-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusGAF 9 - F*** Off, We're Full (Of People With Different Ethnic Backgrounds)
- Thread starter Kritz
- Start date
reptilescorpio
Member
Who gives a fuck about rights, its all about GOSSIP.
shanshan310
Member
More like, who gives a fuck about academics, it's all about hard yakka.
bodyboarder
Member
Another decent game, a game 7 would be interesting. Also it's much appreciated you guys spoiler tagging the results on my behalf.
Yeah I did Australian IP law as an elective. It was fairly basic though. Anything I could help you with?
CrazedProfessional
Member
Australia need to work on their aim, either that or see what kind of stuff they're feeding Iraq's goalkeeper. Either way, good job team.
reported australia for feeding
Just looking under s31 of the Copyright Act and I can't see that resale, gifting or non-commercial lending are covered as exclusive rights for copyright holders, so even if games are only licences I can't see that Microsoft has any bearing for what it's doing, at least in Aussie jurisdiction. Any thoughts?
Far Cry 2 is bloody great.
Slow-paced, and whilst not uber-realistic, the kind of immersion it offers is unmatched in any FPS I've played (haven't touched the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games).
Being aware of and prepared for the game's noted issues has made it a more approachable game. Most notably - respawning enemy checkpoints. My only issue with that is that the game offers no real conceipt for why the checkpoints are re-manned so quickly, and why every soul in the wilderness is out to kill you. However, removal of those elements means a game with far less gunplay and where's the fun in that?
Addmitedly, I'm only 12% into the thing, but I'm sticking with this game for now.
Plus, it's visually gorgeous when run at full spec.
Game 6 loss for the Spurs would be worth it just for the a surly post-game Greg Popovich.
Slow-paced, and whilst not uber-realistic, the kind of immersion it offers is unmatched in any FPS I've played (haven't touched the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games).
Being aware of and prepared for the game's noted issues has made it a more approachable game. Most notably - respawning enemy checkpoints. My only issue with that is that the game offers no real conceipt for why the checkpoints are re-manned so quickly, and why every soul in the wilderness is out to kill you. However, removal of those elements means a game with far less gunplay and where's the fun in that?
Addmitedly, I'm only 12% into the thing, but I'm sticking with this game for now.
Plus, it's visually gorgeous when run at full spec.
Game 6 loss for the Spurs would be worth it just for the a surly post-game Greg Popovich.
(Disclaimer: Might be wrong)
So s 31(a) applies to LDM works (stands for literary, dramatic and musical works) while s 31(d) applies specifically to computer program.
It's worded a bit weird but s 47AB seems to imply that computer programs are literary works so they have all the exclusive rights under s 31(a) as well as s 31(d).
Yeah, I get that, but as far as I can tell, the exclusive rights don't actually cover resale/non-commercial lending/gifting (Computer programs are literary works under both s47AB and some Apple Computers case from the 90s iirc). I guess theoretically it could be found under a class of exclusive rights? But I can't really read it into reproduction, publishing, performance or adaptation.
That Apple computers case is from the US but I suppose it would be persuasive here anyway. The way I read it is that the rights provided under s 30 are the rights that all copyright holders intrinsically have (based on their classification) but that doesn't necessarily mean that they can't contract for more rights.
That doesn't make a lot of sense though. If I sell you a used game. I have made a contract of sale with you. You don't owe the rightsholders anything except their statutorily protected exclusive rights. They're otherwise not privy to the contract between you and I. This means that EULAs are impossible to enforce on third parties. (Until they accept the EULA through install, maybe).
I meant Computer Edge v Apple which is an Aussie case. I mean, not that it matters since the Act got amended.
Hmmm... you might be right regarding the existence of additional rights created by contract, but then does that mean they're still part of copyright? And can original copyright holders really be able to enforce restrictions on or to third parties? Hmmm.
Hmmm... you might be right regarding the existence of additional rights created by contract, but then does that mean they're still part of copyright? And can original copyright holders really be able to enforce restrictions on or to third parties? Hmmm.
Never heard of it. Which tells you the breadth of things we covered in IP law. (To be fair we dealt a lot more with trademarks/tort of passing off/crown copyright/patents/copyrights and enforcement)
But I don't see why a copyright (A) would be able to enforce a right they agreed to with one end user (B) onto another end user (C) whom (A) sold the copyrighted work to. At best they'll only be able to enforce their exclusive rights because they're guaranteed by statute.
