ye but trademarks are still enforcable after that if they are still in use
say how smith and wesson had to pay money to glock over their sigma series being direct rip offs(instead of like 90% the same) none of the other pistols on the market which are the same thing use the same technology, look exact the same, use their branding etc
ye but then courts get to define what is improved, i mean if you take fallout new vegas and put on a nude mod is that a different game now that every adult male model has been modified/replaced?
i mean on youtube right now they have like entire movie of lord of the rings or shrek whatever memes, where people edited the movie like every time shrek smiles it speeds up x% which is allowable in the current fair use definitions as it doesnt supplant the actual shrek movie they are distinct enough that you arent getting the same experience
mean that depending on the software even if they were mandated to give you a version, there is no guarantee it would even work, or in the context of the software/game make any sense, like the online game stronghold kingdoms its like an rts castle building thing but online, its 24/7 people can attack you when you go to sleep, not gonna be the same if you have a single player version, nor would it make sense to force them to let you resync your version to theirs to cheat or something
that it couldnt be mandated that they have to give you the same experience off line, since in some cases thats not possible
public domain movies and such are just not owned by anyone(think in some cases cant even be owned by somone, like cant just buy the rights after not sure) that people can upload/torrent, sell on dvd whatever they want any of that content
but they(the previous owners) dont have to provide you a copy
that feel like if that wasnt the in a million years alter its public domain, if it was more like a trademark where you have to actually use/defend it to maintain ownership over the ip, and once you no longer do that tough tiddies its free game
that would be the point of the law though, to prevent it being one wherever possible by providing guidance as to the outcome of such a case
mean if it was left to judges, that one time a guy modified his tesla to remove over current protection so he could send more power to the motors to try and go faster, and it started on fire and killed his wife and kid
than any time after that you have modified firmware/softwares, and a car judge will just site that case, and your gonna have to uphill battle against massive company with unlimited lawyer budgets and the precedence against you because you wanted a better eq on the music player, so they dont have to do recall service on your car, or your insurance doesnt have to payout after a thing happened etc
like if you had a third party android os but the battery in your samsung 8 still blew up, is that your fault or samsungs?
like would have to describe things like if it effects the primary function of the device in a negative way, or makes it less safe etc. that when you lose liability its generally in the realm of, if you replaced it with buggy software and it became less reliable they arent liable for that unreliability, as opposed to any and all liability for manufacture defects or otherwise
if youāre gonna have protections for stuff like that anyways
least < would much rather have specifics as much as possible to prevent end run around shenanigans, getting buried in legal fees and endless appeals
