Weirdest letter from NC Interactive ever:
Magnus, Robot Fighter.
We would like to thank you for your understanding in our attempt to
create a more friendly and positive playing environment. Your
character(s) were discovered in game with a costume that violates the
Rules of Conduct(RoC) #16. In an effort to limit the interruption of
your game play as much as possible, the costume(s) has been reset to
basic tights. For each costume that has been reset your character has
been granted a free costume change at any Icon tailor shop. This is a
follow up message to inform you of our policy regarding this issue.
Please make sure that your new costume is unique and does not in any
way resemble any existing intellectual property.
We also have noticed that the character(s) reported also contained a
profile and/or battle cry which violates the USER AGREEMENT (EULA)
Section 4f. The support team has removed the inappropriate profile. To
update the game to reflect the change, please log in with the
character and delete the profile and select OK. Once you clear the
profile and select OK, you will be able to go back and edit the
profile again. Once you have replaced the profile, it will be
necessary to zone or log the character out and back in for the profile
change to take effect.
Account: pavelb1
Character Name / Server: Harvey Birdman on Freedom
Costume Slots Changed: 0, 1
Two free tailor sessions granted
Motto "I\sll Take The Case!\n"
Description "Lawyer by day, idiot by night."
Intellectual Property: Harvey Birdman
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
His costume is a guy in a suit. Without the wings because they don't
have wings. The whole character is a copyright violation...but they're
just tagging me for the costume and his ' BATTLECRY'?....but not the
name? Crazy.
allow me to summarize: The name is the most blatant violation...the
costume next...and 'Ill take the case!' being removed is just silly.
Yet they're letting me keep the name.
And don't bother flaming me. I'm not complaining. I think it's funny.
-------------------------------------------------------
Michael Alan Chary on intelligent Newsgroup discussions:
"I'm not telling him he can't post his inane
opinions here. I'm telling him he's more likely to get a response somewhere
else. That response will be "Levitz is a genius. You're an imbecile.""
Xocyll
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:
<snip nc letter>
>His costume is a guy in a suit. Without the wings because they don't
>have wings. The whole character is a copyright violation...but they're
>just tagging me for the costume and his ' BATTLECRY'?....but not the
>name? Crazy.
>
> allow me to summarize: The name is the most blatant violation...the
>costume next...and 'Ill take the case!' being removed is just silly.
>Yet they're letting me keep the name.
Presumably it's because it's the combination of name
+costume/bio/battlecry that makes it a violation.
You are permitted to call yourself Wolverine after all, as long as you
have nothing in common with the Marvel property.
[Ok the actual name wolverine is blocked and/or long since taken, but
you get the idea.]
Wolverine the pink/purple suited psi controller is quite obviously NOT
the Marvel X-man.
Since you picked a more obscure hero (instead of
hulk/wolverine/spiderman) they're likely giving you a break instead of
name changing you.
>And don't bother flaming me. I'm not complaining. I think it's funny.
Like everyone else their "abuse" people are human with all the foibles
and personal biases.
Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Magnus Itland
wrote:
> His costume is a guy in a suit. Without the wings because they don't
> have wings. The whole character is a copyright violation...but they're
> just tagging me for the costume and his ' BATTLECRY'?....but not the
> name? Crazy.
>
> allow me to summarize: The name is the most blatant violation...the
> costume next...and 'Ill take the case!' being removed is just silly.
> Yet they're letting me keep the name.
>
> And don't bother flaming me. I'm not complaining. I think it's funny.
Names of superheroes are rarely trademarket. Especially names of common
objects, or combinations of existing given names and family names. It is
the "distinctive likeness" that is copyrighted. Thus, if your hero is
changed so that it can not at all remind anyone of the original until they
see the name, the problem is solved. Otherwise, you may find a harsher
response next time.
To be honest, I can't even remember the distinctive likeness of Harvey
Birdman, but I'm sure you can.
--
"When someone starts bragging about how much debt they have, it's not a
good sign." -G
Steve H
is. They are the WORST company to deal with, they have a dictatorship
type of attitude and are totally not helpful at all.
I say boycott them!
On Mon, 30 May 2005 16:13:55 -0500, "Magnus, Robot Fighter."
<m...@key.com> wrote:
Dark Tyger
wrote:
>I'm not flaming you, it's just another example of how crappy NCSoft
>is. They are the WORST company to deal with
You -CLEARLY- haven't dealt with many companies' CS...
