- Thread starter Game and Zen
- Start date
- Jul 10, 2018
- 924
- 2,441
Android Pack for Kids-whose-parents-won't-buy-them-a-computer
- Jun 13, 2021
- 4,180
- 2,398
FreakyFriday-0.5
rpdl torrents are unaffiliated with F95Zone and the game developer.
Please note that we do not provide support for games.
For torrent-related issues use here, or join us on
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Please note that we do not provide support for games.
For torrent-related issues use here, or join us on
You must be registered to see the links
!
You must be registered to see the links
,
You must be registered to see the links
. Downloading issues? Look here.
- Nov 11, 2022
- 248
- 414
I spend 1-3 hours in the night in my bed wanking with my Super Amoled screen phone, better experience and more comfortable.
PC isn't comfortable and heavy and it's annoying to keep clicking , especially with the cold weather.
- Jan 24, 2018
- 2,564
- 2,290
But if you use the same plot mechanics - dunno how this one is, but i have a feeling - you could end up in trouble.
I mean, if you made a film called Mad Max and it was about an amusement park ride that starts killing people, that would almost certainly be okay.
But if you made a film called Mad Max and it was about a cop out for revenge on the bikers who killed his child and maimed his wife, chasing them down on the highway in a world slipping into anarchy...
- Feb 23, 2018
- 836
- 1,579
I'm a little less certain about this, but it would depend on how they define some things. You can copyright a specific character, but not an idea. You can copyright a complete work, but not every individual detail of it. In theory, you could tell the same story with the same title but make the main character a different person. Disney absolutely owns their version of Snow White, but a person would have to be using the same visual representation of the character for them to do anything about it. Universal owns Dracula, Frankenstein's monster, and two mummies, but again only those specific versions of those characters. Anyone can make a movie called "Snow White" or "Dracula," and as long as they don't copy the exact characters from those versions, it's good to go. Mad Max is a bit different because the character isn't an old traditional, so there is no other more generic version of Max himself, but you could call the movie Mad Max (new font/logo), have the same plot, but change the name and look of the central character to be, say, a woman named Maxine who's a cop that loses her family, and you might actually get away with it. At least in U.S. copyright law. There is a reason we have SO MANY things that are obvious blatant rip-offs of other things.
- Jan 24, 2018
- 2,564
- 2,290
You ever hear of a SF writer named Alan Nourse?
{That's Doctor Nourse, pronounced "Nurse". He did his residency, apparently, at ah hospital where they had another resident named "Dockter". I understand the PA announcements were amusing...}
Anyway, Alan Nourse wrote a book named Bladerunner.
The movie had nothing to do with his book, but they paid him a chunk for rights to the title, anyway.
- Feb 23, 2018
- 836
- 1,579
As to why they bought those rights, I can only assume that it was to avoid the possibility of someone making a movie based on the novel, which then would have had a very similar title. That makes sense, since someone had already made one unsuccessful attempt to do so. With such an odd and unique sounding title, audiences surely would have been confused, and that's not good for anybody. As to how one goes about "buying the title" of a book, I'm a little unclear on what exactly that means. It may mean that they bought the rights to the entire book, or that they bought the rights to adapt the book into a film. What I do know is, I've researched this multiple times, because I've had this argument many times, and every time I look into it, I see the same thing consistently everywhere I look, including on the U.S. copyright office's own website: it is not possible to copyright a title, and you cannot stop someone from using the same title that you have already used, except in very specific or unusual circumstances, such as if it is the title of a series which then gets into branding laws, or if it's a made-up word that you have trademarked as a brand.
And there is good reason for this. If everyone who used a title or business name that had already been used had to pay the first person smart (or lucky) enough to use that title, then there would be constant lawsuits and a bunch of really wealthy people who got money by publishing an unknown piece of garbage with a catchy title. Every person who used their name as their business name would have to pay the first person ever to use that name. It would be hell on earth for the copyright offices, and they don't wanna deal with that crap.
