Should Copyright Laws Affect Minecraft?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- Xisuma Says Playlist ► • Xisuma Says
Taken from the Enigmatica 2 (12) Livestream 19/01/20
• Enigmatica 2 (12) Live...
Edited by Adam Aarts
/ adamaarts
Links!
💜 Main Channel ► / xisumavoid
💛 Second Channel ► / xisumatwo
📺 Livestreams ► / xisuma
🔷 Twitter ► / xisumavoid
📘 Facebook ► on. xisuma...
💻 Website ► www.xisumavoid.com
👍 Patreon ► / xisuma
📞 Discord ► / discord
#xisumasays #minecraft #copyright
Imagine if common redstone builds were copyrighted. Like piston doors, Etho's Hopper clock, types of farms, etc.
Something functional can't actually be copyrighted (in real life) for the simple fact that it can be invented by two people separately. That said it could be patented, which is effectively the claim that you invented it first, although the US Courts have started not to uphold the patents on virtual models and systems that was all the rage in 1990's IP law. Since the USPTO got successfully sued for denying a patent in 1987 (IIRC) they ceased to vet patents and rely on the courts to subsequently uphold the patent in litigation. Similarly systems (and that includes virtual systems) cannot be copyrighted because they are functional. So inventing a game like Bed Wars is not actually copyrightable. However the name "Bed Wars" could be trademarked - but there is no natural right here - you'd actually have to go attempt to register that trademark, and then prove that that trademark identifies your product in particular in the eyes of a consumer (and only for a specific use) and requires that you are offering that product for sale (the *trade* part of trademark is very important). And even then it would not stop someone producing the same game and calling it something else (provided it did not cause customer confusion - such as "Bad Wars" for example).
Generally copyright as applied to something in Minecraft would only apply to a *specific* artistic expression, and more importantly the right to reproduce that expression. You have an automatic copyright on the videos you produce (and any use of the footage in a video would need to obey copyright restrictions), but the creation of a virtual sculpture within the Minecraft environment is a much trickier legal issue, since just building something (in the real world) does not make it a sculpture protected by copyright. It must have some measure or artistic merit that is copyrightable. I could build a chair and it would not be considered art - on the other hand if I built a singular chair carved like a scorpion then it probably would be considered art, especially if I exhibited it in an art gallery and/or found a buyer for the piece. The same would probably apply in a virtual environment, but the courts are also very afraid of setting precedent in this area (since claiming a virtual object has an existence outside the physical media it is embedded in would open a big legal can of worms with respect to download services and eBooks). You could register a copyright of the build, but then you have to declare that it is in fact registered as a copyrighted work of art. So to get actual copyright protection you would probably need to take the matter to court (and in the US civil litigation fees are generally not recoverable by the winner, which is their method of preventing frivolous litigations). And non-willful infringement is a civil case. [Willful infringement is where you attempt to make money by intentionally reproducing and selling the work, and is a criminal as well as civil offence.] In any case the damages (financial loss to the copyright owner) that might be claimed are extremely minimal in this case and lawyers just love billable hours. You can expect to pay multiple thousands of USD$ in legal fees; just the preliminary research would probably cost you about USD$2,500.
That said, TH-cam as a private corporation can apply any standards it wants to providing it's service, and does not have to consider the actual law that applies when doing so, save where they do have a statuatory obligation to obey the law (such as responding to a DMCA take-down request or obeying the restrictions of COPPA). If they receive a DMCA request they are obliged to remove the offending material from the net immediately, but there must also be a mechanism where this takedown notice can be contested. That said, TH-cam does have a history of siding with the takedown notice because lawyers are expensive and the DMCA is generally considered valid without a legal opinion (after all it might be if actually tested in court ... and again, lawyers are expensive). And takedown notices come with copyright strikes I believe.
Note that this should not be considered legal advice. If you do have problems with copyright go consult a lawyer licensed to operate in the appropriate jurisdiction (either California or Delaware [for dealing with Google/TH-cam] or your home state). Although is would be interesting to see what a US lawyer who specialises in this area of law would say about the matter. It's not a simple area of law (despite what everyone and their donkey on the internet claims).
[Morally/ethically I personally think that not crediting someone else's build and presenting it as your own is blatant fraud (not to mention poor sportsmanship), but that issuing a takedown notice over it is also an overreaction to someone's bad manners, especially given the rather dubious legal standing of the claim (but then they are probably ignorant of this aspect).]
@@reverance_pavane Wooow, thanks for all the info! I've been a little in the dark on that system for a long while. Saving this for later :)
Excuse me , you have spruce wood as your roof . I will proceed to take all of the money you made because I did that aswell
I think the best thing to do with contraptions is to give credit in the name
ETHO hopper clock
@@zacharyhandy9606 Except Etho admits he was not the first to use the Hopper clock, but he made it popular
I had NO idea you created Bedwars. That's such a good example of it outliving the creator
Did you know grian invented the concept that tnt run uses?
@@macaroon_nuggets8008 Really? How long ago was that?
@@casertanick in one of his minecraft evo videos he mentioned it. Im not sure which one.
Nick Caserta that’s a compliment and an insult
I knew from his old videos and when it came to Hypixel I was kind of sad for the lack of credit
"I think it's dangrous to build legality around ideas" That quote is so true, and is probably the single biggest takeaway from this video.
ideas are different than full on builds and complex redstone contraptions :p
Wait you created bedwars? 😦 that’s insane I never knew
I am surprised the Etho hopper clock survived the test of time. I have never seen the video where Etho developed it but I know Etho made it because everyone still calls it the Etho hopper clock. Maybe we should put names of creators in the name of the product more often.
Just answering from the title, no.
Long story short:
Cite your sources/inspirations people.
It's not that hard, it doesn't take away from what you are doing, and it helps grow the community.
It still isn't right. without a copyright, this is abuse of the system.
Edit: I will say that it is still a good idea to give credit where credit is due.
A lot of official networks don't give credit and are often given a pass because that's just how the business is," but _creators,_ people too small to afford ten lawyers and can't properly hide behind fair use laws, are often *bullied* into submission by, frankly, entitled people who wouldn't make a sound if it was an official corporation "stealing" their work.
This is why copyright law is so muddied. Too many brat's just trying to inflict power over people where they're not entitled to any. It's gotten to a point where the video game industry is cannibalising itself due to us gamers saying x is a "clone" of another property.
Skippy did
@@lucarionite6538 going by that logic every bedwars TH-camr would have to ask xisuma before playing bedwars
undead890 I agree with that but you can’t copy strike people for it
Just the other day I was hearing about a different youtuber being hit with copyright claims for basically the same reason, but a little different: they were uploading tutorials of builds that not only were created by other people, but the people who had made them had already uploaded tutorials themselves. I agree copyright issues is a major gray area, and nearly impossible to draw a line in, but I think the issue there (and why I side more with the original creators) is that by having a bigger youtuber do that, and not credit you, you lose out on the attention your build could have gotten you. Take for example Etho's hopper clock: in a purely hypothetical situation, what if someone, a small but growing youtuber, had made it and done a tutorial for it long before, then Etho happens to see it and decides that because he's a much bigger channel, he can get more views out of it, so he does a tutorial too, a block for block, word for word remake of the original tutorial. Suddenly the hopper clock becomes super popular and is dubbed the Etho Hopper Clock, and the person who originally made it gets made to look like a copycat, just because the Etho video is seen way more, even though it was posted more recently. That's what this other youtuber has been doing for years to channels that are smaller than his, without giving them credit. That's a huge problem.
Note: The Etho thing is entirely hypothetical and only meant as an example, to the best of my knowledge Etho has not done anything like that with any build.
I always get mad when I dont get credit for what I did, also I find it important to give credit to others for their stuffs.
Hate to say it but while I agree people should give credit you can get mad all you want but that is all you can do technically as you do not own that build...Mojang still technically and legally own it as it is their property/software you used to create it.
@@xJamesLaughx but doesnt mojang just deliver a "canvas" where people create stuff?
@@lolbenz We can say the same for a lot of things, TH-cam, programming languages and other creative tools
Title suggestion: "Should copyright laws affect Minecraft creations" (I added that last word)
Minecraft as a game is copyrighted, and the video doesn't talk about it as a game. It instead is discussing creations within Minecraft.
I was so surprised that you had the idea for bedwars! Good work.
"Copying" other people's builds can also lead to being more creative and in turn make your own build to share, so you're totaly right, there isn't anything called copyright in that regard to minecraft.
Well technically and in all legal sense Mojang own everything you build in Minecrat using their base game. When it comes to video games you do not OWN the game you paid for, you only have a license to USE the program but Mojang still owns it and all rights to it.
