Copyrights and Copycats
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
The laws are design to be purposely vague so cases can be decided on a case by case basis. It is almost impossible to find the line between an infringement derivative work and an original piece influenced by game play mechanics. I know the courts are pretty good at understanding all the factors and deciding these cases, good lawyers or not.
Shamus, you hit the nail on the head with this. Brand names are covered by trademark law, and that's easily the most useful branch of IP law as far as I can see. In fact, I'd go so far as to claim it's the only one that actually makes logical sense, but that's a whole other debate.Shamus Young said:
Suing for being "too similar" to another game/song/movie/any form of art is a very slippery slope. George Harrison had to pay $1.6 million because a song he wrote sounded similar to a different song by another artist that he claimed he had never heard before. They were able to show that he had previously been exposed to it in some context, and so the judge actually ruled that he had "subconsciously" plagiarized the song. That's the kind of shit we have to look forward to if people can sue over ideas.
What? He infringed He's So Fine by The Chiffons, one of the recognizable and top songs of the 1960s. And it only cost him $580,000 because he bought the company that owned the copyright instead of playing the $1.6 million.Dorkmaster Flek said:
You can not copyright ideas, it has to be a fixed media.
If you're going to talk about music lawsuits, don't stop at George Harrison getting sued over My Sweet Lord. John Fogerty once got sued for sounding too much like himself.
I think a Neil Gaiman quote fits well in here: "Law is not a scalpel, it is a sledgehammer."
I'll add that every economic report seems to show Zynga is suffering. Just ignore them for a little longer and they'll die off.
I'll add that every economic report seems to show Zynga is suffering. Just ignore them for a little longer and they'll die off.
woo a link to Litigation Hammer one of the few articles i actually bookmarked on this site!
Transmorpher...o that made me laugh. As always a good read.
Transmorpher...o that made me laugh. As always a good read.
This is one of the reason I'm happy the Netherlands doesn't use a jury system. Granted, most judges won't have played the game either, but have at least studied the law enough and are educated enough to hopefully understand the similarities when explained to them and know which ones are illegal.
I applaud the message and the way it was said. But how can we make things better (fairer?). While you are right there will be clones and knock-offs, how can we discourage companies like Zynga get away with creative kidnapping? Because if they are not held responsible now - they will cotinue to do so.
On a side note, Zynga has signed a contract with Chinese company Tencent (who manage the vastly popular chat program QQ in China) - the motto of the CEO of Tencent is "[To] copy is not evil".
When put into context;
Stephen Bell, a Shanghai-based partner at Trinity Ventures, a venture capital firm, says he hears this all the time: ?In the U.S., students think, ?If I build something good, Google will buy me.? In China they think, ?If I build something good, Tencent will copy me.? ?
Zynga just signed with these guys, seems like a perfect marriage. Keep in mind that Tencent wants to expand into the USA.
On a side note, Zynga has signed a contract with Chinese company Tencent (who manage the vastly popular chat program QQ in China) - the motto of the CEO of Tencent is "[To] copy is not evil".
When put into context;
Stephen Bell, a Shanghai-based partner at Trinity Ventures, a venture capital firm, says he hears this all the time: ?In the U.S., students think, ?If I build something good, Google will buy me.? In China they think, ?If I build something good, Tencent will copy me.? ?
Zynga just signed with these guys, seems like a perfect marriage. Keep in mind that Tencent wants to expand into the USA.
Juris suck anyway. no one ever bothers to do homework while theyre juri, or cares for that matter, or knows anything relevant to the case.
Copyright laws are fine as they are right now. Case by case basis when it comes to this type of complexity is the best way to go, specially since there arent THAT many game copyright law cases. That being said, there is such a game as DigCraft...several actually. i actualy think that knockoff that got launched to the XBOX LIVE didnt get sued cause it was too BASIC to be similar to minecraft xD. that and notch said he didnt care.
Copyright laws are fine as they are right now. Case by case basis when it comes to this type of complexity is the best way to go, specially since there arent THAT many game copyright law cases. That being said, there is such a game as DigCraft...several actually. i actualy think that knockoff that got launched to the XBOX LIVE didnt get sued cause it was too BASIC to be similar to minecraft xD. that and notch said he didnt care.
As someone that recently served on a jury, I take offence.draythefingerless said:
The most important point against you here: Juries are not allowed, by penalty of law, to research the cases they are hearing. It is the job of the judge and the lawyers to present the issue, not of the juries to discover it for themselves. A juror that independently researches a case can be found in contempt of court, fined and possibly jailed.
"Spyfox is taking 6wave to court"
Much as seeing the word spyfox makes my nostalgia senses all tingly, for the sake of the article I shall mention the typo.
Other than that, good read. Kinda weird when I think about it. I'm so used to knock off being used for the ridiculous toys and whatnot that I don't even consider the knockoff cereals and stuff that I see on a regular basis.
Much as seeing the word spyfox makes my nostalgia senses all tingly, for the sake of the article I shall mention the typo.
Other than that, good read. Kinda weird when I think about it. I'm so used to knock off being used for the ridiculous toys and whatnot that I don't even consider the knockoff cereals and stuff that I see on a regular basis.
Yup.Shamus Young said:
To expand: imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, not [copy-pasting. It truly shows your support for something cool when you start using the concepts it presents for yourself. But you need to take said cool thing and make it your own, as the article-made-up Steamtown did.
The lawsuit examples that Shamus warn about is possible, as far as I know Zynga themselves have been pretty aggresive in this regard. I think it's quite possible that the developers of Tiny Towers called Zynga out on their plagiarism simply to try to prevent a lawsuit from Zynga. That would have been ironic, to be sued by a copycat company.
And in relation to Shamus' closing statement. Copying other people's work is great practice for artists, programmers, musicians and other creative beings. It's definitely reccommended. But keep it in the desk drawer of course.
We already have too many laws making it illegal to learn from other people's work. It should be perfectly fine to reverse engineer software for educational purposes. Unfortunately it isn't.
And in relation to Shamus' closing statement. Copying other people's work is great practice for artists, programmers, musicians and other creative beings. It's definitely reccommended. But keep it in the desk drawer of course.
We already have too many laws making it illegal to learn from other people's work. It should be perfectly fine to reverse engineer software for educational purposes. Unfortunately it isn't.
Fantastic, well written and argued piece and point of view. This should really be required knowledge in the digital ageShamus Young said: