banthapoodoo wrote:
kroenen77,
I want to clarify that my post earlier was simply to encourage respectful discussion; it was not to take sides.
This forum's definition of recasting is "copying or re-creating the work of another without the owner’s permission for sale or other personal profit."
I think that you have developed a reasonable argument that the work you are doing is not "recasting". If the Portumac-specific changes to the DPDLX (it's presumed base) are not present in your item, then I would say you haven't copied or re-created his work. Using the copyright law analogy of a "derivative work", one can claim ownership only to their modifications, not to the original, unmodified portions. And it seems that you have reverted to an original form before making your changes, or you have directly implemented your modifications from other references (and did you get permission to use those?
.gif "Bang Head")
)
Its not a question of whether recasting is good or bad that's being debated, it's whether in this specific case it can be labeled as recasting. I know this is not to be put up for a vote, but I at least wanted to submit my opinion. Obviously it's important as it could result in your being banned and have a chilling effect on future submissions of this kind.
BP
Everyone can say what he wants.No problem.My answer to your post was only a little bit sarcastic...not really bad!
This discussion is a big joke because nobody of us can change something.I have only said what I´m thinking about the "recasterunterhobby" and thats it all.
I´m a big enemy of the real recasters that are making bad copys of other artists work...but my case shows how bullheaded this sytem is.
I will ask portumac for nothing because he did nothing for my build.I had a lot of work to remove all his wrong areas back to a (near) screenaccurate status.That he is a familiar Recaster and a member here,that I need to ask....is another story.
