Curse

Inde · Oct 05, 2009, 09:14 PM // 21:14

I can't be the only one who knew that mentioning original/copyright/3rd party as part of the contest rules and guidelines meant exactly what Regina stated. You can't "own" a build. Goes back to my first post on just common sense that there are no original builds.

While I understand people's frustration on copy+paste and on submitted builds not being part of the meta... what Regina stated is factual. I didn't find the contest rules misleading so this would come down to perception and interpretation on the part of the user. Which no, ArenaNet can't be responsible for the majority of the time. You'd be amazed how a single sentence can be taken so many different ways. What the official rules stated was pretty typical legal jargon.

And please don't make posts calling out the community to "tear something apart" and encourage flaming.

]HM[ Sabre Wolf · Oct 05, 2009, 09:19 PM // 21:19

Regina does have a point... The skills and the pictures and all are the properity of ANET... so any combonation of the skills combined would be a property of theirs. So the Third Party site would be PvX which has promissions from ANET to use the skills... In essence, since ANET own the skills, they own the rights to the builds which are made up of said skills. So no matter what can be said if the builds were taken from PvX, Gamependium or Team Builder... ANET still owns the rights to the skills used... so no infringement is actually possiable in the end.

Karate Jesus · Oct 05, 2009, 09:19 PM // 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inde

I can't be the only one who knew that mentioning original/copyright/3rd party as part of the contest rules and guidelines meant exactly what Regina stated. You can't "own" a build. Goes back to my first post on just common sense that there are no original builds.

While I understand people's frustration on copy+paste and on submitted builds not being part of the meta... what Regina stated is factual. I didn't find the contest rules misleading so this would come down to perception and interpretation on the part of the user. Which no, ArenaNet can't be responsible for the majority of the time. You'd be amazed how a single sentence can be taken so many different ways. What the official rules stated was pretty typical legal jargon.

And please don't make posts calling out the community to "tear something apart" and encourage flaming.

I was only joking with the "tear it apart" thing. And tbh, I understood the legal jargon and I'm sure most other people understood it too. However, Martin's and Regina's words about "originality" made it sound as if they didn't want meta builds/PvX builds to be part of the contest.

If I'm misinterpreting what they said, please feel free to explain to me how I'm getting this wrong. I'll happily quote Martin's comments here again about originally and staying away from "niche meta builds" if necessary.

EDIT: And obviously no one had any claim to copyright infringement. Anet owns the skills. I was just more surprised that she is claiming that that's what they meant by "originality", which is obviously false. How could we have possibly used "original" skills that don't exist inside GW?

Pheenix Down · Oct 05, 2009, 09:28 PM // 21:28

"Entries must be the submission of the contestant and cannot be taken from any other source."

And yet hundreds of people, some who are PvE'ers, suddenly happen to come up with the exact same skillbars, skill for skill.

How can you not see the rule being broken here?

]HM[ Sabre Wolf · Oct 05, 2009, 09:53 PM // 21:53

no rule was broken... ANET owns all the skills which means they own all the builds... its up to all of us to come up with the combonations.

as for the rule breaking for me personally... I felt that we were suppose to submit off-meta builds... not the current meta builds...

El Presidente · Oct 05, 2009, 09:56 PM // 21:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina

Guys, the official rules state: "Entries must be the submission of the contestant and cannot be taken from any other source. Your submission must not infringe on any patent, copyright, trademark or other intellectual property right, or any privacy, publicity or publishing rights of any third party, or be libelous, obscene or otherwise contrary to law."
This means that entries should be original to the extent that they do not violate another person's copyright or trademark. The skills used in Guild Wars are owned by ArenaNet, the sponsors of this contest. Using those skills and putting them into particular combinations is not violating a third party's rights. That is what's meant by "originality". --Regina Buenaobra 20:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Regina, you certainly are no lawyer...

The bold part is where you screwed up in the rules. Any first year law student can rip your explanation on "originality" to pieces. "...any other source" includes PvXwiki, whether or not Anet "owns" the skills or gave PxXwiki permission to use those. It is still from another source!

If I take a line from a famous author and claim it to be mine, it's plagiarism. If I take the same line and change one word, it's still not original. It was original as the idea (as a whole) of the author, not me.

Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

Copy/paste of a build and changing one skill...well, any reasonable person can see it's plagiarism (meaning, not original). Now, add in Martin's statement to the above and you'll see your flawed explanation, Regina. A copy/pasted build/skill bar from PvXwiki therefore negates any win due to it "taken from another source". Follow?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inde

You'd be amazed how a single sentence can be taken so many different ways. What the official rules stated was pretty typical legal jargon.

