PDA

View Full Version : SG1 Archive pleads guilty



prion
August 25th, 2004, 06:32 AM
Reposted from SG1_Spoilme http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/sg1_spoilme/
-------------------------------------------------------

Follow-up on the SG1 archive mess:

Source: http://news.com.com/2062-12-6895.html?date=20040824

reports in an article on online copyright infringement that

“The federal government already pursues criminal charges against online copyright infringers, however. One recent case, sparked by MPAA complaints, saw the Justice Department charge a Cincinnati man with illegally offering episodes of "Stargate SG-1" http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cac/pr2004/050.html on a Web site devoted to that show.

A Justice Department spokesman told me last week that Adam Clark McGaughey has agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge later this month. (He also said the feds had not used provisions of the Patriot Act to investigate McGaughey, countering a widely circulated Web rumor.) http://www.sg1archive.com/nightmare.shtml :eek:

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 07:03 AM
McGaughey moved his website overseas and continued to stream episodes over the Internet until April 2003

The FBI, DOJ or any other US body has absolutely no right to sit there and press charges against those who host material in another country that may not have the same laws concerning things like this. Another testament to the endless American capitalist greed. :D

ibwolf
August 25th, 2004, 07:05 AM
Actually they do IF the individual(s) responsible for operating the site are on US soil.

Also "Stargate SG-1 is produced by MGM and airs on Showtime and UPN.". This is a little out of date. The reporter really should have done his homework. It's over 2 years since the show moved.

prion
August 25th, 2004, 07:54 AM
McGaughey moved his website overseas and continued to stream episodes over the Internet until April 2003

The FBI, DOJ or any other US body has absolutely no right to sit there and press charges against those who host material in another country that may not have the same laws concerning things like this. Another testament to the endless American capitalist greed. :D

Yes, Adam apparently was greedy too. he was making money off his site, and if he had downloads on it, he was profiting off it. Copyright holders ARE allowed to defend their copyrights. Unfortunately too many fans think they can steal and profit as much as they want.

DownFallAngel
August 25th, 2004, 08:27 AM
Wha!? I always thought that was a joke, no kidding. Cause posting it on April 01, 2004, was not a good idea. But why did he have to shut down his site and move it overseas?

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 08:29 AM
McGaughey profited from his website through advertising and sales links on the website itself.
He wasn't making profit off the videos themselves, he was making profit off the of banners and stuff. Those two things are totally unrelated. Making a profit off the videos (ie burning them to DVD and selling them) is illegal.

ibwolf
August 25th, 2004, 08:41 AM
He wasn't making profit off the videos themselves, he was making profit off the of banners and stuff. Those two things are totally unrelated. Making a profit off the videos (ie burning them to DVD and selling them) is illegal.

No, you are wrong. First off, it is illegal to make them available for download, period. But he was also making money of the site that offered the downloads. Assuming that the videos represented the bulk (or at least a significant portion) of the sites content then he was (even if indirectly) profiting from them. Because they drew in the audience. Without an audience no one would buy his ad space. And no one would follow the sponsor links. So the videos were putting money in his pocket, period.

Sharing copyright material is a grey area at best (and it's rarely at its best). But the moment you start making any sort of money of it you are way over the line.

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 08:58 AM
If you get caught...

brihana25
August 25th, 2004, 09:08 AM
He wasn't making profit off the videos themselves, he was making profit off the of banners and stuff. Those two things are totally unrelated. Making a profit off the videos (ie burning them to DVD and selling them) is illegal.

From the U.S. Copyright Office website:

Uploading or downloading works protected by copyright without the authority of the copyright owner is an infringement of the copyright owner's exclusive rights of reproduction and/or distribution. Anyone found to have infringed a copyrighted work may be liable for statutory damages up to $30,000 for each work infringed and, if willful infringement is proven by the copyright owner, that amount may be increased up to $150, 000 for each work infringed. In addition, an infringer of a work may also be liable for the attorney's fees incurred by the copyright owner to enforce his or her rights.

I seriously doubt that MGM gave him any reproduction and/or distribution rights to the episodes, seeing as how they decided to sue him over it.

