copyrighted chars and npcs in game

[ShardWarrior]

1 minute ago, MunkiLord said:

In good news though, that desperation is likely why we have the MCU. They had to take a gamble to stay alive and it worked. 

Shame that they can't reach a deal with Sony though.  🙁

[subbacultchas]

Right, and they are making bank and comics are getting the recognition I always thought they could. No beef with Marvel, been a fan for years, but Marvel post-2009 or so is a vastly different creature than it was 1990s to mid 2000s.

[subbacultchas]

1 minute ago, ShardWarrior said:

Shame that they can't reach a deal with Sony though.  🙁

Love their products, but on some level Sony is the damned devil itself. Also Apple, and yes you can quote me.

[Abraxus]

8 minutes ago, subbacultchas said:

Love their products, but on some level Sony is the damned devil itself. Also Apple, and yes you can quote me.

Quoted. 🤣

 

[MunkiLord]

35 minutes ago, Frostbiter said:

I believe the judges's decision compared CoH to playdoh and said Cryptic only provided the medium. They were not responsible for what people did with it beyond enforcing reports.

Speaking of enforcing reports, this is my guess as to why HC doesn't have a policy on copyrighted characters. Having a policy and not enforcing it has led to lawsuits from copyright holders in the past. I don't know how successful they were though, so my guess is a literal guess. 

[jubakumbi]

28 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

Speaking of enforcing reports, this is my guess as to why HC doesn't have a policy on copyrighted characters. Having a policy and not enforcing it has led to lawsuits from copyright holders in the past. I don't know how successful they were though, so my guess is a literal guess. 

IIRC in Dune, our young protagonist is told not to ever make a decision for his people unless he wants to always make that choice, because once he makes it, his people will always look to him instead of thinking for themsleves about the specific topic.

I can only imagine as things move forward that HC will want to create as few rules as possible, for all kinds of very good reasons.

[Troo]

1 hour ago, Frostbiter said:

I believe the judges's decision compared CoH to playdoh and said Cryptic only provided the medium. They were not responsible for what people did with it beyond enforcing reports.

Agreed.

It didn't hurt that the game maker had already been making a good faith effort to minimize infringements.

 

More details from that case are easy to search for.

 

December 12, 2005 - Marvel Entertainment, Inc., NCsoft® Corporation, NC Interactive, Inc. and Cryptic Studios, Inc. are pleased to announce today that they have amicably settled all claims brought by Marvel and all claims brought by NCsoft, NC Interactive, Inc. and Cryptic Studios, Inc.

From the statement: “The parties' settlement allows them all to continue to develop and sell exciting and innovative products, but does not reduce the players' ability to express their creativity in making and playing original and exciting characters. Therefore, no changes to City of Heroes® or City of Villains' character creation engine are part of the settlement. The parties have agreed that protecting intellectual property rights is critically important and each will continue aggressively to protect such rights in accordance with all applicable laws. While the terms of the settlement were not disclosed, all parties agree that this case was never about monetary issues and that the fans of their respective products and characters are the winners in this settlement.”

 

Some keys to arguments before the settlement included:

#1 The game makers argued in a response to the initial complaint, that characters named after third party properties were not allowed to be played in the game, and that, given the character creation engine of the game, similarities to Marvel characters may exist, but constitute a fraction of the possible outcomes of player-designed characters.

#2 The lawyers bungled it. Screenshots used as exhibits in the original complaint which claimed were players found in the game were actually characters created by the attorneys for Marvel in an attempt to prove their point that characters with names that infringed copyrights could be created in City of Heroes. Marvel’s counsel later admitted this to be the case with three of the characters shown in the exhibits it submitted.

[jubakumbi]

11 minutes ago, Troo said:

Agreed.

It didn't hurt that the game maker had already been making a good faith effort to minimize infringements.

 

More details from that case are easy to search for.

 

December 12, 2005 - Marvel Entertainment, Inc., NCsoft® Corporation, NC Interactive, Inc. and Cryptic Studios, Inc. are pleased to announce today that they have amicably settled all claims brought by Marvel and all claims brought by NCsoft, NC Interactive, Inc. and Cryptic Studios, Inc.