Yes, and legal jargon can be interpreted 100 different ways by 100 different lawyers. It's why we have the Supreme Court for the final say (well, in most cases).

snaek · Oct 05, 2009, 09:57 PM // 21:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by regina buenaobra

This means that entries should be original to the extent that they do not violate another person's copyright or trademark. The skills used in Guild Wars are owned by ArenaNet, the sponsors of this contest. Using those skills and putting them into particular combinations is not violating a third party's rights. That is what's meant by "originality".

damn... you mean i can't submit my awesome wow retribution paladin build? i was really hoping to win with that.

but for real though... this rule makes absolutely no sense. it is 100% impossible to submit a "non-original" build (according to your definition) thereby rendering this rule pointless (hire better writers?). so one can only assume you are meant to fully create your own build, i.e. not copy-n-paste build comes from pvxwiki. i'll admit that some people are going overboard with the pvxwiki copying, but it is pretty clear that a few entries are a result of this, i.e. the mindblast bar.

regardless of what "official rules" are, the guidelines given were that originality was going to be considered, and meta builds were likely to be discarded. so whether or not it is against the rules (i don't care either way), the build selections were horrible.

personally i don't care if the winners still get their prizes even if most don't "deserve" it--simply rename this "contest of skill" to a "lottery of luck" (although i think scrapping it entirely would be ideal). just please fix the henchie problem... and no, ai tweaking is not good enough. tbh, i think anet is scared to change the skillbars because then the people who won didn't really win with their skillbar (thus pissing off more people)...but it has to be done. that or remove heroes+henchies all together.

Pheenix Down · Oct 05, 2009, 09:59 PM // 21:59

Doesn't matter if Anet owns all the skills or combinations of all the skills since you had to follow the rules of the contest.

And their rules explicitly state: "Entries must be the submission of the contestant and cannot be taken from any other source."

And yet, hundreds of people, some who are PvE'ers, suddenly happen to come up with the exact same skillbars, skill for skill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ]HM[ Sabre Wolf

no rule was broken...

Then explain the discrepancy between these two facts.

Karate Jesus · Oct 05, 2009, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

damn... you mean i can't submit my awesome wow retribution paladin build? i was really hoping to win with that.

Apparently my builds with skills like Chidori and Kamehameha were disqualified.

Damn.

Wait.....how the hell could "original" mean "not using skills that aren't in GW". There seems to be some.....line there that got crossed.

Martin Firestorm · Oct 05, 2009, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Presidente

Regina, you certainly are no lawyer...

To which she no doubt is thinking "thank God for that."

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Presidente

The bold part is where you screwed up in the rules. Any first year law student can rip your explanation on "originality" to pieces. "...any other source" includes PvXwiki, whether or not Anet "owns" the skills or gave PxXwiki permission to use those. It is still from another source!...

Look, since you're so knowledgable about the law, isn't this like telling a court that it can't interpret a statute the way it believes is correct? Anet is the court here: its their contest, their skills, their virtual world. Anet IS the law in GW. You can complain about the bars, but all this crap about IP law, law in general, and law according to first year law students, is stupid when applied to this little thing some of us call a game. And even stupider when applied to what is ultimately a meaningless contest within a game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Presidente

Yes, and legal jargon can be interpreted 100 different ways by 100 different lawyers. It's why we have the Supreme Court for the final say (well, in most cases).

The supreme court, huh? Perhaps you are taking this a bit too seriously. Or maybe you should file your writ application now. Surely one of them would want to hear argument on this novel issue, given the important national implications and all.

Draikin · Oct 05, 2009, 10:22 PM // 22:22

I don't think there's any point in arguing semantics and debate about what the rules actually meant, that's not going to get us anywhere. The main problem here is that Anet led people to believe that they weren't going to pick the popular meta builds. I certainly understand people's frustration when they see RaO thumpers, assassins with a Jagged Strike -> Fox Fangs -> Death Blossom combo and Elementalist skill bars with 5 AoE attacks winning the contest, especially when very few of the builds are actually optimized for AI use.

El Presidente · Oct 05, 2009, 10:34 PM // 22:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Firestorm

Anet is the court here: its their contest, their skills, their virtual world. Anet IS the law in GW.

Uh, not quite. Their contest is bound by the laws of the states and countries to which it was offered to players. It's one of the reasons they offered it to only select states/countries... Read what they'd have to do to let those in Quebec participate, as one example, and you'll see why Anet opted out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Firestorm

The supreme court, huh? Perhaps you are taking this a bit too seriously. Or maybe you should file your writ application now. Surely one of them would want to hear argument on this novel issue, given the important national implications and all.

If you even followed what I replied to, it was in reference to the prior "legal jargon" comment, meaning ~ even a lower court's opinion/interpretation is subject to reversal...all the way to the Supreme Court. So, do some research and see how many "contest" cases actually do wind up in the court system. You'd be surprised at the number.

