Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) Government The Courts Entertainment Games News

Copyrights, Videogames, and LAN Parties? 84

Posted by simoniker from the mechanical-royalties-for-mr.quake dept.
mse61 writes "I'm currently the sole organizer for what will hopefully be a large gamer club/LAN party on the campus of Bowling Green State University in Ohio. While booking the room for our next event (March 4th 2004) I was casually informed that I had to secure permission from the copyright holders for the games we would be playing. I was quite confused as to why they needed this, and their only answer was that it would be considered a 'public showing of copyrighted work', and therefore I must secure permission. I asked a lawyer about the policy and his best advice was to get a hard copy of their policy and then comply to the bare minimum. The University was unable to provide much hardcopy, but largely referred me to the University rule that all State and Federal laws were in effect. Have any Slashdotters ever run into this problem, and would they have any advice for a gamer lost in the mire of copyright laws?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Copyrights, Videogames, and LAN Parties? More

Copyrights, Videogames, and LAN Parties?

Comments Filter:

  • i'll support you! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by cybin ( 141668 )
    i'm a grad student at BGSU in the music department -- let me know if you need help with this.

  • Actually... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gamgee5273 ( 410326 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:09AM (#8382583) Journal
    I contacted the companies years ago when I organized a "LAN Day" sort of thing at Wayne State up in Detroit. It wasn't for clearance (nothing of that type was requested of me by the university) but all the companies I contacted responded and some even sent along doorprizes and gifts to be raffled off.

    Call the companies. If there are any public performance issues they're the best ones to tell you if you need clearance. I suspect you don't, but it's always possible that if there is a audience (let's say you have a large bracket tournament for the best Halo player at BG), that the company might want you to get clearance, dictate that no cameras be present, etc...

  • Copyrights (Score:5, Interesting)

    by atomic-penguin ( 100835 ) <wolfe21@marsFREEBSDhall.edu minus bsd> on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:17AM (#8382634) Homepage Journal
    Our LUG has a monthly LAN party. We picked a LAN game that was easy enough for everyone in the group to afford: Unreal Game Of The Year -- Retail $10.00 at our local Wal-Mart. We temporarily store it on lab computers as necessary, and remove it after the game is over.

    We require everyone present to have a licensed copy to play. Most people bring in their own boxes, and each have their own copy.

    I suppose it depends on whether the players are using College property or their own personal property to play the game. It is in no way infringing for a group of people to bring in their own personal computer along with their own licensed copy of the game to have a gathering.

    Check the license agreement, for example you don't need a licensed "standalone" game server for Unreal Tournament. The standalone server is publicly licensed, because nobody is using it as a client.

  • Yes I have (Score:5, Informative)

    by Prien715 ( 251944 ) <agnosticpope@nOSPaM.gmail.com> on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:23AM (#8382687) Journal
    Hi, I was in charge of LAN parties for ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) at the University of Delaware. We had similar issues to the same ones you did and there's multiple ways to resolve it.

    1) Some games have implied licensing. For example, say a certain game allows you only one copy of a key per internet server, but 4 copies of a given license per LAN server. Since this was done deliberately, it can be seen as an implicit contract since surely this was no accident.

    2) I did multiple LAN parties. One of the things I realized reading the EULAs was that it was for one copy of the game to be "installed and played on one system". I then thought of the word "and". What I ended up doing, is making a contract [ashdreams.net] (doc format sorry) through which people gave us permission to use a copy of their game for our events. Given the above "install and use" restriction, the person isn't required to attend the event, merely not be using their copy of the game at the same time. From there, I noticed I had large pools of licenses for two games and simply split each LAN party into two parts (one playing each game). I'm fairly certain the general idea is kosher. I talked to our University's computer ethics advisor and a professional IP lawyer and both thought it sounded great.

    I had further ideas, but since I graduated, I never got a chance to implement them. One was to buy copies of a game that for extra licenses and then sell them (at no profit) to people who attended the parties who liked the games (I got a lot of approval for this, but no funding in time for me to implement it before graduation).

    • Re:Yes I have (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Bobulusman ( 467474 )
      Given the above "install and use" restriction, the person isn't required to attend the event, merely not be using their copy of the game at the same time. From there, I noticed I had large pools of licenses for two games and simply split each LAN party into two parts (one playing each game).
      That's...that's...brilliant. I'm sure the company lawyers wouldn't like it too much, but it would certainly get you around such university problems.

