Inquiry on Latest Mah-jong Rules from China

Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

Later this year, I shall be going to China to do research on a history
project on Zheng He (2005 being the 600th anniversary of his first world
voyage), visiting Shanghai, Ningbo, Nanjing, and norther Fujian
province. Ningbo being the birthplace of Mah-jong, I plan to gather
additional information on the history of MJ for a project I have been
working, off and on, for quite a while.

The purpose of this posting, however, is to inquire whether
International MJ Rules previously promulgated by China's Sports
Commission have been revised or finalized. Earlier, when the first
International MJ Championship was scheduled for Ningbo, I made
arrangements to be there (Ningbo is also my birthplace), and, to
commemorate the occasion, I also wrote a book on these international
rules. The change in venue, from Ningbo to Tokyo, prompted me to cancel
both the trip and the publication of that volume. Now, I would like to
dust it off -- to include changes in rules if they are made -- and
publish it, as many have asked me about it. (I made several
presentations to the Chinese communities in the Washington DC area after
the initial announcement of the first International MJ tournament.) Any
leads of addresses and contacts in China would be most welcome, and
contributions will be duly acknowledged in the book. Thanks.

David Li
22 answers Last reply
More about inquiry latest jong rules china
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    >From: David H Li <davidli@erols.com>
    >
    >The purpose of this posting, however, is to inquire whether
    >International MJ Rules previously promulgated by China's Sports
    >Commission have been revised or finalized.
    >... Any
    >leads of addresses and contacts in China would be most welcome, and
    >contributions will be duly acknowledged in the book. Thanks.

    Hi David,

    To the best of my knowledge, the rules have not yet been revised. I predict
    that they will be revised sometime in 2005 or early 2006. They may never be
    "finalized."

    Since I can't read Chinese, the best I can do is post scans of the cards and
    addresses I collected. Go to http://www.sloperama.com/WCMJ/cmoccards.htm

    Cheers,
    Tom
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    I wish to thank Tom Sloper for his prompt and extremely useful addresses. I
    shall write to them and seek visits with him during my stay in China, and I'll
    this newsgroup posted. Thanks again. David Li

    Tom Sloper wrote:.

    > Since I can't read Chinese, the best I can do is post scans of the cards and
    > addresses I collected. Go to http://www.sloperama.com/WCMJ/cmoccards.htm
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Tom
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    David H Li <davidli@erols.com> wrote in message news:<411B6A4F.6A671FD5@erols.com>...
    [...]
    >
    > The purpose of this posting, however, is to inquire whether
    > International MJ Rules previously promulgated by China's Sports
    > Commission have been revised or finalized. Earlier, when the first
    > International MJ Championship was scheduled for Ningbo, I made
    [...]

    Hello David,

    I'm just curious, a learned and educated writer like you, by saying
    "International MJ Rules" could you explain what do you mean or refer
    to?

    The rules approved by the China's Sports Commission is called Chinese
    Mahjong Contest Rules (translated name). The Chinese Government do not
    call their mahjong rules "International Rules" or "Official
    International Rules". Shouldn't we also call it by its original name
    when we refer to its entire contents or make use of it (i.e., the
    entire set of rules)?

    I don't quite understand, why people don't respect the origin of the
    work and the copyright of the owner (the Chinese Government), by
    simply calling the rules by its original title? Does it mean something
    by using the entire contents of the Chinese Mahjong Contest Rules but
    calling it by other name in other language? Copyright and piracy
    co-exist?

    Again, just curious!

