Top Mud Sites Forum Return to TopMudSites.com
Go Back   Top Mud Sites Forum > MUD Players and General Discussion > Tavern of the Blue Hand
Click here to Register

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-30-2006, 11:37 PM   #101
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,301
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Shane @ April 30 2006,23:32)
Likely some district attorney, or the Attorney General of the US(!?) would have to sign on to make it a criminal prosecution if the mud is based here. Just getting here to make the official accusation might be more trouble than it is worth to the Diku team.

I guess my point was that it appears that by and large the blue screen on DVD's is just a scare tactic, but that the majority of the time it doesn't happen that way.
Yes, they'd need the cooperation of government prosecutors for a criminal prosecution, but the scale here is so miniscule that they wouldn't waste their time on it. They have limited resources and are going to reserve those resources for cases where there is real or potential harm being done.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2006, 11:38 PM   #102
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,301
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Shane @ April 30 2006,23:36)
*chuckles*

And yet you continue exchanging barbs with him. <!--emo&

I am honestly curious how you got to be in the category of icons of unethical conduct is all. If you happen to know, please, before the little blood vessel in my temple explodes from curiosity... tell me...

It's off-topic, so I'll PM you.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 12:58 AM   #103
John
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 252
John is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (nhl @ May 01 2006,06:12)
Matt and the staff of Medievia are seen by certain zealots
Could you not make personal insults please? If you feel anyone else has made insults to you or someone else in this thread, ask them not to or PM the moderator for the sub-forum. But returning in kind is not the answer. I'm surprised this post has not yet been editted. Isn't this a moderated thread?
John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 02:33 AM   #104
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,301
the_logos will become famous soon enough
John has a point. Let's try to avoid strongly-loaded terms in this thread. This thread has been admirably light on the flames so far. Let's keep it that way. I would prefer not to have to moderate as it just causes bad feelings.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 03:10 AM   #105
DonathinFrye
Senior Member
 
DonathinFrye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Name: Donathin Frye
Location: Columbus, OH
Home MUD: Optional Realities
Home MUD: Atonement RPI
Home MUD: Project Redshift
Posts: 510
DonathinFrye is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to DonathinFrye
Quote:
Originally Posted by
To be fair, what you seemed to have said was that Medievia AND Matt were both icons of unethical behavior, and it did seem as if you were then telling Nhl that he was going to suffer a little guilt by association in taking up any argument in their defense.

As I said earlier, I am somewhat confused how Matt is some sort of a symbol for unethical behavior.
Discussing Matt's ethics in-depth would both be off-topic and pointless. I could start another thread about it, but you could research itself, because another thread would immediately resort to flaming.

I was not attempting to guilt-trip Nhl. I was pointing out, as I've tried to say several times, that when you decide to publically lobby an argument that goes against a given social norm/rule, you should be ready for the inevitable ethical judgements that will be made against you by those who believe strongly in the status quo. I, myself, am aware of this rule of thumb, and do not think any less of Nhl's opinions on the DIKU license. Any fuzziness on what motivates his opinion on this issue is not really important for the argument.
DonathinFrye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 06:16 AM   #106
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 01 2006,01:14)
Quote:
Originally Posted by (KaVir @ April 30 2006,18:44)
Copying is one of the rights.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci

Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

* To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;

* To prepare derivative works based upon the work;

* To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

* To perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works;

* To display the copyrighted work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work; and

* In the case of sound recordings, to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.


So what are you planning to do with the codebase which doesn't infringe any of those rights?  You can't compile it, you can't modify it, you can't make backups, you can't let other people connect to it...
I'm a bit confused as you are using a more or less typical set of examples about writings, music, art and so forth.  Code copyright is the actual written code itself.  I have not seen anything in this example at all to suggest that the activities you list constitute a violation of the copyrights.  
See here: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wwp

"These categories should be viewed broadly. For example, computer programs and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary works""

Compiling the source code creates either a "derivative work" or a "copy", depending on the specifics of the compilation process. Modifying the code creates a "derivative work". Creating backups as a "copy". Letting other people connect to it is a public "performance" or "display". All of these are exclusive rights under copyright law.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 07:23 AM   #107
Anitra
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 123
Anitra is on a distinguished road
the_logos April 30 2006,23:13
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I'm also not aware of any proof that Medievia, or any other MUD supposedly violating the profit clause, is turning a profit. Do you have some? Have you seen their financial statements? If so, please, share them with us. Share the evidence with us.
You keep repeating this argument in different forms.

