Doom monster
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Special Interest > Freedoom > Project name list
Pages (2): [1] 2 »  
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:13. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
cph
Junior Member


Posts: 208
Registered: 05-00


Ok, the current list of possible project names is now up at http://cacodemon.despayre.org:81/names.html. From now until the weekend I'll continue to accept any more suggestions. So if anyone has any more inspiration, make sure you have it before Saturday.

For the next couple of weeks, I'm mainly interested in eliminating any names from the list which are known to be trademarked, used by other FPS games or well known Doom projects. I'll probably do some searching myself, but if you know of any objections of this type let me know.

I plan to set up a vote internal to the project in a couple of weeks time to cut this list down to a shortlist. Nothing is being removed from the list before then unless it fails one of the above tests.

Old Post 09-17-01 20:52 #
cph is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
spank
I'm afraid of Americans


Posts: 1888
Registered: 06-00


Burden
Opress
Warfare
Portal
Constrictor
Mishap
Prone
Death
Eliminator
Prolapsus to Death
Recidivism (cough)
Redout
Vomica
Misgiving

Old Post 09-17-01 22:03 #
spank is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
geekmarine
Senior Member


Posts: 1566
Registered: 05-00


Pestilence
Torture
Scourge
Terminus
Abyss(mal, either way works)
Void
Singularity (yeah, I've been reading about black holes for a research paper)

And a few for fun
System Error (hey, actually might be good)
George W. Bush (almost TOO scary)
Windows (you WILL be crashed)
DOS (ahhhhh, a command prompt and a blinking line, run)



Old Post 09-18-01 00:25 #
geekmarine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
captmellow
Junior Member


Posts: 217
Registered: 09-00


Anathema
Pestilence
Plague
Locus
Flaccid
Defenestration
Mastication of the Innocent
Tedium
Ad Nauseum
Moratorium
Decollation

BTW oppress not opress (sp)

Old Post 09-19-01 05:55 #
captmellow is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
spank
I'm afraid of Americans


Posts: 1888
Registered: 06-00


Uh, yeah, you're right. My finger must've slipped or something.

Old Post 09-19-01 23:22 #
spank is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01


AfterDOOM
NewDOOM
ForeverDOOM
Banzai
FragDOOM
FragSpawn
UACDOOM
UAC
DeathWish
HellBorn
HellDOOM
HellFrag
HellSpawn
FragHell
SpawnHell
DeathSpawn

Old Post 09-20-01 00:07 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
fraggle
Filled with the code of Doom


Posts: 7468
Registered: 07-00



AfterDOOM
NewDOOM
ForeverDOOM
FragDOOM
UACDOOM
UAC
HellDOOM


I read your comment in the other thread, but I have to say that I'm yet to be totally convinced that we're safe to use the doom name. Personally I think we should play it safe and avoid it. We should DEFINITELY avoid anything related to the UAC: we dont even use UAC on the textures.

Old Post 09-20-01 00:46 #
fraggle is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01



I'm yet to be totally convinced that we're safe to use the doom name.

xxxxDOOM is 100% safe. The links I gave are -THE- US TRADEMARK/PATENT office. It gets no more official than that, including the definition of a trademark. Do the lookup and SEE all the DOOM names already used by lots of things. I thought Marvel Comics use was interesting.

I wish I had the money back I've paid to be informed on this subject matter:) As a practical matter, the worst thing that could happen (assuming for a minute that there was a problem) is that ID would say you couldn't use the name. They are not nuts though and recognize that DOOMNUTS (for example) is a perfectly legitimate name that does not infringe on any TRADEMARKED name.

No participants will be harmed in the making of DOOMNUTS - if no copyrighted material is used.


Personally I think we should play it safe and avoid it. We should DEFINITELY avoid anything related to the UAC: we dont even use UAC on the textures.

Why? UAC is even less special than DOOM. Look at the number of books with EXACTLY the same title. Movies too. Why?

But more importantly, if one creates a texture with an original UAC logo, then there is 100% no problem. What you say is akin to arguing I can't make a painting with UAC on it and that just ain't so. For example, a painter can paint ANYTHING they like - including copying someone elses work BY HAND - it just can't be "traced" or copied with machines.

