"I have to side with the victim's family members because autopsy photos, even if they are considered to be in the public domain, doesn't give anyone else the right to profit off those photos."
Um, that's EXACTLY what it means for something to be in the public domain....
Ok, let me try to explain this to you, and maybe you'll understand. Prior to starting this post about trouble's for online gaming, I searched through Techdirt's search field for similar stories to reference in an opening graf about the topic. I then started giggling at the results, because most of the stories involved EA. Granted, many of those were written by myself and Tim Cushing, who covered the SimCity debacle REALLY well, but that's what I found. Then I decided that if I was giggling, maybe I could make a funny opening paragraph built around a gimmick of pretending to be unaware that I was writing about EA over and over again. So that's what I did.
Now, I know you think I've got some kind of mega-boner for bashing EA, but I really don't. Go through my article history and you'll see me bashing EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard, etc. etc. etc. I write articles in the polemic form. Examples below:
And there's almost certainly more. So, the point isn't that I don't write articles criticizing EA. No, the point is that you appear to be a crazy person, or at least someone with an exceptionally selective memory, given that you seem to think I've got some kind of hard on for EA. I don't.
Oh, and I REALLY love some of your games, too! Unlike others here, my experience with Origin has been mostly free of negatives. I prefer Steam, but I have nothing to bash Origin for, likely because I used it after all the controversy. The NBA Live, MVP Baseball and Madden NFL series games were long-favorites of mine for MANY years before your company ruined them beyond repair. The old Sim City games were glorious. System Shock makes me masturbate. The Sims was wonderful, all the way up to the last iteration. And the Mass Effect series is still my favorite game franchise ever, surpassing my much-loved Final Fantasy series.
But none of that was the god damned point of this article, which focused mostly on Sony and opened up with a graf tweaking the people you happen to work for. You somehow globalized that tweak and turned it into some kind of personal vendetta that doesn't exist. I'd call that ego-maniacal, but that isn't how you spell narcissistic. If you think I got something wrong, present a valid counter-argument, but crying about how much we're mentioning EA's fuckups doesn't help your cause in the least....
I think my favorite part of this whole thing is that you came to an article chiefly about Sony to criticize me for focusing too much on EA....resulting in a comment blitz bashing EA that I had nothing to do with.
I mean, would you also like everyone to mention that the sky is blue in each of these articles? Who doesn't know the CIA funded Noriega? They admitted as much....
Here's what I'll never understand about publicity rights in the context of your question. Let's consider a few points.
1. Historically, public figures enjoy LESS protection in certain forms of media, including journalism, parody work, etc.
2. Historical figures likewise enjoy LESS protection than the average person by virtue of their stories being known, meaning that journalists, historians, and documentarians are generally fairly free to teach and tell their tales. Nobody, for instance, insists that Ken Burns gets permission and pays every baseball and jazz player he immortalizes.
3. Video Games are not seen as art in this country, generally speaking, and are generally not regarded as commentary or speech.
4. Video Games get sued for publicity rights by historical and/or public figures.
To me, as unsatisfying a conclusion as it is, this all boils down to a disrespect of games as a cultural medium. After all, it's not as though Noriega hasn't been featured in creative works in the past (example below), or referenced in movies/television. It's just that games are somehow different, for reasons nobody seems to be able to properly explain to me....
"But I think a pretty good case could be made that (1) it's potentially newsworthy that they're trying to hide their identity"
Meh, I don't see why that's newsworthy at all. In fact, I would HOPE that our elected and un-elected officials would partake in the same democratic and/or online presence and process that the rest of us do. That would be ENCOURAGING to me. The beauty of anonymous comments is that it levels the playing field in the battleground of ideas. Chris Dodd commenting anonymously means nobody can be for or against his ideas/comments strictly because he's Chris Dodd. Let the ideas fall where they may.
"(2) that others on the site might benefit from that knowledge as well."
