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
Evidence is still evidence. It does not matter what other semmantics come along-side it. Evidence isn’t “unstable”.
On another note, him acting out publically is not appropriate behavior, in my opinion. He should have just kept it relatively quiet and taken it up with Roblox through the proper channels via directly contacting them (I cannot confirm or deny that he did this), then taking it to a court of law if needed. Dragging the community into it wasn’t a great choice in decision making.
7 Likes
I’ve read a lot of content here. To be honest, I believe and agree with both side’s arguments. Tommy’s contract clearly stated he owned the sound. Roblox clearly was unaware of this and its usage has gone on for 13 years without trouble.
Here’s my take on this considering the information. I do not believe Roblox is responsible for this issue and I do not believe Tommy has grounds to sue Roblox. If Roblox purchased this sound on CD and the sound was released by Shiny Entertainment as an uncopyrighted sound, it’s Shiny Entertainments fault for breaching contract. Roblox is not bound by this contract nor are they responsible for its breaching.
I think Tommy is “in the right,” however at the same time I believe Roblox is not “in the wrong.” Roblox hasn’t done anything unlawful or unjustified and it is impossible for them to avoid. According to replies above as well as tweets the sound doesn’t appear to be registered anywhere. As such, Tommy has no grounds to sue to begin with.
In summary and conclusion, Roblox has broken no laws or done anything necessarily unjust. It’s impossible for them to avoid and it’s impossible for Tommy to sue as there are no legal grounds to do so even with the contract (Roblox did not have access to the contract nor are they bound by it in the slightest.)
13 Likes
This thread has the expected debate of such a controversial topic.
So it seems that Roblox had purchased a license to the sound from a third party. Years later, the original creator of the audio sees that his audio from a game in 2000 is a part of the core of a really popular game, one that he did not license to. So he fights back. He doesn’t want to sue just yet, for he believes that Roblox would compensate him fairly. However, Roblox already has the license to the audio. They shouldn’t need to pay him anything - they’ve already paid for it.
And it is here at the story that we arrive. While Tommy’s conduct was certainly not the most professional, he is definitely within his right to be upset. And with Roblox’s claim that they have a license and that Tommy is causing a bit of backlash within the community, they too are fully within their right to be upset.
There is obviously a lot of information that simply hasn’t made it to the public, for this isn’t a court case. It is currently impossible to make a 100% informed decision. All we can do is simply wait and respect both sides. There’s been a lot of threats and hate being thrown at both sides, and neither side should be attacked.
21 Likes
I really agree with this. There’s no need for negativity to either side. As I mentioned above, I really think both sides are in the right with their arguments. But even if that’s true, we have no way of knowing for sure from either side. Plus Tommy currently has no legal backing.
(Additionally, even if Roblox can’t provide proof of the CD it doesn’t matter as Tommy has no legal grounds and Roblox is not bound by his contract with Shiny)
6 Likes
Tommy’s actions regarding this situation have been deeply unprofessional for months.
This is a matter that should be solely discussed behind closed doors, rather than his bantering on twitter trying to drag Roblox through the mud over it and pushing the victim card harder as soon as this public statement was made.
I think a large part of the issue is that much of this case is hearsay. There isn’t much to base an informed decision on. While Roblox insists they believed they owned the rights when they bought a CD, he claims they did not as the sound was not legally supposed to be on the CD. However, at this moment both are mere claims–and claims have no legal ground. While he does own a basic form of copyright as soon as the sound was created, it becomes a bit difficult to take into a court of law considering it wasn’t officially registered. Additionally, there is a lot that is not being disclosed–one is what Tommy deems to be a fair compensation. It is likely a large enough number that Roblox can’t mindlessly throw money at him to leave them alone. Otherwise, this likely would have been settled months ago.
Also, Roblox is not packaged with a .WAV file of the uuhhh. It is an .mp3 and has been for as long as I remember. A quick look at the metadata disproves the claim that he’s in there because…well…it’s empty.
14 Likes
Seems to me that a CD ROM had the sounds, but then maybe the creator of that CD ROM stole the sounds, so maybe blame the creator of the CD-ROM.
EDIT: Or Tommy doesn’t own the sound at all.
12 Likes
Yeah that’s what I was thinking.
All of this is pretty ridiculous over an “oof” sound effect.
25 Likes
Not trying to say this is the case. But a lot of youtubers have dome things similar and a few years later it is copyrighted.
7 Likes
Thank you roblox for responding! Maybe tommy will mind in creating an Roblox account whatever.
I will like to see him as a part of our community!
Because some videos on Social media told that roblox may get sued because of that but i think that was a Big Biggg missunderstanding by tommy.
-mfg dominik
5 Likes
It does a lot. They answer to the rumors that have been around regarding getting the “oof” sound illegally. (Which they say they didn’t.)
7 Likes