[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Usa Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

V:tES and the Deckmaster license

YY

9/27/2010 8:08:00 AM

Out of curiosity, does the WotC copyright cover just the production
and sales, or does it also cover official events?

I was thinking, if it only covers production and sales, what's
stopping CCP/WW (or anyone who picks up V:tES) from simply rewording
the rules around the copyright and dropping the Deckmaster logo from
the card backing?

I mean, since we already have 2 (3 if you consider Third Edition)
different backings for the game, what difference does it make if
there's another one?

-YY
10 Answers

John Whelan

9/27/2010 8:40:00 AM

0

YY wrote:
> Out of curiosity, does the WotC copyright cover just the production
> and sales, or does it also cover official events?

Copyright does not cover any of those things. It covers works of art,
including games, and protects them from being copied. It does not
merely cover exact copies, but also covers derivative works and
"substantially similar" copies.

> [...] what's
> stopping CCP/WW (or anyone who picks up V:tES) from simply rewording
> the rules around the copyright and dropping the Deckmaster logo from
> the card backing?

Well, in the case of CCP/WW they are also no doubt bound by the terms
of the contract they made.

As for anyone else (including CCP/WW), rewording the rules would not
bring it outside copyright law, which covers derivative works and
those that are substantially similar. You would have to essentially
make a whole new game.

> I mean, since we already have 2 (3 if you consider Third Edition)
> different backings for the game, what difference does it make if
> there's another one?

Well, apart from the fact that this is obviously not a good thing, in
and of itself, it would not solve the problem.

Peter D Bakija

9/27/2010 11:34:00 AM

0

On Sep 27, 4:07 am, YY <the1andonl...@yahoo.com.sg> wrote:
> I was thinking, if it only covers production and sales, what's
> stopping CCP/WW (or anyone who picks up V:tES) from simply rewording
> the rules around the copyright and dropping the Deckmaster logo from
> the card backing?

What is stopping CCP/WW from doing that is that they apparently don't
want to.

-Peter

XZealot

9/27/2010 2:50:00 PM

0

On Sep 27, 6:34 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote:
> On Sep 27, 4:07 am, YY <the1andonl...@yahoo.com.sg> wrote:
>
> > I was thinking, if it only covers production and sales, what's
> > stopping CCP/WW (or anyone who picks up V:tES) from simply rewording
> > the rules around the copyright and dropping the Deckmaster logo from
> > the card backing?
>
> What is stopping CCP/WW from doing that is that they apparently don't
> want to.
>

They apparently don't want to be dragged into a lawsuit where they
very obviously violate someone's patent.

.....and lose, which they will.

John Whelan

9/27/2010 4:12:00 PM

0

XZealot wrote:
> They apparently don't want to be dragged into a lawsuit where they
> very obviously violate someone's patent.
>
> ....and lose, which they will.

The "patent" isn't the issue. Copyright rights and Contract rights
and perhaps Trademark rights cover about everything. The Deckmaster
"patent" is, as far as I can tell, a silly attempt to get extra
protection for things that that are either already covered by
Copyright, or not protectable at all.

XZealot

9/27/2010 4:15:00 PM

0

On Sep 27, 11:12 am, John Whelan <jwjbwhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> XZealot wrote:
> > They apparently don't want to be dragged into a lawsuit where they
> > very obviously violate someone's patent.
>
> > ....and lose, which they will.
>
> The "patent" isn't the issue.  Copyright rights and Contract rights
> and perhaps Trademark rights cover about everything.  The Deckmaster
> "patent" is, as far as I can tell, a silly attempt to get extra
> protection for things that that are either already covered by
> Copyright, or not protectable at all.

So, we agree.

John Whelan

9/27/2010 4:25:00 PM

0

XZealot wrote:
> So, we agree.

Yes. They will lose (but perhaps not on the patent issue).

RoddPrime

9/30/2010 11:22:00 PM

0

On Sep 27, 12:24 pm, John Whelan <jwjbwhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> XZealot wrote:
> > So, we agree.
>
> Yes.  They will lose (but perhaps not on the patent issue).

I don't get it. Isn't there an expiration date on all those things?
And by similar for card game mechanics, virtually every CCG uses
something similar.

librarian

10/1/2010 5:26:00 AM

0

On 9/30/2010 4:21 PM, RoddPrime wrote:
> On Sep 27, 12:24 pm, John Whelan<jwjbwhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> XZealot wrote:
>>> So, we agree.
>>
>> Yes. They will lose (but perhaps not on the patent issue).
>
> I don't get it. Isn't there an expiration date on all those things?


I'm not sure, but copyrights last for 28 years, and can be renewed at least
once. Trademarks I think last as long as the company wants to keep paying
to renew it (every 10 years?). Patents I'm not so sure, but I think they
last for quite a while, except maybe medicine?


chris

John Whelan

10/1/2010 2:42:00 PM

0

On Sep 30, 7:21 pm, RoddPrime <roddpr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 27, 12:24 pm, John Whelan <jwjbwhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > XZealot wrote:
> > > So, we agree.
>
> > Yes.  They will lose (but perhaps not on the patent issue).
>
> I don't get it. Isn't there an expiration date on all those things?

Not within our lifetimes.

> And by similar for card game mechanics, virtually every CCG uses
> something similar.

Not every individual element of a work of art is protectable by
copyright. The work of art as a whole, however, is protected.

John Whelan

10/1/2010 3:04:00 PM

0

On Oct 1, 1:25 am, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure, but copyrights last for 28 years, and can be renewed at least
> once.  

You're way behind the times. The 1909 copyright law was superceded in
1976, extending copyright terms to life of author+50 years, or 75
years for works of corporate authorship. Thanks to the Copyright
Extension Act of 1998 (a/k/a the Sonny Bono Act, a/k/a the Mickey
Mouse Protection Act) copyrights are now extended an additional 20
years and now last 95 years for works of corporate authorship; or life
plus 70 years for works of human authorship.

The old law is relevant only because the new laws only extended the
copyright for works not already in the public domain.