You'd like an example? Sure, just don't anyone download it, it WILL install Malware on your computer: http://buildcraft.net
And this is why your code to crash the game has nothing to do with viruses. You get the virus on download, not on running the game. By crashing the game, you prevent nothing and just harm the player.
Didn't CJ say he is sorry that certain groups he did not target are affected by this change? Anyways most often this brought up together with RP2. And all i have to say is: A little mod called RPTweaks back then did it the right way. It left the original jar untouched and instead byte-edited the code at runtime.
.
Honestly, he may have. If he did and I misremember about that, then I apologize for the comment, as it was a while ago and the incident itself really shouldn't be that important. But what he did still is not the way to go about dealing with issues he had with small populations still should not be promoted. His DCMA's he sent, and he sent many, were fine and proper as they were targeted to those who he would have disputes with and not towards the community by imposing the code into the mod itself. And his attitude continues to be that he did the right thing, as he was just protecting users from themselves. If he really believes this, then I don't know what to say. His coding did nothing to protect users and just crashed the game without warning about viruses, just telling players that they weren't playing a version of a mod he approved of.
And I disagree with Covert's assertion that a mod has the right to crash the game for ideological reasons. Why are players that want to play someone elses mod along with yours such a bother to you? If mods are having real compatibility issues within the coding due to there nature, there may not be much that can be done about that. But it is none of a modders' business how the players themselves play. If you want your mod to be an independent specific balance, make a total conversion mod for minecraft and don;t use forge. Otherwise, I would like to play the game how I enjoy, and if I enjoy exploiting something for my own game, that's just me. It will not affect your ability to play the mod you created in the way you yourself enjoy it.
First Point:
Has CovertJaguar allowed that his mod can be modified by others than him and his team?
I don't think so. Because then there would not have been any DRM.
So they are acting illegally then. They are breaking both CovertJaguars copyright AND the MineCraft EULA.
In fact of that they officially have no right anymore to even play MineCraft and Mojang might possibly delete their accounts if they get them caught.
That this community is private does not allow it to modify others intellectual property (mods) without their permission.
Second Point:
Is CovertJaguar allowed to protect his mod by DRM? Yes, I think so, but he has to be very careful there because he might easely go too far.
Disabling his mod from working in that case should be ok, possibly by also showing a message that the user uses stuff that breaks tha law for a few seconds.
But crashing the game might go too far because that affects the whole gameplay of MineCraft and he has only rights on his own mod, even if the first point of my statement here is true.
Only Mojang might be allowed to shut down the whole game because they own it.
As you see DRM actions have to be planned carefully. Otherwise the DRM-stuff might also break the MineCraft EULA...
O.o modding other mods(without permission) is in violation of the minecraft EULA?
First Point:
Has CovertJaguar allowed that his mod can be modified by others than him and his team?
I don't think so. Because then there would not have been any DRM.
So they are acting illegally then. They are breaking both CovertJaguars copyright AND the MineCraft EULA.
In fact of that they officially have no right anymore to even play MineCraft and Mojang might possibly delete their accounts if they get them caught.
That this community is private does not allow it to modify others intellectual property (mods) without their permission.
Second Point:
Is CovertJaguar allowed to protect his mod by DRM? Yes, I think so, but he has to be very careful there because he might easely go too far.
Disabling his mod from working in that case should be ok, possibly by also showing a message that the user uses stuff that breaks tha law for a few seconds.
But crashing the game might go too far because that affects the whole gameplay of MineCraft and he has only rights on his own mod, even if the first point of my statement here is true.
Only Mojang might be allowed to shut down the whole game because they own it.
As you see DRM actions have to carefully planned. Otherwise the DRM-stuff might also break the MineCraft EULA...
If they were acting illegally then, he should DMCA (he did), and take them to court should they refute the DMCA (this is the point he implented the DRM). DRM is only to be used in the case of widespread fraud and an individual community does not constitute widespread. When you have a problem with a specific group, keep your dispute between you and them and do not bring it into the larger community as a whole. We do not deserve to be treated like pawns and disrespected when we haven't done anything ourselves to them.
