Author Discovers Assassin's Creed Uses Same Cliche'd SciFi Trope As His Book... Sues For Infringement

from the genetic-history?-really? dept

Tue, Apr 24th 2012 3:55pm — Mike Masnick

Ah, ownership society. We see this all the time with successful books, movies and TV shows -- where suddenly someone (generally a complete nobody) discovers that a popular media vehicle is based on a similar generic idea that they once wrote about too... and they insist that the successful work must be infringing. I guess we can add video games to that list as well. Ubisoft has apparently been sued by an author you've likely never heard of, John Beiswenger, who wrote some book whose premise has a vague similarity to the premise of Ubisoft's popular Assassin's Creed game. Both stories apparently involve genetic memory -- the idea that memories can be passed down from your ancestors.

But that seems to be about as far as the similarities go. One would have hoped that a lawyer would have explained to Beiswenger that copyright only covers specific expression, rather than generic idea, but apparently that didn't happen. Of course, as Julian Sanchez points out, the idea of "genetic memory" is such a common sci-fi trope that there's a whole page dedicated to listing out stories that use the concept -- many of which predate Beiswenger's book (and nearly all of which were significantly more successful). Don't expect this lawsuit to go very far.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: assassin's creed, expression, john beiswenger, ownership society
Companies: ubisoft

154 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 3:58pm

Amazing that Techdirt continues to champion the big boy while criticizing the little guy.
Of course, you'll never hear of the less powerful artists while the bigger corps leech off them.
And if you're going to plagiarize someone's work, of course you'll choose something obscure and someone with no financial clout.
Good to see you love financial power and it's ability to stomp on less well resourced creatives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:02pm
  
  Re: zing!
  3 minutes. Is that a record?
  
  Hey, I dare you to see how much antifreeze you can drink in one sitting...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - sehlat (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:04pm
    
    Re: Re: zing!
    DO NOT FEED THE TROLL
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - kyle clements (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:21pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: zing!
      I think it's ok to feed the troll antifreeze.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - harbingerofdoom (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 8:59pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: zing!
      see avatar ^^^
      :)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - DC, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:10pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: zing!
      Smells like a shill, not a troll. Shills should always be smacked down by whomever has the patience.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:15pm
        
        Shill?
        There is that support and respect Techdirt is noted for again.
        Shill Definition: A person engaged in covert advertising.
        
        I'm a musician, speaking for myself and other musicians like me. Nothing false or covert in that. I just disagree with this place's attitude to selling records and copyright.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        G Thompson (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:39pm
        
        Re: Shill?
        I just disagree with this place's attitude to selling records and copyright.
        
        So instead of constructive criticism or actually submitting on article (I'm sure TD would love to get others writing articles about copyright based on their own experiences and needs) you complain, whine, and generally annoy everyone to get your own way.
        
        You sure you're not the RIAA?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Niall (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 2:30am
        
        Re: Shill?
        So, you represent other illiterate musicians, who jump to conclusions without ever reading articles properly?
        
        Given the number of times this blog 'attacks' big entities because of their attitude to 'the poor starving artist', I think you have it all backwards.
        
        If there already exists a long list of books using a particular trope, many predating an author who is hardly up there with Heinlein, Asimov or Clarke, they are hardly 'stealing' this idea, let alone from this particular gentleman.
        
        Plus, there is the total lack of comprehension of the fact that copywrong covers the particular expression of an idea, not the actual idea itself.
        
        Otherwise, Harry Potter, which 'clearly' 'plagiarises' Neil Gaiman's Books of Magic, would never have got anywhere.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 10:42pm
        
        Re: Shill?
        >I'm a musician, speaking for myself and other musicians like me. Nothing false or covert in that.
        
        Yeah, nothing covert in your "Anonymous Coward" name. We could instantly tell you were a musician!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Donnicton, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:04pm
    
    Re: Re: zing!
    I really, really hope I simply got Double-Poe's law'd.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Nigel (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:07pm
    
    Re: Re: zing!
    "3 minutes. Is that a record?"
    
    Nope.. clocked him at about a minute last week.
    
    Having said that, I still take comfort in the fact he doesn't even seem to know what we are talking about let alone have a point to make.
    
    Nigel
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:37pm
    
    Re: Re: zing!
    Are we sure she/he is not just a really really believable fake troll?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:11pm
  
  Re:
  What was plagiarized? Be specific.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:55pm
    
    Re: Re:
    What was plagiarized? Be specific.
    
    Nothing until proven of course, but Masnick doesn't even like the idea of a small guy challenging a more successful one on a case of plagiarism.
    
    The small guy claims his book plot has been plagiarized for the game.
    That's what plagiarism is, copying someone else's ideas.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - RD, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:00pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "That's what plagiarism is, copying someone else's ideas."
      
      Massive, categorical FAIL.
      
      You never answered the question either. What, SPECIFICALLY, was plagiarized?
      
      Double FAIL.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:08pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Massive, categorical FAIL.
        
        Definition: Plagiarism is the action or practice of taking and submitting or presenting the thoughts, writings or other work of someone else as though it is your own work.
        
        What, SPECIFICALLY, was plagiarized?
        Quote: The suit alleges that the video game series is SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR to "Link," a novel he published in 2003.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        RD, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:16pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "Massive, categorical FAIL.
        
        Definition: Plagiarism is the action or practice of taking and submitting or presenting the thoughts, writings or other work of someone else as though it is your own work."
        
        But not mere ideas that have been around in other forms for nearly 100 years.
        
        "What, SPECIFICALLY, was plagiarized?
        Quote: The suit alleges that the video game series is SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR to "Link," a novel he published in 2003."
        
