Spartan448 said:
Andy Chalk said:
"Naughty Dog seems to have known that they couldn't use the official map without paying a hefty license fee.
It's shit like this I hate. Would Naughty Dog actually be REQUIRED to pay a hefty license fee, or is it just that you see this large company as prey, and a good opportunity to make some quick easy money off of your modified transit map that you probably made without permission in the first place?
Riiiiight, poor ND is the one being preyed upon by the evil graphic designer from whom they stole!
I will repeat all these points again, since apparently nobody seems to be grasping them despite their incredible simplicity.
1. It doesn't care how any of you feel about the law, or what you think the law should be, etc. It matters what the law is.
2. If ND wanted a map of the system and the original was already licensed, they have TWO choices. ONE: PAY someone to do the work for them, or TWO: pay to use an already created work. Oh, but wait, there's a third: steal it from someone! Then they don't have to pay any licensing fees, they don't have to pay to employ someone to do the work, and they get it for free! Yay! Oh wait, except let's take this idea to its logical conclusion. If ND can steal this one small part its game, why not steal everything else? Lets make all the character models in the game in the game by stealing character models from previous games. I mean, sure, people worked hard on those models, they deserve to be paid for their work and not have it stolen and have someone else take credit for it, but whatever. Next, lets steal some dialogue from a movie. Wow, this game is reall coming together, and we haven't even spent a single cent yet!
3. Anyone here who thinks that just because his map is based on an original map means he either doesn't have a claim or is a thief himself has no concept of the law. Do you know what the copyright status of the original map is? No? ok then. Those who are claiming he didn't make enough changes to the original also have no concept of copyright law.
People deserve to be paid for their work, not have it stolen from others. Single graphic designers are not the enemy. Companies that steal from others, but then turn around anf yell piracy at every opportunity are the enemy.
EDIT: and the cruel irony is that these companies have been engaging in these practices for ages. How is a graphic designer supposed to make any money if you can just steal his ideas? These are people's LIVELIHOODS we're talking about. Their jobs. The way they put food on the table for their families and children. These are entire industries on which ND and others are preying. People are being left out, not getting paid for their work, all so ND can save a few dollars that wouldn't matter much in the scheme of things to them, but that is huge to a single graphic designer. Many people here also seem to have little concept of money, jobs, employment, and how people get by in the world by doing work and getting paid for it. J
And those who complain simply because they don't like the overall effect IP law is having on things? Why do you think those effects are happening? I'll tell you one thing after spending the entire last YEAR studying copyright law at Fordham Law School and applying it to this industry on my own time: it's because companies like ND and EA are using those laws improperly or maliciously, not some little designer in Massacussetts.
EDIT 2: and these "stifling creativity" arguments are even worse. This guys claim is not the kind of thing that stifles creativity. You know what does? Companies like ND. If you're, say, a designer, creating workes and hoping someone will pay you to use them, but knowing that your work will likely be stolen anyway and you won't be paid for it. Why bother doing your livelihood when people are just going to steal it instead of pay to use it or pay you to make a new one?