Toggle menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-28349479-20161216221639/@comment-25117610-20161217214105

< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | Inclusion debates‎ | @comment-28349479-20161216221639
Revision as of 14:20, 27 April 2023 by SV7 (talk | contribs) (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

SOTO wrote: But the fact remains that, legally, if we are to consider the elements in Faction Paradox to be the same as the equivalent elements in the DWU, then they do not have all the relevant copyrights. Everything they borrowed, they gave new names, to make sure they're their own property, their own independent universe at least from a legal standpoint, even if narratively, the intention is for them to fit into the DWU--if we try to consider them DWU, they fail rule 2.

But don't we do something similar for characters like The Mistress, K9 (The Choice) and a lot of other stuff from BBV? For what a different name is given, we create a different page, and for what the same name is given, we use the same page. Couldn't the same be done to Faction Paradox?

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.