Not knowing or entering unknown areas leads one to be cautious and is "scary". That's a normal human reaction, but not a logical reason. The way one gets over that is to do the research and read up on it. I didn't learn all this overnight, but over many years of dealing with this stuff.

There are LOTS of links that explain Trademarks and Copyright in great detail. It's really not that complicated, sort of like learning DOOM editing. One learns the underpinnings and then it all becomes relatively simple.

Another simple reason that names like UAC (outside of the context of a texture) are ok is that novels would soon become impossible to write if everyone had to worry about what abbreviations were used by someone else. The trademark and copyright laws do have to be practical. Yeah, sometimes they screw up when enough money is behind it, but overall it makes sense.

In fact, to continue the "what if" consideration, if UAC was a problem then ALL the fan stories written could be considered a "problem"? IOW, one can write and publish a story with UAC in it and that would be 100% legit too.

It would be a shame to throw away the essence of the project name over lack of information on this subject.

Old Post 09-20-01 03:06 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
captmellow
Junior Member


Posts: 217
Registered: 09-00


This point re: "FreeDoom" should be taken to John Carmack. If he doesn or doesn't mind, then that should bring the whole thing to a long-overdue conclusion.

Old Post 09-20-01 05:51 #
captmellow is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
AirRaid
Graphics Zealot


Posts: 2735
Registered: 11-00


That's what I said right at the beginning.

Old Post 09-20-01 20:15 #
AirRaid is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
cph
Junior Member


Posts: 208
Registered: 05-00



This point re: "FreeDoom" should be taken to John Carmack. If he doesn or doesn't mind, then that should bring the whole thing to a long-overdue conclusion.


Whether they mind or not is beside the point - trademarks have to be defended to remain valid, so id would be forced to enforce it. Carmack would know that and just point us to their lawyers, and that's a direction we don't want to go in.

Old Post 09-20-01 20:34 #
cph is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01



Whether they mind or not is beside the point - trademarks have to be defended to remain valid, so id would be forced to enforce it. Carmack would know that and just point us to their lawyers, and that's a direction we don't want to go in.
Not exactly. As I pointed out in the other thread, there are many other issues besides the FREEDOOM name. Besides you assumed that FREEDOOM is a trademark violation and I hope to demonstrate it's not.

Trademarks are very specific and tend to refer to MARKS as in LOGOS and the like - if they weren't NAMES would get stifled into things like $*&#$&F. That's why you see duplicate registrations for the same "name" because the represent different "marks". DOOM is one of those.

Look up QUAKE for another example. So it's not the "name" DOOM that is trademarked, the "TYPED DRAWING" (Logo) is, i.e. MARKs. Xerox was not a "word", plus it was a process and thus that was easy to establish as a trademark. Aspirin (Bayer) is the common example of a trademark that was lost because of lack of defense - but note again that the word was a NEW invention.

Here's a simple example that clearly illustrates the confusion over names and marks:

Is Coca Cola a trademark? Hell yes you say, obviously. Is Pepsi Cola a trademark? Mmm, they both have Cola in the name. Well the "marks" are different aren't they. Over time, they established a unique identity tied to the name combination. It could be a mistake to make something called CocaColaDOOM:)

I hope everyone sees, this attempt to argue that nothing with DOOM is valid since it diminishes a trademark is not so simple after all. DOOM happens to be a normal everyday English word - imagine that. And that's why FREEDOOM is actually MORE of a natural "trademark" in the word sense than DOOM ever was. If you develop a "logo" then that becomes even a stronger trademark.

The most relevant question is: Does Id care you are making a replacement xWAD? Avoidance as a defense argument is not a productive way of reasoning. I'm arguing that nothing that's being done hasn't been done before in at least one form. If Id cares, they will care regardless of the name choosen - IOW the least of your worries is the name.

Just to throw you a curve - collectively ALL the names in the IWAD can be considered "copyrighted" in the same sense that a program is copyrighted by using a unique sequence of otherwise common elements with "programmer chosen" names.