From the statement: “The parties' settlement allows them all to continue to develop and sell exciting and innovative products, but does not reduce the players' ability to express their creativity in making and playing original and exciting characters. Therefore, no changes to City of Heroes® or City of Villains' character creation engine are part of the settlement. The parties have agreed that protecting intellectual property rights is critically important and each will continue aggressively to protect such rights in accordance with all applicable laws. While the terms of the settlement were not disclosed, all parties agree that this case was never about monetary issues and that the fans of their respective products and characters are the winners in this settlement.”

 

Some keys to arguments before the settlement included:

#1 The game makers argued in a response to the initial complaint, that characters named after third party properties were not allowed to be played in the game, and that, given the character creation engine of the game, similarities to Marvel characters may exist, but constitute a fraction of the possible outcomes of player-designed characters.

#2 The lawyers bungled it. Screenshots used as exhibits in the original complaint which claimed were players found in the game were actually characters created by the attorneys for Marvel in an attempt to prove their point that characters with names that infringed copyrights could be created in City of Heroes. Marvel’s counsel later admitted this to be the case with three of the characters shown in the exhibits it submitted.

Leaving us with a law based precedent that HC is fully prepared to follow, based on GM comments, as opposed to something with which to beat other players over the head with in an effort to make them conform to the creative tenants of other players.

 

I think a real Hero that should be added to the game somplace is the CoH side lawyer who caught out Marvels council...

[Chance Jackson]

On 9/11/2019 at 11:19 AM, GM Capocollo said:

We don't currently have any policy against characters, Architect Entertainment missions, supergroup bases, etc. that copy or make homage to other people's trademarks or intellectual property.  Reports of infringement will be noted, but no action will be taken*.

 

However, that does not mean HC will never have any such policy, especially if Homecoming Team finds itself in a situation where it is required to comply with a rights-holder's cease-and-desist or DMCA takedown notice.

 

(In short: it is fine now, but don't assume it will always be fine).

 

* If you yourself are an author, artist or other intellectual property holder and a HC player's content is infringing on that, please file a ticket with proof that you're the rights-holder, and we'll talk.

  Any way that the player base can gett informed if we're reported on? That way we can switch up what we're doing.

[Abraxus]

12 minutes ago, Chance Jackson said:

  Any way that the player base can gett informed if we're reported on? That way we can switch up what we're doing.

Something tells me, IF that were to become an issue, we would know pretty quickly across the board.

[jubakumbi]

25 minutes ago, Abraxus said:

Something tells me, IF that were to become an issue, we would know pretty quickly across the board.

@Abraxus, I think your spider senses arachnoid perceptions are tingling sensing a disturbace in the force on the money.

[Twisted Toon]

3 hours ago, jubakumbi said:

@Abraxus, I think your spider senses arachnoid perceptions are tingling sensing a disturbace in the force on the money.

you are tempting me to make Arachnoid Person.

[PaxArcana]

3 minutes ago, Twisted Toon said:

you are tempting me to make Arachnoid Person.

.... Lord Recluse's lawyers quite zealously guard his very broad, and sadly, internationally-valid trademarks on all things arachnid.

[boggo2300]

Mind you, If Recluse's legal team perform as well as the rest of Arachnos, @Twisted Toon is pretty safe

[Dr. Gemini]

On 9/12/2019 at 9:37 AM, PaxArcana said:

No, it's not.  This isn't (strictly speaking) a pirate server.

 

If NCSoft wanted these servers shut down, they would have been.  Months ago.  Their decision not to do so, represents a state of tacit permission for them to operate. 

While this is a great way for you to justify picking and choosing which illegal activities it is moral for you to be an active participant in, it also invalidates your entire position, both on the morality of copying characters and on trying overly hard to generate fear over server shutdown on this issue.

 

"If Disney wanted these servers sued, they would have been.  Months ago.  Their decision not to do so, represents a state of tacit permission for players to copy characters."

 

That would be just as valid as your own statement. So do stop trying to pretend you're on some kind of moral high ground. Bottom line is very simple, you don't like something and believe everyone else should fall in line with what you want. Sorry, but my world does not revolve around you so I have to say...no.

 

On to something else...

