Code of Conduct Update - September 25th 2019

[Doc_Scorpion]

49 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:

Thor isn't a very good example because he is more an exception than the general rule in that his name cannot be copyrighted.  More often than not though, character names are copyrighted material. 

This.  People keep harping on Thor, because it's such an obvious and egregious edge case.  If you're afraid of getting genericed...  Then don't use Thor.  It's that simple. 

Your life won't end over it.

That being said...  I wonder if we'll see the people we had on Live again - folks that set out to be genericed to get the name.

[Blackbird71]

 

5 hours ago, molten_dragon said:

Honestly, I expected something like this was coming for a long time.  I think I only have one character that might be affected by this, although it's pretty obscure so I'm not sure anyone will actually catch it and report it.  If it does, I'll pick another name, no big deal.

Oddly enough, when this policy was in effect on Live, I only ever had one alt that was affected, and it was the most obscure one of them all.  I could never figure that one out; why that one got hit but the more popular and obvious ones were untouched.

 

For the curious, that character was named "Ralph Hinkley".  I won't explain it, just to see how recognizable it really is.

[OriginalGameBug]

2 minutes ago, Blackbird71 said:

For the curious, that character was named "Ralph Hinkley".  I won't explain it, just to see how recognizable it really is.

Well, I won't let the Katt out of the bag, but he was one of the greatest heroes for those that remember 🙂

[ShardWarrior]

13 minutes ago, GameBugTV said:

Well, I won't let the Katt out of the bag, but he was one of the greatest heroes for those that remember 🙂

I see what you did there. 🙂

[Trademarked Name]

Is this immediate? When I get home tonight will my toons be gone?

Oh well...good night rocketeur....It was nice knowing you....Hello xxXXX$moldydood69XXXxx. Welcome to paragon!

 

[Mansome]

16 minutes ago, GameBugTV said:

Well, I won't let the Katt out of the bag, but he was one of the greatest heroes for those that remember 🙂

He was definitely American. 😁

[Obsidius]

3 hours ago, PaxArcana said:

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

That's actually a very important note.

 

The original suit by Marvel to Cryptic/NCSoft was settled out of court after the parties came to an agreement wherein that they'd work on Marvel Universe Online, a Marvel MMO. When that fell through due to unknown reasons, Crypic bought all the Champions IP and rolled the project into Champions Online.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champions_Online#Development

 

In essence, the Marvel lawsuit actually created one of CoH's competing MMOs, ironically also developed by Cryptic (before Paragon Studios took over development of COH).

Edited September 25, 2019 by Obsidius

[Hyperstrike]

17 hours ago, Sylar said:

If NCSoft aren't even concerned at this point, why would Marvel or DC or any other franchise give a hoot, especially when this isn't even a legal server?

Because, at some point, it could open the HC crew up to a lawsuit.

Better to just head it off now.

[ShardWarrior]

7 minutes ago, Mansome said:

He was definitely American. 😁

One of the greatest Americans in fact!

[Obsidius]

8 minutes ago, Trademarked Name said:

Is this immediate? When I get home tonight will my toons be gone?

Oh well...good night rocketeur....It was nice knowing you....Hello xxXXX$moldydood69XXXxx. Welcome to paragon!

 

Did you confirm that? There's some wiggle room for parody or homage. You may not need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. On the original game, for example, I played for years with a guy named UltraBatz, who was an homage to another famous bat-themed crime fighter.

[Williwaw]

1 hour ago, ShardWarrior said:

Thor isn't a very good example because he is more an exception than the general rule in that his name cannot be copyrighted.  More often than not though, character names are copyrighted material. 

Names can't be copyrighted, names can only be trademarked.  You can copyright an entire character, but not just their name (which is why Marvel has a Captain Marvel and DC has a Captain Marvel... but only Marvel has the trademark rights to use "Captain Marvel" in a comic's title)

 

In theory, you can make a CoH character named Captain America, as long as said character didn't resemble Marvel's character in any other ways, and you'd be breaking no copyright or trademark laws.  (In practice, of course, you'd probably get smacked down anyway, on the Better Safe Than Sorry clause)

[ShardWarrior]

8 minutes ago, Williwaw said:

In theory, you can make a CoH character named Captain America, as long as said character didn't resemble Marvel's character in any other ways, and you'd be breaking no copyright or trademark laws. 

I don't believe that is correct.  The name is an important part of the overall likeness of the character, so it is not going to be fair game under trademark protection.  Marvel and DC share "ownership" of the word "superhero".  Chances are very, very high names are off the table too.

 

This topic reminds me of this - anyone remember this? 🙂

 

Edited September 25, 2019 by ShardWarrior

[Blackbird71]

3 hours ago, PaxArcana said:

The same as Cryptic and NCSoft did before the shutdown:

 

Player reports.

