Hello, 

 

First of all, I think this is the right section because it deals with legal issues.

 

Ok, so on to the question. A guy recently re-uploaded a SA clans pack up to Dropbox without permission. He claimed that he had the right to re-upload it to there because the files in the pack are not allowed to be in the pack, which by the way they are, oh and if they weren't why is he reuploading these as well. This honestly makes no sense. After I stated to him that we requested he would take down the pack and that the permission was given he stated that he dared me to take him to court and that if I lose then he would counter-sue me for harassment. So my question is... can he actually go to court and do this? (oh and he stated he had a lawyer backing his statement up).

 

Here is the profile: http://sa-astclan.enjin.com/profile/3272547

I highly doubt a court would be willing to hear a case over 3rd party models in a video game.

I highly doubt a court would be willing to hear a case over 3rd party models in a video game.

 

I agree. I wanted to see what some people say.

Honestly, you can sue anyone for anything. I could sue you for even looking at me funny. But like C13 said, the court might not care or have the time to hear a case like that. You might be lucky if you do.

Dude... It's just a game, everybody's gotta calm down...

100% guarantee this would never make it into a court room.

You can sue anyone for anything, but if a court deems it frivolous, you can be subject to sanctions, ranging from having to pay the other side's legal fees, to being barred from filing lawsuits in that court without an attorney's approval (and the attorney is also subject to sanctions if they approve a frivolous lawsuit), to having a license to practice law revoked (for attorneys), all the way to being held in contempt of court (if you continue making frivolous claims after being ordered to stop). Litigation is also fairly expensive on both sides.

You pretty much can never sue someone for suing you, period (such a claim would likely be dismissed before trial).

Did you personally make or substantially modify the content in that pack? What I would do then would be to file a DMCA takedown notice with Dropbox. You actually *can* have copyright on game mods; even if they're unauthorized derivatives of the game (in which case you have no right to distribute them), you still have copyright on your changes to them and can stop *other* people from distributing them.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, at a bare minimum talk to a lawyer before you bring anything into a courtroom.

You can sue anyone for anything, but if a court deems it frivolous, you can be subject to sanctions, ranging from having to pay the other side's legal fees, to being barred from filing lawsuits in that court without an attorney's approval (and the attorney is also subject to sanctions if they approve a frivolous lawsuit), to having a license to practice law revoked (for attorneys), all the way to being held in contempt of court (if you continue making frivolous claims after being ordered to stop). Litigation is also fairly expensive on both sides.

You pretty much can never sue someone for suing you, period (such a claim would likely be dismissed before trial).

Did you personally make or substantially modify the content in that pack? What I would do then would be to file a DMCA takedown notice with Dropbox. You actually *can* have copyright on game mods; even if they're unauthorized derivatives of the game (in which case you have no right to distribute them), you still have copyright on your changes to them and can stop *other* people from distributing them.

 

These files are part of the SA clan that I am in made by our lead Commissioner. I have actually filed the DMCA report already.

It is just a game who cares about proper credits? I understand people want to be have credits for their work but they need to loosen up and understand their files are on the internet and can be stolen and claimed by anyone.

No. You're altering San Andreas without Rockstars approval so this doesn't matter, you'll probably get a fine for wasting the courts time if you try to sue them. Besides, good luck finding a lawyer to take that case. If it doesn't benefit them, they won't waste there time.

Honestly, you can sue anyone for anything. I could sue you for even looking at me funny. But like C13 said, the court might not care or have the time to hear a case like that. You might be lucky if you do.

You can't sue someone for looking at you funny. If that was the case then there would be no such thing as "poor" because of people sueing everyone because "He looked at me funny." There has to be an actual legal premise to sue someone.

I am sorry , but those GTA4 clan issues are so F""""""" CRAZY ; YALL FIGHT AND HARRASS FOR A SILLY MODEL WHICH DOESNT EVEN EXIST IN REAL LIFE . He can go to court along with you if you have used any kinda model-texture-mods which you arent supposed to be using ?

I am sorry , but those GTA4 clan issues are so F""""""" CRAZY ; YALL FIGHT AND HARRASS FOR A SILLY MODEL WHICH DOESNT EVEN EXIST IN REAL LIFE . He can go to court along with you if you have used any kinda model-texture-mods which you arent supposed to be using ?

No. He cannot recover from you for violating a third party's copyright.

@OfficerBurningBowl

You will likely NOT get a fine, because altering SA without R*'s permission does not in fact preclude you from enforcing your rights. It's not even clear the EULA is enforceable; different courts have found different things. If the model is scratch-made, you could argue it's not a derivative work, so Rockstar has no claim against you.

Furthermore, the courts don't and can't fine you for this. You have copyright interest in any creative work you make. You might not be able to legally distribute the work (e.g. models using Ford's IP without Ford's permission are violating IP law, and Ford can sue you), but you can stop anyone *else* from distributing your work. There is no basis for a fine there; you aren't even remotely wasting the court's time, because you're enforcing your rights through legal action. You just might open yourself up to legal action from Ford (and they may well begin legal action against you). "Wasting court time" generally means "you're asking for things that have no basis in reality, and you repeatedly say things and file motions that have no legal bearing on the case, and/or you keep making claims that you've been told are meritless". This would not be considered a waste of time.

