@cmuratori @LiaSae A hypothetical contract could say anything, but we're not talking about hypothetical contracts.
-
-
Replying to @nothings
@cmuratori@LiaSae Since (IMO) the 2nd case is creating a derivative work, UNLESS the contract says otherwise, copyright law applies.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nothings
@cmuratori@LiaSae That could go in either direction; you could have Nintendo forbidding derivative works, or MC & Bohemia allowing them.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nothings
@cmuratori@LiaSae But this is exactly because they ARE derivative works. The new creators cannot distribute without permission of original.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@LiaSae It may have been a breach of contract right at the moment you even started making the video, before it even became a work.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori@LiaSae It can be a breach of contract to review a work! That's not unique about ANY of these cases.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@LiaSae Judicial review of "silence" in contracts actually does depend on whether or not there is a "public good" being served.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@LiaSae To the best of my knowledge, that is _not_ true for non-news/criticism functions. Or at least I've never heard of it.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.