How about the evidence that the Medievia representatives provide themselves? Like for instance Soleil repeatably requesting that Medievia be added to the 'professional games' list, which, if I recall right, has as one of the basic requirement that at least one staff member must be working full time on it? If you make a living from running a mud, (in fact, support a family on it), is that not making a profit?

Or how do you define 'turning a profit' yourself?
Anitra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 07:32 AM   #108
Wik
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: OtherSpace
Posts: 140
Wik is on a distinguished road
In a community such as ours, there are unwritten rules dictating behavior. Where I come from, that's articulated as 'Don't be a dick'. Contract or no, lawsuit or no, you don't f*** your parents over, and one would be hard-pressed to say that DIKU wasn't the father of the mud revolution, even if it wasn't the originator.

To use their contribution to our community inappropriately is not only inethical, it's dishonorable.
Wik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 07:39 AM   #109
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 01 2006,05:13)
I'm also not aware of any proof that Medievia, or any other MUD supposedly violating the profit clause, is turning a profit. Do you have some? Have you seen their financial statements?
There is clear evidence that they do not have the diku or merc credits. Such credits are required by the Diku and Merc licences, and therefore it is clear to me that Medievia is not following those licences.

Do you disagree?
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 07:46 AM   #110
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Sombalance @ May 01 2006,05:09)
Simply because the majority of copyright cases are handled privately, it doesn't mean that is the only option. In a situation like this, where "no profit" is part of the issue, a private lawsuit for monatary damages would probably not be productive and would be expensive for the original copyright holders.
You may find this article of interest.  In particular:

If you register the work before the infringement begins or within three months of the date the work ispublished, you may be entitled to recover standard damages from the infringer, in addition to your actual damages:

* your attorney fees and court costs, and

* "statutory damages" -- special damages of up to $100,000 per infringement -- without having to establish what damage you actually suffered.


The Diku team could also claim that by using the mud commercially, the user was avoiding paying for the Diku II licence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
I suspect (but do not know one way or the other) that the DIKU team is also limited to not profitting from the DIKU code. which may impact their ability to consider monatary damages in a civil case.
I fail to see any evidence which would suggest that.  The fact is that the Diku team are the copyright holders - they don't need to follow their own licence, because as the authors they already have the rights granted under copyright law.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 08:42 AM   #111
Shane
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Shane is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Shane @ April 30 2006,22:44)
"The failure of a copyright holder to bring a timely lawsuit against known infringers may later block such a claim by establishing an implied license, as may other acts or omissions that could informally signal consent to use the work."

http://www.brookings.edu/press/books/mathyoucantuse.htm

"How did the situation arise? And where should we go from here? In Math You Can’t Use, Ben Klemens draws on his experience as both a programmer and an economist to tackle these critical issues. The answer to the first question, he explains, is simple: while patent laws are intended to apply to physical machines, software is something quite different. Software is not just another machine, and it is not Hamlet with numbers. It is a functional hybrid that can be duplicated at no cost, it is legible by computers in some forms and by humans in others, and it has a unique mathematical structure. All of these facts have to be taken into consideration in designing an appropriate intellectual property regime."
Kavir,

Heya. You consistently seem to misunderstand me, and perhaps that's largely my fault. My points are all over the place at times. I am not saying a violation has not occured, I am saying the violation may well be unenforceable.

These are aspects of the situation I feel you have yet to address.

Whether we like it or not, there are other considerations over time than just the Diku team's license. Mud's very specifically are a strange amalgum between normal literature and programming, such that I doubt, for example, that the world design could be coopted by the Diku team as a derivitive work should the mud be moved to another code base.