    • Re:Yes I have (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Lord Bitman ( 95493 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @01:32AM (#8383233)
      I had a similar idea a while back... the difference being that in mine it combined the "I'm not using it at the moment" idea with the "time shifting" idea. That is, you can use it for as long as I haven't used it. It's been a week or two since I've used it, so you should be good for well over two-hundred hours.
      • In that case, how about, "I'm going to be using it at the same time as you, but I won't use it while I'm sleeping next week, so that's 40 hours." Or, even, "That program was already out for a couple of months before I bought it, so we can both use it concurrently for one month." I'm not sure that many publishers would smile upon this "time shifting" idea.
        • Well, I have had an idea for a while about a system through which "donations" are given, and when enough to acquire a product are had, the product is bought, then destroyed. All people making donations are still doing something illegal, but still there is money given to the creators.

    • Re:Yes I have (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @01:42AM (#8383288)
      A computer person that doesn't know that both conditions must be met in an and statement? You should read it as "installed on one system" (Assuming you correctly copied the EULA.) If both machines had it installed you violated the licensing agreement.

      Not that I really mind.

      • Re:Yes I have (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Prien715 ( 251944 )
        Um...if you can "install and use it" on one system, you can install it as many times sas you want and as long as you don't use it on any of them you're not satisfying the conditional. As long as you're using it on one system at a time, the game is only "installed and used" on one PC. I think you mean "install or use" which is not what the EULA said at all.

    • Re:Yes I have (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @03:21AM (#8383714)
      Unfortunately your LAN parties violated at least the UT2003 EULA. The UT2003 EULA specifies that it can only be installed on one hard drive and only played on the system with that hard drive. It further goes onto say that you cannot sublicense the game. In a long winded sentence with a bunch of other things you can't do, public display is listed. I am guessing you didn't provide all the EULAs to the ethics advisor or lawyer since your contract is not clearly not a legal way to play at least UT2003. By the way all of those licenses were void when sublicensed.
      • But who cares about the EULA? Take the road so many of us are taking and just dont agree to them. EULAs, in the incarnation they take with most commercial software, are atrocious. Decline them and stick to the rights granted you by the law. The only reason to accept an EULA is in return for considerations or rights that the law restricts, like accepting the GPL so you can redistribute modified code.
        • The very act of buying the product and installing it is entering in an agreement... specifically the EULA. You can't just say "I decline this" and not be legally bound to follow it.
          • Of course you can, by doing precisely that. They are offering you a contract, you are completely within your rights to decline to accept it.

            PS: By reading this comment you agree to paypal me $50. You cant decline, since you already read it.
            • Do you know anything about the law, or are you completely talking out of your ass? I wager it's the latter. The only way to decline to accept the EULA is to not buy the product, or to return it. When install the product, you are effectively signing a contract. Your statement boils down to "You can decline the contract after you signed it". Sorry, but you're wrong. If you disagree with this, then that's fine, you can have your own interpretation of the law... but the fact is your interpretation is wron
              • So somehow you replied to my post without having read it? And commented on the PS without reading it... I would say you just proved it for me. The fact is that there is no law against using software, no matter what the situation (cept for anti-hacking laws, i mention this only for thoroughness as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand). Once you have physical posession of a copyrighted work you can do anything you want with it, including USING it, as long as you dont break copyright law (that list
                • Why are you brining laws into this? Who said there was a law against using software? I never claimed claimed that EULAs have anything to do with some particular law, only that THE LAW states that when you enter in an agreement, you are bound by that agreement.

                  You are saying that you can continue to use that software without agreeing to its EULA, and that therefore you wouldn't be bound by its terms. You're 100% wrong. In the eyes of the law, the very use of the software implies agreement with the EULA
                  • so, youre basing your 'if you install it then you agree' on what exactly? did the contract fairy bring you a note from god saying thats how contracts work now? there is no legal connection between installing the software and agreeing to the contract. they are completely seperate. i can think of a dozen ways to install any particular piece of software without ever having to deal with the agree/decline dialog, or to continue installing after declining. or, better yet, to amend the agreement (see here [cexx.org] for
                    • I'm not basing "if you install it then you agree" on some obscure notion of how contracts work, it's explicit in the license itself. Look at this excerpt from the XP Pro EULA
                      "YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS EULA BY INSTALLING, COPYING, OR OTHERWISE USING THE PRODUCT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL OR USE THE PRODUCT; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND."