Lastly, this only applies if you file suit. DMCA notices are not lawsuits. They don't go through the courts. They're designed to stop you from having to go to the courts; if the person files a counter-notice, *then* you have to either drop the matter or file suit (which is expensive, don't get me wrong). You aren't even using court time with DMCA notices.

By the way: You can *file* suit for looking at you funny. For given values of those terms, you might actually win (if your suit is "I'm being ogled by my boss", you might well win a sexual harassment suit). But if you say "I don't like the look on his face", you can still file. You're just going to have to pay the other guy's legal fees, and may find yourself unable to file *any* lawsuit without a lawyer signing off.

 

No. He cannot recover from you for violating a third party's copyright.

@OfficerBurningBowl

You will likely NOT get a fine, because altering SA without R*'s permission does not in fact preclude you from enforcing your rights. It's not even clear the EULA is enforceable; different courts have found different things. If the model is scratch-made, you could argue it's not a derivative work, so Rockstar has no claim against you.

Furthermore, the courts don't and can't fine you for this. You have copyright interest in any creative work you make. You might not be able to legally distribute the work (e.g. models using Ford's IP without Ford's permission are violating IP law, and Ford can sue you), but you can stop anyone *else* from distributing your work. There is no basis for a fine there; you aren't even remotely wasting the court's time, because you're enforcing your rights through legal action. You just might open yourself up to legal action from Ford (and they may well begin legal action against you). "Wasting court time" generally means "you're asking for things that have no basis in reality, and you repeatedly say things and file motions that have no legal bearing on the case, and/or you keep making claims that you've been told are meritless". This would not be considered a waste of time.

Lastly, this only applies if you file suit. DMCA notices are not lawsuits. They don't go through the courts. They're designed to stop you from having to go to the courts; if the person files a counter-notice, *then* you have to either drop the matter or file suit (which is expensive, don't get me wrong). You aren't even using court time with DMCA notices.

By the way: You can *file* suit for looking at you funny. For given values of those terms, you might actually win (if your suit is "I'm being ogled by my boss", you might well win a sexual harassment suit). But if you say "I don't like the look on his face", you can still file. You're just going to have to pay the other guy's legal fees, and may find yourself unable to file *any* lawsuit without a lawyer signing off.

&nbsp

Agreed.

Giving someone a funny look and ogling are pretty different. Looking at someone funny is a broad statement. That may mean someone is doing something weird, they said something odd, ect. You took that straight to sexual harassment without considering any other meaning of the statement, I obviously did too. But in the end agreed. Regardless, it would be a petty thing to sue over.

Edit: Obviously they wouldnt fine them for "waisting time." Sarcasm...whoa.

Edited June 21, 201411 yr by OfficerBurningBowl

  &nbsp

Agreed.

Giving someone a funny look and ogling are pretty different. Looking at someone funny is a broad statement. That may mean someone is doing something weird, they said something odd, ect. You took that straight to sexual harassment without considering any other meaning of the statement, I obviously did too. But in the end agreed. Regardless, it would be a petty thing to sue over.

In the following sentence, I cover the trivial interpretation I assumed was implied.

There are times you can in fact be fined for wasting court time - you can even be jailed for doing it, if you ignore an order to stop. It's just that filing lawsuits based on legitimate grounds is not a waste of court time.

 

In the following sentence, I cover the trivial interpretation I assumed was implied.

 

You also don't need a lawyer/Attorney to file a lawsuit, you can represent yourself.

   

You also don't need a lawyer/Attorney to file a lawsuit, you can represent yourself.

Courts can revoke your right to file pro se. They do this when, for instance, people make a habit of frivolous lawsuits. They can also revoke your right to appear pro se in any given trial, if you're disruptive in the courtroom - basically, disrupting court process means you waive your right to represent yourself, and a member of the bar has to sign off on all your actions.

 

Courts can revoke your right to file pro se. They do this when, for instance, people make a habit of frivolous lawsuits. They can also revoke your right to appear pro se in any given trial, if you're disruptive in the courtroom - basically, disrupting court process means you waive your right to represent yourself, and a member of the bar has to sign off on all your actions.

 

That may be, but I'm saying if he didn't have money to hire a lawyer or enough for a public defender then he could represent himself.

Edit: I got off work hours ago wanting to play lcpdfr, but im fuckin discussing court shit lol.

Edited June 21, 201411 yr by OfficerBurningBowl

  

That may be, but I'm saying if he didn't have money to hire a lawyer or enough for a public defender then he could represent himself.

Edit: I got off work hours ago wanting to play lcpdfr, but im fuckin discussing court shit lol.

Yeah, but... going pro se tends not to work so well.

BTW, public defenders are only for criminal defendants (and maybe only for those accused of felonies) - they are never appointed for civil suits, because there's no right to an attorney for civil suits.

 

Yeah, but... going pro se tends not to work so well.

BTW, public defenders are only for criminal defendants (and maybe only for those accused of felonies) - they are never appointed for civil suits, because there's no right to an attorney for civil suits.

 

Of course it won't work well unless you have knowledge of the law.

A lady somewhere in the US is suing a dead kid,  yes a dead kid whom she killed with her vehicle, and is also suing her family who wasn't even there for here "pain & anguish" the accident caused her, the fuck is wrong with society?