next »

[mona.adele]

I believe saying his name three times in a row while looking in a mirror will also do that...

Bloody Timmy, Bloody Timmy, Bloody Timmy... 

[Reiss]

Thank you everyone for your advice.

I've decided to transpose. Keep the same idea and mechanics as I planned, but rename EVERYTHING so there is no brand connection whatsoever. Just a similar idea and general mechanics. No asset use whatsoever.

However, I plan to make a world editor, so in theory, some nefarious person could create the world from the original game...  

Good decision.  To explain some of the differing responses you got: generally Japanese companies are fine with fangames; maybe copyright law is different in Japan?  On the other hand, American companies tend to be ruthless about protecting their IP, because American copyright law can be construed to imply that if they don't protect it, they lose ownership of it.  Since you said that EA owned the IP, you could definitely get in some trouble -- at the very least a takedown notice, which would suck considering the amount of time you'd have spent developing the game.

Changing names and images generally absolves you of that kind of stuff, though, as long as you don't seem like you're trying to screw the company that made the original game; it looks like you're on a good track.  Gang Garrison 2 got love from Valve, for example.

[Ushi-kun]

I think it really depends on the company and franchise, not really the country.
Also full-blown remakes made by fans usually tend to get stopped quite often.

Like these projects
that got their tails caught.

Speaking of Japan and copyright laws..
I've always wondered how copyright comes into play when we talk about doujinsofts,
and doujinshis..because they obviously use Anime/Game IPs..and i really doubt
they have permission to use these IPs in a legal standpoint..
plus..people make money off of selling these stuff..

[Reiss]

Yeah, doujinsofts/doujinshis are pretty weird...  This article on Wikipedia says that apparently they're technically infringements of Japanese copyright law, but typically companies overlook them.

Edit: also this article specifically about doujinsoft.

Like fangames, dōjin soft frequently use characters from existing games, anime, or manga. These unauthorized uses of characters are generally ignored and accepted by the copyright holders, and are seen as encouraging a greater fan community. This is quite different from the West where high-profile fangames are regularly shut down by cease-and-desist orders.

[Craig Stern]

To explain some of the differing responses you got: generally Japanese companies are fine with fangames; maybe copyright law is different in Japan?  On the other hand, American companies tend to be ruthless about protecting their IP, because American copyright law can be construed to imply that if they don't protect it, they lose ownership of it.

This is not true. You can cause your mark to become weak or generic by not enforcing it under trademark law, but you can't do anything of the sort with a protected work under copyright law. Copyright is not like trademark; it is an absolute right under the American legal regime. The strength of copyright protection typically depends on the nature of the work itself (e.g. whether it's creative or just a compilation of facts, whether its characteristics are expressive or functional, etc.)

[weasello]

Spoke with my lawyer on this subject a few years back. It's not all about money. You can be fined for any form of compensation you get for the game, INCLUDING fame/recognition/credit -- those things have a cash value apparently. If you happen to steal a dozen ideas that they were "working on" or "thinking about working on" or "lying about thinking about working on" then you can also be slapped with denying them potential sales of their new product. Then there's diluting of their IP if you take it in a direction they don't like.

All of those things have cash value; the opposing lawyer makes up some figure that the company thinks will make them feel better.

If you can't pay up, or refuse to pay up, there's a chance you'll go to jail, but it's not likely.

Of course, it all depends on the opposing company. Sure, Nintendo and maybe a few others are "nice guys" about it, but all it takes is one jerk company to come along and sue the bejeezus out of you to ruin your life.

The lesson here was stated in the first few posts: Make your own world that doesn't rely on the IP to get your message across.

That said: Try writing the company. Tell them your plans. See if they let you do it. Most often I'll bet they say "yes", especially if it's a smaller company or a title/IP they no longer care about. Giving you special permission also protects their company from the "failure to defend" bits if that comes into play.

[Christian Knudsen]

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that if you specifically ask a company, they pretty much have to say no?

[s0]

I think the question isn't so much what could happen, but whether something like what weasello described ever has happened in practice.  Sure, big companies are often ruthless I but I don't think they're sadistic. For instance what would a company like Nintendo have to gain by suing a bunch of kids who make their own their own game with ripped Link To The Past sprites and music?

[Christian Knudsen]

Hey, kids earn a lot of cash these days! 

[mona.adele]

Hey, kids earn a lot of cash these days! 

Some of them do. They really, really do.

I wound up writing on this at under development since it's peripherally related to a case I'm working on. Unfortunately the site's kind of being goofy right now because I just moved it off of typepad. But if you're curious: http://underdevelopmentlaw.com/

[Titch]

I dunno if anyone linked it in this article, but I just hit on a Gamasutra article about this subject:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=26290

[s0]

Actually, the person who wrote this article has posted in this very thread. 

Anyway, it's a good read. I didn't know you could patent game mechanics. That's bullshit, in my opinion.

[mona.adele]

I dunno if anyone linked it in this article, but I just hit on a Gamasutra article about this subject:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=26290

this made me smile. Especially since I wrote it partially in response to this thread...

[Imagineergames]

I don't want to sound like an ass. But with all due respect, Why do you want to expand on someone else's vision? Why not create an original product, instead of 1- taking the risk 2- losing your time and 3- not even exercising your own creativity. I respect fangames (Because I could not even fathom spending a minute creating one) but Wouldn't you rather do something original that might even net you profit?

[Hangedman]

Two reasons.

1 - I already have other projects on the go, and am not setting them all aside to do this. It's not wasting my time or anything of the sort.

2 - It's barely a fangame. New logos, new design, new setting, new characters, new gameplay concepts. Now it's really just an elaborately customizable roguelike with a similar game structure to the original, which is a structure that so beautifully fits the concept of a roguelike, but isn't yet.