Again, I don't see how. All having the name attached does for the community is introduce the potential for bias in response to the ideas. It means that many people will disagree w/anything stated simply because the name Chris Dodd (BLECH!) is attached to them. That's seems to be a disservice, not a benefit.
"Ugh, bunch of whiners! What happens if a lawsuit like this wins, anyway, huh?"
There is no lawsuit, so not sure what the shit you're talking about....
"Do you hate the F2P business model so much that you want to kill it"
This isn't an attack on F2P, it's an attack on EA's bullshit marketing tactics. As noted in the article, EA can make games like this all they want, they just can't pretend the actual gameplay is reasonably free.
While I appreciate everyone's help, and do think most of you are missing the point per the comment further up, let's just say I write many of these posts from work where the company is both quite strict about what browser we use and what extensions we're using with it.
I'm guessing this is what you mean, but it's actually simpler than that: one is an action that society has determined is legal, the other is a crime of epic proportions in the eyes of the law.
The religious might think abortion is a crime, but their opinions only matter as far as they can get the government to mirror them. There's simply no relevant comparison between the holocaust and abortion clinics....
On the post: Behind The Veil Part 3: Comcast Rep Confirms That You Should Always Record Customer Service Calls
Re: (parody)
On the post: 4th Grader Suspended For Properly Completing Assignment With A Nerf Gun
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: 4th Grader Suspended For Properly Completing Assignment With A Nerf Gun
Re: Re:
On the post: Tropico 5 Game Hits A Little Too Close To Home For Newly-Minted Thai Military Junta
Re:
On the post: FIFA Pisses Away Free Advertising By Banning F1 Racer's Tribute Helmet To Germany's Futbol Team
Re:
On the post: Senators Goad DOJ Into More Pointless Online Gambling Takedowns
Re:
On the post: Family Sues Over Autopsy Images Appearing In Southland Opening Montage
Re:
Um, that's EXACTLY what it means for something to be in the public domain....
On the post: 24 Hours Left To Support Our Crowdfunding Campaign On Net Neutrality: Now With Stretch Goals
Re: Re:
On the post: 24 Hours Left To Support Our Crowdfunding Campaign On Net Neutrality: Now With Stretch Goals
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: 24 Hours Left To Support Our Crowdfunding Campaign On Net Neutrality: Now With Stretch Goals
Re:
On the post: Key Sony Gaming Websites Go Down Because They Let Their Domains Expire
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Now, I know you think I've got some kind of mega-boner for bashing EA, but I really don't. Go through my article history and you'll see me bashing EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard, etc. etc. etc. I write articles in the polemic form. Examples below:
1. EA - This article and those referenced
2. Blizzard - This article, among others: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140522/08582227325/blizzard-still-all-about-twisting-copyright-t o-go-after-cheaters.shtml
3. Ubisoft - This article, among others: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140612/14220327558/fans-mad-ubisoft-nixing-female-characters-2-g ames-ubisoft-mumbles-something-about-cost.shtml
4. 2k Games - This article, among others: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120508/05595318826/2k-sports-botches-their-perfect-game-1-millio n-contest.shtml
5. Nintendo - This article, among others: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140617/06231427601/back-to-normal-nintendos-youtube-plan-sounds- like-big-bucket-terrible.shtml
6. Eidos - This article, among others: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130711/12193523772/drm-plus-how-eidos-is-treating-anyone-with-ja il-broken-ipad-like-criminal.shtml
7. Square Enix - This article, among others: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130802/06442624044/just-kidding-square-enix-still-hates-its-bigg est-fans.shtml
8. Sega - This article, may be more: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121206/17321021296/sega-goes-nuclear-youtube-videos-old-shining- force-game.shtml
9. Sony - This very article, among others
And there's almost certainly more. So, the point isn't that I don't write articles criticizing EA. No, the point is that you appear to be a crazy person, or at least someone with an exceptionally selective memory, given that you seem to think I've got some kind of hard on for EA. I don't.
