Slashdot Mirror
A Broke Fan Owes $5,400 For Pokemon-Themed Party Posters
Jason Koebler writes: A fan has been ordered by a Washington judge to pay the Pokémon Company International $5,400 for copyright infringement after attempting to throw a Pokemon-themed party earlier this summer. Even though he canceled the free event, the Pokemon Company successfully sued Ramar Larkin Jones, for using an image of Pikachu to promote the Unofficial PAX Pokemon Kickoff Party.
I've been thinking of buying a 3DS for when I travel...
If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans, I shudder to think of how they treat their enemies and competitors. What a fucking shitty thing to do. These people love Pokemon enough to have a big fun party kicking of PAX, and all Nintendo cares about is extracting it's fucking pound of flesh and in the process looking like a big, wobbly, flaccid dildo. In other words: Go fuck yourselves Nintendo, if you can't treat your fans well, then you deserve no fans. You bunch of litigious morons.
Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
Gotta catch them all!
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
The big piece of information that always gets neglected in these articles is that they didn't sue because he was throwing a party, but because he runs a business which hosts party events and then used Pokémon to promote such an event. Here is the company's trashy Facebook page. "Fans" and "Businesses" are NOT the same thing. https://www.facebook.com/Rucku...
Don't sue your fans!
There is a system for subverting the system and you should use that system!
The envelope please.... aaand the "Douchey" goes to.... Yes!!! The folks at Pokemon!! ...Ummm can they sue me for typing "Pokemon"?
Brokemon
Table-ized A.I.
Starting with me not buying Pokemon for nephews and nieces.
Noone says "End of story." unless there's more to the story and they don't want to acknowledge it.
I'd welcome fan backlash against a company who is punishing their fans for celebrations which don't earn an income. Question is: was this event really free or was it earning them an income?
Did Ramar Larkin Jones profiting from this in some way? Strange he says it's a money loser, and says he's got hardly anything in the bank and can't afford to pay the damages yet he did this five years running supposedly losing money each year?
> From Slasdot OP: Jason Koebler writes: Even though he canceled the free event
It wasn't free. Check below. They were selling tickets for $2 each. Big mistake for Koebler to make there since he's written about the Pokemon scene before
>"The Pokémon party would have been a money-losing endeavor, Jones told Geekwire, as it has been every year since 2011 when he first threw it. He collected about $500 by selling tickets at $2 apiece, but that revenue was outweighed by the $450 he spent on a DJ and gift cards, plus additional revenue spent on decorations, a Kindle Fire, and cash prizes. Jones refunded the tickets after he canceled the party."
>"Jones timed the party to coincide with the PAX gaming conference that takes place each year in Seattle, where he lives. According to the poster, the 5th Annual Unofficial Pokémon PAX Kickoff Party would have included "Pokémon themed shots and drinks," a "Smash Bros. Tournament with cash prize," as well as dancing, giveaways, a cosplay contest, and an "AMAZIN POKEMON MASHUP.""
Wouldn't it make more sense to let people in for free and have no door prizes? Are the number of places capped or did he stand to me a profit if he managed to sell more tickets than the cost of the door prizes?
>"A second defendant who was named in the suit, Zach Shore, is a manager at the host bar, and Jones said Shore had nothing to do with the event."
Was Shore selling drinks or food at the event? If he was then he'd be profiting from it. Ramar does the publicity. Shore makes the money. If that's true then they are making a profit by using Pokemon and without paying a cent in licensing fees
"The Pokémon Company is seeking statutory damages "within the higher range allowed when infringement has been committed willfully"; any profits the organizers made through the events since 2011"
That part means the Pokémon Company has no idea if Ramar and Shore have been making money but if it goes to court they can call evidence to find out.
If you can't cook dinner is what my mom would say.
If you think that is bad take a look at bronies.
You might notice the link to the Scribd document is no longer valid. Cause there has NOT been lawsuit yet. That motion was never filed. Please read the Techdirt article for much more thorough and correct information.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151002/17085432430/pokemon-wants-to-totally-bankrupt-one-biggest-fans-thanks-to-copyright.shtml
Posting anon to avoid karma whoring, please mod up for visibility. The linked article is fairly wrong and contradicts itself, the lawyer is being a douchebag on behalf of Pokemon International, and should know better. Honestly, its probably him you should be hating on and Pokemon International who merely hired his firm.