        Except its not. It only shares the BASIC idea, that has been around for nearly 100 years.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Hey, in fairness did you really expect him to read the actual claims before attacking mike? If he formed an opinion he might, *shudder, agree with mike.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        But not mere ideas that have been around in other forms for nearly 100 years.
        
        Well that's just Techdirt's take on it.
        It isn't a 'massive fail' unless it's tested in the courts and the author is found to be wrong. That's why we have laws and courts, so kangaroo courts like Techdirt don't have the last word.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        RonKaminsky (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:38pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It isn't a 'massive fail' unless it's tested in the courts and the author is found to be wrong.
        
        It is a massive fail for society as a whole that people choose to waste their own time and the justice system's time (and possibly channel their own money to lawyers) for no good reason.
        
        <snarkmode>
        If this phenomenon becomes more widespread, authors everywhere will be going bankrupt paying lawyer's fees and court fees. Don't you even think of the authors?</snarkmode>
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        AB, 24 Apr 2012 @ 8:49pm
        
        genetic memory in literature
        But not mere ideas that have been around in other forms for nearly 100 years.
        
        Well that's just Techdirt's take on it.
        
        No, sorry, wrong again, BZZZZT.
        
        Here is a short list of "Genetic memory in fiction":
        http://www.enotes.com/topic/Genetic_memory_in_fiction
        
        That was the second result in my google search btw. I can see why Google scares the scam artists to badly!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Watchit (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 11:51pm
        
        Re: genetic memory in literature
        Here's the TVTroups article on it... have fun ;D
        
        http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GeneticMemory
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Mike42 (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 3:24pm
        
        Re: genetic memory in literature
        Just say, "Dune" dude.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 8:53pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        If people can find instances of that crap before the complaining party expressed anything why is that we need the courts to state the obvious?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:12pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Good to see that now you like the courts handling those things, that is the same reason copyright holders should never get to decide what is infringement or not on their own so kangaroo courts like your opinion don't get the last word LoL
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        techflaws.org (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:19pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Appeal to authority. You gotta love it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ltlw0lf (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Definition: Plagiarism is the action or practice of taking and submitting or presenting the thoughts, writings or other work of someone else as though it is your own work.
        
        Which is against the law? No. It will get you kicked out of college, but good luck with suing. Plagiarism is not copyright infringement, although if you take someone's work and copy it, discard their name and post it as your own, you can be sued for copyright infringement, but otherwise good luck.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:32pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Which is against the law? No. It will get you kicked out of college, but good luck with suing. Plagiarism is not copyright infringement, although if you take someone's work and copy it, discard their name and post it as your own, you can be sued for copyright infringement, but otherwise good luck.,/i.
        
        REally you guys have got to do a lot more readin' and learnin' if you want to just ridicule people who disagree with your view.
        I have a couple of pages of Google links, but I'll just post a few:
        
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2023036/Lady-Gaga-faces-new-lawsuit-Judas-plagi arism-claims.html
        http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/thr-esq/oprah-sued-plagiarism-author-polit ical-32841
        http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/767464--j-k-rowling-sued-for-plagiarism
        ht tp://www.entertainmentwise.com/news/74117/50-Cent-Sued-For-Plagiarism
        http://www.spin.com/articles/ coldplay-sued-plagiarism
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_plagiarism
        
        "sued for plagiarism - sued for plagiarism - sued for plagiarism"
        It's essentially copyright infringement in law, but 'plagiarism' is the very commonly used term describing the issue.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        khory, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Regardles of the semantics of plagarism vs infringement, did you read the claims in the complaint? They are very broad and hardly enough to be infringing. Recalling or reliving memories stored in DNA is an idea that has been around for a very long time. Also Beiswenger is trying to say that having Biblical themes and referencing Jesus, Adam and Eve, etc is plagarism?? I'm pretty sure he didn't invent that either.
        
        Can you not read the claim, apply a little common sense, and concede that a lot of this lawsuit is really reaching?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 6:47pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Regardles of the semantics of plagarism vs infringement
        
        Exactly, regardless, so why are posters so hung up on the two?
        
        did you read the claims in the complaint? They are very broad and hardly enough to be infringing.
        
        I just favour the little guy having his day in court, not an anti-copyright blog shouting him down.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:45pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        >Exactly, regardless, so why are posters so hung up on the two?
        
        Because if you found a kid downloading music, and took him to court for charges of plagiarism, you'd be laughed out of court.
        
        >I just favour the little guy having his day in court, not an anti-copyright blog shouting him down.
        
        Where were you when Tanya Andersen had to fight the RIAA?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 8:41pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Because if you found a kid downloading music, and took him to court for charges of plagiarism, you'd be laughed out of court.
        
        I can't for the life of me think why you are confusing two different wrongs; copying of ideas and the copying of a product not paid for. Both are wrong, but are of course different.
        
        Where were you when Tanya Andersen had to fight the RIAA?
        
        Are you claiming she didn't have her day in court?
        http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/05/andersen-relentless-in-quest-to-nail-the-ria a.ars
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:14pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Copying of ideas is not a problem for the law, copyright doesn't even have anything to do with that only the expression of the idea is worth a damn in court so I can't see why for the life of me you keep spouting that nonsense.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        DC, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:27pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        But you are conflating the two by equating plagiarism with copy right infringement.
        
        Copyright conflated in your post at Apr 24th, 2012 @ 5:32pm
        .
        
        And your conflation of big vs. little where if you had a consistent freaking pseudonym, it would be obviously you pretty much always side with the big. Prove me wrong on that one by choosing a pseudonym.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 7:17am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        >Are you claiming she didn't have her day in court?
        
        I'm claiming that what you claim to believe in doesn't make sense. It seems that you're only willing to support the little guy when copyright is involved.
        