And this does apply to players as well. Players have no right to harass modders about about releases, what a modder chooses to put in there mod (gameplay-wise), or who they give official use of there mod to. They have every right to retain their code if they choose, and to not be open source or use adfly (even if some of us disagree with those decisions). What users do have a right to complain about is malicious code and being harassment themselves. No side is allowed to push around the other regarding what they do with there own private time, and if either side does, they should be admonished by the community at large. The way Eloraam was treated was horrible and I believe that what went down during that time really should have been tamped down by the community.
For a final say, can I make a suggestion? Can we use try to use this thread as a final vent point. It never works,. but maybe we should just let things come out from all agree that after this point the past is the past. For the most part, neither the player base nor the mod community are the same as they were back when the worst of this was happening. I know I make everything sound worse than it is, but it pretty much just over at this point. My only reason for bringing this up is to try to let others know what my own boundaries as a player are for what will cause a modder to lose my respect. Most modders are awesome people who create amazing things in the game, and have absolutely nothing to do with the drama that goes down. It's just that people rarely speak up when everything is going according to plan, and it can make things seem a whole lot worse than they actually are.
Just like Marc's word isn't legally binding (and I mistook it to be for a bit), neither is Grum's word. It would seem the EULA is so vague that even Mojang are confused with it. Maybe we'll get a rewrite of it soon.
DMCA's cant even be issues with out a lawyer and be binding can they?
Sure they can. But it depends on whether or not one is submitting such a notice to a country that has similar laws. One need be a lawyer only to sell one's services as such.
DMCA's cant even be issues with out a lawyer and be binding can they?
DMCAs are a very touchy form of paperwork. Your average person should not be filing their own DMCA, I highly suggest that you have your lawyer produce the paperwork. I say this because DMCAs require a very strict form to how they are written and are incredibly strict on what information they must contain and what wording is used. While issuing a DMCA to most hosting companies will get them to shut things off almost immediately, even if there is one flaw in the issued DMCA, you can issue a counter notification to both your hosting provider as well as the person issuing the DMCA. As per counter notification laws, the hosting provider has to restore functionality . Small errors in a DMCA can be read as you committing purjury. After a counter notification has been set up, the complainant has within ten days to file a suit against you, further DMCAs at this point are direct acts of purjury.
As reference I have written several successful counter-notifications for people for various materials, this is one section of the law I am actually familiar with.
The EULA states clearly that a mod belongs to the owner and that the owner has all rights on it except selling it.
So if you are modding others mods without their permission you are also breaking the MineCraft EULA.
If you're stealing/decompiling their source code and reuploading it with changes without permission, that's more what you're talking about (and has to do with control of distribution aka copyright). There are ways to legitimately override other mods' code as part of one's own mod that doesn't involve having any access to the other mods' code at all. For example, one mod has a recipe one way, but a balance mod wants it another way, it can re-register it with the new recipe. The methodology ends up being the same as overriding something in vanilla minecraft without altering the main jar.
The EULA states clearly that a mod belongs to the owner and that the owner has all rights on it except selling it.
So if you are modding others mods without their permission you are also breaking the MineCraft EULA.
I wonder if marc would be so kind to clear that up, as some may think that would mean you can not claim someone else's mod as our own.
DMCAs are a very touchy form of paperwork. Your average person should not be filing their own DMCA, I highly suggest that you have your lawyer produce the paperwork. I say this because DMCAs require a very strict form to how they are written and are incredibly strict on what information they must contain and what wording is used. While issuing a DMCA to most hosting companies will get them to shut things off almost immediately, even if there is one flaw in the issued DMCA, you can issue a counter notification to both your hosting provider as well as the person issuing the DMCA. As per counter notification laws, the hosting provider has to restore functionality . Small errors in a DMCA can be read as you committing purjury. After a counter notification has been set up, the complainant has within ten days to file a suit against you, further DMCAs at this point are direct acts of purjury.
As reference I have written several successful counter-notifications for people for various materials, this is one section of the law I am actually familiar with.
Since copyright law has been a part of the discussion and others seem to have some knowledge of it, I have a question.
Doesn't maintaining copyright of something require that the individual claiming copyright must actively challenge any that break this right through the legal system? Basically, that in order to maintain copyright, you are required to take to court anyone you believe has violated that or risk losing copyright status on your work? I don't do coding, but have had minor run ins with this in regards to my food business, but I am nowhere near accustomed to this enough to be able to claim any real expertise on the subject. Especially not in regards to code. For reference, my basic understanding comes from what I can and cannot put on my menu.
