Blaze349 wrote:

Cool_Guy10 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

I think in cases like this…Instead of fighting just ignore them. Why? trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

That's a good idea, but if you ignore them they'd probably start sending harsher measures and if you don't turn up at a court case or something the other guy would automatically win.

The ST wouldn't need a lawyer so court wouldn't matter

So basically, I can prevent from having to do anything for, say, damaging someone's car if I don't turn up on court.

iamunknown2 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

Cool_Guy10 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

I think in cases like this…Instead of fighting just ignore them. Why? trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

That's a good idea, but if you ignore them they'd probably start sending harsher measures and if you don't turn up at a court case or something the other guy would automatically win.

The ST wouldn't need a lawyer so court wouldn't matter

So basically, I can prevent from having to do anything for, say, damaging someone's car if I don't turn up on court.

Not exactly.

If you damage anyones car, you're gonna have to go to court.

but if a person halfway around the planet says you broke their car, you definitely don't have to go to court.
Remember:

Blaze349 wrote:

trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

And now I've completely forgotten which side I'm on. Doesn't matter.

Alberknyis wrote:

iamunknown2 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

Cool_Guy10 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

I think in cases like this…Instead of fighting just ignore them. Why? trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

That's a good idea, but if you ignore them they'd probably start sending harsher measures and if you don't turn up at a court case or something the other guy would automatically win.

The ST wouldn't need a lawyer so court wouldn't matter

So basically, I can prevent from having to do anything for, say, damaging someone's car if I don't turn up on court.

Not exactly.

If you damage anyones car, you're gonna have to go to court.

but if a person halfway around the planet says you broke their car, you definitely don't have to go to court.
Remember:

Blaze349 wrote:

trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

And now I've completely forgotten which side I'm on. Doesn't matter.

You don't need a lawyer or attorney to go to court.

Blaze349 wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

iamunknown2 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

Cool_Guy10 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

I think in cases like this…Instead of fighting just ignore them. Why? trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

That's a good idea, but if you ignore them they'd probably start sending harsher measures and if you don't turn up at a court case or something the other guy would automatically win.

The ST wouldn't need a lawyer so court wouldn't matter

So basically, I can prevent from having to do anything for, say, damaging someone's car if I don't turn up on court.

Not exactly.

If you damage anyones car, you're gonna have to go to court.

but if a person halfway around the planet says you broke their car, you definitely don't have to go to court.
Remember:

Blaze349 wrote:

trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

And now I've completely forgotten which side I'm on. Doesn't matter.

You don't need a lawyer or attorney to go to court.

Ah, ok then.

I realize I have no idea what's going on here.
I'll just sit in the corner for now. Ignore my previous comment. I'll figure out something to say soon.

Blaze349 wrote:

Cool_Guy10 wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

I think in cases like this…Instead of fighting just ignore them. Why? trademark isn't the same as copyright so they will know they have no ground to stand on

That's a good idea, but if you ignore them they'd probably start sending harsher measures and if you don't turn up at a court case or something the other guy would automatically win.

The ST wouldn't need a lawyer so court wouldn't matter

That's what I'm saying, but if the ST ignore people, won't the people take it to court? Or are you saying that most companies won't bother if Scratch is refusing to budge?

I Apologize if this is off-topic, but it just hit me– how did Namco find the PAC-MAN project? For the AHOF, it was in Google Search results. But why would Namco employees randomly Google PAC-MAN? And aren't there plenty of other PAC-MAN projects? Lastly, is the user who posted the controversial project still active?

iamunknown2 wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

They're having something copied from them.

So let's target kids who want to remake Pacman!
Is the Scratcher trying to:

• Use the legal doctrine of Fair Use because s/he can?
  
• Trying to make NAMCO lose profit and potentially go bankrupt?
  
• Trying to mislead people into thinking that the Scratch project is the real Pacman?
  

Or is s/he just a Scratcher, trying to see what cool games s/he can remake with Scratch?

You know no one likes being copied. We're lucky more projects haven't been removed.

