[MAP]Fortress Resurrection BETA4

[cortez]

nice C.Brutail

What will you add in the final version of this map?

[A8hm]

In the specific case of terragen, it may be the case that the agreement is void, as you don't get it BEFORE downloading. On other sites (e.g. sun.com), you need to agree to the terms before downloading... which makes it valid.

But, it is too dangerous to rely on that.

In the USA the agreement is effectivly void without an electronic signature (identifying information of yours). The 'I agree' button doesn't qualify. There is no contact. Since there are multiple reasons why this prohibiton is unenforcable I do not think it is risky for him to use terragen in this manner: the law says it's not illegal, the courts say it's not illegal: It's not illegal in the USA. If he lives in the USA he's free and clear to what I see. If he does not then he needs someone in the land of the free (or another country with similar to US laws) to make his skybox for him.

[divVerent]

I don't believe a word of what you are saying.

First of all, I doubt the first sale doctrine actually applies here. It allows you to sell the product you have bought. But I see nothing in it that states anything about what ELSE you can do with it.

Then... if what you say is true... why do especially US companies put such a contract before the download? I doubt it's really void. It may be hard to prove that it was part of the contract though.

[A8hm]

I don't believe a word of what you are saying.

First of all, I doubt the first sale doctrine actually applies here. It allows you to sell the product you have bought. But I see nothing in it that states anything about what ELSE you can do with it.

Then... if what you say is true... why do especially US companies put such a contract before the download? I doubt it's really void. It may be hard to prove that it was part of the contract though.

You don't have to believe anything. You would have known about what is needed to make a contact if you studied law. Eulas have been struck down in the USA in various juristictions because they do not create a valid contract. Weather or not you believe me and the US courts and the letter of the law please don't tell other mappers that they cannot use terragen as they wish because in the USA that is not true.

[Shoe]

Somehow I'm expecting a rant on men's rights to come out of this...

[TVR]

You don't have to believe anything. You would have known about what is needed to make a contact if you studied law. Eulas have been struck down in the USA in various juristictions because they do not create a valid contract. Weather or not you believe me and the US courts and the letter of the law please don't tell other mappers that they cannot use terragen as they wish because in the USA that is not true.

In the USA the agreement is effectivly void without an electronic signature (identifying information of yours). The 'I agree' button doesn't qualify. There is no contact. Since there are multiple reasons why this prohibiton is unenforcable I do not think it is risky for him to use terragen in this manner: the law says it's not illegal, the courts say it's not illegal: It's not illegal in the USA. If he lives in the USA he's free and clear to what I see. If he does not then he needs someone in the land of the free (or another country with similar to US laws) to make his skybox for him.

Yes, I'm talking from US law as it's all I know.

Now that we know his copyrights are valid we have to defeat the next problem and that is the license. There are two ways to do this in the US.

First is the first sale doctrine and the next is the electronic signature laws.

Terragen inc is selling you terragen for $0. You buy the software for $0. They didn't negotiate with you. You can do whatever you want with the software now (first sale doctrine applies).

Second is trying to get you to agree to an End User License Agreement. This Agreement is a contract, however you did not give any identifying information [you just click 'I Agree'] which does not qualify as an electronic signature.

US courts have ruled that the output of a program cannot be copyrighted / claimed by the owners/authors of the program. The copyrights go to the user. Any output he creates in terragen is copyrighted to him. Weather he has a properly licensed version of terragen is between him and the company (he might have one even).

The terragen authors cannot invalidate his copyright to his skyboxes regardless of licensing status.

So, yes, he can release skyboxes he creates in terragen under whatever license he wishes to release them under no matter if his copy of terragen is legal or not.

That is the law.

It's almost unfathomable to why you believe US law applies in other countries, considering that, granted US court rulings [which are only valid in the same circuit as the ruling was made were] & various US laws were all factful, and was relevant to the entire nation, there still are other nations which respect Terragen's limited use EULA [which is accepted by the instillation and subsequently use of the software]

As US laws, amendments, and rulings have no merit upon other sovereign nations, relicensed work created with a no-commercial use EULA, is declared VOID, and must still abide by the EULA licensing; especially if the license is question is the GPL V2 or 3, which both explicitly allow commercial redistribution & resell.

Thus even if what you have said is completely true in every regard [to the United States], it would be useless in other countries.

[PS, Software usage is permitted by a 'End User License Agreement', it is different from hardware, as accepting an EULA is a standard requirement for use of propriety software, and the purchasing party must agree to the exact same EULA; The EULA itself is valid because it can be seen before acceptance.]

[divVerent]

You don't have to believe anything. You would have known about what is needed to make a contact if you studied law. Eulas have been struck down in the USA in various juristictions because they do not create a valid contract. Weather or not you believe me and the US courts and the letter of the law please don't tell other mappers that they cannot use terragen as they wish because in the USA that is not true.

1. Does this apply to ALL US states?
2. Then why does everyone put an EULA in his program? It must be valid SOMEWHERE (and certainly isn't in Germany, for example, where EULAs only count if you have seen them BEFORE purchase/download and if they were clearly part of the contract (if you can just click them away, they usually aren't))
3. The GPL does not allow country based restrictions. Basically, this means: if you violate the EULA, this at first is just your problem. However, if there is one country - A SINGLE ONE SUFFICES - where this means you cannot use the output of the program, the whole package becomes GPL incompatible.

So when using the free terragen version means that the map can't be distributed in Nigeria, you can't stick the GPL on it any more.

However: in German law, violating the EULA doesn't hinder your copyright on what you made, so it can freely be distributed - the only one who risks anything is YOU, the warez user. And I wouldn't be surprised if terragen embeds a digital watermark to identify the system the skybox was made on. But again - even one country with differing laws about this make the map not free any more.

[divVerent]

[PS, Software usage is permitted by a 'End User License Agreement', it is different from hardware, as accepting an EULA is a standard requirement for use of propriety software, and the purchasing party must agree to the exact same EULA; The EULA itself is valid because it can be seen before acceptance.]

Interesting... so EULAs ARE valid in the US. In Germany, the EULA can just give you additional rights - if you have bought the software, you can also ignore the EULA and use it according to the regular terms of copyright (which basically allows USING it for anything you like, but not copying it). Only exception is when the agreement was shown to you BEFORE purchase/download and when it clearly was part of the contract... and no idea if anyone ever managed to fulfill that "clearly" online.

[PinkRobot]

Maybe a mod can split these two topics ? I don't think C. Brutail started this thread to talk about loopholes in international law.

[Xeno]

Can anyone site some references to specific cases involving the validity of EULAs in different countries as well as the status of copyright to material produced by programs, both in accordance and in violation of the producing program's EULA?


If the US gives the copyright to the program's user, can the copyright of the produced content really still belong to the programmers when you cross borders? That sounds ridiculous to me, but there world is full of ridiculous things.