Not a problem. Many things in this world is ridiculous, read the case of my recent brush with Singapore's traffic police. If they don't listen, people are going to be very unhappy, but what else can we do?
Just a point: There is in real no such thing as 'internet copyright'. Not yet.
Let me explain this point.
Assuming people don't blog because tech has advanced to the point that the brain wave can create 3D representative of yourself and act (in place of words) in the cyberspace. Now, this is highly to understand since we already have 3D world in some 'environment'.
Now what happen when you choose a 3D design using the environment's software and create your own character? There is a high chance that a following member will bang into the design of character of an earlier member. By rigid (and nosensical) intepretation of laws,there will be fights over 'copyrights', but it is just 'personalisation'.
Can anyone say that is internet copyright? In real, there is no such things as internet laws for the world, for the world of cyberspace.
Using this to illustrate, if this laws are upheld, then what happened when a 3D character representing you is 'murdered' by another angry netizen's 3D character? Where is the law to kill your murderer 'an eye for an eye'? You are dead, if you go by any valid laws... hahahaha... As I have said, there is no sense while importing real life laws to impose on part of virtual reality and say the other laws are invalid. What nosense is that?
But if you really do so by import or applying real-life (or traditional) laws on cyberspace, that's even a bigger nosense. No justice at all, so why do we need courts?
Of course, the point is, nobody really owns the internet, and that's because we have a simple UN charter when the 'residents of cyberspace' are sharing this (virtual) 'land'.
Besides, deleting your blog is wordpress' business. I use 'business' because in reality, it depends on WordPress' ideology. Now if I were to use $1m to lure wordpress to remove your blog... Will WordPress not hesitate saying No? But then again, you can create another blog with maybe a back up copy or a repeat. So it's either I pay $1m again and again to close your blog or it's pretty pointless.
It's not 'using something from a game' that is the point. It's 'how you use it' which is the point.
For instance, a Judge may himself took a picture and place it in his blog. Now, the picture may have the (copyright) of a Mercedes, the (copyright of design) of a new shopping mall, the (copyright of design) of various products laying on the streets and malls, and even the courts (when people bring in, such as T-shirts, shoes...), and of course, you may even have posters and newspapers and magazines all shot in. If he took not a picture but a video, songs may be heard! And that's copyright as well. There was a company who has indeed so absurdly sued for home video with its song heard.
So this judge could 'infrign copyrights' with just a harmless shot with the digital camera if he judge things that way. LOL~
Saying this is helping merely to point out something.
Courts around the world doesn't have necessarily the expert brains to handle such cases. So you also need to know certain things and you have to watch out.