In response to the 'oof' sound discussion

Updates Announcements
#115

I’m honestly glad they’re finally responding to this situation but at the same time, i’m pretty sure there’s at least one lie in the statement they put out.

thing1
thing2

I really dont like the fact that at least 90% of the people replying are unaware of Tommy’s response to this thread.

And the fact that there’s clearly a few lies in the response they posted.

1/3 of this post will be meant to show some of Tommy’s responses here, but he has a dozen tweets about this and i’m only gonna post like…1 or 2 more.

If you want a better picture on his view of the whole thing, you can go investigate yourself, a reminder that this post is not meant to start up hate.

If you’re a little disappointed or upset that Roblox didnt completely tell the truth in their response, just leave a decent response or say nothing.

thing2

Also, if the tweets dont count as proof that he owns the “Oof” sound effect. Here’s some evidence Tommy posted.

thing4

thing5
thing51803×792 666 KB

A few people here were wondering if the sound even belonged to Tommy, or if he was just a copyright troll. Even Roblox themselves just calls this whole thing a “claim”.

Well, it does belong to him…and he’s not a copyright troll.

There’s tons of proof out there but the response fails to inform anyone about it, making at least the first half of it a lie.

So, what can really be done about whole issue?

How can the situation end? How can Roblox avoid getting sued?

Well, my suggestion is to simply pay the guy since he made the sound effect before Roblox was even a company.

And before anyone at Roblox or some other poster reads this and just clicks away with a bit of annoyance or anger that some of this got on the DevForum…just think.

You dont need to give the guy 20 million dollars, but give him something.

He’s one guy trying to fight a billion dollar company all so he can rightfully get what he’s earned, even if it’s 1 second long. It doesnt matter, Roblox probably wouldnt be the same site as it is now without that sound effect.

Look at the effect it has on Roblox, even today.

oof
oof916×825 377 KB

oof2
oof2994×832 327 KB

Look how many Roblox related videos gained popularity because they simply had that “Oof” sound effect. And look how many views each one has.

Millions…tens of millions on almost every video in fact.

Now think to yourself.

“How much money has he earned, i mean he simply must’ve gotten something out of the popularity of it?”

The answer…NOTHING. Not one penny.

He didnt know Roblox was a thing until the Mid-2010s and yet some people still want this guy to fail and get nothing.

Even though he needs any amount of cash Roblox decides to give him.

And some people…including a few DevForum members are like this…“Why he is so upset? Why is he so money-hungry?”

Well, if Roblox had paid him earlier, like in 2012 or 2016. His life would’ve been less stressful and he would’ve had all that money for his bills or his retirement fund. But since he got nothing, he’s had to work harder more than he should’ve.

I can keep talking about this, but this post is large enough already.

To end it off, ill say this. Before you click reply, do not post hate-comments here.

This whole post is meant to give everyone a larger view on the situation beyond what Roblox stated here, nothing more.

EDIT:

Found the sound effect in a game Tommy worked on in 1999, the video displayed at the bottom was uploaded in 2008 which proves that it’s not edited in or anything.

57 Likes
#116

this is a seriously lame idea, children being happy does excuse copyright infringement, and no, this isnt “capitalism” this is somebody trying to protect the asset that they have created, he has a right to be angry, and he has a right to claim compensation, not any amount of happy children will make up for what is (hypothetically) millions of dollars practically stolen.

16 Likes
#117

practically doing my job for me

8 Likes
#118

Unfortunately emotion has no place in law.

15 Likes
#119

I have had very good experiences with ROBLOX and I love the platform and community we have here. But I guess some things here aren’t the best, it is still good to know that we get notified on this. Let’s always remember the “oof” sound and all the joy it brought to everybody of ROBLOX.

4 Likes
#121

The way Roblox responded to this issue was accurately and professionally. I’m obliged to side with Roblox because they addressed the issue in an appropriate etiquette. As @Mariofly5 described on Twitter:

Your contract states that you own any audios you make for the company.
HOWEVER, It does not automatically grant your work copyright protection. As a US citizen, you have to register your creative work with the US Copyright Office and you have not.

Tommy’s proof isn’t publicly disclosed at the moment. However that’s partially irrelevant - Roblox addressed all visible misconceptions professionally and transparently.

11 Likes
#122

He has a right to be angry and a right to claim compensation:

BUT.

Tommy is failing to provide any form of proof that he actually owns the audio in a legal sense. From the looks of it, the only evidence of ownership he’s put on twitter is his legal contract with the developers of Messiah (the original game the OOF sound was made for.). Roblox is correct to claim they haven’t been given evidence of his ownership because in order to be considered as the legal owner of property, you have to have registered that property in the first place.

Essentially in the US, everything you create, such as a book or audio file receives copyright protection by default. However, that work is not legally considered yours until you register the copyright over the audio. (He quite literally tweeted out a document that states this, find the document here.

What I am seeing at the moment from his side of the argument, is a lack of physical evidence that will actually give his cause some substance when taken up in legal court. (This doesn’t mean that I think he didn’t make it, he likely did and he clearly contributed to Messiah in some shape or form, but it just means in a legal sense, he doesn’t have a strong level ground.)

