IN the case of the dead man the point was that the FANATICS physically assaulted the person they WRONGLY accused of piracy. Its totally unreasonable to expect somebody to spend money on hiring a lawyer to investigate the copyright just to use the game for personal use that's hasn't seen any retail shelf in 30 years. These things are not researchable online, they require money, an attorney and a copyright investigator. It turns out in fact, that game, a Atari 2600 video game, written by the dead man had an abandon copyright and the people attacking the person were DEAD WRONG. Baseless accusations from uninformed extremists attacked some kid over a dumb video game .what's the matter with people?
As my lawyer has advised me there must be a injured party to present a case. So again with Panzerblitz as an example. If you don't like Panzerblitz available for download by ANYBODY without needing to prove they own a copy then call up Jim Dunnigan and tell him. I'd be interested in his take. Perhaps he's already made a statement. All this fanaticism of copyright will do if brought to the extreme some seem to want it brought to is, shut down the use of programs like CB. Its really a shame how self destructive the wargame community is. What nobody can answer amongst there screams of thief are. What are the damages? How much money was lost from these people that haven't made a dime off the Game in over 30 years and the game is no longer sold? What will the judge award? Some guys enjoying a game no longer available for sale and are not presenting the material as their own nor offering for sale as cost the copyright holder what? It's completely different then reprinting the game and selling copy after copy for profit. The bottom line for me. Is I don't care what you think about my use of Panzerblitz with a person that doesn't own the game. Using the word thief is totally out of line. It's no small wonder why the amount of people putting out wargames has declined. Why subject yourself to that kind of harassment? If you think they are infringing notify the wounded party. That party will decide what action they want to take. This online vigilantism does every bit the damage to creativity that IP infringement does. When an attorney writes letter on the firms letterhead stating there is case being presented then that is REAL. Some Jerk spreading boloney over the net or in person about a company he thinks is violating a copyright is *LIBLE. Baseless accusations against any creator of a game by unqualified vigilantes can fall in this category. Somehow all this supposed law knowledge abruptly falls silent on that tidbit of legal knowledge hmmmm. It's no small wonder why the amount of people putting out wargames has declined. Why subject yourself to that kind of harassment? Perhaps that's the intent of some of these people, eliminate the completion with all this mudslinging? Thanks for "contributing" *li⋅bel    /ˈlaɪbəl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [lahy-buhl] Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -beled, -bel⋅ing or (especially British) -belled, -bel⋅ling. noun 1. Law. a. defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures. b. the act or crime of publishing it. c. a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge. 2. anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents. verb (used with object) 3. to publish a libel against. 4. to misrepresent damagingly. 5. to institute suit against by a libel, as in an admiralty court