It just seems your view on this is narrower than what evidence I can find just fishing around the internet would seem to indicate.
Shane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 08:44 AM   #112
Shane
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Shane is on a distinguished road
Okay, that's the second time this happened to me in a row!

I went back and refreshed my browser and everything, and my post didn't show, then I posted it a second time and had a double copy.

Is there a bug command here?
Shane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 08:58 AM   #113
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 01 2006,14:42)
I am not saying a violation has not occured, I am saying the violation may well be unenforceable.  
It would be a copyright infringement.  The licence is what you hold up as your defence. If the licence were deemed unenforcable, you'd have no defence against the Diku team's claims of copyright infringement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Whether we like it or not, there are other considerations over time than just the Diku team's license.  Mud's very specifically are a strange amalgum between normal literature and programming, such that I doubt, for example, that the world design could be coopted by the Diku team as a derivitive work should the mud be moved to another code base.
I already cleared that up for you.  The US Copyright Office has stated that "...computer programs and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary works"".

Quote:
Originally Posted by
It just seems your view on this is narrower than what evidence I can find just fishing around the internet would seem to indicate.
I've provided links for each of my statements.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 10:34 AM   #114
Shane
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Shane is on a distinguished road


My post is like two up from here, and you did not seem to register the fact that a sufficient time between finding someone might be in violation and registering the complaint can imply a license does not appear in your replies.


Obviously a program is copyrightable. The point is that it may not give the same rights to the writer concerning derivative works if the "derivative" is not code, but large amounts of standard, textual fiction. What exactly Medievia would then be forced to do regarding the intertwining of the code and the world of Medievia imbedded in it is not clear.

The issue regarding enforceability is not that there is no violation. It is that the method to go about proving that there has been a violation normally used is not available. Normally, there is the work there, and that person is presenting it, selling it, whatever. All you do is point it out. In the case of a computer program, given the license of Diku, the distribution has already occured. The accusation of copyright infringement then has to be backed up by something that would require forced searches. Depending on whether or not Medievia's prior record were taken into account, maybe that would cause a judge to order a code audit, but barring something like that there is nothing to show that the mud is Diku, therefore nothing to show there is any case at all for a jugement of copyright violation. In other words, Diku just saying, "hey that's my program" isn't going to work in the same way an author just pointing at a book being sold and saying, "hey, that's my book!" Proving that it is indeed their program is part of the question, and getting the necessary information to prove that may well be outside the scope of the law because of privacy issues.

I posted links for mine as well.  Twice, in fact.  It's no big deal, just that your answers aren't really applicable to the specific issues that I am seeing raised.
Shane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 11:37 AM   #115
Shane
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Shane is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ May 01 2006,03:10)
Discussing Matt's ethics in-depth would both be off-topic and pointless. I could start another thread about it, but you could research itself, because another thread would immediately resort to flaming.
Discussing Matt's ethics at all without some sort of evidence was off topic and pointless, with due respect to your superior knowledge of what has gone on before I showed up here.    

I have done some slight amount of web searching now, and by all accounts Matt is a fine fellow.  *shrugs*  People disagreeing about whether or not the Diku license could be enforced, or even whether Medievia is ethical, or whether the Diku license itself represents an unethical power grab, or any number of other wild and bizarre things does not make them unethical, whereas accusations impugning others are often seen as unethical.  

I seem to remember back when "Myspace.com" was spelled "Geocities", that the Geocities team made an attempt to claim the content on the web pages they gave out.  I am not sure if there was ever any legal action taken, as if memory serves, what happened instead was that people left the service in droves and they changed their tune.

At some point, the value of the work being added to a Diku server is going to end up having to be considered.  By any account I can find on the web, artwork incorporated into a program tends to be separately licensed from the program itself, and I would have to imagine that includes text written for a mud.
Shane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 11:44 AM   #116
Shane
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Shane is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (KaVir @ May 01 2006,08:58)
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 01 2006,14:42)
I am not saying a violation has not occured, I am saying the violation may well be unenforceable.  
It would be a copyright infringement.  The licence is what you hold up as your defence.  If the licence were deemed unenforcable, you'd have no defence against the Diku team's claims of copyright infringement.
It occurs to me that the term "unenforceable" possibly has a meaning in legaleze that I am not familiar with.