Kisuro · Oct 05, 2009, 10:34 PM // 22:34

Quote:

Guys, the official rules state: "Entries must be the submission of the contestant and cannot be taken from any other source. Your submission must not infringe on any patent, copyright, trademark or other intellectual property right, or any privacy, publicity or publishing rights of any third party, or be libelous, obscene or otherwise contrary to law."
This means that entries should be original to the extent that they do not violate another person's copyright or trademark. The skills used in Guild Wars are owned by ArenaNet, the sponsors of this contest. Using those skills and putting them into particular combinations is not violating a third party's rights. That is what's meant by "originality"

Really? Gosh darn it, and there I was, using WoW and War skills in my builds, thinking that that'll be reeeally original. Now I know why I didn't win anything, I clearly broke the originality rule.
[/sarcasm]

Are you serious? You really mean to tell us that the originality rule was there only to enforce the fact that we need to use only skills that are in GW and nothing else? Congratulations, youmay have just found the lamest excuse ever.

Fril Estelin · Oct 05, 2009, 10:36 PM // 22:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Presidente

Copy/paste of a build and changing one skill...well, any reasonable person can see it's plagiarism (meaning, not original). Now, add in Martin's statement to the above and you'll see your flawed explanation, Regina. A copy/pasted build/skill bar from PvXwiki therefore negates any win due to it "taken from another source". Follow?

How can you prove that the people that submitted the builds explicitly copied PvX? What about the fact that the current meta implies that many people know builds without knowing where they come from? What about people actually coming up with these builds on their own without knowing PvX? However imaginary and improbable these situations are, they are the ones that Anet can't argue against. Hence, they have to accept the signature of the contestants as saying that they obeyed the rules, which Anet interprets to be enough for the intent and purposes of this contest.

In my job as university lecturer, I came accross several cases of plagiarism where reasonable doubt was enough for the case to be dismissed at the early stage of the enquiry, despite my professional opinion giving me the confidence that the students did indeed plagiarise (although depending on the exact definition of term, certain clauses can be difficult to meet, see for example requiring to prove "intention" to plagiarise). And contrarily to this contest, these were very real and significant cases. So don't blow it out of proportion please.

JR · Oct 05, 2009, 10:40 PM // 22:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

If Joe Kimmes said that they'd work on Infuse and look at Frenzy if necessary, there may be things possible. He even said "[AI is] one of the easier things to tweak" and "Compared to a lot of things in the game, skill AI is often easy to update". Sure, players do see the results of this code every single day and many know the limits better than programmers.

My point was that tweaking AI can not solve this issue. Not that it was too hard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

I think, as many PvPers, you're thinking about these skills with the highly-skilled use that only humans can do, whereas the programmers don't see it that way. Any program can be beaten, you simply have to make it "good enough", which depends on player skills I guess. So for a lot of players it may be "challenging", for the good players it'll always be easy after a certain point. Yet I imagine that if henchmen kick in whenever there's a dc, it could improve many PvP games.

You've strung together some mighty fine words, but I have absolutely no idea what your point is.

Kashrlyyk · Oct 05, 2009, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karate Jesus

Here's Regina's latest response on GWW:

Btw, here's the link for those of you that'd like to talk to Reggie in person: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback_talk:Regina_Buenaobra#The_Henchmen_Contes t

Love your reaction to Regina`s post on the wiki. All the questions from all the other users are great too.

Pheenix Down · Oct 05, 2009, 10:44 PM // 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

How can you prove that the people that submitted the builds explicitly copied PvX? What about the fact that the current meta implies that many people know builds without knowing where they come from? What about people actually coming up with these builds on their own without knowing PvX? However imaginary and improbable these situations are, they are the ones that Anet can't argue against. Hence, they have to accept the signature of the contestants as saying that they obeyed the rules, which Anet interprets to be enough for the intent and purposes of this contest.

In my job as university lecturer, I came accross several cases of plagiarism where reasonable doubt was enough for the case to be dismissed at the early stage of the enquiry. And contrarily to this contest, these were very real and significant cases. So don't blow it out of proportion please.

Many of us took the time to not only make our builds original, but viable in terms of AI usage. To belittle the time and effort we exerted in our endeavours does little justice to your role as a mentoring status.

Fril Estelin · Oct 05, 2009, 10:44 PM // 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

You've strung together some mighty fine words, but I have absolutely no idea what your point is.

In simple words: AI may be difficult enough for a player with "average" skill; you're not of average skill, thus complain about this AI, which is fine for most players. Better now?

El Presidente · Oct 05, 2009, 10:51 PM // 22:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

How can you prove that the people that submitted the builds explicitly copied PvX?

"use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another...'

How much more closer do you want some of the builds to be than off by one skill?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

despite my professional opinion giving me the confidence that the students did indeed plagiarise

Despite the majority that have posted here claiming the same...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Hence, they have to accept the signature of the contestants as saying that they obeyed the rules, which Anet interprets to be enough for the intent and purposes of this contest.

... ^that^ is all Anet cares about at this time and their hands will be washed clean.

Karate Jesus · Oct 05, 2009, 10:55 PM // 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kashrlyyk

Love your reaction to Regina`s post on the wiki. All the questions from all the other users are great too.

Yea, the IPs have really stepped up on GWW lately. They've called out this mess more often than actual users have. It's gone beyond ridiculous at this point and yet they're still trying not to address it.....which I guess is a tactic for addressing it (ignore it 'til it goes away

)