Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 3693010" data-attributes="member: 307">Because of the copyright precedent (in U.S. courts) of inferred copying. To demonstrate copying in a court case you have to show similarity and proof of copying. In other words, you have to demonstrate that the allegedly copying material is similar to the alleged original, and you have to show that the alleged copier had access to the original. For example, when a relatively obscure singer-songwriter from Chicago sued the Bee Gees claiming that he had written a song that they had copied to make their hit How Deep Is Your Love, the case turned on whether or not the Bee Gees had ever heard the song - which had only been performed in local clubs in the Chicago area a handful of times. The court found no evidence of copying, because it found no evidence that the Bee Gees had heard the song.However, when the writers of the song He's So Fine sued George Harrison alleging that his song My Sweet Lord copied their work, the court found that the fact that the song He's So Fine was a big hit was sufficient evidence that Harrison had heard it, and may have unconsciously copied its melody (even though George stated he had not). The court inferred copying from the fact that he had easy access to the original material (and the melodies of the two songs are very similar). George lost the suit.So, if someone posts something on Gleemax, even if WotC came up with the same idea later completely independently, it is likely that if a court case over the material came up, unless WotC could somehow demonstrate that they never saw the post from their own messageboard, then the court would likely infer access, and consequently (if the material was similar enough) copying. Even if WotC were, in fact, innocent (because they probably would not be able to prove they were innocent.So they create a ToS that protects them in the event that there is a case of parallel development. And gamers scream bloody murder.(By the way, I used shibboleth correctly - it has a secondary meaning of a "prophetic statement".)Under the ToS as presented - you can.</blockquote>

Verification