And just to use an example of you own nothing you do in Minecraft...Mojang if they so chose to could copyright claim every single video that goes up using their game. Cause under copyright laws these videos are in violation.
Nintendo used this for years to stop people uploading videos of their games being played and would not allow even streaming of their games until as recently as last year when they loosened those restrictions. Nintendo would copyright claim and strike anyone who would upload their games in a video on TH-cam if they found them.
I guess you’re right, but more often than not allow game devs, people to make videos of said game, and when it comes to minecraft a large part of it is to share experiences with each other.
@@xJamesLaughx What? That's like saying the owner of a programming language own the programs you make with it.
Give credit though.
@@PashaGamingYT what if you just found a random build on the internet and say 'i like this build! I'll make my own build with the same blocks and style '(style is like type of build like futerstic,rustic etc) But you dont know who originally created the build.What do you do then?
As a writer one piece of advice has always followed me. No idea is original. Everything has already been done before at some point, but it is what you make of those ideas that gives you something unique.
Also, I didn't know that you came up with bedwars. That's one of my favorite minigames!
i didnt know xisuma was a metal head. just saw the master of puppets cover and i clicked instantly
imagine if ilmango copyrighted everyone who uses his builds
I would have never guessed Xisuma thought up bedwars. It's amazing to think about how ideas compound upon themselves. People like Technoblade had their start on bedwars.
Copyright is very tricky, I deal with a lot of intellectual property at work such as engineering drawings. You can't give out an engineering drawing if you don't own that drawing but you can give the final product to someone else and they can reverse engineer it so they can make their own drawings, but it also differs from country. It's such a thin line
If Minecraft is to be treated as a medium for the creation of media, then copyright law should certainly be applicable.
Someone like Jeracraft who makes a living making artistic creations within Minecraft needs to secure in that nobody else can steal his creations. Like you say, the community should be a place where people all follow the spirit of the game, with iteration and advancement, and ideally credit where it is due. The issue is that there *are* malicious actors who *do not* follow this spirit, and thus there needs to be some kind of system in place to ensure that Minecraft
Now, things like redstone circuits, such as the Etho clock, obviously should not be applicable to copyright. If something is a functional component, or something simple like the "bomb lobber" from Reddit that was a fad recently, since these types of creations are by nature iterative. However, there must be a distinction drawn between these common creations and builds that are meant to be artistic pieces, like Jeracraft's work. I think this is your misunderstanding, X, since what Jera did was not to attempt to shrewdly prevent others from using a technique or concept, but to protect a creation he produced to make money.
**Tl;dr:** Minecraft needs a copyright system to protect creators, though this should not be extended to functional or overly simple designs. Think how you can copyright a book, but not the concept of a sentence itself.
This is how I see it: You should always reach out to someone and try to figure out their intentions. But if it is happening repeatedly, and they are claiming that they didn't mean anything by it every time, sometimes you need to be a little harsher for people to learn that lesson. I know for a fact Etho did something similar very early into his original LP series and he talks about how he didn't want to because they seemed like a nice person, but his hand was kind of forced because they just weren't learning from their actions
The piston door community is pretty strict about copying or stealing other peoples doors. One of the cases where the "design outlived the creator" is the 2x1 observer semi hipster that everybody uses now but doesn't know the original creator was a player named MelonBP
Minecraft copyrights that sucks! I make some of yours all the time!
I think the difference is that nobody else ever claimed that they invented bed wars themselves. That other guy though has appearently done so. I do understand that with how much time and effort JeraCraft puts into his videos and his gigantic builds he doesn't like someone just saying they made it.
It's not hard to see where his frustration came from.
So this problem is rampant on bedrock with restone builds. Problem is, no one really has a big established TH-cam platform. The biggest is at 300k subs, and the guy basically sells restone farms and builds as his own, when he rips off a block by block build from another much smaller channel. It really hurts the bedrock community greatly because the channels that are small don’t get views and some channels go under and suddenly there’s one less, two less, a dozen less, forty less minds working out great mechanics that everyone should use. So what do we do?
I think people should at least give credit to the creator. For example, people like unspeakable gaming copies Mumbo’s contraption with no mention.
PewDiePie on the other hand, made slime stone creations and promoted Mumbo. I think that’s ok
Copyright use is fair in context of Minecraft if there is actual copying AND claiming of CREATIONS in place. A copyright strike is not a fair way to deal with someone copying a build block-by-block without giving credit, but simply calling them out and making sure that people are aware of that behavior is definitely a fair way to approach that situation.