    Cofa Tsui
    www.iMahjong.com
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    Good morning


    On 2004-08-17 10:17:45 +0200, cofatsui@hotmail.com (Cofa Tsui) said:

    > I'm just curious, a learned and educated writer like you, by saying
    > "International MJ Rules" could you explain what do you mean or refer
    > to?
    >
    > The rules approved by the China's Sports Commission is called Chinese
    > Mahjong Contest Rules (translated name). The Chinese Government do not
    > call their mahjong rules "International Rules" or "Official
    > International Rules". Shouldn't we also call it by its original name
    > when we refer to its entire contents or make use of it (i.e., the
    > entire set of rules)?
    >
    > I don't quite understand, why people don't respect the origin of the
    > work and the copyright of the owner (the Chinese Government), by

    I do understand. Mahjong is not a matter of copyright. It is a treasure
    of mankind, just as the games of chess or soccer. In the little
    Rulebook, translated by Ryan Morris, they are called Official
    International rules. Whether this translation is right or wrong, I do
    not know, and to me this is not important, as long as I see that people
    enjoy these rules very much and that they might - just might - grow out
    to be *an* international standard one day.
    I have asked the publishers of the rulebook several times if I could
    re-publish the rules, e.g. on my website, in the original form or in
    translation. The publisher was *very glad* with the Dutch, German,
    French and Italian translations and never bothered about copyrights.

    And no, my dear friend Cofa, I will *not* discuss the copyright matter
    with you here (^_^)

    Greetings


    --


    |
    |Martin Rep
    |The Independent Internet Mahjong Newspaper
    |Mahjong News:
    |www.mahjongnews.com
    |The Dutch Championship Riichi Mahjong:
    |www.riichi.tk
    |The Golden Dragon Hong Kong Mahjong Club:
    |www.gouden-draak.nl
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Martin Rep" <mrep@mahjongnews.com> wrote in message
    news:4123e4e6$0$34762$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...

    [...]
    >
    > I do understand. Mahjong is not a matter of copyright. It is a treasure
    > of mankind, just as the games of chess or soccer. In the little

    I have the same belief as yours, Martin! However, I also believe things are
    different if a brand name is added to it. You certainly understand the
    differences between MAHJONG and 4WINDS MAHJONG!?

    > Rulebook, translated by Ryan Morris, they are called Official
    > International rules. Whether this translation is right or wrong, I do
    > not know, and to me this is not important, as long as I see that people
    > enjoy these rules very much and that they might - just might - grow out
    > to be *an* international standard one day.
    > I have asked the publishers of the rulebook several times if I could
    > re-publish the rules, e.g. on my website, in the original form or in
    > translation. The publisher was *very glad* with the Dutch, German,
    > French and Italian translations and never bothered about copyrights.

    (I am not sure if Mr Ryan Morris has such authority. If he does, this is
    very well!)

    >
    > And no, my dear friend Cofa, I will *not* discuss the copyright matter
    > with you here (^_^)

    Don't worry Martin, I didn't mean to discuss any copyright matter either,
    but matter about the moral standards people should have about other's
    copyrights! I believe, at least, people here are very right every time by
    expelling those who post in this newsgroup and ask for key or password of
    copyrighted games!

    Cheers!

    Cofa Tsui
    www.iMahjong.com
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    On 2004-08-19 05:54:53 +0200, "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> said:

    >> I have asked the publishers of the rulebook several times if I could
    >> re-publish the rules, e.g. on my website, in the original form or in
    >> translation. The publisher was *very glad* with the Dutch, German,
    >> French and Italian translations and never bothered about copyrights.
    >
    > (I am not sure if Mr Ryan Morris has such authority. If he does, this is
    > very well!)

    No, I did not ask Mr. Morris, but the publishing house, i.e. Takeshobo.
    --


    |
    |Martin Rep
    |The Independent Internet Mahjong Newspaper
    |Mahjong News:
    |www.mahjongnews.com
    |The Dutch Championship Riichi Mahjong:
    |www.riichi.tk
    |The Golden Dragon Hong Kong Mahjong Club:
    |www.gouden-draak.nl
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Martin Rep" <mrep@mahjongnews.com> wrote in message
    news:41245d92$0$36860$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    > On 2004-08-19 05:54:53 +0200, "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> said:
    >
    > >> I have asked the publishers of the rulebook several times if I could
    > >> re-publish the rules, e.g. on my website, in the original form or in
    > >> translation. The publisher was *very glad* with the Dutch, German,
    > >> French and Italian translations and never bothered about copyrights.
    > >
    > > (I am not sure if Mr Ryan Morris has such authority. If he does, this is
    > > very well!)
    >
    > No, I did not ask Mr. Morris, but the publishing house, i.e. Takeshobo.
    > --

    But the principle is the same. (I am not sure if Takeshobo...)
    In fact, shouldn't the State Bureau For Physical Sports Of China(*) be asked
    instead?

