Thinking of the Statesman thing, it reminds me a lot of the situation with Ultima Online and Lord British.
With Ultima Online the lead developer was a guy called Richard Garriott. He had been known as Lord British for years and appeared as the Lord British character in many Ultima games before Ultima Online. But when he left for various reasons EA who now owns Ultima Online had to remove the Lord British character from the game world as that character was still owned by Richard Garriott.
[ QUOTE ]
So what's my incentive to log in and create a toon that Cryptic ends up owning?
If Cryptic owns the toon to protect against anyone else in the game from stealing my idea and making money off of it for so long as I have an active account w/ Cryptic, then I'm 100% ok with that. But I should still be able to sell my idea on afterwards if I so chose.
If the account is cancelled or the toon deleted, then its up for grabs. I wouldn't be trying to use Cryptic as a Copyright office but I expect my original ideas to be protected when I log into the game and still remain my ownership rights for so long as I keep the account active.
Would that be a fairer way to look at it?
[/ QUOTE ]
'Fairer'? Hard to say, rather subjective.
You could have a lawyer write up a EULA to that effect and present it to Cryptic as an alternative to what they have now. Who knows, maybe they will adopt it.
In the meantime, it is not up to Cryptic to protect Rubberlad, it is up to you. If Rubberlad was legally protected prior to your hitting the 'enter Paragon City' button, you have nothing to worry about. Profit to your heart's content.
However, Rubberlad could get genericed at any time. If he is, you can then start sending Cryptic documents to prove you own the character, or change his appearance and name in their game, whichever you prefer.
Just out of curiosity, have you ever checked to see if any of your fans have created a Rubberlad on any of Cryptic's servers?
As far as what is your incentive to create a character for Cryptic to own? I say one incentive is that it's a damn fine game, and fun to play. Another is that you might find it fun to be able to create characters whith the express hope to show up someday in the Comics, Novels, Cards, etc. You may even end up working with them some day.
I've created a LOT of characters that Cryptic now technically owns, but if I end up publishing my own comics some day I have no doubt that I will end up making plenty new ones that Cryptic has never seen.
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Marvel tried this already. They created a Wolverine clone in the game and then tried to sue Cryptic over allowing the character to be created.
[/ QUOTE ]
This I can 100% appreciate. But in lieu of the settlement, can't the EULA be updated to recognize previously trademarked ideas that players self-own and recreate in the game? That's totally different to what you're saying when a player logs in and recreates a toon that *someone else* owns.
Granted, I don't want to see someone create a 100% identical toon like "Rubberlad" and rename him "Tennis Ball" but at least it's not "Rubberlad." But to say Cryptic owns "Rubberlad" the minute I log in and create it even if the toon never existed in the game prior to my logging in, that's just ridiculous.
That would assume the same mentality as corporations who own their email and IT storage systems and own exclusive creative rights to all the work created by salaried employees and contractors they pay to work within that system and create those ideas which would be incorrect.
As a consumer, I'm not paying Cryptic to take ownership of my ideas but to provide the environment in which I can make my ideas possible and enjoy them. Next it'll be Microsoft suing me for ownership rights of a novel because I created and published it in Microsoft Word (even though I paid for the software to make it possible to create and publish my ideas).
Sorry but it just doesn't work like that.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. This has to be the stupidest thing I have heard all month. If MMOs actually did things this way they would all be pretty well screwed out of business. Most player character names used in any MMO will also show up in other games, by other players. There is no possible way an MMO can claim ownership of a name chosen by a player. The best they can do is moderate recognizable names from popular literature, like Drizzt or Lestat.
What an MMO owns of your character is not your intellectual property, but the data that comprises the character. You have no rights to that data, and if you decide to leave the game, you do not get to take a backup copy of your character data with you. It stays in their posession.
There is no way they can claim ownership to a name, and as I understand it, their winning arguement against marvel was that you can not claim ownership on peices of costume art. What more is there to your character, your powers? Dont tell me NCsoft thinks it has ownership of flight, teleportation and ninjas.
The only thing they own is the title of the game, the setting, storyline and any NPCs. Speaking of which, some of "thier" major characters in this game strike me as ripoffs of other existing comic characters. Statesman especially sticks out.
How do other MMOs handle ownership of player created characters?
[ QUOTE ]
Speaking of which, some of "thier" major characters in this game strike me as ripoffs of other existing comic characters. Statesman especially sticks out.
[/ QUOTE ]
What industry like this isn't wildly incestuous? Statesman = Superman = Hyperion = Captain Marvel = Prime and so on and so on. Do we want to get into derivative works of J.R.R. Tolkien?
[ QUOTE ]
Just out of curiosity, have you ever checked to see if any of your fans have created a Rubberlad on any of Cryptic's servers?
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, but I know it's possible for any toon. Names reserved on one server aren't reserved on all servers, and why should they be? If my concept for "Rubberlad" involves an energy blaster on Victory and someone else's involves an earth controller on Virtue called "Rubberlad" its not the same toon because that wasn't my concept.
Marvel didn't have a suit because someone created a toon called "Wolverine" who's a Sonics-powered superhero. Or a toon called "Criss Cross" who was claws-wielding mutant. They're issue was having someone log in and create "Wolverine," a claws-wielding mutant which was their idea. That I get because there were multiple components there plagiarizing their trademarked creative concept.
It's the same reason why DC Comics (who owns Green Arrow) and Marvel (who owns Hawkeye) can't sue each other for copyright infringement because they used superheroes that employ bow and arrows - sure they're both archers but it goes way beyond *just* being archers to say someone is stealing a creative concept.
And for the record, Rubberlad isn't the toon I'm referring to. I'd be a fool to say publically which one it was but Cryptic can research my account if there's a concern (and I'm happy to comply and change the name if there is). But again I'm not worried about my concept toon that's protected. I'm worried about the other concept toons that are *not* protected - like Rubberlad.
Usual, I am not a lawyer, nor am I speaking as an official CoH rep.-type caveat. I am, however, trying to make this clear for players (and do speak as an NCsoft employee, obviously, and was on CoH, and have looked into these issues even before joining the team).
It's a sticky issue. Those of us who are writers and artists (or creatives if you prefer), need to be careful of investing too much into what may be potentially another person's world.
[ QUOTE ]
I 100% disagree with this interpretation. If I have created and instituted the creative template for "Rubberlad' prior to City of Heroes being created and published for a public mass-consumer market, I would argue that I don't have to be "Warren Ellis" to protect my work in the event I then sell it off down the road regardless of whether or not I "recreated" my own copyrighted material in the COX mmorpg universe.
Is the issue of previously created player-owned images specifcally dealt with in the EULA? Is this an "in name only" issue or name and/or image - in which case, isn't Cryptic at risk of assuming Marvel's position in that recent lawsuit where they lost their bid to defend their copyright "images" if not certain trademark names?
[/ QUOTE ]
What Cryptic/NC is concerned with are generally:
1) Image of character -- if you build it in the character generator. I'm not trying to say "we" own blue half capes, and I'm not trying to say we don't. If you build a character in the generator, and then have it drawn, if it's 100% the same character and you are profitting from it, then you might have a problem.
2) Character name & history - technically the character names/history that you create for CoH/CoV are owned by Cryptic/NCsoft. You can use them in fanfiction, etc., but you cannot profit from them.
3) History of Paragon City and all her associated characters (this is the obvious one, of course, and causes least confusion).
Obviously there are many characters with the same names in comic book history. And many that look similar. But if you take a character who exists on one of the servers, and use the same name and same look, and try to use it in a commercial enterprise, you're entering dangerous waters. I'm not going to say if this is right or wrong -- but if you can avoid all potential legal entanglements, why wouldn't you?
Note: in the case of a character that existed *before* being created in CoH, and this can be proven, then Cryptic/NCsoft is obligated to force you to change the name/look of the character. So Rubberlad's character, or let's say I created a character from the old superhero game, Silver Age Sentinels, that I was involved with. In an exceptional case (like the Warren Ellis example I created earlier), Cryptic/NC might be so tickled to have a guest star that they would find a way to allow it. But in most cases the legal mine fields, and lawyer costs, and bad press, etc. is not worth it.
So once again. If you want to write/draw superheroes in a commerical enterprise, make sure they are original and don't exist in CoH/CoV.
cheers,
Arctic Sun
On this topic, we also have Plastic Man, Ping the Elastic Man, Elongated Man, Mr. Fantastic, Luffy, and Elastigirl/Mrs. Incredible.
Just for the curious, go look here on Wikipedia.
[ QUOTE ]
So once again. If you want to write/draw superheroes in a commerical enterprise, make sure they are original and don't exist in CoH/CoV.
[/ QUOTE ]
Understood. I still have some concerns with point #2, but I can be more vigilant when creating my in-game concepts in future.
Thanks Arctic!
Cryptic does not purport to own the name Captain Marvel or Drizzt Do'Urden.
It is because they do not own these names that they cannot allow you to play characters with those names on their servers.
By the act of creating a character on the servers, you are stating that the character is your own original creation, and not previously legally protectd, which you are gifting to Cryptic.
If the character is not your own original creation, you are lying.
If the character is previously legally protected, you are lying.
If you also played a character of the same name and appearance in Dark Age of Camelot, it is probably (I haven't read their EULA) owned by DAOC, in which case you are mistaken or lying.
When Cryptic discovers that you are playing a chearacter in their game that is owned by DAOC, they technically should generic that character.
They may not, because they are nice. But if they do not, they are chancing a lawsuit.
Marvel forced their hand.
It is true that Cryptic only owns your character data. They cannot really own the character name and appearance. But they can make you change the character name and appearance as it appears on their servers.
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
Summary, so far (this seems most logical)...
If I made "Turtle Boy The Slow" as a character, and he was half turtle, half boy, and played him to 50, blah blah...
...and turned around and got Image Comics to publish Turtle Boy The Slow, in all likelihood (conjecture) best case is that TBtS would have to be gone from COH.
Worst Case would be that TBtS: The Movie makes more money than Raimi's Spider-Man, and NCSoft starts a legal war to get their cut.
In other words, don't do stupid clones of existing characters, and do the rest at your own risk.
[ QUOTE ]
What Cryptic/NC is concerned with are generally:
1) Image of character -- if you build it in the character generator. I'm not trying to say "we" own blue half capes, and I'm not trying to say we don't. If you build a character in the generator, and then have it drawn, if it's 100% the same character and you are profitting from it, then you might have a problem.
2) Character name & history - technically the character names/history that you create for CoH/CoV are owned by Cryptic/NCsoft. You can use them in fanfiction, etc., but you cannot profit from them.
3) History of Paragon City and all her associated characters (this is the obvious one, of course, and causes least confusion).
Obviously there are many characters with the same names in comic book history. And many that look similar. But if you take a character who exists on one of the servers, and use the same name and same look, and try to use it in a commercial enterprise, you're entering dangerous waters. I'm not going to say if this is right or wrong -- but if you can avoid all potential legal entanglements, why wouldn't you?
[/ QUOTE ]
So, theoretically speaking, I could make an alternate version of Sir Morgant who looks different, acts different, different history, and never came to Paragon in the first place, but rather came to the unique and original world in which the novel/comicbook/TV series/anime/whatever takes place?
And...get away with it?
It'd still be a gunslinging knight from medieval times who speaks in olde english, which only the skeleton of CoH/V's Sir Morgant.
If I took that skeleton and made it into a completely different char for original use, would that still be stepping on CoH/V toes?
Also, if we deleted our char from your servers, would you still hold rights to them, since they were still made on your servers? Or would you hold them temporarily, or would your rights to them be gone, or what?
[ QUOTE ]
Also, if we deleted our char from your servers, would you still hold rights to them, since they were still made on your servers? Or would you hold them temporarily, or would your rights to them be gone, or what?
[/ QUOTE ]
This is the most interesting part, to me. What constitutes Cryptic's ownership? If I created and deleted a Wolverine clone named Woolverine, am I still liable for breaking the EULA? If Cryptic does a backup and I delete my character, effectively trying to reassert my ownership of that concept, who "owns" it?
Law is funny.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But now, a twist on it. What about if I don't have, like, a t-shirt press myself, and so commission a single-item run from someplace like CafePress or something?
[/ QUOTE ]
Won't work. CafePress makes a profit on every item they sell, even if you do not.
Summary: CP sells a shirt for, say, $12 base price. If you sell it for $12 that means you make no profit. Good! But CafePress DOES make a profit; they set the base price up so that they do and anything beyond that is for you alone.
So, it's not legal, since of the two parties involved, CP does profit. CP has a policy against using copyrighted elements in your designs for this reason.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh baloney. If I hire a third party decal/T-shirt entity to silkscreen a copy of my favorite screen shot of my hero onto a T-shirt I've already bought separately, I see no copyright infringement or violation of the EULA as long as I do not intend to sell it for profit, and have retained the original screenshot for my private, not-for-profit archives.
Otherwise, where do you draw the line? I can screenshot all day and print my screenshots and post them all over my house for my personal use anytime I want. I can make demo movies all day and display them for CoX-night LAN parties as long as I am not profiting from it.
Fatal error: Uncaught mysqli_sql_exception: You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MariaDB server version for the right syntax to use near 's Assassin'' at line 1 in /var/www/vhosts/cityofheroes.dev/forumarchive.cityofheroes.dev/topic.php:262 Stack trace: #0 /var/www/vhosts/cityofheroes.dev/forumarchive.cityofheroes.dev/topic.php(262): mysqli->query() #1 {main} thrown in /var/www/vhosts/cityofheroes.dev/forumarchive.cityofheroes.dev/topic.php on line 262
So what's my incentive to log in and create my concept idea for a toon that Cryptic ends up owning?
If Cryptic assumes "contractual governance" of the toon to protect against anyone else in the game from stealing my idea and profiting from its sale/use for whatever duration of time my account is active, then I'm 100% ok with that.
If the account is cancelled or the toon deleted, then its outside of Cryptic's purview to protect unless I've gone the extra mile to copyright it outside the game. I wouldn't be trying to use Cryptic as a Copyright office but I expect my original ideas to be protected when I log into the game and still remain my ownership rights for so long as I keep the account active.
Would that be a fairer way to look at it? Honestly not trying to be a jerk here and I realize Artic's trying to advise in the player's best interests but this interpretation just floors me, and I'm just like anyone else - I'm passionate about the ideas I create in the realm of this playspace.
At the same time, as much as I love the game, I love my ideas more and I'm not sure I'm ok with passing ownership over to Cryptic permanently when I log in to create them if Artic's interpretation holds true.