So they are acting illegally then. They are breaking both CovertJaguars copyright AND the MineCraft EULA.
A) No mods have Copyright currently. I posted this earlier. You're making huge assumptions.
B ) How are they breaking the Minecraft EULA? No, really, read it again.
"If you make any content available on or through our Game, you must give us permission to use, copy, modify and adapt that content. This permission must be irrevocable, and you must also let us permit other people to use, copy, modify and adapt your content."
And lets say they are. So what? What are you going to do about it? It's free software distrubuted freely. If you take them to court, you're going to get laughed out.
Doesn't maintaining copyright of something require that the individual claiming copyright must actively challenge any that break this right through the legal system?
That's trademarks, not copyright.
A trademark is a word, phrase, etc, that is protected because it only associated with you. The second that people start using it with association with something else, you start losing the power of it.
The issue is that we're dealing with things that aren't even transformative enough to justify being derivative works. If you want to be the one who gets them protection, you can try taking someone to court. As is, saying mods have copyright is an outright lie at best, and malicious attempts to destroy the community at worst.
Lets also not forget CovertJaugar is the only person who has outright BROKEN THE LAW with regards to modding, as filing maliciously false DCMA notices is a felony and is punishable by jail time should anyone choose to prosecute.
Since copyright law has been a part of the discussion and others seem to have some knowledge of it, I have a question.
Doesn't maintaining copyright of something require that the individual claiming copyright must actively challenge any that break this right through the legal system? Basically, that in order to maintain copyright, you are required to take to court anyone you believe has violated that or risk losing copyright status on your work? I don't do coding, but have had minor run ins with this in regards to my food business, but I am nowhere near accustomed to this enough to be able to claim any real expertise on the subject. Especially not in regards to code. For reference, my basic understanding comes from what I can and cannot put on my menu.
I believe copyright doesn't need to be aggressively enforced, only trademark does if I am correct.
Since copyright law has been a part of the discussion and others seem to have some knowledge of it, I have a question.
Doesn't maintaining copyright of something require that the individual claiming copyright must actively challenge any that break this right through the legal system? Basically, that in order to maintain copyright, you are required to take to court anyone you believe has violated that or risk losing copyright status on your work? I don't do coding, but have had minor run ins with this in regards to my food business, but I am nowhere near accustomed to this enough to be able to claim any real expertise on the subject. Especially not in regards to code. For reference, my basic understanding comes from what I can and cannot put on my menu.
That more has to do with selective enforcement. If a million different places steal your mod and repost it behind their own ad/pay-walls, and you choose to only ever pursue legal action against ONE of them, it could be argued that you are not making an effort to defend your work and are instead only seeking to harm the selected defendant. You don't really ever lose copyright status on your work, but attempting to defend it in a selective manner can be detrimental to successful legal action. This is generally why the movie/music industry tend to sue anyone and everyone for theft even though most of them aren't worth the paperwork in damages.
If you posted it earlier, it was incorrect earlier.
Weird, because I posted the actual legal information that people need on page three, got upvoted, and no one replied to me. How was I wrong?
Again, where do mods fall under copyright? What protects them?
Unless you're arguing in the most base way possible and worrying about my language:
Copyright is meaningless unless it's actually accepted by the general community. If you copyright music, music has a history of being copyrighted. Non-transformative modding code doesn't have a history of being accepted, hasn't had thousands of court cases to figure out where the lines are, and doesn't fit under protected as currently stands.
You can say you have a copyright. I can also say I have a copyright of your code. I can, if I choose, file for copyright of your code the next time I send off some my stuff to be registered, and register it under my name. Hell, if I do that and you haven't, I have copyright of your code for all intents and purposes, because you can't justify it in a court of law. Especially when it comes to digital interactions.
People are really, really stretching the practical realities of what copyright can actually cover and how it practically works.
Lets not even consider most people aren't paying to register their code, so their claims are worthless.