    Cofa Tsui
    www.iMahjong.com

    * Correct name for "China's Sports Commission".
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> writes:

    > "Martin Rep" <mrep@mahjongnews.com> wrote in message
    >> No, I did not ask Mr. Morris, but the publishing house, i.e. Takeshobo.

    > But the principle is the same. (I am not sure if Takeshobo...)
    > In fact, shouldn't the State Bureau For Physical Sports Of China(*) be asked
    > instead?

    It depends. Given that Takeshobo apparently translated and published
    the rules at their own expense, it's not unlikely that their agreement
    with the China Sport Commission included sublicensing and additional
    translation rights.

    > * Correct name for "China's Sports Commission".

    The official (i.e. used in PRC government publications in English)
    English name of the China Sport Commission was "State Physical Culture
    and Sports Commission"; and it's now been abolished.
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    Although this isn't supposed to be a forum on legal issues, let me as a
    publisher contribute this:

    Titles cannot be copyrighted. You can publish a song titled "Heartache"
    and I can do the same. You can publish a book titled "Mahjong Rules" and
    I can do the same. It is the content (the tune, the lyrics, or the exact
    verbiage) that is subject to copyright protection.

    --
    J. R. Fitch
    Nine Dragons Software
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Julian Bradfield" <jcb@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
    news:e6csmajt43g.fsf@palau.inf.ed.ac.uk...
    > "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> writes:
    >
    > > "Martin Rep" <mrep@mahjongnews.com> wrote in message
    > >> No, I did not ask Mr. Morris, but the publishing house, i.e. Takeshobo.
    >
    > > But the principle is the same. (I am not sure if Takeshobo...)
    > > In fact, shouldn't the State Bureau For Physical Sports Of China(*) be
    asked
    > > instead?
    >
    > It depends. Given that Takeshobo apparently translated and published
    > the rules at their own expense, it's not unlikely that their agreement
    > with the China Sport Commission included sublicensing and additional
    > translation rights.

    Certainly! If they have an agreement that agreement shall have a direction.
    But I can hardly imagine the Chinese Authority would give an agreement (if
    any) that would also give the licensee the power to allow others to publish
    their work (the Chinese Government's work, or the CMCR).

    > > * Correct name for "China's Sports Commission".
    >
    > The official (i.e. used in PRC government publications in English)
    > English name of the China Sport Commission was "State Physical Culture
    > and Sports Commission"; and it's now been abolished.

    Thanks for the update. I got the name "State Bureau For Physical Sports Of
    China" from the local Chinese Consulate General in December 1998. I just did
    a research and found a department called General Administration Of Sport
    (http://www.sport.gov.cn/). Would this be the current name?

    Cofa Tsui
    www.iMahjong.com
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> writes:

    > Certainly! If they have an agreement that agreement shall have a direction.
    > But I can hardly imagine the Chinese Authority would give an agreement (if
    > any) that would also give the licensee the power to allow others to publish
    > their work (the Chinese Government's work, or the CMCR).

    Why not? Such agreements with publishers are quite normal.

    > a research and found a department called General Administration Of Sport
    > (http://www.sport.gov.cn/). Would this be the current name?

    You tell me - you read Chinese! All I know is that the Commission was
    abolished a couple of years ago and its functions entrusted to "the
    all-China Sports Federation". Maybe the Party couldn't cope with
    this much formal detachment from government and re-created a
    government department?
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Julian Bradfield" <jcb@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
    news:e6c4qmy2s1k.fsf@palau.inf.ed.ac.uk...
    > "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> writes:
    >
    > > Certainly! If they have an agreement that agreement shall have a
    direction.
    > > But I can hardly imagine the Chinese Authority would give an agreement
    (if
    > > any) that would also give the licensee the power to allow others to
    publish
    > > their work (the Chinese Government's work, or the CMCR).
    >
    > Why not? Such agreements with publishers are quite normal.

