fchan

>>142
Still missing the point: it's not the age that matters, it's the perceived age, based on visual alone.

There's no reason why I should do so. I've played the game, I've made conclusions based on it. Maybe you should ask the lawyers to play the game as well?

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/17C4.txt tells me that in the USA, works are automatically copyrighted. Many countries follow the US system of copyright. It may be possible that you're confusing with trademark, which registration is required, and better at protecting characters eitherway, in that more restrictions of use are granted.

Meybe you should ask your dad to comment here then. He should know more about this topic and can give better opinions, since several of yours have been proven flawed.

a) You automatically assume that a law isn't valid even though I posted a link to an law school, and that it's been repeatedly mentioned in this thread. It took me 1 minute to simply check google.
b) You know nothing about parody and copyright laws. Either that or you're confused with trademark laws.
c) You know nothing about legal definitions.
d) Canonical age: You keep harping about whether canonical age is a point, when it's obviously out of point. If you're trying to prove it's out of point, you obviously missed the many times I've mentioned that it's the perceived age that matters.

>>143
So you're saying that http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C71.txt is somehow not legal, despite being written into legislation? Again, send complaints to the legislation/government offices, I didn't write that piece. I do not need to post where in that link it is, since the term is easily searchable.