Ze_ro Posted October 19, 2001 Share Posted October 19, 2001 Okay, this one's a bit of a judgement call, but I was wondering about some legal advise. More specifically, I was wondering about the copyright issues involved in naming a homebrew Atari game. For example, if you came out with a new game and called it "Jaws", and it was very likely based off the movie (This would be a cool idea in my opinion).. would you be liable for lawsuits? Would the movie companies even care about a small, low-distribution game for a 25 year old system? I mean, they came down on Apollo... but things were quite different back then. I was also thinking about my idea of porting Crazy Taxi over to the 2600. My final decision was that I wouldn't call it Crazy Taxi, and I'd probably downplay any similarities as coincidental. Besides, it won't look much the same, and probably won't play very similarly either. I'm probably on a lot safer ground than anyone working on Jaws though. --Zero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genki Posted October 19, 2001 Share Posted October 19, 2001 Call it Stella Taxi and make sure you don't use the name of the drivers or anything like that. Gameplay might be somewhat similiar but I doubt you can pull off a WOW-kick-ass 3D graphic like on modern consoles. I would check with their legal dept first to see if they have any issues or objections. Unless they are the kind of company that would make Scrooge proud, I doubt they'd have any problem if you tried making a 2600 version of the popular Taxi driving sim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Night Phantom Posted October 19, 2001 Share Posted October 19, 2001 Unofficial 2600 homebrew adaptations of movies, TV series and other video games have been done before; for example, at Hozer Video you can find cartridges based on The Blair Witch Project, Mystery Science Theater 3000, and Tetris. Speaking as a layman, I am quite certain that such efforts can be considered liable under intellectual property law. (Note: the name of the cart would fall under trademark law; the actual game could be subject to both trademark and copyright law.) To my knowledge, no copyright/trademark holder has yet challenged a homebrew 2600 game. Still, there could be a first time. An intellectual property holder might be tempted to threaten (and ultimately pursue) legal action simply to prevent dilution of the trademark or copyright. Apparently, failure to protect one's intellectual property can damage a later case claiming infringement on that same property. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJr Posted October 20, 2001 Share Posted October 20, 2001 I too had these concerns, therefore the vampire hunting game that I am working on (which will be much in the vein of another popular vampire hunting game *cough-Cstlvn-cough*) will simply be called "Vampire Hunter." I'm going to dodge every legal encounter I can, because stupid red tape should not get in the way of fun. Besides, if I just give it away for free, they can't prosecute me! So you legal watchdogs! "Kill all the lawyers" Stan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nostalgic Posted October 20, 2001 Share Posted October 20, 2001 quote: Originally posted by StanJr: I too had these concerns, therefore the vampire hunting game that I am working on (which will be much in the vein of another popular vampire hunting game *cough-Cstlvn-cough*) will simply be called "Vampire Hunter." Better watch out for the makers of "Vampire Hunter D", then. Seriously, I've been thinking it would be good to have some legal guidelines posted as an FAQ for homebrew artists. For example, if you give yourself an imprint (i.e. "Nostalgic Games"), do you need to incorporate with yourself as an employee? What is the proper wording of a "there is no warranty implied and I am not responsible for damage" statement? What about taxes on royalties earned, both if the game is distributed through Hozer and if the game is self-distributed? Are there any lawyers out there among the Atari fans who could do this, either here or in the Stella list? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapdash Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 In a nutshell, and remembering that I'm NOT a lawyer... If you use a trademarked term, you CAN be sued. Does that mean it will happen? Probably not, but you never know. If you use code from a copyrighted program, you CAN be sued. Does that mean it will happen? Less likely yet, but possibly. There is also the possibility of a "look and feel" copyright lawsuit, but this seems pretty unlikely too. Most likely though, is that if anybody even notices, and further, cares, they will send a cease and desist letter. That's a lot cheaper than a lawsuit anyway. That actually happened to Bob Colbert for his Stell-A-Sketch program -- Ohio Art found out about it somehow and told him to stop. The didn't sue. Of course, I don't know why they even bothered to waste the stamp. It's not like Bob was making any money on those, or claiming their trademark or anything. Yeesh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJr Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 There's a way around the trademark thing, something to do with "as long as you are not making any profit from using a trademark" thing. This may be what gets the cease and desist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Night Phantom Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 quote: Originally posted by StanJr: There's a way around the trademark thing, something to do with "as long as you are not making any profit from using a trademark" thing. This sounds like a distortion of the fair use doctrine. It's easy to see why nonprofit use would not be sufficient grounds for protection. Example: Person “A” has created a hot new game and is selling copies for $30 a pop. Person “B” is making his own copies and giving them away for free. ...Along comes Joe Consumer, who says to himself, “Gee...I can get this fantastic game for $30...or I can get it for free. Which way should I go?” I should think the answer obvious. Person “B” may not make a cent for all his hard work, but he's going to destroy Person “A”'s livelihood anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJr Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 Ah, but you are referring to exact copies of the SAME thing. Not simply the use of a trademarked name, character, or such. i.e. I can write a Spider-man story and post it on a web site or hand out printed copies, as long as it is not a direct story from an existing comic book or such, I shouldn't be able to be sued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Night Phantom Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 quote: Originally posted by StanJr: Ah, but you are referring to exact copies of the SAME thing. Not simply the use of a trademarked name, character, or such. i.e. I can write a Spider-man story and post it on a web site or hand out printed copies, as long as it is not a direct story from an existing comic book or such, I shouldn't be able to be sued. No, the principle still applies. Suppose my (miniscule!) budget allows for only two comic books a month, and I am a Spider-Man fan. Suppose further that I find these two options: Buy one copy each of Amazing Spider-Man and Peter Parker: Spider-Man monthly, thereby getting two superhero stories per month. Read non-Marvel Spider-Man stories on the Web, and spend my comic book money on Green Lantern and The Flash, thereby getting even more superhero stories every month, including my fix of the amazing arachnid adventurer. The second option might be more attractive to the consumer, but I doubt it would do Marvel Comics any good. Eventually Stan the Man might have nothing to present! Excelsior! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJr Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 The principle may be similar, but legally they are different. There is a group that functions independent of Marvel Comics called the Marvel Zombie Society, who write stories using existing Marvel characters (they have a website, methinks?) and they can do that because they are original stories. They do it for the fun of it and make no money and Marvel doesn't touch them. Maybe its just small potatoes to Marvel, but they still haven't taken action. This is what makes me think there is a loophole somewhere. And besides, would you really read some hack story (even if it is good) on a website over buying the real comic? And in favor of buying the Green Lantern and FLASH no less! EEP! Face Front True Believer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Night Phantom Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 quote: Originally posted by StanJr: They do it for the fun of it and make no money and Marvel doesn't touch them. Maybe its just small potatoes to Marvel, but they still haven't taken action. This is what makes me think there is a loophole somewhere. The loophole is that Marvel chooses not to pursue action. Believe me, Marvel could. A couple years ago it was big news that numerous media companies were sending cease-and-desist letters to fan Web sites; I don't recall hearing that Marvel was doing this, but they easily could have. Legally, their trademarks and copyrights are their property and they have the right to act against their theft. The general consensus says that it is smarter for companies like Marvel to permit some unauthorized not-for-profit infringement; in the big picture, fan activity is better publicity than crackdowns against same. But “free of charge” does not automatically excuse you from all legal liability. (If it did, AOL-Time-Warner [DC's parent company] might try it. If not, then Microsoft probably would. ) quoteAnd besides, would you really read some hack story (even if it is good) on a website over buying the real comic? And in favor of buying the Green Lantern and FLASH no less! EEP! This is not about me!! Those comics used to be worthwhile, but I haven't read them in years. That actually reinforces the point: the official comic is not necessarily better than fan stories. (As a Spider-Fan, does the word clone send a shiver down your spine?) quoteFace Front True Believer! Until Spider-Man finds out he's a clone of the Flash, make mine Marvel! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJr Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 GAH! Night Phantom said the "C" word! Bite your tongue! I see your point, though.(about the copyright stuff) FLASH is supposed to be making a comeback, might be worth looking into if you're a fan. Kevin Smith has pretty much revived and then destroyed the GREEN LANTERN. That comic is a mess. Then again, I find few DC comics worth the cover price. Until Aquaman realizes that talking to fish is NOT a super-power, MAKE MINE MARVEL, baby. True Believer Stan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Night Phantom Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 Turning Hal Jordan into a major psycho and killing him off just to bring in a replacement was inexcusable. But I digress... I want to provide a correction and a clarification of things I said earlier. First off, in our Marvel example, I proffered the notion that Marvel chooses not to pursue certain infringement cases. While I'm sure that's true, another reason would of course be that Marvel doesn't know of all infringements. So, a better way to put would be that Marvel doesn't choose to pursue them, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Second, I wish to clarify my remark that “not for profit” does not automatically excuse one from all legal liability. That is true; however, not-for-profit status can have some bearing on an intellectual property case, along with other factors. Also, I'd like to thank Russ Perry Jr for bringing up the Stell-A-Sketch incident, which I had forgotten about. 'Nuff said! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Cafeman Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 This subject makes me wonder if our 5200 game will *really* be called Adventure II. I'd hate to get Infogrames mad at me! Even though the word "adventure" is common, there's no doubt our game is an unofficial homage to a licensed Atari 2600 game. And if it gets made into a cart, then dollars will be spent by people to purchase it. Hmmm.. I bet we'd really get in hot water if we named it "Atari and Warren Robbinett's Adventure, part two" ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJr Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 CORRECTION: Kevin Smith ruined GREEN ARROW, not GREEN LANTERN, I have no idea what is going on in GREEN LANTERN. My bad. The trouble with your game Adventure II is that it builds off of the theme of the first game (at least that's what it sounds like). It would be ULTRA-lame if Infogames got their panties in a bunch over it, though. They should be happy that people still like old school Atari after all these years. It will always be Adventure II to me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Cafeman Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 Well, Robinett pretty much gave his blessing on the project. He told me via email that he viewed the project as a 'spinoff' but he wouldn't split hairs over definitions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jess Ragan Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 Vampire Hunter is definitely out as a name... that's what Capcom calls NightWarriors in Japan. That's the sequel to Darkstalkers (Vampire), their fighting game with monsters, by the way. JR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJr Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 Then I shall call it "THE Vampire Hunter" Ha! Oh boy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
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.