I am a visual artist and I would be really disappointed if my work was copied by someone. My WORK. Not my *idea*. What you said about people getting same ideas, is very common indeed. But what is not common is two separate people creating 100% identical objects independently. It does happens sometimes, there are even examples of that IRL. Minecraft is much more than just a game though, it is a tool that gives enormous possibilities for creative work. And I think that creations, as well as their creators must be respected. No matter if we are talking about Minecraft or IRL arts
Hold up - Xisumavoid created bed wars? This is news to me. I can’t find any information about the origin of bed wars online.
You created bedwars!?!! Well I had no idea that's so cool!!! 😁😁😁 Wow our own Xisuma!!
wait he came up with BEDWARS
I think that recreating a build block-for-block and taking credit for it should be punished. However, I think it's ok when you add something of your own to it and give credit to what the build was inspired by/is a version of.
but there is a problem if a creator(let's call them creator A) comes up with a design and builds it not knowing that another creator(creator B) also has built the exact same design then creator B finds the video and gives it a copyright strike and now creator A is punished for having the same idea. But I agree that creators should give credit if they copy someone else's design.
@@dagamerplays Copyright laws already handle stuff like this. No court is going to uphold a copyright claim on a knock-knock joke, for example. However, they will likely uphold a copyright claim on an entire comedy set that involves a knock knock joke. Like, two individual people may both write the same sentence. But no two people are going to write the exact same book.
I really love listening to you xisuma. You sound complete woke and we need more people like you
Yo is that pic in the thumbnail inspired by Master of Puppets by Metallica?
Love that band
TheDerpyLuigi11 considering the tendency for Xsiuma to play metal on his second channel from time to time, i wouldn't be surprised
Who created the stair with signs chair? Sure you saw it on a TH-cam video, but they got it from someone else who got it from someone else and so on. It’s really hard to pinpoint certain concepts on a person
This is why it’s so “depressing” that I don’t get to catch up with his streams because he does that so early for me in west Australia
Sorry sir I got a little bit confused, also I'm gonna rewatch this after I am done with studying (tomorrow ;-;)
Oh yeah, forget X made bedwars HAHA!!!! How crazy is that!
Other youtubers videos are'nt this interesting.
Cover: Master of Puppets
Reality: *Master of Bees*
actual copyright no, crediting a creator or inspiration piece yes.
You're describing copyright with a license right now lol
There was also a recent controversy with a content "creator" who routinely stole other people's builds and they ended up getting kicked out of a community for it. They have a larger platform and apparently took builds from creators who didn't. I don't know the whole story, much like you said, so I can't pass judgment there, but I do think the proper response is to investigate, see if there is a pattern, and then take appropriate action from there. If it goes unchanged and they continue to take value from other people's creations, then I think legal action could be called for. It's easy to say it's okay for people to take your ideas when you've already established yourself. For someone who is trying to do so, it can be nigh impossible if it's the wild west and anybody can take anyone else's idea without repercussion. That was why copyright law was invented in the first place, to prevent larger corporations from exploiting the work of individuals who worked hard to create something of value, and it's the reason we continue to see innovation in business, technology, industry, and yes, even creative works like music and Minecraft. But that's just my two cents worth. :)
Is it stealing someone's creation when you do a tutorial on a build that you saw on someone's channel give them a shout out at the beginning of of your video and tell you have a link to their channel in the description and tell people to check out their channel? Because that's exactly what the content creator did that was kicked.
I agree with your point of view. I like to look at it this way as well. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" I've personally done videos on other creators farms/builds but I always try to add my own spin to it. Whether that is giving the tutorial and leaving the explanation to the original creator or by making improvements to the design. I always credit the original creators as it would make me feel like a thief otherwise.
I think the original creator should just leave a comment like “Hey I am the original creator and I don’t like you showing this off as yours, please credit me”. If the copycat deletes that comment and tries to hide their mistake I would side with a copyright strike.
many of your ideas and builds have changed and inproved the minecraft community. like your afk fish farms.
**Ilmango contraption*
Ilmango: *STONK*
As i see it the community is basically there to help each other. Personally if someone used one of my builds for something and never gave credit, as long as it helps other the same result has been achieved. And as mentioned by Shish-wam-bam there is always a chance of similar builds existing in a finite world of possibilities. My real issue with Minecraft atm is that 2 versions existing of the same game which splits the community. Bedrock is obviously going to eventually be the main version, java (the language) is very old and Minecraft is probably the biggest thing using it, which means of course developing new features like ray-tracing would require a lot more work than bedrock. But bedrock if it were to become a proper replacement, needs to have some of the bugs from java deliberately implemented to keep people interested.
These videos are basically short podcasts.
I made a realistic re creation of a subway station in NYC based off Lexington Avenue 63 St, took days and someone started copying it block for block. I spoke to them and told them its not cool and they stopped using it for videos.
As the original creator of Vs Saxton Hale Mode (which is quite popular to this very day) for Team Fortress 2, I can tell that a creation can indeed outlive its creator, and be picked up by the community, like it or not. On a good side, it means I didn't had to support it, community did it instead. Fortunately, I can use in my portfolio, because my original forum thread still exist, and I can use it to proove that I made it.
And to be honest, I initially did NOT like that somebody else picked my work up __while I was around, making things for it as well__, but ultimately it ended up as a good thing, because I've lost interest in TF2.
Jera and magma is my favorite dang
I expected this to happen ever since microsoft's minecraft marketplace. It's expected but still wrong.
Wow I didn't even know you made bedwars I thought hypixel made it and I looked it up and it says hypixel made it. It's strange that people don't give credit
I think the "I wanted to bring that content to my following even if I didn't come up with all of it" explanation is fine BUT truly, it should be prefaced with a [credit to artist] or at the very least "I didn't come up with this, but I wanted to makes sure you guys saw this cause it's really a great build that I think you're all gonna like". Otherwise, law aside, it would just be generally dishonest. Not violently so but still. And dishonesty is not okay. Even if it's small, or has a small impact. We should all avoid dishonesty as much as we possibly can. Full disclaimers are important. Transparency is important. Credits are important.
A quick (and not 100% accurate) summary on Intellectual Property, patent and Copyright (Based on EU Copyright Laws): anything created by someone that is new will be copyright-protected until 70 years after the death of the creator. If this is a technological creation, a patent is needed to protect the Intellectual Property (IP). In the example of the fork, the creator of the fork is gone for a loong time, and we could conclude any patent right has expired nowadays. For this reason, anyone can make a fork without infringing on IP.
Of course it is also possible that two people independently make the same thing and both credit themselves for it. This has in the real world happened with the discovery of calculus by Newton and Leibniz, who are both credited for this. In Minecraft, this is just as possible and should definitely not be seen as IP infringement.
In software development, the source code and interface icons are the only things protected by copyright. This means that you could write your own Minecraft but with slightly different icons, name and textures and be fine. On top of this, patents are never issued to software, unless it solves a purely technical problem (this is different from non-IT patents).
Extending this to Minecraft content creations, we could split IPs into two categories: technical (farms, redstone, etc.) and creative (builds, minigames, etc.). These two categories resemble patent-based IP and copyright-based IP respectively and should probably be treated in a similar way, albeit more lightly than IP in the legal world. The consequences of this would be that technical innovations like farms and redstone are free to be copied, and creative IP would need permission. However, this is not something to apply to small, enclosed communities (say, a Minecraft world with your friends that is not used for content creation) and protection on these IPs should have a shorter term (at most like a year). On top of that, crediting someone for (especially technical) IPs should be enough to not infringe on these rights.
I in no way think that laws should be implemented for IP in Minecraft, but some unwritten rules seem welcome and I think this gives a good basis for them.
I mean, isn't it fraudulent to copyright strike someone for a minecraft build? Can you even copyright minecraft builds? I'm relatively sure that Mojang could validly copystrike every minecraft video, so, since the entire game is copyrighted, can you even copyright individual builds within it?
Copyright protects the expression of intellectual property, not its construction. You could potentially copyright the _image_ of a build, but not the method of building it. (I doubt claiming rights to the image would be valid in this case anyway, since all its components are the property of Mojang.) I would definitely recommend fighting the copy strike, because it's not a valid claim. But with that said, people shouldn't take credit for other people's work, even if doing so isn't a legal issue.
you created bed wars? what a legend
Minecraft is a game where people can interact. And as you said ideas evolve. Minecraft to me is a game where people innovate to enrich the game. Battle Royal Games were started in story format with the book then movie Battle Royale (Or possibly the Coliseum) then Hunger Games happened, Minecrafters read the book or watched the movie and thought, we can do this. and they did. Then later came PubG and Fortnite.
