the white drew carey

I was curious if anyone had used any of the simple game developer programs for Mac, and if so, which are the best?

I'm looking for something good for making turn-based strategy games. Nothing terribly exciting, but something to practice or learn on.

Some of the ones I've found are TNT Basic an Coldstone.

Any ideas?

I've always preferred strategy-based RPG, like Macross: ELS.

Basically, Naoko, not being familiar with the proper legal term, interputed it more literally. I'm going to try and contact her and find out her thoughts.

Oh... so you've decided to re-interpret her translation due to her unfamiliarity with the proper term?

And how did you come to conclusion (or even find out) that she was interpreting it too literally? And how did you find out the correct interpretation? Are you second-guessing your own translator?

If memory serves me correctly, we had someone here once who knew English AND Japanese quite well, who was also quite good at not only translating, but also interpreting between the two (there is a difference). Hmmm... But you second guessed her as well.

Both are correct and I've explained why.

No, it's wrong- Because it's "shoddy reporting" that does not clarify the statement.

If it was right, it would say something along the lines of "Tatsunoko was granted the rights of author, but was not granted the individual rights of author."

To be right, it would have to include all available facts.

Otherwise, it's a misleading statement. Not any better or worse than the ANN news report you so readily lambasted.

Or is your translation wrong in stating not once, but twice that Tatsunoko was not granted the individual right of author?

There is no ambiguity in this statement.

the Tokyo district court today ruled that the rights associated with authorship, the "author's right," for the first Macross series, belong to Tatsunoko Productions, not Studio Nue.

Is this right or wrong?

According to the translation provided by you, it's wrong.

This is the main sentence from your translation:

Main Sentence

1. Confirm that the plaintiff has the copyright (without individual right of author) of the animation movie in attached sheets 1-36 between the defendant and plaintiff.

2. Dismiss the rest of claim of plaintiff

3. Expenditure of suit is derided into 10, and the dependant has to bear 9 of it, and the plaintiff has to bear the remainder.

So which source are you choosing is the right one now? Mainichi's news report or your translation. They both say different things.

I'm assuming the exclusion of individual right of author is due to the fact that most of the aspects contained under the Economic Rights were already divided and determined by the Memorandum.

It could also be that the exclusion is more aimed towards the fact that Tatsunoko has no stake at all in derivitives. The court document doesn't say so, but if we're assuming outcomes based on our interpretations of simple statements, it's as good as any.

Simply put, the court document does not clarify the reasons or the specifics of why Tatsunoko was not granted individual right of author.

Then I ask you this Drew, is the Mainichi article wrong or does TP own the entire "author's right?"  The statement you quote may be ambiguous but the statement about TP owning the "author's right" is not ambiguous.

The "moral right" only allows for a person to be properly credited for their work, their work cannot be attributed to any other person which is why the "individual right of author" was excluded from TP copyright.

The thing is that I'm assuming that you're assuming this is the intent of the court's decision not to grant Tatsunoko individual right of author.

The statement is ambiguous enough that it can be left open to our inexpert interpretation. Tell me, does it exactly say "Tatsunoko is granted Economic Rights. BigWest is granted Moral rights"? No, it does not.

I'm not the one saying that this is what the court document means, while you are. And, as of yet, you have not provided evidence backing up your statement. To me, it is solely based on how you interpret the document.

The "moral right" only allows for a person to be properly credited for their work, their work cannot be attributed to any other person which is why the "individual right of author" was excluded from TP copyright.

With no evidence to back up this statement, it becomes simply your opinion that this is why "individual right of author" was excluded.

There's a splashpage gallery now?

MW Splash Page Gallery

Remember, there's more to MacrossWorld than the forums.

GreatMoose- Have you tried looking through the magazines? I think I saw it in there once, but I can't remember which.

As for TP....we don't know that they hadn't been sending word to BigWest to stop producing stuff past Flash Back 2012. They could easily have sent a cease and desist to BW once Macross II became a reality.

I forgot to respond to this part...

Although this is a possibility, I highly doubt it's a probability. If something like this had happened in the past, we'd know about it.

I doubt that Tatsunoko sent a C&D letter to BigWest. IF they had, it definitely would've either A- gone to court, or B- been settled outside of court. In either case one could safely assume that the WHOLE matter of the Macross franchise would've been ironed out way back then.

The only other option is C- that BigWest simply ignored Tatsunoko. But this one is near impossible because Tatsunoko, unlike their North American buddies, HG, probably wouldn't send a C&D letter and then not follow up.

Perhaps the lack of elaboration is intentional?

That's exactly what I was thinking. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if actual clarification of the division of Author's Rights is still forthcoming.

Wrylac- Here's what I'm curious about. You post this chart...

... on which you've handily circled what rights BigWest has been granted. But you still have not clarified how you've come to the conclusion that BigWest was only granted the Moral Rights of Author. Does it say that in Naoko's translation?

The problem is that you seem to be making a leap here and, I may be stupid, but I simply cannot see how you've come to this conclusion.

Also, this quote from Mainichi is very ambiguous (being a short news blurb)...

Japanese copyright law gives ownership to the company when the body of work is created by its employees (or by people under contract) as a part of their duties. Therefore, the property right are guaranteed to the production company, not the planner(s) nor the director(s).

...and mentions only Property Rights, not Economic Rights as you've sectioned in the above chart.