(I hope I didn't accidently say something backwards in so long a post<g>)

Old Post 09-21-01 00:11 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Jon
Freedoom Bloke


Posts: 1351
Registered: 09-00


Since we can't use likenesses to ID's intellectual property (e.g. their distinctive monsters) our work has to create its own distinctive style, rather than emulate doom's 100%. Because of this, why use UAC/doom in the title at all? we are a TC in the true sense of the definition, more so than anything that has gone before us, so lets be total about it.

Also there's a difference between being within the law, and comfortably within the law. Nobody can say we're 100% legitimate, we're on dodgy ground with lots of aspects of the project. Plus this is a controversial project, and you need more than legitimacy to survive when you have enemies as big as ID, their lawyers or other institutions.

(especially in america)


Incidentally, US Copyright law, do we need to abide by international copyright, because this isn't a project that has its home in any particular country?

Old Post 09-23-01 13:08 #
Jon is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01



Since we can't use likenesses to ID's intellectual property
Actually, that's another assumption that is not quite true. You can make your own IMP, etc and be 100% legit. Why?

Easy. The same reason you can do the textures. If you argue that you can't do the sprites, then you'll be arguing that you can't "emulate" the textures either. They are both EXACTLY the same - graphic images used in the game. From what I've seen so far, there are quite a few textures that one could argue are questionable - using the reasons you present (remember, I don't necessarily think so, but exposing the problem with that kind of "reason").

Of course, one would want to make the "emulated" sprites look for sure like -original- art.

Original art by a user is protected by the exact same copyright laws that protect companies.

Pease review "emulate" - it's a tricky word - I think you'll find that no matter what you "replace" it with, you will always be "emulating".

I think few question the use of the textures? Again why? So far all the arguments are not consistent. This implies that the basic underpinnings of how this works is not understood.

Also there's a difference between being within the law, and comfortably within the law.
That kind of statement has a good sound bite, but nothing to back it up. It's a "political" statement, not a logical one. To counter that, all I have to say is "you are comfortably within the law". I don't need anything more to back it up, just like the original statement didn't:) Make sense?

Incidentally, US Copyright law, do we need to abide by international copyright
ALL the countries have agreed to abide by the general rules I have described. They all get together and hammer this stuff out. A few countries refused to sign, but there's great pressure on them now to cooperate:)

Old Post 09-23-01 17:31 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Jon
Freedoom Bloke


Posts: 1351
Registered: 09-00



Actually, that's another assumption that is not quite true. You can make your own IMP, etc and be 100% legit.

As long as it isn't a roughly man-proportioned brown thing with spines, i.e., a doom imp...


From what I've seen so far, there are quite a few textures that one could argue are questionable - using the reasons you present (remember, I don't necessarily think so, but exposing the problem with that kind of "reason").

I agree, too many of the textures are virtual replicas. Right at the beginning of the project, my self and some others (aardappel for example) realised that because we couldn't create monsters and similar doom universe things that resembled the originals too closely, we would be making a different game, so there was no reason to try and stick to the originals too closely, apart from broad description and proportions ('gray wall'); but some people don't seem to be very imaginative.

I could also rant on about high-resolution textures here..


I think few question the use of the textures? Again why?
Because its easier for them to accept what we have then agree we need something new :)


That kind of statement has a good sound bite, but nothing to back it up. It's a "political" statement, not a logical one.


I don't believe the law is black and white, on or off: we are creating something that in a techincal sense could be considered a way of evading copyright law, even if it was only used by ports. Again, I'm no law expert, and I imagine if ID wanted to, they could get lawyers that could convince a court that we should be shut down for any number of reasons detailed in these threads.

Old Post 09-24-01 16:53 #
Jon is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01



As long as it isn't a roughly man-proportioned brown thing with spines, i.e., a doom imp...
One can make it "roughly man-proportioned brown thing with spines" so long as it is ORIGINAL. As the expense of repeating, I do have quite a bit of experience with copyright law. I've explained this in several different ways.

What part of my explanation do you think is wrong? I really disagree with "scare tactic" reasoning or just opinion based on lack of information.

Explain how an ORIGINAL drawing that looks as above can be a copyright violation? What part of the copyright laws prevent one from creating a simile of same?

The textures are ok, so long as they were made from scratch. I only brought it up as a clear contradictory point vis-a-vis the sprites. Like I said, I DO NOT think they are a problem since I assumed they were all original art. They are right?

I don't believe the law is black and white,
Another sound bite without anything to back it up. Water is wet and all days are not sunny. Does that keep one from going outside?

In a "technical" sense there are a few copyright issues, but they are NOT original graphics problems (read my other posts). Any graphic drawn from scratch is 100% safe. It's best to make it obviously different to minimize the problem. A "creature" can look the same, yet be graphically quite different.


techincal sense could be considered a way of evading copyright law
That's a strange way of putting it. Either it's a copyright violation or it's not. "Evading" implies somebody taking/making a copy and tinkering with it to make it look like an original. Specifically, either you COPY something or it's an original work. The easiest way to PROVE an original work is to document how one created it.

As I've alluded to already, I've had dealings with id on this very subject. I explained and documented how I did my work on new replacement graphics. End of story.

I imagine if ID wanted to, they could get lawyers that could convince a court that we should be shut down for any number of reasons detailed in these threads.
So? More scare tactics.

Continuing with that thought, NO MATTER WHAT YOU DID, that could happen. Fruitless and futile type of argument. Tomorrow the world could end.

But let's get real. Do you know how much it would COST for id to actually go to court? LOL. Thinking that they would actually bother to do this is an imagination beyond realility. As I wrote, the worst is they would tell you they didn't want it done. Think business, not emotions.

Just write them and stop this nonsense kind of argument based on fear.

Old Post 09-24-01 17:40 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
cph
Junior Member


Posts: 208
Registered: 05-00



Either it's a copyright violation or it's not. "Evading" implies somebody taking/making a copy and tinkering with it to make it look like an original. Specifically, either you COPY something or it's an original work. The easiest way to PROVE an original work is to document how one created it.


Another good reason to keep hires/hicolour copies of graphics. I'm keeping the xcf (gimp) files of all my contributions, complete with layers and alpha, as well as the source code used to make the playpal and colormap.

It may clutter the tree too much to include all these in the deutex tree, but perhaps we should consider having a sources tree and encourage people to upload this kind of thing.

Old Post 09-25-01 14:05 #
cph is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Jon
Freedoom Bloke


Posts: 1351
Registered: 09-00


Of course if you made an imp that was close enough to the original it would be construed as a breach of intellectual property. I dont care about your painting metaphor, we aren't talking about a vase with roses in it, we're talking about something that, completely beyond our control, will move around and do EXACTLY the same things as IDs imp. For it to look the same and/or sound the same too, that sounds like IP breach to me, and any jury.

Old Post 09-25-01 18:56 #
Jon is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
tom
Green Marine


Posts: 34
Registered: 05-00


heh
yeah deep why are you even here anyway
nobody likes you or has any interest in anything you have to say. it's their project and if they dont want to use the names doom/uac, for whatever reason, it's up to them.

Old Post 09-25-01 19:24 #
tom is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01


Is flaming the only thing tommie can contribute? Must be a strange existence.

Nobody likes .. fill in the blank.. tom. What a cheesy, childish and unoriginal thing to say. LOL. Keep it up, it will just reinforce the lack of self-control you display in some petty attempt to denigrade. Repeating that kind of stuff over and over is absolutely wasted on me. It might affect you, but to me it's a sign of desperation:) (Did Jon call you to "help" - tsk tsk .. not nice).

Next back to actual facts:

Old Post 09-25-01 21:04 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01


And here we are back to actual facts:

It was obvious from the git-go that everyone "want"ed to use the name FREEDOOM. Then people posted imaginary reasons without any understanding of the actual way this stuff works. Scare tactics and lack of understanding hardly make for a good "reason". Repeating same does not make it any more credible. Nor does stating opinion without any rational explanation.

These matters can be addressed outside of pure opinion - by using references and by looking at precedence. Most people don't realize that what has transpired in the past heavily influences the legal future. What is termed "common" law.