4: Dictate which mods can and cannot be used in an install alongside their mod? There will be incompatible mods, for both technical and ideological reasons. Its not a "right", its a "fact". Pretending you can wave a magic wand and fix that is silly. For example, Railcraft frequently dictates which version of Forge you must have to a run specific version of Railcraft (can be for either technical or ideological reasons). Its no different from ExtraBees dictating that Forestry must be installed to run (technical). Or yes, even that TCon and Gregtech cannot be run together (both technical and ideological). You can't ban one example and allow the others.
6: Dictate who can and cannot re-implement features present in their existing mod in a new mod? No, ideas are not copyrightable. Doesn't make it any less of a **** move though.
Wow. That's some fancy mental gymnastics and changing the subject you do there. You should be a politician.
4. I don't think anyone is even suggesting that your code must be perfect. We aren't talking about bugs. Let's apply a little common sense here. Not being able to run because of a missing dependency? Really? Extrabees doesn't work for me because I don't have Forestry installed? *slaps forehead* Who woulda thunk it? Thank you for pointing that out to me. Here I was about to blame Binnie. </sarcasm> You need the same or a close enough version of Forge to the version Railcraft was compiled with for Railcraft to run??? That's just silly! (Sorry, I guess I was premature turning off sarcasm before) </sarcasm> I find your examples downright insulting. Surely you can do better than that. These examples you give and purposely causing issues are a far cry from each other. Can't dispute you're a very smart guy so I'm very disappointed in your absurd examples (and that is not sarcasm)
6. Yeah, like that guy who made a mod that does stuff with rails and minecarts, since those were definitly Notch's ideas. What a **** that guys is. Oh, hey, wasn't that you CJ??? Not too much of a hypocrite are we?
Not going to bother quoting but RP2? WTF is RP2? Wasn't that like 3 or 4 versions of MC ago? Excuse me, are you from the past? (IT Crowd)
No additional protection is needed. Any work is automatically protected upon creation.
Unless, say, it's a non-transformative derivative work. Which isn't protected. Which are mods.
Additionally, there's a difference between saying you have a copyright on creation (which is true) and the practical reality of enforcing your copyright, which is the ACTUAL discussion we should be having. Not some theoretical intent of a law.
Copyright is created when something is created. However, let's say we are discussing music, which is much easier because (from a broad picture, effectively) everything is covered (it isn't. We're getting into racial/gender politics and the creation of the copyright system if I continue down this path). You write a song. You put it on soundcloud. You're an idiot and don't register it. I, then, do. I have copyright of the written song and can actually demand you take it down. Registration matters for any copyright.
"This isn't fair" is the standard claim for this, but it doesn't matter, it's how it has to work in the practical world for it to work.
Semantic gymnastics aren't useful for the discussion.
Copyright only effectively exists when it can be useful.
Congrats on posting one of the most damaging posts to the minecraft modding community. We all have you to thank for the loss of many important modders, such as the lead forge maintainers.
There is a rare mythical button called "Search" that likes to answer questions; however, due to its nature, it often blends in with its surroundings so as to remain hidden.
And this is why your code to crash the game has nothing to do with viruses. You get the virus on download, not on running the game. By crashing the game, you prevent nothing and just harm the player.
Honestly, he may have. If he did and I misremember about that, then I apologize for the comment, as it was a while ago and the incident itself really shouldn't be that important. But what he did still is not the way to go about dealing with issues he had with small populations still should not be promoted. His DCMA's he sent, and he sent many, were fine and proper as they were targeted to those who he would have disputes with and not towards the community by imposing the code into the mod itself. And his attitude continues to be that he did the right thing, as he was just protecting users from themselves. If he really believes this, then I don't know what to say. His coding did nothing to protect users and just crashed the game without warning about viruses, just telling players that they weren't playing a version of a mod he approved of.
And I disagree with Covert's assertion that a mod has the right to crash the game for ideological reasons. Why are players that want to play someone elses mod along with yours such a bother to you? If mods are having real compatibility issues within the coding due to there nature, there may not be much that can be done about that. But it is none of a modders' business how the players themselves play. If you want your mod to be an independent specific balance, make a total conversion mod for minecraft and don;t use forge. Otherwise, I would like to play the game how I enjoy, and if I enjoy exploiting something for my own game, that's just me. It will not affect your ability to play the mod you created in the way you yourself enjoy it.
O.o modding other mods(without permission) is in violation of the minecraft EULA?
mind pointing me to that section?
