Using real-life things in games...

[Technocrat]

So, I've no doubt it's just paranoid speculation on my part, but I was wondering about the use of real-life, branded products in fiction, specifically adventure games since that's kind of the focus of the AGS fora, isn't it?

I would imagine that it's a lot less of an issue in games that aren't commercial, since they can more reasonably count as "parody", but in my case the next game I'm planning is aimed at being sold, so I figured I should get it cleared up in order to quiet the paranoia in my brain. The story, as it stands, has a Hawker Hurricane as a central plot element.



Lovely, innit? The more rational part of my brain tells me that:
a) it's a cultural icon, as part of Britain's history
b) Hawker went defunct in the sixties, Hawker-Siddeley went out of business in 1992, and BAe probably has bigger things to care about

I also thought that if anyone has a concrete idea of what constitues "fair use", it'd probably be a useful thing to clarify for other creators on here!

[Armageddon]

As long as their brand or logo isn't in it I don't think it will be a problem at all.

[miguel]

If you don't advertise your game on Facebook you'll be fine...

[Technocrat]

If you don't advertise your game on Facebook you'll be fine...

Why, what's wrong with Facebook?

[Icey]

Having a lot of attention makes it easier for you to get caught or get in trouble.

[miguel]

If you don't advertise your game on Facebook you'll be fine...

Why, what's wrong with Facebook?

Hehehe! Just been reading an interesting thread from our friends here and thought it could relate!
But I'd go with what was written by Armageddon.

http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=44995.0

[Babar]

I don't see how it would be a problem at all, no matter what you do...would it really? Unless maybe you're portraying the plane in a bad light or something. Otherwise it is just free advertising for them, isn't it?

[selmiak]

write to them and ask them for moneys for a nice product placement. win win! And if they refuse you have all the rights in the world to have the plane stand in a bad light in the story and have people make fun of it.

Why should they stop you. There is a film about the titanic, there are original weapons in every action film, there are normal cars used in every film, IIrc there is a huge coca cola ad in blade runner. I think either ridley was very optimistic about the american economy and sugar addiction of people or the company paid a lot of money to have their logo in it and not pepsi.

[Technocrat]

In the case of this game, my plan is to have the main character's surname as "Spitfire" too, and have to keep explaining to people that his plane is in fact a Hurricane.

[Layabout]

I wouldn't worry too much about it, particularly if it is a 'historical' game. If you are worried about it call it a Hawkey Hurricane.

[WHAM]

You could also do what the japanese (and others) are doing in cartoons, comics and movies.
If you cannot get the rights for the correct item, modify it very slightly. Examples: Television sets that have their logo written out as "PONY" or "PHONY" using the Sony logo font. 

Instead of "spitfire" you could just use "spitfury" and be done with it. Peace of mind and identifiable references to those viewers/players who would get the reference anyway.

[Mati256]

Sorny is great.

[Thaumaturge]

I realise that this is a somewhat old thread (and my apologies for the necromancy), but I wanted to add a note of caution: even if you have a good case for use of such a name or likeness, you may still find yourself getting a "cease and desist".  After all, legal proceedings can be costly, as I understand it, so the threat of them is still viable, even if an actual case might go against the IP holder.

Perhaps it might be wise to contact those with the rights and ask, or perhaps contact a lawyer for an opinion?

You may very well be in the clear, but checking with either the IP-holder or a lawyer seems safer than working under the assumption that you are.

All of that said, I have little experience with this myself, and am not a lawyer; most of the above opinion comes from time spent on GameDev.net, where "contact a lawyer", with more or less the above rationale, was pretty much a standard response, as I recall.  Given this, take my advice with a grain of salt.

[doimus]

AFAIK, military equipment is clear as long as one uses military (government) designations. These designations are somewhat already yours, as you paid through tax for them. 

Stuff like M16 is fine (military designation) but Colt AR15 is not (commercial designation of the same rifle). UH-1 Huey is OK (military) but Bell 212 (commercial name for the same helicopter) is not.

There was a similar case recently between Bell (the company that produces helicopters) and EA. Bell wants money from EA for using their helicopters in Battlefield 3. Don't know how that one panned out. Might be worth googling about.

[Thaumaturge]

I take it from your examples that you're referring to such cases in the US; does it apply to the UK?  (I gather that Technocrat is based in the UK, from profile and references made in the original post.)

If it does (and I'd recommend getting a fairly official source; perhaps the UK military or government has a site that might help?), then that may well solve the problem, presuming that "Hurricane" is the military designation, and not the commercial designation.

[doimus]

US examples are most prominent as the US is at the forefront of both gaming and warfare  , but I guess it should be relatively the same in all countries where there are similar law systems.