Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Traithe · 06-10-2003, 01:58 PM

Heh - I've been trying to bite my tongue for the last -140- posts or so, but enough is really enough.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Ahem.

AHEM.

So, really, after 20 pages, what are we left with, in terms of a legal argument against my position?

1. There is no clear legal precedent for this particular case. I was apparently in fact wrong in making my earlier admission that you were "technically" right - though I'm quite sure (if your exceedingly confident tone is any indication - surely you wouldn't make such adamant declarations without qualifications to do so?) that you possess a juris doctorate, Logos, this would be a case for a judge and a group of attorneys well-versed in the relevant law to decide.

2. The IP holder, Tolkien Enterprises, is clearly uninterested in pursuing action - even a written response or acknowledgement - to any fanfiction/derivative work authors/MUD administrators.

3. Such derivative works have existed publicly for 20-30 years.

Ergo: while I won't say the legal argument lacks validity, because it clearly does not, I will state that it is far from the cut-and-dry matter your rather inflammatory remarks portray it as.

Furthermore - as you yourself have stated that you don't burden yourself to follow the law simply because it is the law, I find it fairly ironic that you're on a witch-hunt because someone else may or may not be in violation of a civil statute.

Regarding the ethical arguments against my position: unless I'm mistaken, you're essentially arguing that because my MUD (or the dozens of other Tolkien-based MUDs out there - not even counting the likely hundreds of other derivative work MUDs) has the potential of causing financial damage to Tolkien Enterprises, I am in the wrong.

I believe you yourself stated that we are in no position to judge the financial results of our actions on the assets of an IP holder. I'm certainly not going to make the assertion that my MUD will increase their profits - though I have a strong suspicion there's some validity to that statement - but neither can you make the assertion that it causes them direct financial damage. Since you can't make this statement, most of that copyright infringement law that has been brought up might not even apply - I'm no lawyer, but I believe it refers to ACTUAL damages, not POTENTIAL damages. Argued ethically: if your action has the potential to harm someone, but you have seen no evidence whatsoever that it actually does so and hence continue doing it - are you acting immorally and/or irresponsibly? That seems entirely unreasonable to me.

In closing, as I don't think I'm going to allow myself the indulgence of getting involved in this debate yet again - my MUD will continue to operate up until the day I receive a letter, an email, a telephone call, or a smoke signal from Tolkien Enterprises or another associated group kindly asking me to shut it down. At that point, I will do so, and happily. Until then, however, you may feel free to hurl whatever baseless accusations and nomenclatures at me that you like - you aren't Tolkien Enterprises, nor are you a judge, and even your ethical arguments are entirely unconvincing.

Perhaps your time would be better spent elsewhere.

-T., who also avoids arguing with religious zealots for precisely this reason.

06-10-2003, 01:58 PM	#197
Traithe Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Name: Kite Posts: 131	Heh - I've been trying to bite my tongue for the last -140- posts or so, but enough is really enough. Thank you, Your Honor. Ahem. AHEM. So, really, after 20 pages, what are we left with, in terms of a legal argument against my position? 1. There is no clear legal precedent for this particular case. I was apparently in fact wrong in making my earlier admission that you were "technically" right - though I'm quite sure (if your exceedingly confident tone is any indication - surely you wouldn't make such adamant declarations without qualifications to do so?) that you possess a juris doctorate, Logos, this would be a case for a judge and a group of attorneys well-versed in the relevant law to decide. 2. The IP holder, Tolkien Enterprises, is clearly uninterested in pursuing action - even a written response or acknowledgement - to any fanfiction/derivative work authors/MUD administrators. 3. Such derivative works have existed publicly for 20-30 years. Ergo: while I won't say the legal argument lacks validity, because it clearly does not, I will state that it is far from the cut-and-dry matter your rather inflammatory remarks portray it as. Furthermore - as you yourself have stated that you don't burden yourself to follow the law simply because it is the law, I find it fairly ironic that you're on a witch-hunt because someone else may or may not be in violation of a civil statute. Regarding the ethical arguments against my position: unless I'm mistaken, you're essentially arguing that because my MUD (or the dozens of other Tolkien-based MUDs out there - not even counting the likely hundreds of other derivative work MUDs) has the potential of causing financial damage to Tolkien Enterprises, I am in the wrong. I believe you yourself stated that we are in no position to judge the financial results of our actions on the assets of an IP holder. I'm certainly not going to make the assertion that my MUD will increase their profits - though I have a strong suspicion there's some validity to that statement - but neither can you make the assertion that it causes them direct financial damage. Since you can't make this statement, most of that copyright infringement law that has been brought up might not even apply - I'm no lawyer, but I believe it refers to ACTUAL damages, not POTENTIAL damages. Argued ethically: if your action has the potential to harm someone, but you have seen no evidence whatsoever that it actually does so and hence continue doing it - are you acting immorally and/or irresponsibly? That seems entirely unreasonable to me. In closing, as I don't think I'm going to allow myself the indulgence of getting involved in this debate yet again - my MUD will continue to operate up until the day I receive a letter, an email, a telephone call, or a smoke signal from Tolkien Enterprises or another associated group kindly asking me to shut it down. At that point, I will do so, and happily. Until then, however, you may feel free to hurl whatever baseless accusations and nomenclatures at me that you like - you aren't Tolkien Enterprises, nor are you a judge, and even your ethical arguments are entirely unconvincing. Perhaps your time would be better spent elsewhere. -T., who also avoids arguing with religious zealots for precisely this reason.