To further clarify what I am talking about, say the Diku team accused you of making a derivative work of theirs. You are well known to have worked with Diku, so perhaps there is room for some suspicion in their minds, or whatever.

If they make that accusation in court, do you think that they are assumed to be correct until you prove them wrong, or do they not at the least have the burden of proof that the program you made is indeed a derivative work? How are they to do that if they have no right to look at the program?

That is what I mean by "unenforceable".
Shane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 12:19 PM   #117
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by
My post is like two up from here, and you did not seem to register the fact that a sufficient time between finding someone might be in violation and registering the complaint can imply a license does not appear in your replies.
An implied licence - according to Wikipedia. However an implied licence is "created by law in the absence of an actual agreement between the parties. Implied licenses arise when the conduct of the parties indicates that some license is to be extended between the copyright owner and the licensee, but the parties themselves did not bother to create a license"

(Ref: http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/license.html#implied)

However we already have a licence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Obviously a program is copyrightable. The point is that it may not give the same rights to the writer concerning derivative works if the "derivative" is not code, but large amounts of standard, textual fiction.
It would be a derivative of both. If you incorporate chunks of Star Wars fiction into a modified version of DikuMUD, for example, then you end up with something which is a derivative of both Diku and Star Wars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
The issue regarding enforceability is not that there is no violation. It is that the method to go about proving that there has been a violation normally used is not available. Normally, there is the work there, and that person is presenting it, selling it, whatever. All you do is point it out. In the case of a computer program, given the license of Diku, the distribution has already occured. The accusation of copyright infringement then has to be backed up by something that would require forced searches. Depending on whether or not Medievia's prior record were taken into account, maybe that would cause a judge to order a code audit, but barring something like that there is nothing to show that the mud is Diku, therefore nothing to show there is any case at all for a jugement of copyright violation.
Well you're talking about burden of proof, and that's really going to depend on each specific case. In the case of Medievia, I'd say it's pretty clear cut.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
To further clarify what I am talking about, say the Diku team accused you of making a derivative work of theirs. You are well known to have worked with Diku, so perhaps there is room for some suspicion in their minds, or whatever.

If they make that accusation in court, do you think that they are assumed to be correct until you prove them wrong, or do they not at the least have the burden of proof that the program you made is indeed a derivative work? How are they to do that if they have no right to look at the program?
If they had good reason to believe my mud was a Diku derivative then they could try and legally force me to reveal the source code, yes (although they wouldn't need to - I'd just show them, if they honestly thought my mud was a derivative).
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 12:29 PM   #118
Kylotan
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Nottingham, UK
Home MUD: Abattoir (Smaug)
Home MUD: ex-Jellybean (Smaug)
Home MUD: ex-Dark Chambers (Merc)
Posts: 174
Kylotan is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Kylotan Send a message via AIM to Kylotan Send a message via MSN to Kylotan Send a message via Yahoo to Kylotan
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Shane @ May 01 2006,08:42)
Mud's very specifically are a strange amalgum between normal literature and programming, such that I doubt, for example, that the world design could be coopted by the Diku team as a derivitive work should the mud be moved to another code base.
I'm not at all sure why you think that any sort of mixture makes it harder to protect. The world is protected, the code is protected. Changing part of the whole or even 99% of the whole does not exempt the rest.

As for enforceability, it's likely that if a court felt that there was a case to answer, they would take action to ensure that the code was available to that court, the same way as any sort of evidence or documentation can be brought to a court.
Kylotan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 12:37 PM   #119
Spoke
Member
 
Spoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 101
Spoke is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (KaVir @ May 01 2006,06:39)
Quote:
Originally Posted by (the_logos @ May 01 2006,05:13)
I'm also not aware of any proof that Medievia, or any other MUD supposedly violating the profit clause, is turning a profit. Do you have some? Have you seen their financial statements?
There is clear evidence that they do not have the diku or merc credits. Such credits are required by the Diku and Merc licences, and therefore it is clear to me that Medievia is not following those licences.

