[quote who="Inibriatus" reply="32" id="3737161"] I had planned on buying Paul&Fred's SC game as well but now that I see another underhanded move by them I'll go ahead and skip that. Buying their game would leave a bad taste in my mouth so... season pass here I come [/quote] Hopefully you aren't just getting your news through Stardock's own forums. At the beginning I would have been happy to buy both games too, but I can't see myself buyi
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="17" id="3737047"]stealing the work and reputation of Steve Cole and the SFB Staff [/quote] Classic stuff there, have you thought about writing a book on this? [quote who="Prof_Hari_Seldon" reply="21" id="3737104"] Chill Kavik please. [/quote] That is literally impossible.
[quote who="zwabbit" reply="277" id="3713665"] UQM isn't engaging in commerce, therefore the confusion issue doesn't come into play. There are two components to trademark law, confusion and engaging in commerce. Both need to be fulfilled for trademark infringement to kick in. If Stardock ever did find UQM to be engaged in commerce, then UQM is SOL and would be dead. Parody explicitly does not cause confusion. That's why it gets away with it. If something is not sufficiently pa
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="233" id="3712736"]First off, I can find no "story" in there that would rise anywhere close to being protected by copyright. You are the one saying they hold a copyright to a story. I'm asking, what story? For example, how would one infringe on "the story"? [/quote] As in the script, as in the text in the game. Is text in a game not covered by copyright? (I'm genuinely asking, I assumed text was very much covered as it is i
[quote who="UrQuanian" reply="603" id="3711964"]If this is all true then i am very sorry to hear that. [/quote] Please, don't encourage him. He keeps derailing the thread with this subject despite being told multiple times to make a new thread about it.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="599" id="3711945"]Reposting my post where I said, I don’t know since Primal must not have seen it. [/quote] I did see that. Is that a correction or retraction of the earlier statement? I didn't read it that way, but I'm happy to admit to making a mistake.
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="593" id="3711905"]t. I actually dont know the law behind this. What i had heard from friends is that the reason people dont get sued from fan based movies is that they cant make any profit from movies. If i was trying to say make spore, or simcity which has gone bankrupt, and then got a cease, and discist order then i would probably destroy everything involved in this. I would not certanly take my own advice on this. I was just trying to join the convers
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="584" id="3711884"] Quoting SirPrimalform, reply 582 I think most people's understanding of the situation was the latter, but according to Brad he thinks that UQM does use the SC trademark (either fair use or infringement). I'm pretty sure I said "I don't know". 
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="578" id="3711871"]Well one reason they are hard to sue is because they are not allowed to make money off this. I don't think this includes donations. And pretty much when they say making money that is more of a personal thing. This is gutsy for not knowing any specifics on the subject. [/quote] I don't mean sued for damages, but I've seen a lot of completely non-profit fan projects issued C&D letters. Are you saying that if they ignored
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="574" id="3711860"] Words as in, individual words or short phrases. I can trademark the word Drengin or the word Drengin Empire. I cannot copyright them. [/quote] You can, but if you haven't trademarked them then they're simply part of the copyright of the overall work.
[quote who="Arch Zero" reply="568" id="3711845"] Quoting SirPrimalform, reply 565 Not exclusively. The contents of a book are copyright, not trademark. I see no difference between that and the words in a game, but perhaps the law does? Words as in names. [/quote]</p
[quote who="Taslios" reply="561" id="3711837"]Again, I think this links back to the creative commons laws that Elistan just posted. As long as the fan thing is not SELLING something, they are protected and their actions do not threaten either the Copyright or the Trademark. However if they DID start selling something then yes the Trademark has to be protected or it becomes invalid. [/quote] Tell that to the fan productions I've seen shut down.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="557" id="3711829"]Words fall under trademark. [/quote] Not exclusively. The contents of a book are copyright, not trademark. I see no difference between that and the words in a game, but perhaps the law does?
[quote who="Taslios" reply="554" id="3711824"]to my not legal expert... yes. However as UQM project was not trying to sell anything or make a profit on something it is actually probably protected by the same laws that protect fan fiction and parody. Most fan projects such as the Star Trek Axxanar project violate either copyright or trademark or both in some form, but most companies realize that suing their fans is counter productive for the long
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="551" id="3711814"] What would prevent a third party from having the Ur-Quan in their game would be the Star Control trademark. You’d need the trademark holder to cooperate.[/quote] Hmm. But doesn't that mean that the UQM project was already a violation of the SC mark despite not actually using the name?
[quote who="DarkGildon" reply="304" id="3709196"] These posts are now so off-topic, you should probably take them elsewhere. [/quote] Kavik_Kang has already been warned about this in the Q+A thread.
Ok, well just to cap this off, here's my insane 'email' (forum PM) rantings. Read from bottom to top like an email chain: No. I am going to go make another post in that thread right now just because you have sent me this e-mail. I will make a new post in that thread for each and every e-mail that you send me attempting to order me not too. After all, it is the MOST relevant subject bein
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="161" id="3708156"] There is nothing more relevant to this discussion that Paul & Fred's plagiarism and theft of IP. If this were untrue, couldn't Paul & Fred sue me for liable? I'm am not concerned... no lawsuit is coming my way. Because they are thieves who refuse to acknowledge what Star Control II actually is, and they know that.[/quote] Frankly, your arguments come across as the ravings of a madman. Generally people onl
Kavik_Kang, please please go and talk to a therapist. Justified or not, your bubbling undercurrent of rage is probably not doing you any favours in life. EDIT: Also you are extremely off topic. This thread is about the legal dispute between Stardock and Paul and Fred. Make a separate topic for your own dispute.
[quote who="DarkGildon" reply="239" id="3707799"]Is this question directed at the so-called moustache-twirling villain? [e digicons];)[/e] [/quote] Well exactly. If Brad cares to deny this then I will of course treat it as unverified, but until then that's certainly how he looks. EDIT: Strictly speaking I have already left the forum as I expect to get canned like Elestan soon. See you!
StarControl Forums
Stardock.net Forums