One thing people need to remember about when the Marvel suit against CoH happened. Back in the late 90's and early 00's, companies didn't really know what to do about the internet. CoH wasn't the only thing Marvel was going after, nor was Marvel the only company that was targeting anything online that used its IP in any way, whether it was for-profit or not. For example, there was a time when even putting a home-made D&D module online would get a C&D from the game's makers. Marvel's suit was at the tail end of that period, which is when those IP holders finally began to realize that fansites using their IP generated interest in their product rather than took away from it. So, if we could make a Mickey Mouse clone that beat up bad guys with his male genitalia, THAT would likely get Disney's interest, as it denigrates the image of their IP. Someone playing "Iron Dude" in a copy of Iron Mans costume? One should be more worried about the Zombie Apocalypse, as that has better odds judging by the last almost decade.

[Skyhawke]

Well, if nothing else, I know I can always fall back on this guy.

 

 

[PaxArcana]

8 hours ago, Dr. Gemini said:

"If Disney wanted these servers sued, they would have been.  Months ago.  Their decision not to do so, represents a state of tacit permission for players to copy characters."

Gigantic material difference:

 

NCSoft absolutely does know about the Homecoming Servers.

To the best of my knowledge - and very likely yours too - Disney does not know about any particular, potentially-infringing character(s) on these servers.

[justicebeliever]

33 minutes ago, PaxArcana said:

Gigantic material difference:

 

NCSoft absolutely does know about the Homecoming Servers.

To the best of my knowledge - and very likely yours too - Disney does not know about any particular, potentially-infringing character(s) on these servers.

Yes, but Marvel/Disney, DC/Warner, and anyone else with a Superhero IP knows about the internet.  From FanFiction, to Fan-Art, to Cosplay sites, they are all over.  And if you've been to a comic con, you know that those some of those fan artists are selling DC/Marvel prints they haven't gotten permission for.

 

I'm not saying it's right.  But if we are going to go with the Tacit Permission argument, then DeviantArt and all the others must have a state of tacit permission.

 

Finally, while you could make the argument that NCSoft is open to this arrangement (and let's be clear, they have not said so yet), that would only hold water if you started play on Aug 7, because prior to that it was extremely unclear if NCSoft was at all OK with this arrangement. That would eliminate either of us from holding any "moral high ground" here.

[PaxArcana]

I'll settle for "two steps less down-in-the gutter than thee".

[ShardWarrior]

9 hours ago, Dr. Gemini said:

So do stop trying to pretend you're on some kind of moral high ground. Bottom line is very simple, you don't like something and believe everyone else should fall in line with what you want.

If I could up vote this a thousand times, I would.  Hit the nail squarely on the head.

 

10 minutes ago, justicebeliever said:

Yes, but Marvel/Disney, DC/Warner, and anyone else with a Superhero IP knows about the internet.  From FanFiction, to Fan-Art, to Cosplay sites, they are all over.  And if you've been to a comic con, you know that those some of those fan artists are selling DC/Marvel prints they haven't gotten permission for.

 

I'm not saying it's right.  But if we are going to go with the Tacit Permission argument, then DeviantArt and all the others must have a state of tacit permission.

 

Finally, while you could make the argument that NCSoft is open to this arrangement (and let's be clear, they have not said so yet), that would only hold water if you started play on Aug 7, because prior to that it was extremely unclear if NCSoft was at all OK with this arrangement. That would eliminate either of us from holding any "moral high ground" here.

Agreed.   And for people to try and make the imbecilic claim that Disney/Marvel or WB/DC or whatever IP holder don't know about the prevalence of free skins/mods for games or fan art sites (where artists are taking money for commissions on copyrighted characters) and such on the internet is completely and utterly stupid - especially while saying it's perfectly ok to play a stolen game on a pirate server because "the owner didn't say stop" - yet.

 

This is exactly what @Dr. Gemini said it is. 

9 hours ago, Dr. Gemini said:

Bottom line is very simple, you don't like something and believe everyone else should fall in line with what you want.

 

[PaxArcana]

I find it funny (in a very un-humorous way) that the very people who ...

• Are in favor of copyright infringement;
• Keep insisting that those opposed to it "have no moral high ground";

... are also often the very people trying to claim that moral high ground themselves.

[THEDarkTyger]

On 9/10/2019 at 9:54 PM, jubakumbi said:

And many of us players completely and totally do not agree with this outlook, at all.

So, no, you speak for you and only you, unless other tell you implicitly you have their voice.