Whether or not he was making money from the actual episodes is irrelevant to whether or not it's illegal. He had no right to do what he did, and he got caught doing it.

Making money from his site and moving the downloads to a server overseas just made it worse - on the first point, he was profitting in a roundabout way by stealing from them, on the second point, because he was intentionally trying to evade United States law.

He should consider himself lucky that they're allowing him to plead to a misdemeanor here. If he seriously did continue to offer the downloads until April of 2003, despite the FBI becoming involved an entire year before that (and the C&D orders that would have been sent prior to the FBI being sent in), then he was willfully and with intent refusing to comply with federal law. I say they shouldn't allow him to plead anything on this.

Think about it. April of 2003 - the end of Season Six. Six years, 22 episodes per year, 132 episodes being distributed not only without the lawful copyright holder's permission but in violation of their direct C&D orders going hand-in-hand with willful evasion of copyright law... at $150,000 for each willful infringement... he'd be looking at $19,800,000 in fines alone, never mind the attorney fees (and MGM would have some seriously expensive lawyers) and court costs.

Doing what he did isn't a game, and he's not the wronged party here. He broke the law, plain and simple, he got caught red-handed, he refused to stop when he was told to, and he deserves to reap what he sowed.

Had he simply complied with the first D&C order rather than trying to hide from the law, he wouldn't be in this mess now.

Interesting to note that CafePress has already revoked his affiliation rights. I wonder how long it will be before Amazon does the same.

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 09:11 AM
Isn't C&D? Ceist and desist? Some BS like that.

Well, as I have previously stated: Another testament to the endless American capitalist greed. :D

brihana25
August 25th, 2004, 09:20 AM
Isn't C&D? Ceist and desist? Some BS like that.

Cease and Desist, yes. Stop what you're doing now, or we're going to sue you - in a nutshell.


Well, as I have previously stated: Another testament to the endless American capitalist greed. :D

Actually (and yes, I do see the :D in there, so I'm pretty sure you're being tongue-in-cheek here :)), it has much less to do with American greed or Capitalism than it has to do with basic artistic integrity and common respect.

MGM owns Stargate. It is their creation, and they should be the only ones allowed to decide what is done with their property. Fan fiction, though never challenged, would most likely not fall under this same banner, because as a derivative work transferred in a different medium, it would most likely fall under the Fair Use provision.

But all and still, my site - all of the graphics, the stories I've written and am still writing, the videos I've made and am still making - if MGM came to me and said, "You can't do that because we own it, and we're telling you to take it down."... everything would be gone. Because I realize and I understand that no matter what, MGM still owns the rights to everything I do or make that pertains to Stargate, and if they told me I couldn't play with it, I'd honor that request.

That's what he should have done, from the very beginning. If he'd simply respected them enough to honor their wishes for their creation, there wouldn't have been a problem at all.

Skydiver
August 25th, 2004, 09:26 AM
Greed or not, it's the law.

sites, even like gateworld here, exist at the 'mercy' of the copyright owners. Every single person that writes fanfic, makes wall papers, etc, etc are breaking the copyright law of the original owners of the item, in this case MGM & co.

USUALLY, if the fan is not making money, the corporations tend to look the other way. It's written off as free advertising and not worth the bad PR to track down and shut down free (to the viewers) sites.

HOwever, if that fan IS making a profit from their endeavor, then it's easier to justify tracking them down.

Adam broke the law first. Got his chance to back down when he got TOLD to back down. Instead, he thumbed his nose at authority, kept right on doing it and, just like Martha Stewart, just ticked authority off more and more until they came down on his head.

If you, general you here, want to earn the studio's respect, you have to treat them with respect. Adam didn't do that.

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 09:31 AM
Ehh. Well, I am sort of serious. I really do have a strong aversion to capitalism.

Chances are, MGM didn't want him transferring those shows because if people have the movie files on their computer- what will they need the DVD box set for. Hence, their motives are most likely monetary.

I feel that the arguement of "protecting" media is kinda void. What are you protecting it from? You can't just say its yours, and even if you do, no one will believe you.

