Copyrighted Generics Issues

[biostem]

Just now, ShardWarrior said:

Why not?  They are not the Hulk.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

[ZacKing]

2 minutes ago, biostem said:

You forgot "in your opinion".  They are perfectly valid points - telling someone not to rip off someone else's character/IP is legitimate feedback.

Your forum pic looks too much like Beast Boy.  I'm going to report it.

[ShardWarrior]

1 minute ago, biostem said:

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

So Trolls in the game are Hulk rip offs now based on your criteria?

[Blastit]

14 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

Your forum pic looks too much like Beast Boy.  I'm going to report it.

Okay. You're perfectly able to do that. Let's see what the moderators think.

[MunkiLord]

19 minutes ago, biostem said:

You forgot "in your opinion".  They are perfectly valid points - telling someone not to rip off someone else's character/IP is legitimate feedback.

I didn't forget anything, if I have to spell out that my statement is my opinion for you, that's 100% your problem. 

 

More than legitimate, it's hypocritical seeing as how every person here is either directly engaging in or supporting copyright infringement. So no, it's not legitimate one bit.

 

And since you need it spelled out, that was an opinion. You're welcome by the way. 

Edited April 22, 2020 by MunkiLord

[ZacKing]

18 minutes ago, Blastit said:

Okay. You're perfectly able to do that. Let's see what the moderators think.

But but but there's no legitimate reason to make a character that looks like a copyrighted character!  Be more creative!

[Bossk_Hogg]

41 minutes ago, biostem said:

You don't see the irony in your statement, do you?

Honestly, no. Feel free to enlighten me. But I find it amusing for anyone to be on a high horse about IP protection on a stolen game.

 

Honestly, darkwing duck ripoff in the old comic-con farm took a lot more creativity in repurposing costume parts than random schmoe in tights #4285

[MunkiLord]

Just now, Bossk_Hogg said:

Honestly, no. Feel free to enlighten me. But I find it amusing for anyone to be on a high horse about IP protection on a stolen game.

 

Honestly, darkwing duck ripoff in the old comic-con farm took a lot more creativity in repurposing costume parts than random schmoe in tights #4285

You nailed it right here. A lot of people say creative when they really mean original. Creativity is difficult, being truly original is almost impossible for the average person. 

[Galaxy Brain]

[Oubliette_Red]

1 hour ago, Bossk_Hogg said:

Honestly, no. Feel free to enlighten me. But I find it amusing for anyone to be on a high horse about IP protection on a stolen game.

 

Honestly, darkwing duck ripoff in the old comic-con farm took a lot more creativity in repurposing costume parts than random schmoe in tights #4285

Odds are, the players going on and on about their gen'd character are the same ones that were going on about their gen'd characters back on Legacy.

 

Regardless of rules or legitimacy, players will continue to make IP-infringing characters and other players will continue to report them.

 

[kenlon]

2 hours ago, ShardWarrior said:

This is an important thing to remember, in addition to here in the USA where copyright is not necessarily intended to be held in perpetuity.

Hah. Copyright will continue to be extended every time Steamboat Willie comes close to being in the public domain until such time as Disney is prevented from buying congresspeople to keep their IP in copyright. "Intended" means two things, jack and shit.

[Blastit]

1 hour ago, ZacKing said:

But but but there's no legitimate reason to make a character that looks like a copyrighted character!  Be more creative!

I think that character has the plant hair piece. Beast Boy, iirc, does not turn into plants nor is he plant-themed other than being green. But I could be wrong. So do contact the moderators about it, if you believe you have cause.

[MunkiLord]

14 minutes ago, kenlon said:

Hah. Copyright will continue to be extended every time Steamboat Willie comes close to being in the public domain until such time as Disney is prevented from buying congresspeople to keep their IP in copyright. "Intended" means two things, jack and shit.

That very well could happen again, but this article from Ars Technica suggest it won't be as easy this time. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/hollywood-says-its-not-planning-another-copyright-extension-push/

 

Granted this is two years old and we're still a few years away from Disney potentially taking this up, but we could be surprised. Personally I have yet to hear or read a valid reason why it should last more than 56 years like it was for a while pre-1976. I actually believe 28 is a good number, with the option to extend it for an additional 28 if the copyright holder opts in.

[Wild Claw]

16 minutes ago, kenlon said:

Hah. Copyright will continue to be extended every time Steamboat Willie comes close to being in the public domain until such time as Disney is prevented from buying congresspeople to keep their IP in copyright. "Intended" means two things, jack and shit.

The next deadline for copyright extension for Steamboat Willie is 2024. Which isn't really that far away, legislation-wise. Previously, Disney was 'lobbying' a good ten years before the deadline, so they're running late this time.

[Haijinx]

Why is the first post so weird?

 

 

[Galaxy Brain]

8 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Why is the first post so weird?

 

 

To avoid copyright claims

[MTeague]

7 hours ago, Greycat said:

If the choice is between "I want to be Iron Man" and "The game is now legal," I'm *not* choosing you. And I don't think the devs or GMs would, either. I'd much rather have donations go to keeping the server running than having to get even more to fight another lawsuit.

.....

I have had *hundreds* of characters on live (approaching a hundred here, actually.) Many of them probably had powerset combinations that matched comic characters - I don't know, I'm not a comic encyclopedia and there are hundreds of thousands of comic characters out there. Know how many of mine I've had a hard time trying to keep from being generic'd? Zero. It's fine to have ideas inspired by characters or franchises you like. But there's a big difference between "Female archaeologist and adventurer" and "I'm Lara Croft, down to name, backstory and look!"

.....

 

I regret that I can only upvote this comment once.

