PaxArcana

One convention I've used a lot myself, is the ((double-parenthesis)). Anything in those, is assumed to be OOC ("Out Of Character"). Narrating other characters' reactions to their own. Don't say, for example, "When DarkOne's transformation is complete, you cower in fear before the flame-wreathed demonic form before you." That violates their agency as a player - and assumes their character WOULD be afraid, which is something you cannot know. Maybe they're a demon-hunter, and instead of afraid, they'll be angry. Maybe they're supremely jaded, or just physically incapable of feeling fear, and their reaction will be more along the lines of "neat parlor trick, kid. Do you do birthday parties?" Leave the decision of how their character reacts, to them. So, instead, try something like "When DarkOne's transformation is complete, a fearsome, flame-wreathed demon stands before you". You've established that he becomes a scary-looking thing (and hopefully whatever Costume slot you've just changed to fits that description, ha!) ... but, you've also left it up to them, to decide their own character's reaction to it.

Inspiration is fine. If their named differently, and the only common point in their looks is "red", you should be 100% fine. That's not possible, unfortunately. Like Icarus and the sun: the closer you try to get, the more the risk that you got TOO close.

Probably yes. Please don't make the mistake of assuming that your personal experiences are - or should be! - universal.

No, it was not. It was settled out of court. That is not the same as being dropped.

DCUO allows such things, because you're on their game - essentially, you have a license to do such things while on their servers. HC is not there. Your license does not extend to HC. I expect that character would be found in violation of the new policy. Your best bet is to "file off the serial numbers" - remove references to Batman (just say "a certain famous vigilante" and such), remove references to Gotham ("a city in the U.S. northeast, rife with super-villains"). Rename Joker to "the Punster", that sort of thing. Then change your costume, to be different. Not completely, just maybe change up the colors. Dark green and grey, instead of blue-and-grey or black-and-grey. And finally, change the name to not reference bats (if it still does). The result will be a Batman homage. Anyone who knows Batman mythology, will recognise it for what it is. BUT ... the differences will make it legally a transformative work, which shelters and shields it from copyright law .... and int eh process, shelters and shields the HC devs.

You have misunderstood two important facets of Coopyright (and Trademark) Law. Public Domain means, the property being copied is not owned by anyone - it is owned by the public at large, collectively, and anyone can use it as they see fit. Fair Use is a set of very narrow, very specific cases that allow a copyrighted work to be used, often just small parts of it. "Not paying" is never the basis for Fair Use. If you violate someone's copyright, and they take you to court, saying "but your honor, there was no money involved" will. not. matter. Indeed, claiming Fair Use is dangerous, even when you think you are within it's narrow scope .... because to do so, you must first admit that you did make the cop(-y/-ies) in the first place, and if the court holds that you did not qualify for Fair Use ... you lose, right there, on the spot. The same as Cryptic and NCSoft did before the shutdown: Player reports. The community must self-police. When an infringement is reported, GMs will look at the character (it doesn't have to be online for that), and decide if they think it's too close to an established IP. If it is, it gets "Generic'ed" - turning into a featureless, I think white, character with a name like "GenericHero#1515126". The character is then issued a free costume change token, and a rename token; the player is notified that their character was found in violation of the copyright and trademark policy, and they should not attempt to recreate the offending name/costume (or harsher penalties could happen - up to and including banning / deletion of the account). Just being fast and wearing red isn't enough. Being fast, wearing red-and-yellow, with a lightning-bolt motif could. Especially if your name is some variation on the Flash, or if you use any of the secret identities of the various Flash characters (e.g. Wally West, Barry Allen, etc) in your bio. No. It's a sign that the HC devs don't want to hit us up for donations to cover, say, fifty thousand dollars of lawyers' fees.

I'm not a dev or a GM, so I can't answer for them. But if I WERE, my standard for that call would be: Powers Costume Story ... if more than one is "too close for comfort" (which, yes, would be an entirely subjective and nonscientific judgement), then the whole character is problematic and must be changed. Note, Name alone would be it's own category. There'd be no room for "Bat-Man" / "BattMann" / "B4tm4n" / "xxBATMANxx" / etc. Clean sweep with the Mighty Broom of Genericness, for that.

This is more possible than most people are giving credit for. I cannot be more specific, especially by naming the person who did this (without renewing a hefty infraction and multiday ban, possibly making it permanent), but ... weeks ago, when one of the other copyright-related threads had just been closed down .... one of the people on the side of allowing copycharacters sent me a PM claiming to have sent notices to Disney, DC, and more about infringeing characters. The timing of this is just about right for their lawyers to have figured out how to check up on that, and seen a few clear infringements themselves, as justification for a C&D letter to the HC development team. I sincerely hope that's not the case; that this really is just one more step toward legitimacy, progress in the negotiations with NCSoft. But ... maybe ... 😢

I sincerely doubt that they will just say "it got reported, generic it" without even looking, and googling the name. Even Cryptic, which was pretty severe about such things, has let a few of my own homage characters slide. Like, in Champions Online, my Invader Zim homage, "Conqueror Zuub". Fun trick with Cryptic, at least back when CO had just launched: if you SELF-reported, they seemed more inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt for any cases that "could go either way". That might be a good policy for HC to adopt, too.

8 slots per power would be useless. 90% of the time - except when stacking up sets for set bonusses - more than 3-4 slots per power is useless. ... Enhancement Diversification says "hello, new friend!"

Fire/Fire is what happens to you after CONSUMING the Sriracha-Sriracha. 😄 Fire out your mouth, and fire out your ... um ... 🤯

Sriracha-Sriracha. ... It's the Rad/Rad of the flavor world. 😄

Rename him Crush-It Carl ... or Smash-It Steve ... or Break-It Brett ... or ...

... Sriracha. That is all.

I never said you couldn't express your opinion. You're welcome to it, and I won't argue with it. It's when you've misrepresented facts, that I've felt compelled to rebut your claims. Also: you say you're not angry, but damn son, you're looking pretty steamed from here.

.... and I'd be the one making the whole "gnashing of teeth" sound thing. 😄

😄 Fixed that for you. 😄

Sylar, seriously, it's clear you're not going to be happy here, with the new policy. Serious, honest advice time: The code is out there, available. Grab a copy, run your own server, and you can have whatever policies you want ... or none at all, if that's what you prefer. I honestly suspect you'll be happier doing that.

<--- trying not to gloat. I'm happy with the new policy, but I'm not going to go around shouting OH HA HA at people. ... Well, okay ,.. I will, but only here at my desk, where no-one else can hear it. 😄

Marvel has to vigorously and actively protect their trademarks. DC has to vigorously and actively protect their trademarks. Disney has to vigorously and actively protect their trademarks. ... we're not talking about protecting the CoX IP. We're talking about very large, deep-pocketed companies being compelled to attack the CoX IP in order to protect their own. Trademark is a nasty thing: if you don't protect it, you LOSE it.

If anyone, it was Marvel facing that. Their finances were shite at the time. 🙂

It's not rocket science, Sylar: If Cryptic and NCSoft were, between them, completely convinced that they would win ...? They would not have accepted Marvel's settlement offer, the case would have gone to trial, and only then would there be an actual winner and an actual loser. So .... the team of very skilled and well-trained lawyers - who know more than you or I, by a very wide margin - looked at everything, decided that Cryptic's ability to achieve victory was still in doubt by a wide enough margin, that they were compelled to advise their clients (NCSoft and Cryptic) to accept the settlement offer .... because the risk of losing completely, and it's associated effects, was "non-zero" by much to large a margin. ... Out of court settlements are TIES. Nobody won that lawsuit.

I didn't mean you, specifically, Subba. Just that there are people who will be especially unhappy with the new policy. And if you look at the other thread? I'm right. There are.

As has already been pointed out to you: negotiations along those lines are usually conducted with an expectation of confidentiality. Sometimes, that confidentiality is even enforced via a binding legal contract - an NDA, if you will. They did not fail. The case was settled out of court. And, if NCSoft/Cryptic had been 100% confident of their inevitable eventual victory, they would never have accepted Marvel's settlement offer. An out-of-court settlement is not a victory, nor a loss, for any one party. HC is the only server known to be in direct talks with NCSoft regarding potential legitimizing. And, the HC devs are absolutely NOT obligated, neither legally nor morally, to represent "the ENTIRE community". They only need to represent themselves. Then GTFO. It really is that simple. As I just stated: no, they did not win. An out-of-court settlement is a TIE, not a victory, nor a loss. No-one (who hasn't gone dead broke) settles when they think they can win. They settle when they think there is too great a risk of losing. A settlement is a matter of "better to lose a little, than to lose everything ...!"