If someone is sharing someone else's vision with the world to those who may not have a chance to see it otherwise, shouldn't that be looked upon as a positive thing?

In fact, I feel that because you have used their copyrighted material to make your own images, that you are very well stealing more than those who share recorded eps.

brihana25
August 25th, 2004, 10:14 AM
Ehh. Well, I am sort of serious. I really do have a strong aversion to capitalism.

Ahhh... see, I don't. :) But it's the economic system that I was raised with, and the thought that I can earn my way up is something I find very appealing. But that's a whole other discussion.


Chances are, MGM didn't want him transferring those shows because if people have the movie files on their computer- what will they need the DVD box set for. Hence, their motives are most likely monetary.

This is why copyright law exists - to keep unauthorized persons from making money from someone else's creation, so yes - of course the motive was monetary. But it only became that way when Adam refused to cooperate. Had he simply stopped uploading the episodes, there would have been no motive to pursue any legal action against him.


I feel that the arguement of "protecting" media is kinda void. What are you protecting it from? You can't just say its yours, and even if you do, no one will believe you.

Do you honestly think that no one "believes" that Stargate is MGM's property?

And yes, if I made it with my own two hands, I can just say it's mine, because it is. Filing for legal copyright status with the US Copyright Office only makes my rights more enforceable, it doesn't "create" them. Every piece of art, every piece of writing, every piece of copyrightable material - once published - is automatically copyright to its creator.

If it's mine, it's mine. And if I catch you making money off of it, I'm going to be more than a little ticked off.


If someone is sharing someone else's vision with the world to those who may not have a chance to see it otherwise, shouldn't that be looked upon as a positive thing?

Not if doing so infringes on the copyright holder's property rights or detracts from the value of their holdings. And offering the episodes for free download, right alongside the sale of legal copies, affects MGM's earnings.


In fact, I feel that because you have used their copyrighted material to make your own images, that you are very well stealing more than those who share recorded eps.

Um... I believe I just said that I am very aware that what I do is only at MGM's discretion. Yes, I use their official images to make wallpapers. Yes, I use their DVDs to make videos. Yes, I use their characters in my stories. And if I ever cross the line and go too far for their tastes, they will tell me, and I will take them all down.

But no, I'm not stealing "more" or "less" than Adam did. Bottom line is we're both stealing from MGM without their permission. It's a matter of intent and proportion.

I use portions of the episodes - most times completely out of context - and in so doing I create completely new and seperate (derivative) works and transmit them in an entirely different format. I have never, and will never, offer entire episodes for download on my site. That's a line that I cannot and will not cross - not only because it's wrong, but because I am fully aware of the ramifications it may have for other members of the fandom.

What if MGM now, because of Adam, decides to come after all of us for infringement? What if this one man going as far as he did, for as long as he did, has convinced them that none of us can be trusted? What if GW, OS, AbydosGate... what if every single Stargate site on the web got shut down because of this?

Would you still think Adam didn't do anything wrong?

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 10:39 AM
Would you still think Adam didn't do anything wrong?

No, I'd just blame it on MGM for taking it too far. I think piracy is great.

Ugly Pig
August 25th, 2004, 11:31 AM
Chances are, MGM didn't want him transferring those shows because if people have the movie files on their computer- what will they need the DVD box set for. Hence, their motives are most likely monetary.
Exactly. Then you go on to ask this:

I feel that the arguement of "protecting" media is kinda void. What are you protecting it from?
You already answered your own question above. If a work is not protected by copyright, people won't pay for it.

Now you can preach all you want about "the evils of capitalism", but consider this: If it wasn't for copyright law, artists would not be able to sell their works (because people would copy it for free). If artists were not able to sell their works, they couldn't afford to do them. Hence, there'd be nothing for you to copy or buy.

