«

[Timpsi]

Originally posted by Sebatianos@Dec 14 2004, 07:47 PM
Warner Bros. are there, but The Flight off the Amazon Queen is abandoned and free to uptain even on Scumm site.

Flight of the Amazon Queen was released as freeware by the nice copyright holder which is not Warner Bros.

the US doesnt seem to abide by the treaties it signed up to (geneva convention, anyone?) so i dont think anyone is going to care about the US position on copyright outside of the US

[QBiN]

Originally posted by Guest@Dec 16 2004, 09:27 AM
the US doesnt seem to abide by the treaties it signed up to (geneva convention, anyone?) so i dont think anyone is going to care about the US position on copyright outside of the US

Low blow by whoever that was.

All that cut&paste legalese from the ESA website is their spin on it, otherwise known as their "interpretation" of the law. Highlighting in bold their interpretation where it fits their agenda does not make the matter black&white, right vs. wrong, ipso facto.

I agree w/ Seb (and this is my take), that they can't be harmed monetarily since they no longer collect revenue from the sale of the game. It would be difficult for them to sue for any sort of damages either monetarily or brand/franchise defamation if the game is released unaltered.

It is a gray area, and LucasArts just shot themselves in the foot by stopping its sale -- denying them of any claim to real damages.

[Tuttle]

Originally posted by QBiN@Jan 1 2005, 06:56 AM
I agree w/ Seb (and this is my take), that they can't be harmed monetarily since they no longer collect revenue from the sale of the game. It would be difficult for them to sue for any sort of damages either monetarily or brand/franchise defamation if the game is released unaltered.

That's why copyright law typically includes criminal penalties as well as the potential for civil damages.

It's also worth noting that in the US in particular there is the concept of punitive damages, where money is awarded in a civil case purely to hurt the defendant, in addition to any compensation for actual damages.

[Razor2]

I think the solution would be that someone sends a message to lucasarts, and asks them where he can buy MI1 or 2. Of couse, he must not mention abandonia.

If they say that it can't be bought, then they can't enforce copyright laws in the case abandonia has it for download, because abandonia has not caused them any financial damage, which can be the basis for a lawsuit. (that's the law in most countries in Europe) So they can say that we violated the law, but no court in Europe will deal with it.

By the way the ESA (European Space Agency) should sue the ISDA (ESA) for using the same name.

[Borodin]

If they say that it can't be bought, then they can't enforce copyright laws in the case abandonia has it for download, because abandonia has not caused them any financial damage...

But you don't have to prove financial damage to enforce a claim of ownership in a court of law--you only have to prove uncontested ownership. As an example, take the late films of Charlie Chaplin, from the 1940s onwards. He never released the rights on these after their initial screenings. He wasn't making any money on them as a result, but he (and later, his estate) quickly issued injunctions against any movie theater that tried to revive them. They were only shown again after the rights finally lapsed.

Mind, I'm not saying Lucasarts would automatically do that. But any abandonware board has to ask itself this question, when they go up against a multi-billion dollar corporation that protects its own copyrights eagerly: do you feel lucky today, punk?

[mouse31e]

Originally posted by Razor2@Jan 1 2005, 12:31 PM
I think the solution would be that someone sends a message to lucasarts, and asks them where he can buy MI1 or 2. Of couse, he must not mention abandonia.

If they say that it can't be bought, then they can't enforce copyright laws in the case abandonia has it for download, because abandonia has not caused them any financial damage, which can be the basis for a lawsuit. (that's the law in most countries in Europe) So they can say that we violated the law, but no court in Europe will deal with it.

Lucas Arts are already saying it is not available. That would not make any difference at all legally. Unless we have permission from the copyright holder, it is technically illegal to offer the game for download.

Also, it could be taken as financially damaging as we have no idea what they intend to do with the game next. Maybe there is a box set of Monkey Island games coming out next christmas! If everyone has already downloaded the games from here, they would not sell as many copies! That is why it is best to wait until a game has been off the shelves for a while so you can see whether they have really stopped selling it!

[Razor2]

Anyway Lucasarts can have the best lawyers money can buy, but they won't even come near a lawsuit in the EU, in the case they can't prove that abandonia caused them x $ damage. That should be hard to prove if the game can't be bought. So I doubt they would try.

I don't know about US laws, maybe there is no such basis for a lawsuit, and anybody can be sued without proof that he had caused financial damage.

[Razor2]

By the way I would buy MI1 if I could, but unfortuately even as lucasarts sold it a few months ago, they only shipped it within the US and Canada.

[mouse31e]

The problem is that it wouldn't be about financial damage - it would be a criminal proceeding because a crime has been commited. That means any court in any country in the world would deal with it!