        Oh, and if you've actually read Techdirt at all you'd know that Techdirt has called Ubisoft out on a ton of dick moves the company has made, so it's not about supporting the "big guy" - but it looks like argumentation is not your strong suit.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:00pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You don't favor anything that is of value, only your malformed poor cognitive defective opinions.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        techflaws.org (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I just favour the little guy having his day in court, not an anti-copyright blog shouting him down.
        LOL, everything in your statement is wrong. And no, just because he's a little guy doesn't make him right.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Niall (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 2:35am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Who is shouting him down? We're simply agreeing with Mike's opinion that it's a pointless waste of money and time and energy, and typifies the 'entitlement' culture that existing copywrong breeds. And is pushed by the big companies that you apparently so hate, yet blindly follow along with.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        dwg (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 12:07pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You favour the little guy having his day in court when his claim is frivolous? Are you against laws that protect us from vexatious litigation? Laws that allow for costs and fees against frivolous claims? Summary judgment? Malicious prosecution laws?
        
        If so, then, you're what one might call "litigious." In other words, you think that court is the best place to bring any and all arguments, often without vetting them in advance. You're also what the rest of the world considers a drain on the system--you would cost defendants in meritless lawsuits money, and also drain the public fisc that pays for these suits.
        
        Just because someone is relatively smaller than his adversary in a given dispute does not automatically confer laudable "little-guy" status on him. For that, he has to also have justice favoring him.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ltlw0lf (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 6:05pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2023036/Lady-Gaga-faces-new-lawsuit-Judas-plagi arism-claims.html
        
        Lady Gaga was sued for copyright infringement, not plagiarism (filed in August, 2011,) and the lawsuit has not yet been heard by a judge. Quite a few legal and news blogs say that this will go nowhere.
        
        http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/thr-esq/oprah-sued-plagiarism-author-polit ical-32841
        
        Again, sued for copyright infringement. Dismissed on March 18, 2011 with prejudice. You lose.
        
        http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/767464--j-k-rowling-sued-for-plagiarism
        
        In England. And dismissed. You lose again.
        
        ht tp://www.entertainmentwise.com/news/74117/50-Cent-Sued-For-Plagiarism
        
        Filed this month. Just because someone sues doesn't mean that they automatically win. Also, sued for copyright infringement, not plagiarism. Jury hasn't even been impaneled yet.
        
        http://www.spin.com/articles/ coldplay-sued-plagiarism
        
        Again, sued for copyright infringement. Dismissed on September 19, 2009 with prejudice because of Settlement.
        
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_plagiarism
        
        Nothing here says anything about plagiarism being against the law. However, it reaffirms what I said, that you can be sued for copyright infringement, not plagiarism.
        
        Might want to check the pages of google links, because they aren't doing what you think they are doing.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 6:49pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Did you just plagiarize all those links from Google? I think that's illegal.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ltlw0lf (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Did you just plagiarize all those links from Google? I think that's illegal.
        
        Heehee. Now that was funny.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Dumbass go back to school, if you copy somebody else ideas that is fine under the law, that is what it says in the USA.
        
        Now here is another pirate author trying to infringe on the rights of the content owner defying Universal and even given advice to some schmuck on how to evade the law.
        https://torrentfreak.com/repo-man%E2%80%99s-alex-cox-move-sites-overseas-to-kill-copyright-com plaints-120424/
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 6:47pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "What, SPECIFICALLY, was plagiarized?
        Quote: The suit alleges that the video game series is SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR to "Link," a novel he published in 2003."
        
        Give specific examples of how the works are "substantially similar". Otherwise you haven't answered the question at all.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 6:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I hate to break it to ya, but I'm not the person bring the suit.
        I just support little guys being able to take big guys to court if they feel PLAGIARIZED.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:43pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Techdirt is not against little guys bringing things to court if they feel plagiarised, but if the claims are poorly grounded to begin with it's within everyone's rights to call it idiocy when they see it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:51pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I hate to break it to ya, but I'm not the person bring the suit.
        I just support little guys being able to take big guys to court if they feel PLAGIARIZED.
        
        So what's with the emotional attacks on Techdirt, I mean if you were campaigning with your big boy pants on for the little guy, you should probably focus on that.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Eponymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 8:54pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        So you think this is all some David v. Goliath Inc. type bullshit where David can sue for any frivolous reason whatsoever regardless of the claim's significance. Grow up and get past such idiotic ideals, this is a waste of resources for all involved. If anything we should sue you for an assault upon our intelligence!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:01pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Liar, you only favor anything that advances your bias, you don't even bother with logic, is just nonsense nonstop all day for ya.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        techflaws.org (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:23pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I hate to break it to ya, but I'm not the person bring the suit.
        
        Yeah, right, John.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        DC, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:29pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Pick a posting name and we will see that you really don't support the little guys.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 1:57am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "I just support little guys being able to take big guys to court if they feel PLAGIARIZED."
        
        One of your regular failings is that you won't take facts into account. You FEEL that infringement is theft. You FEEL that piracy is the biggest problem. You FEEL that Mike supports piracy. You FEEL that you're intelligent. Sadly, none of these feelings are backed by fact or the law.
        
        Nobody's saying that he shouldn't be able to take Ubisoft to court for any real problem. However, he needs a basis rather more solid than the FEELING that he's been wronged or that he FEELS that the profits from the AC series belong in his bank account. He needs facts, and proof that significant portions of the game were copied from him. A common trope that predates his work is not proof.
        
        So, the facts of the case are considered. They're found to be lacking. Either present your own facts to prove that this guy was plagiarised, or STFU. Feel free to return and gloat if Mike's prediction is wrong, but I somehow doubt either of those things will happen.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        DC, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Uhm ... presenting thoughts you got from someone else, such as in conversation, is not plagiarism.
        
