Member Discussions

Kingdom Heroes has been around since 2004. It is a
relatively quiet place with nice features. Currently, we
have one dedicated builder and two coders (including myself)
who have been around since the beginning. Right now, one of
the coders's time is consumed with transitioning our thac0
damage system into a balanced d20 system. I on the other
hand have been picking away at our to do list, which is full
of bugs and dozens of other relatively small changes. The
list is however quite long, and we need someone else who
might be interested in helping out and sticking around long
term on the MUD. We are also working on creating challenging
areas for hero/superhero players and would love to have
another builder. As I said, the MUD is a pretty quiet place
but with great features just ready to be discovered by
others--staff and players alike...

Any interest, just stop by the MUD and send me (Kira) a
tell/a note on the personal board:

ftg.homeip.net 1234

or shoot me an e-mail:

applebritterz@gmail.com

Thank you for reading!

So is this a superhero mud or Heroes of might and magic mud?

Neither... :P

(Comment added by Heroes on Wed Mar 21 2:58:33 2012)

I should add that hero/superhero is only referring to the
level of the area.

(Comment added by Heroes on Wed Mar 21 3:09:12 2012)

I should add that hero/superhero is only referring to the
level of the area.

Well the term Heroes has been copyrighted so it's very
confusing.

Jodah wrote:
Well the term Heroes has been copyrighted so it's very confusing.

Names are not protected by copyright law.

Oh really, McDonald's isn't copyrighted? Sears isn't
copyrighted? Disney isn't copyrighted? Those are all names.
Your failure to comprehend US copyright due to the fact you're
a foreigner never ceases to amaze me.

Jodah wrote:
Oh really, McDonald's isn't copyrighted? Sears isn't
copyrighted? Disney isn't copyrighted? Those are all names.
Your failure to comprehend US copyright due to the fact you're
a foreigner never ceases to amaze me.

U.S. Copyright Office - What Does Copyright Protect?

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html#band

Can I copyright the name of my band?
No. Names are not protected by copyright law.

Troll, no one is talking about copyrighting a band or an
individual "name" of a person. Can I copyright the name of my
store? Sure you can. This is why you don't see McDonalds
knockoffs in the US. Keep grasping.

Jodah wrote:
Troll, no one is talking about copyrighting a band or an individual "name" of a person. Can I copyright the name of my store? Sure you can.

U.S. Copyright Office - What Does Copyright Protect?

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html#title

How do I copyright a name, title, slogan or logo?

Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases.

Once again, no one has argued that copyright does
protect individual names (sorry can't copyright Kavir),
slogans, or blah blah blah. That's all your link shows. I
know it's hard to understand because English isn't your first
language. Does copyright and/or trademark protect the name
World of Warcraft? You better believe it. Do you think
Heroes of Might and Magic makers would sue the pants off of
Sony if they decided to make a game with the title Heroes of
Might of Magic? You bet they would.

Can I copyright the name of my
store? Sure you can. This is why you don't see McDonalds
knockoffs in the US.

Once again, no one has argued that copyright does
protect individual names

Why don't you pick up a nice healthy hobby rather than trolling this forum? Or at least
diversify and troll another forum exclusively for a few weeks, giving people a chance to rest up.

Jodah wrote:
Well the term Heroes has been copyrighted so it's very confusing.

Jodah wrote:
McDonald's isn't copyrighted? Sears isn't copyrighted? Disney isn't copyrighted? Those are all names.

Jodah wrote:
Can I copyright the name of my store? Sure you can.

Jodah wrote:
Once again, no one has argued that copyright does protect individual names

Actually that's exactly what you've argued, repeatedly.

Jodah wrote:
I know it's hard to understand because English isn't your first language.

Not that it has any relevance to this topic at all, but English is my first language. It's also my nation and my ethnic group, and would be my Nationality as well were England still an independent nation state.

Jodah wrote:
Does copyright and/or trademark protect the name World of Warcraft?

Not copyright. Trademark. Glad to see you finally read the links I provided, and are now backpeddling. Trademark law protects names, words, phrases, etc. But trademarks work very differently to copyrights.

Copyright does not protect the name of McDonalds. Trademark does.

Copyright law and Trademark law are not the same. In fact, they are not even remotely similar. They do very, very different things, and have very different rules and requirements.

In general, Jodah's claims regarding copyright near the top of this post are incorrect. It is important to be precise when dealing with these topics because they are so vastly different, with different legal consequences.

-dentin

Alter Aeon MUD
http://www.alteraeon.com

dentin wrote:
In general, Jodah's claims regarding copyright near the top of this post are incorrect.

Jodah's claims regarding copyright are always incorrect. What is this - the eighth or ninth thread where he
has tried to armchair lawyer over intellectual property rights and failed miserably? It's clear at this
point that he's either an idiot or a troll. Either way, whatever he says should be dismissed.

