They are still common words.deadish said:Those aren't genres ... those are nouns. They aren't as huge in scope.DoPo said:Because it's a title of a product. Or maybe we shouldn't allow any normal words and phrases as official names? So, I guess no Paranoia, Half-Life, Battlefield, Grand Theft Auto, Heroes, etc.deadish said:Frankly, I'm not even sure how a descriptive mark like "cyberpunk" even got registered.
How would you feel if a company like Square Enix trademarked "Steampunk"?DoPo said:They are still common words.deadish said:Those aren't genres ... those are nouns. They aren't as huge in scope.DoPo said:Because it's a title of a product. Or maybe we shouldn't allow any normal words and phrases as official names? So, I guess no Paranoia, Half-Life, Battlefield, Grand Theft Auto, Heroes, etc.deadish said:Frankly, I'm not even sure how a descriptive mark like "cyberpunk" even got registered.
I really don't get why you seem so bothered.
I think that's why it got through. The clerk reviewing the registration chances are haven't heard of the term "cyberpunk".Pyrian said:The trademark was granted in 1988. I don't think it was as generic back then.
Uh, nothing. Why, does it cause you pain or something?deadish said:How would you feel if a company like Square Enix trademarked "Steampunk"?
The trademark already existed. Besides, even if they own it, so what - do you think they'll go around and slap anybody who utters the word with a fish? Because according to my understanding that's not how it works at all - if somebody uses the word Cyberpunk for their product as a TITLE, then that'd be in breach, if somebody claims that their work is of the cyberpunk genre, then it's fine.deadish said:If we allow CD Projekt Red to trademark a genre label ... this opens the door for every company to do so.
i think you have summed up the issue perfectly and why its actually not an issueDoPo said:Uh, nothing. Why, does it cause you pain or something?deadish said:How would you feel if a company like Square Enix trademarked "Steampunk"?
The trademark already existed. Besides, even if they own it, so what - do you think they'll go around and slap anybody who utters the word with a fish? Because according to my understanding that's not how it works at all - if somebody uses the word Cyberpunk for their product as a TITLE, then that'd be in breach, if somebody claims that their work is of the cyberpunk genre, then it's fine.deadish said:If we allow CD Projekt Red to trademark a genre label ... this opens the door for every company to do so.
Should I remind you again, that no one who uses the term "paranoia" for, you know, the actual mental condition, has suffered any legal backlash?
The trademark of the word "cyberpunk" does by no way, shape or form give anybody any claim over the genre. Trademark isn't really magical - it only applies to stuff that's in the same field. Have you heard of Apple - the company that released Beatles records [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Records]? They happily coexisted with, you know, the other Apple [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.] for decades because their trademarks applied to completely different spheres - one was a computer manufacturer, the other a music producer. It wasn't until Steve Jobs's company decided to actually deal with music via iTunes when they had problems [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer]. So, you can see it applies only when it applies not at whatever random times you seem to assume it would. Apple Inc. has not sued any makers of apple pies or apple cider to my knowledge, nor could they.
You can totally have, say, a plumbing business and call it Coca-Cola without having trademark issues with the beverage, as you're going to be in a completely different business sphere.
So, again, I don't see what the problem is with the trademark of the word "Cyberpunk". I suppose you might be really itching for Digital Homicide or similar to churn out a bunch of games called Cyberpunk - is that it?
They made a big deal of it being untitled, so its success wasn't just "hype around the band". But it had names in order catalogues and stuff, and would be in a record store under "Led Zeppelin". So kind of a wash in that sense.Skatalite said:What about Led Zeppelin's fourth album. That's the only one I can think of.Ezekiel said:This reminds me... I was considering making a thread asking for popular works that are untitled, to see if a work can be successful without a title.
Its funny how many of those show up on the Playstation store even. "Dead Effect" (with cover art thats a mashup of exactly what you'd expect) is the last one I remember. About a billion things that are playoffs of Final Fantasy. Prettysure I saw something cloning off Darkest Dungeon the other day. And I recall a decent number of No Mans Sky imitators (ironically)Amaror said:I don't see the problem. Cyberpunk is the name of their game, so they do need to trademark it. Trademark isn't copyright. Their not going to sue reason for dumb reasons and they don't have to in order to keep their trademark. Again: It ISN'T copyright.
If they didn't trademark it you can bet that around the release of the game we would have thousands sh***y asset-flips games on steam named "Cyberpunk 2078", "Cyberpunk 3077", "Cyberneticpunk 2077". Just look at the state of greenlight-games and you know that would totally happen.
I presume you actually wanted to quote me on this.deadish said:BTW copyright and trademarks are not the same thing.Dornedas said:Probably the latter.
As I stated before, it can't be that easy to lose trademarks or you'd think Marvel and DC would clamp down on everything in the superhero genre for fear of losing their trademark.
Considering how much companies fuck around with Copyright Law, I just can't see a situation where they'd accept a system that means they have to get potentially litigious to defend their works.
And "paranoia" is a medical condition, "half-life" is a technical term, "battlefield" is a common word, "grand theft auto" is a phrased used in law, "heroes" is also a common word.darkcalling said:It's a genre not a title.
For the record I always thought that Half-Life was a dumb name too. Never got around to playing either of them though. The name isn't why though. The first one flew soooo far under my radar I had no idea why everyone was so hyped about the second one (not a PC guy).DoPo said:And "paranoia" is a medical condition, "half-life" is a technical term, "battlefield" is a common word, "grand theft auto" is a phrased used in law, "heroes" is also a common word.darkcalling said:It's a genre not a title.
Should we petition to have them renamed to something more appropriate?
No, I mean the tabletop game Paranoia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia_(role-playing_game)].darkcalling said:Also I've never heard of a game called Paranoia. Did you mean Amnesia?