Gamerprudence: Video Game Law Explained

See how the pieces fit. Interactive Entertainment Law is a ten billion dollar per year industry and growing. Read thoughtful analysis by Attorney Mike Mintz on the latest issues in "video game law" and related IP practice.

My Photo
Name:
Location: North East, United States

I work in publishing because I love words and information. The process of expressing thought, particularly verbal or written, demonstrates the most divine attributes of humanity. In the early 21st century we have experienced rapid evolution in the dissemination of information. Connecting billions of people in an ironic deluge of information has diluted the market for creativity. We must now rethink what it means to express and contribute content to the swelling marketplace of ideas. May we be guided in our quest to express by two great pieces of writing advice: "Fundamental accuracy of statement is the one true morality of writing." (Ezra Pound) "Omit needless words." (Strunk & White, The Elements of Style)

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Copyright Law Is Not Always Hard On Flying Penises


In an article from our good friends at the Video Game Law Blog titled:

Anshe Chung's Husband Drops Lawsuit, Admits It Wasn't Really About Copyright...

From VGL: "Guntram Graef, husband of Ailin Graef, better known as Second Life's real estate mogul Anshe Chung, has withdrawn a complaint filed under the Digital Millenium Copyright against YouTube for copyright infringement, after YouTube allowed clips to be posted of his wife's avatar being attacked by "a barrage of digital flying penises." The, ahem, "attack" was launched by griefers during an appearance by Anshe Chung in CNET's Second Life bureau for an interview. Chung is a controversial figure in Second Life because of her dominance in the real estate market (the Graefs claim over US$1,000,000 in real-life assets arising from the value of their virtual properties, and boast that they currently employ 30 persons full-time in their studio in China to manage Chung's empire) and her omnipresent advertising presence.

Graef told CNET that he withdrew the complaint because "the real issue at hand wasn't at all about copyright," but about the offensive nature of the video and the trauma of seeing his wife's avatar sullied in such a manner. Graef complained that there was no other way to compel YouTube to take down the video clip, and that the DMCA claim was a last resort."


Regardless of what Graef or his lawyers decide to call it, the digital attack likely receives strong protection as an expressive work of fiction, and/or political comment. Good luck getting the offensive argument to work: generally free speech protects even offensive speech

Of course bringing the suit under some other country's law may yield different results, but the chances are that (1) they want to take advantage of the U.S. litigious climate and bank all the money they can & (2) Second Life has a clause in their End User agreement ordering that all claims be litigated in the U.S. (YouTube also). Hence, it was a good decision for the Graefs to drop the suit.

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its mike right?

Hey mike, I love the type of articles you write, I wanted to extend an invitation to you to post your articles on my site, Video Game Law is a unique under-written subject in video game journalism, if youd like to share your articles with us(or would just like more info), please dont hesitate to contact me

kastle.grayskull@gmail.com

Looking forward to hearing from you.

TG

1:47 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home