4 ms·
> I just don't think "I paid $40 so it's mine" can cut it any more when we're really not buying many of the core or important bits of the game itself. Yes. But
by venomsnake 11y ago
> I just don't think "I paid $40 so it's mine" can cut it any more when we're really not buying many of the core or important bits of the game itself.
Yes. But I paid $40 USD and I am entitled to the profits of the art I create with it is sensible stuff. MS cannot prevent you from profiting from the word documents you create. But Bethesda can claim that video of my speed play trough of Doom II infringes their copyright (the case was with Nintendo and some of their games I think). Blizzard can claim that modifying a bits in my RAM memory infringes their copyright and so on.
- balfirevic 11y ago> MS cannot prevent you from profiting from the word documents you create Hypothetically, could Microsoft legally do that if it wanted to? I'm guessing something like that could be part of EULA.
- creshal 11y agoThe home/academic licenses for MS Office have not-for-profit terms, IIRC.
- mattlutze 11y agoIn different words, you recorded and broadcast your performance of the production company's game. Which, for other forms (Music, stage plays/musicals, etc.) usually requires royalties paid to the creator of the thing being performed if you perform it for profit. I think it wouldn't be difficult to argue that the different mediums -- character on a screen vs. character on a stage -- don't really change that aspect significantly. The legal evolution around the birth and maturation of machinima is kinda interesting to dig into.