This is the worst of it to me.  It effectively gives those players who dislike copy/homage characters a tool with which to grief those who do.  Blatant copies are one thing, but there are those who will report any and every character even remotely similar to an existing IP.  If such a report happens to catch a GM on a bad day, or if the massive influx of these reports overwhelms the GMs and in frustration they turn to a "scorched earth" policy, then the griefers effectively win.

 

Please tell me there will be some sort of appeals process, in which disputed reports will be reviewed by a different GM than the one who originally decided the case?

[Trademarked Name]

You already can't name a character exactly like the trademark character. The game won't let you make "Batman" or "Superman". So I assume it's any variation on that name...."xXBatManXx" would qualify. What about Bat Mon, the jamaican caped crusader that dresses all in black but with dreadlocks? Is that "variant" enough?

 

It would be nice if they could be more specific but I think anything that could be "construed" as a comic book character that is copywritten or TMd would qualify. 

I'd rather not take the chance. I think I've got 4 homage characters that can be randomed. I'll change the global name when I get home as well. 

I also have an "imp" character that I tried to make look like the "demon" prestige pet. I'll randomize him as well in case he's too much like some IP character that some company owns. 

I just don't want to lose the XP/INF/IOs I've invested in already. 

 

[Blackbird71]

3 minutes ago, Trademarked Name said:

I just don't want to lose the XP/INF/IOs I've invested in already. 

 

I could be wrong, but I've never heard of anyone losing this stuff over this type of violation.  If HC follows the way Live handled it, I'm pretty sure that you just have to rename the character and/or redesign the costume.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Blackbird71

[Obsidius]

21 minutes ago, Trademarked Name said:

You already can't name a character exactly like the trademark character. The game won't let you make "Batman" or "Superman". So I assume it's any variation on that name...."xXBatManXx" would qualify. What about Bat Mon, the jamaican caped crusader that dresses all in black but with dreadlocks? Is that "variant" enough?

 

It would be nice if they could be more specific but I think anything that could be "construed" as a comic book character that is copywritten or TMd would qualify. 

I'd rather not take the chance. I think I've got 4 homage characters that can be randomed. I'll change the global name when I get home as well. 

I also have an "imp" character that I tried to make look like the "demon" prestige pet. I'll randomize him as well in case he's too much like some IP character that some company owns. 

I just don't want to lose the XP/INF/IOs I've invested in already. 

 

That Bat Mon character would be a parody, and would almost certainly be safe.

 

Rocketuer might be safe also, if you change the costume (perhaps even the colors) just enough to make it more an homage than a clone.

 

There's a bit of wiggle room, but even if your character got whacked, it would NOT lose XP/INF/IOs. What happens is that the GM simply resets the character's name and costume. Everything else stays intact, like AT, power choices, enhancements, inventory, etc.

 

Edit: in fact, unless you get whacked, I'd say it's business as usual. Just roll with your characters, and if they get hit by a GM for being too close to the mark, just make their name and costume a little less close than what you're paying the homage to. It's only if you keep doing the same thing over and over and over that a GM will take more severe action.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Obsidius

[ShardWarrior]

6 minutes ago, Blackbird71 said:

This is the worst of it to me.  It effectively gives those players who dislike copy/homage characters a tool with which to grief those who do.  Blatant copies are one thing, but there are those who will report any and every character even remotely similar to an existing IP.  If such a report happens to catch a GM on a bad day, or if the massive influx of these reports overwhelms the GMs and in frustration they turn to a "scorched earth" policy, then the griefers effectively win.

 

Please tell me there will be some sort of appeals process, in which disputed reports will be reviewed by a different GM than the one who originally decided the case?

^Fair question.

[Widower]

9 minutes ago, Blackbird71 said:

This is the worst of it to me.  It effectively gives those players who dislike copy/homage characters a tool with which to grief those who do.  Blatant copies are one thing, but there are those who will report any and every character even remotely similar to an existing IP.  If such a report happens to catch a GM on a bad day, or if the massive influx of these reports overwhelms the GMs and in frustration they turn to a "scorched earth" policy, then the griefers effectively win.

 

Please tell me there will be some sort of appeals process, in which disputed reports will be reviewed by a different GM than the one who originally decided the case?

Trust me, I'm not looking forward to maliciously-intended reports any more than you are, and indeed probably less since I have to read them. As with all disciplinary matters, my colleagues and I will discuss borderline cases as a group. If you strongly feel you have been wronged, you may appeal to Lead GMs and/or Admins.

 

8 minutes ago, Trademarked Name said:

I just don't want to lose the XP/INF/IOs I've invested in already. 