You can't agree in contract to confer an obligation onto a non-contracting party. That's a pretty fundamental breach of privity of contract.
reptilescorpio
Member
The fact that they're a license is not really controversial. A license just means something that falls out of traditional established propriety rights. The problem is that we're using a really out of date piece of legislation the world has basically moved on.
The law simply breaks down sooner or later. Take a freedom of contract view. I buy a game that I agreed to never onsell. Fine. What happens if I sell it to a third party? What happens if I sell the disc to a bona fide purchaser for value without notice? The law says they take free of any encumbrances.
reptilescorpio
Member
That would seem logical. It's almost certainly a case of a policy presumably designed for US application being just slapped into Australian jursidiction and hoping nobody catches that it doesn't actually work, legally speaking.
Always the case with the law. The market moves to damn fast for it to catch up. Legislators will probably reform it when they see that it's not working. As annoying as it may be given my own view, services like iTunes and Steam do work quite well. It will be interesting to see the developments in the European Union.
I honestly think if you were to defeat any used game or first sale type doctrine it would be for reasons outside the Copyright Act. Whether it was using property law or consumer law or other such legislation.
GoddyofAus
Banned
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/busines...o-take-a-pay-cut/story-fni0d2cj-1226665581042
The fair dinkem truth or a typical corporate bait and switch? I'm more likely to believe the latter.
Has Mike offered to take a pay cut?
Don't try too hard guys. Mentioning your pay hasn't risen but remains stable while asking others to reduce theirs by up to $10,400 per year is a dick move, to put it lightly.
LOL. Clowns.
ACCC is being very cagey at the moment in response to my queries, but they seem to think (like you do, as I recall) it might impact on misrepresentation or unfair contract terms in the ACL.
Ruthless_Barbarian
Member
Came back from 'After Earth'. Why did I go in the first place?
TriangleOfCorruption
Member
Would any Melburnian's or Sydeysiders be able to recommend me a good book shop in their respective towns. A big second hand one would be amazing, but new would be ok too. Last time I was in Sydney Kinokuniya blew me away, because while there's a few awesome second hand book shops, there's no big new ones left in Brisbane. Dymocks doesn't cut it.
Also goddamn it postman hurry up and deliver my poptart already.
Also goddamn it postman hurry up and deliver my poptart already.
TriangleOfCorruption
Member
Just so it's clear, I'm talking about the Animal Crossing 3DSXL. Does Blockbuster still sell real poptarts for way too much money? I haven't been in one for years.
Anyway I ordered it from Ozgameshop. I'm going away at the end of the week, so if it doesn't arrive by then, well, I don't want to think about it.
Ugh. Fuck you, Avalanche :/
Jables Swan
Member
I have no words. :/
New game in the same vein as Candy Box. A Dark Room.
Interesting. I'm unsurprised that the regulator is being cagey. The unfair contract terms provisions are really new and they haven't really been tested all that thoroughly.
I could see a pretty damn compelling argument as to why stopping someone selling something they've honestly bought is pretty damn unfair though. I honestly can't think of anything else in the world (off the top of my head) where you're not allowed to on-sell a product you've bought.
You could easily catch steam though. They say it's a 'subscriber agreement' but the content of the relationship isn't one of subscription. A court would have absolutely no problem striking a lot of their ToU down. Especially on the basis of misleading conduct. When you 'buy' a game it says 'purchase' not 'rent'.
bodyboarder
Member
I do like how they need to save money now, for something thats over 2 years away. I'd be willing to bet money that even if the workers took the paycut, they'd still close up shop by 2016. Hell probably earlier just to rub salt in the wound.
You don't get to upper management by taking paycuts.
Nice pick ups, I am still yet to play Power Grid after buying it weeks ago.
BRAZIL! GET HYPE NOW FUCKEN!
Jables Swan
Member
Fuck off markot.
Yeah, ever since buying it I have been looking at ways to replace.... saw someone link this yesterday which I thought was a good idea. http://www.artscow.com/gallery/card/power-grid-money-cards-1o28qac1ygj8
It comes as no surprise that you are an ignorant so and so.