Do you disagree?
There is only one thing with which one might disagree. They clearly do not have Diku or Merc credits listed, but, other than the code audit done on the stolen code 10 years ago, there is no proof that at this moment they are actually running a Diku or Merc derivative MUD.

Seeing how someone in the Diku team seemed satisfied with changing the structure, functions, etc behind the sceness as a condition to not being called Diku derivative in the case of Aardwolf (I do not really feel like looking it up but if any has a problem accepting that as true, PM me and I will do the lookup for you in these forums). Therefore, if we do not really know (eventhough we may be suspicious about it because they seem to have lied in the past about it), I feel pressed to assume that they learned from those past mistakes and actually rehauled they handful of code lines and code structures that 10 years ago made them a Diku derivative.
Spoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2006, 12:59 PM   #120
Shane
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Shane is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (KaVir @ May 01 2006,12:19)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
My post is like two up from here, and you did not seem to register the fact that a sufficient time between finding someone might be in violation and registering the complaint can imply a license does not appear in your replies.
An implied licence - according to Wikipedia.  However an implied licence is "created by law in the absence of an actual agreement between the parties. Implied licenses arise when the conduct of the parties indicates that some license is to be extended between the copyright owner and the licensee, but the parties themselves did not bother to create a license"

(Ref: http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/license.html#implied)

However we already have a licence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Obviously a program is copyrightable.  The point is that it may not give the same rights to the writer concerning derivative works if the "derivative" is not code, but large amounts of standard, textual fiction.
It would be a derivative of both.  If you incorporate chunks of Star Wars fiction into a modified version of DikuMUD, for example, then you end up with something which is a derivative of both Diku and Star Wars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
The issue regarding enforceability is not that there is no violation.  It is that the method to go about proving that there has been a violation normally used is not available.  Normally, there is the work there, and that person is presenting it, selling it, whatever.  All you do is point it out.  In the case of a computer program, given the license of Diku, the distribution has already occured.  The accusation of copyright infringement then has to be backed up by something that would require forced searches.  Depending on whether or not Medievia's prior record were taken into account, maybe that would cause a judge to order a code audit, but barring something like that there is nothing to show that the mud is Diku, therefore nothing to show there is any case at all for a jugement of copyright violation.
Well you're talking about burden of proof, and that's really going to depend on each specific case.  In the case of Medievia, I'd say it's pretty clear cut.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
To further clarify what I am talking about, say the Diku team accused you of making a derivative work of theirs.  You are well known to have worked with Diku, so perhaps there is room for some suspicion in their minds, or whatever.  

If they make that accusation in court, do you think that they are assumed to be correct until you prove them wrong, or do they not at the least have the burden of proof that the program you made is indeed a derivative work?  How are they to do that if they have no right to look at the program?
If they had good reason to believe my mud was a Diku derivative then they could try and legally force me to reveal the source code, yes (although they wouldn't need to - I'd just show them, if they honestly thought my mud was a derivative).
It appears the Wikipedia entry is saying that a sufficient length of time allowing a known infringer to use something establishes the implied license. It would be similar to adverse possession of real estate if it indeed works that way. It is not entirely outside the scope of the law as I know it, in any event.

Burden of proof, yes. And I think it is entirely possible that given Medievia's past dealings, if the Diku team were to bring suit that it would not be at all unlikely that an injunction to look at the code of Medievia would be forthcoming.

Coming from me it means little, but hehe. I don't know if I will ever have the energy to look more into the implied license thing or not.
Shane is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


The DIKU license - Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Diku license the_logos Legal Issues 86 07-27-2007 09:31 AM
DIKU License Revisited xanes Legal Issues 14 07-27-2007 09:16 AM
What if there had never been DIKU? Threshold Tavern of the Blue Hand 24 05-26-2006 08:43 PM
original Diku? david Advertising for Players 0 02-16-2006 03:26 AM
Diku License -- Facts? tresspassor Legal Issues 1 08-15-2002 05:00 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Style based on a design by Essilor
Copyright Top Mud Sites.com 2014