        Only presenting the expression of those thoughts without citation is plagiarism. And only then if uncredited. It is also a far different thing from copyright infringement, since the standards are academic, not legal.
        
        Presenting thoughts you have experienced from someone else in a scholarly paper, or otherwise is simply your acquired opinion without citation so of weak support for your thesis.
        
        Your definition is simply incorrect. Nothing there about expression From dictionary.com:
        
        pla�gia�rism
        [pley-juh-riz-uhm, -jee-uh-riz-] Show IPA
        noun
        1.
        an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author: It is said that he plagiarized Thoreau's plagiarism of a line written by Montaigne. Synonyms: appropriation, infringement, piracy, counterfeiting; theft, borrowing, cribbing, passing off.
        2.
        a piece of writing or other work reflecting such unauthorized use or imitation: �These two manuscripts are clearly plagiarisms,� the editor said, tossing them angrily on the floor.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:38pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Did you actually read the author's claims? Every single claim in the lawsuit is over vague, unsubstantial concepts. It's a joke, which I suspect is why you cannot even mount the tiniest defense of it.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:19pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The peabrain didn't read anything, that is not in his job description.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 3:51am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Every single claim in the lawsuit is over vague, unsubstantial concepts.
        I particularly liked the bit where he seemed to be trying to claim copyright over the story of eden / the bible.
        
        I could be wrong but I'm reasonably sure that's public domain and also much copied :-)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:22am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        My take on it is that he's noticed a very superficial similarity in some basic themes (genetic memory, assassins and biblical references) and is trying to sue because *nobody* could possibly have come up with the same combination.
        
        It's a bit silly, especially when you take into account things that aren't mentioned in the lawsuits (for example, the Knights Templar are the main villains in AC, which explains both the presence of biblical references and an order of assassins).
        
        It's just the usual thing that happens with these lawsuits - somebody creates a successful product, someone less successful decides they want a piece and tries to claim their ideas were stolen. It happens with virtually every successful book and movie, this is only notable because it's a videogame for a change. This won't get anywhere.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 11:00am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      By that defintion everyone is a plagiarist.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:34pm
  
  Re:
  Mike is a piracy apologist constantly trying to disrupt the legacy industry just to be contrarian and a champion of the major industry players. Makes sense.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Watchit (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 12:14am
    
    Re: Re:
    can't tell if serious... or trolling...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Niall (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 2:42am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I think he's trying to point out the fundamental contradiction of the original responder's position. With a dose of 'troll talk' thrown in.
      
      Cognitive dissonance at its best.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Watchit (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 12:22am
  
  Re:
  So, your angry because Mike stated the fact that someone doesn't have a case against a big video game company? Have you even looked at what that guy is trying to argue? The authors status as the "little guy" has nothing at all to do with the immutable fact that his case doesn't stand a chance in hell.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 1:00am
    
    Re: Re:
    So, your angry because Mike stated the fact that someone doesn't have a case against a big video game
    
    Hmm, never said i was angry.
    I've been calmly putting the opposing view to anti arts industry, anti copyright slanted propaganda.
    Find anywhere where I have abused anyone personally. So far other Techdirters have called me an a-hole, an idiot, wouldn't piss on me if i was burning, a shill, a troll. Seems more like you are angry with my platform than I am with yours.
    Long live intellectual debate, alive and kicking.... elsewhere.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Torg (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 1:21am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      If this was about bias, no one here would be coming down on the side of Ubisoft. The fact is that the concepts allegedly copied from the book are not novel, and we don't need a court to tell us that, no matter how little the guy is.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Niall (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 2:46am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You were the one who made this 'personal' against Mike and the community. You could have made your point without being so rude about everyone's motivations - and so blatantly incorrect and inconsistent as well.
      
      So, we look forward to seeing you posting 'for the little guy' every time one of them keeps being put down by the big companies and content controllers.
      
      Pick a screen name and put your money where your big mouth is.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - John Fenderson (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:19am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Find anywhere where I have abused anyone personally.
      
      You're an AC, so how is anyone able to do that? The problem is that in the entire time I've been coming here, there have always been a handful of ACs who are abusive, and it's only natural to assume that any AC who takes a rude or aggressive tone is one of those. While I don't think it's useful to heap abuse on these ACs, it's quite understandable why that happens. It's a tit-for-tat kind of thing.
      
      If you want to offer an opposing point of view and to be taken seriously, then you should start using a consistent name so people can tell it's you.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Watchit (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 3:01pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No not that kind of angry, I suppose "annoyed" would be a better word, at least that's how your first comment came off to me. So, I'm still curious as to why you think Mike pointing out that a case has no chance of actually going anywhere is somehow equatable with Techdirt is always against the little guy when that is clearly not true. In fact a recent article today is about a researcher was silenced through copyfraud by a large company.
      
      http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120419/18163418570/chilling-effects-copyfraud-blockin g-researcher-fair-use-scaring-him-into-staying-quiet-about-it.shtml#comments
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:39am
  
  Re:
  Amazing that Techdirt continues to champion the big boy while criticizing the little guy.
  Your selective memory has blinded you to the fact that Techdirt has often come down in favour of the little guy. eg here.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
david, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:08pm

Prior Art .. Stargate
The Gouls in Stargate did this in 1994.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ferel (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:46pm
  
  Re: Prior Art .. Stargate
  Goa'uld*
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:08pm
  
  Re: Prior Art .. Stargate
  Really, that's the earliest you can come up with?
  
  First that popped into my head was Dune by Frank Herbert, 1965. But I'm sure there's something earlier.
  
  You can always check out http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GeneticMemory for more.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JEDIDIAH, 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:19am
    
    Re: Re: Prior Art .. Stargate
    It doesn't have to be the earliest possible example.
    
    I was just watching an SG1 episode the other night just recently that focused heavily on the implications of the whole genetic memory thing.
    