Because they enjoy the game and part of the joy of being an adult is deciding how you want to spend your time?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
Well? When it comes to copyable media we do get to use it for free for near enough all eternity. The only exception is a relatively short time near the beginning.
Yes pedants - 95 years is a relatively short time compared to the billions of years we expect the universe to exist.
Because they enjoy the game
Some things you grow out of with age. Reading comic books is another one of those things.
deciding how you want to spend your time?
I never said it should be illegal.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Because they enjoy the game
More specifically, some things you grow out of because you grow into other, more mature, interests.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
do not use shitty websites, scrubs!
Get real, the next time Mickey Mouse is about to expire, copyright will be extended again. Are you that naive you believe congress won't pass infinity-1 sooner or later? Nothing will come into the public domain ever again. Never. Get it?
You don't do it, it's as simple as that. Don't use someone else's property, especially when it belongs to a megacorp that will destroy your life just to send a message. Heed that message. Or is your life over if you can't have a Nintendo- or Disney-themed party?
Go ahead. If a thousands of people like you and your nieces and nephews died right now, a megacorp like Nintendo would not care. For one poor fool boycotting, a million does not. You're irrelevant and if your nieces and nephews like pokemon, you'll just alienate them and some smarter relative will nake them happy. You only hurt yourself.
The article doesn't make it clear, but Pokemon Company International have not claimed any money for the breach of the copyright. In the lawyer's letter, the money claimed is purely for court fees and attorney costs.
It's unusual for this type of claim to go to court, as they are almost invariably settled out of court. I'd guess that he got the C&D letter from the lawyers, and was offered an out of court settlement to pay for the lawyers fees accrued at that time. He then decided to take it to court, where he had no meaningful defence, and served only to rack up more lawyers fees and the court fees.
Oddly enough, RMS depends upon the very same copyright laws in order to validate the GPL. Without those laws, so that everything would be in the public domain, people would be able to get anything and everything free for all eternity. On the other hand, they would lose some of the rights that the GPL grants. That includes access to the source code. That would be a world in which someone could publish a program with source code, then a third party could modify the source code and only ship binaries. In other words, the modified sources would more-or-less be treated as a trade secret.
Copyright can be used for good or for ill. Thankfully there are some people like RMS who do the former.
A lot of you are forgetting that this guy operates a cafe. Even if there was no cover charge to the event, he would have profited from the sales made during it. And now he will profit even more due to the exposure. Whether the operator is "broke" or not is irrelevant. A lawsuit like this 20 or 30 years ago could have been considered overly harsh...but in today's business environment, where everyone is desperate to eek out the slightest extra profit by any means necessary, it's not.
The organizer seems to be focussing on ticket sales as his source of revenue, but there is also mention of serving themed shots and drinks. Alcohol is expensive and surely he was not giving that away for free. It can also be a good revenue generator. I wonder how that fits into how much revenue he would have, and whether it would end up being profitable?
(Note: I'm not saying that this would be a hugely profitable event because of those drinks. I am suggesting that there are important details being left out, details which mean that this is more than a simple fandom party.)
That would be a more appropriate headline. The $2 admission their company charges is basically the cover charge to get into a party with sale of alcoholic beverages. Does this sound like your typical fan gathering?:
Defendants boast that the "5th Annual Unofficial Pokemon PAX Kickoff Party" will feature among other things, "Pokemon themed shots and drinks - Smash Bros. Tournament with cash prize - Dancing - Giveaways - Cosplay Contest and more," and an "AMAZIN POKEMON MASHUP."
This sounds like a typical commercial "theme night" that bars and clubs might have, only instead of using a generic unprotected theme like Halloween they made a Pokemon party. Not surprised their lawyers got angry, They managed to put a very good media spin on it though, clearly they as event organizers know how to get media attention and manipulate it. I hope they get to pay every dollar.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
This generation has the assumption that everything visible on the Internet and/or available for public consumption is by default Public Domain and thus available to use however they wish. Putting up some Pokemon decorations in your home for a game-night party is ok but organizing a public event and charging admission (even just to "cover expenses") is NOT ok.
Why is this even being debated?
And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?
For the record, I don't play Pokemon and was never really that into it. I get irritated at folks who look down their noses at other folks' hobbies because it's "not something adults do". Who made you arbiter of what's appropriate?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
congress
Nothing will come into the public domain ever again. Never. Get it?
