User talk:Liquidhelium

Note: I dislike having a long talk page, since it increases the scrolling distance to get to my newest messages. Therefore, don't be surprised if conversations disappear into my black hole.

Anyone who uses British spelling or date format on my talk page can expect to be swiftly ignored.

hello
-- 17:29, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * nou -- 17:42, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Your signature colours are repulsive and vomitous. -- 17:53, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * i agree wit tat guy. my sig is pretty. 18:03, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

lol
i bet i could beat that, gimme a few years. 02:02, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Logo
Don't delete it. It is used in the heroes theme made by mark. It wasn't uploaded for the competition. 06:36, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * See RS:NOT: "The wiki is not Photobucket, Imageshack, or Flickr, either. All uploaded images and videos must serve a purpose that is useful to the project. This means that fake images are disallowed, and images or videos in general that are not used in article space, or is under discussion in a forum, may be deleted at any time." Thought you should keep that in mind, in case you weren't aware. 11:58, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

RE:UOL
I changed the page so it does not make any mention of an in-game lesson. These in-game lessons, while a nice idea, would be nearly impossible to get up and running. Instead, one reads the material on their own, but are able to contact any of the users on the teacher list for support. I should probably implement some system of removing users from the list should they go inactive as well. Anyway, with that change (which I have been meaning to implement for some time), there is reason to put the link back on the list. 16:36, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Originally I wanted two deans, each with a broad enough understanding of the wiki to pass people off for anything that comes up. Tlul and Rwojy fit this bill, though it eventually became clear that people would ask me to do this anyway. As for why I picked Tlul when I went to propose the guild, I can't think of any particular reason other than what was said above. 16:42, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't need more for Basic Formatting (even though I would accept applications), but Templates could use some support. 16:45, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * How about you hop on IRC and I will tell you. 20:37, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Re:BurnettBot
I've unblocked it because I only ran it in semi automated mode, fully monitored by me, as a demo for the discussion. This is not prohibited per RS:BOTS. That is the only time the "bot" has been run, and the only time it will run until the community reaches consensus. -- 18:39, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good -- 18:54, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

IRC
Can you get on plox? 21:51, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * See? That's why I want the clean delete :P 02:33, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * But ya, if I ever get one of these ideas to do something through my head again I'll start a YG drama thread on it. 02:35, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I already new about it first, and thought it was okay, but i didn't realize it wuz gone when i clikd teh 'Kill it with fire' button. 02:36, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * tats wrong, man. its fien for you to spam/vandle us, but not fur us 2 vandle u????? hypocrite@@@@@@@@@@@ 02:39, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Hey
Lol. Yea I was trying to figure it out but nothing seemed to work. Noticed that it was blank, so that didn't seem right. Tried to install the auto welcome and cvu, but it doesn't seem like anything is happening =\ Sc0tty 02:45, August 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yea I tried that right after installing the auto welcome. Still seems like nothing has changed yet. Also force refreshed and such on Chrome. Sc0tty 02:47, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

stawp
stawp beating me to blawks kthx 02:45, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Windows
WINDOWS 7 ULTIMATE@@@@ -- 12:02, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why? -- 14:31, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * lol -- 14:35, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * ... -- 14:48, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * ok -- 14:51, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * epic fail -- 14:45, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

re:Personal Image
What do you mean? i didn't upload a personal picture.

As you can read on my talk page Evil1888 already told me this. I read this and updated the images to html.