--
Dark Tyger
Stop the madness! (Marvel Vs Cryptic Studios petition)
http://www.petitiononline.com/marvscoh/petition.html
Hey, everyone else is doing it. Free iPod:
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=15728814
bombaymix
>Names of superheroes are rarely trademarket. Especially names of common
>objects, or combinations of existing given names and family names.
You basically can't copyright nouns. If Marvel made a char called
John Smith and copyrighted it, it would mean every other book, film,
persons etc with that name would be in violation of their copyright!
John Smith who looks like the Marvel char can be copyrighted but the
name can't.
If you make up the name it can be copyrighted, ie Wolverine.
My main was called Iori and many people thought it was named after a
SNK character. I actually got it from another JP manga but my Iori
looks nothing like either one and Iori is a JP name and thus not
copyrighted.
George Johnson
news:1117705553.9...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
They can Trademark a name.
Copyrights apply only for unique designs so the creator can exclusively
profit for a short period of time from that copyright.
GOOGLE [ weak trademark ]
http://www.google.com/search?&q=weak+trademark
Marvel Comics can Trademark the name "Wolverine", however, since the
name is also the name of a common animal found in the wild they have rather
distinct limits on what they can pursue for litigation. Dictionary-derived
names also have this limit. Unique names like "Galactus" or "Spider-Man" or
"Daimon Hellstrom" are completely legally defensible. Unallowed
duplications of a specific unique logo for any Trademarked character are
litigatable. Even abuse of widely known identification keywords or phrases
(known as "Trademark Squatting") is sueable in court.
A non-Marvel Comics business can create and sell a "Wolverine
Snowblower" so long as there is no confusion that it is manufactured or sold
by Marvel Comics. The word "Wolverine" is pretty much a generic word but by
popular appeal has grown into a recognized character Trademark of Marvel
Comics. Laws of "Unfair Competition" covers Marvel Comic's asses until the
character becomes recognized and gains a following. It also pays to
remember that Trademarks have to be registered and paid for to retain any
kind of legal protection.
Trademarks tend not to be so easily defended if there is no profit. For
example a for-profit website domain will have stronger protection than a
website using a similar name (litigatable under "Brand Confusion") that
isn't seeking profit unless that website falls under the legal protections
of the "Protected Parody" clauses (although there is a distinct movement to
allow full unhindered protections for "Protest / Complaint Websites").
Marvel Comics character list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Marvel_Comics_characters
Non-unique names are not so easily defended.
============
http://www.quicken.com/cms/viewers/article/small_business/45205
Small Business
Strong and Weak Trademarks
With very few exceptions, only strong trademarks or service marks have the
full protection of federal and state trademark laws. Remember, too, that
trademark laws don't automatically protect a business name (the name of your
company); to be considered a mark, a business name must be used to identify
a product or service in the marketplace.
A trademark is considered weak when others can use it (or something similar)
on products or services that don't compete directly with yours. Most
ordinary trademarks are weak. Examples: Liquor Barn, Cuts Deluxe, Charlie's
Auto Parts, 10-Minute Lube.
A trademark is considered legally strong when others can't use it or
anything similar on related goods or services. There are two kinds of strong
trademarks: ones that contain distinctive terms and ones that contain
ordinary terms that have acquired distinctiveness through use.
1. Distinctive Terms
Distinctive trademarks are memorable, evocative, unique or somehow
surprising-for example, 7-Up, Lycra or Cherokee apparel. The words
themselves have little or no descriptive function; they serve to set the
product or service off from others.
So if you're naming a service or product and want a strong mark, try for a
name that is either unusual or used in an unusual way. A judge is likely to
treat a distinctive name as a trademark or service mark and protect it from
use by others-unless someone else has used a similar trademark on the same
type of product or service first.
EXAMPLE: "Buick" distinguishes a line of cars from others, and the name
means nothing apart from its trademark use. It's a distinctive name.
Conversely, "Dependable Dry Cleaners" merely tells you something about the
business; it doesn't help you distinguish it from rivals who might also
advertise their services as reliable or efficient. So the name would
probably not qualify for trademark or service mark protection unless it had
been in use for a long time and developed a sizable following-that is, a
secondary meaning.
2. Ordinary Words
Generic terms can't be protected by trademark law; original and distinctive
words can be protected. But what about other words used to identify products
and services-ordinary words that are neither generic nor distinctive? This
category covers place names (Downtown Barbers), surnames (Harris Sales),
words that describe the product or service (Slim-Fast Diet Food) and words
of praise (Tip-Top Pet Shop). Ordinary words receive limited legal
protection as trademarks. It's more difficult to keep others from using them
or something similar.
Even a weak trademark can acquire limited protection under unfair
competition laws. For example, an ordinary name (a weak trademark) can be
protected from someone else using the name in a confusing way. The law of
unfair competition is generally based on state law (statutes and judge-made
law) that supplements federal and state trademark laws. Owners of weak and
unregistered names can get some relief from a rival's use of the identical
name on the identical product or service in a competing market.
Weak trademarks can become strong ones through long use and extensive public
familiarity with the mark. A trademark that starts out being ordinary or
otherwise weak (like Dependable Cleaners) can sometimes, over time and
through use, become identified in the public's mind with a specific product
or service. When that happens, it can be transformed into a strong
trademark.
EXAMPLE: Chap Stick brand of lip balm was originally a weak trademark. It
simply described the condition the product was designed to cure: chapped
lips. But it became strong as advertising and word of mouth helped the
public develop a clear association between the name and a specific product.
Over time, the name developed distinctiveness based on familiarity rather
than any quality inherent in the name.
Lawyers describe a trademark that has become distinctive over time as one
that has acquired a "secondary meaning." McDonald's is another good example
of a weak mark that developed a secondary meaning over the years-and now
qualifies for broad protection.
Excerpted from the "Legal Guide for Starting and Running a Small Business"
by Fred S. Steingold
bombaymix
Which is basically what I said but with more legal jargon. (Ok so
Wolverine was a bad example, I totally forgot about the animal of the
same name. Put the general jest is correct.)
Xocyll
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:
><snip>
On that subject, i'll just note that the Marvel guy is named after the
animal since his bad disposition sometimes makes him _nearly_ as bad.
A story I read in another group some months back follows
==================================================================
A friend was deployed to the Phillipines some years ago, was somewhat
concerned about jungles full of poisonous snakes, and happened to
mention this concern in the hearing of a local, who was shocked that my
friend wasn't *happy* to be out of those dangerous Canadian woods and
into some nice safe jungles.
This fellow had apparently been present some time earlier when three
donated animals had been taken by ferry to a zoo on another island
there; a moose and a wolverine were arriving from Canada, and a Bengal
tiger was arriving from where ever they come from. The locals knew
about building bamboo shipping cages that'd safely hold a tiger, and had
built two more, one extra large, for the others.
Apparently the wolverine got seasick, decided it wanted out, ripped away
one of the bamboo bars with its teeth, got out, fell overboard, was
fished out and recaged, then the tiger made the error of growling at the
wolverine, at which point it ripped through both cages and partway into
the tiger. At this point they got out the trank gun and stopped the
wolverine. Meanwhile, the moose got caught up in all this excitement
and burst out of its cage, attacking some of the cars on the ferry.
With a fair bit of veterinary care, they were able to save the tiger.
These people now *fear* Canadian wildlife.
=================================================================
That pansy little X-man only wishes he was half as mean as the real
thing.
Dark Tyger
wrote:
>If you make up the name it can be copyrighted, ie Wolverine.
...Wolverine isn't "made up". It's a real animal.
Thus, if you made a character that was a female blaster named
Wolverine, there are no copyright/trademark issues. Only if name AND
character design match will you have a problem.
On the other hand, naming a character Voldemort -would- be an issue.
The name exists nowhere outside of Harry Potter fiction.
Daniel G.
"Dark Tyger" <dark...@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:hrru91lvh1m1d1cgh...@4ax.com...
> On 2 Jun 2005 02:45:53 -0700, "bombaymix" <bomb...@altavista.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>If you make up the name it can be copyrighted, ie Wolverine.
>
> ...Wolverine isn't "made up". It's a real animal.
>
> Thus, if you made a character that was a female blaster named
> Wolverine, there are no copyright/trademark issues. Only if name AND
> character design match will you have a problem.
>
> On the other hand, naming a character Voldemort -would- be an issue.
> The name exists nowhere outside of Harry Potter fiction.
>
What if you changed the spelling to something like Vuldimort? Would this be
allowed?
Rich G.
*snipped for the 2 dial-up users out there and for courtesy, not because
I wanted to. GREAT story!!!
> These people now *fear* Canadian wildlife.
> =================================================================
>
> That pansy little X-man only wishes he was half as mean as the real
> thing.
ROFL - great story!
