Copyright and Trademark concerns/queries

Started by Frikker, Tue 12/07/2016 23:55:00

Previous topic - Next topic

Frikker

I have been working on a game for a few years now, and Im at a point where both the game name, and some companies/products featured in the game need to start getting put into the visuals. This means I really need to get some answers to some naming concerns I have, as I am planning in the long run to make this game commercial.

Basically, are there any restrictions to naming a game, Ie copyright/trademarks?
My working title is "Colourblind" although it may get added to or changed, but if I named my game colourblind, and there is another game out there with this title, would it get me in trouble? Especially If my game goes commercial?

I can never understand the whole copyright thing, I get that if you created a brown drink , and called it coca cola then yes you are blatantly ripping a brand off, but any product/title that is a single word from the english dictionary... how can anybody copyright or trademark that? Or cant they?

Secondly, I have a company in my game called Bloom INC , and they manufacture a drink called Bloombrew , now again, if there is a company out there called Bloom INC , or a product called BloomBrew, can I get in trouble for it? And If I can , then how can I ever be sure that there is not one? I mean, not everything can be found on google.....

Thankyou in advance to anybody that can shed light or offer advice on this.

Mandle

#1
I believe there is a list of trademarked names available to the public that can be searched.

Like an official website somewhere where you can type in the name(s) and it will run a search for you on all same/similar names which already are protected property.

I don't know exactly what site, but it's probably just one easy googling away...

(If you find it maybe paste the link in this thread for future reference?)

I also believe that it is okay in many cases to use the same/similar name IF the two businesses/products/etc are vastly different in nature. For example: A cosmetic product with the name "Pristine" would not prevent an author from naming their novel "Pristine", but another cosmetics company would probably get in trouble.

Best of luck!

Fitz

Looks like trademarks and patents apply to specific territories. There's a separate entity for US of A and others for, say, Australia -- and what's restricted in one may not be restricted in others. Also, as Mandle said, if the products are different in nature, you should be ok. US PTO lists two live trademarks for the word "Colorblind": one for jackets and one for beverages.

Radiant

#3
Quote from: Frikker on Tue 12/07/2016 23:55:00
My working title is "Colourblind" although it may get added to or changed, but if I named my game colourblind, and there is another game out there with this title, would it get me in trouble? Especially If my game goes commercial?
If the other game is from a big company AND you go commercial, then yes. Otherwise, no.

Quote
I can never understand the whole copyright thing,
Copyright applies to CONTENT, trademark applies to NAMES, patent applies to RECIPES. You automatically have copyright on any content you write; you need to apply for trademarks or patents. By the American system (but not the European one) anyone can trademark or patent anything, and this will automatically stand unless someone successfully challenges it in a lengthy and expensive court procedure (this is why patent trolls work; it is cheaper to pay them for a license than to pay for the court costs). People have in fact tried to patent the wheel, and to trademark the word 'zombie'.

Also, as Mandle already pointed out, a trademark for (e.g.) a soft drink named Blorble does not interfere with a video game named Blorble, because it is extremely obvious that a soft drink is not a video game.

For example, I legally cannot create a game called King's Quest, regardless of its content, because Activision owns the TRADEMARK (although I could probably get away with selling a soft drink by that name). I legally cannot create a game using sprites from earlier King's Quest games, regardless of its name, because they own the COPYRIGHT. I legally could not use their point-and-click interface, regardless of name or content, if they had PATENTED it (which in fact they haven't).

Patents expire after a set amount of time. Trademarks expire only if the company stops using AND defending them (this is why DC Comics illogically owns the trademark to Captain Marvel, and why they have to publish a title by that name every now and then, otherwise Marvel Comics would swoop in). Copyright expires in every country except the USA, because of the Disney lobby.

QuoteSecondly, I have a company in my game called Bloom INC , and they manufacture a drink called Bloombrew , now again, if there is a company out there called Bloom INC , or a product called BloomBrew, can I get in trouble for it?
No, you can claim fair use on that. Although if Bloom is a big company AND you go commercial, it is safer to avoid this (because they can afford big lawyers and you can't).

HTH.

Snarky

#4
Quote from: Radiant on Wed 13/07/2016 12:46:02I legally could not use their point-and-click interface, regardless of name or content, if they had PATENTED it (which in fact they haven't).

Patents expire after a set amount of time.

The second point here overrules the first: The patent term is 20 years from filing (and you normally have to file for a patent within one year of making an invention public), so if Sierra had patented the point-and-click interface, that patent would now be expired. (Anyone remember how in the late nineties, people were nervous about GIF files because there was a patent on the type of compression it uses?)

Danvzare

When a company files a trademark, they have to explicitly say what it is a trademark for. By that, I mean they have to say whether it's a trademark for films, comics, games, food. You know, those types of things. They also can not change the trademark, ever. No matter how much technology may change.

