toxictaipan
New Member
So when you were trying to catch me in contradicting beliefs it was okay, but now that you've just been caught, you're tired of playing word games?
Last edited:
Copyrights
- Thread starter MattPL
- Start date
- Status
ninetales1234
<a href="http://pokegym.net/gallery/browseimages.p
Sandslash7 can keep on believin' whatever he wants to. He's got his own definition of "rights" and that's okay.So when you were trying to catch me in contradicting beliefs it was okay, but now that you've just been caught, you're tired of playing word games?
Sandslash7
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=
Mmm... "My own definition of rights?"
What is YOUR definition of rights? I find it degrading that you won't even talk to me either. Ignoring me is not helping your case. I think you've just given up because I've defeated your position.
Besides, "My own definition of rights" is the Merriam-Webster Dictionary definition. If you have one you like better, than please share it with the class.
You STILL have not answered HOW you believe that no one has rights, but that people have the right to not be put in cages. PLEASE explain this to me.
Let me break it down again if you have forgotten.
You believe that people who are harmless should not be put in cages. This is morally wrong to you. People own themselves. Because they own themselves; a power one is justly entitled too, it is morally wrong to put them, without due cause, into cages.
THEREFORE, you believe that people have the RIGHT to NOT BE PUT IN CAGES.
Where have I missed your "logic?" How can you say you don't believe in rights, and yet say you do? PLEASE tell me how you pull this off.
What is YOUR definition of rights? I find it degrading that you won't even talk to me either. Ignoring me is not helping your case. I think you've just given up because I've defeated your position.
Besides, "My own definition of rights" is the Merriam-Webster Dictionary definition. If you have one you like better, than please share it with the class.
You STILL have not answered HOW you believe that no one has rights, but that people have the right to not be put in cages. PLEASE explain this to me.
Let me break it down again if you have forgotten.
You believe that people who are harmless should not be put in cages. This is morally wrong to you. People own themselves. Because they own themselves; a power one is justly entitled too, it is morally wrong to put them, without due cause, into cages.
THEREFORE, you believe that people have the RIGHT to NOT BE PUT IN CAGES.
Where have I missed your "logic?" How can you say you don't believe in rights, and yet say you do? PLEASE tell me how you pull this off.
Benzo
Front Page News Editor<br>Forum Moderator
We have laws in place to keep reason and sanity. Even though there are 2 sets of laws and one middle ground does not mean that the consequences can not be handed out.
People seem to misunderstand that laws are not meant to be biased ( I said MEANT- before that sentence gets misconstrude, as the intention of a law is to resolve a problem or to detour a problom from arising)
Anyone can be placed in jail- wether they are peaceful or not or if the crime they did was peaceful or not.
Some say that theft is a harmless crime- it still hurts in the emotional side, that is why it is considered a crime, no matter how small or large.
It is a RIGHT to choose for oneself if they would like to take the chance of being "caged" or not. Your personal morals and choices will be what decides if you are in need of encagement or not, decided upon by an authority figure who has been given the right to do so by the law and the people who appointed them to be there.
A person can not believe in a right while believing that the right does exist- and that can be done. They do not believe the right is valid or applies to them, while saying that there is a need for that right for another person.
I am not picking sides or taking favortism, as each person see everything in a different view. If a person who steals ,oh,say 2 pennies from the till every day they work. They work for the company for 30 years.
Now, an average work schedule.- lets see.....
7200 days worked.
now- the pennies-
$144.00.
yes- a long time to accumulate that total. Worth it? Not if it took 30 years to get the $144.00.
But to some people, it is worth it, as every penny counts.
Risking your job to steal such a small amount? Take that chance if you want to, but your boss will prolly not want too keep you around, as he/she may wonder what you will steal next.
Some people are not aware that when a company takes another company to court, it does not nesseccerly mean the company suing the other will be awarded the full amount asked for.
To emphesis on the seriousness of the penalties they will sue at the max limit.
Laws are written in catagories which are broken down into level. ( example: Class A through Class C misdominear)
If it is law that if a warning is given for a company to stop doing something because it infringes on the rights of another company, those warnings being ignored only up the consequence level in court.
It is the company that is infringing that needs to stop- and if they want to persue the right to continue, they need to see if the company asking them to stop has the right to do so.
I do not see it as two companies fighting- just a disagreement at level that does need to be settled in the proper manner and legally. Heck- both companies would like to receive payment for the work they do and the sevice they provide. But the company that has the right to make profit legally should be the one to succeed- wit out that, the company can not expand, nor provide a better service and higher quality product if they are being ripped off.
People seem to misunderstand that laws are not meant to be biased ( I said MEANT- before that sentence gets misconstrude, as the intention of a law is to resolve a problem or to detour a problom from arising)
Anyone can be placed in jail- wether they are peaceful or not or if the crime they did was peaceful or not.
Some say that theft is a harmless crime- it still hurts in the emotional side, that is why it is considered a crime, no matter how small or large.
It is a RIGHT to choose for oneself if they would like to take the chance of being "caged" or not. Your personal morals and choices will be what decides if you are in need of encagement or not, decided upon by an authority figure who has been given the right to do so by the law and the people who appointed them to be there.
