The creator of the Cyberpunk 2077 VR mod CD Projekt recently hit with a DMCA strike has paused his Patreon page and pulled access to all his mods after receiving another strike from a different publisher.
Looks like the Ghostrunner developers also have an issue with paid mods running off their IP.
Architectural copyright (Architektenurheberrecht) protects an architect’s original intellectual and creative achievements, including designs, plans, and completed buildings, provided they possess a sufficient level of originality (Schöpfungshöhe).
Architects can, and have, use this to deny changes to such buildings or claim injunctive relief, removal of the infringement, or financial damages.
Installing extra cabinets would most likely not be enough to seize the house, but if he can convince a judge that it will sufficient change his art he could get a order to have them removed and the original space restored again.
Not sure if this is germany only, but it shows that every bullshit is possible when it comes to laws.
Yes, but such a license agreement is fully inside the limits of the law, not beyond it. There is no violation, only a addition inside of the rules and limits of the law.
we were talking about laws that exist in Germany and perhaps somewhere else too. Are you commenting on the German law specifically and familiar enough with it to say it can be superseded by a contract?
Not really, or not always at least.
Not every law system allows to sell your copyrights. In germany for example it is only possible to license your copyrights but not to fully transfer them.
Copyrights are therefor not part of the transfer of ownership, you have to add a license agreement additionally.
In germany we have the “Architektenurheberrecht”.
Architectural copyright (Architektenurheberrecht) protects an architect’s original intellectual and creative achievements, including designs, plans, and completed buildings, provided they possess a sufficient level of originality (Schöpfungshöhe).
Architects can, and have, use this to deny changes to such buildings or claim injunctive relief, removal of the infringement, or financial damages.
Installing extra cabinets would most likely not be enough to seize the house, but if he can convince a judge that it will sufficient change his art he could get a order to have them removed and the original space restored again.
Not sure if this is germany only, but it shows that every bullshit is possible when it comes to laws.
I’m surprised and also not really.
It’s exactly the same line of thinking where someone else is given more rights over a thing than the person who owns it.
If you want to fully own it then put a exclusive and unlimited license agreement into the contract with your architect.
If there is a law that puts limits on what you can agree to in a contract then you don’t get around it by making a contract that violates the law.
Yes, but such a license agreement is fully inside the limits of the law, not beyond it. There is no violation, only a addition inside of the rules and limits of the law.
we were talking about laws that exist in Germany and perhaps somewhere else too. Are you commenting on the German law specifically and familiar enough with it to say it can be superseded by a contract?
That’s what ‘own’ means.
Not really, or not always at least. Not every law system allows to sell your copyrights. In germany for example it is only possible to license your copyrights but not to fully transfer them. Copyrights are therefor not part of the transfer of ownership, you have to add a license agreement additionally.
Yeah, I know there’s some nuance and was being a bit facetious. :)