EDIT:
I’ve also found that you can actually search up Copyright Records online on Congress’ own database, if you want to have a go looking for any public records of the sounds made by tommy, have a go here:

10 Likes
#123

no, no he does

image
image2547×1117 957 KB

does anyone see this? it clearly states that all work produced for the company is owned by the contractor? hello? am i missing something here? wouldnt this count as legal protection over the audio file? i may be seriously wrong but if a contract states that "all work performed under this addendum shall be included within the definition of work, and shall be owned by the contractor

please inform me if i am incorrect…

8 Likes
#124

Alright, so firstly please excuse my unwarranted opinion; this is something I’ve been feeling for a while about this whole debacle and I think it needs to be said: there’s a distinct lack of professionalism and informed discussion around this whole issue. Thankfully, the discussion on here seems to be somewhat more productive and less flame-y than on other platforms such as Twitter, and many people on this thread have raised excellent points which provide valuable material to the discussion.

I have, unfortunately, seen some… less productive responses on this thread. There’s additionally a lot of people assuming this is a binary ‘Roblox-vs-Tommy’ issue; the reality is this is potentially a tangled, complex case, and we don’t have all the details, nor a definitive answer.

I wrote a long thread on Twitter that goes a bit more in depth.

I think the final tweet really summarises what I’m trying to say, and what I advise many respondents to this thread to keep in mind;

There are so many crucial details we don’t know yet. This is not a decided issue.

So put down your pitchforks and stop flaming each other. This is an issue for the courts to decide, not a boxing match.

(but seriously, thanks guys for not devolving this into a hot mess of rage and stuff. I’m learning a lot reading this!)

12 Likes
#125

Look, i see why you’re saying this and i’m happy you’re sorta still neutral on the whole thing.

But it’s important to note that he has a lot more proof than you think, it just hasnt been made available to the public.

Just because he chooses to show only one contract to the public doesnt mean he has no rights to his sound effect.

His lawyer would’ve convinced him not to go on with this whole thing if he didnt have enough to go on, the best thing to do is to just wait until the actual court debate starts. Which is when we’ll probably see all the proof he has.

7 Likes
#126

You are missing something—something major. He has compiled all theoretical evidence to support him in this case, but he lacks physical evidence (or fails to publicly disclose physical evidence). He can banter about his theoretically accurate nonsense but he fails to provide physical evidence. Please read the aforementioned as it may potentially educate you on something you are misinformed about.

Theoretical evidence: his contract

Physical evidence required:

As a US citizen, you have to register your creative work with the US Copyright Office and you have not.

Previously mentioned by @Mariofly5:

It’s unreasonable to assume all the evidence is supporting him when he fails to provide the evidence. He failed to register his creative work with the US Copyright Office and therefor Roblox are unanimously irresponsible and not liable.

@Mariofly5

I agree with all your points. Your substantiated conclusions are, in my eyes, factual.

@Elttob

Although this is true, I feel it is relevant to discuss about the issue itself due to the misinformation that has been spread.

9 Likes
#127

I’ve seen both sides of this, and I’m left to wonder why hes so open and public with it. I understand hes annoyed that they used his sound effect without permission, but robloxs understanding is they legally bought it and it was all fine and dandy.

I simply don’t understand why he wouldn’t try to resolve it behind closed doors, make a little tweet about it regarding the situation and set the cogs in motion for court where legal professionals can see both sides of the story, look at the evidence and make a decision of whose in the right.

Regardless of whos in the right or wrong, Tommy would of had a lot less hassle had he opted to remain private about the ordeal instead of getting into a twitter boxing match with the roblox twitter community, who are mostly children and don’t really care or understand what they say to other people.

Edit:
I firmly believe that anything related to your work, money and copyright should be resolved behind closed doors and using the legal system before trying to expose a company when both sides are a bit confused to whos in the right of wrong.

Ultimately the best thing Tommy can do now is make a final twitter post saying hes going to remain private and actually go to court and let the professionals do their job.

21 Likes
#128

I do encourage discussion about the issue! All I’m trying to say is that we shouldn’t ignore or accidentally overlook cases where a third party may actually be at fault, rather than Tommy or Roblox directly. It would also be unwise to suggest that one party or another is overall ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ at this current stage; with the information we have, it could be incorrect and would be unhelpful.

This.

7 Likes
#129

Expertly described. As discussed in this Twitter post:

Genuine question (And don’t take this the wrong way, you’re owed your pound of flesh), if you/your lawyer are planning on taking legal action against Roblox, why are you posting about this on social media?

Tom’s doing this for publicity (at least partially) or to degrade Roblox as a company. In my opinion, Tom’s response is unsubstantiated. It fails to require fundamental evidence. Additionally, there’s a lack of professionalism. It’s a play of self-victimization. I don’t mean to incite any rumors, but this is the situation in my eyes.