    Prior art doesn't have to be ancient to invalidate someone else's claim. SG1 just happens to be a recent prominent example of the concept in question.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:08pm

Someone who disagrees with your world view is NOT a troll.
It's the freedom of speech and democracy that you guys LOVE championing so much.
Get used to it, or get out of the debate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:11pm
  
  Re:
  You don't know what freedom of speech is.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Benjo (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:12pm
  
  Re:
  L2Internet please. Reply to the correct thread.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:17pm
  
  Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 24th, 2012 @ 4:08pm
  Sorry if we have a hard time believing someone could read this story and or the brief and still say something so stupid.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Xenophorge (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:30pm
  
  Re:
  What debate? Nonsense spouted, nonsense ignored. If you honestly wanted a debate, you most likely could start one. The above posts are far from any attempt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ats, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:58pm
  
  Re:
  the freedom of speech and democracy allow him to type his opinion, doesn't mean he isn't a troll / knows what he is on about. If it isn't a troll post then the guy obviously is a few sandwiches short of a picnic, so lets hope he is just trolling.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chris Rhodes (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:04pm
  
  Re:
  Free speech also allows us to call you a troll, troll.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:24pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Free speech doesn't mean you are right about everything.
    When you are wrong you exhibit a tendency to call the people pointing out you are wrong trolls.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Atkray (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:06pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Nah they just pick at you because...well, what else do you do with a scab.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Eponymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:06pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You have no real stake in this issue except for your silly notion of "the 'little guy' can sue whoever he feels has wronged him on any grounds." It seems your way too emotionally involved in something that has no relevance to your life in any way. Maybe you should step back and reexamine whether your notions of the world are wrong and ill suited before you go on a crusade for someone you don't know over something you have no clue about.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:14pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It seems your way too emotionally involved in something that has no relevance to your life in any way. Maybe you should step back and reexamine whether your notions of the world are wrong and ill suited before you go on a crusade for someone you don't know over something you have no clue about.
        
        Rubbish.
        As someone who is an independent artist i have a keen interest in anything that seeks to weaken my ability to protect my hard work.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        AB, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The courts are already way overloaded by people trying to 'protect' their hard work. Personally I don't object to basic copyright, but I do object to it being abused - by anyone. The 'big guys' (aka the maffiaa) are the most prominent copyright abusers, but they don't have an exclusive license.
        
        Every individual who attempts to abuse copyright for their personal gain is increasing the damage to society and all other artists of any type by encouraging them to simply avoid even trying because they might get sued. Litigation should never be taken lightly, such as seems to be the case here.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ltlw0lf (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:39pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        As someone who is an independent artist i have a keen interest in anything that seeks to weaken my ability to protect my hard work.
        
        Man, I wish I knew who you were so I could stop buying your stuff. I tend to only buy from independent artists (actually, that is all I buy now-a-days.)
        
        But I don't want to support independent artists that treat me the same way the RIAA does. I like supporting people who treat me with the same respect I treat them, and don't accuse me of stealing the stuff I buy from them. I suspect, given your childishness that I probably don't like your music anyway, so I guess it really isn't that important.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:03pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        
        But I don't want to support independent artists that treat me the same way the RIAA does. I like supporting people who treat me with the same respect I treat them
        
        I hope you do. Meanwhile there is a distinct lack of support and respect for professional musicians on Techdirt unless they fit your narrow type.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:06pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Well that tends to happen when the professional musicians lack support and respect for their fans.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ltlw0lf (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I hope you do. Meanwhile there is a distinct lack of support and respect for professional musicians on Techdirt unless they fit your narrow type.
        
        Really? I support professional musicians by going to their concerts. I know that they receive money by people going to their concerts, not buying their albums. Like all other humans, I don't go to concerts of professional musicians who don't fit into my narrow type because, well, they don't fit into my narrow type. I don't listen to Rap music (well, most Rap.) I don't listen to Country music either. Why should I buy the music I don't want to listen to? (And no, I figure you are going to say something like don't download it either, I don't download what I don't like listening to either.)
        
        Why should I support musicians I don't have any interest in listening to?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:58pm
        
        Support
        Really? I support professional musicians by going to their concerts. I know that they receive money by people going to their concerts, not buying their albums.
        
        Your funding model is outdated.
        Records are a performance just as valid as any concert. Many musicians don't play concerts, or don't play many concerts, and many not internationally. So you tend to support local musicians only?
        Many musicians also release their own music, or in 50/50 deals with independent labels. That's the beauty of the internet. And new business ideas.
        In reality, all you are doing is claiming to support live performance, while consuming recordings.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ltlw0lf (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 11:13pm
        
        Re: Support
        Records are a performance just as valid as any concert. Many musicians don't play concerts, or don't play many concerts, and many not internationally. So you tend to support local musicians only?
        
        At this time, I am calling the bullshit flag. You're an idiot. Keep tilting at windmills.
        
        In reality, all you are doing is claiming to support live performance, while consuming recordings.
        
        Wow...putting words in my mouth. At no point did I say I wasn't consuming recordings. I buy music (from Amazon MP3, itunes, CD-Baby, etc., and from the musicians own website.) What I said was that I support professional musicians by going to their concerts. If you aren't touring, why is that my fault. I don't get paid for not showing up to work, why should you?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        hothmonster, 25 Apr 2012 @ 7:38am
        
        Re: Re: Support
        I am gonna try this actually. I am gonna work really hard next week and do a fantastic job. The whole time I will run a keylogger and record all my phone calls. Then I will just play that back for a few months while I plan my next really good week of work.
        
        I should get a raise right?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Niall (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:44am
        
        Re: Support
        Records - those vinyl discs that are about 100 years old? And you accuse /us/ of being outdated?
        
