Quote:
I had wondered on this. But then just thought maybe NCSoft settled with DC or thought maybe DC couldn't sue if Marvel was.
|
Originally Posted by Tenzhi
Yes, Marvel had no choice. Which is why DC was also suing, right?
|
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
Quote:
lol |
Originally Posted by Torment And Agony
Ok... first of all when did it become a prerequisite to be creative to play a game? Most of us are here because we like the superheroes we grew up with and want to be just like them. I had Wolverine and Batman in mind when I created my first toon. We pay our $15/month and want to punch stuff. Nuff Said.
As for protecting the game from lawsuits by reporting on your neighbour..... you're only fooling yourself. The lawsuit is settled and NCsoft takes reasonable steps to avoid infringing on registered trademarks. Again, nuff said. As an aside to naming regulations - yes, I had a name gen'd and got very angry. It had nothing to do with a copywrite violation, it involved someone reporting me because they didn't like my name. I sat an read the user agreement (it's since been updated) and found that pretty much every name in the game can be gen'd because NCsoft has so thoroughly covered their *****. It said specifically amoung other things that you could not use body parts in your name. Obviously they didn't want certain parts used, BUT by the wording, "Eagle Eye" and "Fist of Fury" are forbidden. You going to report those too? Finally, I think everyone has missed that your global @dark energon, is a reference to power cubes in the Transformer universe. Go report yourself dude.  Ah, I never answered your original question. No I am not sick and tired of the lack of imagination in others. I like my toons and don't really care about yours. Generally, I find the people that complain about names and costumes, have pretty crappy ones themselves. |
werk!
Quote:
If Marvel won, then DC would have been fine. If Marvel had lost, then the courts basically would have been ruling that NCSoft wasn't at fault for what their users did, even if it meant making copyrighted characters. If they settled, there would likely be some sort of agreement that protected copyright holders (which is exactly what happened).|
Originally Posted by BrandX
I had wondered on this. But then just thought maybe NCSoft settled with DC or thought maybe DC couldn't sue if Marvel was.
|
Basically, either Marvel or DC had to sue, but both of them didn't. Marvel just got their first. DC would have been stupid to sue until the outcome of that trial/settlement had been known, because otherwise they'd just be wasting money. If the lawsuit had continued, and Marvel lost, DC would have likely sued anyways, even knowing they would have also likely lost, because they would have had to have been appearing to defend their copyrights.
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus
Quote:
In my experience comments like this get made by people who are unhappy with this games unique naming policy and are jealous they didn't get a name they wanted first.|
Originally Posted by Torment And Agony
Generally, I find the people that complain about names and costumes, have pretty crappy ones themselves.
|
Of course you may very well be one of the few exceptions to what I just described.
Quote:
What's funny about this, is that the actual law has no bearing on this conversation whatsoever. What matters is that specific parts of the EULA.. the rules we as players need to follow, state that we can't make costumes or use names that infringe on copyright, or other intellectual property.|
Originally Posted by Bloodspeaker
And, like a large and unsurprising number of people in this thread, obviously has a less than useless understanding of copyright and intellectual property laws and, more importantly, their nebulous and extremely subjective enforcement.
Some folks need to do a bit of genuine study before opening their mouths. Not holding my breath on that, honestly. |
So, the law is moot... we have to go by whatever Paragon Studios defines as "infringement." So, it's not about the law at all, it's about the rules we all agree to when we log in... EVERY time.
And if you argue that the EULA is wrong, or is asking us to do something contrary to the law, that's tangent to the point, actually. Because, unless you say no to the EULA, and don't play and then lodge a legal complaint to get it changed to follow whatever law it isn't, you have still agreed to follow the rules of the game. That would be like a guy walking into a casino and ignoring the rules of the house for whatever game he is playing because he used to play it a different way over in Sri Lanka, that don't fly.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daveyj3
lol
werk! |
Quote:
Actually, when i made my 1st toon in the summer of '09, i made an Electric/Energy Blaster, i tried many combinations of energy and electric, and for some reason energon came in my mind, i couldn't for the life remember where it came from. Since my toon was very dark skinned, covered in his bio, and energon was unavailable, i named it Dark Energon. weeks later Power customization came out and i made my powers dark red and black. It took months before someone told me about the energon reff from TF. By that time my toon was 50, my 1st 50, made his own SG and i just could not bare to change my toon name or global handle. There were many times i was contemplating changing my global handle to my strongest toon, a toon i played for well over a year and a half straight, the toon everyone knew me on, but i just couldn't. DE is my glob handle, my forum name, my 1st 50, the creator and leader of my SG. If none of these were in place, i would have changed my global name years ago.|
Originally Posted by Torment And Agony
Finally, I think everyone has missed that your global @dark energon, is a reference to power cubes in the Transformer universe.
