Chrono Compendium
Zenan Plains - Site Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: FaustWolf on March 01, 2010, 10:10:48 pm
-
Oh, for fuck's sake!
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27441/Activision_Shuts_Down_Kings_Quest_Fan_Sequel.php
http://www.tsl-game.com/
!#&*&DHLAIUSD
:picardno
Fans just can't get a break these days. For reference, this is an in-progress trailer (2006) of what would later become C&D'd yesterday. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQVVwK0uM-8) Ironic that the project survived one C&D only to be taken out by a second one.
I think I'll spend the rest of the night in a corner, silently chanting "The Dream of Zeal is Alive. The Dream of Zeal is Alive" while I try to be otherwise productive.
-
!#&*&DHLAIUSD
Note that I'm not being facetious when I say that this is probably the most coherent way to express how it feels for this to happen again. Damn.
Worst part is(with all due respect to the CE Team) this game seems sooo much more involved than Crimson Echoes did. The extra dimension of the models and polygons and whatnot...*sigh*.
-
This was probably more on the level of Chrono Trigger Resurrection from what I understand, though development got much further than CT:R. There are demos of The Silver Lining (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYe5w0bcwfo) floating around it seems.
What bothers me most about this trend is that fan projects are often a major step in an artist's development. I realized this when I walked into a friend's house in high school and his brother's room was plastered with well-made drawings of Link, Lara Croft, Crash Bandicoot, etc. Same goes for writers who have fanfics to thank in large part for their interest in writing and budding skillset. Imagine how many artists wouldn't even take their first baby steps if they knew their drawings and writings depicting pre-existing characters were going to be torn up and shredded by the IP holders.
It's a strange thing: musicians, writers and visual artists who dabble in fan creativity are allowed to work on their own with impunity, but the moment a programmer enters the mix to string all the arts together into something interactive -- bam.
-
You've hit it on the head, Faust. There ought to be an exemption in intellectual property law for (noncommercial) self-education.
-
Approaching fangame legality through education-as-fair-use is an interesting concept. I think there's a basis for this, but still with plenty of room for quibbling based on current guidelines for copyright in teaching (http://teflpedia.com/index.php?title=Copyright_in_English_language_teaching#So.2C_what_can_I_use_in_class.3F) (if that article is accurate, of course).
-
As far as I'm concerned with the legalities of fan games (like CE), the fact that distributing whole fan games is illegal is what gets me. Could CE have been distributed as a patch, which is perfectly legal as it does not violate the copyright laws set up around these companies?
Well, what can one do? It's not like we can just turn back the clocks and try again, because it would be cliched to say that if we knew now what we knew then, then everyone would be playing CE and showering the team with gratuitous praise.
-
Could CE have been distributed as a patch, which is perfectly legal as it does not violate the copyright laws set up around these companies?
CE was intended to be distributed as a patch to begin with, just like Prophet's Guile (also mentioned in the C&D).
-
But distributing patches isn't illegal. What you were doing was perfectly legal.
http://www.emulationzone.org/articles/general/how-to.htm (http://www.emulationzone.org/articles/general/how-to.htm)
So why did Squeenix slam you guys?
-
Xulf Laropmet, is probably what caused the heat to come down on CE and Prophet's Guile, specifically. A tool as powerful as that might have some bigwigs a mite scared.
Of course, they were still wrong, but I doubt anyone on these forums will dispute that, so it's a moot point.
-
I'd love to have a thread specifically devoted to legal discussion on fanworks. Benefits could accrue because budding artists need to be aware of the risks associated with the various fanarts, as recent C&Ds have made clear.
I think the questions about game modding would have to be tested in court before we get a solid legal answer one way or another. I tend to organize the basic lines of reasoning on each side as follows:
My guess is the reasoning on emulationzone's site might draw from Galoob v. Nintendo. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc.) Basically a "the end user can do what he or she wants with his or her copy of a product" sorta thing. The patch can be analogous to a Game Genie code in the way it makes the game do something not intended by the producer, but intended by the player. The technical difference is that the Game Genie code writes something into a RAM address (dynamic memory) whereas the patch writes something into a ROM address (static data). I doubt the difference between ROM and RAM is worth quibbling over in a legal sense, so I do see a solid legal argument here. The risk in defying a C&D is that if the IP holder is serious about litigation, someone's going to have to pay a lawyer to prove that the link to Galoob v. Nintendo applies.
Weighing against this is a general belief in the right of IP holders to protect the quality of their property (I've sometimes heard this referred to as "goodwill", or at least I think I have). By this rationale, Square Enix has a general right to order stopped not only game modifications and from-scratch derivative games, but also every fanfic and piece of fanart ever conceived based on its characters. If someone draws a pic of Crono in his skivvies (or even less) and posts it on the net, people could associate that with the IP from which the idea derived, thus eroding the quality of the IP -- from a more conservative point of view I suppose. This "goodwill' or "IP value degredation" angle is what a lawyer for Square Enix might argue if one of these cases were ever taken to court. When you input a Game Genie code you aren't changing or adding anything to the IP as a whole, just making a technical change in the gameplay mechanics specifically. The insertion of a timelessly classic character like KZ, on the other hand, is a qualitative change to the greater IP (or so a lawyer might argue to distance CE from the Galoob precedent). In essence, instead of being pissed at SE for canning CE and Prophet's Guile, we should thank our lucky stars that they've allowed us to get away with all we have otherwise. Not that I agree with this logic, but it's out there, and strong enough even amongst the fanbases to give me pause.
