Temple of The Roguelike Forums
Websites => Off-topic (Locked) => Topic started by: Krice on October 19, 2011, 12:39:04 PM
-
Well what do you think? Some company tries to sue that Notch person for using word "Scrolls" in his game. Elder Scrolls company doesn't like that. I think it's sad and homo trying to copyright a single word. It's so american stupid.
I was thinking. Why don't we join the fight? Let's release a bunch of games named almost like Elder Scrolls. I'm reserving Älder Skrulls as my next roguelike game (which might take some time to create and release...)
-
AFAIK first court allowed Notch to use word 'Scrolls' for his game.
Also Notch called Bethesda for a Quake3 match. Whoever wins will get 'Scrolls'.
But they refused.
-
I was doing some reading about this, and I can only find one aspect of the situation that makes Notch look bad. Whereas Bethesda's patent goes so far as to claim ownership of the words in "fantasy video games," Mojang wants control of Scrolls in games, TV, books, apparel, film, food, music, etc. I don't know whether it's just inexperience or whatever, but it could be construed (and has been) that Bethesda's suit was sort of a preemptive strike against a perceived future threat.
-
From what I've gathered if Zenimax don't shoot down this then it would make it harder for them to shoot down other infringements on their trademark in future. Sounds stupid to me though, and Bethesda aren't coming off well from the whole deal.
-
Mojang wants control of Scrolls in games, TV, books, apparel, film, food, music, etc.
Really? Didn't know that. What the hell is wrong with these guys? You can't patent words. They were already invented!
-
I completely agree with this:
You can't patent words.
But why do you use this as an insult:homo
As always,
Minotauros
-
Yes, yes, copyright then. :-X
-
Trademark actually.
-
But why do you use this as an insult:
It's a funny insult word. I think english speaking people sometimes use it instead gay, but in finnish gay is actually homo, which makes it even funnier. And we use it as insulting word.
-
Actually, no. Using it as an insult is kind of primitive. At best, it resonates with the kind of simplistic irony that was considered neat in the early 90-s. In any case, it lands you in a proud tradition of abuse and hate crime. I didn't expect to have to explain this to you.
As always,
Minotauros
-
hate crime.
Who was that homo who invented "hate crime". It doesn't mean anything! It's not criminal to hate someone/thing.
Oh wait, I think it was americans. The same americans who commit crimes against humanity all the time.
-
I happen to think you're just ranting at the moment, but let's not have a prolonged flame war over this. My only reason for commenting on your post was, considering that about one in ten who will read it are in fact homos/dykes, and considering we live in a world where people still get harassed and killed for being homosexual[1], it might be nice for some people to get an indication that this community isn't uniformly homophobic. I'm not saying I think you hate homosexuals, I just get annoyed at people using language in a stupid, hurtful way. With no harsh feelings for you personally, I think I've made the point I wanted to make.
As always,
Minotauros
[1] Which, for your future reference, is the definition (if you don't know what "definition" means, look it up in a dictionary ;)) of hate crime: actual crimes motivated by hatred towards a perceived group; not, as you seem to think, hatred defined as a crime in itself. Also, you're probably not interested to know that Europeans played a central part in developing theories about hate crime, genocide, etc., as should be pretty obvious if you know the slightest thing about modern European history. In any case, I can't see how using insults like "homo", "nigger", "gypsy" etc. would somehow be justified by the fact that our governments perpetrate crimes against humanity. Feel free to elaborate, or not.
-
Lucky we have our very own attorney to clear some of this up.
1. Intellectual Property: If you do not aggressively defend every instance of possible infringement you will lose the right to stop others from using your I.P. in the future. So we get ridiculous situations like this.
2. Gay/Fag/Homo is used as an epithet synonymous with 'stupid' throughout every culture I know of. It is considered insensitive and bigoted to use the term throughout the English speaking world. But I call my friend's 'fag' all the time. As a joke. Even my gay friends. So it can be situational. But it's best avoided.
3. Hate Crimes: Hate crime law in the US was not developed to elevate crimes against certain victims. Historically the separate states, mostly in the south, ignored crimes against racial and sexual minorities. So the federal (national) government intervened by passing the 'hate crime' laws to protect the groups the states refused to protect. You could basically get away with murdering a black person in the South before these laws were passed. Now the FBI will come in and throw you into Federal 'Pound My Ass' Prison.
Of course the laws now may have expanded to the point of irrationality but their origins were very positive and necessary.
Hope that clears things up.
-
1. Intellectual Property: If you do not aggressively defend every instance of possible infringement you will lose the right to stop others from using your I.P. in the future
A word is not an intellectual property. A game could be, if it's not a clone like all modern games usually are.