You say you think piracy is great. If everyone felt that way, we wouldn't have Stargate. Or other movies, music, video games... you name it. And that is an absolute certainty.

prion
August 25th, 2004, 11:46 AM
Ehh. Well, I am sort of serious. I really do have a strong aversion to capitalism.

well, if it wasn't for capitalism, stargate wouldn't even exist as it, as well as all other tv shows, as they are created to make money. Yes, evil capitalism as it's best :rolleyes:

One thing I must say is that MGm offers some of the best prices on their DVD box sets for SG1. I've seen season 1 of some shows go for $100+, so getting SG1 at $50 (if you shop around) is very good.

Again, that's capitalism at work too.

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 12:43 PM
Well fortunately, not everyone thinks piracy is great.

As for the prices of the DVD box sets, if you downloaded them all the price of it wouldn't matter anyway, would it? Can you really say that TV shows wouldn't exist if it wasn't for capitalism?

FYI- I do buy the DVD box sets, but have downloaded all of S7 because I missed the entire season. I do intend on purchasing it when it comes out.

ADDENUM: I would also like to add, that many futuristic sci-fi shows and movies like Star Trek are relatively close to a form of national socialism.

Skydiver
August 25th, 2004, 12:48 PM
Captiolism is the system we live with. for better or for worse.

And bri brought up a good point. There are other fandoms that are nowhere near as tolerant as MGM and Stargate are. fanfiction.net will refuse to publish fan works based on origianal works of some authors, because those authors have asked ff.net not to.

It's my understanding that Lucasfilm is most protective of Star Wars, Paramount has been known to be pissy more than once over Trek, JK Rowling tolerates fanfic, as long as it's not either slash or above an R rating, i'm not sure which

Basically, we exist because the original copyright owners LET us exist. People like Adam endanger that.

and IIRC, there was also something with him involving the promise of dvd players that were never delivered after they were paid for. This gentleman has a long standing reputation of behaving less than honorably. IMHO, he got what was coming to him and I just hope that he hasn't managed to ruin it for the rest of us.

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 12:51 PM
I didn't know about that. Scammers deserve to be taken down. :mad:

I'm sorry if I seemed as if I were standing up for this guy. I meant it in no such light.

Skydiver
August 25th, 2004, 12:56 PM
aschen, it's your opinion. you're entitled to it.

capitolism is far, far, far from perfect. But it's all we got :)

As to Adam....it's between him, his conscience and his lawyers.

I never downloaded from him, never paid him so it doesn't concern me other than any future ramifications that may result from this

aschen
August 25th, 2004, 03:52 PM
aschen, it's your opinion. you're entitled to it.

capitolism is far, far, far from perfect. But it's all we got :)

As to Adam....it's between him, his conscience and his lawyers.

I never downloaded from him, never paid him so it doesn't concern me other than any future ramifications that may result from this
Agreed. Unfortunately, not everyone feels I should be entitled to my opinions. I honestly never even heard of that guy or that site until today.

How do such hearings go these days anyway?

Andy867
August 25th, 2004, 09:13 PM
Oh, and for those who were wondering about his site being overseas, if the gov'ts recognize the Interpol agreement, as well as the United States' stand on copyrighted material. then the DOJ as well as the FBI would have full jurisdiction, especially since it originately started in the US.

Teal'c
August 31st, 2004, 04:27 PM
I'd like to point out that if it weren't for Adam I wouldn't be here today (In Stargate fandom) and MGM would not have made the money from the DVDs I purchased. That said, there was some controversy a few years back when SG-1 Archive's message board was part of The Midas Array (www.midasarray.com/vb) and nobody seemed to receive the DVD players they ordered through the site.

Also, I'm pretty damn sure SG-1 Archive's episodes were gone long before April 2003... I remember having to download Season 6 from alternate sources, and that was June 2002...

Andy867
August 31st, 2004, 06:27 PM
But the article said that they had been tracking him for 3 years, which would place it back to 2001 or sooner. They probably had to wait ont he Federal Prosecution to be convinced that there was enough evidence built up against the invididual that case would have no choice but to proceed.

prion
October 18th, 2004, 04:37 PM
<http://www.nbc4.tv/entertainment/3830198/detail.html> reports:

Man Pleads Guilty In TV Show Website Dispute
Man Allegedly Moved Site Overseas After Receiving Cease, Desist
Letters

POSTED: 2:12 pm PDT October 18, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Cincinnati man who runs a Web site based on the
science fiction TV series "Stargate SG-1" pleaded guilty Monday to a
misdemeanor copyright infringement charge involving episodes of the show.