"The system of laws originated and developed in England and based on court decisions, on the doctrines implicit in those decisions, and on customs and usages rather than on codified written laws." (the U.S. inherited that tradition).

If anyone wants to factually question copyright and trademarks as I've explained do it. Please list your sources:)

On "intellectual property":

"A product of the intellect that has commercial value, including copyrighted property such as literary or artistic works, and ideational property, such as patents, appellations of origin, business methods, and industrial processes."

And yes, a VASE and the IMP are EXACTLY the same copyright issue - it has nothing to do with "movement". That's nothing new either, look at cartoons. Are there cartoon characters that are similar? Micky Mouse and Mighty Mouse? My god, they are both "meeses".

"Intellectual property" is a wishy washy term that is not so simple. Primarily it revolves around copyrights and trademarks in the context of what I've been discussing.

Just stating that "you don't care" is not a rebuttal. What background do you have? None. I've been there and done that.

Besides, using the argument you try to present, then the textures are in big trouble. Hey they are "intellectual property" just as much as the sprites (see definition) - especially mimicked action ones.

However, as I said, avoid a direct similarity - that would be asking for it and keep records of the original creation. That's the professional approach.

There are lots of potential variations that would stay very clear from the original "imp". For example, a gorilla with spikes! Use your imagination.

To argue that any game using "similar" enemies would violate some other games "intellectual blah" is just b.s. Lots of games have shared evolutionary themes of a similar nature. Hell, DUKE3D intruded quite heavily on this supposed "intellectual" argument. Incredible as it may sound, games SHARE many basic themes. If one company could have laid claim to a beasty "concept" via wishy-washy "intellectual" grounds, it would now be a sad gaming universe. Good thing that it takes more than that!

It's easy to post theoreticals, it's a damn sight harder to back it up with supporting facts.

Let keep flaming out of what can be a productive result - which is keeping the FREEDOOM name and making enemies that are more flexible than originally envisioned. (write id, that would answer it in short time).

Old Post 09-25-01 21:07 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Jon
Freedoom Bloke


Posts: 1351
Registered: 09-00


Just quickly:


"Intellectual property" is a wishy washy term that is not so simple. Primarily it revolves around copyrights and trademarks in the context of what I've been discussing.

wishy washy, as in not just black and white?



Besides, using the argument you try to present, then the textures are in big trouble. Hey they are "intellectual property" just as much as the sprites (see definition) - especially mimicked action ones.

A brown spiny, roughly human shaped monster which croaks and throws fireballs is rather unique, which is why ID have control over it, more so than 'brown brick wall' which is so general IP can't be applied to it.

Old Post 09-25-01 23:15 #
Jon is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
tom
Green Marine


Posts: 34
Registered: 05-00


heh
so deep how does it feel to be about as unpopular as king reol

Old Post 09-26-01 03:34 #
tom is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Naked Snake
HAHA I AM A FAG AND I CAN'T CHANGE THIS TITLE ANYMORE


Posts: 11313
Registered: 05-01



We should DEFINITELY avoid anything related to the UAC: we dont even use UAC on the textures.


I think if you made UAC stand for something else, and changed the UAC logo, it would become legit but best to be safe than sued huh?

Old Post 09-26-01 03:49 #
Naked Snake is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
cph
Junior Member


Posts: 208
Registered: 05-00


FWIW I'm very glad deepteam is posting here; let's face it, for most of the rest of us, our legal experience could be summed up as reading slashdot for a couple of years, which is hardly a definitive source. At least he has actually tackled these issues before IRL.

Of course being non-profit and not wanting to hire lawyers we may need to take a safer line than the law strictly requires. But that doesn't mean we don't need to have some idea of where the line is, and I for one have found the discussions informative.

Old Post 09-26-01 10:52 #
cph is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Jon
Freedoom Bloke


Posts: 1351
Registered: 09-00


Agreed cph, its better to be informed than in the dark: my opinion is still that if you live on the cutting edge, you're going to get cut.

