@mcnichoj: I'm surprised, and a bit dismayed, that you went at it from the, "They'll do more with it than the creator would" route rather than the, "You can't fight against corporations in a country where they own politicians" route. The latter approach is quite realistic while the former strikes me of enabling immoral and/or unethical behavior under the aegis of "the greater good." Might as well be arguing that because the US government can make better use of an individual's money than they can that the US Treasury shouldn't have to pay people who want to cash out their bonds.
The law gives them the option of regaining their property. In order for a law to remain valid and usable it needs to be used on a regular basis.
It's also worth considering that they might find Disney retaining the copyrights to their property to be somehow immoral or unethical. If someone else has the option of taking the copyrights to Mulan away from Disney in 20 years I wouldn't be one bit surprised if they did so due to Disney's (in)actions during the filming of the live action version.
@amaneuvering:It'd be interesting if they file DMCA takedowns against Disney on anything Predator-related after 35 years elapse.
I mean on the one hand you have copyright trolls hitting people with takedowns over their own personal, and personally copyrighted, material and corporations like Nintendo hitting people despite legitimately engaging in fair use. On the other hand I don't think I've ever heard of someone successfully filing such claims against corporations.
On the gripping hand it'd be outright hilarious to go see a Disney Predator film only to have "This film has been removed due to a DMCA violation."
And now having just typed "Disney Predator" I can't help but think of all of Disney as a predator...
@mogan: Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if that happened, but at the same time humans can get pretty stupid and contradictory. It'd be equally unsurprising for them to take it in stride.
Now a real test would be if AMC Theaters started offering gaming coverage. :-D
@zmanbarzel: I'm not "hung up" in the slightest. Dunno about anyone else though.
I also don't see a reason to not poke at that disconnect either. I probably do it once or twice a year. Soon as the site gets renamed or they stick with just gaming-related news I'll stop. /shrugs
Huh. And the GOG help site had a mod/dev/someone-semi/actually-official comment that effectively implied that fixing the save file was a very, very, very low priority that may, someday in the distant future, be fixed.
I wonder how much flak they took from the non-cheating hoarder crowd to finagle that change.
@Smosh150: It's closer to gaming news than fluff articles about WWE that have no mention of games. At least this vaguely tosses an air of promiscui... I mean presentability by mentioning that the guy spent some of the money on video games.
That said, you're mirroring what I posted years ago when GameSpot threw u... I mean put up that article about the WWE with absolutely nothing gaming-related in it. Frankly I expect that it's at least partly the fault of CBS Interactive and this is just par for the course for what happens when one company is bought out by a major corporation.
Really it's not a whole lot different than what happens to companies that EA buys, and I suppose that at the end of the day having GameSpot articles that are the result of CBS Interactive giving them the trEAtment makes all this garbage "gaming-related."
@vtadave: Gotta be. Between calling it the "kay eff seance-soul" and telling you to stick greasy, steamy stuff inside of it, two things which are generally considered Very Bad Ideas for PCs, this screams, "As seen in Trump's fever dreams."
Marikhen's comments