Adam Clark McGaughey, 35, is free on bond pending sentencing Jan. 24
before U.S. District Court Judge George H. King, said Assistant U.S.
Attorney Wes Hsu.

McGaughey is facing up to a year in prison, with a felony charge
against him expected to be dismissed at the time of sentencing,
according to the prosecutor.

Authorities alleged earlier this year that McGaughey gave visitors to
his Web site a chance to download episodes of the show, which airs on
Showtime and UPN.

After getting letters from the Motion Picture Association of America
asking him to stop, McGaughey allegedly moved his site overseas.

He was accused of profiting through advertising and links on the site.

The case against him stemmed from an FBI investigation.

MartoufMarty
October 18th, 2004, 05:14 PM
Wow.

They need to update their info! It doesn't air on Showtime, and I never heard of it airing on UPN.

Wow though. I remember when I first became a Stargate SG-1 fan downloading episodes from his site...

DJFavorite
October 18th, 2004, 05:40 PM
Wow.

They need to update their info! It doesn't air on Showtime, and I never heard of it airing on UPN.

Wow though. I remember when I first became a Stargate SG-1 fan downloading episodes from his site...
SG1 airs on UPN in sydincation.

Perhaps the reason they mention Showtime and not SciFi, is perhaps when they started the investigation, it was on Showtime and the reporter is only giving out the facts as it is written in FBI investigation reports.

MartoufMarty
October 18th, 2004, 05:47 PM
SG1 airs on UPN in sydincation.

Perhaps the reason they mention Showtime and not SciFi, is perhaps when they started the investigation, it was on Showtime and the reporter is only giving out the facts as it is written in FBI investigation reports.
Ah. I never knew that it aired on UPN. I know that sometimes it's on FOX and CBS and half a dozen Canadian channels at any given time. I swear I can find Stargate SG-1 on every hour, of every day almost. On day we just sort of watched Stargate on NTV, then Global, and Space and CH, and the other CH channel.

Erik Pasternak
October 18th, 2004, 05:59 PM
Ah. I never knew that it aired on UPN. I know that sometimes it's on FOX and CBS and half a dozen Canadian channels at any given time. I swear I can find Stargate SG-1 on every hour, of every day almost. On day we just sort of watched Stargate on NTV, then Global, and Space and CH, and the other CH channel.
Lucky. I wish SG-1 would be on all the time here. :(

Andy867
October 18th, 2004, 07:03 PM
there should be a strictly Stargate Channel:) With Discussions of the show, interviews, showing episodes, and merchandise selling (like the Home Shopping Network) it COULD do well.

MartoufMarty
October 18th, 2004, 07:04 PM
there should be a strictly Stargate Channel:) With Discussions of the show, interviews, showing episodes, and merchandise selling (like the Home Shopping Network) it COULD do well.
I would buy it lol.

And I'd probably watch it 3/4 of the day!

Major Fischer
October 18th, 2004, 07:27 PM
It could be the law enforcement source. They aren't always known for getting their facts right when it comes to scifi anything. I work in the role playing game industry and there is a rather famous case about fifteen years ago where the secret service began an investigation, confescated computers, and nearly bankrupted a publisher because they mistook a blade runner like game about future cyberpunk stuff for a guide to computer hacking.

I own a copy of the resulting book for the collectors value alone. It took them a VERY long time to get their computers back and the Secret Service was still telling them "you don't understand, this is not a game."

prion
October 19th, 2004, 05:56 AM
Wow.

They need to update their info! It doesn't air on Showtime, and I never heard of it airing on UPN.

Wow though. I remember when I first became a Stargate SG-1 fan downloading episodes from his site...

It began on showtime (five seasons) and yes it sure as heck does air on UPN. I see it twice a week on UPN.

However, the fact that he profited from downloads is the big bugaboo. Had he not made money, and listened to hte C&D orders, he wouldn't be in court. There is a limit to how much TPTB will turn a blind eye to fan activities, but this crossed the line.

