Fucking Fucking shit Autocorrect!!

Won't be long / make an ass

Btw,

There is no such thing as an “international copyright” that will automatically protect an author’s writings throughout the world.

Lol. Yeah, figured that philcore. And I feel the exact same way. What the fuck are people talking about in their in-game PMs? I mean, I already know who they are, what they do for a living, their age, sex, marital status, job, etc. from the forum. What kind of sick shit is going on that I don't know about on PMs?

@phil - Good point. And since kestas is in Australia...

Maybe some homosexual offers in return for support to Clyde?

But then that would be metagaming, offering favors outside the game, in return for favors inside the game.

Both the US and Australia are signatories to Berne.

But the privacy claim is stronger anyway.

@phil - Lol. That move was the bomb, wasn't it?

Haha, it was, I was hoping you wouldn't connect the dots, because I wasn't really referring to that. You didn't even need support, after all. I was just trying to think of a random, non SC, like my Albania reference. Then I clicked river to that game and remembered your brilliant Ruhr to Clyde move, and thought, "oh, I hope jimgov doesn't think I was referring to that"

Maybe that's why Clyde came to mind when I was thinking of an insignificant territory for my example though :-)

Just a thought: depending on the amount of press they need, we could just give them the full disclosure games. They were well played, everyone consented to the release of press, and Tru Ninja already formatted them nicely.

I do have some games where I took player press and put it together in a clear PDF format. He's welcome to those. They already have player permissions

Forget copyright. Does anyone here deny that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy and that this would violate that expectation? What gets posted in global and on the forums is for the world. PMs and in game country tabs are for only the sender and recipient and should require at least one of those players explicit consent. And in the finally made easy to access Notes tab is strictly for the author's use requiring the author's consent to share. I simply do not give that consent.

Personally, I think the presumption of privacy is a nonsensical argument in terms this game and the private press between players. but I'm going to play along, as though it actually had some kind of legal standing.

If someone's private press to me in a game is fair for me to post to global, which is in turn available for the while world to see, then it stands to reason, that it is no different than me posting it on the forum (provided that complies with existing site rules regarding ongoing games, etc.). I can therefore post the contents if private in game messages between me and draug. Everyone one else could do the same. Then the content of those messages are in the public domain even though draug didn't give me permission to do so. After all, they're just as much my private press as they are his.

So to skip this intermediate step, I can just tell kestas, that he has my permission to do whatever he wants with my private press, including the other payers' remarks. And if enough people did that, it would quickly render the privacy claim irrelevant.

If this is the case, then again, skipping the middle man, isn't the claim already irrelevant?

There is only an expectation of privacy during the course of a game because it's part of the game. THAT particular game. Once that game is over, the contents of the messages could be made public just like our identities are in anon games once its over.

I may just call Stanford and Sons and tell him Robert Bolin, told me to call him to ask him if my messages in an online game are considered copywrite or carry an expectation of privacy. I hope he's expensive, and he is offended that I have wasted his time with such nonsense. And then I hope Nigee calls him. Because that would be Fucking priceless!

I think Draug is just scared that someone will see the Private Message he sent me with a link to him dressed up in women's underwear. I still think red was sexier than the black.

Except for the notes tab which has existed far longer than it has been exposed. And say I play with someone else who *doesn't* give their permission. Then any messages between that person and myself are off limits as well. Now if kestas wishes to filter all notes tabs from those who have expressed a desire to opt out and any messages between players who have both expressed a desire to opt out, fine. But I doubt he wants to go to that much effort.

That being said. Privacy smivasy. Go ahead and take the data, do with it what you want and dont tell anyone about it so the whiny babies on this site dont have anything to waste everyones time whining about.

Go for it. You're making the call. Stan will bill *you*, not me. And yes, he is generally expensive when you aren't a member of a family he calls "close friends".

Just so no one else has to do the work looking them up:
http://www.ctks.com/Contact.aspx

Cohen, Todd, Kite, and Stanford.
(513) 421-4020

http://www.ctks.com/Contact.aspx

Replace email with private communication.

