[Hephos]

[Molly]

[the_logos]

And if you cannot see the difference between ripping off IP of almost no value (stock areas in DIKU, for instance) and ripping off IP worth hundreds of millions of dollars, I question either your sanity or your desire to do anything but justify, however possible, ripping off that IP.

--matt

[the_logos]

Everquest, UO, etc etc are all muds. They're just graphical muds. And an informal poll on our text muds showed that more than half the people also play or have played graphical muds.

--matt

[Fharron]

I must say that I am very disappointed with you Molly. I was happily pottering about my holo-pad, in the year of no lord 2035, when I decided to take my first trip of nostalgia into the past. Without further ado I stepped upon my newly invented beam of light cell projector, copyright Mc Beam Technologies formerly Mc Donalds – our food tastes more like cardboard than our packaging.

Upon arrival, gasp, shock, horror, what do I find? A fantastic MUD that is identical to the one I have just finished creating. It can’t possibly be the case that my mud was copied from yours because the Mc Frothy Milkshake explosion of 2020 destroyed all past records. I can only assume that someone attached to the MUD journeyed into the future and stole my work, thus making illegal use of my IP. My Mc Money is on that deviant Soulstar and his Sicilian upstarts. I have consulted with my lawyers and you have been tried in your absence. The guilty verdict requires you to eat, without the addition of self-applied flavourings, 2 Mc Burgers and one portion of Mc Fries.  

On a separate note, my second trip took me to the region of Achaea. A lot of people where aghast to hear that the name of their beloved region is being used without their permission. As I left I saw a group of warriors gathering swords and shields and writing a missive to someone called Archemedies, requesting a big catapult to hurl them through time. By all accounts they are intent on some rigorous disembowelling activities, rowdy bunch.  

--------------------
Now I have to go and serve the graphical Tolkein game with a legal summon for Illegal Pumpkin use, those things are dangerous when used by little people with no adult supervision.

[Lone Wolf]

I was introduced to MUDs by graphical game players, and I myself come from a background of Console RPGs and fighting games, and now enjoy text based MUDs more than any other type of game (having played Diablo, EQ, Ultima Online and enjoyed them as well). Conversation on my MUD often includes other graphical as well as text games... I think this assumption is , respectfully, very far off the mark.

However, what I would say is that a RP-oriented game like Shadows of Isilidur wouldn't cut into the profits of MEO, but there is at least one Tolkien based MUD with a player base of 1000+ players that I think would be more than a little relevant in that respect...

In the end, though I do agree with Logos that it should be up to the copyright holder , I am far more sympathetic to builders/coders in your position than people that make a game completely based off of someone else's IP.

[Molly]

Actually I DON'T see any difference, from an ethical point of view. Using the same logic you could also claim that robbing a millionaire would be a bigger crime than doing the same to a beggar.

I don't share your definition about what constitutes  'ripping off' either, but that may be a semantic problem, so let's not dwell on it.

As for your final insult; If that were my 'desire', then why would I post about it on a discussion board, drawing as much attention as possible to my 'vile crimes'?

I guess I am not as obsessed with profit as you seem to be.
That appears to be what mainly worries you in this matter.

Tough questions weren't they?  Surely there are differences between petty theft, grand theft, and armed robbery.  As was pointed out if one were to measure the degree of theft by the value of the property, then stealing areas from your mud ranks about the level of shoplifting gum.  Clearly you're using a different measure in assigning value.  

I've already warned earlier on this thread for using conspiracy theories as arguments.  My motive for disagreeing with you is that you are just plain wrong.  As I pointed out, your previous post totally ignored the distinctions being public domain and copyrighted material.  Instead of making a smartass remark about your intelligence, I'll just put it down to ignorance.

[Xorith]

[Delerak]

Sure it is up to the adminstrators of that site. But does that make it right and lawful? I don't know.

-Del

[Dumbledore]

First off let me say i think this argument is ridiculous.Every fantasy novel ever written has been based on Tolkien's works,dungeons and dragons,wheel of time,the list goes on and on and the basis for Tolkien's work is popular mythology Tolkien no more created elves than he did dwarves or humans.you wont find mentin of hobbits in any book other than Tolkien's but you do find numerous mentions of halflings so i guess we should round all the authors of every fantasy book weve ever read and put them all on trial for borrowing others ideas and adapting them to suit their stories.
i would imagine that the designers of middle earth online had a pretty easy time of convincing tolkiens estate of the marketin potential of that game by showing them the number of tolkien based muds that are out there thus making their job alot easier.

[KaVir]

A common misconception - Tolkien actually drew inspiration from earlier fantasy authors such as George MacDonald, William Morris and Lord Dunsany. However the discussion was not about inspired work, but fan fiction.

[Dumbledore]

if you dont think fan fiction is inspired work you should read more often,there are some truly talented writers out there in the realm of fanfiction and like they say imitation is the greatest form of flattery

[Dumbledore]

i also should have qualified my statement about every fantasy writer borrowing from Tolkien's works, i intended to say everY modern fantasy writer.the whole point of my post is that it all builds on traditions and myths that have been lost to antiquity.

[KaVir]

I read plenty, but you're still missing the point. Fan fiction is a form of inspired work, but inspired work is not necessarily fan fiction. Almost all authors, including Tolkien, drew ideas and inspiration from fantasy authors before them - and legally speaking there is nothing wrong with that. Fan Fiction, however, is the production of fiction based upon somebody else's work, and technically is almost always a breach of copyright.