A person can not believe in a right while believing that the right does exist- and that can be done. They do not believe the right is valid or applies to them, while saying that there is a need for that right for another person.
I am not picking sides or taking favortism, as each person see everything in a different view. If a person who steals ,oh,say 2 pennies from the till every day they work. They work for the company for 30 years.
Now, an average work schedule.- lets see.....
7200 days worked.
now- the pennies-
$144.00.
yes- a long time to accumulate that total. Worth it? Not if it took 30 years to get the $144.00.
But to some people, it is worth it, as every penny counts.
Risking your job to steal such a small amount? Take that chance if you want to, but your boss will prolly not want too keep you around, as he/she may wonder what you will steal next.
Some people are not aware that when a company takes another company to court, it does not nesseccerly mean the company suing the other will be awarded the full amount asked for.
To emphesis on the seriousness of the penalties they will sue at the max limit.
Laws are written in catagories which are broken down into level. ( example: Class A through Class C misdominear)
If it is law that if a warning is given for a company to stop doing something because it infringes on the rights of another company, those warnings being ignored only up the consequence level in court.
It is the company that is infringing that needs to stop- and if they want to persue the right to continue, they need to see if the company asking them to stop has the right to do so.
I do not see it as two companies fighting- just a disagreement at level that does need to be settled in the proper manner and legally. Heck- both companies would like to receive payment for the work they do and the sevice they provide. But the company that has the right to make profit legally should be the one to succeed- wit out that, the company can not expand, nor provide a better service and higher quality product if they are being ripped off.
Been away, so a little late, but thanks for the link.
This is a great sharing of thoughtful, and sometimes in the comments thoughtless, communication of ideas relating to the topic of intellectual property rights. While it can be used to illuminate the Pokemon / Beckett situation, for me the piece makes me consider the ramifications and ethics (or lack thereof) of internet piracy and file sharing.
A really intelligent piece.
I wouldn't normally bump an old thread like this but have you guys seen Pokébeach:
http://pokebeach.com/2010/09/pokemon-black-and-white-game-coverage-begins
Getting a notice to take down Black & White images = yikes!
http://pokebeach.com/2010/09/pokemon-black-and-white-game-coverage-begins
Getting a notice to take down Black & White images = yikes!
Sabett
Active Member
Users still have it, and they still can't purge the internet of it. Still pointless.
starlighteevee
New Member
Yikes. Ok, pokemon is getting a bit lawyer-happy this past year, huh? First it was Beckett, then pokebeach, and now all the fan sites. You would think they'd appreciate all the free publicity they're getting. =/ I wonder why they're hitting everyone so hard now yet left them alone for years before... I just don't get it.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
Has that letter been confirmed as genuine yet?
Last I read, there were some doubts.
Wouldn't exactly be the first internet hoax of all time, would it?
Last I read, there were some doubts.
Wouldn't exactly be the first internet hoax of all time, would it?
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
Did you read NoPoke's post? I'll repost for your benefit...
Basically, if they *don't* start throwing out these kinds of notices, then they have no basis for attempting to stop the real bad stuff when it starts (again). Anybody remember the original Diamond ROMS when they first came onto the internet? Anybody want to have those days back again? Neither do I. If the price is the Beach, then that's the price.
of course, how much the (alleged) cease-and-desist has to do with the fact that he out-and-out STATES on his front page that he and his minions got the content by playing through the game via *ROM* is arguable.
i'm sure it wouldn't take a rocket scientist in nintendo's legal dept to come up with the idea to google the phrases 'pokemon black ROM' and 'pokemon white ROM' and see what sites pop up....=/
jmho
'mom
i'm sure it wouldn't take a rocket scientist in nintendo's legal dept to come up with the idea to google the phrases 'pokemon black ROM' and 'pokemon white ROM' and see what sites pop up....=/
jmho
'mom
Hmmm... I think you're right about trademarks, but copyrights are completely different. I don't think you have a requirement to 'protect' your work. Successful application of copyrights means that you "own" that work for the period of copyright and that unless exempted by fair use, noone else is allowed to reproduce it.
I don't think Nintendo has to randomly take action just to look like its enforcing anything for the copyright to still be valid.
Well actually, as far as I could tell from a Google search, Pokébeach isn't anywhere near the top,,,
Now I'm not trying to defend the use of ROMs - I'm not. I just don't think it is obvious that Pokébeach and the other fansites should be targeted...
jaws_is_ra
Member
what ever happen to Fair use law that got with Copyright laws thees websites are not making any money off the Images unlike Becket that Pokeer mon should not be allowed to go after them go after the people on DAvenArt before these people a lot of people are selling fan art of pokemon on there all the time
Next thanks to this fulling
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/artic...ventually_lead_to_blocking_of_used_game_sales
Pokemon will try and stop the Used game sales of pokemon games
Next thanks to this fulling
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/artic...ventually_lead_to_blocking_of_used_game_sales
Pokemon will try and stop the Used game sales of pokemon games
- Status