 

6 hours ago, altaholic said:

I guess I was a bit too broad in my statement about "original costumes" already being done. Let me put it this way then, you cannot make an original costume because there is no way to create one. you are limited by what is there, so you aren't being original. Chances are you are using what others have already used.

 

If I open up a box of Lego's, it's true.  Anything I make from that box of Lego's is constrained by the full list of all possible things that you can create with Legos. I cannot make something that looks like it was composed of anything other than Lego's.  In that sense, there are "limits" to just how creative I can be. 

 

But there's still a LOT of room to be creative in those conditions. People get astonishingly creative with what they build with a basic box of vanilla Legos, even if many others also prefer specialized "kits" to make a saturn rocket or the milennium falcon.

[ShardWarrior]

58 minutes ago, kenlon said:

Hah. Copyright will continue to be extended every time Steamboat Willie comes close to being in the public domain until such time as Disney is prevented from buying congresspeople to keep their IP in copyright. "Intended" means two things, jack and shit.

Absolutely correct and the very heart of the problem.  This is why I had said copyright was never intended to exist in perpetuity any why everyone should be aware of what is going on with the legislation @MunkiLord mentioned. 

[ABlueThingy]

I don't think there's any hard rules because the copyright laws also don't have hard rules. Trying to do the old Nihilist Shuffle of "Ohh ho ho, but how do you KNOW it's a hulk clone" is like... no one has the time for this, no one is getting payed for this.  If a Disney corporate drone holds up a picture of "The Chalk" and a picture of their The Hulk in a court and the judge goes "Ok, yeah, looks like you were enabling the theft of copyright"  then that's it, game over.

 

If Disney said that they projected large hypothetical losses from trying to develop their own Marvel video game because a large part of the appeal is playing with their copywritten characters/worlds and people could just come here and do that for free. Declare them "The Napster of Superheroes" because they let you make illegal copies and siphon money away from the fair holders of the copyright.  More so because at the moment HC has absolutely no legal leg to stand on.  We're all stealing here, we all know it.

 

Now a judge might say that's bullshit.  That's like suing Crayola because crayons can draw Superman comics.  Which is what happened when Marvel sued Paragon Studios.

 

...But that did cost them money, they had to hire lawyers and file papers and show up to court.  That shit is not cheap.  And even if HC won a lawsuit the mere fact that they had one might cause NCsoft to drop any negotiations like a hot potato.  Or worse encourage them to C&D us to avoid legal liability on themselves(for letting a pirate server run that might have infringed on a separate company's copyright).

--

 

I keep seeing people who think they are asking the HC devs "How close can I get to the line."

 

What you're really asking them is "How close to getting the HC devs sued are you willing to let me get"

 

The answer is "Not very close"

 

So the counter question then is "Will you pay their legal fees if they get sued because of you."  Because right now HC taking all the legal liability on themselves for everything that happens here.  Are you willing to take some of that?

 

If you are not going to pony up.  If you want the HC Devs to shoulder all the legal repercussions themselves.  If you're not willing to pay the all volunteer GM staff so they can quit their jobs and work fulltime for HC so they have the time to read every three page dissertations on why you should be allowed to play "Steel-Man" The orangy-gold/red armored NRG/NRG Sten because he is legally distinct instead of just spending two seconds to go "That's Ironman" and deleting it.  Well...

 

... stop trying to make clone/homage/parody characters. We've been having these arguments for almost 20 years now.  You know what you're doing.  We know what you're doing.  Just stop. 

 

 

[Haijinx]

This idea is dumb.  

 

Its really very simple, just imagine you are starting your own comic book company.  

 

What are your limitations?  

 

Can you make Superman Comics?   Of course not. 

 

Can you make a comic about the last survivor of an Alien race who has super strength and can fly?  Sure.  As long as you change enough story details to blur the lines?

 

Can your character look like Superman in a Superman costume?  Nope.  Can he be a tall muscular  handsome guy with dark hair and blue eyes?  Sure.  

 

Would this comic be called unoriginal?  Possibly.  Probably if you stick too close to the Superman formula.

 

[ZacKing]

53 minutes ago, Blastit said:

I think that character has the plant hair piece. Beast Boy, iirc, does not turn into plants nor is he plant-themed other than being green. But I could be wrong. So do contact the moderators about it, if you believe you have cause.

But but but there's no reason to make a character that looks similar to a copyrighted character.  Be ORIGINAL!  Be CREATIVE!  Why is it so hard?

[MTeague]

8 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:

Absolutely correct and the very heart of the problem.  This is why I had said copyright was never intended to exist in perpetuity any why everyone should be aware of what is going on with the legislation @MunkiLord mentioned. 

I would LOVE to see some changes and limits to copyright law.  Some kind of "under no circustances shall it be possible for a copyright to extent beyond X years".

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for such changes to come about though.

And until and unless such limits are put in place, we have to deal with the crazy laws we have, not common sense we wish we had.

Besides, common sense isn't.

[ShardWarrior]

8 minutes ago, ABlueThingy said:

That's like suing Crayola because crayons can draw Superman comics.  Which is what happened when Marvel sued Paragon Studios.

Correct and people seem to keep forgetting the specifics of the case and the circumstances behind Marvel bringing the suit.  Marvel was nearly bankrupt and looking for ways to squeeze money out of anyone they could to keep afloat.

[Blastit]

5 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

But but but there's no reason to make a character that looks similar to a copyrighted character.  Be ORIGINAL!  Be CREATIVE!  Why is it so hard?

If you believe that two characters are too similar because you reduce them down to "they're green" then go invent new colours about it.

[ShardWarrior]

1 minute ago, Blastit said:

If you believe that two characters are too similar because you reduce them down to "they're green" then go invent new colours about it.

To be fair, that is what most people on the opposite side are doing.