doesn't hinge on the fact that you personally profit from it.[2017-8-03. : 10:31 pm] Suicidal Insanity -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Pr0nogo I was just saying if you could some how figure it out ha. In theory you could have stored the entire mod in EUD triggers. The Koreans did some amazing shit with those[2017-8-03. : 10:30 pm] Ashamed -- Yeah most likely the person that was brought to court made personal gains out of the case.[2017-8-03. : 10:29 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed Voyager7456 Voyager7456 I am saying it doesn't matter ha... I dont care if they say that in some agreement. Its like a painter saying you cant cover up their art after you purchase it[2017-8-03. : 10:29 pm] Voyager7456 -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernor_v._Autodesk,_Inc. 9th Circuit held that the first-sale doctrine didn't apply in the case of Autodesk's licensing. So there's precedent.[2017-8-03. : 10:28 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 I am saying they can't... First sale is going to protect the consumer against any bogus EULA/Agreement Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed First Sale is murky when it comes to this kind of stuff - a lot of EULAs specifically mention that you don't own the software, rather you own a license to use the software. Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: SC's license agreement appears to be along those lines. [2017-8-03. : 10:27 pm] Ashamed -- Pr0nogoPr0nogo shouted: Ashamed this isn't possible since mods aren't like map files, and must be downloaded externally from the game itself I was just saying if you could some how figure it out ha.[2017-8-03. : 10:27 pm] Pr0nogo -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Now modding something and then using battlenet to distribute said mod.. I could see that as being a gray area. this isn't possible since mods aren't like map files, and must be downloaded externally from the game itself[2017-8-03. : 10:27 pm] Ashamed -- Voyager7456Voyager7456 shouted: Ashamed Whether they are *going* to and whether they *can* are two entirely different things I am saying they can't... First sale is going to protect the consumer against any bogus EULA/Agreement [2017-8-03. : 10:26 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Pr0nogo I was not talking about pirating. I was talking about purchasing said software and modding it for personal use. I don't care what their terms say they are not going to sue you. The rights I mention trumps any agreement they may create. I would like you to show me one example of someone being sued for modding something for personal use Whether they are *going* to and whether they *can* are two entirely different things [2017-8-03. : 10:26 pm] Ashamed -- Now modding something and then using battlenet to distribute said mod.. I could see that as being a gray area.[2017-8-03. : 10:25 pm] Ashamed -- Pr0nogoPr0nogo shouted: and untenable in court Aw - Then we are on the same page ha.[2017-8-03. : 10:24 pm] Pr0nogo -- i know what you were talking, I was responding by saying that piracy lawsuits seem equally as frivolous[2017-8-03. : 10:24 pm] Ashamed -- Pr0nogoPr0nogo shouted: Ashamed i don't think someone pirating a program would hold up in court either I was not talking about pirating. I was talking about purchasing said software and modding it for personal use. I don't care what their terms say they are not going to sue you. The rights I mention trumps any agreement they may create. I would like you to show me one example of someone being sued for modding something for personal use[2017-8-03. : 10:21 pm] Voyager7456 -- ExcaliburExcalibur shouted: Voy is pink now? Da fak? I think I'm more of a purple[2017-8-03. : 10:20 pm] Suicidal Insanity -- I learned about a new C++ syntax feature at work today... you can do try catch in a constructor, e.g. Foo::Foo( void ) try : Bar() { ; } catch (... ) { }[2017-8-03. : 10:19 pm] Voyager7456 -- AshamedAshamed shouted: Voyager7456 Look up the First Sale Doctrine. You can do whatever you want with the game (besides copying it). The EULAs you have to read before installing any game? They don't stand up in court. You don't own the IP when you buy a game, but you can do whatever you want with the game itself. Sure I am guessing they could take said person to court, but if you prove you have not sold and or used their service.. I feel like it would hold too much weight in Court. First Sale is murky when it comes to this kind of stuff - a lot of EULAs specifically mention that you don't own the software, rather you own a license to use the software. |
Members Online: TheHappy115, Roy
Roy