LittleBigPlanet's Media Molecule Invents Copyright Law?
Shocking invasion of users' hard work from lazy big bullies!? Maybe not...
Cow in a flag. Offensive?
In a startling act of corporate law bullying, it appears that LittleBigPlanet developer Media Molecule has invented something called 'copyright'.
That's right, LBP users are popping up and explaining that levels that they have invented entirely using their own imaginations - well, their imaginations and some other people's (known in legal circles as 'creators of the original idea') - are being deleted or modified. Yes, people using other 'copyrighted' characters or scenes (for example, Gears, Batman, Pac-Man) for their published levels are having their hard work devastated by corporate storm troopers from Media Molecule.
(Note, if you don't publish all that hard work, then it won't get deleted.)
This outrage appears to happen when the LBP users publish their totally original works (well, works using other people's IP) for the rest of the world to then see how clever they are. If, however, the user wants to do the work for the sake of the work (maybe as a learning tool before creating something actually original) but not publish it for the adoration, it doesn't get moderated or deleted.
Sick! Corporate bullying! Not really, straightforward copyright protection really. Why not have some original ideas and publish those?
More seriously, voices are being raised regarding the rather clumsy method by which published (that's 'published') levels are moderated or deleted. Media Molecule developer Sam_Protagonist has responded on the US PlayStation board:
Looks like more simple protection against spurious legal claims; sounds fair enough until we reach:
(Our bold)
This would appear to be a very rocky road to travel indeed given that a level in which cows are incinerated would be offensive in India but hilarious in Idaho; a level in which female characters are allowed to wander around without being covered from head to toe in hessian would be acceptable in certain parts of Perthshire but offensive in certain parts of Pakistan; lord knows how a game level featuring Henry XIII would go down in the Vatican City!! The list goes on.
That's right, LBP users are popping up and explaining that levels that they have invented entirely using their own imaginations - well, their imaginations and some other people's (known in legal circles as 'creators of the original idea') - are being deleted or modified. Yes, people using other 'copyrighted' characters or scenes (for example, Gears, Batman, Pac-Man) for their published levels are having their hard work devastated by corporate storm troopers from Media Molecule.
(Note, if you don't publish all that hard work, then it won't get deleted.)
This outrage appears to happen when the LBP users publish their totally original works (well, works using other people's IP) for the rest of the world to then see how clever they are. If, however, the user wants to do the work for the sake of the work (maybe as a learning tool before creating something actually original) but not publish it for the adoration, it doesn't get moderated or deleted.
Sick! Corporate bullying! Not really, straightforward copyright protection really. Why not have some original ideas and publish those?
More seriously, voices are being raised regarding the rather clumsy method by which published (that's 'published') levels are moderated or deleted. Media Molecule developer Sam_Protagonist has responded on the US PlayStation board:
"We've seen a few messages from people whose levels have been moderated but are puzzled to work out why it happened. Here's a quick overview of how the moderation process works :
- You upload your level
- Someone plays the level and finds something they don't think is appropriate (we're ignoring "funny" people who report content for laughs in this example)
- Your level is placed into a moderation queue to be checked over
- Within 24 hours absolute maximum the moderation report is checked
- If the complaint is upheld, the level is removed from the shared part of the game, if the offense was particularly strong further action may be taken against the content creator."
- You upload your level
- Someone plays the level and finds something they don't think is appropriate (we're ignoring "funny" people who report content for laughs in this example)
- Your level is placed into a moderation queue to be checked over
- Within 24 hours absolute maximum the moderation report is checked
- If the complaint is upheld, the level is removed from the shared part of the game, if the offense was particularly strong further action may be taken against the content creator."
Looks like more simple protection against spurious legal claims; sounds fair enough until we reach:
"That's how it stands right now. We are working on a system whereby any level that is moderated will inform the creator of the level why the action was taken, as there could be unintentionally unsuitable content in the level, or a cultural offense which is harmless in one country and offensive in another - either way we want to ensure that creators' levels are only permanently removed if they warrant it. In most innocent cases a simple tweak to the level may be required and that's what we're working on communicating."