Nobody will be banned unless they are quixotically persistent.

[Harrow]

I think it would be a good idea to publish some guidelines for enforcement, perhaps with examples of what is and isn't acceptable. Even outside of characters who are inspired by a comic book, movie, novel, or game character, there's a huge number of copyrighted characters out in the world that many players might not even be aware of and nothing original under the sun. Having some sort of hard guidance for what is and isn't against the rules would help calm some anxiety about the policy.

 

For example, let's use a character I don't have anymore (I actually already redesigned him to be more original just for my own sake when he started to become my main). Right when Homecoming launched I made a character who was designed to resemble Joker from Persona 5, and named him the Phantom Thief. Would that have been too close? He didn't have the same name, but he was a dark-haired character in a black trenchcoat with red gloves and a name that made clear reference to something from Persona 5--but the term "phantom thief" is also a character archetype in fiction that just happened to be used as a term in Persona 5.

 

That might seem like an intentionally complicated example, but it's one that actually could have happened had I not already redesigned and renamed him. But knowing how the ruling would work in cases like that would probably help clarify how this will be enforced.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Harrow

[Blackbird71]

3 hours ago, Arawanach said:

I made a character in DCUO and played trough the entire storyline with Batman as mentor. Since it was my main character and I liked the powerset I remade my character in City of Heroes. Note that this character is from Gotham and was mentored by Batman, and is an offical member of the Justice League. That is trough me playing trough the game with that character. Story is then that she was transfered from Gotham City to Paragon City to help out there. However my character is not based on an existing DC character, but is my own DC character from the online game DC made. It would be like if you remake and everquest character here. That is allowed, so remaking your own character and using IG storyline you played trough from a different game should be allowed.

 

Nothing preventing you from remaking your own characters, right?

 

Actually, there may be something preventing you from remaking "your own" character; and that is the fact that it may not be "your own."  I can't say for certain in this case, because I never played DCUO and I don't know their user agreement terms, but a lot of games include the stipulation that any characters you create become the property of the game publisher/copyright holder.  If that's true for DCUO, then once you created the character in that game, legally it became DC's property, not yours.  Remaking that character on CoH would in principle be the same as making Batman himself.

 

Now in practice, it may just slip under the radar, as someone would have to see your character and recognize it as DC property (i.e., they'd have to be familiar with your character on DCUO), and then report it for the GMs to take notice.

[ShardWarrior]

2 minutes ago, Harrow said:

I think it would be a good idea to publish some guidelines for enforcement, perhaps with examples of what is and isn't acceptable. Even outside of characters who are inspired by a comic book, movie, novel, or game character, there's a huge number of copyrighted characters out in the world that many players might not even be aware of and nothing original under the sun. Having some sort of hard guidance for what is and isn't against the rules would help calm some anxiety about the policy.

 

For example, let's use a character I don't have anymore (I actually already redesigned him to be more original just for my own sake when he started to become my main). Right when Homecoming launched I made a character who was designed to resemble Joker from Persona 5, and named him the Phantom Thief. Would that have been too close? He didn't have the same name, but he was a dark-haired character in a black trenchcoat with red gloves and a name that made clear reference to something from Persona 5--but the term "phantom thief" is also a character archetype in fiction that just happened to be used as a term in Persona 5.

 

That might seem like an intentionally complicated example, but it's one that actually could have happened had I not already redesigned and renamed him. But knowing how the ruling would work in cases like that would probably help clarify how this will be enforced.

Personally, I don't disagree with the idea.  However, I think it opens up the HC folk to a whole can of worms they would rather not get into.  I can only imagine the myriad of forum posts, emails, in game tickets and such demanding to know why one thing is allowed whereas another isn't. 

[Abraxus]

45 minutes ago, Trademarked Name said:

Is this immediate? When I get home tonight will my toons be gone?

Oh well...good night rocketeur....It was nice knowing you....Hello xxXXX$moldydood69XXXxx. Welcome to paragon!

 

I don't believe any characters will be deleted, but some could get the generic treatment for name, costume, bio, or any combination of the three. 🙂

[Blackbird71]

1 hour ago, ShardWarrior said:

Indeed!

 

@GM Capocollo or @GM Widower - might we please ask if/how are parodies covered in this policy?  Thank you.

Yes, I am very curious about this as well.  Parody law in the U.S. allows for quite a bit of imitation, almost to the point of duplication.  The only requirement I am aware of is that the parody work be somehow "creatively transformative."  I'm not well enough versed in this to say where that line is, but let me give an example:  For "Weird" Al Yankovic's "Eat It" music video, he used the same sets, costumes, and even dancers and extras that Michael Jackson used for his "Beat It" video.  The result is that with the exception of a few gags, and Al himself in place of the Prince of Pop, visually the two are incredibly similar.  But as the song lyrics were changed, the content was different, and so it is classed as parody.