        Oh wait, you mean recordings. Sure they are a performance. But they are infinitely reproducible, and generally considered to be of lower value than a live performance. In part, *because of* the ease of reproduction. Read some Econ 101.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:26am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Meanwhile there is a distinct lack of support and respect for professional musicians on Techdirt unless they fit your narrow type.
        
        I think this is 100% incorrect.
        
        What there is is a distinct lack of support for is copyright abuse. That is independent of the idea of support & respect for professional musicians.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        techflaws.org (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        As someone who is an independent artist i have a keen interest in anything that seeks to weaken my ability to protect my hard work.
        
        All the more reason to realize that EVERY story has been told already. So better use your hard work to create entertaining variaton instead of wasting it on a pointless lawsuit.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 2:12am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I've said it before and I'll say it again - if your "art" is as of the same high quality as your logic, reasoning and social skills here, there's a very good reason why it's not selling - it's crap.
        
        Like so many here, I only hope that I've not been inadvertently supporting you financially while you tilt at windmills and attack customers for daring to point out reality to you.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:02pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You are wrong all the time and you are a troll, so I don't understand why you keep trying when obviously you are incapable of spouting anything coherent or useful to anybody else.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 8:50pm
  
  Re:
  Someone who disagrees with my world views surely is not a troll you on the other hand most certainly is.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:51pm
  
  Re:
  You have just in the top thread, and in this one had over seventy comments directed at your starting thread comments.
  
  This is the epitome of trolling.
  
  You Sir/Madam are the Awesome Troll of Awesomeness.
  
  We bow down to your trolling skills and understand that we are not worthy of you posting here.
  
  We must meditate until we are ready for your teachings on being a troll , so please Sensei leave us to our contemplations for at least one year
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JEDIDIAH, 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:21am
  
  False-martyr nonsense.
  No. Being a troll makes you a troll.
  
  You make insults and avoid saying anything meaningful.
  
  Some false-martyr nonsense won't alter that.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:23am
  
  Re:
  Someone who disagrees with your world view is NOT a troll.
  
  Absolutely correct! The funny thing is that I do see commenters offering opposing viewpoints without being called a troll.
  
  You know why> Because they aren't.
  
  Commenters who are abusive, rude, insulting, or make unsubstantiated accusations get called trolls because they are.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:09pm

Mike somes days it seems like you just got done reading the last coule weeks of Rock Paper Shotgun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws.org (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:27pm
  
  Re:
  So what?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DC, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:32pm
  
  Re:
  laziest troll ever?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Watchit (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 11:55pm
  
  Re:
  I don't get it :[
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 7:40am
    
    Re: Re:
    I think he was referring to this story and the video game used sales one from earlier being stories that were covered over a week ago on rockpapershotgun.com.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Watchit (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 3:02pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      ah, I see, thanks :]
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
mudlock (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:12pm

That's all you could find?
Paltry lists. TV Tropes' is much more complete (it includes The Fifth Element, for example):

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GeneticMemory
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- A Dan (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:15pm
  
  Re: That's all you could find?
  Maybe he was trying to keep people from getting sucked into that black hole of time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - mudlock (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:28pm
    
    Re: Re: That's all you could find?
    Well, did it work? Did I suck anyone into the vortex?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Watchit (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 11:57pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: That's all you could find?
      I've already seen the other side! I am immune to your tricks >:]
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Niall (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:48am
    
    Re: Re: That's all you could find?
    More like the black hole of daydreaming about Leloo...
    
    ...what, sorry?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- silverscarcat (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:20pm
  
  Re: That's all you could find?
  I was just going to link there.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:17pm

Uh.. DUNE
The GRANDADDY of genetic memory as a plot device in SF?

And the concept goes back at least to Jung, who was probably dead before this author was born.

I'm guessing this idiot is so ignorant of his artistic forbears he isn't even being malicious, just that clueless.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- aethercowboy (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 8:30am
  
  Re: Uh.. DUNE
  You're not giving Beiswenger enough credit. Obviously, he is descended from the person who had this idea first.
  
  Since (a) ideas are property, (b) property is inherited, and (c) Genetic Memory exists, Beiswenger clearly has a case here.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:19pm

funny you mouth breathers act like it takes 10 minutes to read a couple of short paragraphs

well, maybe it does take Mikes rabid, but ignorant fans to read two small paragraphs, while getting mommy to help you with the big words....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nigel (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:25pm
  
  Re:
  Still can't comment on the post I see.
  
  But, since your initial musings still escape you. We do vouch for the little guy, unless, such as in this case, he has his head up his ass. You folks must keep good company up there in the nether region.
  
  N.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DC, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:41pm
  
  Re:
  Certainly takes more than 60 seconds to both read the article, and compose a coherent response.
  
  Seriously, is this the best you have?
  
  No wonder you won't pick a consistent handle.
  
  Then the stupid ad hom on the whole readership.
  
  Not many mouth breathers here, but you are definitely one.
  
  FAIL.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:50am
  
  Re:
  Well, two small paragraphs and the 42 page complaint... But really, who isn't paying attention other than you and the other mouth breather who just sees 'little guy! must defend!' and goes rabid about how we're just calling him names.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:25pm

You Have Got To Be Kidding
Why on earth would the lawyer bother to explain that he's going to lose upfront? There are no billable hours if the client walks away after one meeting. Lawyer dude has to milk the golden cow for as much as possible before the final loss at the end of the final appeal a couple of years down the road. Lawyer dude just has to hope there is no hard slap down of the suit. Any "soft" decision could obviously be appealed and "The judge didn't like us, we'll surely win on appeal". If this author is silly enough to think he invented the idea and owns it, the lawyer could keep him believing he'll win over the course of a couple of hundred hours at the phenomenal rates that lawyers charge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DC, 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:54pm
  
  Re: You Have Got To Be Kidding
  It is _supposed_ to be part of our legal system that lawyers only take cases with a proper basis in law, and that they get sanctions for spurious arguments and filings.
  