For example, Marvel and DC Comics both own every single version of the word Super Hero. So you're not allowed to use that phrase (or any similar version). Except in a video game, since they made the trademark before games were even a thing. (laugh)

Another thing to note, is that so long as you aren't blatantly using any major and well known trademarks, for example Red Bull, Coca Cola, Facebook, then you should be fine. The little companies that you've never heard of, will probably never hear of you. And if they did, you'll just have to remove the name, which won't be a big deal. You'll only be risking a lawsuit if you don't change the infringing name.
Besides, it's only the major companies which have loads of lawyers that police the internet for copyright and trademark infringement.

Lastly, avoid the word Edge. Avoid it like the black plague!
A guy trademarked that word just so he could sue anyone who used it, no matter how much in the wrong he was. He even tried suing EA. The idiot. (laugh)

Radiant

#6
Quote from: Snarky on Wed 13/07/2016 14:48:40(Anyone remember how in the late nineties, people were nervous about GIF files because there was a patent on the type of compression it uses?)

Yes. The main reason why the PNG format was invented was because the patent owner of GIF's compression method was being a d*ck about licensing it, in 1994. Several major software vendors refused to support GIF until its patent expired ten years later.

selmiak

so are there still patent on the mp3 codec (was it lame?) or can we use it without problems in AGS games? Or is ogg still better because it's free?

CaptainD

Quote from: selmiak on Wed 13/07/2016 22:27:49
so are there still patent on the mp3 codec (was it lame?) or can we use it without problems in AGS games? Or is ogg still better because it's free?

AFAIK this is still current:

"Do I need a license to distribute mp3 encoded content?
Yes. A license is needed for commercial (i.e., revenue-generating) use of mp3 in broadcast systems (terrestrial, satellite, cable and/or other distribution channels), streaming applications (via Internet, intranets and/or other networks), other content distribution systems (pay-audio or audio-on-demand applications and the like) or for use of mp3 on physical media (compact discs, digital versatile discs, semiconductor chips, hard drives, memory cards and the like).
However, no license is needed for private, non-commercial activities (e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration of any kind or for entities with associated annual gross revenue less than US$ 100 000.00."


(From http://mp3licensing.com/help/developers.html - seems legit but I haven't exhaustively investigated the veracity of the statements on this site.)


Personally I can see absolutely no disadvantage to using OGG, and it's easy enough to convert files so no real obstacle.
 

m0ds

#9
" or for entities with associated annual gross revenue less than US$ 100 000.00."

An important line - I always thought you were allowed to distribute 1000 copies before needing to license the mp3 stuff, but this line basically blows that out the water, means then that you can use mp3 until you reach 100,000 dollars revenue -- exactly the same as Unity, you can sell a unity game until your revenue is 100,000 then you pay them (a subscription fee rather than royalties etc). Publishers like Dave and myself are perhaps more likely to exceed the 100,000 annual limit with multiple games, but folks who make their own singular ags game and sell it, well...let's just say I wouldn't expect any AGS game I made to sell 100,000 dollars worth in a year, even if it was quite successful. Balance up whether you're making the next Halo or the next Pub Master Quest...or just be aware of the reality of selling point n click adventures...

There is also the thing that MP3 don't actively go out hunting people down for this, at least, if they do, over all these years - why have we never heard of anyone ever being affected by it?? Oh that great court case of when someone used an mp3....doesn't exist. And how "fair use" plays into this I don't know. Of course, as CaptainD says, OGG is the quick, simple solution, for the law abiding citizen :)

Snarky

There have definitely been lawsuits over companies releasing software that include mp3 technology (though I don't know off the top of my head if they've gone after players that only do decoding, or just mp3 encoders). But certainly the risk of getting sued for having mp3 audio in your game is minuscule.

Most of the mp3 patents have expired by now. There's apparently some debate about two or three that might still be in effect (which might only cover certain special cases that may not apply to AGS), but they should all be gone by the end of next year in any case: http://www.tunequest.org/a-big-list-of-mp3-patents/20070226/

Problem

I'd also like to add that OGG isn't just better because it is free, it is generally a little better than MP3. Most importantly OGG is better for seamless playback of loopable tracks. MP3 compression can introduce small gaps that you don't want when you play music in a loop. As far as I know there's no good reason why you would prefer MP3 over OGG in a game.

Frikker

Ok guys, thanks for all your feedback, its really appreciated :) . Im just worried because these days , it is impossible to be original, and also impossible to really know if you are being original. You can come up with any name, idea, design etc, and almost guarantee that sometime, somewhere, somebody has done it already. And just because you cant find it on a google search doesnt mean its not still out there.
these days, so many people will sue you just for the money if they get the slightest of chances. Its this sort of situation that has caused health and safety to go ridiculous, and politically correct to do the same.

When all is said and done, I just want to create my project as I envision it, without somebody raining on my parade because his company is called Bloom and my Game has a company called Bloom and we both have Grandmas called Elsie so I have to pay up £150000 for being so inconsiderate.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk