Jump to content
IGNORED

List of Taboo Trademarks


Cybergoth

Recommended Posts

  • 10 months later...

I was just reading the thread here and I know William at elektronite got permission from first star to make a Boulder Dash game for the Intellivision so I would not think they would turn AA down or maybe AA could talk to William and see if he could help with getting permission in making a B.D. Clone for the 2600 or 7800 from First Star. Just a thought

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

This is pretty simple. Game ideas or concepts cannot be patented. However, like all creative works, they are copyrighted. Things like game names and/or characters names and images can be trademarked, which gives them even more protection.

 

What this means is if you want to make a Pacman clone you can. You just can't call it Pacman because I'm sure that name is trademarked. You also can't copy the exact 'levels' of the game (create your own) because those would probably hold under copyright laws. And you can't copy the graphics or images of any trademarked characters. Making the walls or the dots look the same is not a problem, as long as you draw them yourself, but don't copy the same Pacman or ghosts basically.

 

If you want to make a Boulderdash clone go for it. Just don't use any of their level design, or copy their main character or use the name BoulderDash. Call it RockFall if you want, etc.. You can even have him collecting diamonds, although draw them yourself a bit differently.

 

The important thing is to draw all the art yourself and don't use any Trademarked characters or names.

 

In the early days of game IP, game company lawyers got away with way more then they should have. Things that would NEVER hold up in court today. This was because the industry was just getting started and there was a lot of frivolous patents and such getting granted. Nobody knew what to do with these things. But since then, thanks to the user interface wars, we know that computer interfaces cannot be patented. Games are basically user interfaces when you think about it.

 

As an example, I think one of the worse rulings granted in gaming history, was awarded to Richard Garriott's company Origin (of Ultima fame). He actually won a lawsuit against another RPG game, Questron, based on the fact that they also had a game using tile graphics! Garriott's lawyers somehow were able to convince the courts that this was a legit argument and awarded damages to them.

 

The makers of Questron had to pay licensing fees or fines to Origin. This was the equivalent of Garriott's lawyers convincing the courts that Origin was the first to use tile-based graphics and that no other games should be able to use them. Which I am sure they would have loved to patent. However, we now know this was total crap. Any decent programmer (not lawyer) could have argued that bit mapped tile-based graphics were essentially the same as bit-mapped character sets. So this would mean any previous game based on using bitmapped character sets, such as Rogue, could have sued Origin for copying them. The only legit argument would have been if Questron stole Origin’s source code and was using it in their game, which was not the case as far as I know. If Questron came up with their own code and graphics themselves, then there should have been no case. This was just some of the madness that game companies could get away with before the lawyers and courts started really understanding the field better.

 

Bottom line these days... you can make your game function just like any other of your favorite games. If you want to make a Donkey Kong style game go for it. Just don't call it the same, or copy the likeness of the characters or their names, or the games levels. Don’t use their source code or graphics, and create everything yourself from scratch and you should be golden.

 

Companies can not patent ideas like barrels rolling down platforms, or game characters eating dots or diamonds, etc... Companies cannot put a monkey and a plumber in their game and claim that no other game can have a monkey or plumber in it. You just can't use THEIR monkey and plumber, since they are copyright, and most likely trademarked. Sure they may try to come after you with a nasty letter, but they won’t be able to sneak one by the courts like in the old days.

 

Heck Zynga’s entire business model is based off of copying other game mechanics and calling them their own. Is it legal? You bet. Is it shameful? I would hope any game designer with a hint of pride in their craft would think so.

 

 

Anyway I hope this helps! Now go forth and create your "clones" :)

 

 

(Disclaimer: IANAL)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How strict is this stuff today? I saw a lot of recent encouragement to make tie-in games for horror/Halloween film properties like Halloween and The Nightmare Before Christmas. I'm getting some mixed signals, here.

 

And what if someone made a game based on stuff like the Rudolph or Dr. Seuss animated specials? Those things are old and, I would imagine, unlikely to rile up much trouble should one make a tie-in game on a long-outdated console, but where's the actual current state of this sort of thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the bottom line: regardless of what "would hold up in court" or whatever, you do what you can get away with without pissing off someone's legal department. Few of us can afford to defend a lawsuit even if our clones have different names, different level designs and entirely different graphics (see PR), and it's unlikely the EFF would choose one of us as a test case to establish precedent.