I now have a newfound respect for Canadia (sic). :)
--
http://www.simplerich.com/blog
Read my book!!!
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1411617576/
Dark Tyger
<Dan...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
>What if you changed the spelling to something like Vuldimort? Would this be
>allowed?
Nope. Reasonable similarity to the point where the reference is clear.
Knight37
> These people now *fear* Canadian wildlife.
I fear pretty much anything from Canada. Aye.
--
Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com
Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
Knight37
> On the other hand, naming a character Voldemort -would- be an issue.
> The name exists nowhere outside of Harry Potter fiction.
How do you know? Have you checked all the phone books?
Knight37
> I'm not flaming you, it's just another example of how crappy NCSoft
> is. They are the WORST company to deal with, they have a dictatorship
> type of attitude and are totally not helpful at all.
>
> I say boycott them!
Um, they are getting SUED by Marvel over stuff like this. Of course they're
going to do what they can to show "due diligence" in policing the servers
for copyrighted material.
Magnus Itland
> Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> once tried to test me with:
>
>> On the other hand, naming a character Voldemort -would- be an issue.
>> The name exists nowhere outside of Harry Potter fiction.
>
> How do you know? Have you checked all the phone books?
You can trust publishers do that. They don't particularly want to pay
millions to some guy.
J Anlee
news:Xns966AD025B...@130.133.1.4:
> Um, they are getting SUED by Marvel over stuff like this. Of
> course they're going to do what they can to show "due diligence"
> in policing the servers for copyrighted material.
>
Okay.....say Marvell get's their MMORPG up and running.
If someone makes a toon that is a 'copy' of Statesman, can NCSoft sue
Marvel?
I love irony.
Dark Tyger
>Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> once tried to test me with:
>
>> On the other hand, naming a character Voldemort -would- be an issue.
>> The name exists nowhere outside of Harry Potter fiction.
>
>How do you know? Have you checked all the phone books?
Okay, try that again: It doesn't exist outside of fiction commonly
enough to allow enough room for doubt that it's a reference to the
Harry Potter character.
Dark Tyger
>Steve H <mus...@loveable.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>> I'm not flaming you, it's just another example of how crappy NCSoft
>> is. They are the WORST company to deal with, they have a dictatorship
>> type of attitude and are totally not helpful at all.
>>
>> I say boycott them!
>
>Um, they are getting SUED by Marvel over stuff like this. Of course they're
>going to do what they can to show "due diligence" in policing the servers
>for copyrighted material.
...and I think they could stand to show a little more, IMO.
However, you wanna see a game that goes overboard on policing names,
play WoW. Seriously, guy named "Travistt" got his name changed because
of the double t at the end. It fell under the "gibberish" rule
Angel
> On 4 Jun 2005 01:26:17 GMT, Knight37 <knig...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> once tried to test me with:
>>
>>> On the other hand, naming a character Voldemort -would- be an issue.
>>> The name exists nowhere outside of Harry Potter fiction.
>>
>>How do you know? Have you checked all the phone books?
>
> Okay, try that again: It doesn't exist outside of fiction commonly
> enough to allow enough room for doubt that it's a reference to the
> Harry Potter character.
>
If I have a son and name him Voldemort will I get sued by the Harry Potter
author (name esacpes me at the moment)
Dark Tyger
wrote:
>> Okay, try that again: It doesn't exist outside of fiction commonly
>> enough to allow enough room for doubt that it's a reference to the
>> Harry Potter character.
>>
>
>If I have a son and name him Voldemort will I get sued by the Harry Potter
>author (name esacpes me at the moment)
JK Rowling. No, because your son isn't a character in a work of
fiction being used for profit. As an aside -YOU- don't have to worry
about getting sued for trademark names in CoH. Cryptic does.
Matt Frisch
into the ether:
Yes, yes they could.
Knight37
> However, you wanna see a game that goes overboard on policing names,
> play WoW. Seriously, guy named "Travistt" got his name changed because
> of the double t at the end. It fell under the "gibberish" rule
That's wack. I haven't yet had a name change on WoW but I got one changed
on EQ1 before. I had a frog-whatsit named Kermedic (a priest, natch) and
someone changed it to Karmadic without telling me. I just rerolled. I think
my next one was Uncroakurr and that one didn't get a rename. ;)
Dark Tyger
>Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> once tried to test me with:
>
>> However, you wanna see a game that goes overboard on policing names,
>> play WoW. Seriously, guy named "Travistt" got his name changed because
>> of the double t at the end. It fell under the "gibberish" rule
>
>That's wack.
