Thus spake "Battlegroup": > Yes it's the motivation. Sure even if you can't make any more money on > something you can protect it. But that protection can cost money in legal > fees. The example of the GI Joe PC game was an example where even though the > maker of the game was distributing it for free. Hasbro did not like that. > Nobody exactly knows why, and the argument was made that the game was > helping promotion of the GI Joe franchise. The game would not have harmed > Hasbro financially, and I agree it would have helped promotion. Hasbro had > its position and that was it. It doesn't have to make sense to users of that > mod. Sometimes though these copyright things go to far though. At a retro > video game console convention and patron was thrown out physically for > having a copy of a 30 year Atari 2600 game from a 3rd party software company > that was out of business right after making that program circa 1981. The > company totally non-existent, the writer of the program deceased and yet > these kids bounced some guy like he was a drunk in a bar out of a convention > hall. It was ridiculous. Not it wasn't me. LOL. I observed the altercation > first hand and was mortified. Way out of line. >
If you're in the US, perhaps writing your representative and senators about the ill effects of current copyright law would be a good idea? -- J.