The problem about copying is when the creator of the “copy” is taking all the credit for the idea and gameplay. Is the Scratcher intending to take all the credit for Pacman? Will anyone mistake his/her version of Pacman for the REAL Pacman?

^^^^^^^^^^^
This

Scratch will end up being the smaller chicken in this case (excuse my phrases), because any big corporation could take them into a legal battle, and there is no chance the ST will win. Scratch is for kids, and a big company shouldn't have the right to tell them to take down a game made by a creative kid, just because it is “copying” their program/game. All they want is money. It makes me mad in this case, with how big and popular scratch really is. It's just sad that they don't have a way to fight these stupid legal battles.

Letsgopitt wrote:

I Apologize if this is off-topic, but it just hit me– how did Namco find the PAC-MAN project? For the AHOF, it was in Google Search results. But why would Namco employees randomly Google PAC-MAN? And aren't there plenty of other PAC-MAN projects? Lastly, is the user who posted the controversial project still active?

Because they are sticking their abnormally large nose into a kids social media programming site.

Maybe if the ST could get more donations from people, they would stand a better chance in this case…

Zarlog wrote:

iamunknown2 wrote:

Alberknyis wrote:

They're having something copied from them.

So let's target kids who want to remake Pacman!
Is the Scratcher trying to:

• Use the legal doctrine of Fair Use because s/he can?
  
• Trying to make NAMCO lose profit and potentially go bankrupt?
  
• Trying to mislead people into thinking that the Scratch project is the real Pacman?
  

Or is s/he just a Scratcher, trying to see what cool games s/he can remake with Scratch?

You know no one likes being copied. We're lucky more projects haven't been removed.

The problem about copying is when the creator of the “copy” is taking all the credit for the idea and gameplay. Is the Scratcher intending to take all the credit for Pacman? Will anyone mistake his/her version of Pacman for the REAL Pacman?

^^^^^^^^^^^
This

Scratch will end up being the smaller chicken in this case (excuse my phrases), because any big corporation could take them into a legal battle, and there is no chance the ST will win. Scratch is for kids, and a big company shouldn't have the right to tell them to take down a game made by a creative kid, just because it is “copying” their program/game. All they want is money. It makes me mad in this case, with how big and popular scratch really is. It's just sad that they don't have a way to fight these stupid legal battles.

Letsgopitt wrote:

I Apologize if this is off-topic, but it just hit me– how did Namco find the PAC-MAN project? For the AHOF, it was in Google Search results. But why would Namco employees randomly Google PAC-MAN? And aren't there plenty of other PAC-MAN projects? Lastly, is the user who posted the controversial project still active?

Because they are sticking their abnormally large nose into a kids social media programming site.

Maybe if the ST could get more donations from people, they would stand a better chance in this case…

"Because they are sticking their abnormally large nose into a kids social media programming site."

That's used in Harry Potter, when The Marauder's Map is insulting Snape. That made me laugh!

EDIT: Only the abnormally large nose part is used in HP, not the programming site bit.

I definitely think that fighting legal battles would be an ideal solution for the ST, as long as we are not actually committing copyright infringement. It is usually good to stand up for what you think is right, as long as it makes sense. However, you must consider something:

Scratch doesn't sacrifice its integrity for money—
It is completely free to join and become a full fledged Scratcher, unlike some sites that require you to upgrade to Pro. There are zero ads on the site, and the ST never posts any encouragements to go to other non-related sites. This is a good thing for us Scratchers … but this also means that Scratch is not earning MIT any money this way*. It is generally extremely expensive to fight legal battles, and since Scratch is not making any money, who would finance the legal battle? And even if we won, how would that benefit the site? Taking down a few projects is easy compared to spending thousands of dollars on a legal war. The former is much easier and less resource-intensive then the latter option. This is probably the reason the ST doesn't fight.

*Citation: There are things like donations, but those are not reliable. After all, have you, any Scratcher you follow, any Scratcher you know, or even anybody you have even heard of ever made a donation? Unless you are not very social, this should be a good example of how few people on Scratch are making donations. It's a pretty small percentage of people who know about Scratch.