From everything I've found (and according to WIPO) Property Rights seem to be a catchall term for Intellectual Rights (patents, etc.) and Copyrights. As I read the Mainichi quote, that's what I take from it. So by using that as a base for stating that BigWest is only granted Moral rights and Tatsunoko gets everything else seems to be wrong.

From what I gathered from Wrylac's translation is that Tatsunoko was not granted individual rights of author.

This could mean any number of possible divisions or that both BigWest/Studio Nue and Tatsunoko were both granted the same level of rights.

Sadly, the translation (and quite possibly the court document itself) does not elaborate further on the possibly division of rights.

Because both BigWest and Tatsunoko have been actively in business, where Macross is concerned, for the past 20 years. If Tatsunoko ever felt that they had any rights to derivitives, they definitely should've said so by now.

I've brought this up before. HG may claim that they were "asleep at the wheel" during the years that Macross II, Plus and 7 were produced, but surely Tatsunuko was not.

Yeah, I've been saying the same thing.

It's the same thing with DYRL, MII and M+ being released internationally. If Tatsunoko had the int'l rights, I'm sure they would've said something.

Wrylac- I still don't understand where this ruling gives Tatsunoko int'l rights to the derivitives. Simply put- Court documents are VERY specific (even to the point of insanity to us laypersons). Unless it directly states ownership of int'l rights to either the whole franchise (which is still too generic of a term for legal purposes) or lists each Macross production individually, then stating complete ownership is an erroneus statement.

This court case was simply in regards to the TV series of SDF: Macross and nothing else.

Not to further muddy the waters, but I was chatting with my lawyer friend who said something very interesting:

(Note, this is an unofficial opinion and in no way represents a complete and final interpretation of the law)

On thing which was mentioned was the subject of derivitives. While not having a complete understanding of Japanese law, the possibility was brought up that BigWest has essentially been granted all derivitive rights anyhow, and that no court will say otherwise. Why? Because both BigWest and Tatsunoko have been actively in business, where Macross is concerned, for the past 20 years. If Tatsunoko ever felt that they had any rights to derivitives, they definitely should've said so by now. The recent court rulings which state that Tatsunoko paid a majority of production costs for SDF: Macross was proof enough to give them the copyright to the series. But the simple fact that BigWest has been footing the bill for everything else and has been actively promoting the franchise since then would grant them franchise rights.

As stated before, this is broad generalization of events with a basic understanding of Japanese law, but apparently situations similar to this have panned out this way in the states.

The YF1R is an animation mistake that is in one of the late SDF macross episodes.

Actually, the animation mistake is simply a VF-1A with two small lasers coming off of the side. The YV-1R as interpreted by Tommy Yune and HG is a derivitive because they have taken creative license and made their own version of that mistake.

The "mistake" VF-1A and the YF-1R are clearly different heads, albeit on the same theme.

I think that Bandai did buy the design off of Matsuhiro.

As to derivitives? IIRC, the memorandum (the first thing ruled upon in the courts) did actually state that Tatsunoko cannot make derivitives. Speculation persists (and makes a good argument) that this is why the RT II: Sentinels characters are look different enough as to not be considered derivitives.

Just one thing too to clear up any misconceptions, by owning the rights to the TV Tatsunoko owns it all, that means video and sound, exploitation rights, and so on, the whole shabang.

There would never be any case of they own the video and not the sound. When they say "the TV animation" it's the show, the whole set.

Jope that stems some of the speculation. And yes, some will have to take HG to court before thing really clear up over in the US I think.

Yeah. I'm pretty sure the sound is, in all likelihood, lumped in with the actual animation... except for, as we all know, the music and songs- Since they are owned by Victor.

As to the rights themselves? Tatsunoko may be granted certain rights through their ©, but the memorandum still holds as to the actual distribution of those rights and who actually is entitled to benefit from which rights.

What you should do when pasting on the head is use the transform functions after you paste it in but before you flatten it in order to make the perspective match thatof the underlying image.

Click on Edit -> Transform-> Skew, Distort and Perspective.

Definitely the second, but you need to do something about the head, it's really screwing up the perspective.

What program are you using?

Arcadia? Never heard of it.

Wasn't there a "Warzone in Exile" forum for RT.com'ers called Battlefield? What happened to that?

Jemstone- On a side note, I think BoK is still technically "banned" here. But I could be wrong.

wrylac and even Ben-Man were notable "banned" persons who seem to be doing quite well here these days.

The loophole in Dogmatic law (ie- new forums) allowed them to get back in.

The Mods stated they're going to keep a close eye on all who have returned, and won't give them much, if any, leeway.

I thought I heard someone mention that BoK knew about this, but decided to be a better person and simply insult us from over at RT.com instead of coming over here...

I gots me a question:

What's the difference and/or benefits over using the Slidecard and Swap Magic disk system vs. the Swap Magic disk and No Solder Mod Chip system?

Is one basically cheaper than the other?

Has Max been going to the gym?

He looks a little husky doesn't he?

Max knows that YOU like your men big and buff... just like Gah-bunah Ah-nuld!!!

You know what'd be nice?

If you can stand on the Prometheus' deck and look into the SDF-1 via that huge "picture window" as seen in the beginning of DYRL. 

You never know... they might have added that. Maybe you can even shoot at the viewport and watch it vent hundreds of tiny little ppl screaming at their certain deaths.

You're terrible!!!

Would be good if I added the picture, eh?

Just for the halibut, here's a screengrab of my current desktop.

You know what'd be nice?

If you can stand on the Prometheus' deck and look into the SDF-1 via that huge "picture window" as seen in the beginning of DYRL.