Skydiver
October 19th, 2004, 07:27 AM
the upn reference is probably the syndicated shows....which air on whatever network the local station is affiliated with

round here, channel 43 is part fox, part upn

KatG
October 19th, 2004, 09:28 AM
I've seen season 1 of some shows go for $100+, so getting SG1 at $50 (if you shop around) is very good.

I actually get them at Sam's Club for $40 and some cents. Not bad at all.

Darren
October 19th, 2004, 01:13 PM
The article is from a specific city paper (L.A., I think), so they'll be specific to the stations it airs (aired) in their readers' neck of the woods.

Andy867
October 19th, 2004, 01:26 PM
I picked up S7 at best buy for 42.99 (before my $10 Reward Zone coupons);)

Melyanna
October 19th, 2004, 04:36 PM
Captiolism is the system we live with. for better or for worse.

And bri brought up a good point. There are other fandoms that are nowhere near as tolerant as MGM and Stargate are. fanfiction.net will refuse to publish fan works based on origianal works of some authors, because those authors have asked ff.net not to.

It's my understanding that Lucasfilm is most protective of Star Wars, Paramount has been known to be pissy more than once over Trek, JK Rowling tolerates fanfic, as long as it's not either slash or above an R rating, i'm not sure which

Anne Rice and Terry Goodkind are among the least tolerant of authors out there, for whatever reason. Marion Zimmer Bradley was as well, after an incident in which a fan sued her for allegedly stealing one of his ideas. Lucasfilm has an attitude of look the other way when it comes to fan fic — the only times they've come crashing down on people is when they are either making money off it (like the guy who tried to sell the "script" of Episode III a couple years back on eBay) or if a collection of fics is really, really obscene.

Paramount has gone on a rampage with 'zines and fan sites a few times, but they usually calm down after a while. J. K. Rowling, as far as I know, has not had any sites shut down for slash or explicit material. One of the largest and most respected HP sites on the web allows R-rated fics, as well as limited slash (Sirius/Remus, to be specific). (However, about three years ago Warner Bros. tried to have some sites shut down, on copyright issues.)

I don't know how the SG-1 PTB really feel about the issue. Given the fact that fan fic authors have been hired to write published novels in the franchise, I'd say they don't care. And they probably don't pay much attention to the less mainstream offerings of fan fic, as there are plenty of sites out there that deal exclusively with Jack/Daniel, or with NC17 Sam/Jack. But the minute someone starts making money off of it, there are bound to be problems — in fact, I've understood that a fan artist has recently gotten into serious trouble for selling her SG-1 drawings.

A law school friend of mine just explained it to me this way — most of the time they'll look the other way if it's derivative, if you're taking their characters and settings and doing your own thing with them. The problem comes when you're just copying, as in taking their product and putting it on your website. When that happens, you're taking profit away from the copyright holder.

Technically it's all a violation of copyright, but they tend only to be tetchy about it when the latter happens.

Mel

Skydiver
October 19th, 2004, 04:52 PM
I know i've read anne rice in interviews openly not liking anyone messing with her characters.

her right. she made the world.

and what i may have heard about rowling was a dislike of slash involving the kids WHEN they're kids. which is kiddie porn....it;s just kiddie porn with fictional characters

And i think you're right. Playing is one thing. If fans are doing it for fun, not taking any money from mgm's coffers, tracking them down is usuallly more trouble than it's worth

but if they're making money, then instead of 'hey, we're just having fun' as an excuse, it turns into 'yeah, but your fun is ruining our bottom line'

not to mention the confusion caused. there are people out there that will buy a fan made item and think that it's official. then if that item is of a lower quality, then the official owners reputation suffers

Jprime
October 19th, 2004, 06:27 PM
It could be the law enforcement source. They aren't always known for getting their facts right when it comes to scifi anything. I work in the role playing game industry and there is a rather famous case about fifteen years ago where the secret service began an investigation, confescated computers, and nearly bankrupted a publisher because they mistook a blade runner like game about future cyberpunk stuff for a guide to computer hacking.

