= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MichaelVassar comments on Deception and Self-Doubt - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (34)
I've done that. Recently, even. I think it's generally the debate failure mode, as you suggested - if I wasn't caught up in the argument, I wouldn't have even considered saying it.
(For the record: it was claiming that derivative works based on material still in copyright was illegal. Which I know is not true.)
In practice you were right. Derivative works fairly frequently draw lawsuits even when they are largely original.
See as examples http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_disputes_over_the_Harry_Potter_series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wind_Done_Gone
Now that is very interesting - I had heard of such cases, but I wasn't thinking of them when I spoke. They derive from the very common (legally incorrect) idea that derivative works are always illegal, of course.
Unfortunately, it isn't really a defense for me - I felt, as I spoke, that I was engaged in false rhetoric, because I didn't believe what I was saying.