Slashdot Mirror
LittleBigPlanet Creations Raising Copyright Questions
Joystiq's Law of the Game column uses the recently released LittleBigPlanet to address the question of intellectual property rights for user-created content within and for games. At this point, Sony's ToS claims a great deal of control over users' work, unlike Second Life's, which is much more permissive. GiantBomb has a related story pointing out creations within LittleBigPlanet that are copies of other games, and how they could lead to legal troubles for Sony if they aren't quick about taking them down.
Sony is one of the worst offenders with draconian EULA's. I am not surprised by this. They don't want to have people creating their own content to own their own content. They want to own our content.
I learned a long time ago to just say no to Sony.
Sony should just pull a Youtube and say they are a carrier for this content, and will pull down content based on DMCA claims.
The other thing is, how many real commercial games are simply copies of other games with slightly different graphics anyway?
Don't point that gun at him, he's an unpaid intern!
They could just say 'anything you do here is your own responsibility' and leave it at that.
If they were stupid enough to allow claims of copyright or copyright infringement in their game it'll die like a jolly fast dying thing, of death.
I mean seriously.. its a game...
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
It's practically guaranteed that someone using a game's level editor is going to recreate their favorite game. It happens all the time. I can't tell you how many Starcraft maps I have that are based on some other game.
This is a simple case of people having fun.
Legal troubles? Yeah, right.
So by Sony's logic, if I fire up Microsoft Word and write a document, then Microsoft owns the copyright to my creation?
I fail to see the difference between this game and a word processor.
"And then I visited Wikipedia
This is a great example of what can be done with the level editor, but is anyone going to actually confuse it with the real thing? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg0ZBHdz7wM This game has barely been released and we are getting stuff of pretty high quality. I can't wait to see what happens in the next few months.
Has everyone been paid for their creations? If not, is Sony violating minimum wage laws?
So in effect it says "It belongs to you, but you can do nothing with it and you are not allowed to profit from it, but we are."
Anyone see a problem of logic there? A judge is going to tear that ToS apart.
Seriously, suing LBP because people choose to create something replicating another game is asinine. Firstoff, if people want to play the *real* super mario brothers, they'll find a way to play the real thing (on NES, Wii, rom, whatever). If you need a fix that bad, you'll get the real thing. Secondly, LBP gives people a toolset to make things with. Just like a programming language. Or musical instruments. What people choose to do with them from that point on is up to them. Are you going to start suing art schools because they could potentially train art counterfitters? Or Gibson guitars because some teenager tries to cover a Metallica song with his garage band?
The modding toolkits that come with PC games usually contain clauses that say the PC game developer or publisher owns the rights to all content created with the mod toolkits. UnrealED is a great example of this.
Man, I'm going to have to get another hard drive. This list is growing too fast!
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Defending Sony? You're damn right I'm posting AC! Now as I understand it Sony is making two claims of relevance here:
1. You may not sell your content without our permission.
2. We may sell your content without paying you.
Both of these provisions have pretty reasonable justifications in affording Sony legal protection in the event of two types of inevitable situations.
1. You create something that violates copyright with their software, sell it on their network, and turn a profit. In doing so Sony is also turning a profit from whatever cut they take of your income, exposing them to the legal consequences of your copyright violation. Their first provision allows them to prevent this without having to argue with you or waiting for a DMCA takedown. Furthermore it allows them to block you from distributing anything they find objectionable or subversive to the spirit of their community; which they have a right to do.
2. Suppose you create a wildly popular level and sell it. Then you quit the game, and sell your copy. Your content is still on the PSN store, still making money for Sony. The second assertion prevents you from coming back in 5 years after your abandoned mod has sold a million copies and trying to sue Sony for money due you, the creator. One could argue that they really do owe it to you, but from the standpoint of a large corporation trying to protect its shareholders from the million potential litigants it hopes to sell its software too; its not an unreasonable move.
On their face, neither of these stipulations indicates that Sony intends to prevent you specifically from selling anything, or intends to withhold your fair share of the market price. It just allows them to do so on a case by case basis if, for example, you're making a nuisance of yourself legally or otherwise.
Though it bears mentioning that thinking Sony is seriously considering allowing you to profit off your content in any real way, when they could just as easily pocket all the cash themselves, is pushing my powers of infernal advocacy to their breaking point.
I tried to follow the instructions to cancel my PSN account (I will not accept that EULA), and it took two weeks just to get the email people to give me correct instructions -- which involve calling in.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Didn't anyone teach these people that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery? Its free publicity. "where did you get that nice design?" "oh its from _____, I like that show/movie/comic/etc so I made a tribute" I fail to see how this scenario or many others infringe on anyone's copyright.
So... Using Sony's hardware, software, I write a program. Sony Owns it. => I use Dell hardware, Microsoft software (Windows XP, Visual Studio), I write some code. Who do I give my money to? Dell or Microsoft because one of them MUST own it, if not both, using Sony's logic.......As usual, big business = ridiculous!
"Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"