    Because this will leave the owner out of control of the original work.

    >
    > > a research and found a department called General Administration Of Sport
    > > (http://www.sport.gov.cn/). Would this be the current name?
    >
    > You tell me - you read Chinese! All I know is that the Commission was
    > abolished a couple of years ago and its functions entrusted to "the
    > all-China Sports Federation". Maybe the Party couldn't cope with
    > this much formal detachment from government and re-created a
    > government department?

    I went through the site again. I could not find the old (English) names so I
    could not compare. However, when I compare the Chinese name of the site it
    is the same as the one appears on the CMCR book (Chinese version). So it is
    now certain that General Administration Of Sport is the new name.

    Cheers!

    Cofa Tsui
    www.iMahjong.com
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:20:31 GMT, "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com>
    wrote:


    >But the principle is the same. (I am not sure if Takeshobo...)
    >In fact, shouldn't the State Bureau For Physical Sports Of China(*) be asked
    >instead?


    I know there's a danger I get involved in a copyright discussion with
    you, and that I do not want...
    But: no. The principle is the same. The rules are free. Just as the
    rules for soccer are free, and for chess. They can freely be copied
    all over the world.
    But if someone writes a book about it, then there is copyright
    involved. I.e., because of the way that the hands are described, the
    examples that are chosen, etc. I asked permission to the copyright
    holder of those descriptions to Takeshobo. The Chinese commission has
    nothing to say about that, just as the FIFA cannot prevent me from
    publishing the soccer rules (but they can forbid me to copy them from
    their formal handbook).

    Okay, these were *my* final words about this matter. Just one little
    thing:


    Cofa, why do you bother about the copyright of a game that is given to
    the whole mankind? Did it ever occur to you that *no one* plays your
    mahjong rules, perhaps *because* you hide them behind some copyright?
    While e.g. the Official Internatioanl Rules of 1998 are slowly but
    surely becoming a success?

    Regards


    >
    >Cofa Tsui
    >www.iMahjong.com
    >
    >* Correct name for "China's Sports Commission".
    >

    |
    |Martin Rep
    |The Independent Internet Mahjong Newspaper
    |Mahjong News:
    |www.mahjongnews.com
    |The Dutch Championship Riichi Mahjong:
    |www.riichi.tk
    |The Golden Dragon Hong Kong Mahjong Club:
    |www.gouden-draak.nl
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    Martin Rep <mrep@mahjongnews.com> writes:

    > I know there's a danger I get involved in a copyright discussion with
    > you [Cofa], and that I do not want...

    No, because you'd lose. As I have remarked before, your definition
    of copyright is lax, to say the least.

    > But: no. The principle is the same. The rules are free. Just as the
    > rules for soccer are free, and for chess. They can freely be copied
    > all over the world.

    The rules of Mah-Jong in general are, because they've been around a
    long time. The composite entity that is the Chinese National Rules
    cannot be copied or translated without permission, though you can try
    to describe its contents without copying.

    > nothing to say about that, just as the FIFA cannot prevent me from
    > publishing the soccer rules (but they can forbid me to copy them from
    > their formal handbook).

    And since the rules are those in the formal handbook, how will you
    publish the rules without copying?

    > Cofa, why do you bother about the copyright of a game that is given to
    > the whole mankind? Did it ever occur to you that *no one* plays your
    > mahjong rules, perhaps *because* you hide them behind some copyright?

    Now here I agree with you. It's possible the China Sports Commission
    and its successors are actually interested in promoting Mah-Jong, and
    have no interest in restricting publication of their rules.

    > While e.g. the Official Internatioanl Rules of 1998 are slowly but

    And here I agree with Cofa. They are *not* the official international
    rules. Indeed, they are actually called "Chinese Mah-Jong Competition
    Rules", if you look at the cover of the (original) book.
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Julian Bradfield" <jcb@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
    news:e6c6579in4h.fsf@palau.inf.ed.ac.uk...
    > Martin Rep <mrep@mahjongnews.com> writes:
    >

    [...]
    Thanks Julian for answering to those copyright issues.