Oh, and I REALLY love some of your games, too! Unlike others here, my experience with Origin has been mostly free of negatives. I prefer Steam, but I have nothing to bash Origin for, likely because I used it after all the controversy. The NBA Live, MVP Baseball and Madden NFL series games were long-favorites of mine for MANY years before your company ruined them beyond repair. The old Sim City games were glorious. System Shock makes me masturbate. The Sims was wonderful, all the way up to the last iteration. And the Mass Effect series is still my favorite game franchise ever, surpassing my much-loved Final Fantasy series.
But none of that was the god damned point of this article, which focused mostly on Sony and opened up with a graf tweaking the people you happen to work for. You somehow globalized that tweak and turned it into some kind of personal vendetta that doesn't exist. I'd call that ego-maniacal, but that isn't how you spell narcissistic. If you think I got something wrong, present a valid counter-argument, but crying about how much we're mentioning EA's fuckups doesn't help your cause in the least....
On the post: Key Sony Gaming Websites Go Down Because They Let Their Domains Expire
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well done all around?
On the post: Manuel Noriega Sues Activision From Jail Over Call Of Duty Depiction
Re:
On the post: Manuel Noriega Sues Activision From Jail Over Call Of Duty Depiction
Re:
1. Historically, public figures enjoy LESS protection in certain forms of media, including journalism, parody work, etc.
2. Historical figures likewise enjoy LESS protection than the average person by virtue of their stories being known, meaning that journalists, historians, and documentarians are generally fairly free to teach and tell their tales. Nobody, for instance, insists that Ken Burns gets permission and pays every baseball and jazz player he immortalizes.
3. Video Games are not seen as art in this country, generally speaking, and are generally not regarded as commentary or speech.
4. Video Games get sued for publicity rights by historical and/or public figures.
To me, as unsatisfying a conclusion as it is, this all boils down to a disrespect of games as a cultural medium. After all, it's not as though Noriega hasn't been featured in creative works in the past (example below), or referenced in movies/television. It's just that games are somehow different, for reasons nobody seems to be able to properly explain to me....
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Favorite-Novel-Lawrence-Wright/dp/1416562478
On the post: Man Falls Asleep At MLB Game, Sues MLB For $10 Million For Noticing
Re: Cough cough
On the post: Blogger Defends Outing Politician Trolling His Comments
Re: Just a question
Meh, I don't see why that's newsworthy at all. In fact, I would HOPE that our elected and un-elected officials would partake in the same democratic and/or online presence and process that the rest of us do. That would be ENCOURAGING to me. The beauty of anonymous comments is that it levels the playing field in the battleground of ideas. Chris Dodd commenting anonymously means nobody can be for or against his ideas/comments strictly because he's Chris Dodd. Let the ideas fall where they may.
"(2) that others on the site might benefit from that knowledge as well."
Again, I don't see how. All having the name attached does for the community is introduce the potential for bias in response to the ideas. It means that many people will disagree w/anything stated simply because the name Chris Dodd (BLECH!) is attached to them. That's seems to be a disservice, not a benefit.
On the post: UK Advertising Regulator Nixes EA's Dungeon Keeper Advertisement Due To Microtransactions
Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
There is no lawsuit, so not sure what the shit you're talking about....
"Do you hate the F2P business model so much that you want to kill it"
This isn't an attack on F2P, it's an attack on EA's bullshit marketing tactics. As noted in the article, EA can make games like this all they want, they just can't pretend the actual gameplay is reasonably free.
On the post: The Trials Of Being A Techdirt Writer Volume 1: Stupid Copyright Popups When Pressing CTRL-C
Re:
On the post: Local Blog Outs Local Politician's Crazy But Anonymous Comments. So...Is That Okay?
Re: Re: Re: An example of Godwin's Law?
The religious might think abortion is a crime, but their opinions only matter as far as they can get the government to mirror them. There's simply no relevant comparison between the holocaust and abortion clinics....
On the post: Author To Chobani: I Own The Word 'How'
Re: Portends?
Next >>