From what I’ve gathered by listening in thus far, the contract he showed isn’t enough evidence for this case - what is needed is a record of registered copyright.
7 Likes
This is not my point.
What I am trying to explain is that neither side can be written off as “wrong”. Roblox acknowledges that Tommy T. made the song. The argument is over whether Roblox had the rights to use the sound track. I think that it is highly improbable that after over a year of this dispute, Roblox suddenly claims they had a CD-ROM with the track on it. They cannot prove they ever had it and for all we know, the content on the disc was obtained illegally.
Bottom line, I am trying to point out that neither side is “wrong”
4 Likes
I would be wary of this point; this is unbased speculation. The reality is that we don’t know whether the disc exists, who authored it, whether they had the rights to the content on the disc, and, in the possible case where the contents of the disc were illegally distributed by the author, whether Roblox was misled over the legality of the contents. This is not unprovable.
There are several reasons pertaining to the legal case why Roblox may not have released that evidence at this time, but I’m not a legal expert, so I’ll save that for someone more experienced with this stuff.
I do generally agree with your sentiment that neither side should be written off as wrong at this point in time, from a legal perspective.
9 Likes
Thats good, but I’m left to wonder why he felt the urge to create a public spat on twitter about it rather than making a little tweet with his intentions and going to court.
Regarding your other post. The argument shouldn’t be out in the public at all. It should be using the court system as thats what its set up to do. Roblox has currently done nothing wrong in my eyes. They have rightfully or wrongfully used audio that they believe they own and have addressed the concerns by putting out a public statement. They are just waiting for a summon to court to defend their actions. The ball is in Tommys court and hes just sat on it.
4 Likes
Definitely. I understand why you would feel Roblox is not wrong in this case. But at the same time, you can’t go bash tommy tallarico.
In regards to him being wrong due to self-victimization does not pertain to this conversation. In the situation at hand, he simply is not wrong.
3 Likes
Tom is undeniably wrong. He instigated the situation publicly with the intentions of attention and publicity. Regardless of if he is legally correct, his approach to the situation was inappropriate.
11 Likes
I’ve not bashed Tommy at all in my posts. I feel i’ve remained fairly neutral and only came into this post as I saw plenty of people bashing both sides. I still stand by my post that we shouldn’t even be involved in this and it should not for us to put anybody on the ol’ shame board.
I will refrain from posting anymore as I don’t wish to carry on fueling fire.
5 Likes
I’m glad to see an official response. Always better than no response!
I never really had a strong opinion on this matter. Not my place to determine who owns the copyright (if he has a registered copyright, that is pretty hard to dispute). Either way, if he does own it, Roblox will either be forced to remove it, or they will have to pay for the right to use it.
I do hope that they come to an actual agreement, aside from asking him to join our community (very one sided).
Aside from removing this sound due to it illegibly being stolen by whoever made that cd, I do hope you change your mind on that second last paragraph. Although I do agree creators should be given the choice to make creations that are entirely original, I also believe that it is important to preserve history so that we can learn from it.
4 Likes
Sorry but I just can’t believe this. How would it get on a CD in the first place? Isn’t that also illegal? I also doubt it was from a CD in the first place.
4 Likes
4 Likes
Only problem is, it wasn’t copyright infringement. He created the sound yes, but he did not own the sole rights to it.
6 Likes
He in fact does own the sound, as per the contract.
3 Likes
Agreed, but without a registered copyright. If that is incorrect, he should have brought it up by now. From the evidence that he has gathered, it appears like a gimmick for attention.
3 Likes
Look, I may be wrong about the fact that he tried resolving this in private ( Still, he’s known about the sound effect being in the game since July so it’s still likely that he did this. ) but him being the victim here sorta makes sense.
Like, why would Roblox replace the sound effects shortly after he found out about the whole thing?
Why would someone that’s been in the game industry for 3 decades embarrass Roblox on Twitter for no reason? I’m pretty sure someone like him wouldn’t start up arguments for nothing.
Why would so many people defend him if he was nothing but a copyright troll?
Why would Roblox post a response on the DevForum a few hours after Tommy talked about his situation on Youtube?
Sure, it was to save their reputation i suppose. But the PewDiePie situation took entire days for a proper response from Roblox and that was a thousand times bigger than this.
But for them suddenly talk about Tommy 3 hours after he talked about his situation on Youtube is just…suspicious…
He stated that he does have evidence on Twitter, the first 2 screenshots on my first post display that.
Him making a case is still a possibility though, he gets more and more angry with them as time goes on. Even if there’s no case ready to go in the court yet, it’s still possible that they’re organizing one if Roblox doesnt make an agreement with him.
Look, you make good points. And I get why you see him as a troll since Roblox getting attacked online is nothing new. But if i try seeing the situation from your view on this, it just raises so many questions in all this.
The responses from Roblox are just off and weird to me, they even deleted a tweet showcasing a poll that was meant for voting on new sound effects. Even the poll itself was shut down.
Plus it still doesnt make sense on why they dont simply ignore Tommy if he was just tweeting garbage. Why interact with him at all?
And Tommy’s response to the situation just makes more sense and has more support. And he’s been in the game industry longer than Roblox has. Roblox being greedy and money-hungry is also nothing new which makes sense in his argument.
Again, I have no ill will against you since you’re clearly just tired of Roblox always being attacked for who they are. I’ve seen the forum raids and know about things like the April Fools 2012 hack so i get it.
I’m not saying you’re completely wrong, there’s a lot he should’ve done right.
This is true.
Also true.
5 Likes
HOWEVER, It does not automatically grant your work copyright protection.
This is simply not true. The following is taken directly from the US copyright website:
When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
14 Likes
nah, it really doesnt
a man has the right to protect what is his, we dont know the full story yet, im sure theres more too this
9 Likes
This statement is self-contradictory. You mention how Tom is escalating the situation publicly (which is inappropriate) but mention how him playing victim is logical. Firstly, playing victim in any situation does not support your case legally and publicly.
People defending him are misinformed by his social media banter, and are uneducated about the ultimate reasoning.
Everything else was thoroughly addressed in previous posts.
@Reshiram110
I forgot to mention this in my previous posts, but him owning copyright to the asset does not result in Roblox being deprived of the asset.
To your next reply: I needn’t get spammy, but this was previously mentioned. If he does not have publicly valid evidence, he is not obligated to banter nonsense on Twitter and play self-victimized. He should preferably resolve it with Roblox professionally, behind doors.
To the reply after it: as aforementioned states, the contract is his only piece of evidence and is weak (discussed more thoroughly in previous replies).
To your third reply:
Tom is aware that he cannot successfully compromise privately, so he intends to fool people maliciously.
How are you going to speak for the thoughts of someone else? You do not have enough information to make this conclusion. He isn’t fooling anyone - he’s proven that he owns the asset.
The copyright information is unstable due to the rumors and misinformation distributed. I can safely conclude this because bantering on media does not support his case legally in any way, but situates him in a position where he appears to be victimized publicly. To reduce all spam, I will not address any concerns publicly, so please contact me privately for a more elaborate inquiry.
4 Likes
Just because Tommy hasn’t provided other evidence aside from the contract does not automatically mean he has no other evidence. “A lack of evidence is not evidence of no evidence.”
6 Likes
He has already provided one piece of said evidence, as mentioned in my previous post. He took a picture of the contract that was between himself and shiny entertainment.
That I can agree with. I even replied to him about this on twitter - all of this public drama was not needed.
7 Likes
How are you going to speak for the thoughts of someone else? You do not have enough information to make this conclusion. He isn’t fooling anyone - he’s proven that he owns the asset.
Again, unless you can prove that he has made no attempts to do so, this is simply hearsay.
4 Likes