(Our bold)
This would appear to be a very rocky road to travel indeed given that a level in which cows are incinerated would be offensive in India but hilarious in Idaho; a level in which female characters are allowed to wander around without being covered from head to toe in hessian would be acceptable in certain parts of Perthshire but offensive in certain parts of Pakistan; lord knows how a game level featuring Henry XIII would go down in the Vatican City!! The list goes on.
Read More Like This
Comments
deleted 10 Nov 2008 16:45
1/2
Declare it to be a parody?
"It has been a long-standing practice to poke fun at our cultural icons, symbols, public figures and celebrities. A parody exists when one imitates a serious piece of work, such as literature, music or artwork, for a humorous or satirical effect. Parody, as a method of criticism, has been a very popular means for authors, entertainers and advertisers to communicate a particular message or point of view to the public.
A parody, because it is a method of criticism, must inevitably make use of another creative work. This inherently creates a conflict between the creator of the work that is being parodied (as no one likes to be criticized, made fun of or ridiculed) and the creator of the parody. It is also highly unlikely that a copyright owner will grant permission or a license to a parodist to use their copyright protected work in creating a parody.
Since copyright law prohibits the substantial use of a copyrighted work without permission of the copyright owner, and because such permission is highly unlikely when the use is to create a parody, it may be necessary for the parodist to rely on the fair-use defense to forestall any liability for copyright infringement. However, the fair-use defense if successful will only be successful when the newly created work that purports itself to be parody is a valid parody".
of course there is fair use?
" Fair Use Analysis
The Copyright Act in Section 107 enumerates four "fair use factors" that must be analyzed to determine whether a particular use of a copyrighted work, such as a parody, is fair use. These factors are the (1) purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is commercially motivated or instead is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) nature of the copyrighted work; (3) amount and substantiality of the portion used in the newly created work in relation to the copyrighted work; and (4) effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. A court when evaluating a fair-use defense takes into consideration each of the four factors as no single factor by itself is sufficient to prove or disprove fair use. The following discussion will describe the specific fair use criterion and provide an overview of the key issues involved in the analysis of the fair-use defense. "
but i suppose the creator could argue that sont or LBP devs are making money on the basis the gaem must be purchased first with DLC being an extra of the original purchase price?
"It has been a long-standing practice to poke fun at our cultural icons, symbols, public figures and celebrities. A parody exists when one imitates a serious piece of work, such as literature, music or artwork, for a humorous or satirical effect. Parody, as a method of criticism, has been a very popular means for authors, entertainers and advertisers to communicate a particular message or point of view to the public.
A parody, because it is a method of criticism, must inevitably make use of another creative work. This inherently creates a conflict between the creator of the work that is being parodied (as no one likes to be criticized, made fun of or ridiculed) and the creator of the parody. It is also highly unlikely that a copyright owner will grant permission or a license to a parodist to use their copyright protected work in creating a parody.
Since copyright law prohibits the substantial use of a copyrighted work without permission of the copyright owner, and because such permission is highly unlikely when the use is to create a parody, it may be necessary for the parodist to rely on the fair-use defense to forestall any liability for copyright infringement. However, the fair-use defense if successful will only be successful when the newly created work that purports itself to be parody is a valid parody".
of course there is fair use?
" Fair Use Analysis
The Copyright Act in Section 107 enumerates four "fair use factors" that must be analyzed to determine whether a particular use of a copyrighted work, such as a parody, is fair use. These factors are the (1) purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is commercially motivated or instead is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) nature of the copyrighted work; (3) amount and substantiality of the portion used in the newly created work in relation to the copyrighted work; and (4) effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. A court when evaluating a fair-use defense takes into consideration each of the four factors as no single factor by itself is sufficient to prove or disprove fair use. The following discussion will describe the specific fair use criterion and provide an overview of the key issues involved in the analysis of the fair-use defense. "
but i suppose the creator could argue that sont or LBP devs are making money on the basis the gaem must be purchased first with DLC being an extra of the original purchase price?
Hi 10 Nov 2008 20:29
2/2
What about the LBP TV advertisement, where the guy has invented a game about his ex girlfriend and has a special device that kills his ex-girl fiend's best friend. Lets see, defamation, libel, threats of violence, harassment.....