undefined | Better HN

0 pointsvkazanov3y ago0 comments

Well, they payed for this text to be included in the game (for further distribution, obviously).

That's a bad legal definition. It needs a clarification which usually comes in a form of a contract.

Mojang clearly acted un-professionally: there's money on the table without a clear job definition. What happens with the copyright? Authorship? Should the author be mentioned in the game? etc.

Same goes to the writer, obviously. Even this post sounds almost... Jealous?

The contract they suggested is a standard document suggested to contractors of the kind in IT. This is not "strong arming". The only thing that changes the discussion is the fact that it happened post-factum. And the text author, having seen the success of the game, is clearly not satisfied with just signing the doc.

He mentions money a lot so, i guess, this is root the problem.

Either way. 99.99% of Minecraft players would still play and enjoy the game with or without this text. It's a nice little touch to a brilliant game, not much beyond it.

0 comments

wartijn_3y ago

> Well, they payed for this text to be included in the game (for further distribution, obviously).

They paid for the deal they agreed on as described in that first email. We don’t know the contents of that email, so it’s impossible for us to know if it they agreed on just including the poem in the game, transfer of copyright or anything else.

vkazanovOP3y ago

True. We don't.

But there no "just including" in legal speak. "Including" means some sort of copyright transfer or a license.

Either way, the text was created specifically for inclusion in the game and was payed for by Mojang.

BlueTemplar3y ago

Not "almost", he openly admits being jealous (and how it's a bad, in many senses, feeling), how else are we supposed to interpret the monkey and bananas bit ?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse