Banned names "Generic 123 456 789"

Except he was creative, he found at after using the name that it was "Similar" to a name of a race in some other game, and he asked and they cleared it as ok.

Originally Posted by Forbin_Project Then it's time for them to get off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge, and get over it.

Hehe - just keep those emails handy; someone could still report the name, and another GM would make a snap "better safe than sorry" decision. Those emails may be your key to getting the name back in such an event.

Issues like this have to be thrashed out in court, which costs money. Most businesses are publicly owned and have a responsibility to the shareholders. Crusading to fix the laws is all well and good but, unless it is going to benefit that specific company, it would be financially irresponsible to do so. Just saying.

I'd like to second this sentiment.

I don't agree. The awful and litigious nature of our current courts system is the primary reason for this state (and in a larger sense, the entire legal system).

It is in no way the responsibility of NCsoft to "police" our law system, and would in fact be financially irresponsible to do so. The responsibility lies with our legislators, the public and anyone connected in any way with the legal system.

Congrats, BC!

/This

NCSoft doesn't have unlimited funds to throw away in a court battle with the government. That money has to come from somewhere. Any guesses where that will be? From game development and employee layoffs.

There is also a DC Comics character named Uncle Sam. That is almost certainly why you were generic'd.

Funny that I mentioned the very same on page 1 of this thread...

Great minds eh...

Coolio Wolfus leader of Coolio�s Crusaders on Union.

Tekna Logik leader of Tekna�s Tormentors on Defiant.

Creator of: Coolio's Tech Beacon Replacements

AE arc 402506, 'The Rise and Demise or Otherwise of Tekna Logik...'.

Yeah, I'd have to say the GM was right on that call.


The only thing that was out of line would be a person telling another player they are reporting them. You don't announce that your reporting someone, you just do it and let the GM's handle it.


But go on and file an appeal Cass. You might get lucky.

Yeah, your problem is, Uncle Sam as a recruiting poster is almost a century old, and his original appearance in papers is almost 200 years old. So the image and such is public domain. But, Uncle Sam as a super-hero is only a few decades old, from WW2. And trademark law is very much in force when there is the possibility of confusing the Uncle Sam in a super-hero game with one from a super-hero comic.

It is pretty much the same thing that would happen if you tried making a Thor in game, even using what is considered his regular appearance rather than Marvel's version. (Red hair and beard vs blond and clean shaven) Thor as a Norse god, no problem, Thor in a super-hero game? Not happening.

Go ahead and appeal it, but don't be surprised if you lose.

The awful and litigious nature of American society is a serious problem, I do not dispute that one tiny bit. However, there's more going on here than merely one company's penchant (or ability) to bring expensive suits against another. In this particular case, we're talking about the very nature of "intellectual property", how we define it, how we value it, and to what extent we are willing to protect it (as a society). Everyone who creates or provides tools for creation is involved in this larger social project. It costs nothing to care about it, talk about it, and think about what it means to do business within the creative domain.

Your point about NCSoft taking on legislative responsibilities seems mis-targeted to me. They are in a business in which their customers are seeking to express a virtual identity through a name in a game. To the extent to which another company can restrict NCSoft's customers from doing perfectly legal things within the game they pay to play, NCSoft has a responsibility to defend against predatory legal action lacking any real merit. If NCSoft wants to sacrifice their own rights (and those of their customers) in order to save on legal fees incurred defending bogus lawsuits, then that is their choice. But that is the sort of "responsible business practice" that allows protection rackets to flourish. I don't find it particularly laudable even if it is highly "practical".

Typical American whining. Easier to pass the buck onto someone else and complain rather than accept responsibility and take action.

Newsflash W_L. The laws you are referring to are American laws. Put into place by American legislation. NCSoft is a KOREAN company. It is not their responsibility to fight to change American laws. And I guarun-damn-tee ya that if NCSoft were stupid enough to try it you'd see a ton of negative press about how a foreign company was trying to screw over US copyright/trademark holders, which would be more financially disasterous than the occasional lawsuit.

American citizens are responsible. So if you think the laws should be changed get off YOUR butt and do something about it.

A quick TESS search gives 16 active trademarks. Oddly, the DC Comics character isn't among them.

Well then, I'm glad you're not involved in running the company. If you were, that attitude would be grossly irresponsible.

NCSoft may ultimately be a Korean company, but it has a sizable American prescense and does business here. It has a hood number of employees here and a sizable number of American customers. And you don't have to be foreign to be targeted by media idiots. (Some tea party floozy was saying the TP was not like Occupy Wall Street because they started and are "respectable/calm/whatnot". Says the party comparing a genocidal dictator to Obama. )

Wing_Leader - NCSoft gas taken reasonable steps to protect itself. But it doesn't "back down" it fought back quite well when marvel sued.

And this is exactly what I'm talking about. Take that type of dingbat and picture her arguing against NCSoft. Then realize that there are millions of idiots willing to believe all the garbage that spills from her mouth and blindly vote whatever way the dingbat tells them.

Then put that against the tens of millions of Americans who sit around at home and complain that something should be done, but someone else should do it for them.

I'm going to curse your name, because at this rate your going ył guilt me into registering to vote then I'll get hit with Jury Duty.

I am surprised, then, that the consequences of not backing down and fighting the Marvel/DC suit has turned out to be the present policy of "generic first and sort it out through a cumbersome petition process later", which is a guilty-before-being-proven-innocent philosophy that ought to feel alien to most people (and probably does given the surprise it engenders in the innocent who come here and plead their case in the court of public opinion).

Oh so now you are going to pretend that you have knowledge of the procedures that NCSoft GM's go thru when they receive a petition on a possible copyright/trademark violation?

Do you work for the company and can provide incontrovertible proof that when a GM gets a petition that they don't log onto Google and type the character name in question along with the words comic or super hero and do a 10 second search to see if it's valid. Or that they don't have a database that contains a list of copyrighted super heroes/villains form the various major comic books.

Can you prove beyond the shadow of any doubt that they automatically generic every single petition without verifying any facts.


Yeah right.

As any copyright violations would be a civil matter, it's not a guilty/innocent thing. It's a "preponderance of evidence" thing. (Preponderance of evidence roughly equates to "is it more likely then not likely". Please note, however, that I am not a lawyer.) NCSoft would rather not have to spend copious amounts of time and money arguing civil suits because someone decided to make a "Green Lamp" character, or a "Clawed Canadian Mammal" character or whatever. You're playing on their servers, under their EULA. If someone creates a character that, inadvertently, or on purpose violates a copyright or a trademark, then NCSoft is well within the bounds to generic the character.

Problem being, my character did not resemble that image. It resembled this one:




And that one is public domain (the US government cannot own trademarks or copyrights, by law) and can be used by anyone, for any purpose.