D
Dork
Guest
Reported to the authorities.
Ah, so the credit for a piece of work belongs to the people that reblog it, not the author him/herself? And if the author wants recognition or compensation when someone else profits off his work, he's a "lazy ass" and "greedy" because he wants to "make profit" off of all the poor, exploited internet users that reblogged his work?While the original idea is the creation of one person, the real work is done by people sharing the funny stuff, it growing in popularity makes it a potential meme. So yes, making profit out of other people work, here the internet folks all around the world sharing funny stuff is greedy, definitely.
The copyright on a video or an animated short is not a "first time". But apparently when something becomes widespread it gets dubbed a "meme" and instantly becomes public domain.The copyright on meme is a first time, granted it could not exist without the work of popularity growing within internet communities.
Let's recap, shall we? The author of a piece of work isn't entitled to any form of recognition, because all he/she did was make it, the people forwarding it around did the "real work" and it is them who deserve to be recognized, and if any profit arises at some end, paid. Because paying only the author would be "unfair".So they want to be credited for it in the game? This is fair. To get money? Not fair unless it is spread all over the net to reward real "workers" making meme unknown to popular.
I know, right? It's terrible how creators don't like their work being used in commercial products without their permission, the entitled bastards. Now future Scribblenauts will have to, *GASP*, ask first before using someone else's work. Disgusting.Hell... these bastards will just manage to make it so that future Scribblenauts will be barred from having cool little easter eggs because of their stupid, completely unfunny meme that simply means shit. Warner will certainly be on the developer's tails about anything and everything. Nice.
snip
I think memes shouldn't be copywritten. I also think creators of said memes should be flattered that they are even considered to be part of a game that supposedly allows you to create "whatever you want". To be even considered as part of the real universe. lol
A meme can be anything that becomes popular online. Should the copyright on Rick Astley's "Never Gonna Give You Up" be void because people like it? Should NBC void their rights to Seinfeld because everybody likes the Costanza face? Should the creators of Nyan Cat give up what they took time and effort to create it because everyone shared the link for a month?
Also, the "They should just be grateful!" line of thinking is so laughable it warps around to being just a little bit sad. I mean... seriously? Seriously?
I think games shouldn't be copyrighted.I think memes shouldn't be copywritten.
That's basically my justification for piracy.i wouldnt say "give up" but instead "not bitch" after all, its at the least more publicity for their respected material.
That's my opinion. You have yours.
I wouldn't say "give up" but instead "not whine", after all it's at the least more publicity for their respected material. Maybe a kid sees nyan cat on scribblenauts, tells all his friends and youtube views go up, and more revenue is acquired from youtube to the owner.... there are many ways to look at it...
And?
That's not a "get out of jail free" card when it comes to justifying your viewpoints.
Breaking the law is breaking the law no matter how much publicity the original creators garner. Making excuses for WB here is beyond ridiculous; they should absolutely know better. Asking the creators to feel grateful for being ripped off is just adding insult to injury.
I agree that what was done was against the law.
however I don't see any insult OR injury here.
So we shouldn't hold people and companies accountable to the law?
Okay, buddy.
Yeah that's right. That's exactly what I said....
just because I think the law is stupid doesn't mean it doesn't exist... and just because I said I don't think there was any injury per se, does not mean the authorities don't.
just because a law was broken doesn't necessarily mean there was ANY injury.
Because this is the Internet. There is no such thing as a dialog or discussion, only verbal fights. You win an argument on having the last word. You have to explain yourself to others, and justify your viewpoints. I kid you not!
*snip*
I would think there's a fair use argument here since they're (I assume) using these as parody.
You have to explain yourself to others, and justify your viewpoints. I kid you not!
Yeah, I don't get the purpose in making others feeling stupid like some perverted judge to their trial. In a real encounter face to face it would not happen and it doesn't. Think of a random stranger at the supermarket arguing you for your opinion? Nope. Internet, anonymous, well.. It's alright to be wrong or being proved wrong, just not in an accusatory and disrespectful manner. We're all growing with experience and opinions are subjected to change, just like mine on the matter changed as I acknowledged there may be advertisement involved in trailers with said copyrights.. The right way is to adapt with objective facts as they are discovered, the wrong to hang on subjective opinions. Current lawsuit case, I think I expressed all I wanted to say already..lol so true. back on topic. I fired up my scribblenauts. nyan cat doesn't even look 100% the same, its adapted in scribblenauts drawing style.
Precisely my good Gahars, a debate is to confront arguments when a dialog or discussion is to build up opinions sharing knowledge. Imagine yourself with your wife or kids or bros sitting at your dinner table, debates anytime one open their mouth for speaking about weather or actuality.. I would retire in an underground grotto, lol.lemon key face.jpg
Not really, no.
It's almost as if that's expected in any debate, online or off. Weird...