Copyright or look-and-feel of arcade games
Michael A. Kelly
I'm working on a new arcade game for the Mac. It started out as a clone of
an old (c. 1983-84) video game I used to play in high school, but has since
been added to extensively. The new game is essentially the old game plus
a whole lot more; but the old game is still there and easily recognizable
by anyone who ever spent time with the original.
Is there a potential copyright problem here? Assuming the company that made
the game is still around, would it be prudent to contact them? If the
company isn't around any more, do I have to do anything?
It's difficult to describe the similarities between the two games without
getting specific, and I'm not at liberty to do so. But it's kind of like
the difference between Blasteroids and the original Asteroids. Blasteroids
is like an ultra-enhanced Asteroids. If I was making Blasteroids, would
I have anything to worry about from the makers of Asteroids? (Sorry if
you're not familiar with Blasteroids, but that's the best example I could
think of.)
BTW, is there a more appropriate newsgroup for this discussion?
Later,
Mike.
--
_____________________________________________________________________________
Michael A. Kelly Senior Partner
mke...@cs.uoregon.edu High Risk Ventures
_____________________________________________________________________________
Tim Smith
>I'm working on a new arcade game for the Mac. It started out as a clone of
>an old (c. 1983-84) video game I used to play in high school, but has since
>been added to extensively. The new game is essentially the old game plus
>a whole lot more; but the old game is still there and easily recognizable
>by anyone who ever spent time with the original.
>
>Is there a potential copyright problem here?
It depends.
>
>It's difficult to describe the similarities between the two games without
>getting specific, and I'm not at liberty to do so. But it's kind of like
>the difference between Blasteroids and the original Asteroids. Blasteroids
>is like an ultra-enhanced Asteroids. If I was making Blasteroids, would
>I have anything to worry about from the makers of Asteroids? (Sorry if
>you're not familiar with Blasteroids, but that's the best example I could
>think of.)
This example has happened: Atari v. Amusement World, except that I don't
think Amusement World enhanced the game, but just cloned it. Atari lost.
However, on the subject of PAC-MAN rather than Asterioids, North American
Philips *lost* when Midway and Atari sued over K. C. Munchkin.
So you can't just say what you have done is "like the difference" between
Asteriods and Blasteroids. Copyright protects expression of ideas, rather
than ideas themselves. This means that if something is required to express
an idea, copyright can't protect it. In particular, copyright can't
protect the idea of a "shoot rocks in space" game. The court decided
that any "shoot rocks in space" game would include Asteroids, and so
there could be no copyright protection.
On the other hand, "run around a maze avoiding enemies" is a broader
idea. There is room for more variation in how that idea is expressed,
and K. C. Munchkin was too close to PAC-MAN.
Note the result: a near exact clone of Asteroids was OK, but something that
had several differences from PAC-MAN wasn't OK. I don't think you will be
able to get a good answer in your case without divulging details of your
game.
--Tim Smith
Michael A. Kelly
OK. The specific part of our game that we're worried about is:
There is an enemy base/fortress/castle (hint hint)/mother ship which is
surrounded by three concentric roughly circular (regular n-sided polygons)
rings/shields. The rings spin, with the outer and inner rings spinning the
same direction and the middle ring spinning the opposite direction. The
good guy has to shoot out segments of the rings so that he has a clear
shot at the enemy base when the holes in each ring line up. The enemy base
can shoot back, also only when the holes in the rings line up. The base
shoots huge plasma balls like in the first Star Trek movie.
That is what is the same in both the original game and our game. Here are
some differences:
In the original game, the base & rings were static in the center of the
screen, and the good guy flew his ship around the base, with his flight
wrapping around when he flew off the screen. In our game, the base stays
in one spot in the world/galaxy, but the galaxy is much bigger than the
screen, so the base could be anywhere on the screen or not on the screen
at all. Here's one important difference between the two: there is no
notion of the good guy's flight wrapping around on the screen. The wrapping
was very important in the original game; the enemy base could only shoot
in the direction it was pointing, so the good guy could sit close to the edge
of the screen and fire away from the castle (oops, I mean base), hitting
it from behind, and then thrust forward a bit to the other side of the
screen when the base was aiming at the ship, thus avoiding attack from the
base while whaling on it. There is no way to do that in our game.
There are no bad guys in the original game (I think, although my partner
thinks that there was). There are quite a few in our game, with lots of
variation in strength and strategy, plus 'yummies' and 'space garbage' and
asteroids and such floating about in space. And the good guy's ship is
a lot more complicated than the original.
We've basically taken a simple ten year old video game and extended it
tremendously. I consider the original game inspiration, but others may
consider it more than that. I don't want to get sued. But I don't want
to cause myself any unnecessary legal hassles either. If it isn't possible
for the makers of the original game to win a lawsuit against us, I'd
rather not go out of my way to bring the game to their attention.
