I basically was saying that with the troll part, like basically this assumes that ONE GUY almost autonomously, decided to put "traps" in a catalogue which he either couldn't or wouldn't or didn't act on purely for...what? His own joy? And all of this is based on the idea that we have "confirmation" of this which we don't.
That's why the "trap" theory never held water for me, the whole thing turns to dust as soon as you ask "Why?" There are so many reasons this either wouldn't work, or would at best would just be petty spite and have no value to his company, that he'd have to basically be a sociopath.
I don't think he's a sociopath for wanting to see if other companies were stealing his info? I also don't think it all falls apart if you ask "why?" I just think we don't know enough about Bob to totally get his reasoning, other than maybe to troll, he was misinformed in how it worked, or whatever. People do weird things, bu there doesn't have to be a totally logical explanation as to why they do these things. Who knows, maybe he thought it was fun to make up names because his job was boring? Maybe he wanted to see if ANYBODY would notice. We just don't know though.
Agreed, I think we need Bob's side of the story to make a more educated conclusion/prediction. That means waiting for the response from the letter.
Model in profile picture by MMDSatoshi Background in profile picture by ムムム Effects used in profile picture: WorkingFloor2
Post by thatgamingasshole on May 20, 2021 11:43:52 GMT
Regardless of who copies who, assuming it happened, I've had two separate lawyers or people who study the law say that, at least by that time (someone said '88) the idea of a "trap" was gone. Also since this has no effect whatsoever on other companies like Nintendo, Sega, etc then there literally IS no copyright, because you don't own a list if that list is made up of someone else's property you're pawning. So that still deflates that argument, because if we even assume for an instant that whoever set this "trap" was aware of the law (which logic dictates since they're attempting some kind of legal attack) they would be aware of that ruling. Or at least their lawyers would.
Or I assume, again it could be this was all a Rick Roll, lol
Post by stintergalactic on May 20, 2021 13:19:39 GMT
Ok, I think everyone needs to take a step back. This whole thing is being way over-thought.
I doubt anybody involved was concerned about using a fake listing as a means of legal recourse. If you're worried about "why" someone would include a fake listing in their ad, when "it just doesn't make sense", then you're complicating things way more than necessary.
Robert Schwartz ran a video game resale business. It was a crowded field with many players. He just simply wanted to keep an eye on what his competitors were doing. That's it.
I admit it's not a sexy answer. But it's the simplest answer.
Ok, I think everyone needs to take a step back. This whole thing is being way over-thought.
I doubt anybody involved was concerned about using a fake listing as a means of legal recourse. If you're worried about "why" someone would include a fake listing in their ad, when "it just doesn't make sense", then you're complicating things way more than necessary.
Robert Schwartz ran a video game resale business. It was a crowded field with many players. He just simply wanted to keep an eye on what his competitors were doing. That's it.
I admit it's not a sexy answer. But it's the simplest answer.
Ok but that also depends on asking why, since there was nothing to "keep an eye on" since it would be useless. He couldn't even stop them, or outmaneuver them, so what point would there be? To prove they have access to the same list? Ok but why would anyone care? And yes, the entire concept of a "copyright trap" if it exists at all would by default require some kind of legal action, or else it would be not just worthless but require effort and time for literally no gain whatsoever. The entire idea of a copyright trap depends on SOMETHING being copyrighted, to trigger the trap, otherwise it's pointless and does nothing, it doesn't even "keep an eye on his competitors" since literally just picking up a magazine does that better, quicker, with less effort.
Post by stintergalactic on May 20, 2021 15:34:09 GMT
We've been using the term "Copyright Trap" because that is what these types of things are usually called colloquially. But they're often not meant to literally legal traps.
I doubt the idea is to try to sue anyone, or stop anyone, or even to take any kind of action at all. Just knowing that someone copied your work is usually just the only endgame.