...what's worse is the name "Legolos" (Instead of Legolas) took nearly
a month to get changed. I actually had one of the GMs tell me that it
didn't break the rules because of the letter being changed. I got
obsessive. I EMAILED the GM email address about the name, quoting the
rule from their website about how altered spellings of trademarked
names were still against the rules. The name was changed the next
day.....
George Johnson
| On 6 Jun 2005 00:59:59 GMT, Knight37 <knig...@gmail.com> wrote:
|
| >Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> once tried to test me with:
| >
| >> However, you wanna see a game that goes overboard on policing names,
| >> play WoW. Seriously, guy named "Travistt" got his name changed because
| >> of the double t at the end. It fell under the "gibberish" rule
| >
| >That's wack.
|
| ...what's worse is the name "Legolos" (Instead of Legolas) took nearly
| a month to get changed. I actually had one of the GMs tell me that it
| didn't break the rules because of the letter being changed. I got
| obsessive. I EMAILED the GM email address about the name, quoting the
| rule from their website about how altered spellings of trademarked
| names were still against the rules. The name was changed the next
| day.....
|
| --
| Dark Tyger
Dude, you've got to get that sand out of your vagina, really.
Dark Tyger
<matr...@voyager.net> wrote:
>| ...what's worse is the name "Legolos" (Instead of Legolas) took nearly
>| a month to get changed. I actually had one of the GMs tell me that it
>| didn't break the rules because of the letter being changed. I got
>| obsessive. I EMAILED the GM email address about the name, quoting the
>| rule from their website about how altered spellings of trademarked
>| names were still against the rules. The name was changed the next
>| day.....
>|
>| --
>| Dark Tyger
>
> Dude, you've got to get that sand out of your vagina, really.
And you have to get your head out of your ass.
Shenanigunner
>>| ...what's worse is the name "Legolos" (Instead of Legolas) took
>>| nearly a month to get changed. I actually had one of the GMs tell me
>>| that it didn't break the rules because of the letter being changed.
>>| I got obsessive. I EMAILED the GM email address about the name,
>>| quoting the rule from their website about how altered spellings of
>>| trademarked names were still against the rules. The name was changed
>>| the next day.....
>> Dude, you've got to get that sand out of your vagina, really.
> And you have to get your head out of your ass.
Okay, talk like a biker day is over now, boys.
It really does sound a little anal and obsessive, Tyg. Why should that
name be such a horrifying breach of usage? Personally, I'd use what Mad
Magazine called him: Legolamb.
--
-= Victory Server =-
-= Shenanigunner: Level 38 Natural Tanker, Fire/SS, M =-
-= Sgt Glory B: Level 29 Tech Blaster, Electric/Energy, F =-
-= RorShok: Level 17 Natural Scrapper, MA/SR, M =-
-= R A Heinlein: Level 16 Science Controller, Ill/Rad, M =-
-= Always looking for reliable teammates - look me up! =-
-= See you on HEROICA! - http://www.dgath.com/coh/ =-
-= The Keybind & Macro Guide is now available! =-
Rich G.
> Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> wrote:
>
>>>| ...what's worse is the name "Legolos" (Instead of Legolas) took
>>>| nearly a month to get changed. I actually had one of the GMs tell me
>>>| that it didn't break the rules because of the letter being changed.
>>>| I got obsessive. I EMAILED the GM email address about the name,
>>>| quoting the rule from their website about how altered spellings of
>>>| trademarked names were still against the rules. The name was changed
>>>| the next day.....
>
>
>>>Dude, you've got to get that sand out of your vagina, really.
>
>
>>And you have to get your head out of your ass.
>
>
> Okay, talk like a biker day is over now, boys.
I've got 37 more minutes of it here. :)
Now if only I could figure out something clever to say in bikerese. *sigh*
Dark Tyger
<shenan...@NOdgathSPAM.kom> wrote:
>>> Dude, you've got to get that sand out of your vagina, really.
>
>> And you have to get your head out of your ass.
>
>Okay, talk like a biker day is over now, boys.
>
>It really does sound a little anal and obsessive, Tyg. Why should that
>name be such a horrifying breach of usage?
Seeing a flagrant trademark violation go unchanged despite rules
-specifically- against it is a problem for me. I have a personal
interest in trademark/copyright issues...