Go report yourself dude. |
PS: I have seen global names such as Mr. Energon, toons named Energon X, and even Energon.
Dark Energon, Founder of the Freedom Legion SG on Guardian server.
(SG founded on 12-08-'09, Top100: 08-17-'10, Top50: 12-23-'10, Top25: 12-11-'11)
Crab Spider Nephila on Titan Tracker
Weekly events on Guardian: W.A.V.E. & FNFN
Quote:
My names are awesome and they seem to be at least original enough that I've never had a problem with anyone "getting it first". |
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
In my experience comments like this get made by people who are unhappy with this games unique naming policy and are jealous they didn't get a name they wanted first.
Of course you may very well be one of the few exceptions to what I just described. |
________________________________
"Just cause you don't understand what's going on don't mean it don't make no sense
And just cause you don't like it, don't mean it ain't no good" - Suicidal Tendancies
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Torment And Agony
My names are awesome and they seem to be at least original enough that I've never had a problem with anyone "getting it first".
|
Glad to hear you confirm that you are one of the exceptions. Personally I enjoy coming up with names other people never think of using.
Quote:
Exactly this. |
Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
If Marvel won, then DC would have been fine. If Marvel had lost, then the courts basically would have been ruling that NCSoft wasn't at fault for what their users did, even if it meant making copyrighted characters. If they settled, there would likely be some sort of agreement that protected copyright holders (which is exactly what happened).
Basically, either Marvel or DC had to sue, but both of them didn't. Marvel just got their first. DC would have been stupid to sue until the outcome of that trial/settlement had been known, because otherwise they'd just be wasting money. If the lawsuit had continued, and Marvel lost, DC would have likely sued anyways, even knowing they would have also likely lost, because they would have had to have been appearing to defend their copyrights. |
DC was waiting to see how the Marvel suit turned out before taking action.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately. |
Quote:
I mean, I know they're famous for breaking the game and all, but banning them seems excessive. :|
|
Originally Posted by RadDidIt
My entire coalition shuddered at the title of this thread.
|
I don't suffer from altitis, I enjoy every minute of it.
Thank you Devs & Community people for a great game.
So sad to be ending ):
I think the difference is that Marvel costumes tend to be more specific in design (while, at the same time, many them tend to change every decade or so), while DC costumes tend to be just tights and a cape but with a very specific insignia (and those costumes have remained more or less unchanged, with maybe a few color differences, for more than half a century).
For example, it's easy to replicate most of Superman's classic costume in the CoH costume creator, but impossible to replicate his trademark stylized S chest insignia. (You can put an S on your character's chest, of course, but it's not Superman's S).
On the other hand, there are pieces in the creator that very closely resemble some trademark Marvel pieces, like Cyclops' visor, Wolverine's claws, and Iron Man's faceplate. (And Cyclops is one of those characters who has never had a single "iconic" costume; the iconic part of his costume is that visor and an overall blue color scheme, with the rest of it changing every couple of years)
So that may be why Marvel got to Lawsuit-land first.
Quote:
I believe that I've reported three in eight years, two of which were Claws/Regen Scrapper Wolverine clones, and one (redside) that was a SS/Inv Brute named 'Supermann' with a costume that failed to be a perfect clone only through not having the right 'S' on the chest and not being high enough level to have a cape yet.
|
Originally Posted by Nethergoat
In any case, the only costume I've reported in my CoH career was a dude in white robes & a hood named 'The Klansman'. Somebody wanting to be Wolverine or a Power Ranger or whatever isn't hurting anyone's fun or threatening anyone's IP.
|
"But in our enthusiasm, we could not resist a radical overhaul of the system, in which all of its major weaknesses have been exposed, analyzed, and replaced with new weaknesses."
