"No, you can't make a damn fan game."

  • >

    > Oh good grief!'

    >

    > The average game designer never sells any games and the whole reason most kids get a C2 version is to create a game like their favorite games and you are just crushing their creativity with scare tactics IMO.

    >

    > You can claim the lawyer is correct and I can tell you it is a scare tactic and advertising for his services and looks like he has some paid shills on here?

    >

    > I have been publishing content for over 10 years and I have many ebooks, songs, and games copyrighted with the US library of congress and occasionally I send out a DMCA notice so I guess I have as much experience as you and while you are certainly entitled to your opinion you are misinformed and spreading fear that will hurt C2 and game designers and crush creativity.

    >

    > That is my opinion!

    >

    I don't know this lawyer, have never spoken to this lawyer, and have my own legal counsel related to IP, copyright and trademark laws. If you think someone is a paid shill just because they have more experience with how the law functions in relation to IP, that's on you, and no one else.

    Your opinion is irrelevant. My opinion is irrelevant. What matters is how the law works (again, I'm speaking of US law), and you're wrong on that. The average "game designer" makes money designing games and needs to understand the legalities involved.

    Let me help you out:

    US Copyright laws

    https://www.copyright.gov/title17/

    Fair US law:

    Fair use is a US legal doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. ... Examples of fair use in United States copyright law include commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, and scholarship.

    https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html

    I repeat:

    The average game designer never sells any games and the whole reason most kids get a C2 version is to create a game like their favorite games and you are just crushing their creativity with scare tactics IMO.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • Im sure you'll be willing to go out on a limb and say that you take full responsibility for anybody that reads what you've said to make a game using protected material?

    Let's work on the "crushing my creativity" defense.

    I think it starts by trying to turn the lawyer into the boogey man.

    You could reference a bunch of games that were never made, and possibly all the stuff you claim to have made over the past 10 years.

  • Im sure you'll be willing to go out on a limb and say that you take full responsibility for anybody that reads what you've said to make a game using protected material?

    Let's work on the "crushing my creativity" defense.

    I think it starts by trying to turn the lawyer into the boogey man.

    You could reference a bunch of games that were never made, and possibly all the stuff you claim to have made over the past 10 years.

    You can start by referencing the law:

    US Copyright laws

    https://www.copyright.gov/title17/

    Fair US law:

    Fair use is a US legal doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. ... Examples of fair use in United States copyright law include commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, and scholarship.

    https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html

    Trying to turn this into a personal attack is not going to work.

    I addressed your article with the laws that apply.

    End of discussion.

  • You can claim the lawyer is correct and I can tell you it is a scare tactic and advertising for his services and looks like he has some paid shills on here?

    I would consider that a personal attack.

    I think the lawyer would too.

    Anyway, the fact that you don't state that you are willing take responsibility for any of your advice answers everything.

  • One can stand theoretical correct, and yet make no sense in practice. Not attacking anyone, just in general.

    Case: 'Oh what can happen, you get a take down notice, take it down an all is solved'. Theoretical correct, in practice .... take it down and you plain lose. I have seen projects taking down with the value of 8 years work for several people. Do not take it down and you are in a big war with a lot of damage and collateral damage. You can not win against class justice as a normal individual.

    It smells like robbery, if put as "'Oh what can happen, you get a take down notice ....". Similar. One puts a gun to my head and says : "Give me your iPhone". If i give it, all is solved ? No harm done ?

    Case: 'I am protected by Fair Use'. (We have a similar law, a bit better formulated). Can be theoretical totally correct. In practice you are never ever protected by Fair Use, unless you work for someone/something who is to big to fail. As individual you are never protected, because this is a law that needs interpretation:

    In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

    • the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
    • the nature of the copyrighted work;
    • the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
    • the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

    The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

    This law fits perfect in a class justice. And will be always provoked that way.

    Contrary to the constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection of the laws and the etching “Equal Justice Under Law” on the Supreme Court building, the kind of justice people get in America’s courts depends very much upon the amount of money they can spend at an army of lawyers. That is reality. Not only in America. An upcoming trend here too.

    My 2 small cents.

  • Gamejolt recently got a notice from Nintendo for 562 "fan" games

    http://fireside.gamejolt.com/post/dmca-notices-for-fangames-bzc9h583

    Never heard of the guy who created Mario and Sonic Adventures?

    His house was burned, his wife left with the kids, aliens kidnapped him and threw him into a black hole.

    Don't earn money with fan games.

    Can you link the article which states this please ?

    And that gamejolt dmca notice just proves my point. Fan games get shut down and that's about it.

  • I think it's important to note:

    • the exact laws vary around the world and depend on the jurisdiction
    • if you want to know for sure, get proper legal advice - consult a lawyer

    Still the easiest answer is - just don't do it. At least one sure-fire way of avoiding copyright infringement is to simply not go down the fan game route at all.

    As far as I am aware (as a non-expert, non-lawyer) in some cases companies are required to issue takedown notices, to keep their trademarks valid. For example if you could prove that Nintendo knew about, but did not try to take down, a game using the Mario character, they could lose the rights to use Mario themselves. So they have to come after you. They probably have staff hunting for this kind of thing. This makes it pretty risky to release anything at all, ever. And I think the reddit post is correct in saying that making it free does not change anything.

    If you make a game privately and never release it to anyone else ever, I guess you might get away with it. But I think most people eventually want to share what they've made, and I'd guess keeping it private still doesn't make it legal either.

    I also think in the community there's an interesting comparison to C2 devs who want their games protected. Lots of users are worried someone will rip off their games, and often ask questions about how to best protect the code & assets, what to do if someone copies your name/character ideas etc. It's funny that so many people in this community are worried about this exact problem happening to them, yet others seemingly defend the whole fan-game idea, which is often doing just that. I don't know if any particular individuals exist who are both worried someone will rip off their game and is also in favour of ripping off other people's games, but it's still interesting that these conflicting views exist in the community.

  • > Gamejolt recently got a notice from Nintendo for 562 "fan" games

    > http://fireside.gamejolt.com/post/dmca-notices-for-fangames-bzc9h583

    >

    > Never heard of the guy who created Mario and Sonic Adventures?

    > His house was burned, his wife left with the kids, aliens kidnapped him and threw him into a black hole.

    >

    > Don't earn money with fan games.

    >

    Can you link the article which states this please ?

    And that gamejolt dmca notice just proves my point. Fan games get shut down and that's about it.

    It was just my thoughs, you don't want someone earning money or attracting people by "using" something you created.

    It can be an homage like all the FNAF clones on gamejolt but big companies don't care about homages, homage doesn't bring money.

  • I think this article by Mona Ibrahim a Trademark, Entertainment & Media law attorney is much more accurate than the attorney advertisement used for original post.

    http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=26290&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GamasutraNews+(Gamasutra+News)&utm_content=Google+Reader

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)