                      It's clear, plain, and simple. There IS a legal connection between installing the software and agreeing to the
                    • You are basing your argument about the validity of the EULA on something IN THE EULA? Bzzt, try again. Anyone can modify a contract before agreeing to it. If both parties dont agree then the contract isnt valid. Which is perfect, the entire goal here is to NOT have a binding contract between me and the software company. I dont *WANT* them to agree to the changes.
                    • Basing it on the EULA is not valid, UNLESS it states on the outside of the box (visibly) that you have to agree to an (enclosed) eula. If it doesn't then it breaks down to modification of contract after sale according to at least one Federal Court (if you bought the box of software & they are the copyright holder). You could potentially get into a lot of trouble if you sold a linux distro & didn't mention that the software inside was licenced under various terms (see inside). Because without the Lic

    • I then thought of the word "and". What I ended up doing, is making a contract ...

      Of course, the more practical thing to do is to realize that you're too small to be on the radar, so even if you break the laws, the copyright holders would never notice/give a damn.

      Also, they tend to encourage this sort of LAN party atmosphere. The way they see it, if you play the game at a party and have a lot of fun, you'll probably want to buy a copy for yourself.

  • I am a grad student in the Coll of Tech at BGSU (Score:5, Informative)

    by heldlikesound ( 132717 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:27AM (#8382729) Homepage
    Talk to Dr. Paul Cessarini and Dr. Chase Wilson, both very interested in copyright law and digital rights.

    Also, why don't you post some details about the club online?

  • Permissions (Score:5, Informative)

    by OutRigged ( 573843 ) <rage@outCOUGARrigged.com minus cat> on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:28AM (#8382741) Homepage
    Playing games at a lan party isn't a public showing, unless you're providing both the games and the computers. If the participants are providing thier own machines and thier own copies of the game, then you need no such permission. If you want to play it on the safe side though, just call a few of the games' publishers and ask permission, or ask what you need to do to go about getting permission. My money's on the fact that not one of them will say 'no, you may not play our game at your lan party', and some might even provide cheap door prizes.

    I've been running a LAN party [www.lotl.cc] with some friends for the last few years btw, so I'm not completely talking out of my ass. :)
    • You guys apparently never got hit by the Blizzard "buy our LAN license or we will PWN YOU" cease and decist letters for Warcraft 3.
    • IANAL, but that is not exactly true. If everyone is providing the games and the hardware, technically you would *all* have to get permission from the copyright holders if there is an audience more than a certain amount [50 if I remember correctly?] and there's a cost involved to get in , OR if one of the displays is over some set amount... 60 inches or some such. [this last provision actually allowed the NFL to prevent the showing of the last Super Bowl in Las Vegas]

      Though most of the lan parties I've been

  • Depends on the crowd (Score:3)

    by superpulpsicle ( 533373 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:29AM (#8382756)
    We use to have console parties in college dorms. As long as 100% of the audience were local students, no one cares.

    It's when we turn the parties into a public display with an open invitation to anyone that it might become a legal matter. But still... there were no real paperwork needed. Just make sure all games were legit, non-copies etc etc.

  • Well (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Masami Eiri ( 617825 ) <brain DOT wav AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:35AM (#8382799) Journal
    Chances are you don't, but most of the people I know that run LAN parties routinely contact the companies when they have one coming up. Often times, the companies will supply a few copies of a game or some hardware or other merchandise. I have two heat.net shirts from such parties. Hell, I was at one where they had Razor Boomslang mice provided (when they were new and cost like $100)

  • Whoever told you that is an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)

    by IshanCaspian ( 625325 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:36AM (#8382810) Homepage
    Seriously. Think about it this way. Ever been to a public lab? A public high school? A library? They all have computers, all running copies of Windows. Is that a "public performance"? No. As long as you have one license for each computer, you're in the clear. Whoever told you that must have been thinking of movies or music...that's what the legal catch phrase "public showing" comes from. A lan party is no more a public performance than twenty people standing in the same room, listening to the same song on individual cd players with headphones.