Shenanigunner
> Seeing a flagrant trademark violation go unchanged despite rules
> -specifically- against it is a problem for me. I have a personal
> interest in trademark/copyright issues...
As a writer, editor, publisher, photographer and graphic designer, so do I.
But there are limits to what I'm going to fuss about.
Dark Tyger
<shenan...@NOdgathSPAM.kom> wrote:
>Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> wrote:
>> Seeing a flagrant trademark violation go unchanged despite rules
>> -specifically- against it is a problem for me. I have a personal
>> interest in trademark/copyright issues...
>
>As a writer, editor, publisher, photographer and graphic designer, so do I.
>But there are limits to what I'm going to fuss about.
*Shrug* YOur limits are different. You honestly have no more business
telling me my limits are wrong than I have telling you that yours are.
Shenanigunner
> *Shrug* YOur limits are different. You honestly have no more business
> telling me my limits are wrong than I have telling you that yours are.
I didn't say they were - just that, with all the soundalike and clone names
in all these games, your reaction to that one seemed out of proportion. I
see many names that are that close to an established media character.
"Legolos" doesn't seem like much of a violation - especially as it's based
on a 60-year-old book that is out of copyright anyway.
Magnus, Robot Fighter.
<dark...@somewhere.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 02:08:18 -0000, Shenanigunner
><shenan...@NOdgathSPAM.kom> wrote:
>
>>>> Dude, you've got to get that sand out of your vagina, really.
>>
>>> And you have to get your head out of your ass.
>>
>>Okay, talk like a biker day is over now, boys.
>>
>>It really does sound a little anal and obsessive, Tyg. Why should that
>>name be such a horrifying breach of usage?
>
>Seeing a flagrant trademark violation go unchanged despite rules
>-specifically- against it is a problem for me. I have a personal
>interest in trademark/copyright issues...
The funny thing is, I'm almost sure I could get permission from Adult
Swim/Cartoon Network to use Harvey Birdman as a character in an
MMPORG.
-------------------------------------------------------
Michael Alan Chary on intelligent Newsgroup discussions:
"I'm not telling him he can't post his inane
opinions here. I'm telling him he's more likely to get a response somewhere
else. That response will be "Levitz is a genius. You're an imbecile.""
Dark Tyger
<shenan...@NOdgathSPAM.kom> wrote:
>Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> wrote:
>> *Shrug* YOur limits are different. You honestly have no more business
>> telling me my limits are wrong than I have telling you that yours are.
>
>I didn't say they were - just that, with all the soundalike and clone names
>in all these games, your reaction to that one seemed out of proportion. I
>see many names that are that close to an established media character.
>"Legolos" doesn't seem like much of a violation - especially as it's based
>on a 60-year-old book that is out of copyright anyway.
Nevermind the series of movies, the last of which is only a year
old...
And it's not so much the one violation, but the fact it was ignored on
one letter being changed. I report all violations when I see them,
honestly.
(And, by the way, even the books aren't out of copyright yet...)
Robotech_Master
> The funny thing is, I'm almost sure I could get permission from
> Adult Swim/Cartoon Network to use Harvey Birdman as a character in
> an MMPORG.
Wouldn't matter. By the terms of the license, you're not permitted to
use copyright/trademarked characters even if *you* own them. Cryptic
wants the whole enchilada, baby!
--
Chris Meadows aka | Homepage: http://www.terrania.us
Robotech_Master |
robo...@eyrie.org | Earn a free iPod and a free Mac Mini!
| http://www.terrania.us/conga.html
Shenanigunner
> Nevermind the series of movies, the last of which is only a year
> old...
Um, if you make a movie about, say, the siege of Troy or the life of
Alexander, you don't get to copyright the character names in it.
> And it's not so much the one violation, but the fact it was ignored on
> one letter being changed. I report all violations when I see them,
> honestly.
Okay. Sounded like you were being anal about this one.
> (And, by the way, even the books aren't out of copyright yet...)
So I see - I'd forgotten that. The Tolkien stuff is one of the classic
horror stories in the copyright world. Serious mess and I believe the
later copyrights (mid-1990s) were granted under a special waiver.
Dark Tyger
<shenan...@NOdgathSPAM.kom> wrote:
>Dark Tyger <dark...@somewhere.net> wrote:
>> Nevermind the series of movies, the last of which is only a year
>> old...
>
>Um, if you make a movie about, say, the siege of Troy or the life of
>Alexander, you don't get to copyright the character names in it.
...and historical figures suddenly became IP....when?