From http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Reasonable_expectation_of_privacy

"With respect to the content of an Internet communication (such as an e-mail), a computer user generally has a legitimate expectation of privacy in that content while it is in transmission over the Internet. To date, the federal courts appear to agree that the sender of an e-mail, like the sender of a letter via first-class mail, has an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the content of a message while it is in transmission.[17] In United States v. Maxwell,[18] the court addressed e-mail privacy:

“ E-mail transmissions are not unlike other forms of modern communication. We can draw parallels from these other mediums. For example, if a sender of first-class mail seals an envelope and addresses it to another person, the sender can reasonably expect the contents to remain private and free from the eyes of the police absent a search warrant founded upon probable cause. However, once the letter is received and opened, the destiny of the letter then lies in the control of the recipient of the letter, not the sender, absent some legal privilege.[19] ”

“ Drawing from these parallels, we can say that the transmitter of an e-mail message enjoys a reasonable expectation that police officials will not intercept the transmission without probable cause and a search warrant. However, once the transmissions are received by another person, the transmitter no longer controls its destiny. In a sense, e-mail is like a letter. It is sent and lies sealed in the computer until the recipient opens his or her computer and retrieves the transmission. The sender enjoys a reasonable expectation that the initial transmission will not be intercepted by the police. The fact that an unauthorized "hacker" might intercept an e-mail message does not diminish the legitimate expectation of privacy in any way.[20] ”

“ Expectations of privacy in e-mail transmissions depend in large part on the type of e-mail involved and the intended recipient. Messages sent to the public at large in the "chat room" or e-mail that is "forwarded" from correspondent to correspondent lose any semblance of privacy. Once these transmissions are sent out to more and more subscribers, the subsequent expectation of privacy incrementally diminishes. This loss of an expectation of privacy, however, only goes to these specific pieces of mail for which privacy interests were lessened and ultimately abandoned.[21]
"

Either way whether they are released or not there should be an addition to the terms of agreement or an opt out option to releasing press

He can't bill me for calling and asking a question. We would have to have an agreement for that to happen. And I certainly don't plan on retaining him for such an absurd question. But I will waste his (and my) time for the humor of it.

Philcore. Lets set a specific day and all call that attorney you posted and ask him about this absurdity. Man, that would be awesome :)

"Does anyone here deny that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy and that this would violate that expectation?"

Draug, he's asking for our permission. He's not imposing it on us. If you don't want it, but don't be a fucking asshole and threaten to sue kestas. He made this site that you clearly enjoy enough to spend all of your time on, and instead of being an adult and giving him your opinion, you throw a temper tantrum like a spoiled child. Grow the fuck up.

ghug - Fuck off. I have no intention of pursuing anything unless I find out my posting to the notes tabs or between myself and someone else who opted out were to be used. I have posted numerous reminders in now called notes tab, some calling certain players or nations some graphic and disgusting names far worse than anything I've *ever* posted here in the forums. I simply do not wish that information released as is my right under a reasonable expectation of privacy pursuant to the IT Law article I posted above.

Without the agreement, you won't get past his receptionist. You realize that, right? Then he will put a paralegal researching it for a couple hundred an hour with a minimum of two hours. If you don't agree to it, you won't get to him or a paralegal and will just have slightly inconvenienced the office receptionist who spend her days handling calls like that anyhow.

@draug. " Replace email with private communication"

This isn't "private communication" in the sense that an email, instant message, or phone call is. This is "game private" meaning in the context of this game, for the duration of the game, and to facilitate diplomacy (the name of the game) there are some messages meant only for other players for the purposes of that game.

If your giving out more personal details in game messages than you give on the forum, then you need to stop. We already know you have a choad, haven't had sex with your wife for several years, and have a thing for 17 year old girls, and that you think that's ok because the age of consent in Ohio is 17.

I don't know that much about my close real life friends! And that's the hit you're ok with the entire world knowing! You want your private negotiations with Germany regarding your potential stab of Russia to remain private under threat of a lawsuit?

Dude, sometimes you just try to hard to be right, when your not.

Well, lets just try it. You convince Kestas to post some notes tab messages of mine on the forum. He does not have my permission to do that nor do you. You do so at your own risk. I will then pursue a violation of my right to privacy and we will see who comes out on top. K? Or are you chicken shit and realizing my excerpt does not make reference to any time frame and that I am correct in my expectation of privacy?

"With respect to the content of an Internet communication"

What part of this says "unless it's for a game and then that expectation goes away"?

What? No pithy comeback that somehow tries to deny an in game PM is an Internet communication? By your logic, the moment an IM session in Lynq ends, all the communication should be publicly available and there is no more expectation of privacy on the part of the two participants.

The fact that, to read the message through normal means (i.e. not some special mod tools or directly accessing the database) requires access to one of the two participants accounts means there is still an expectation of privacy. If not, all the tabs in game would become available as soon as the game ended and everyone on the site could see all communication from the game.