    >
    > > Cofa, why do you bother about the copyright of a game that is given to
    > > the whole mankind? Did it ever occur to you that *no one* plays your
    > > mahjong rules, perhaps *because* you hide them behind some copyright?

    The game of mahjong doesn't have copyright (for many historical reasons).
    How it is being promoted or distributed doesn't bother me at all. However,
    the Chinese Mahjong Contest Rules is a work protected by copyright laws and
    treaties. Applying its entire contents in other language and calling it by a
    different name not agreed with or authorized by the original owner of the
    work is the topic I wanted to bring up for discussion (on the assumption
    that there is no such agreement or authorization from the Chinese Government
    that is already in place).

    It also has nothing to do with my copyrighted work or with any copyrighted
    titles of other authors. The 4W Mahjong and 9 Drag Mahjong (sample names)
    are simply not free gifts to the mankind. They are copyrighted but they
    could still be popular.

    >
    > Now here I agree with you. It's possible the China Sports Commission
    > and its successors are actually interested in promoting Mah-Jong, and
    > have no interest in restricting publication of their rules.

    Apart from copyright issues, if the established Chinese Mahjong Contest
    Rules can be translated and copied and dealt with in whatever manners
    without the control or management of the original author, there will be a
    chance this particular rule set will deviate and soon or later players will
    play by many different rules again. (Currently people other the Chinese
    Officials are already calling it by different names!)

    >
    > > While e.g. the Official Internatioanl Rules of 1998 are slowly but
    >
    > And here I agree with Cofa. They are *not* the official international
    > rules. Indeed, they are actually called "Chinese Mah-Jong Competition
    > Rules", if you look at the cover of the (original) book.

    That's exactly the issue I wanted to bring up for discussion:
    QUOTED
    I don't quite understand, why people don't respect the origin of the
    work and the copyright of the owner (the Chinese Government), by
    simply calling the rules by its original title? Does it mean something
    by using the entire contents of the Chinese Mahjong Contest Rules but
    calling it by other name in other language? Copyright and piracy
    co-exist?
    UNQUOTED

    Cofa Tsui
    www.iMahjong.com
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> writes:

    > It also has nothing to do with my copyrighted work or with any copyrighted
    > titles of other authors. The 4W Mahjong and 9 Drag Mahjong (sample names)
    > are simply not free gifts to the mankind. They are copyrighted but they
    > could still be popular.

    Titles are not (in general) copyright, although this varies a bit
    according to jurisdiction. The names of games etc. are protected by
    trademark law, which is quite different.

    > calling it by other name in other language? Copyright and piracy
    > co-exist?

    Piracy means boarding a ship with guns or knives and stealing its
    cargo by force. Please don't abuse the term to mean unlawful copying.
  17. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Julian Bradfield" <jcb@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
    news:e6c4qmsg1hy.fsf@palau.inf.ed.ac.uk...
    > "Cofa Tsui" <cofatsui@hotmail.com> writes:
    >
    > > calling it by other name in other language? Copyright and piracy
    > > co-exist?
    >
    > Piracy means boarding a ship with guns or knives and stealing its
    > cargo by force. Please don't abuse the term to mean unlawful copying.

    For "piracy" the following meanings are found at Dictionary.com
    (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Piracy):

    "The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material:
    software piracy."

    "the act of plagiarizing; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were
    your own"

    Cofa Tsui
    www.iMahjong.com
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    From: Julian Bradfield <jcb@inf.ed.ac.uk>

    >Piracy means boarding a ship with guns or knives and stealing its
    >cargo by force. Please don't abuse the term to mean unlawful copying.