(yes thats a metaphor, no its not scare tactics :P)

Old Post 09-26-01 11:17 #
Jon is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
tom
Green Marine


Posts: 34
Registered: 05-00


fine, as long as you dont take what he says as gospel - dont forget that he's outright admitted to lying just to get a rise out of people in the past

Old Post 09-26-01 14:45 #
tom is offline Profile || Blog || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01



fine, as long as you dont take what he says as gospel - dont forget that he's outright admitted to lying just to get a rise out of people in the past
God tom the black kettle.

I've never said any such thing EVER.

What I have said (and that is really with nasty posters who like to flame, who could that be?) that I enjoy toying with them. Toying is not the same as lying. Look it up.

How about that. Making stuff up is .. err .. lying. Not a very nice positive contribution to make.

Please stop the b.s. If you have anything factual to debate, do it.

Old Post 09-26-01 16:03 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
deep
as in Deepsea


Posts: 1066
Registered: 09-01


Skating in loose terms is handy, but they don't contribute to this thread. They only want to raise fear and doubt where there should none. Me senses you are just on a "mission" and intent on just ignoring the facts?

I gave the definition of "intellectual property" and noted that in general that's wishy-washy in that it is not a SPECIFIC term. I then explained that the parts of this seemingly cool sounding informed word that are relevant are -copyrights and trademarks-. But not the other stuff.

Please don't try to redefine the meaning of words just to try to flame. Wishy-washy does NOT mean not black and white. It means:

"Lacking in strength of character or purpose; ineffective".

That's the way your arguments have all been so far - lacking and ineffective.

A brown spiny, roughly human shaped monster which croaks and throws fireballs is rather unique, which is why ID have control over it, more so than 'brown brick wall
snip

Remember, I said make the art ORIGINAL. So we have an ORIGINAL enemy, with ORIGINAL sound, with ORIGINAL weapons. Guess what - it's UNIQUE. Therefore it doesn't violate any copyright. No different than an "action" texture. Q.E.D.

As far as "actions". How come in the cartoon world there are various duplicates? Did you not understand the similarity of the various "meeses" in cartoons? Various cats too. Why?

Because they were artfully DIFFERENT. Yet they are the same in a general sense. Just like -new enemies- will be different to replace the originals.

I find it rather astounding that you have NO experience in this and somehow think that just stating an "opinion" without corroborating evidence is enough. That's not the way it's done in, for example, a court of law (joke).

Please give a REAL WORLD case law example that backs up your opinion. IOW, a case where someone made an ORIGINAL (not a copy) piece of art (in a game) and they got sued and lost.

Lots of games have "machine/gatling" guns. Or grenades or railguns or ... How come they can do that? They act the same, represent the same "action". The reason is that they are ORIGINAL art. No company can prevent "cloning". What is DUKE3D? (as I previously pointed out).

Even now there are various WWII games with almost exactly the same set of appearance 3D models. They were all made from scratch though - so no problem.

One can argue the same for "similar" acting enemies (using your extreme notion that "actions" count for something) and find that is also done all the time.

Cool down and contribute POSITIVE analysis to this thread.

I'd like to see the name FREEDOOM used and I'd like to see enemies that are a bit more suited to the game (eventually anyway). If everyone is scared off by negative comments this will not happen.

Old Post 09-26-01 16:32 #
deep is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
fraggle
Filled with the code of Doom


Posts: 7468
Registered: 07-00



FWIW I'm very glad deepteam is posting here; let's face it, for most of the rest of us, our legal experience could be summed up as reading slashdot for a couple of years, which is hardly a definitive source. At least he has actually tackled these issues before IRL.

Of course being non-profit and not wanting to hire lawyers we may need to take a safer line than the law strictly requires. But that doesn't mean we don't need to have some idea of where the line is, and I for one have found the discussions informative.

I have to agree. I'm still not convinced of what deep says (while theres any doubt I'd like to play it safe) but I still appreciate his input. He's doing this to try to help, not to stir up argument so can we keep the flames off the forum?

Old Post 09-26-01 22:40 #
fraggle is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:13. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (2): [1] 2 »  
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Special Interest > Freedoom > Project name list

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.