It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
F4LL0UT: But who would do that? Most possible uses of screenshots are free advertizing and the moment a publisher/developer would force a journalist to take down a negative review (or at least the screenshots used in it) the Streisand Effect would kick in. The revenge from other journalists and the online community would be gigantic.
who knows - but it is inherent problem with all fair use legislations I have seen. It does not mean it will ever happen, but there it is.
I actually had two photographs of a D&D session taken down due to a copyright complaint, which surprised me.
Copyright, the black plague of the modern ages.
ya there was a article where sega was taking down anything that showed shining force 3 all of a sudden , even total biscuit was affected and decided to remove all sega games he had reviewed.
avatar
Shinook: I actually had two photographs of a D&D session taken down due to a copyright complaint, which surprised me.
Wow. I knew that those Pen & Paper and Tabletop companies do largely consist of assholes but that case beats the rest.
avatar
Shinook: I actually had two photographs of a D&D session taken down due to a copyright complaint, which surprised me.
Very incompetent since it's nothing but free advertisement for them.

To expand, to my knowledge such is (or should be) technically legal as long as no financial gain is involved.
Post edited December 11, 2012 by Densetsu
So, people have been brainwashed with all this copyright bullcrap (piracy is killing the economy!!! P2P is starving the world!!! Omg! Omg!) at the point of asking the "copyright status" of a screenshot?!?

Oh geez....
avatar
Shinook: I actually had two photographs of a D&D session taken down due to a copyright complaint, which surprised me.
avatar
F4LL0UT: Wow. I knew that those Pen & Paper and Tabletop companies do largely consist of assholes but that case beats the rest.
Unless that was during the 90s (in which case the problem wasn't so much the company but the moron who owned it at the time), that certainly isn't their standard practice.

During the 90s, on the other hand... even mentioning D&D online was tempting a lawsuit (again, due mainly to the bozo in charge).
It strongly depends on a country. In most countries you are free to take and publish screenshots for a review, commentary, article etc. It's either a "fair use" or "quotation rights".

Remember, that in most law systems, takin a screenshot is just like quoting a book fragment. At least in Poland, doctrine (because there are no legal cases...) says a screenshot is a quotation just like a book quote.

In Poland you may use screencaps, quotations, examples, to make your article more attractive, to address your points better, etc etc.


Listen to me. I've got 666 rep.
Post edited December 11, 2012 by keeveek
avatar
Garran: Unless that was during the 90s (in which case the problem wasn't so much the company but the moron who owned it at the time), that certainly isn't their standard practice.
True, but something that's really pissing me off is say Games Workshop's attitude. I mean you'd expect them to endorse fans to be creative with that universe, you'd expect them to appreciate fan-fiction and stuff (in two official GW stores the vendors even motivated me to introduce non-GW parts or even build models of my own to create a truly unique army) and still GW simply killed one of the most impressive fan-made movies I have ever seen just for the sake of being assholes (some German Warhammer 40k movie, don't remember the title). It just blows my mind.
avatar
Shinook: I actually had two photographs of a D&D session taken down due to a copyright complaint, which surprised me.
I never heard more ridiculous thing about copyrights (I assume it's true, not a joke).
avatar
Shinook: I actually had two photographs of a D&D session taken down due to a copyright complaint, which surprised me.
avatar
SLP2000: I never heard more ridiculous thing about copyrights (I assume it's true, not a joke).
Nope, not a joke. I posted them on twitter and the images were removed due to a copyright violation. This was about 6 months ago or so.

I just checked it again and it said "violation", not "complaint". I suppose that means that the host (Lockerz) is free to determine if they think it's a violation without an actual complaint. So technically it could either be the host determining it's a violation or it could be a complaint, it doesn't clarify which it is. Either way, ridiculous.
avatar
Shinook: Nope, not a joke. I posted them on twitter and the images were removed due to a copyright violation. This was about 6 months ago or so.

I just checked it again and it said "violation", not "complaint". I suppose that means that the host (Lockerz) is free to determine if they think it's a violation without an actual complaint. So technically it could either be the host determining it's a violation or it could be a complaint, it doesn't clarify which it is. Either way, ridiculous.
One question - did you play your own adventure (made by your GM) or was it a campaign or scenario made by WOTC?
If you're going to make money of it then it might be problematic. Depending on how anal the rights holders are.

For videos at least I know that everyone can make a Let's Play on youtube but if you want to monetize it then you need permission from the devs/publishers before youtube will allow it in their monetizing program.
avatar
Shinook: Nope, not a joke. I posted them on twitter and the images were removed due to a copyright violation. This was about 6 months ago or so.

I just checked it again and it said "violation", not "complaint". I suppose that means that the host (Lockerz) is free to determine if they think it's a violation without an actual complaint. So technically it could either be the host determining it's a violation or it could be a complaint, it doesn't clarify which it is. Either way, ridiculous.
That sounds more like an issue with the host - did they actually say that it was to do with the D&D brand? I can't see WotC complaining (or even caring), and people routinely post pictures of their games all over the place, but the host might have a no-recognizable-IP policy or there might have been something else in the photos that got them pulled (as there are some product makers who pitch a fit if their stuff is even vaguely visible in the background).
Post edited December 11, 2012 by Garran