Strange userpage...
It appears as though this account may be used by multiple people, unless they enjoy welcoming themselves It also appears as though they got no welcome message from another user, and that psycho removed some postings for no evident reason. Idk whats going on, if anything, and its more then likely nothing bad is happening, but I though I'd give you a heads up, since it seemed strange. 02:38, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Re:FFFFFUUUUUU
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100629234135/ajraddatz/images/5/5e/Going-Down-FFFFUUUU.jpg 14:30, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Sysop bots
Transfer of sysop tools only applies to human accounts, due to the fact that a bot is a series of lines of coding created by the user, we must trust both the user and the coding, there are also different standards applied to bots than humans in terms distribution of these tools by the community.-- 21:47, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * AWB is a process that requires both the input and judgment of the user, as I have previously stated, the tools would be transferred due to this distinction.-- 22:18, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

IRC
Can you pop on for a while at this time? Thanks, 22:16, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nao. 23:19, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

stuff
we had already stoppeds, so stawp adding stuff to eet. ktxbai. 23:17, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Recent block
I would have beat you to blocking 71.23.145.27, except I wrote in my usual summary of "Vandalism", remembered what you said, deleted that and looked down the checklist, found the right one, looked at the RC in another window and saw you block him about a second before I pressed the block button. Congrats D:< 01:33, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Re:10,000th edit
You're catching up to me >:( -- 14:35, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I edited his archive, not his talk page -- 14:47, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I could change it to read "quest items do not include rewards" and change holy book back to no... -- 21:43, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

RE: GEMW Script
The ability to update an item with the same price is intended, to let items that rarely change price still maintain a recent last update time (see Forum:GEMW_Script). I can try adding a minimum time between updates when the price is the same, though. -- 23:30, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Hilite
nuffink -- 19:44, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't like the green. -- 19:54, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * A block doesn't intimidate them enough? :O -- 19:58, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * User talk:Liquidhelium/Notes about adminship/Coalition? -- 20:01, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with my current signature? -- 21:55, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * You spelled section wrong. -- 22:57, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * LIQUID - I SPELL - LIMA INDIA QUEBEC UNIFORM INDIA DELTA - LIQUID - HELM - I SPELL - HOTEL ECHO LIMA MIKE - HELM - OVER -- 23:03, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * i change teh sig -- 23:18, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * amg qubec tats in canadia rite/??/ 23:26, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * ye -- 23:27, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * it must be kewl then 23:29, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

lolwut
is this? -- 22:01, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * It is quite interesting. -- 14:49, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Re:directs
That's gaming the system. 01:02, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah but it does exist! Anyone could pour some liquid helium on their computer and get to your userpage. 02:29, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Shame
Corporal is so pretty, even if they can't do anything. 01:08, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

btw
While Rwojy wrote the thing, the stuff in it was devised about equally by both of us. 02:16, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, the word "eh" is reserved for Canadians only. If you use it again then I will be forced to pick your fingernails off one by one. Regards, 02:27, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, I like opposing RfDs on other wikis too ^.^ 02:28, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

'most active user wasn't meant to be me.' I may have to change that. 02:37, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

btw
hao much tehy pay u 2 writ tat??? 01:39, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Forum:Modifications to AOTM
Degen archived it already... so un-archive it. 22:13, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * That was the fastest I've seen of a forum thread being archived, then un-archived, then re-archived. The page only existed for 18 mins.  22:22, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

My user page
I'm on a lot but I don't really consider myself to be actively playing. When I'm on, all I'm doing is growing pets and taking pictures of them. Half the time I'm not even paying attention to the game, and when I actually am paying attention, I'm not doing anything but talking in the clan chat. 22:45, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Abyssal demon head
Seeing as I just recently received one, and put it in my house, should I go ahead and add the dialogue to the mounted head page? Coelacanth0794 23:54, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks :P Coelacanth0794 00:27, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I also forgot until now, but the page names for these are Abyssal demon head, while the actual in-game is simply abyssal head. Should they be moved? Coelacanth0794 14:00, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just catching your attention, I received another one today, if you need proof, I can take a picture that shows its ingame name is Abyssal head. Coelacanth0794 23:29, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey thanks Coelacanth0794 23:46, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

World 30
Just so you know world 29 was offline for like 6 months so we had to temporarily adopt world 30 as the free to play wiki world in the meantime  00:01, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Blue Outfit
Hey! Can you tell me what the name of this robe is? Thanks!

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/4750/blueoutfit.png

00:57, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

bad faith
Isn't this assuming bad faith? How do you know its fake? I'm guessing it is, but don't you have to do more then guessing? 02:47, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Fewer than 50 kills
I noticed you reverted a few Charm Log updates with fewer than 50 kills today. I also recall seeing part of a discussion on the validity of the minimum sample size being 50, though I didn't follow it all or notice if there was an actionable consensus. However, one reason folks may be adding samples less than 50 in size is this edit. So was there an actionable consensus on anything like this? --Saftzie 06:57, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

29,000 edits
Only 14,000 more edits until I can catch up to Rich Farmbrough! -- 21:51, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

What are you smoking?
On an RfD, if there is no consensus, then the article is kept. You are proposing to delete the article, so when consensus fails, no action is taken (it is kept). Additionally, you have no right to close that. You are not neutral, I see a "Strong Delete" from you. 22:54, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * At any rate, let it be closed by a neutral admin. Also, it was nominated for deletion. There is no consensus for it to be deleted. Regardless of policy, it should then be kept, because there is not consensus to do otherwise. There isn't even consensus to say that this article falls under that policy. As such, keep it, but at the very least let it be closed by a neutral admin. 23:00, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

released
it is now released officially. Me and ajr will be linking to it, and my new sig is not subtle at all. 00:32, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Lores
Well, I don't really know what to say. The wiki would not be hurt by linking to the Lores as they are a low-profile group of pages. Updates, on the other hand, are very often read. I believe Robert or Left said that Updates could be considered press releases and therefore not under copyright, but I'm not sure. I think we started this discussion before, but never got around to doing anything about it. I agree a YG thread would be the best course of action, but I'll need some time (and more information) to formulate my own opinion on it. 00:37, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Copyright issues
Bah, there's no need to create that much work over something that Jagex themselves isn't even concerned about. Just replace the content as it's a genuine attempt to be in compliance with the law. If they request a purging of the page histories then we'll wipe the histories, however, removing the offending content should be sufficient.-- 02:07, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I told you the exact same thing but you didn't believe me :o 02:08, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I must say you're beyond my legal expertise (or lack thereof). Try asking Leftiness about it, maybe.   06:41, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

RE: RSMV in the Previously Rejected Proposals
Allow me to write the reasoning? I would prefer to seal up as many loopholes as possible so as to actually prevent people from bringing it up notwithstanding a license from Jagex or copyright law reform. It may take a book. Leftiness 03:07, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

@@@@@@@
Thank god -- 18:27, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * srsly? -- 23:10, September 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 23:13, September 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Grrr..... -- 23:16, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Mexicans
lmfao -- 20:17, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * The great Merovingian deigned to post after four years and five months -- 22:33, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

User:Liquidhelium/Sandbox/Requests_for_rollback
How hard is it for 'crats to check that? Seriously, you are over-complicating a simple process. 20:34, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

RE:Wikifest
There's not much more to be done, as the only remaining task is to determine how much time we will spend at each event. I had a time of day in mind that fit comfortably for all the timezones the fest is supposed to cover, but I've forgotten what it was. I will have to look at a chart and figure it out again. 20:43, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Why close threads?
Even if there won't be any concensus, why close the thread? Look at this rsmv issue, its had like 5 threads already- why not just have all on 1 thread, instead of closing them? Unless server space is an issue, I don't see why we should be cutting discussions short. 21:14, September 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Its no pain for me or left, and we are really the only1s involved... 22:00, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