  Unfortunately, this is rarely applied. Hence, legal system pollution.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:55pm
  
  Re: You Have Got To Be Kidding
  Why on earth would the lawyer bother to explain that he's going to lose upfront
  
  Because if he believes this and doesn't inform his client he is being highly unethical and could be sanctioned or even disbarred by the appropriate Law Society he belongs too.
  
  Lawyers have not only a duty to the client to tell them all the facts and law, but also to the court to not bring what they consider frivolous or malicious suits.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
RD, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:26pm

Gauntlet thrown....still lying on the ground
So, within MINUTES you screaming shills can jump all over this one, but you still can't refute

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120417/16432118532/when-kids-major-label-execs-get-acc used-infringement.shtml

after several DAYS.

This is why no one on this site takes your shrill pro-copyright whining seriously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:51pm
  
  Re: Gauntlet thrown....still lying on the ground
  The problem is you see everything like a 1950's Western. Good guys in white, bad guys in black.
  I have no real love for the major labels, and could care less about Jamie Iovine, nor his father actually.
  If Jamie has done wrong he should be punished just like everyone else.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Dixon Steele (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:02pm
    
    Re: Re: Gauntlet thrown....still lying on the ground
    Better be careful. The lawsuit claims one of the infringed ideas is "A recurring theme [of a] battle between good and evil" (par. 35). You don't want to get added to the suit.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:21pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Gauntlet thrown....still lying on the ground
      ...this....this is too funny.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 4:46pm

Hey, you know another work of fiction that used the idea of genetic memory?
G.I. Joe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- silverscarcat (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:07pm
  
  Re:
  COOOOOOOOOBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ron Ludwig (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 10:33pm
  
  Re: Genetic Memory
  Also referred to as racial memory. Look at the part of the story line of Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke. The reason the aliens did not reveal themselves to the humans was because of human racial memory.
  
  Some also think that the general fear of snakes is due to a genetic memory imbedded in most, if not all, mammals.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zenstrive (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:14pm

Genetic Memory.
Like in Dune?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- vegetaman (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:54pm
  
  Re:
  He who controls the genetic memory controls the universe.
  
  The genes must flow!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
GMacGuffin (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:20pm

I have dealt with this lawyer...
The lawyer who filed this suit sent an overreaching C&D letter to a girl who runs a charity pay-it-forward, be-nice-to-people site, threatening all sorts of bad if the girl didn't turn over the domain to the lawyer's client (who had a blogspot Melaleuca blog by the same name ... er, different market). That's right, despite having no legally cognizable claims, bullying a site dedicated to helping people.

I seriously thought the lawyer was just a shameless bully, but now...

(The girl kept her domain.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Watchit (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 12:00am
  
  Re: I have dealt with this lawyer...
  I'm glad the girl kept her domain, I hate it when people get taken advantage of :[
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:21pm

Arcadia of my Youth
Genetic memory was also a plot device in Arcadia of my Youth. In that one they literally strapped two characters down to electronic brain stimulating machines to discover their shared ancestral memories.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 5:22pm
  
  Re: Arcadia of my Youth
  Forgot to mention that was 1982.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eric Aitala, 24 Apr 2012 @ 6:45pm

Oddly...
one of my friends is on the list of similar books, Gene by Stel Pavlou...

Eric
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eric Aitala, 24 Apr 2012 @ 6:46pm

Oddly...
one of my friends is on the list of similar books, Gene by Stel Pavlou...

Eric
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 24 Apr 2012 @ 11:05pm
  
  Re: Oddly...
  Awesome.. I read Decipher (a few times actually) never knew he wrote a new book.. *places on must buy list*
  
  And any author who has a red "do not press button" on his website is my kind of crazy (especially when you see what happens when you press it)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:11pm

I Don't See A Problem. By The Way...Please Read!
Dear TechDirt Posters,

My name is Mr. Stickem, and I am contacting you through this forum on behalf of my client, who wishes to remain Anonymous at this time.

It has been brought to our attention that you are currently in violation of 4 patents for which my client holds exclusive rights, which are the following:
1) U.S. Patent #1-�Letter�
2) U.S. Patent #2-�Word�
3) U.S. Patent #3-�Sentence�
4) U.S. Patent #4-�Punctuation�
TechDirt Posters, this forum is clearly in violation of said patents. However, my client is a reasonable person and is willing to agree to an out of court settlement to avoid further violations and to license the further use of his patents with a very generous offer. If you agree to settle out of court you can continue to use my clients patents for the remainder of the year and may apply thereafter for a yearly extension.
The terms of the settlement are as follows:
1) You agree to pay my client, for prior violations, the amount of 14 quadrillion U.S. Dollars. You may think that this amount is erroneous, but I can assure you that it is.
2) You discontinue using letters (U.S. Patent #1) to form the word (U.S. Patent #2) �Hollywood� (U.S. Patent #1, #2). Again, my client wishes to remain Anonymous.

Please carefully consider my clients very generous offer, as he is inclined to cancel at any time and move forward with litigation.

In the interim, please CEASE and DESIST from further use of my clients patents.

Sincerely,
Mr. Stickem.
Law Offices of Stoppem, Stickem & Runn LLP
5555 Melrose Avenue
Hollywood, CA. 90038
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 5:02am
  
  Re: I Don't See A Problem. By The Way...Please Read!
  Mr. Stickem,
  
  My name is Mr. StickYouToo, and I am contacting you through this forum on behalf of my client, who wishes to remain Anonymous as well at this point of time.
  