It's pointless to keep asking "why" someone would do that, because it's something that happens all the time, and has for as long as people have been writing things down. People just want to know when someone is copying their work. There doesn't need to be legal motivation
Post by thatgamingasshole on May 20, 2021 16:03:06 GMT
Well that still goes into "why". No body "copied" anything since the list is freely available and covers items which they have no actual ownership of, so they have zero stake in it, and if it were no purpose than why would anyone care? Or are you genuinely suggesting he was just so vain he wanted to prove to...some unknown person in his immediate circle...that another company used publicly available information? I mean I hate to break it to you but even then "why" comes into play? This "unsexy answer" literally makes less sense than a mistranslation since one can be explained and one has no logic whatsoever behind it. The Super Pitfall theory literally has more logic than "I'm going to put a trick listing here to prove to myself a company I have no control over copies information I have no control over regarding games I have no stake in!"
Well that still goes into "why". No body "copied" anything since the list is freely available and covers items which they have no actual ownership of, so they have zero stake in it, and if it were no purpose than why would anyone care? Or are you genuinely suggesting he was just so vain he wanted to prove to...some unknown person in his immediate circle...that another company used publicly available information? I mean I hate to break it to you but even then "why" comes into play? This "unsexy answer" literally makes less sense than a mistranslation since one can be explained and one has no logic whatsoever behind it. The Super Pitfall theory literally has more logic than "I'm going to put a trick listing here to prove to myself a company I have no control over copies information I have no control over regarding games I have no stake in!"
1) You're gonna tell me that them using code to hint at Super Pitfall makes more sense than some guy wanting to see if someone was copying his stuff? Why list other unreleased games but then be weirdly vague about Super Pitfall?? 2) Again, we now have a source, a source that TPFSV verified in the messages. Neil Levin worked in the same industry as Bob Schwartz, he would know more than any of us. This isn't just us spitballing ideas anymore, this comes from a real life person who was there. Now that doesn't mean that's what YYB1 is, and Bob could easily tell us something different about his business practices. But as of now, we got circumstantial evidence here. Not just a theory. 3) We should see what David has to say, and wait to see if Bob gets back to us. Unfortunately, you're not gonna get a definitive answer by over-analyzing one aspect of the story here.
Post by stintergalactic on May 20, 2021 16:13:55 GMT
I can see that it doesn't make any sense to you, but respectfully, just because you don't understand it doesn't make it less likely.
Copyright traps, or fictitious entries, are a thing that exists. Fake towns are added to maps. Fake words are in the dictionary. I remember back in the 90s, a guy added a fake episode to a list of Saved By The Bell episodes that he had on his website. Why did he do that? Just so he could tell what other websites were using his site as a resource.
You might think it's pointless, but that doesn't stop it from happening the countless number of times it has.
IMO, I think we all need to take a step back from over analyzing the (frankly) little information we have from contacts so far. Even if Neil didn't work for Play it Again, he had connections and was working for a competitor. We just need to contact more people to get a fuller picture.
Yesterday we only got one piece of the puzzle, there are so many other pieces we need to collect via other contacts
Model in profile picture by MMDSatoshi Background in profile picture by ムムム Effects used in profile picture: WorkingFloor2
Post by thevoiddragon on May 20, 2021 19:41:30 GMT
Outside of the "why would they?" side of things and it not really serving any actual purpose, the problem I have with the "copyright trap" is on the Funco side of things. On the assumption that it was a fake entry, that then implies Funco, while going through the list to at the very least shorten names and change prices, must have read a game entry that they had no idea about and had no heard of before, not bothered to find out about the game and just left that strange unknown game in there anyway?
I'm a bit confused by this anyway though. A guy named Neil Levin used to work at Forest Hills which was the old name for PlayItAgain, but the Neil Levin phoned was a different Neil Levin who just happened to know the guy who ran PlayItAgain, but was competing with them? So a different guy from the one we were looking for but he coincidentally just claims to know what we're asking about? Can someone explain what I'm missing?
I'm a bit confused by this anyway though. A guy named Neil Levin used to work at Forest Hills which was the old name for PlayItAgain, but the Neil Levin phoned was a different Neil Levin who just happened to know the guy who ran PlayItAgain, but was competing with them? So a different guy from the one we were looking for but he coincidentally just claims to know what we're asking about? Can someone explain what I'm missing?
I believe Neil Levin founded Forest Hills with Robert, but was not in the company by 1989 (when YYB1 was printed). In short terms, Robert was the main founder, Neil went on to other ventures (like The Game Experience) after founding Forest Hills for some time. There is a chance he did not know about the name change as well from Forest Hills to Play it Again (this point was brought up by tpfsv)
Model in profile picture by MMDSatoshi Background in profile picture by ムムム Effects used in profile picture: WorkingFloor2
Outside of the "why would they?" side of things and it not really serving any actual purpose, the problem I have with the "copyright trap" is on the Funco side of things. On the assumption that it was a fake entry, that then implies Funco, while going through the list to at the very least shorten names and change prices, must have read a game entry that they had no idea about and had no heard of before, not bothered to find out about the game and just left that strange unknown game in there anyway?
That was Funco's first ever mail in advertisement, previously, David would hit up other mail in businesses to get the inside scoop for what games were coming out for his business. Then he had some kind of fallout with one of these mail in businesses, and that spurred him to try and do the mail in business on his own. I personally believe he trusted the mail in lists to be accurate, as he had called these people for info before. Never would he have happened to know that some of these entries could have been faked. He kinda just had to learn as he went, which obviously paid off because he then founded FuncoLand.
That being said, we're working on contacting David next. So we might get more clarity on this.
That was Funco's first ever mail in advertisement, previously, David would hit up other mail in businesses to get the inside scoop for what games were coming out for his business. Then he had some kind of fallout with one of these mail in businesses, and that spurred him to try and do the mail in business on his own. I personally believe he trusted the mail in lists to be accurate, as he had called these people for info before. Never would he have happened to know that some of these entries could have been faked. He kinda just had to learn as he went, which obviously paid off because he then founded FuncoLand.
That being said, we're working on contacting David next. So we might get more clarity on this.
Ye, this is my theory as well ^^ Hopefully David can respond, giving us a more fuller picture of the story from his side
Model in profile picture by MMDSatoshi Background in profile picture by ムムム Effects used in profile picture: WorkingFloor2
That was Funco's first ever mail in advertisement, previously, David would hit up other mail in businesses to get the inside scoop for what games were coming out for his business. Then he had some kind of fallout with one of these mail in businesses, and that spurred him to try and do the mail in business on his own. I personally believe he trusted the mail in lists to be accurate, as he had called these people for info before. Never would he have happened to know that some of these entries could have been faked. He kinda just had to learn as he went, which obviously paid off because he then founded FuncoLand.
That being said, we're working on contacting David next. So we might get more clarity on this.
Ye, this is my theory as well ^^ Hopefully David can respond, giving us a more fuller picture of the story from his side
I should make a master post of all of the articles and interviews I found about David Pomije, it really helped me understand how Funco came about in the mail in business and eliminated the "in-joke" theory for me as well. David is pretty open about how it started, and a lot of people reported on his then success story.
I'm a bit confused by this anyway though. A guy named Neil Levin used to work at Forest Hills which was the old name for PlayItAgain, but the Neil Levin phoned was a different Neil Levin who just happened to know the guy who ran PlayItAgain, but was competing with them? So a different guy from the one we were looking for but he coincidentally just claims to know what we're asking about? Can someone explain what I'm missing?
I believe Neil Levin founded Forest Hills with Robert, but was not in the company by 1989 (when YYB1 was printed). In short terms, Robert was the main founder, Neil went on to other ventures (like The Game Experience) after founding Forest Hills for some time. There is a chance he did not know about the name change as well from Forest Hills to Play it Again (this point was brought up by tpfsv )
It sounds like in that interview his story changes halfway through though, playitagain and the context of a mail order service in the 80s is mentioned at the start and he says it's not him and that seems like its about to be the end of it, but then he asks what it was about and when it's mentioned a second time he claims he does have relevance to it. Maybe it just seems that way because of not being able to properly hear what he was saying though.