Imagine all the money you can make if you could put an interest rate on a common build. Did you build my dirt hut? **YOINK** There goes your $5
I think everything you said was completely true. If you don’t know who’s the original creator or you just decide to not credit them for some reason it’s fine I think. But if you make the exact thing, block for block, and it’s not like a common idea or a redstone contraption that can be built the same by accident, and they claim it’s THEIRS then that’s just a dick move
I think that some insight on this can be borrowed from existing copyright laws, specifically fair use. If you borrow an idea and you transform it, say you alter the build slightly, or include your own personality within a minigame, or you critique it, though I see this being a bit rarer in the minecraft TH-camr community, I don't see a problem with that.
But mainly I think the issue is with crediting. If you borrow an idea, and you make income off that idea, you should credit where you got that idea from.
Building in Minecraft is an art form, and I don't see why it should be treated as fundamentally different from other artforms, but if an individual decides that they are fine with their ideas being used elsewhere as an exact copy without credit, good on them I guess.
It does raise the question though. Would a unique and new Redstone contraption be a copyright or a patent?
I think the issue comes from people simply taking others work without crediting them. Take Mumbo, you have lots of startup redstone channels simply taking his world download which he kindly provides to us and then making videos off of that. I think simply copying what someone did in a video and putting it up in their let's play (take Mumbo and the inspiration for the outer ring of his build in HC S7) isn't the worst thing in the world, it wouldn't even be copyrightable however on a moral level one shouldn't take someone else's work and pass it off as their own, it stifles creativity if all your doing is stealing from the true creatives which one is absolutely doing if they manage to grow to a point where people see them before the original creator, take Carlos Mencia, a joke thief,
Am i the only one that thinks the thumbnail reminds me of Metallicas Masters of puppets albums cover
No. It was a prank done by Xisuma on Tango in Hermitcraft Season 5, but I don't know by what it was motivated etc anymore.
It was supposed to be that album cover, yes...
First thing that comes in mind is Grian's video in which he built the item sorter saying explicitly he copied from someone else but not telling who... I think Important and large audience youtubers have the responsibility to promote and give regards to smaller ones. Even if in this case it's probably Impulse or Mumbo's design.
You still playing in the modded world? And yes, the copyright system can allow anyone to give a strike to anyone
jeracraft builds massive maps with hundreds of hours of work, i still don't know the full context of the story, but if an entire map like that was stolen, i support this takedown.
I think it's kinda scummy that the guy rebuilt it block for block and purported it to be their own. I think it would've only been okay to copyright strike if that person refused to credit the original
but otherwise, i dont think that copyright should come into minecraft
I played so much bed wars back in the day and never imagined that you made it... If they did give you credits at the time, I would know, but I only know now
Three really easy examples that show copyright shouldn't apply to Minecraft.
IMPULSE item sorter
ETHO hopper clock
TANGO iron farms
GC Markert tango’s multi item sorter too
That's not how anything works
There isn't context here.
if redstone builds were copyrighted then literally no one can create thier own LPs
Sharing credit is great because it grows your channel as well as other peoples it improves your channel by people knowing your a good person who will give credit
I have no problem with people copying me. The only time me and you will ever have a problem if you're doing griefing.
its funny because i had a same design that an other guy had and apparently we both have had it in our worlds since 2019 please check it out its really cheap and simple
If you dont have a registered copyright for something then you can not claim anything...
What?! So did Xisuma invented bed wars? I'm surprised
I thing that the copyright should be considered the same as the way that comedians go around joke theft where it can't be confirmed if the idea came form someone else or not but the second they realise they give credit to that person until it gets to the point where it becomes a staple of mincraft and from that point it is public domain
Ourcraft
You invented bed wars?
One of the funniest things going on in my brain now is Xisuma playing bedwars...
Builds are creative works, so it is quite a gray area.
The world would be a much better place without copyright laws
Love the “master of puppets” themed thumbnail! Giving credit to where credit is due is important, but you are right on with the whole fabric of minecraft thing. If everyone who builds an ImpulseSv filter or Etho clock had to link to the original videos it would get silly. I dont even know that Ive seen the originals, these two have been showcased so many times by others. Recently I came up with a Bedrock logic circuit, my own creation. Im flat out certain others have already invented it!