If they were acting illegally then, he should DMCA (he did), and take them to court should they refute the DMCA (this is the point he implented the DRM). DRM is only to be used in the case of widespread fraud and an individual community does not constitute widespread. When you have a problem with a specific group, keep your dispute between you and them and do not bring it into the larger community as a whole. We do not deserve to be treated like pawns and disrespected when we haven't done anything ourselves to them.
And this does apply to players as well. Players have no right to harass modders about about releases, what a modder chooses to put in there mod (gameplay-wise), or who they give official use of there mod to. They have every right to retain their code if they choose, and to not be open source or use adfly (even if some of us disagree with those decisions). What users do have a right to complain about is malicious code and being harassment themselves. No side is allowed to push around the other regarding what they do with there own private time, and if either side does, they should be admonished by the community at large. The way Eloraam was treated was horrible and I believe that what went down during that time really should have been tamped down by the community.
For a final say, can I make a suggestion? Can we use try to use this thread as a final vent point. It never works,. but maybe we should just let things come out from all agree that after this point the past is the past. For the most part, neither the player base nor the mod community are the same as they were back when the worst of this was happening. I know I make everything sound worse than it is, but it pretty much just over at this point. My only reason for bringing this up is to try to let others know what my own boundaries as a player are for what will cause a modder to lose my respect. Most modders are awesome people who create amazing things in the game, and have absolutely nothing to do with the drama that goes down. It's just that people rarely speak up when everything is going according to plan, and it can make things seem a whole lot worse than they actually are.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumSure they can. But it depends on whether or not one is submitting such a notice to a country that has similar laws. One need be a lawyer only to sell one's services as such.
Are you playing Sleepless Horrors? Let me know what you think!
http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/1-6-4-sleepless-horrors.39181/
DMCAs are a very touchy form of paperwork. Your average person should not be filing their own DMCA, I highly suggest that you have your lawyer produce the paperwork. I say this because DMCAs require a very strict form to how they are written and are incredibly strict on what information they must contain and what wording is used. While issuing a DMCA to most hosting companies will get them to shut things off almost immediately, even if there is one flaw in the issued DMCA, you can issue a counter notification to both your hosting provider as well as the person issuing the DMCA. As per counter notification laws, the hosting provider has to restore functionality . Small errors in a DMCA can be read as you committing purjury. After a counter notification has been set up, the complainant has within ten days to file a suit against you, further DMCAs at this point are direct acts of purjury.
As reference I have written several successful counter-notifications for people for various materials, this is one section of the law I am actually familiar with.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumIf you're stealing/decompiling their source code and reuploading it with changes without permission, that's more what you're talking about (and has to do with control of distribution aka copyright). There are ways to legitimately override other mods' code as part of one's own mod that doesn't involve having any access to the other mods' code at all. For example, one mod has a recipe one way, but a balance mod wants it another way, it can re-register it with the new recipe. The methodology ends up being the same as overriding something in vanilla minecraft without altering the main jar.
Are you playing Sleepless Horrors? Let me know what you think!
http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/1-6-4-sleepless-horrors.39181/
I wonder if marc would be so kind to clear that up, as some may think that would mean you can not claim someone else's mod as our own.
Since that could mean GT is breaking copyright
Since copyright law has been a part of the discussion and others seem to have some knowledge of it, I have a question.
Doesn't maintaining copyright of something require that the individual claiming copyright must actively challenge any that break this right through the legal system? Basically, that in order to maintain copyright, you are required to take to court anyone you believe has violated that or risk losing copyright status on your work? I don't do coding, but have had minor run ins with this in regards to my food business, but I am nowhere near accustomed to this enough to be able to claim any real expertise on the subject. Especially not in regards to code. For reference, my basic understanding comes from what I can and cannot put on my menu.
A) No mods have Copyright currently. I posted this earlier. You're making huge assumptions.
B ) How are they breaking the Minecraft EULA? No, really, read it again.
"If you make any content available on or through our Game, you must give us permission to use, copy, modify and adapt that content. This permission must be irrevocable, and you must also let us permit other people to use, copy, modify and adapt your content."
And lets say they are. So what? What are you going to do about it? It's free software distrubuted freely. If you take them to court, you're going to get laughed out. That's trademarks, not copyright.