So it sounds like our game vs. the original would probably go the way of
K.C. Munchkin vs. PacMan. What do you think?
BTW, what happens if that company isn't around any more?
Thanks for your help,
Neil A Haldar
know who the original manufacturer of the game is. Go to the largest library
near you... and go look them up... Grab a copy of their D&B (Dunn and
Bradstreet[correct me if I'm wrong]), which will tell you their current
financial situation, assuming their a publicly-held company.
Next, I'd go look up on the CD-ROM database (for that's what's available here)
what copyrights, trademarks, patants, and other legal ownership they still
retain... this should be all inclusive, and include all of their filings
they've made with various federal offices.
Then... see if those copyrights/trademarks/patents are still in effect... I
don't remember what the law is, but I believe a patent is 7 years and a
copyright is 20 or so; and these of course can be extended.
This should tell you LOTS about this company and how their marks are legally
protected. Patents/copyrights are considered a form of ownership, and the
original company could easily sue you if they still have a foot to stand on or
if they still exist.
Just like I said in my first posting... get a competent lawyer. ;)
-Neil
--
*> Neil Haldar <*
*> nha...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu <*
*> ne...@well.sf.ca.us <*
*> 364 West Lane Ave #225, Cols., OH 43201 614.299.8529 <*
rodney jacks
My guess is that as long as you don't copy the artwork or sounds from
Star Castle then you're probably safe. You can probably use the basic
premise of the game safely. But then I'm no lawyer :-)
-Rodney
rja...@austlcm.sps.mot.com
James Preston
}There are no bad guys in the original game (I think, although my partner
}thinks that there was). There are quite a few in our game, with lots of
}variation in strength and strategy
If by "bad guys" you mean enemy ships other than the big mother, then there
definitely were bad guys in the original arcade game. They took the form
of a swarm of little tiny "ships" that would start following your ship
around.
Are you planning on this being a commercial game or shareware? In either
case, I look forward to it. Be sure to let the mac newsgroups know when
it's released.
--James Preston
Terry Carroll
> Then... see if those copyrights/trademarks/patents are still in effect... I
> don't remember what the law is, but I believe a patent is 7 years and a
> copyright is 20 or so; and these of course can be extended.
A patent duration is 17 years, not subject to renewal (Although, I believe,
maintenence fees must be paid, or the patent lapses, which is similar in
effect to a shorter duration, with the maintenence fees serving to "renew"
for up to the full term of 17 years). Sorry no cite available, this is from
memory, and if incorrect, I hope someone will post the correct information.
For works created after 1/1/1978, copyright is significantly longer than 20
years. It is the life of the author plus 50 years for most works, and is 75
years for works made for hire, anonymous works, and pseudonymous works.
There is no longer any renewal. 17 USC 302.
For works created before 1/1/78, it's more complicated, but it effectively
works out to 75 years. See 17 USC 303 and 304.
Terry Carroll - tj...@juts.ccc.amdahl.com - 408/992-2152
The opinions presented above are not necessarily those of a sound mind.
Michael A. Kelly
>
>Are you planning on this being a commercial game or shareware?
Sorry, I should I mentioned that in the first place. It will commercial,
and will eventually be ported to the IBM and Amiga platforms. That's why
I'm so concerned about getting sued.
Bruce Hayden
>Next, I'd go look up on the CD-ROM database (for that's what's available here)
>what copyrights, trademarks, patants, and other legal ownership they still
>retain... this should be all inclusive, and include all of their filings
>they've made with various federal offices.
>Then... see if those copyrights/trademarks/patents are still in effect... I
>don't remember what the law is, but I believe a patent is 7 years and a
>copyright is 20 or so; and these of course can be extended.
Utility patents have a term of upto 17 years (exercising all extensions).
Copyrights are now Life + 50 for individuals, or 75 years for corps, etc.
Renewals for older copyrights are going out the door (are becoming automatic).
Figure that if it was ever copyrighted, it probably still is. Also, note
that any work created after March 1, 1988 need not be marked to be protected.
Works between 1978 and 1988 may possibly still be protected w/o marking.
Registration with the C/R office is actually only required if and when
you are going to bring suit. So, all you will be able to see in the C/R
office files is if the C/R has been assigned. Otherwise, assume that it
is good.
>This should tell you LOTS about this company and how their marks are legally
>protected. Patents/copyrights are considered a form of ownership, and the
>original company could easily sue you if they still have a foot to stand on or
>if they still exist.
Bruce E. Hayden
Copyrights, Patents, etc.
(303) 758-8400
bha...@csn.org
bha...@du.edu