User redirect
Well, the way I see it, its fine to do that because it doesn't just benefit him or wojwoj, nor is it just going to be used as a shortcut. Its to direct people towards a common spot of dicussion about administrators. Its for the benefit of other users, not themselves. 22:00, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * How so? I thought the outcome of the thread was that user related redirects could be used for maintenance purposes, account switching, and for the ease of other users. I think that rabbitz's redirect was part for maintenance and part for ease of other users. The intent was to stop users from abusing redirects for personal gain, whether its to make use of a nickname or a shortcut as Joeytje did. 22:06, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Good good... Now... Go jump off a bridge...
 * http://a.imageshack.us/img695/1465/hypnotist.jpg
 * 22:20, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Wrote the book and checked it thrice
I'm not a lawyer. I'm not pretending to be a lawyer, or a judge, or a jury. I have never studied law. At the time of this writing, I'm an 18-year-old college freshman majoring in business management. I played Runescape from 2003, at the end of classic, until about 2006 before "quitting," and, as all quitters do, I went back and played a bit in 2010, which is also when I joined the Runescape Wiki. I'm a strong advocate of the open-source community, and I oppose many of the DMCA's harsh restrictions on digital content. The purpose for me detailing myself a bit is to show readers that I'm not some nobody that walked in and decided to mess with the Runescape Wiki. I disapprove of many effects that the DMCA has had, but this, at least, is one instance of it working correctly.

The purpose of law isn't to stop people from doing things that are fun. Congressman don't sit in their cozy offices dreaming up ways to further oppress the people. While reduction in liberty is sometimes the unfortunate effect of poorly written law, the purpose of law is to protect the rights of the people.

I believe we're all in agreement that Jagex owns Runescape. They made the game, they made the models, and they put it all together. It's theirs. They can go into the market and release items to counteract price manipulation. They can ban us for no reason. They can take Runescape off the internet for no reason. It's theirs. Since it's theirs, they have the right to tell us what we can do with it. They do so in the terms and conditions.


 * "Jagex Product(s)" is used as shorthand for our online games including all Jagex websites used to play those games. (source)
 * Please read these terms and conditions carefully. Your accepting them in full is a condition of your use of a Jagex product (whether or not you subscribe). If you don't agree with any part, please don't accept them or use the Jagex product. (source)

Notice that anybody who uses a Jagex Product is bound by this agreement and that "use" is a loose term including any interaction with the product. Also notice that "Jagex Product" includes the game Runescape and that the database containing protected Runescape models (the "cache") is part of the game Runescape, so it's covered by this agreement.

The Runescape Model Viewer ("RSMV") is a software created by developers at Moparisthebest (www.moparisthebest.com). It's purpose is to open the cache. If the cache isn't located on the hard drive, it will connect to a Runescape server - World 169 by default, and it will download the cache. It then applies the same methods applied by the Jagex's game client to view the images inside the cache.

Jagex wrote Runescape from scratch. The cache is stored in a secure, proprietary format, and it's protected by the terms and conditions, among other things. Two notable quotations arise from the situations described in this paragraph and the one above.


 * You must not reverse-engineer, decompile or modify any Jagex Product client software in any way (except to the extent allowed by applicable law). (source)
 * What type of third-party software is NOT allowed? ... Software that attempts to communicate directly with our game worlds. (source)

The second quote is self-explanatory, but the first quote warrants some explanation, and it depends on common sense. First, RSMV is the only software except the game client that can read the cache. Second, RSMV was created by people who admitted to reverse-engineering Runescape; they created private servers. Third, the cache is in a proprietary format that Jagex created; they wrote code in their own language. To any other software, the cache files are gibberish because the formatting - the syntax of the code isn't the same as any other software. There's only one way to gain access to a proprietary format: you reverse-engineer the software that uses that proprietary format; you take apart that software and learn how it works. Since the developers at Moparisthebest are admitted reverse-engineerers, it's common sense to say they reverse-engineered the game client, especially because RSMV works; it opens the cache.

Moving on to copyright law, the server that hosts the Runescape Wiki is located in the United States, so any legal action takes place under US law. In the US, the law that applies is called Copyright Law. It's a complex system put in place to protect the rights of people who create things so that other people don't use those things unfairly.