I’d like to finalize something before I disengage from this discussion. Unfortunately there is misinformation between both parties, and that leads others into assuming false knowledge. That makes this discussion relevant, and that produces all this speculation. As mentioned previously, the cause of this nonsense is from social media, hence the publicity.

The reason this isn’t being settled behind doors is because there is nothing to settle. Roblox owns the copyright to the “oof” sound effect.

13 Likes
#130

Okay. This is interesting. I honestly didn’t hear about this 'till now as I don’t use social media, but this seems like Tommy did make the “oof” sound, and created it for the company, but it might have been that Tommy created it, it was put on a disc, and Roblox allegedly bought it as copyright-free sound.

Some tweets that need attention.

@Mariofly5 - I’m starting to get annoyed. Your contract states that you own any audios you make for the company. HOWEVER, It does not automatically grant your work copyright protection. As a US citizen, you have to register your creative work with the US Copyright Office and you have not
It definitely proves that you made the audio but even so, you don’t have any grounds to go after them if the audio isn’t protected by any copyright laws.

One that I fully support:

SwitchGamingClub - I think this whole thing can be sorted with a single question - how much is Tommy asking for?
If he’s looking for $400 & a credit, I can understand his frustration.
If he’s is looking for $10,000+ simply because Roblox is popular then I want nothing to do with him or his argument

:heart: (Don’t take seriously):

ACheesyQuesadilla - How about you just let roblox keep the sound and be grateful that they made your sound loved by millions?

Anyways, I also have one more question. Why does this come up almost 12+ years after ROBLOX started using the sound?

And another tweet that is like what @TheCardMechanic stated:

PieWindmill - Not to be rude or anything but you could have sent them this in private rather than on social media

8 Likes
#131

I agree that he should’ve resolved the whole thing in private and it’s likely that he was. Because i sorta remember that he tried doing that. But it was getting him nowhere.

It’s important to note that he has a lot of evidence, but only him and his lawyer has access to them aside from the one contact he made public on Twitter.

If he didnt have enough proof to support his case, his lawyer would’ve stopped him before anything huge happens. Suing a billion-dollar company without enough proof is an important thing to factor.

Before anyone states he doesnt have enough proof, let’s just wait until the actual court-debate starts first.

6 Likes
#132

Let me clarify a bit of that though.

633×732 65.5 KB

4 Likes
#133

I’ve seen his claim about roblox trying to tear down his reputation and its a bit of a weird claim. Roblox as a company has came out with this post, told the public what is happening as members of their platform are engaging in twitter spats with him and said they are trying to resolve the issue behind closed doors. In my opinion they’ve done nothing to damage his reputation at all. I’m not sure if hes getting confused from developers arguing with him and hes assuming they work for roblox?

Regarding your edit, its not up to us to decide who owns the copyright. We can all have opinions but I can think we can all agree than everyone is entitled to use the court systems to resolve things. Bundle up your evidence and head to court to present your argument in a civil way rather than fighting on Twitter.

This post goes for everyone saying why hasn’t roblox just paid tommys fee or anything. As I stated in my last post, both sides are confused to who owns the copyright. Tommy thinks he owns it, roblox thinks they own it.
Play this situation out in your head. Roblox buys the CD with all the copyright and whatnot from a company, everyine is fine and dandy. Now, over a decade later someone pops up and goes “Hey! Thats mine! Pay up!” And you go “???”. Would you payup to someone who pops along over a decade later? He can post his claims and images on twitter all he wants. But I fully believe it is in robloxs best interest to go to court, let everyone present their ownership and find out whos in the right.

21 Likes
#134

But do we want an actual court-debate to happen?

TommyTallarico - We would prefer NOT to take legal action in hopes that they will just do the right thing. But the more they try to tear down my reputation… the harder it is for me to want to work with them r\to provide a solution that is fair for everyone

and as @iacxx stated and I previously stated, Why is this coming up 12+ years later!?!?

6 Likes
#135

This is incorrect and objectively silly to believe. If, for example, he owned the copyright contents of the sound effect, he would still have valid and legal evidence to support him. He could have been credited and earned all the money righteously.

He is incorrect and contemplates the credit and fame, which is why he is settling it publicly instead of privately. Tom is aware that he cannot successfully compromise privately, so he intends to fool people maliciously.

@orangewarrior78

What you just wrote was inaccurate misinformation, and nonsense.

He did not try compromising behind doors; I can already assure this. If it was getting no where, he’d needn’t maliciously misinform people about the situation. Additionally, publicly misinforming people will not support his legal case and position.

This conclusion is more than silly. He is in no position to publicly banter about nonsense that he cannot publicly support. Ask yourself this: if only his lawyer has access to the evidence, how do you know that if you don’t have access to the evidence?

What? He can do whatever he intends to publicly; his lawyer is not affiliated with his public status. He did not sue Roblox, nor is he threatening to, so his lawyer hasn’t even played a part in this.

I guarantee you there will never be a course case regarding this issue within the next billion years of existence.

This is, as previously mentioned, a case of self-victimization. He pretends to be correct and responds in this etiquette simply because he is not entitled to respond legally. In essence, he cannot support his case legally so he acts badly.

9 Likes