Spoken like a truly masterful fuckwit who somehow thinks his country that hasn't even stopped shitting itself and is already burning is somehow going to last 'forever'.
Because old lawyers become judges... and it perpetuates the "good ol boy" club.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Umm you got the part at the end wrong,
Since the code came from a GPL source it too has to be released GPL in its entirety all source code for those binaries. This means that the next person whom wants to modify and extend the original application has the same rights as the originator.
So to put the fact right, there are no losses to the source code at all. To do otherwise is a breach of the GPL.
Fuck you, bootlicker. At this rate, corporations will own all culture within the next 30 years and you won't be able to blow your nose unless it's on government sanctioned, di$ney branded tissue that you had to pay $2 a piece for.
And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?
Anything who's second-most identifiable character isn't a pre-teen (Ash Ketchum).
Who made you arbiter of what's appropriate?
My opinion is my own, and I have the right to write it. Your opinion is your own, and you have the right to ignore it.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
If you don't want people to have something, don't give it away in the first place.
Chapter 7 bankruptcy can be done for a few hundred bucks and has the added benefit of burning your credit cards in the process.
And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?
Sports, evidently. Sporting is what adults do. Pokemon video-gaming, bad. Football video-gaming, good. What? Children also play football video-games? Oh, but that's just them wanting to grow up, so it's fine!
Also, cosplaying. True adults don't cosplay. I mean, they don't cosplay Pokemon team's uniforms. Hockey team uniforms, now, those are fine to cosplay.
Also, let's not forget that only children write Pokemon games. Adults never do that. And those rare that do, they hate every single minute of their day. They could all be adulting, and instead they're childring. That's just plain evil! They could be cosplaying their sporting team, and by means of that showing all their grown up adulting, but no, they're forced to be childring. Oh, how they suffer! I'm sad for them. So, so many sporting stuff they could be doing. Sad. :(
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
More specifically, some things you grow out of because you grow into other, more mature, interests.
"Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -- C.S. Lewis
Grow up.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
I'm finding it hard to arrive at $5,000 in costs unless it's just a round number pulled out of a hat.
Can anyone detail how there could be $5,000 in legal fees. I can't see more than about 5-6 hours of time spent on this.
No, don't look at bronies. That's something you can't unsee.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The example that I gave assumed that copyright law does not exist. That is to say that everything is in the public domain. The GPL could not exist in that world since the GPL requires copyright law. If you don't have the GPL, you can't force people to distribute the modified source code.
And, right on cue, the "mature" adult denigrating those he perceives as childish makes a grammatical error a fifth-grader wouldn't have made. Classic.
Time to spread some Rule 34 Pokemon art around! Dare them to sue, and invoke the Streisand Effect.
Amazingly, C.S. Lewis isn't the arbiter of opinion either.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Sporting is what adults do.
Sports change with age.
Hockey team uniforms, now, those are fine to cosplay.
Send me multiple links of many people wearing complete hockey uniforms (including stick) at a hockey-con, since that would be hockey cosplay.
Otherwise, it's just wearing a jersey.
only children write Pokemon games. Adults never do that.
Adults write children's books. That doesn't mean they obsess over them.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
And just such an adult wrote
Critics who treat "adult" as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.
Grow up kid, and put aside your fears.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You're the second person to quote that to me. My reply to you is the same as to him: Amazingly, C.S. Lewis isn't the arbiter of opinion either.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
That's it, my kids are never getting into Pokemon. I'll find them an alternative.
I wonder if Disney will be as lenient as Lucas was. Disney certainly isn't as picky or discriminating in what they will license for Star Wars, i.e. read anything or anyone who will pay a buck...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
What is Julian Assange doing at that Pokemon party?
lucm, indeed.
Sports change with age.
Yes. And once you've grown enough, after decades of effort at adulting, you finally reach the ultimate level: a pretty good dominoes player. Not to mention a regular at the local bingo parlor.
Send me multiple links of many people wearing complete...
Yay! Let's play No true Scotsman as the adults we are!
Adults write children's books. That doesn't mean they obsess over them.
And as an adult, I allow myself to obsess over books written by other adults.
You're the second person to quote that to me.
I was the first. As for him not being an arbiter of opinion, actually he is. That isn't an "opinion". That's his expert advice as one of the foremost scholars in the field of English literature.