A trademark is a word, phrase, etc, that is protected because it only associated with you. The second that people start using it with association with something else, you start losing the power of it.
The issue is that we're dealing with things that aren't even transformative enough to justify being derivative works. If you want to be the one who gets them protection, you can try taking someone to court. As is, saying mods have copyright is an outright lie at best, and malicious attempts to destroy the community at worst.
Lets also not forget CovertJaugar is the only person who has outright BROKEN THE LAW with regards to modding, as filing maliciously false DCMA notices is a felony and is punishable by jail time should anyone choose to prosecute.
I believe copyright doesn't need to be aggressively enforced, only trademark does if I am correct.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThat more has to do with selective enforcement. If a million different places steal your mod and repost it behind their own ad/pay-walls, and you choose to only ever pursue legal action against ONE of them, it could be argued that you are not making an effort to defend your work and are instead only seeking to harm the selected defendant. You don't really ever lose copyright status on your work, but attempting to defend it in a selective manner can be detrimental to successful legal action. This is generally why the movie/music industry tend to sue anyone and everyone for theft even though most of them aren't worth the paperwork in damages.
If you posted it earlier, it was incorrect earlier.
Are you playing Sleepless Horrors? Let me know what you think!
http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/1-6-4-sleepless-horrors.39181/
Again, where do mods fall under copyright? What protects them?
Unless you're arguing in the most base way possible and worrying about my language:
Copyright is meaningless unless it's actually accepted by the general community. If you copyright music, music has a history of being copyrighted. Non-transformative modding code doesn't have a history of being accepted, hasn't had thousands of court cases to figure out where the lines are, and doesn't fit under protected as currently stands.
You can say you have a copyright. I can also say I have a copyright of your code. I can, if I choose, file for copyright of your code the next time I send off some my stuff to be registered, and register it under my name. Hell, if I do that and you haven't, I have copyright of your code for all intents and purposes, because you can't justify it in a court of law. Especially when it comes to digital interactions.
People are really, really stretching the practical realities of what copyright can actually cover and how it practically works.
Lets not even consider most people aren't paying to register their code, so their claims are worthless.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumNo additional protection is needed. Any work is automatically protected upon creation.
Are you playing Sleepless Horrors? Let me know what you think!
http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/1-6-4-sleepless-horrors.39181/
Wow. That's some fancy mental gymnastics and changing the subject you do there. You should be a politician.
4. I don't think anyone is even suggesting that your code must be perfect. We aren't talking about bugs. Let's apply a little common sense here. Not being able to run because of a missing dependency? Really? Extrabees doesn't work for me because I don't have Forestry installed? *slaps forehead* Who woulda thunk it? Thank you for pointing that out to me. Here I was about to blame Binnie. </sarcasm> You need the same or a close enough version of Forge to the version Railcraft was compiled with for Railcraft to run??? That's just silly! (Sorry, I guess I was premature turning off sarcasm before) </sarcasm> I find your examples downright insulting. Surely you can do better than that. These examples you give and purposely causing issues are a far cry from each other. Can't dispute you're a very smart guy so I'm very disappointed in your absurd examples (and that is not sarcasm)
6. Yeah, like that guy who made a mod that does stuff with rails and minecarts, since those were definitly Notch's ideas. What a **** that guys is. Oh, hey, wasn't that you CJ??? Not too much of a hypocrite are we?
Not going to bother quoting but RP2? WTF is RP2? Wasn't that like 3 or 4 versions of MC ago? Excuse me, are you from the past? (IT Crowd)
Additionally, there's a difference between saying you have a copyright on creation (which is true) and the practical reality of enforcing your copyright, which is the ACTUAL discussion we should be having. Not some theoretical intent of a law.
Copyright is created when something is created. However, let's say we are discussing music, which is much easier because (from a broad picture, effectively) everything is covered (it isn't. We're getting into racial/gender politics and the creation of the copyright system if I continue down this path). You write a song. You put it on soundcloud. You're an idiot and don't register it. I, then, do. I have copyright of the written song and can actually demand you take it down. Registration matters for any copyright.
"This isn't fair" is the standard claim for this, but it doesn't matter, it's how it has to work in the practical world for it to work.
Semantic gymnastics aren't useful for the discussion.
Copyright only effectively exists when it can be useful.