    • Re:Whoever told you that is an idiot (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MMaestro ( 585010 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @12:48AM (#8382913)
      Think about it this way. Ever been to a public lab? A public high school? A library? They all have computers, all running copies of Windows. Is that a "public performance"? No. As long as you have one license for each computer, you're in the clear.

      Actually a LAN party could be viewed as a "public performance" because of the broad defination of a LAN party. Theres primarily two types. Theres the 'bring your own computer' system or the cybercafe style of 'walk in, pay and play' system. In a broad defination both are LAN parties, the thing is it only applies for the latter. For the former, yeah you'd need one license for each computer (to be on the safe side.)

      It depends on how you view it. If you invited 20 friends over to your house to watch a DVD, yes that could be considered a "public showing". If you were some rich ass mofo and decided to buy 20 Alienware computer and run 20 copies of UT2k4, yes that could be considered to be a "public performance." (For both Alienware and Epic.)

      As for running Windows on multiple computers at a place like a library or a school, thats not really a fair statement. Some schools and libraries recieve the equipment (and software) for free (at the very least, discounted) so I'm sure theres some kind of special license agreements for them.

      • It depends on how you view it

        It depends on whether or not you charge for it.

      • Re:Whoever told you that is an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)

        by IshanCaspian ( 625325 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @03:36AM (#8383783) Homepage
        No, it couldn't. DVDs / VHSs are licensed for home performance. They sell you those things as an individual, for individual use. Therefore, it's not within your rights to turn around and use that license to show it to a hundred people. That's why there's a difference between public and private performance. Showing a movie to a large group of people is outside of the agreement under which you're allowed to watch the DVD. However, when you buy a computer game, the license explicitly allows you to install it on one computer and to play it online with other people. The point about the "public performance" law is not that you're doing something with other people, but that you're outside of the original parameters of your license to use the work. A LAN party is just a group of people using their individual licenses lawfully together. A public screening of a movie is outside of the permissable license on a DVD sold for private viewing. Your last two paragraphs are false and misleading. If I buy a laptop and sit on a park bench, using it, that would be a "public performance," according to you. There's absolutely no connection between this notion of "public performance" and computer software.
        • *cough*

          outside of the original parameters of your license to use the work

          *cough*

          Someone has put a little too much brainwashing into you son. You dont need a license to USE a work. The only time you need a license is if you want to do something on this list [cornell.edu]. If the License, in the form of the EULA most likely, doesnt grant you any rights you have been denied by law then why would you need, or want, to accept it?

        • A public screening of a movie is outside of the permissable license on a DVD sold for private viewing.

          But then what defines a private viewing? If I decide to show a DVD to a group of 10 friends (say I'm really social), is that a private viewing? Outside of family relationship, showing a movie is one big grey area due to lack of specific parameters.

          If I buy a laptop and sit on a park bench, using it, that would be a "public performance," according to you. There's absolutely no connection between this not

  • Commercial use or not? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RaymondInFinland ( 103909 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @02:43AM (#8383564)
    I guess it all depends on the nature of your LAN party. Is it commercial orientated or just some 'geeks' getting together to play some games?

    For example, the product license agreement for my PS2 game Gun Grave reads:

    -snip-

    You Shall Not:
    Exploit this Program or its parts commercially, including, but not limited to use at a cybercafe, computer gaming centre or any other location-based site. Activision may offer a seperate Site License Agreement to permit you to make this Product available for commercial use

    -snip-

    I'm sure PC games have similair terms in the license agreements. It seems that as long as you are not commercially exploiting the games you should be in the clear. But as usual, IANAL.

  • It's best to contact the copyright holders.... (Score:5, Informative)

    by gringo_john ( 680811 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @03:03AM (#8383654) Journal
    On our campus, the student union showed screenings of various films.

    They got fined for not obtaining public performance rights. article about fines [peak.sfu.ca]. It's best to be safe than sorry.

  • Along the same lines... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Myco ( 473173 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @05:12AM (#8384068) Homepage
    Can I read aloud in public? What if I just move my lips?

    • Re:Along the same lines... (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Can I read aloud in public?

      No. That's a public performance.

      What if I just move my lips?

      No. Some people can lip-read.

      And people still seem to think copyright law doesn't suck.