I own a copy of the resulting book for the collectors value alone. It took them a VERY long time to get their computers back and the Secret Service was still telling them "you don't understand, this is not a game."

What game was it?

Jprime
October 19th, 2004, 06:31 PM
I know i've read anne rice in interviews openly not liking anyone messing with her characters.

her right. she made the world.

and what i may have heard about rowling was a dislike of slash involving the kids WHEN they're kids. which is kiddie porn....it;s just kiddie porn with fictional characters

And i think you're right. Playing is one thing. If fans are doing it for fun, not taking any money from mgm's coffers, tracking them down is usuallly more trouble than it's worth

but if they're making money, then instead of 'hey, we're just having fun' as an excuse, it turns into 'yeah, but your fun is ruining our bottom line'

not to mention the confusion caused. there are people out there that will buy a fan made item and think that it's official. then if that item is of a lower quality, then the official owners reputation suffers

:eek:

And if you think THAT was nasty, you should have read a fanfic I read a while ago with Fox Mulder/Harry Potter slash. I bet some people stay awake at night coming up with these compinations...

Major Fischer
October 19th, 2004, 06:33 PM
What game was it?

GURPS Cyberpunk by Steve Jackson Games.

It's detailed by the company with links to actual documents in the case at SJ Games vs. the Secret Service (http://www.sjgames.com/SS/)

Jprime
October 19th, 2004, 06:36 PM
ARRRRG that name seems SO familiar! What does GURPS stand for?

Major Fischer
October 19th, 2004, 07:10 PM
ARRRRG that name seems SO familiar! What does GURPS stand for?

Generic Universal Role Playing System.

It's suppose to be a dice system/game mechanic that would fit in any world or setting. They just released the 4th edition of it's core book. About the only people who think it's any of the things that it's name implies are it's publishers.

But the company produces some REALLY nice world books. GURPS Cyberpunk suffers because it's 15 years old and computers have changed so fast that it's a little bit too much fantasy now, but I for one really like their historical works. I got a by name credit in their World War II Britian book... ;)

Jprime
October 19th, 2004, 07:24 PM
Oh god I feel like a freaking gamer HERETIC!

Major Fischer
October 19th, 2004, 07:36 PM
Oh god I feel like a freaking gamer HERETIC!

Don't be. GURPS is famous for being the RPG line where people by the source book and don't use the system.

Skydiver
October 20th, 2004, 04:40 AM
:eek:

And if you think THAT was nasty, you should have read a fanfic I read a while ago with Fox Mulder/Harry Potter slash. I bet some people stay awake at night coming up with these compinations...

i've read some absolutely bizarre things in fic. such as jack beating jonas to death, getting off because jonas surely deserved it seeing as he was such a mean horrible person.

or legacy playing out a different way with the aspect of jack, janet and sam being in that lab and getting infected with the linvirs. can't go into details here since it's a pg forum, but let's jsut say that it was an adult movie

folks have odd ideas all the time. I wrote a dark fic where daniel survived meridian but was driven mad byu what had happened. and another where sam cracked up and killed people.

sometmes dark fic is an exploration of the characters beyond the limits of teh show.....other times, yeah, it could be seen as a competition of who can come up with the most extreme circumstances

but, back to topid :)

Until a person knows the creator's bounds with their characters, how possessive and protective they are of them, i think it's best to tread lightly when 'borrowing'

Some authors and creators don't care. others do.
and it's very possible that the main reason MGM is starting to care now (after 7 years of TOTALLY neglecting the show) is because it's getting popular now. and if those folks are making money, then it's easier for MGM to justify spending the thousands of dollars in lawyer fees to shut them down.

prion
October 20th, 2004, 05:15 AM
i've read some absolutely bizarre things in fic. such as jack beating jonas to death, getting off because jonas surely deserved it seeing as he was such a mean horrible person.

was that the story where jack beat up jonas with the hockey stick? i recall a big bruhaha over that story, which I found and read, and he hadn't killed Jonas (I don't think I"ve seen any jonas death fic but then i don't waste my time looking for it either). it was a bizarre story, but probably no less bizarre than some slash or ship or any other genre fanfic I"ve read.