-- Bruce Leverett, Register Allocation in Optimizing Compilers
Quote:
Its also possible DC didn't think the suit had merit, or may have even realized it was counterproductive. Marvel was working with Microsoft on a Marvel MMO at the time, and the thinking was that Marvel was suing NCSoft as a way to hobble the competition. But the gist of their lawsuit (the core parts of it anyway) was that the City of Heroes character creator could be used to make reasonable facsimiles of Marvel characters. Had they prevailed at trial, the legal precedent would have been set that game operators would have to make certain their character creators *could not* make infringing works at all, which would have been nightmarish for Marvel itself - and DC.|
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect
DC was waiting to see how the Marvel suit turned out before taking action.
|
It was obvious they were going to lose when the presiding judge threw out all evidence of infringement created by Marvel and its agents themselves. In doing so, the court implicitly was signalling they were going to rule on the basis of whether NCSoft itself infringed on Marvel copyrights, and not whether it created tools which could be used to do so. So only the acts of NCSoft itself or its customers were relevant, and possible infringing works created by Marvel itself were not.
As to the issue of policing infringing works, NCSoft never explicitly won the right to allow its customers to create infringing works. In fact the opposite is true. If I recall correctly they argued safe harbor that as a service provider they could not be held responsible for the actions of their customers provided they took reasonable steps to deter infringement. Whether they won or lost the lawsuit would not have altered their responsibility to continue to police the game for infringement, as has been suggested.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I could easily be wrong but didn't all the X-Men have an iconic "X" as a part of their costumes? On a belt or harness over their chest?
|
Originally Posted by Thunder Knight
On the other hand, there are pieces in the creator that very closely resemble some trademark Marvel pieces, like Cyclops' visor, Wolverine's claws, and Iron Man's faceplate. (And Cyclops is one of those characters who has never had a single "iconic" costume; the iconic part of his costume is that visor and an overall blue color scheme, with the rest of it changing every couple of years)
|
Also, as far as losing rights to trademarked characters goes. No one was saying that there is a chance in hell Marvel was going to lose the rights to Captain America or Iron Man, they are too iconic and they have both appeared too recently to possibly fit the non use rul in trademark law.
However, there are literally hundreds of lesser Marvel characters that have not appeared in any media in more than 5 years. 5 years is the cut-off point for the non-use clause in trademark laws to take effect. It is quite literally a "use it or lose" it deal. If you hold a trademark and do not use it for anything for a certain length of time, it is possible that anyone who uses it other than you will be awarded the rights to it.
A character like Trapster (AKA Paste Pot Pete), an almost forgotten Marvel B-List villain is a good example. He has not made an appearance in any Marvel publication in at least 15 years. The trademark rights to that character could very easily fall into the "non use" crack in trademark law.
Marvel wasn't the slightest bit worried about its flagship characters, no judge on Earth is going to award the rights to Spider-Man to a video game company because someone made a copy of him.
But they had a valid reason to be concerned about losing some of its B and C listers that haven't been used in a while. And all they had to do to protect them was file a lawsuit. Whether they won or lost the suit itself, the act of filing it counts as defending their trademarks, and it would be a LOT harder for a third party to win the rights from them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately. |
Going back to the initial discussion, I think the probationary/ temporary suspension system would be more appropriate. If a player demonstrates an extensive pattern of copying trademarked materials, they should be more severely punished. Banning is the ultimate punishment the devs can dish out, but I don't know if I would say it's appropriate for two or three instances that are deemed as infringement.
Quote:
Actually, that's not quite true: Marvel can't lose trademark rights by failing to sue an MMO play or another company that happens to use them. The law only requires you to defend your trademark against infringing use which requires the use in a business context. Essentially, NCSoft would have had to use trademark protected images in sales or marketing materials to be infringing. Which may be why the trademark related elements of the lawsuit were dismissed early.|
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect
Also, as far as losing rights to trademarked characters goes. No one was saying that there is a chance in hell Marvel was going to lose the rights to Captain America or Iron Man, they are too iconic and they have both appeared too recently to possibly fit the non use rul in trademark law.
However, there are literally hundreds of lesser Marvel characters that have not appeared in any media in more than 5 years. 5 years is the cut-off point for the non-use clause in trademark laws to take effect. It is quite literally a "use it or lose" it deal. If you hold a trademark and do not use it for anything for a certain length of time, it is possible that anyone who uses it other than you will be awarded the rights to it. A character like Trapster (AKA Paste Pot Pete), an almost forgotten Marvel B-List villain is a good example. He has not made an appearance in any Marvel publication in at least 15 years. The trademark rights to that character could very easily fall into the "non use" crack in trademark law. Marvel wasn't the slightest bit worried about its flagship characters, no judge on Earth is going to award the rights to Spider-Man to a video game company because someone made a copy of him. But they had a valid reason to be concerned about losing some of its B and C listers that haven't been used in a while. And all they had to do to protect them was file a lawsuit. Whether they won or lost the suit itself, the act of filing it counts as defending their trademarks, and it would be a LOT harder for a third party to win the rights from them. |
That's why George Lucas hasn't lost all his trademark rights to Star Wars due to fan sites and fan created works. He's not required to aggressively defend his trademarks in those areas because in none of those cases are any of his trademarks used in a manner that could possibly confuse someone into thinking that George Lucas doesn't still own Star Wars and every midichlorine in it.
As to losing trademark rights through disuse: while that can happen, in the case of trademarks related to fictional characters, the copyrights associated with those characters still exist so even if Marvel were to lose the trademarks associated with the character of the Trapster, no one else could recreate those trademarks in a way that violates the copyright protection on that character and his appearance. I could sell a mousetrap called The Trapster with the same font and color scheme as a trademark the character once had as a title if that trademark somehow expired, but I could not make a fictional character called The Trapster that resembled that character in any way regardless of whether trademark protection existed for the specific name and title.
(Actually, I could probably sell a mousetrap called The Trapster whether the trademark protection existed or not, unless the Marvel villain's superpower was catching mice: trademark protection only extends to the specific business areas the mark is registered for use in and use in other areas that could not reasonably be confused with the registered uses is considered non-infringing.)
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Banning is in fact appropriate IF and only if the offender goes out of his or her way to circumvent the GM's genericing of a character name and or costume.|
Originally Posted by LightBlack
Going back to the initial discussion, I think the probationary/ temporary suspension system would be more appropriate. If a player demonstrates an extensive pattern of copying trademarked materials, they should be more severely punished. Banning is the ultimate punishment the devs can dish out, but I don't know if I would say it's appropriate for two or three instances that are deemed as infringement.
|
Example
Player "A" gets genned for copyright violation and creates the exact same character (or other blatant rip-offs) again and again and again for as many times as it takes the GM's to realize this person is thumbing his nose at the rules and their authority. (That's the real reason for getting Banned. Ignoring and circumventing their authority)
We as players don't need to know if there's a fixed number of times to be genned before a ban is invoked. If we did there would be idiots out there trying to push that limit. After all account are free, and there are plenty of dingleberries that get their kicks seeing how fast they can get accounts banned by acting like jerks in MMO's.
Like I said, an extensive pattern of copying trademarked materials should be more severely punished. If it includes a pattern of circumvention (as named by Forbin_Project) I agree that banning is appropriate. I just don't think two or three instances are sufficient to demonstrate that pattern.
I was genericized once for a character named Captain Latin America, a MA/Shield scrapper. I made 5 different costumes, each one using colors of various South American flags. One costume was red, white and blue with a star, fashioned after the Chile flag. There was a star on the shield but the rest of the costume was pretty different from Marvel's Captain America.
All 5 costume slots and my name was gen'd including the Brazil (green, yellow and blue), Peru (red, green and white), Colombia (yellow, blue and red) and Argentina (white, blue and yellow) costumes.
I thought it was a little much that the CoH rep trashed everything.
Quote:
Ooh, if I were a GM I have to admit I'd be borderline on which way I'd go on that. I'd definitely would check to see if there was a bio that clearly showed the character in question was not a knock off, but I'd probably have suggested that you try picking a specific country because even if I sided with you, that name would get petitioned again and another GM would overrule my decision generic it.
|
Originally Posted by ricohdah
I was genericized once for a character named Captain Latin America, a MA/Shield scrapper. I made 5 different costumes, each one using colors of various South American flags. One costume was red, white and blue with a star, fashioned after the Chile flag. There was a star on the shield but the rest of the costume was pretty different from Marvel's Captain America.