  • I've had to, but it's no big deal (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ayaress ( 662020 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @10:22AM (#8385415) Journal
    When I was graduating from high school, we wanted to have a gaming party (There was a LAN party, but a lot of people brought in their consoles as well), and we were told to get permission from the copyright holders.

    We contacted a bunch of companies of games we figured people would bring (I know we didn't get half of the developers that were actually present, but we seemed to have satisfied the school), and none of them gave any trouble. Most of them responded quite graciously, in fact.

    Several companies sent us promotional posters/flyers and such, and asked if we'd display it at the party. One sent a gift certificate for Poppa John's Pizza. The coolest thing is that probably half of them even sent us disks with game demos or the partial releases they package with some video cards to raffle off and such.

    Technically, you can have the LAN party without permission (I think, anyway - IANAL), but if the university says they want you to get permission, don't worry about it, and just get permission. I'd be very suprised if any company said no (and frankly, if they do, I wouldn't buy their games anymore), and you'll probably score at least a couple freebies if you word your letters well.
    • Well, techinically, you DO have to have authorization to do "public performances", but think of it in terms of the super-bowl, time-shifted:

      Let's say you and a bunch of friends are all super busy on Super-Bowl Sunday and want to wait a few hours to watch the game later the next day (let's say you all have Mon. off). So you program your TIVO or VCR to record the game, and then invite your friends over to watch the game. Technically, you're breaking the law. But seriously, the NFL is NEVER going to try and s

  • Keep things simple (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TheLink ( 130905 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @10:23AM (#8385421) Journal
    For your lan party only use games from software companies with reasonable requirements.

    Personally I don't think copyright law is such a great idea in the first place. And worse are _software_licenses_ (yes I am aware of the GPL).

    Are there any limits on what you can put on a license? Or limits on the limits you can put on a customer/user so that s/he can _use_ the product s/he legally obtained/paid for (usage usually involves making copies of the software - coz it has to be copied somewhere - RAM etc)?

    Maybe someone should come up with a software license that involves users being required to hop on one foot and while screaming "Foobarlicious".

    Or a software license that involves users agreeing to ignore all (other?) software licenses in order to use the software legally.

    • Are there any limits on what you can put on a license? Or limits on the limits you can put on a customer/user so that s/he can _use_ the product s/he legally obtained/paid for (usage usually involves making copies of the software - coz it has to be copied somewhere - RAM etc)?

      In the USA, you don't need a license to make a copy required to use the work. Copying a program into core is explicitly stated as an example in the US code.

  • the law says . . . (Score:4, Informative)

    by n8clark ( 750641 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @10:29AM (#8385464)

    As with most legal topics there is an endless continuum of possibilities.

    [no violation --- probably not --- maybe a violation --- probably --- definitely a violation]

    If you change one fact in your scenario, that can change where you may fall. Little by little the edges of the categories gets pushed. Usually, plaintiffs try and make it as broad a reading as possible, while defendants try to narrow the interpretation. The 1976 Copyright Act is the best place to start in determining the extent of the question at hand.

    > Section 106 - Exclusive rights in copyrighted works: states generally that ". . . the owner of a copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:"

    > Section 106 (4) - in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audio visual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly"

    > Section 100 - Definitions
    To perform or display a work "publicly" means -
    1. to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered; or
    2. to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance or display of the work to a place specified by clause (1) or to the public, by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places and at the same time or at different.
    The best thing to do is try and figure out how your particular set of facts will fall within this framework. If you are unsure, be safe and ask for permission.
  • UT-BASH, the gaming society at the University of Toledo, although nemisis may be, has had some experience with this problem. Try contacting this guy: dfriess3@utnet.utoledo.edu
  • The applicable law is 17 USC 106(4), which states "Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following (4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly."

    The question really is whether your LAN party constitutes a public performance. Is it open to the public, can be public freely enter the a
    • Another factor to consider, in addition to the post above, is whether each participant owns a copy of the game. I don't know the mechanics of a LAN party, but I assume that each computer must have its own, licensed copy of the game. In that case, and as long as there are no spectators (I mean people sitting around watching the game who aren't sitting at a computer "spectating" via their own copy of the game), you probably are not making a public performance.

      I think there is also an open question of whether
  • Do you think this might have been as well thoguht out as to have been an attempt to make you learn the process? Or was it just BS? Either way the fact that most games let you use the same CD key for LAN parties indicates they have abdicated their copy right on a samll scale for marketing and market penetration. The old junkie way, give em a teast then charge!