There are also other variables at play -- namely that the arm of US law extends to, well, the US. Much could hang on whether a server or individual is stored in the United States or another country. This is only my guess, but I tend to think the Metroid II Remake Project and Card Sagas Wars have less to worry about on account of this supposition.
What's really interesting to me is the treatment of IP in the form of music (and I think audio transmission in general) under US law. If you want to make a derivative piece of music, just head over to easysonglicensing.com and license it! Can't find the IP holder? Do your remix and the US government will hold your dues in escrow in case the IP holder wants to make a claim! Simple as that. Can you believe it? Imagine how flabbergasted I was when Mustin answered this question in the Chronotorious interview! Here I was, thinking he had to have developed a network of huge connections, and navigated that secret network like a mad ninja to be able to release an album based on Chrono Trigger's music. He was like, "eh, I just hopped on the Internet and bought a license, dude." And I was like: :shock:
If I remember correctly (which I may not), this aspect of US copyright law developed at a time when audio transmission was the great source of entertainment; phonograph records and radio shows. If I'm right on that, I wonder if US copyright law is simply behind the times with regard to other forms of entertainment transmission, or if there's something so qualitatively different about a musical idea that should make it easier to license than a written or depicted idea.
-
This is a very interesting subject. FW, you should make that thread. You seem much more knowledgeable about it than a lot of people.
-
In essence, instead of being pissed at SE for canning CE and Prophet's Guile, we should thank our lucky stars that they've allowed us to get away with all we have otherwise. Not that I agree with this logic, but it's out there, and strong enough even amongst the fanbases to give me pause.
So basically, it's like a casino in Las Vegas telling us to "take our chips, cash in and leave, because that's the best bet you're gonna have here in town" after we got caught counting cards at the Black Jack Table. What we were doing was technically legal, but they wanted to lose the least amount of money off of our actions while kicking us out at the same time.
-
Okay, I split this so as to not disrupt the discussion on clinical depression currently in the Frustration thread. I'm not an expert on this particular subject by any means; I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express a few times, that's all.
Genesis, I suppose that's one way of putting it colorfully. I'm not entirely sure whether it's about money after all, though -- maybe the chance of money in the future that the IP holder doesn't want blown, since the recent C&Ds focus on long untreated material that could be resurrected in the future. Sometimes I wonder if it's just legal departments looking for something to do; every man with a hammer and all that jazz.
-
I Am Not A Lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but...
The problem is that most modern copyright law (as opposed to trademark law and patent law, which are two whole other kettles of fish) dates from the end of the 19th century and was intended to protect paper books from rapacious publishers who reissued them without the permission of the authors. It's been retrofitted--generally not very well--to cover new media and different societal conditions.
I mean, think about it. The whole landscape was different back then. Making enough copies of a piece of copyrighted material to permit it to be distributed was a major undertaking in terms of time, money, and equipment--you couldn't simply send off a bunch of electrons marching in step the way you can today, you had to create a physical object to act as a distribution medium. Not only that, but people weren't nearly so mad for litigation as they have (especially in the modern US) now become. It's interesting to note that there is one type of derivative work that has iron-clad protection under the law from being a breach of copyright: the parody. Why that one exception? I'm not privy to the thoughts of the people who drafted that law, but I suspect it's because parodies were the only kind of work that really needed that protection back then: it was just assumed that the original copyright holder wouldn't object to derivative works that didn't defame the original.
The combination of easy reproduction and distribution with corporate greed has destroyed that world forever. The laws *should* have changed to compensate. They haven't. As a result, something on the order of 90% of the population of North America over the age of six consists of violators of copyright law, technically speaking.
In other words, the law is really, thoroughly, extremely broken, and no one with the power to fix it seems interested in doing so. In addition, the US has a broken system of civil law which makes the consequences of broken copyright law even worse there. It's a shame, but I don't see what can be done about it under the current circumstances: we're talking about rewriting international treaties of very long standing that involve over a hundred countries.
-
It's interesting to note that there is one type of derivative work that has iron-clad protection under the law from being a breach of copyright: the parody.
Even then, Internet parodies are usually subject to removal from the original company. They shouldn't be, and the law is very clear on this, but it still happens.
-
Entirely new intellectual property laws are required. I can't even begin to approach fangames in particular without addressing the entire legal framework. One thing's for sure, though: The copyright laws as they are enforced today are far too stringent. The provoke contempt. They incite piracy. While my general opinion is that the counterstroke of illegal use is as unjustified as the illegality itself of many of those uses, the state of affairs today highlights the need for institutional reform.