Jodah wrote:
Does copyright and/or trademark protect the name World of
Warcraft?

Not copyright. Trademark.

Copyright does not protect
the name of McDonalds. Trademark does.

Perhaps you guys lack reading comprehension? I know it's
hard. See the little word Trademark in my post? That's
right, I typed "trademark" before ANY of you brought it up,
therefore I'm in the right. And it really doesn't matter
one bit, trademark or copyright, IT'S STILL PROTECTED.

Jodah wrote:

I typed "trademark" before ANY of you brought it up,

I posted two links that mentioned trademarks before you finally caught on and started wriggling like a worm on a hook.

Jodah wrote:

And it really doesn't matter one bit, trademark or copyright, IT'S STILL PROTECTED.

It matters a lot, as trademark law is not the same as copyright law. An obvious example (in the context of this thread) would be non-commercial use.

You guys arguing against Jodah just because his name is Jodah
is MIND BOGGLING.

He's right, the terminology really DOESN'T matter. You won't
see another game with the name World of Warcraft or Heroes of
Might because it is protected, it doesn't matter how. The
result is the same, it's protected.

Quit arguing.

I posted two links that
mentioned trademarks before you finally caught on and
started wriggling like a worm on a hook.

You posted two links that don't even apply to the
discussion. No one wants to copyright a band or individual
name. Give it up.

It matters a lot, as
trademark law is not the same as copyright law.

No one is claiming they are the same. It doesn't matter
since I brought up trademark FIRST. Bringing something up
FIRST is not backpedaling, it's being right. You wouldn't
even had brought up trademark had I not enlightened you on
the subject. In this case, it still doesn't matter. The
game name Elder Scrolls is still protected. Companies go to
court to protect their names, trademark or copyright.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/minecraft-studio-target-of-
legal-action-from-bethesda-6327427

Jodah wrote:
You posted two links that don't even apply to the discussion. No one wants to copyright a band or individual name.

You claimed names can be copyrighted. You were wrong. My links explained why.

Jodah wrote:

It doesn't matter since I brought up trademark FIRST

Actually it went like this:

You claimed names could be copyrighted.

I posted out that names aren't protected by copyright.

You once again claimed they could be.

I posted a link which described how names are protected by trademarks not copyrights.

You disagreed with the U.S. Copyright Office, claiming once again that names could be copyrighted.

I posted another link showing that names are protected by trademarks not copyrights.

You changed your argument, claiming that names are protected by "copyright and/or trademark".

Several people then pointed out that copyright and trademark are not the same.

I'm glad you at least read my links and now recognise that names are protected by trademarks, but trademark and copyright are not the same. Go away and read the latest link I posted. You can always claim you brought it up first afterwards if you can't stand admitting you were wrong, but right now you are spouting really poor advice, and it's not fair on the OP or anyone else gullible enough to believe what you've written.

Kavir, you would argue with a red brick wall if it claimed to
be red.

I brought up trademark first, so it's not like you
pointed anything out to me at all. You can exchange my
original post with the term "trademark" since you are so
adamant in being anal about terminology.

It doesn't matter in the end, it's still protected and it's
still sueable.

Regarding one of the above claims, a lot of people do in fact want to copyright band names, because copyrights last for a very, very long time and don't require any maintenance. However, the law does not allow them to do so, so they must trademark band names instead.

Trademark requires an active legal offense to maintain the purity and ownership of the trademark, or it can be lost (look up what Xerox has to do to try to maintain its trademark.) Copyright is much, much easier to protect, but has different requirements that band names and mud names cannot meet.

-dentin

Alter Aeon MUD
http://www.alteraeon.com

Jodah
wrote:
Kavir, you would argue with a red brick wall if it claimed to
be red.

I brought
up trademark first, so it's not like you
pointed anything out to me at all. You can exchange
my
original post with the term "trademark" since you are so
adamant in being anal about
terminology.

It doesn't matter in the end, it's still protected and it's
still sueable.

When you are talking about legalese, terminology is extremely important, so it's a very pertinent thing
to be "anal" about, especially when trying to give someone advice on the topic.

When you are talking about legalese,
terminology is extremely important,

Yes, because people come here for legal advice and are legally
bound to do what we say *rolls eyes*

When you're having a discussion with internet trolls about an
issue that doesn't matter to anyone about someone that is
smart enough to not use mudconnector for legal advice (from
someone like Kavir that isn't even a US citizen and doesn't
understand US law), then no, terminology doesn't matter one
lick. It's hilarious that you think so though.

Jodah wrote:
from someone like Kavir that isn't even a US citizen and doesn't understand US law

KaVir has a decade long track record of demonstrating a good understanding of intellectual property law, U.S. and European.

You have a year long track record of demonstrating a poor understanding of most topics, especially intellectual property law.

I know this has been said before, but I still find it comical:

Anybody else get a good chuckle when Jodah debates US laws on a Canadian based website/forum?