Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

KaVir · 06-05-2003, 01:47 PM

The Diku license allows you to use the Diku team's copyrighted work, the Merc license allows you to use the Merc team's copyrighted work, and so on - but the copyrights for most of the stock areas belong to other people.

However, as those areas come with the Diku/Merc/etc distributions, don't have any licenses of their own, and are used by a lot of other muds, it is - IMO - reasonable to assume that the builders don't mind people using their areas within the codebases they were distributed with, unless they say otherwise.

If you're going to respond to one of my points, please respond to the entire point. If you had done so, the rest of your "argument" would not apply.

What I said, was that it's worth noting that they know what is going on, yet haven't done nor even complained about muds - we do not know what their opinion about muds is, only that they very definitely have the capability to stamp on infrigements when they want to (because they've done it in the past), yet have left muds (and various other works of fan fiction) completely alone. If you are concerned that such muds may go against the wishes of the Tolkien copyright holders, then email them - I can assure you that they will be able to do far more than any of us can.

The Diku team (and Merc team for the matter), on the other hand, are in the opposite situation. They have made very clear their displeasure about license violations - and Medievia in particular - on many occasions, yet have never legally stomped on anyone. They simply do not have the resources to do so, and therefore it is up the rest of the mud community to encourage people to follow the wishes of the various mud authors.

My personal opinion is that, as was suggested by someone else earlier in the thread, the Tolkien copyright holders enjoy the free publicity that muds give them, but don't want to give the official "okay" in case they later decide they'd like to tear the muds down. If this were not the case, it would be a very simple matter for them to just respond to an email, or make some public statement - but they have not, despite the fact that Tolkien-based games have been around for almost 30 years (unless there is something earlier than Mines of Moria?). If I am correct, then you'd actually be going against their real wishes by trying to shut down muds based on their work.

In the case of authors who have stated they don't their work used for muds, I could agree with the idea of treating them the same way as other license violators. But trying to second-guess what the copyright holder "really wants" is an exercise in futility.

No, implied licenses exist to take care of cases where the conduct of the parties indicate that some rights are to be extended from the copyright holder to one or more individuals, but the parties themselves did not bother to create a license.

You can have an express license without paper, and you certainly don't need a signature for one.

06-05-2003, 01:47 PM	#120
KaVir Legend Join Date: Apr 2002 Name: Richard Home MUD: God Wars II Posts: 2,052	The Diku license allows you to use the Diku team's copyrighted work, the Merc license allows you to use the Merc team's copyrighted work, and so on - but the copyrights for most of the stock areas belong to other people. However, as those areas come with the Diku/Merc/etc distributions, don't have any licenses of their own, and are used by a lot of other muds, it is - IMO - reasonable to assume that the builders don't mind people using their areas within the codebases they were distributed with, unless they say otherwise. If you're going to respond to one of my points, please respond to the entire point. If you had done so, the rest of your "argument" would not apply. What I said, was that it's worth noting that they know what is going on, yet haven't done nor even complained about muds - we do not know what their opinion about muds is, only that they very definitely have the capability to stamp on infrigements when they want to (because they've done it in the past), yet have left muds (and various other works of fan fiction) completely alone. If you are concerned that such muds may go against the wishes of the Tolkien copyright holders, then email them - I can assure you that they will be able to do far more than any of us can. The Diku team (and Merc team for the matter), on the other hand, are in the opposite situation. They have made very clear their displeasure about license violations - and Medievia in particular - on many occasions, yet have never legally stomped on anyone. They simply do not have the resources to do so, and therefore it is up the rest of the mud community to encourage people to follow the wishes of the various mud authors. My personal opinion is that, as was suggested by someone else earlier in the thread, the Tolkien copyright holders enjoy the free publicity that muds give them, but don't want to give the official "okay" in case they later decide they'd like to tear the muds down. If this were not the case, it would be a very simple matter for them to just respond to an email, or make some public statement - but they have not, despite the fact that Tolkien-based games have been around for almost 30 years (unless there is something earlier than Mines of Moria?). If I am correct, then you'd actually be going against their real wishes by trying to shut down muds based on their work. In the case of authors who have stated they don't their work used for muds, I could agree with the idea of treating them the same way as other license violators. But trying to second-guess what the copyright holder "really wants" is an exercise in futility. No, implied licenses exist to take care of cases where the conduct of the parties indicate that some rights are to be extended from the copyright holder to one or more individuals, but the parties themselves did not bother to create a license. You can have an express license without paper, and you certainly don't need a signature for one.