So....many do not share the outlook of being grateful to have CoH back? Because that's the only part where he meant when he said he thinks he speaks for all of us.

[justicebeliever]

2 minutes ago, PaxArcana said:

I find it funny (in a very un-humorous way) that the very people who ...

• Are in favor of copyright infringement;
• Keep insisting that those opposed to it "have no moral high ground";

... are also often the very people trying to claim that moral high ground themselves.

I'll say it - 

I don't personally copy other peoples work knowingly.  However, I don't personally have a problem with it here, because, you know, the Internet, and no one is profiting or removing profit from another entity.

I am playing on a pirate server that doesn't have official permission from the IP holder to be online, because, you know, the Internet, and again, no one is profiting or removing profit from another entity.

 

If an IP holder, either because of trademark or copyright violation insisted on HC enforcing a policy of renaming characters, I would wholly support it, just as I did in Live, because that is their right.

 

If NCSoft decides to shut this down tomorrow, I'll shed a tear, just one, and I'll motor on in life, because that is there right.

 

I have no moral high ground.  I am not right in a moral or legal sense.  I sleep just fine at this point, because there is no obvious harm happening, nor I am personally at any legal risk either.

 

That doesn't make me right, just content.  

 

Pax, I don't find this humorous either, but what are you really fighting for?  Anyone with any legal sense, accepts that infringement might be an issue here at some point.  Anyone who doesn't won't be swayed by anything you or I say.

[PaxArcana]

1 minute ago, justicebeliever said:

no one is profiting or removing profit from another entity.

Copyright is not just about profit.  It is about the right to control the making of copies.

 

1 minute ago, justicebeliever said:

I have no moral high ground. 

I did say most, not all.

Jubakumbi and Shardwarrior chief among that "most".

[ShardWarrior]

33 minutes ago, justicebeliever said:

I'll say it - 

I don't personally copy other peoples work knowingly.  However, I don't personally have a problem with it here, because, you know, the Internet, and no one is profiting or removing profit from another entity.

I am playing on a pirate server that doesn't have official permission from the IP holder to be online, because, you know, the Internet, and again, no one is profiting or removing profit from another entity.

 

If an IP holder, either because of trademark or copyright violation insisted on HC enforcing a policy of renaming characters, I would wholly support it, just as I did in Live, because that is their right.

 

If NCSoft decides to shut this down tomorrow, I'll shed a tear, just one, and I'll motor on in life, because that is there right.

 

I have no moral high ground.  I am not right in a moral or legal sense.  I sleep just fine at this point, because there is no obvious harm happening, nor I am personally at any legal risk either.

 

That doesn't make me right, just content.  

 

Pax, I don't find this humorous either, but what are you really fighting for?  Anyone with any legal sense, accepts that infringement might be an issue here at some point.  Anyone who doesn't won't be swayed by anything you or I say.

Well put.  If in the event that some rule is put in place, I'll happily follow along as well.  As of right now, there is none.

 

Thing is this - the very same excuses of HC being "ok" because (even though the code was stolen) the game code being in the wild and "they can't stop everyone" applies squarely to the creation of homages/cosplays as well.  I will near guarantee most every single one of the IP holders discussed here without question knows full well there are people copying or using their property in some way, but don't act on it.  They are not that ignorant.  They cannot stop everyone and more importantly, they don't want to.  They don't want the negative press.  THAT is going to cost them more money than going after some artist who charges someone $10 for a picture of Iron Man or someone making a free skin available for Minecraft.  Case after case after case presented here bears this out - try and profit from a property or use it in a way that damages the image of a property and owners will act.  Otherwise they don't say a word.

 

To try and claim these companies don't know about cosplays/skins/pirates software/illegal commissions/whatever is complete and utter stupidity.  A very simple web scraping program could be written to automate finding offenders and sending C&D emails to them.  It's also utterly hilarious (and sad) that it's perfectly, 100% without question OK for NCSoft to have their rights infringed upon, their property stolen, altered and used without their consent - but others shouldn't do it.  The very definition of hypocrisy.

 

Pirating software, making illegal copies to profit off of, taking unauthorized commissions, selling mods/skins of another parties property are all illegal and wrong.  No question.   We are all guilty for playing this game and no one is the moral leader here. 

Edited September 14, 2019 by ShardWarrior