Now, evidently you may disagree. But then, who am I to prevent someone from being of an opinion mutatis mutandi similar to that of a flat Earth apologist? Have fun within your prejudice-delimited field of "permissible content". In the meantime, we'll continue having fun with literally anything and everything we want.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
And yet, they haven't shut down this project yet:
http://pokemon3d.net/
Let's play No true Scotsman
I don't see how asking for evidence for your claim that "people cosplay hockey" is the NTS fallacy.
That's his expert advice as one of the foremost scholars in the field of English literature.
Since English Literature has no actual bearing on Pokemon, I'll throw the Argument from authority fallacy at you.
But then, who am I to prevent someone from being of an opinion
Since my statement was not adults should stop playing games where the hero is prepubescent, but rather it was the question why are adults still playing with Pokemon?, what you could have done is try and convince me.
But you didn't. Instead, you got all defensive.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
I don't see how asking for evidence for your claim that "people cosplay hockey" is the NTS fallacy.
Cosplay goes from partial to theatrical production with full makeup. You restricted your side to complete outfits, playing on the fact I randomly mentioned hockey. Other sports, let's say, soccer, use simpler outfits whose fans completely emulate.
But the point you're trying to avoid is this: the delimitation between what is proper adult behavior and what is child behavior is cultural. Sport fans act in every single way exactly like anime, video-game, sci-fi etc. fans, but no one thinks it strange because they're used to seeing it all around. This familiarity is the sole thing that gives any of it the "air" of legitimacy, and that's all there is to it. Objectively, there's no difference except this one, and it's one that's being slowly closed.
Since English Literature has no actual bearing on Pokemon
Actually it does, by means of something that goes beyond it. Pokemon, as almost any work of fiction, including the fairy tales Lewis studied and worked upon (including writing them) and including adult stories, even hard core military fiction, are variations of the same set of narrative elements, that of the monomyth. The teenage boy catching big-eyed cute pseudo-monsters in an all-primary-colors world, or the hardened veteran of a thousand battles watching his companions gruesomely dismembered one by one while struggling to survive in a scenario of nightmares where death is the easy way out and nothing but supreme sacrifices will work, are both the same story. The difference in setting, tone and style are fluff, a matter of taste and preference, and little more.
But you didn't. Instead, you got all defensive.
You asked in an aggressive manner and you got aggressive replies. As for your rephrased and deescalated question, the answer is simple: adults still play Pokemon because for them it's fun to play Pokemon. The same reason anyone does any past time.
Now, would you want a reason for you to play Pokemon? I doubt I'd have any to offer, not even the simple one that you should try it. The reason is that what you wrote make it clear you'd feel so uncomfortable trying a "children's game", so challenged by what others might think if they saw you doing such a thing, that any enjoyment you could discover in the game itself would be overshadowed by that extra layer of negative social expectations, resulting in an almost certain verdict of "it sucks". So, there's no point.
Now, adults who an enjoy "children" things are precisely those who, like Lewis, are able to give the middle finger to that social layer and look at things objectively. For them, the experience of playing for the first time something like a Pokemon game, is one of experiencing that thing, not one of experiencing that thing through the lens and these concepts, those norms, those expectations, these opinions etc. They can allow themselves to enjoy whatever they want enjoy.
Want to have this experience? First thing, learn to not ask yourself anymore whether this or that is something that {list of things you are} "can" enjoy. Managed that? Then I say, go try those games. Then, and only then, you'll be able to say with full knowledge whether it's something worth playing. Note: not "something an adult should be playing", something worth playing.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Sport fans act in every single way exactly like anime, video-game, sci-fi etc. fans
But those sports fans wear the jerseys of other adults, not of teenagers (or worse, pre-pubescents).
It's the same reason why a man cosplaying Worf isn't weird, but a man cosplaying as his son Alexander Rozhenko is creepy.
The teenage boy
Or the 10 year old.
The teenage boy catching big-eyed cute pseudo-monsters in an all-primary-colors world
When I was young, I hated broccoli and squash. As I matured, I started liking them. Why? My tastes literally changed.
The difference in setting, tone and style are fluff, a matter of taste and preference, and little more.
Adults playing a game with a 10 year old protagonist is a creepy as old men staring at little girls.
This is completely different from both adults and children reading the Chronicles Of Narnia and both enjoying it (though for completely different reasons: the adult seeing nuances and subtexts lost on a child).
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
My opinion is my own, and I have the right to write it. Your opinion is your own, and you have the right to ignore it.
You seem to be implying that if I disagree with you, then I should just ignore you and move on. You're leaving out the part where we have the right to call each other's opinions into question. You posted something I found stupid. I responded. Now we have a short (and probably pointless) debate on the subject. That's what adults do.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
You seem to be implying that if I disagree with you, then I just ignore you and move on
You said that I set myself up as the arbiter of what's appropriate. (Which I didn't.)
I wrote that you have the right to ignore my opinion, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate.
Now we have a short (and probably pointless) debate on the subject.
We can. Or you can ignore me, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate. It's all the same to me, since my self-image is not wrapped up in ensuring that adults don't play Pokemon.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
When I was young, I hated broccoli and squash. As I matured, I started liking them. Why? My tastes literally changed.
Since we're throwing around anecdotes, I liked lasagna when I was 6. I still like lasagna as an adult. No one's calling into question changing tastes. We're calling you out for declaring someone else's taste is wrong. You didn't say it outright, but your original post pretty heavily implied it.
Adults playing a game with a 10 year old protagonist is a creepy as old men staring at little girls.
I can't tell if you're deeply insecure or just an exquisite troll. Are you seriously going to equate adults playing video games with child protagonists to paedophilia? If you'd said "adults playing games with a 10 year old protagonist is as creepy as adults who watch My Little Pony", I might have been willing to let it slide as rhetoric. Instead you went and implied that anyone over the age of 18 (or whatever age you consider an adult) who plays a video game with a child protagonist is harbouring paedophilia tendencies.
Just to be clear, are you saying everyone who played and enjoyed Child of Light (with a female child protagonist), The Last of Us (that features a barely-pubescent Elle as a co-protagonist), or the The Legend of Zelda (Link is described as "a young lad") is a paedophile? If you want to make that argument, by all means, go for it. I'll hear you out and we can debate it like adults. But at least have the courage of your convictions and say it as a declarative.
Or, you know, you could not shit on someone else's hobbies in order to give yourself a sense of superiority.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
You said that I set myself up as the arbiter of what's appropriate. (Which I didn't.)
I wrote that you have the right to ignore my opinion, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate.
Congratulations, you can reguritate past events. Now, for your next challenge, can you form a coherent counterargument?
We can. Or you can ignore me, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate. It's all the same to me, since my self-image is not wrapped up in ensuring that adults don't play Pokemon.
Yes, I certainly could ignore you, but I'm not going to do that. Instead I'm going to continue to press the issue since you suddenly very defensive and incapable of backing up your opinion with anything more substantial than more opinions and flimsy rhetoric. Or you could keep your opinions on Pokemon to yourself since no one asked for them and they're completely tangential to the original article.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
Since my statement was not adults should stop playing games where the hero is prepubescent, but rather it was the question why are adults still playing with Pokemon?, what you could have done is try and convince me.
I'm almost certain you're trolling now. No one owes you an explanation of why they enjoy the hobbies they do, so why should they have to convince you of anything?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
Moral of this is never take on a lawyer in court without a lawyer of your own: The Honorable James P. Donohue 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 11 12 THE POKÉMON COMPANY INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:15-cv-01372-JPD FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION v. RAMAR LARKIN JONES; ZACH SHORE; and RUCKUS PRODUCTIONS, 16 Defendants. 17 18 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 19 20 1. This is an action for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 21 101 et seq. In the Complaint, Plaintiff The Pokémon Company International, Inc. (“TPCi”) 22 sought, among other relief, injunctive relief under 17 U.S.C. 502. 23 24 2. The Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). 25 26 27 FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION (2:15-cv-01372-JPD) - 1 DWT 27886547v3 0087890-000027 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP L AW O F FI CE S 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101-3045 206.622.3150 main 206.757.7700 fax 3. 1 The Complaint alleges, in part, that Defendants copied, reproduced, displayed 2 and distributed TPCi’s copyrighted Pokémon works without authorization, thereby infringing 3 TPCi’s copyrighted works. 