-
Both a word and a game clone are very often protected by I.P. laws. Words can be a trademark or a copyright. Games, no matter how derivative, can be protected from piracy. Their titles often cannot be used by another person. Characters and what not (eg Mario) cannot be used without permission.
Note that I am neither defending nor condemning the practice. Just pointing out how the American system works. IP law is very powerful.
-
Just pointing out how the American system works.
It doesn't work. Lawyers just want money and everyone else seems to want money, that's why that kind of insult of a law was invented.
-
Just pointing out how the American system works.
It doesn't work. Lawyers just want money and everyone else seems to want money, that's why that kind of insult of a law was invented.
The US I.P. laws are the result of years of corporate manipulation of the legislative process. Lawyers are often trotted out as the boogie man but the reality is far more complex. Attorneys run the gamut of hero to vulture. I'm glad I'm out of the business.
-
A word is not an intellectual property. A game could be, if it's not a clone like all modern games usually are.
I think I agree with you there, Krice. At least it's not as bad as Apple and the 'i' :-\
-
Both a word and a game clone are very often protected by I.P. laws. Words can be a trademark or a copyright. Games, no matter how derivative, can be protected from piracy. Their titles often cannot be used by another person. Characters and what not (eg Mario) cannot be used without permission.
Note that I am neither defending nor condemning the practice. Just pointing out how the American system works. IP law is very powerful.
I see a small flaw in that logic, however. If anything created (ie, Mario) by one person/group can never be used by another person, then there are millions of law breakers all over the world, who create Mario fan-art, Mario-esque games, Mario crochet dolls, etc.
-
Both a word and a game clone are very often protected by I.P. laws. Words can be a trademark or a copyright. Games, no matter how derivative, can be protected from piracy. Their titles often cannot be used by another person. Characters and what not (eg Mario) cannot be used without permission.
Note that I am neither defending nor condemning the practice. Just pointing out how the American system works. IP law is very powerful.
I see a small flaw in that logic, however. If anything created (ie, Mario) by one person/group can never be used by another person, then there are millions of law breakers all over the world, who create Mario fan-art, Mario-esque games, Mario crochet dolls, etc.
It has not been stated that something protected under IP laws cannot ever be used by another party. There are licensing agreements and a variety of other ways in which a property owner can allow others to use something. Note the owner still has control.
Things you mentioned would mostly fall under the doctrine of 'fair use'. This is a broad exception under most IP schemes in which a party may use a piece of IP without consent of the owner. However any diminishing of the value of an IP or profiting from an IP is almost universally protected. Some companies are far more aggressive in policing this than others.
See Games Workshop as an example of an aggressive company. You cannot even post a fan-made adventure online without drawing their ire. They made Boardgame Geek take down hundreds of fan made cheat sheets and player's aids. Nintendo used to be very aggressive with who and who cannot make games for their systems. They still might be. I don't know. Lately with the rise of emulation sites it seems Nintendo has backed off of certain things. Another good example is the South Park guys. They post all of their shit online about a month after airing. They'd post it immediately except for their studio objected.
I could go on and on. Attorneys tend to blather.
-
Things you mentioned would mostly fall under the doctrine of 'fair use'.
Do you think Scrolls (by Mojang) would fall under fair use, then? After all, it's just a word. Mojang's game has no relation to Elder Scrolls (or whoever is trying to sue them), so it's not Elder Scroll's IP, right?
-
Well it depends on a lot of things really. I don't have enough info. If there is any possibility that it might be confused with something put out by the Elder Scrolls guys then yeah they might have a case. Or they might not.
But the merits of the case do not matter. If they have anything close to a case they can attack and bog the other side down with legal costs. Making it so expensive that it's not even worth fighting for. The wise move is to concede, change the name and move on.
That's just how civil law works. You grind the other side down with costs until they no longer want to fight and they give in or settle. It's incredibly rare, like less than 5%, of the cases actually get in front of a judge and are decided on the merits.
Please note that these are not my personal aspirations or whimsies. They are my objective and professional legal opinion. Personally I think the system needs a major overhaul. But those in power do not agree. So the status quo remains.
-
I just looked into the case a bit more. Where is it being filed? That can matter quite a bit. Is it in Sweden or the US? Or somewhere else?
The Mojang guys won the initial hearing so they are good to go for now. It is unlikely it will go much further. The Elder Scroll guys will not want to waste the money and this game is unlikely to dilute their property at all. Looks to me like they filed just so that they would have the option to fight in the future if desired.
Pure legal maneuvering common among big corps. Nothing to see here. Move along. :-)