As for writers being upset over their fictional characters being slashed (or whatever) by fans, it's within their rights. Harry Potter slash grosses me out. I don't see why people want to read stories of Harry adn Snape 'doing it." eeeuuuu. But authors of books have more to protect than tv shows - their work is predominantly written, so fanfic writers can take away audience. TV shows, it doesn't happen. People will continue to watch the show and read or write fic.

Skydiver
October 20th, 2004, 06:49 AM
there will always be people that will watch a show and have nothing to do with the fandom. fact of life. online fans are a literal drop in the bucket when it comes to total viewership, and really don't matter to the ratings unless they happen to have a neilson box on the top of their set.

however, a lot of the fans that participate in merchandising, cons, etc, are the online fans. tick them off and it does have an effect.

I can understand any creator being possessive about what they've created. but, when it comes down to MGM, it seems to boil down to money.

Major Fischer
October 20th, 2004, 06:55 AM
I think, as Skydiver says, that online fans have to always remember that they do not represent the average or the majority of the ratings. We're important to TPTB because of merchendise and cons, but we are not the be all and end all of the entire fandom.

We're the extremes, and there is a tendency in the extremes to believe that a place like gateworld reflects what the mass of television viewers are thinking. We don't.

prion
October 20th, 2004, 07:54 AM
I can understand any creator being possessive about what they've created. but, when it comes down to MGM, it seems to boil down to money.

Well, MGM isn't making SG1 or SGA out of hte goodness of their heart. They're a business, SG is a product. Simple as that. Fans just tend to love the product a lot more than the average person loves a bar of soap :D

michelleb
October 20th, 2004, 08:05 AM
GURPS Cyberpunk by Steve Jackson Games.

It's detailed by the company with links to actual documents in the case at SJ Games vs. the Secret Service (http://www.sjgames.com/SS/)


reading that, it's quite worrying how much of the evidence they got from legal bulletin boards..makes you realise that they could be watching you at anytime, anywhere, that if i write my candid opinion on a member of the government or the policies, i could be red-flagged for it. that's scary.

Major Fischer
October 20th, 2004, 08:11 AM
reading that, it's quite worrying how much of the evidence they got from legal bulletin boards..makes you realise that they could be watching you at anytime, anywhere, that if i write my candid opinion on a member of the government or the policies, i could be red-flagged for it. that's scary.

And that was in 1990 when the you still had to dial up a forum long distance.

Sy~
October 23rd, 2004, 04:01 PM
I wondered why things stopped being added onto it. It was a good site that... especially since being in the UK I missed out on loads of the episodes for about a year.

Its a shame that he got done for it.. I wonder who tipped them off? But I guess at the end of the day, if MGM didnt enforce it, how could they make their money from dvd box sets, advertising from main corperation channels etc etc when someone was doing it for free.

I think if I ever get rich, I'll buy a little island somewhere and put up all the episodes from all my fav sci fi... and nobody could sew me... and if the American Govenment wanted to put a stop to it, Id show the the middle of my five fingers.

Sy~

Sy~
October 24th, 2004, 12:40 PM
Ohh, Im scared I got a negative point and whoever gave it said Im "Unintelligent"

loser :rolleyes:

Sy~

prion
October 25th, 2004, 05:45 AM
Its a shame that he got done for it.. I wonder who tipped them off? But I guess at the end of the day, if MGM didnt enforce it, how could they make their money from dvd box sets, advertising from main corperation channels etc etc when someone was doing it for free.
Sy~

I sincerely doubt anybody 'tipped off' MGM. MGM was well aware of the site, they reportedly sent C&D notices, which were ignored and then the site moved overseas (which doesn't do any good if the person doing the site is in the States). What the site owner was doing was putting up downloads of SG1 on his site, and profiting from it. He had advertising on the site; when people went to his site, he made money from those ads, hence, the more he pushed hte downloads, etc, the more money he made. MGM doesn't consider theft of copyrighted materials for profit to be 'free advertising'.