Section 106 begins the parts of copyright that apply to this issue. It says that the owner of copyright has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: reproduce the copyrighted work, prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work, distribute copies of the copyrighted work, and, basically, use the work in any way. Nobody else has the right to use the work under Section 106. However, this was determined unfair because newspapers couldn't print any of the work, and, seriously, you couldn't walk down the street whistling the work or even talk about it with your friend without the author's permission. In response to this Section 107 was created - Fair Use.

To be clear, we don't have Jagex's permission to use any of the Jagex property. We have no permission to use screenshots on articles. We have no permission to quote characters. We have no permission to do anything except play the game. Permission comes in the form of a license, and those of us who agree to the terms are granted a license to use the game; I'll discuss licenses later. To use the Jagex property in our wiki, we depend on fair use. Basically, it says that people can use copyrighted works without the creator's permission for purposes that include criticism and comment; there are other purposes, but they don't apply to us because we use the works for criticism and comment.

The following factors are used to determine if a use is fair. There's no exact number of words, number of seconds, and so on that can be used fairly; it's left up to the courts. Therefore, it's best to use as little as possible for the best reasons as possible.


 * The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes (source)
 * The nature of the copyrighted work (source)
 * The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole (source)
 * The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. (source)

Normally we use the Jagex property for comment. We are non-profit, and we use small pieces of the work; nature and market generally don't apply to our uses. Considering the use of these cache images: the purpose is to comment, we're using a small amount of the entire cache, it doesn't hurt Jagex's pocketbook, and so on. It would seem that there's nothing standing in the way of using cache images on the wiki. However, in 1998 the Digital Millenium Copyright Act ("DMCA") was passed, and it put Section 1201 into effect, among other sections that don't apply to this issue.


 * No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. (source)
 * To “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner (source)
 * Nothing in this section shall require that the design of, or design and selection of parts and components for, a consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing product provide for a response to any particular technological measure (source)
 * A technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work. (source)

In the case of Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes, it's quoted that Congress considers the circumventing of an access-preventing measure described in Section 1201 (a) as "the electronic equivalent of breaking into a locked room in order to obtain a copy of a book." To make this situation easy to understand, I will use their metaphor. The proprietary format of the cache is the "lock." The lock is strong, and it prevents access to the cache inside, which is the "book." According to Section 1201, it's illegal to use RSMV to "pick" that "lock" and access that "book."

According to the three quotes above, the proprietary format is an effective technological measure which prevents access to the cache, and it's illegal to circumvent it. I'll point out that the second quote says that any bypassing, avoiding, and so on of any access-prevention is prohibited, so, since some people insist that a proprietary format doesn't count as encryption, it means that it isn't necessary to "encrypt" the cache - just prevent access. This point is supported by the third quote, which basically says that Jagex doesn't have to make their product "RSMV-proof."

Another point made in support of RSMV was that the access-prevention measure is apparently not effective since RSMV can bypass it. Despite the second and third quotes, the forth quote further provides proof. The cache files obviously require the application of information to be used; they aren't JPEG files ready for viewing. They're protected files, and there's a process that's used to turn them into images in the game. All of this combined with the fact that Jagex's sole permission given is the permission for Runescape account holders to use the game client to play the game, the cache "requires the application of ... a process ... with the authority of the copyright owner to gain access to the work." Furthermore, the terms and conditions at Runescape detail the only agreement made with Jagex in its entirety; because of this, the terms and conditions are the "ordinary operation" of the game Runescape. Since RSMV was created contrary to the section of the contract that prohibits reverse-engineering, RSMV is against the terms, so RSMV is outside the "ordinary operation" of the game Runescape. All of this proves without a doubt that the proprietary format effectively controls access to the work in the ordinary course of operation, so bypassing it to access the cache images is illegal.


 * Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title. (source)

After the technological measure discussion had died down, another discussion involving fair use came up again, and the above quote was used. Since fair use was never truly ruled out when we moved on to discussing the DMCA, it was a valid point. While it at first may seem that the above quote means Fair Use is the way around Section 1201, further research proves otherwise. These two quotes come from this - the US Government summary of the DMCA:


 * Section 1201 divides technological measures into two categories: measures that prevent unauthorized access to a copyrighted work and measures that prevent unauthorized copying of a copyrighted work. (source)
 * Since the fair use doctrine is not a defense to the act of gaining unauthorized access to a work, the act of circumventing a technological measure in order to gain access is prohibited. (source)

These quotes are relatively self-explanatory. Effectively, the quote saying that "Nothing in this section shall affect fair use" really means that it isn't necessarily copyright infringement to circumvent an access-prevention measure, but it is still illegal. Basically, fair use can be used as an exception to Section 106 - not Section 1201. Breaking Section 1201 is a separate crime, so the defendant must be separately tried for copyright infringement and for breaking section 1201; the defendant cannot be charged with copyright infringement solely because he broke Section 1201, and the defendant may use fair use as a defense to his copyright charge, should he have one.

After Mod Calm recently allowed a user of the official Runescape forums to post about the contents of the cache, it seemed like Jagex had a change of heart, since they previously deleted all posts regarding the cache. Ironically, the post seems to have been deleted, since the link no longer functions, but the point is that we need paperwork. We can't count things like Mod Calm not deleting a post as permission to violate Section 1201. For example: Kevorkian was charged with murder after documenting video proof of the consent of those with whom he assisted in suicide.

As said at the top, however, the purpose of law is to protect the rights of the people. Copyright owners do have the right to give away the right to use content, and they have the right to waive their protection under Section 1201. While it would be much simpler for Jagex to simply provide the Runescape Wiki with images that have already been removed from the cache, and it seems that they would do just that if they actually wanted us using cache images, some wanted to know just what would allow us to use cache images, and the answer is: a license would be sufficient. Such a license would have to be detailed with exactly what we have permission to do, and it would have to be filed with federal organizations. However, since Jagex has not given us a license, which isn't very much work for a corporation of their size, it may be assumed that Jagex doesn't want us accessing the cache.

A final supporting point for cache images was the idea that such images could be taken from other sites and used on the wiki; that way none of us would be breaking Section 1201, and we would still get the images. Since all cache images originate from the cache, and since the only way to get those images is to break Section 1201, all cache images are illegally-gained; they can be likened to drugs or child poronography. While it isn't illegal to witness someone selling drugs, it is illegal to take some and begin selling them yourself, even if you obtain it for free. Similarly, it isn't legal to host child poronography even if you aren't the photographer and you just took the pictures from other sites.

Therefore, barring a license, there's currently no way to legally access the cache. If Section 1201 of copyright law is repealed or rewritten, there may be a reason to consider repealing this ban, but, unless we receive a license or unless the law is repealed or rewritten, accessing the images in the cache is illegal, and posting those images on our wiki is distribution of illegally-gained content, and, while I'm in no position to regulate what you do in your personal time on your personal computer, there will be no cache images hosted on this wiki. Leftiness 22:23, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Cache images being disallowed
Does not meet the criteria for Do Not Post. On some of the discussions it had a fair chance of being allowed.--Degenret01 22:31, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

ffuuuuuuuuuuu
That double redirect will drive me insane. 23:05, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I know, that's why my brain is exploding >:( 23:07, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 23:09, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well ya, but you're a noob. That's different. 23:12, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * but but but... D: 23:17, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirects are more efficient for the purpose of making people go to Rwojy's page :3 23:19, September 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. Btw, why am I responding on this page O_o - I am going back to my old bad habits of replying on other's talk pages D: 23:21, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

userpage
NOU -- 00:17, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

awake
irc aince u want to tlalk. 01:57, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Changes to BB
Aye, I had a general sentiment, however, I never got beyond the abstract to be honest.-- 02:43, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Did you know...
[ The River Lum is in Lumbridge?] -- 15:08, September 3, 2010 (UTC)