 

Now, I don't expect a single example to be taken as a guiding rule for all decisions, but if we stretch something like this to apply to the CoH situation, it would seem to indicate that, for example, a character with a largely similar (not identical) costume to an existing copyrighted character, but who has a different name and backstory, should generally be considered a parody rather than a copy.  I'll put one of mine out as an example:  I made a character for a contest named Kim Plausible, and visually she does bear a striking resemblance to a certain redhead.  However, her shtick is that she's a teen trying to crack into the superhero business, but just can't seem to get the recognition she needs because her name isn't quite interesting enough to attract the headlines.  This was intended as something of a joke, sort of an homage to The Princess Bride's Dread Pirate Roberts "It's the name that's important" bit, and the idea that someone with the wrong name, even if just a little off, would not get the same respect in their chosen role.

 

So where would such a character fall?  My personal take is that it would qualify as parody, but I realize I may be biased in this case, and this sort of thing is probably on the borderline and could be judged either way, depending on who looks at it.

[PaxArcana]

28 minutes ago, Blackbird71 said:

This is the worst of it to me.  It effectively gives those players who dislike copy/homage characters a tool with which to grief those who do.

I disagree.  Remember, a report is not an automatic "poof, you're Generic'd"; that report goes to a GM, and the GM then makes a judgement call - preferably after setting eyes, themselves, on the character in question (and yes, they do have the ability to look at your bio and costume(s) even while you are offline, or playing a different character).

And if the same person is filing umpteen frivolous reports a day/week/whatever, eventually the GMs will just start ignoring their reports altogether.

 

Quite possibly, that person may even face disciplinary sanctions themselves, for wasting the GM's time and trying to grief other players.

 

... I am, admittedly, one of the more fervent anti-copyclone players in the community.  And yet, I've posted repeatedly (a couple times here, too) that my standards, aside from names, are "at least two of three" between costume, powers, and bio.  If you're in a superman-like costume ... but you're a gravity/empathy controller, your name isn't a variation of Superman, and your bio doesn't make you the last scion of an exploded planet who gets their powers from the light of a yellow sun?  Eh, I could wish you'd made a more original costume, but it just isn't a copyclone.

 

OTOH, if you make a character whose name is ... oh ... The Last Son, in a very superman-like costume (maybe with color differences - swap the red and yellow elements, for example), with a bio that talks about being Kenneth Clarke, the last survivor of an alternate timeline, whose amazing powers (being of the "standard Superman package" SS/Invul/Flight variety) arise from the differing physics of your original home?  Bonus points if you do things like make him a YouTube video blogger with a channel called "The Daily Podcast", maybe with your friend Jenny Olsen providing the IT and AV tech support to keep it running, and that sort of thing.

 

Unmistakably a Superman homage.

 

Different enough to be (easily) argued as a transformative work, and thus, not an infringement on DC's copyrights and trademarks.

And so, I wouldn't report that.  Bloody hell, I'd likely send you a /tell congratulating you on the excellent work to put it all together.

23 minutes ago, Harrow said:

I made a character who was designed to resemble Joker from Persona 5, and named him the Phantom Thief. Would that have been too close? He didn't have the same name, but he was a dark-haired character in a black trenchcoat with red gloves and a name that made clear reference to something from Persona 5--but the term "phantom thief" is also a character archetype in fiction that just happened to be used as a term in Persona 5.

IMO, that would be fine, and I would not report it, unless the character's bio was a direct 1:1 take from the game.

 

"Dark haired, black trenchcoat, red gloves" isn't really distinct enough, by itself, IMO, to be an issue by itself.  With the name being different, and the bio being different (or even just absent, as with most people) ...?  No harm, no foul, no report.

[Rodumas]

I think the sauce is colder than the heat it's being cooked with. I've made an extra copy of my costumes folder because I did put alot of work and, yes....YES: Creativity into creating my looks and various other looks certain characters may have had over the years. That being said, there are a myriad of ways to tweak certain aspects of your characters for public display. I'm also pretty sure this entire situation will create a subculture where, much like those of my kind in the past, people can gather and show off their actual looks if they so choose without fear of getting 'arrested' so to speak. Theres something very sad about that, but them's be the breaks. Now, alot of people like to immerse themselves in the legalese of the matter, and thats fine I suppose. But thats just too sterile for me. MY main issue with this will be interplayer interaction, nothing more nothing less.

I'm a confidant fashionista, so I'm all about tweaks to cleverly bypass whatever it is that is defintive rule of law going forward.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Rodumas