Quote:
Originally Posted by RLacey
^ What he said.
It stuns me that people think it's acceptable to make something that's a breach of copyright, and then complain when offered a deal that allows them to release their product so long as they forfeit the copyright that they were never entitled to anyway  . That's how the law works, and it's hardly like the developers shouldn't have known this going in. |
Absolutely, the developers are knowingly breaking the law.
That doesn't automatically make any deal offered to them a *good* one.
I believe a good deal would include *some* sort of compensation to the developers IF the copyright owners who retain the rights to the work decide that the work is good enough to profit from, and they proceed, in fact, to sell it in some form.
As it is, the deals that are currently cut not only give the full rights to the work to Vivendi, they also cut the developers out of any compensation if the publisher decides to sell the work.
They are also within their rights to cut the developers' names out of the credits if they so choose, so the developers may not even get credit for their work (let alone compensation).
*Any* deal is not the same as a *good* deal.
--Josh