 

So, we have this thread to tell would-be retro game developers which properties are higher-risk than others. I would have guessed Namco's higher risk than most, but 15 years later, the only threat I received turned out to be a fake one from an opportunist. Nonetheless, I go to TESS before I look at threads like this. If the trademark is expired, I don't worry about it. If someone is keeping it alive, I try to find out why before I invest time into a project I might have to cancel.

 

Those who berate people for pulling projects because they don't think the threatening companies have a leg to stand on have largely never received a cease and desist letter and don't understand what it's like when tens of thousands of dollars of potential legal bills are staring you in the face and a low likelihood of getting them covered by the company suing you even if you win.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know in the arcade scene Gottlieb enforces their Qbert license HARD. Many reproduction companies have received C&Ds. Just something to think about if anyone is messing with a qbert game :)

Which is funny because Q*Bert was one of the more cloned games back in the day. Especially for platforms that didn't receive an official port (like the Apple II).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q*Bert strikes me as strange too, given that they just renewed several of their trademarks in July but I can't remember a Q*Bert product being produced (even as a plug-n-play or mobile app) since the late '90s. Maybe they were planning on doing something for the 30th anniversary and it got away from them... but no, it's not a project I'd start either, with a trademark renewed so recently.

 

Edit: I forgot that Q*Bert appeared in Wreck-it Ralph, and (at least in wikireality) will be appearing in another movie next year. It seems Sony owns the character these days, and Sony is indeed very aggressive.

Edited by raindog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q*Bert strikes me as strange too, given that they just renewed several of their trademarks in July but I can't remember a Q*Bert product being produced (even as a plug-n-play or mobile app) since the late '90s.

 

Actually, in July they released a game called Q*Bert Rebooted for Steam and the various smartphones. (I mostly know because I bought it on sale out of curiosity). I think Sony is actually trying to bring Q*Bert back, because they keep giving him cameos in things (Wreck-It Ralph, Pixels, a Radio Shack Super Bowl commercial, etc), and now a new game. Needless to say, I think the Q*Bert name is pretty much off limits for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mean to make anyone angry or anything (especially if this is kind of a touchy subject), but I wonder... does anyone know how Taito treats homebrew ports/clones of their games?

 

I know someone said something about Space Invaders, which is kinda cool how you can make clones of it (as long as they're not called "Space Invaders"), but what about other games of theirs, like... oh say, Bubble Bobble? I'm tempted to send them an e-mail myself, but I'm just wondering if anyone's ever made a deal with Taito in the past, or just asked "hey, I made this port, is it okay if I release it/make it available for download?"

 

Another thing that scares me about it, is that they're owned by Square Enix, which... has really questionable timing, when it comes to throwing C&Ds at homebrew hacks, and things like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

If I can add into this discussion:

 

All points made were on spot, but I want to add that IF you decide to venture down the road of making a game based on a TV program or Movie.. you should get the written consent of the copyright owners themselves & have some kind of an outline to give to them to showcase your game's outline & so forth. Once production is completed & the game has been tested.. from a legal standpoint you'd have to split profit between you & the copyright holder(s). I would say take 30% profit & give the remaining 70% to the copyright holder(s). Other than that, you should be good to go from that aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All points made were on spot, but I want to add that IF you decide to venture down the road of making a game based on a TV program or Movie.. you should get the written consent of the copyright owners themselves & have some kind of an outline to give to them to showcase your game's outline & so forth. Once production is completed & the game has been tested.. from a legal standpoint you'd have to split profit between you & the copyright holder(s). I would say take 30% profit & give the remaining 70% to the copyright holder(s). Other than that, you should be good to go from that aspect.

Reality check... two of my hacks have been among the more popular cartridges in the AtariAge store over the last 15 years, but even combined, the "profit", by which I mean my gross revenue, amounted to well under $1000, putting my hourly rate for hacking far below minimum wage (if I'd taken cash, but for the majority of it I took AA store credit to pay it forward). Actual "profit", as in net income, was well below zero, and people writing games from scratch will spend far more time at it and thus come out further in the hole.

 

But I didn't do my hacks or demos for profit and neither do most Atari 2600 coders. We're doing it for fun, and hiring a lawyer to negotiate a contract isn't fun... trust me. If you're putting together business plans for your VCS projects, you're doing it wrong. Really, really wrong. I assume that's why companies like Ebivision no longer exist today. It doesn't matter how underserved a market is if it's too small to cover expenses.

