|
As far as what was said literaly, you are entirely correct about Logos, though it would be a mistake to tar the other people on the same side of the fence (Tyche et al) with the same brush, either explicitly (as you have not done), or implicitly by not addressing their concerns and statements separately (there have been several good restatements by various people). I am quite sure that Logos is aware of the distinctions between IP infringer and "thief", and was having a bit of fun tweaking some tails by applying the same terms that some people misuse to describe Vryce to Traithe.
The actual suggestion for action was fairly neutral in language: you infringe IP, you don't get listed/tolerated.
How does your statement apply to mine? They have done nothing substantive about Vryce. It's now ten years later. If what you want is me to amend my phrase to be "have done NOTHING to stop Vryce but complain in public forums", consider it so amended.
Yes, I'm sympathetic to their cause. But 10 years later, it's time to move on.
Ok. It does seem to clarify intent when they go to the trouble to print more than a name and a date ("All Rights Reserved", etc)
I have stated that I think you're consistent in your choice of causes to actively campaign for. If you feel that someone is demanding that you personally do something, please complain to someone else, because it ain't me.
If, on the other hand, you are coming out and saying that you think Traithe's mud is defensible fanfiction and oppose the activism of others on those grounds, then you've got a slight legal difficulty: you're wrong.
I haven't asked you to deal with anything.
Stilton
|