    I agree that the term piracy is rarely used (if at all) in regards to misuse
    of intellectual property in written form. But the term is widely used, and
    commonly accepted, in reference to misuse of intellectual property in
    recorded media (videotapes, video discs, and game software)..... whether or
    not certain language purists in the language's mother land are made unhappy
    by the fact. (^_^)

    http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=piracy&x=17&y=14

    Cheers,
    Tom

    P.S. I did note that the Britannica page (at least, the free page) on this
    term discusses only the high seas and airliner use of the term. Britannica
    is not the only acceptable reference on the language..... whether or not
    certain language purists in Britain are made unhappy by the fact. (^_^)
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    "Tom Sloper" <tomster@sloperamaNOSPAM.com> writes:

    > of intellectual property in written form. But the term is widely used, and
    > commonly accepted, in reference to misuse of intellectual property in

    Yes - but it's a rather sordid attempt at emotional manipulation by
    one side of an argument. Piracy in the traditional sense is violent
    crime by anybody's standards, and involves depriving people of their
    tangible property. Copyright infringement deprives nobody of their
    property, and is not violent. Conflating the two gives credence to the
    idea of intellectual "property", which is a concept that has to be
    justified, and so gives credence to the idea that copying is similar
    to theft, whereas it is entirely different.
    If one wishes to argue for copyright laws, one should do so on
    rational grounds, not on the basis of emotions generated by false
    analogies.
  20. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    Okay, I would agree that piracy is more akin to robbery than to theft.

    > [J. B.]..and so gives credence to the idea that copying is similar
    > to theft, whereas it is entirely different.

    Copying for profit, where that profit could have and would have gone to
    the originator, is theft.

    Yes, it's all very debateable. Lofty ideas abound, but coming down from
    the ivory tower to street level, it's clear enough (especially to one
    who is in fact such an originator):

    - this intellectual property must have value, otherwise no one would
    want to take it
    - if they take that value, use methods of neglible cost to
    mass-reproduce it, and harvest gross profits
    - then they are getting something for nothing.

    This makes them a) very clever, b) magicians, or c) thieves.

    Take your pick.

    --
    J. R. Fitch
    Nine Dragons Software
  21. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    In article <412BE0F8.FBEF6F8A@ninedragons.com>,
    J. R. Fitch <jrfitch@ninedragons.com> wrote:
    >Copying for profit, where that profit could have and would have gone to
    >the originator, is theft.

    No. Theft means taking something from somebody else.
    Besides which, it's frequently unclear that the profit *would* have
    gone to the originator. People who buy cheap illicit copies would not
    necessarily buy expensive licit copies - the idea that they would is
    another dishonest rhetorical device. (Think about it: an honest copy
    of Windows costs more than a month's income for most of the world's
    population.)

    >the ivory tower to street level, it's clear enough (especially to one
    >who is in fact such an originator):

    I'm also an originator of "intellectual property", and
    it's clear enough to me that making a profit out of somebody else's
    ideas is entirely different from taking their silverware. It may or
    may not be undesirable, but it's different.
    And if you can't see the difference between having your money stolen
    and taking less profit than you otherwise might, you don't understand
    market economies!

    > - this intellectual property must have value, otherwise no one would
    >want to take it

    Nobody is taking anything. There is nothing to take. If somebody
    copies your game without your permission, what is it that you no
    longer have?

    > - then they are getting something for nothing.
    > This makes them a) very clever, b) magicians, or c) thieves.

    Good businessmen, actually - that's what business is about, finding
    products or services on which you can make a good profit.

    (I understand the annoyance quite well - my first book was copied and
    sold, without permission or payment, by a certain Dutch organization,
    which I only found out when somebody asked me to sign one of their
    copies! However, even though it meant I made less money that I might,
    and more importantly I was very offended by the discourtesy, I have no
    difficulty in distinguishing this from being mugged in the street and
    having the same amount of money removed from my wallet.)
  22. Archived from groups: rec.games.mahjong (More info?)

    In message <e6c4qmsg1hy.fsf@palau.inf.ed.ac.uk>, Julian Bradfield
    <jcb@inf.ed.ac.uk> writes

    >Piracy means boarding a ship with guns or knives and stealing its
    >cargo by force. Please don't abuse the term to mean unlawful copying.

    IANAL but I think this is incorrect. Legally, "piracy" covers any crime
    committed on the high seas.

    Nick
    --
    Nick Wedd nick@maproom.co.uk
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games