  • Play the free UT 2004 Demo (Score:3, Insightful)

    by chrestomanci ( 558400 ) * <david@@@chrestomanci...org> on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @11:56AM (#8386613)

    Last weekend I invited five friends to my home for a LAN party.

    Though we had other games, we spent a large amount of time playing the UT 2004 demo.

    IMHO, it is a very good game. it is also free, and does not have any annoying copy protection to worry about.

    I think that everyone there decided it was a good game and worth buying. Likewise, if you host many games of UT 2004 at your LAN, then Epic will probably thank you for all the converts you will create.

    As it is freely downloadable and redistributable, you can reasonably claim you have permission to use it.

  • Just do it (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I have held over 30 Lan parties and we never got permission. Most of the people that come anyways all have stolen copies and such which is why we could never do the events online. Just mention the word LAN Party in public and 3/4 of the people don't even know what you are talking about. My advise is to just make the college feel happy but if they don't request for permission then don't bother!

  • two options (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bigbigbison ( 104532 ) on Wednesday February 25, 2004 @01:59PM (#8388503) Homepage
    As someone who not only graduated from BGSU but did so with a Master's thesis written about videogames, I can tell you that there have been lan parties on BGSU before, so this seems like a case of someone who is ignorant of what is going on. I see two solutions.

    One is to go and try to talk some sence into them tell them that this is not a public showing, everyone coming will have bought their own copies of the game, everyone has paid for the games, and that the games are designed for this exact purpose. Which office did you talk to? I have reserved rooms at BGSU for various reasons several times for some odd purposes and never had them question me. I would suggest trying to talk to someone else.

    Secondly, baffle them with bullshit. I know that nothing is going to happen, You know that nothing is going to happen. Print out the user agreements to like 10-20 different games and I would imagine that they would just stick it in a file somewhere without even reading it. As long as they have some official sounding paperwork then in most cases they would be happy, unless you run into some power happy person -- again I think the best route is to try to talk to someone else. Don't say, "Can I talk to soemone else" just go over there at various times untill that person is gone and pretend this is the first time you've been there.
  • I for one ran several lan parties before building my own game server for others to access remotely...As long as the game copies on the visiting systems are registered / legal and the host isn't charging a fee to participate there should be no problem. Public performance restrictions only apply when you charge fees for services without sending a cut to the manufacturer...that's my take at least.
  • I'm a music major and have studied copyright laws several times. Public performance is usually not applicable to a LAN party because, unless there are tournaments with prizes and tickets, nobody is "performing" for anyone else. the intellectual property of the companies, UT2003 for EA for example, is not being displayed to a group for profit or any other purpose. Each individual is using their purchased(supposedly) product for his/her own personal use and that is the extent of the use at most LAN parties
  • I was quite confused as to why they needed this, and their only answer was that it would be considered a 'public showing of copyrighted work', and therefore I must secure permission.

    That applies to movies, not pc games. Assuming you have enough liceneses for everyone or you have everyone bring their own, it doesn't matter that it's in a public area.

  • Thank You. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mse61 ( 678636 )
    Thank you for all the responses! It confirmed some of the thoughts i had and help me set an idea of what needed to be done. More info on the orgnization and LAN party can be found here: http://personal.bgsu.edu/~randlem/xngc/ [bgsu.edu]
  • I've read the Federal Copyright laws in great detail and the powers that be at your University are wrong. The Copyright laws were created in the late 70's and amended up to the middle to late 90's ('poorly scotch taped together' is a better term that amended). Most, if not all, of the text of the Copyright laws are aimed at scenarios in the 70's and not today.

    The Copyright laws are aimed at anything BUT electronic games, skins, LAN parties and whatnot. This is one of these situations where LAN parties a
  • As a law student who recently had copyright class, I think at least you have a decent shot at a fair use defense and its highly doubtful if you aren't commercial in nature, (ie: charging for the use of computers and licenses) that the companies would prosecute. If you want to be SUPER safe get the permissions. Think about the nature of the games, say Warcraft III, is by its nature amenable to use in Lan Party situations. Read the EULA for limitations, but would a company legitimately claim that the use o
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

Crazee Edeee, his prices are INSANE!!!

Close