All 5 costume slots and my name was gen'd including the Brazil (green, yellow and blue), Peru (red, green and white), Colombia (yellow, blue and red) and Argentina (white, blue and yellow) costumes. I thought it was a little much that the CoH rep trashed everything. |
Quote:
I've long believed this right here is a large part of the reason for "super groups" in comics. Whether it's the Avengers or the Justice League, or any of the minor SGs, they follow the same pattern: 1-3 "A-listers" (to appeal to a broad customer base), a handful of "B-listers" (who have a good customer following, but not enough to support an ongoing solo title), and then 1-2 "C-listers" that few people really care about, but who need to appear from time to time to keep their trademarks current. It's also why super groups seem to go through membership shakeups so often - they need a reason to rotate different characters in, even if only for a couple appearances.|
Originally Posted by ClawsandEffect
However, there are literally hundreds of lesser Marvel characters that have not appeared in any media in more than 5 years. 5 years is the cut-off point for the non-use clause in trademark laws to take effect. It is quite literally a "use it or lose" it deal. If you hold a trademark and do not use it for anything for a certain length of time, it is possible that anyone who uses it other than you will be awarded the rights to it.
|
Likewise, when Marvel of DC does one of their massive crossover storylines, the key "catalyst" character who turns out to be at the center of everything is often some relatively minor character who hasn't been seen in a while (like Deadman in the Blackest Night/Brightest Day storyline).
10 minutes later, a toon named Generic ### ### #### starts yelling at me that i should get lost because i got his toon Gen'd, his second in a few days. Again, a whole altercation followed, and he said he was going to report me for harassment. Only thing i said: : "Good luck."
Now, obviously if he has two toons that got Gen'd in a few days, this player has no imagination. His reaction, albeit a little, just a little, understanding, was directed at the wrong person. I never reported him prior, or even after the incident, all i did was laugh.
Would it be a smart policy to not only protect the game, but also the players from these type of people that could potentially hurt the game, but also drive people away because of the repeat offender's attitude because he get's angry about the fact his toons get Gen'd.
One way i see is a simple ban for a period after your 3rd Generic in a set amount of time.
Now i hear people say: "hey, i have been playing 7 years, and i had 3 toons Gen'd in that period, i should not get banned!" And i agree.
But i do not agree with the fact that people get to oust their frustrations after a 2nd Gen'd toon in less than 1 week, and this has to stop.
People should get banned for being a repeat offender in a short amount of time. These people will add nothing new to the table, and will only cause harm to the game in the long run, and the player base.
As i stated, i got his full wrath, because he thought i got two of his toons Gen'd. If he went off on a newer player, that new player might just quit the game in order to not deal with these types of people, where as i merely laughed in his face because i knew i did nothing wrong.
Anyone who has any suggestions or feedback regarding this?
As for protecting the game from lawsuits by reporting on your neighbour..... you're only fooling yourself. The lawsuit is settled and NCsoft takes reasonable steps to avoid infringing on registered trademarks. Again, nuff said.
As an aside to naming regulations - yes, I had a name gen'd and got very angry. It had nothing to do with a copywrite violation, it involved someone reporting me because they didn't like my name. I sat an read the user agreement (it's since been updated) and found that pretty much every name in the game can be gen'd because NCsoft has so thoroughly covered their *****. It said specifically amoung other things that you could not use body parts in your name. Obviously they didn't want certain parts used, BUT by the wording, "Eagle Eye" and "Fist of Fury" are forbidden. You going to report those too?
Finally, I think everyone has missed that your global @dark energon, is a reference to power cubes in the Transformer universe.
Go report yourself dude.
Ah, I never answered your original question. No I am not sick and tired of the lack of imagination in others. I like my toons and don't really care about yours. Generally, I find the people that complain about names and costumes, have pretty crappy ones themselves.
________________________________
"Just cause you don't understand what's going on don't mean it don't make no sense
And just cause you don't like it, don't mean it ain't no good" - Suicidal Tendancies