Harsh Ban for Modifying Someone's Map for Pecon7's Boss Battles?

[Lego lad]

I dont see anything wrong with using someone elses map as long as you dont try to claim you made it.

[Ad Bot]

[Headcrab Zombie]

Just ignore planr lol
He's just arguing for the sake of arguing
He's already said he understands what you're saying

I think I understand now what you guys mean. I thought you all were trying to assert in this drama that he doesn't have the right to use Pecon's build without his permission.

[Dannu]

I dont see anything wrong with using someone elses map as long as you dont try to claim you made it.

Yep, but plagiarism is a whole other subject. Plagiarism is actually something people get kicked out of schools for. Copying entire articles off of the internet and not marking sources. It's not plagiarism if you have clearly marked the original author/source of creation.

[Bisjac]

Yep, but plagiarism is a whole other subject. Plagiarism is actually something people get kicked out of schools for. Copying entire articles off of the internet and not marking sources. It's not plagiarism if you have clearly marked the original author/source of creation.

and this is not plagiarism because the builder does not own the rights to the build once others have seen it.
that is fact

[Planr]

Just ignore planr lol
He's just arguing for the sake of arguing
He's already said he understands what you're saying

That's a separate issue. The argument arose out of Ipquarx's commment. The matter of "understanding" I was referring to is the matter of whether or not people were saying killer had no right to use Pecon's build as he pleased. He has the right; nobody's denying that afaik- but some are calling him a jerk for doing it without Pecon's permission, and for claiming it's his when he has every right to claim it as his (as bisjac said and as i also said before, you lose all rights and priveleges to your build when you put it online for other people to use), and that i'm not okay with.

[Dannu]

and this is not plagiarism because the builder does not own the rights to the build once others have seen it.
that is fact

Actually it is, just because it is openly displayed to other does not make it NOT the intellectual property of someone else. The difference between intellectual property and copyright is you are allowed to re-use intellectual property if you clearly mark the source/creator.

[Planr]

Actually it is, just because it is openly displayed to other does not make it NOT the intellectual property of someone else. The difference between intellectual property and copyright is you are allowed to re-use intellectual property if you clearly mark the source/creator.

the builder does not own the rights to the build once others have seen it.

[Bisjac]

Actually it is, just because it is openly displayed to other does not make it NOT the intellectual property of someone else. The difference between intellectual property and copyright is you are allowed to re-use intellectual property if you clearly mark the source/creator.

badspot is the owner of your builds. you cannot decide who can do what with something you made once you share it. nor are you due any credit

[killer12568]

badspot is the owner of your builds. you cannot decide who can do what with something you made once you share it. nor are you due any credit

THANK YOU!

[Pecon]

Part of Blockland's terms and conditions states that Badspot owns anything that is created in or for the game. So there is that. However, it's also generally accepted in this community that you're a gigantic jerk if you try to take credit for a build someone else made. Being the primary operator of Boss Battles, I have the power to ban as many jerks as I want.

Regardless, this topic is resolved because I unbanned him after his dubious apology.

[-Jetz-]

Jesus forget why is the legality coming into question here? You can use a build made by someone else however you want. You don't even have to give credit to the person who made it. From a legal perspective, nobody even cares if you say you built it even when you didn't. However, that's a richard move. He was banned for that richard move, not for breaking any law.

However, it's also generally accepted in this community that you're a gigantic jerk if you try to take credit for a build someone else made. Being the primary operator of Boss Battles, I have the power to ban as many jerks as I want.

This exactly.

[SpongeCraft1212]

Although killer does seem to be happy, I'm still saying the ban was legit.

[Dannu]

IMO killer muddied the water way too much to be considered a reliable source of information and the ban should not have been lifted.

[-Jetz-]

IMO killer muddied the water way too much to be considered a reliable source of information and the ban should not have been lifted.

He's not really a threat to the server or anything. He did something rude, we banned him, he apologised, we unbanned him. Even if he built a reputation as a liar, what are we gonna do? Accuse him of not being sorry enough? If he built up a reputation as a dumbass, that's hardly our problem. Not worth pressing the matter.

[#Ravencroft]

THANK YOU!

Why are you saying thank you to him even though many, many, many people have already said that.