|
The thrust of my post was not directed at the misappropriation of IP per se but how it relates to the artistic rights of an author. Indeed copyrights relating to literature tend to have a dual purpose, to protect the integrity the author’s creative vision and to safeguard its commercial stock. I simply pointed out that the current owners of the LOR IP obviously have little regards for the literary integrity Tolkein’s works, but overwhelming regard for its commercial opportunities. Jokingly I referred to a hypothetical musical, and alas I seem to have been factually correct.
Tra-la-la
Oh where is Gandalf, where can he be?
Over the mountains and over the sea
Come see the hobbits dance and sing
Watch out its Bilbo, and he has a ring!
Enter river-dancing hobbits, stage left.
The point I was making was that I would not feel ethically indebted to the current IP owners in respect to artistic license. Indeed, It might be the case that a respectful interpretation of Tolkeins works might give the soul of the man a little glimmer of happiness, in contrast to the disreputable utilisation of his works as sanctioned by the current IP owners. And no I’m not a big fan of his works, as a piece of popular fiction it has a certain degree of merit, however, as a work of literature it is fairly ho hum and uninspiring. I am also aware that his works have themselves been charged with being derivatives of Wagners Ring Cycle.
Examples of Similarity
Hobbit,LOR then beneath it Wagners Ring Cycle
Alberich forges a Ring of Power
Sauron forges a Ring of Power
The Ring gives the bearer world domination
The Ring gives the bearer world domination
The Ring is cursed and betrays its bearer
The Ring is evil and betrays its bearer
Fafner kills brother Fasolt to get the Ring
Smeagol kills friend Deagol for the Ring
Fafner hides in a cave for centuries
Smeagol-Gollum hides in a cave for centuries
Siegfried inherits the shards of his father’s sword
Aragorn inherits the shards his fathers' sword
Brunnhilde gives up immortality for Siegfried
Arwen gives up immortality for Aragorn
Wotan plays "riddles" for the life of Mime
Gollum plays "riddles" for the life of Bilbo
.... and many more
I can’t find any ethical argument against employing his work in a manner in keeping with the developed of a textual world. Especially when those who should be better placed to make such an argument, having blatantly disregarded his wishes, have paved the way for claims of hypocrisy, should they attempt to do so. If someone wishes to take it upon themselves to create a MUD with a Tolkein theme then in my own personal opinion that’s all well and good. If someone wishes to laboriously create a game while constantly being aware that the plug could be pulled at any time then that doesn’t give me cause for concern, providing the work sympathises with Tolkeins books and is respectful towards them and their content. In this respect I can’t find fault with SOI, they seem to be respecting Tolkeins creative vision in a manner that the man would be proud of.
This is not to say that using the works is permitted. I made a point of not referring to the legal rights of the owners. It goes without saying that possession is nine tenths of the law, and in the world of today whatever Tolkein wished for his works has long since been usurped beneath a tide of legal indemnity and commercial opportunism. Regardless of the authors intentions the law is still the law.
Should such MUDS be prohibited from advertising, where would such a move take the site? When all the games backed by fictional output have been removed, star wars, wheel of time, forgotten realms et al, I suspect their wont be a lot left. Except a few claiming to be original in theme while using racial elements like orcs and dwarves that are obviously derived from other sources, such as RP games, literature, or mythological accounts. At the end of the day it all boils down to the use of a few names that link the MUD with a popular text, and thereby an underlying association with a text that currently has main stream visibility.
Is this is crime worthy of a witch hunt, one worthy of directing input and effort away from other acts of nefarious conduct, acts that are more directly linked to the community, in respect to code theft for example. Shouldn’t this all be left to the individual authors and copyright owners? Don’t they have the means, time and finances to fight their own battles without the community having to tear itself apart over something that isn’t a major concern, well not to me at any rate. As an outlet for an ethical crusade I personally couldn’t give a long-bottom-leaf smoke ring about it. The only final outcome that I can see is the enforced removal of many games from the lists and advertising banners, focussing attention on the few that remain, which would result in a net gain and advantage to original MUDS wishing to increase their player bases.
The bit about P2P list members being economical regarding the P2P element of their games was included because it crops up frequently from time to time and no one ever does anything about it. It was applicable to the thread, not because it deals with IP, but because the heading of the thread also alluded to having a just cause for the banning of MUDS. A tenuous link I will admit, but I had my spade and felt like having a dig.
|