256
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2026
256 points (97.1% liked)
PC Gaming
15834 readers
1013 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Copyrights won't help you here. It's not the same code or assets
How will copyright not help here? You don't have to use the same code or assets for something to be copyright infringement. It's one thing if you personally don't believe in copyright, but just claiming that it has nothing to do with copyright because it's not a 1:1 copy is just not true.
If you made something that "just happens to look like that other thing", you'll have a hard time defending that in court (especially if you extort them beforehand). Heck, there have been copyright lawsuits over musicians using similar lyrics or melodies since forever.
That copyright protection is only against using recognisable characters, samples etc and has a high evidentiary requirement. It doesn't apply to art styles, prose, game mechanics and so on.
Fair, I'm not saying it would be easy to prove in general (if you have an extortion letter, however, it should be fairly easy), but that's what courts are for. Also this is not about copying a style or game mechanic, but the whole game. Then again, copyright law differs quite a bit between countries, so overall it depends, but saying this does not involve copyright is just not true.
It's a very muddy area. Game clones have existed ever since video games existed and using copyrights to fight this is imho going to cause a lot more problems than it solves. Sure, go after the extortionists, but stretching copyright law to do it, is going to fuck us all over.
Training data is based on copyrighted material that is stolen. Someone should be made to pay somewhere. The theft of human thought cannot be allowed to be exploited.
Copyright violations aren't stealing. Human thought cannot be "stolen", only shared.
Human thought shared between humans cannot be stolen. A billionaire's company feeding a machine all human thought for purposes of replacing said human is absolutely theft.
As for copyright, tell that to all the people fined for piracy.
Copyright violation is punishable by law, yes. But it's it's not theft.
It's immoral sure, but not theft. We don't need to equivocate to pass moral judgement.
Fair enough