 

That's why most of us would rather ask forgiveness than permission. What kind of damages could they get? They send a C&D, another demake goes away (unless you're smart enough to release your source so that others might continue it in a non-infringing way) and that's the end of it. Even if you jumped through all the hoops, all you've achieved is working for a company for below minimum wage. If I have to beg someone for something before I start a project, I'm going to either work around them or not do the project. I'm not going to change Pac-Man into a fish or Mario into a raccoon or come up with yet another Flappy Bird/Man Goes Down or whatever. I'm going to sit it out.

 

As soon as hobbyists start treating the hobby like a business, I get disenchanted. This is why I find the current state of Atari homebrew, and threads like this, so dismaying. You are not going to get rich or even make any significant money at all. So just GPL your damn code already and stop pretending your hobby is your job.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reality check... two of my hacks have been among the more popular cartridges in the AtariAge store over the last 15 years, but even combined, the "profit", by which I mean my gross revenue, amounted to well under $1000, putting my hourly rate for hacking far below minimum wage (if I'd taken cash, but for the majority of it I took AA store credit to pay it forward). Actual "profit", as in net income, was well below zero, and people writing games from scratch will spend far more time at it and thus come out further in the hole.

 

But I didn't do my hacks or demos for profit and neither do most Atari 2600 coders. We're doing it for fun, and hiring a lawyer to negotiate a contract isn't fun... trust me. If you're putting together business plans for your VCS projects, you're doing it wrong. Really, really wrong. I assume that's why companies like Ebivision no longer exist today. It doesn't matter how underserved a market is if it's too small to cover expenses.

 

That's why most of us would rather ask forgiveness than permission. What kind of damages could they get? They send a C&D, another demake goes away (unless you're smart enough to release your source so that others might continue it in a non-infringing way) and that's the end of it. Even if you jumped through all the hoops, all you've achieved is working for a company for below minimum wage. If I have to beg someone for something before I start a project, I'm going to either work around them or not do the project. I'm not going to change Pac-Man into a fish or Mario into a raccoon or come up with yet another Flappy Bird/Man Goes Down or whatever. I'm going to sit it out.

 

As soon as hobbyists start treating the hobby like a business, I get disenchanted. This is why I find the current state of Atari homebrew, and threads like this, so dismaying. You are not going to get rich or even make any significant money at all. So just GPL your damn code already and stop pretending your hobby is your job.

 

Such rage in this post. If the Commodore 64 can make it's comeback like it is, I am certain that even through the years that homebrew development has been going on which has been since 1976, mind you.. I can see people making a swift profit off of their VCS 2600 creations. Again, if they own the rights to what they make AND they have a stellar backing & support.. should be fine. It may be a hobby for some & for some it could be more than that, again.. everyone has a career aside from this stuff & I am sure of that but the possibility of extra income or something more than that is always good to shoot for.

Edited by phillip_roberts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Also people concerned about C&D orders for certain games need to buy them on day one so they don't have to worry. Princess rescue lives on through Harmony.

 

And I'll just leave this out as something to think about: My sealed PR is guarded by an army of Bowsers!

post-33189-0-01062000-1392713326.jpg

(Yes, I have a cart only "player's copy" as well...)

Edited by stardust4ever
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, anything is possible if you just use the power of make-believe.

 

If you don't have any faith in a product such as the VCS 2600 that is still going strong in the gaming world, then WHY do you contribute your opinions to this board? People still buy games for the system. I get that many homebrew developers are just in it for fun & that's cool but if you are 'selling' these things as well, then look to market your product & at least make the most out of what you can get for your labor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Also people concerned about C&D orders for certain games need to buy them on day one so they don't have to worry. Princess rescue lives on through Harmony.

 

And I'll just leave this out as something to think about: My sealed PR is guarded by an army of Bowsers!

post-33189-0-01062000-1392713326.jpg

(Yes, I have a cart only "player's copy" as well...)

 

So if you take one jump off Junior over Bowser and land on the button, you're finished in 5 seconds? [/NewSuperMarioDS]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So if you take one jump off Junior over Bowser and land on the button, you're finished in 5 seconds? [/NewSuperMarioDS]

Yeah, I actually just held a Mega-Shroom in my inventory and used it to defeat Bowser, but pretty much. Cheap shot, but it worked. That's why I'm adding a third medium sized Bowser to the mix. No one will steal Princess Rescue now!

 

Getting this World Of Nintendo figure for Christmas. As a Bonus, he's Posable! :cool:

http://www.toysrus.com/product/index.jsp?productId=42398036

pTRU1-19164599_alternate1_dt.jpg

Edited by stardust4ever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...