4 4. 5 Jones (“Jones”). 6 5. 7 prejudice. 8 6. 9 Defendant Ruckus Productions is a trade name used by Defendant Ramar Larkin TPCi has previously dismissed its claims against Defendant Zach Shore without TPCi is the prevailing party in this action within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. 505. FINAL JUDGMENT 10 Judgment is entered in favor of TPCi and against Jones, individually and doing business 11 12 as Ruckus Productions (“Defendant Jones”). INJUNCTION 13 14 1. For the purposes of this Permanent Injunction, the following definitions apply: (a) 15 “Copyrighted Work” shall mean any work, or portion thereof, whether 16 now in existence or later created, in which TPCi, or a parent, subsidiary 17 or affiliate of TPCi owns or controls a valid and subsisting exclusive 18 right under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq. (b) 19 “Infringing Work” shall mean any unauthorized scan, copy, 20 reproduction, counterfeit, derivative work or other colorable imitation of 21 the Copyrighted Works or any part thereof. (c) 22 23 2. “Days” means calendar days, unless otherwise specified. Defendant Jones and his agents, servants, employees, assigns, and all those in 24 active concert or participation with any of them (“Enjoined Parties”), who receive actual notice 25 of this Permanent Injunction by personal service or otherwise, are ORDERED and ENJOINED 26 as follows: 27 FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION (2:15-cv-01372-JPD) - 2 DWT 27886547v3 0087890-000027 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP L AW O F FI CE S 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101-3045 206.622.3150 main 206.757.7700 fax (a) 1 Effective immediately upon the entry of this Permanent Injunction, the 2 Enjoined Parties are permanently enjoined from infringing the 3 Copyrighted Works, either directly or contributorily, including generally 4 but not limited to, by copying, reproducing, displaying, promoting, 5 marketing, advertising, offering for sale or otherwise disposing of or 6 distributing any Infringing Work. (b) 7 Effective immediately upon the entry of this Permanent Injunction, the 8 Enjoined Parties are permanently enjoined from inducing, aiding, 9 abetting, contributing to, or otherwise assisting anyone in infringing upon any Copyrighted Work. 10 (c) 11 Within seven (7) days of the entry of this Permanent Injunction, 12 Defendant Jones shall remove from websites, including but not limited to 13 Facebook.com and Eventbrite.com, all Infringing Works that he has 14 posted there. (d) 15 Within seven (7) days
Just to be clear, are you saying everyone who played and enjoyed Child of Light (with a female child protagonist), The Last of Us (that features a barely-pubescent Elle as a co-protagonist) ... is a paedophile?
I said creepy, not "jail worthy". There actually is a substantial difference.
(Young lad going to rescue a princess is sufficiently ambiguous to be what I consider normal.)
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
since you suddenly very defensive and incapable of backing up your opinion with anything more substantial than more opinions and flimsy rhetoric.
No defensiveness; you're reading in too much. It's my opinion, because it does feel creepy.
since no one asked for them and they're completely tangential to the original article.
You do realize this is /., right?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
No one owes you an explanation of why they enjoy the hobbies they do, so why should they have to convince you of anything?
I've already written that you (and everyone else) can ignore me, and yet while writing this (No one owes you an explanation), in another thread you write, I'm not going to ignore you.
Make up your mind.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Did I cite him as an authority? No. He's simply: correct. You seem obsessed with being very grown up. What stake do you have in how adults enjoy their free time anyhow? Certainly adults who obsess over entertainment as the expense of having a productive career are hurting themselves and society, but once the job is done for the day? To each his own.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You seem obsessed with being very grown up.
Obsessed??????
Channeling Wikipedia: citation please.
What stake do you have in how adults enjoy their free time anyhow?
The thread started out with a question. I have my opinion on the matter, but have given no indication whatsoever that I'm on some sort of Moral Crusade to stop adults from playing Pokemon.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Live long anarchy!
RMS has stated he'd be fine with no copyrights, since then the binaries could be passed around freely and people could reconstruct the source. The GPLs are ways of using copyright law to his advantage, since he's pragmatic in many areas.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Corporations only own our culture because we buy our culture from corporations. If people don't want to be owned, they should stop being a fanboy of someone else's ideas and make their ideas. Of course this will never happen in society at large, it is an individual choice, and once you go it alone you cease to have a meaningful impact on culture. The vocal minority (backed by advertising $$$) will always hog the spotlight and create that gravitational center we think of as culture. Like it or not, our culture has been hijacked and we can't do jack shit about it.