Why just Tolkien? What makes you think they didn't draw upon the same inspiration as Tolkien did? Or maybe they took ideas from more recent novels (eg Terry Goodkind and Robert Jordan)? I just find it strange why you would draw the line at Tolkien, when (for example) one of his favourite childhood books was a fantasy novel written 20 years before he was born.

[Alastair]

My goodness, 24 pages of this...

A few remarks:

Firt, regarding Matt's Nickame, "Logos" or "ho Logos" might be public domain in the same way "Apple" or "Computer" are.

Chances are that "The Logos" is a trademark infringement in the same way an unsername "Apple Computer" would be.

So, Matt, have you checked with The Logos (the band) and the The Logos companies whether you have the right to use that username?

According to your both legal and ethical standards, if the answer is no, you are a thief and should immediately change your Nickname until you do obtain permission.

Second, as has been pointed out several times already, talk is cheap.

It's been one month since Matt has flamboyantly claimed that he would contact TE himself. I think it is quite reasonable to assume that TE is now doubly aware of SoI's violations, so you'd be wise to let them, who have the means to do so, pursue the matter themselves.

Third, "elves" are neither copyrighted nor trademarked by Tolkien. So if someone writes about sex-crazy elves, he's not violating anyones rights. When using stupid examples like this, it is generally a good idea to make sure they apply to the subject discussed.

Fourth, however, I'd like to point out that all the legal arguments made to support the fact that SoI has a line of defense because TE has ignored the MUDs' violation for two decades will agressively pursuing other types of infringement applies to Medieva as well, much to my personal chagrin.
Indeed, the Diku team has demonstrated a willingness to pursue a case of alleged copyright violation - while chosing to ignore all others. That was the Diku vs. Everquest drama which unfolded a few (4? 5? Too lazy to look up) years ago.

Bottomline: both TE and the Diku teams have the means to take action themselves againt copyright violators - yet they choose not to do it in the case of quite a lot of MUDs. I suggest that the righteous crusaders, if they are absolutely unable to mind their own business as they should, conduct it directly with the interested parties and not through a proxy war on any number of message boards.

[KaVir]

No, they do not. I've already covered this point repeatedly. The two issues are completely different. Please have the courtesy to read the posts before posting - yes, I know there's a lot of them, but it's not fair to expect everyone else to keep posting the same points for those who didn't bother to read them the first time.

The violation of mud licenses is my business - and indeed that of anyone who contributes into (or cares about) the mud community.

[Alastair]

I did. I confess I might have skimmed through some of them and missed it.

However, I am pretty sure you never made the case how, DIKU actually HAVING decided to actively pursue the EverQuest matter while letting slide all others is different from TE HAVING pursued some type of violations while ignoring others, as far as the "defense line" of respectively SoI and Med was concerned.

Yes, you talked about Diku's _wishes_. We all know of them. The EQ matter also demonstrated that they were perfectly willing to take action themselves against an alleged and commercial infrigement. Again, I ask, how is that different from the Tolkien case?

Until further notice, I seem to remember that your modus operandi was to ask questions first, then act. It appears you weren't really concerned by my statement...

[JilesDM]

Actually no. A trademark is only protected within the trade for which it is registered. This is what makes it possbile for a band to be named "The Logos" while there exist companies of the same name.

Also, generic words or terms cannot be trademarked. This is why you see Windows® instead of Windows™. Microsoft was denied a trademark on the word Windows due to the fact that it is a single, generic word (though the ® serves as a notice that they will probably vigorously defend their exclusive use of the word in the relevant industry anyway (probably by charging you with fraud or something similar)). Not all company names are trademarked, and in some cases of those whose names are followed by a ™, the trademark only applies to the graphical presentation of the name and not the words themselves.

The Logos contains only generic words presented in a form that is consistent with the standard usage for those words. Apple Computer would stand a better chance at getting a trademark because the juxtaposition of "Apple" and "Computer" is not found in common usage except in reference to that particular company.

Even if a company named The Logos was somehow granted a trademark on that name, it would probably be invalidated if ever competently contested in court. Even if it was upheld, it would need to be given in the industry covering forum posts to affect MM here. So far I cannot find a company named The Logos that marks their name as a trademark that is in the computing/electronics industry.

Also, since the degree of protection granted varies based on how well-known your trade mark is and how likely it is that your use of the mark is diluting the brand recognition value of the mark (in this case, not bloody likely), I'd feel confident in stating that MM is not violating any laws by using The Logos as his screen name here.

With regard to the main topic, the only thing that TE's lack of action against SoI even when notified affects is the potential damages awarded to them should they ever choose to litigate. It does not make it more or less legal. It is absolutely illegal. Period.

Do I have a problem with it? No, and neither does TE, apparently, but that's irrelevant with respect to the legality of SoI's actions. All it means is that while what SoI is doing is illegal, they probably will not be sued.

[KaVir]

Diku have persued others as well, including Medievia (Michael Seifert said to me in an email on 1st August 2000 "I have spent many hours having futile conversations with Mike"). They have made their intentions and wishes very clear to the public. What they've not done is actually take legal action - against anyone (no, not even EverQuest).

TE have repeatedly persued and taken legal action against many people. But they have ignored all muds completely, even when specifically informed of the situation, and haven't even so much as given their view on the situation.

Correct, but that doesn't mean it's not my business.