  It has been brought to our attention that you are currently in violation of 1 patent(s) for which my client holds exclusive rights, which are the following:
  
  1) U.S. Patent #0-�out of court settlement�
  
  Mr. Stickem, your request (if fulfilled)will be clearly in violation of said patent(s). However, my client is a reasonable person and is willing to agree to an out of court settlement(U.S. patent #0) to avoid further violations and to license the further use of his patent(s) with a very generous offer. If you agree to settle out of court(U.S. patent #0) you can continue to use my clients patent(s) for the remainder of the year and may apply thereafter for a yearly extension.
  The terms of the settlement are as follows:
  1) You agree to pay my client, for prior violations, the amount of 14 quadrillion and one (14 * 10 to the power of 15 + one) U.S. Dollars. You may think that this amount is erroneous, but I can assure you that it is not.
  2) You discontinue using the said patent(s) (U.S. patent #0) without prior approval of my client. Again, my client wishes to remain Anonymous.
  
  Please carefully consider my clients very generous offer, as he is inclined to cancel at any time and move forward with litigation.
  
  In the interim, please CEASE and DESIST from further use of my clients patent(s).
  
  Sincerely,
  Mr. StickYouToo.
  Law Offices of Screw'em, StickYouToo & Runn LLP
  666 Melrose Avenue
  GreyWood, NA. 00000
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:53am
    
    Re: Re: I Don't See A Problem. By The Way...Please Read!
    Do I have to call up my lawyers at Dewey, Scruem, & Howe?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:27pm

This is probably the wrong venue for this rant but whatever.
Why the hell are ebooks so unbelievably expensive? Have publishers and amazon lost their damn minds? If I can find a like new print edition for .49 + shipping why would I pay $15 for a kindle version that I can't share with anybody, I can't donate to the library to be shared with my community, and that I don't even own because at any time Amazon can yank it off my device.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:14pm
  
  Re:
  Not all e-books are so expensive, just the ones from the greedy publishers. The smaller publishers and individual authors that I have encountered usually sell their e-books for between $0.99 and $6.00. And they are usually DRM free. But I do know what you mean.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Watchit (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 12:02am
    
    Re: Re:
    Yeah, a lot of independent authors also release some of their books for free as well.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lirodon, 24 Apr 2012 @ 7:44pm

The truth
This man is most likely a Templar; he is trying to hinder the Assassins by preventing other Assassins from learning about the recent discoveries surrounding the ancestral heritage of one Subject 17 and how it relates to our current mission. However, instead of using a blade to commit his acts of intolerance, he is using the weights of Lady Justice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JEDIDIAH, 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:24am
  
  Re: The truth
  "cease and desist"
  
  Be careful. The authors of CivCTP might sue you next.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cowardly Anonymous, 24 Apr 2012 @ 9:52pm

Having read through the filing, he has one claim that would work, provided he had filed for a patent and not a copyright. The Animus 2 is similar enough to the Link machine so as to fall under that branch of law. Of course, a patent for a purely fictional device is fairly ludicrous, and certainly shouldn't be approved.

That said, seeing as the Animus 2 is presented through a visual expression whilst the Link is presented through a literary expression, the territory for copyright is not actually entered.

Of course, I suspect it will come to a trial or settlement over that particular claim.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:09am
  
  Re:
  The Animus 2 is similar enough to the Link machine so as to fall under that branch of law.
  Except as you point out this is fiction and the quoted description of the "Link" machine is very very different from the "Animus" so again it comes down to "Well dey boaf do gene-tic mem'ry fings dont dey?". Even for a (fictional) patent you'd have to show that the method of accessing genetic memory was infringingly similar more than "Well it's done wiv a DEVICE, see?"
  
  The prolific AC above's repeated (evidenceless) ranting notwithstanding there's little in the posted claim that's not generic (plot) devices. Besides, in the fictional space genetic memory access is "obvious to those skilled in the art" so wouldn't be patentable anyway :-)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:07am

I love the way you all ASSUME my 'art' doesn't sell.
I just vote copyRIGHT, not copywrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:16am
  
  Re:
  >I love the way you all ASSUME my 'art' doesn't sell.
  
  Without knowing what your art is it's a little difficult to tell what it's like.
  
  Most people will give an opinion on what they're given to work with. In this case, nothing. Are you expecting to be paid for nothing?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:22am
  
  Re:
  "I love the way you all ASSUME my 'art' doesn't sell."
  
  Well, since you've never identified yourself and you seem to spend every waking moment on here whining about both potential customers and innovative competitors, what conlusions are we meant to draw? I've certainly never seen a successful businessman whine so much.
  
  "I just vote copyRIGHT, not copywrong."
  
  No, you vote for the stripping away of all rights from those who disagree with you, and the destruction of new business models that don't fit the market as it used to be 30 years ago. This you support no matter how destructive it is to both consumers and artists. That's wrong.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jason Isbell, 25 Apr 2012 @ 4:52am

Please
This guy (and his lawyer) neither know nor care if his book was plagiarized.

They're betting some court feels that Ubi-soft will pay up rather than go to court, and that some people will pick up copies of dude's book out of curiosity. Everyone paying any attention to this at all is just feeding the troll.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mega1987 (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 5:06am

Man.... This is short-sighted too much....

You just wasted your time and money on this one, jack....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
aethercowboy (profile), 25 Apr 2012 @ 9:47am

This would be like if I sued Joss Whedon for his film "The Cabin in the Woods" because it, like my 2010 novel "In a Cabin, in the Woods" features an isolated cabin in the woods and sleeping elder gods awakening.

(Of course, this completely ignores the fact that, according to Wikipedia, the filming was complete in 2009, but had some release delays due to bankruptcy. However, since I had never heard of this film until after I wrote my novel, I'm sure I'd have a case...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]