-
http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2010/04/content-id-and-fair-use.html#comments
Earlier today, Youtube announced a change in their content ID system to better handle the issue of fair use.
My initial reaction to this was pretty much positive: No more having to deal with suspended accounts and videos being taken down. Instead, they'd be disabled(which means no copyright strikes against you) and you could easily appeal. This is a system that they have been using for audio material for quite a while now.
However, in that time, I've had conversations with two other Youtubers on the matter. The first said that getting the strike and then having it repealed was a better alternative because it allowed a loophole for the user. I'm not going to get into what that loophole is, simply because. He made a good point either way, that this merely convoluted the DMCA counter claims process.
My second Youtuber friend had a fairly negative reaction to this news though. She makes the claim that this is just a band-aid to keep users on Youtube from leaving for a less stringent competitor site(like Revver, which is very nice about Fair Use), but that it gives the companies too much control and monetization options, and allows them to easily bypass the DMCA to mess with people's videos(like taking them down unfairly, or putting ads on them).
To me, this is all a step in the right direction. The "perfect" scenario for the fan would be that Youtube gets rid of the identification algorithms(henceforth referred to as "bots") and makes all copyright claims on videos manual. The problem with this would be that the production companies of movies, anime, video games would have to hire an army of people to continually check Youtube for illegal uses of their property. Youtube is not a small site; there are millions of videos uploaded every day, and the amount of hours and resources that would need to be put into such a thing would bankrupt one of these companies(plus, it's simply unfair to them). The Viacom lawsuits were what made this system necessary in the first place.
There still needs to be some policy reform to better protect user rights. If something is fair used, it shouldn't be treated like it's only permitted because of the benevolence of a company and their ads. It's nice that things are being allowed to stay up, but they need to be allowed for the right reasons.
But they're starting to change though, and hopefully this is a sign of things to come.
BTW, I'll leave on this note: I don't think you guys should have any problems with the Crimson Echoes playthrough videos on Youtube. The way that the bots work is by "scanning" a video to see if any infringing content is used. Even if Square-Enix put every bit of Chrono Trigger onto video format and put it into these bots, they wouldn't be able to catch you guys because you made a completely new fan work. The only way you would have a copyright problem is if Squeenix manually saw your videos and said "NO FANGAEMS EVAR!" and removed the videos. In which case, a boycott/lawsuit would be not only necessary, but almost required. At that point, Square-Enix would be trampling over your fair use rights, and that can't be allowed to happen.
-
I'm at peace with Youtube's copyright policy nowadays. I've had several videos flagged by music companies, but they've allowed me to keep them up with the provision that they reserve the right to attach ads and purchase links to the videos. No skin off my back, since my motivation in using clips from bands is to give those artists more viral exposure in the first place. I also appreciate that each copyright holder is allowed to define its own policy and reaction; I'm hoping they'll find that the more lenient companies actually benefit more from free viral advertising, and the more stringent companies will follow suit.
-
imo they sued you guys because you said right at the beginning of the game (or in the read me my memory isn't 100%) that this game was made without the express permission of square enix, and if at any time they have a problem with this then we will cease all work on the project. So, they said... Cease. It's not hard to do when you lay it out for them really :/
-
Whoa, whoa, WHOOOOOAAAA
http://jolt.unc.edu/abstracts/volume-11/ncjltech/p103
It's big news that such a subject has been broached academically. Yeah, there's a huge disconnect in IP law between how music is handled and how other types of property are handled; wouldn't it be a dream come true for that gap to disappear one day.
-
Dream or nightmare, depending on how that disconnect gets resolved.
-
WHOOOOOOAAAA
http://www.tsl-game.com/
Now, how do we get Square Enix to do that?
-
WHOOOOOOAAAA
http://www.tsl-game.com/
Now, how do we get Square Enix to do that?
O_O What the fork?! LMAO LET'S RAM SE'S OFFICE AND FORCE EM TO GIVE TEH LICENSE!
-
Been seeing some news about a Duke Nukem fan license, but haven't had much time to check into the specifics. I'll leave this here for reference for now:
Ars Technica article on noncommercial Duke Nukem fan license (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/10/fan-made-duke-3d-update-is-now-official-blessed-by-creators.ars).
-
You listening, Squeenix?
-
You listening, Squeenix?
they better be since i find it awesome that capcom is making megaman legends 3 after a decade of leaving a cliffhanger in mml2. perhaps this will be the age where fans get to be the creators and make their own plot devices?
-
I say don't give up on Square Enix recovering from MMO hell and making a new Chrono game. As we can see, old franchises are often brought back years and years later for no apparent reason. Maybe, in a top secret lab in Mount Fuji, Break is being developed as we type...
-
I say don't give up on Square Enix recovering from MMO hell and making a new Chrono game. As we can see, old franchises are often brought back years and years later for no apparent reason. Maybe, in a top secret lab in Mount Fuji, Break is being developed as we type...
This holds true due to Sailor Moon getting a worldwide revival (it's becoming popular in Rome I believe) and Kid Icarus getting a 3DS game.
-
I was trying to come up with an example of dead series rebirth - there you go, Kid Icarus.