694
edits
Talk:ROM hack: Difference between revisions
→Legality section
| Line 434: | Line 434: | ||
While a section on legality may belong in the article, we will NOT present any form of rom patches, rom hacks, mods, etc, as legal. First because that's simply not true (gray area), second because Bulbapedia should not be a source of legal advice, particularly not legal advice that disagrees with Nintendo's interpretation of the law. --[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 05:43, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | While a section on legality may belong in the article, we will NOT present any form of rom patches, rom hacks, mods, etc, as legal. First because that's simply not true (gray area), second because Bulbapedia should not be a source of legal advice, particularly not legal advice that disagrees with Nintendo's interpretation of the law. --[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 05:43, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
:Would rephrasing sentence(s) to be started with | :Would rephrasing sentence(s) to be started with <code>it is believed that</code> (or some form of this) instead of making a decisive statement that this is legal? Also, is this related to Pokémon Prism being DMCA'd within the past 24 hours of this edit? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 05:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
::No. "It is believed" and most other similar formulation still carry a lot of implications about the actual situation. Short of extensive sources (and I mean legal-grade sources : case law, professional legal articles, etc), and even then I'm not sure we should, this is a position we have no business taking. --[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 06:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ::No. "It is believed" and most other similar formulation still carry a lot of implications about the actual situation. Short of extensive sources (and I mean legal-grade sources : case law, professional legal articles, etc), and even then I'm not sure we should, this is a position we have no business taking. --[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 06:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
:::I'm no lawyer but I heard that ROM hacking is reverse engineering and reverse engineering is considered fair use. Don't quote me on this. This needs to be researched. Would that work if we had proper citations that legally support the stance of ROM hacking? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 07:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | :::I'm no lawyer but I heard that ROM hacking is reverse engineering and reverse engineering is considered fair use. Don't quote me on this. This needs to be researched. Would that work if we had proper citations that legally support the stance of ROM hacking? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 07:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
| Line 441: | Line 441: | ||
::::::You're welcome to look. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 07:20, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ::::::You're welcome to look. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 07:20, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
::::::As it happens, I am, in fact, a lawyer (and a vice-webmaster of Bulbagarden). I removed the text not to reflect recent events, but because legal gray area questions like that are complex and require a *lot* of work to get right. It's staying gone.--[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 07:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ::::::As it happens, I am, in fact, a lawyer (and a vice-webmaster of Bulbagarden). I removed the text not to reflect recent events, but because legal gray area questions like that are complex and require a *lot* of work to get right. It's staying gone.--[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 07:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
:::::::With that said, how should the article present the legality of ROM hacking as we currently understand it in this conversation? Not having any information is worse than it being there. Would it be better to say something along the lines of <code>it is unknown if this practice is legal or not</code>? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 07:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC) | |||