Yeah i do agree people should be more positive about these stuff. I think the old community that x mentioned in this video is great. Someone copying your builds should be an opportunity to do some collaborations to promote and support each other instead of dragging each other down.
Dang, didn't know you made bedwars!
You make the invisable lines of being a good person visable to people like me who doesnt under stand things like this love you X
Also was thinking this was going to go on this channel when i saw it live
Jeracraft did call him out in a video and magma didnt do anything about.
This complaint has been going on in the bedrock redstone tutorial community by a few smaller TH-camrs who seem to think they are the inventors of a design so no one else can show it off even if he gives them credit with a link in the description. These little tubers don't give credit to the people who designed the sub components of their builds even when they are quite complex and they don't recognize that multiple people can come up with the same solutions to the same problems. The whole reason everyone is on TH-cam is sharing of ideas.
YOU CREATED BEDWARS!!!!!!! 👏👏👏😮
Sometimes GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE... I always make my own designs especially for houses which I use in my realm but I also tend to use designs for farms (eg breeders, automatics, etc.)
Quick answer is no
MagmaMusen did credit JeraCraft in at least 1 of his previous videos. I wonder if MagmaMusen "forgot" that he had watched JeraCraft's design. I would like to know more about exactly what happened from both sides of this issue. I hope that it will get resolved asap.
(The WinchesterMCNL that gave you the info)
I completely agree with every word you had said in the stream, reason I said that it was "kinda" valid was because from what I've heard, communication wasn't the best.
There used to be a video on Jeracrafts channel about this as well, but after checking, it's since been taken down. From what I remember, there wasn't any sort of credit given or anything in the likes, but the action of a copyright strike would still have been way too extreme. That I did agree with you upon. It's nice to see a video about this though, it was an interesting topic to hear.
Hmmm. What about IDEA in Hermitcraft?
No of course not
What build did magma "copied"?
I feel like there is a problem here: do you define a minecraft build as art, or the things made within as inventions? If so, then by nature it is subject to copyright, because copyright exists to protect art and invention. They are mutually inclusive of each other. And not only would his build then be able to be copyrighted, but they would also fall under fair use. Now, just like with any art, a copyright court needs to determain weather his use of Jeracrafts build falls under copyright guide lines. If he used it in a transformative or educational manner, (such as, using it in another larger build, or if he was making a tutorial on how to build it when Jeracraft had not previously released one, because then it would just be stealing his tutorial which is also abuse of copyright). From the moment he saves the world to his computer he has copyrighted it.
In order to consider a build art it HAS to fall under copyright, otherwise you start labeling some art as more important or more valid then other forms of art
I say its justified in Jeracrafts case simply because he actually sells his builds on his own website.
Meaning if someone ends up just recreating the build, while entirely possible without crediting them, is fairly legal.
Shitty thing to do, he could just go and... you know... talk to the person about it instead but thats not up to me to decide :/
Most, if not all of the examples you gave ("That's my texture", "I did such and such variation on that idea and now everyone uses it without crediting me", "We both had the same idea independently but I did it first", ...) have very similar parallels in intellectual property history. All those cases have shaped the law in some way, and in fact western countries have very similar laws regarding intellectual property despite having had different lawmakers.
As sad as it may be, even if in Minecraft, the law still applies, and jurisprudence still exists.
However, what you are saying about "back in the days, the community was about helping each other" still holds. No one is forced to file a lawsuit even if they are sure to win it, some people are letting things go. Otherwise, we wouldn't have free software, we wouldn't have open communication protocols, etc. It's the age old argument of sharing ideas versus exploiting them all to oneself.
4:35, I have to debate this, because even with copyright law that's up in the air, if someone invents a concept and claims it as their own, and has a copyright on it, that idea is theirs, but if the idea is floating around for long enough, and the creator of said idea does not actually claim it, it eventually becomes public domain, the fork became public domain. The creator of the build claimed it as their own already, they didn't just leave it become a public domain design, just something the public could use, like a normal copywritten item.
You actually took ideas/builds yourself without crediting (like recently with Idea from Cleos server) the makers and I am not completely okay with that, I think that the polite thing to do is to credit others for it. But I usually stay out of the battle if it doesn't involve me since I might not have all the facts. (Eg maybe you asked Cleo off camera if it was okay to use it. I wouldn't know.)
Can't get copyrighted for making your favorite painting in Minecraft if it's in the public domain :P
I'm referring to Starry Night, I replaced the fighters.png painting with it!
I did not know X come up bed wars