Personal beliefs and the laws to which you are upheld are two different things. I didn’t say I agree with the law. Why are you assuming my personal beliefs?
Right. So whoever did the update at Bethesda found it important to do that update. The developers of FO:London found it important to release their mod. If you ask the Bethesda employee they’d think their work was more important. If you ask the FO:L team they would say their work was more important. How do you determine whose importance was more important?
Don’t get me wrong, fuck Bethesda, but they’re the owners of the IP…whatever they say is more important is more important, paid or not…
I disagree with the fundamental assertion that software can be owned
And that’s completely valid. However, under the current legal framework, that simply isn’t the case.
Why are you using a state’s laws to determine your own sense of morality?
Personal beliefs and the laws to which you are upheld are two different things. I didn’t say I agree with the law. Why are you assuming my personal beliefs?
Because you said what they say is important is more important. That sounds like a subjective opinion to me, not an interpretation of the law.
Well, if they own the IP, under the framework under which we live, their will is factually more important. 🤷♀️
No. Importance is a metaphysical construct, not a legal one.
Right. So whoever did the update at Bethesda found it important to do that update. The developers of FO:London found it important to release their mod. If you ask the Bethesda employee they’d think their work was more important. If you ask the FO:L team they would say their work was more important. How do you determine whose importance was more important?