UPDATE: Make sure you read the official statement from Stardock regarding newer events.
Re: November's blog post by Paul and Fred claiming Stardock's objection to their new game being promoted as a "true sequel" constitutes Stardock preventing them from doing a new game.
We are disappointed that Paul and Fred, two people we have a great deal of respect and admiration for, have chosen to imply that we are somehow preventing them from working on their new game.
Stardock has been nothing but supportive of their new project and wish them the best. I personally made the post here on StarControl.com in support of it.
With regards to their contentions:
First, as many people know, the classic Star Control games have been available for sale long before Stardock acquired the rights from Atari four years ago. For the entirety of the time we have held the rights, they have been getting paid for those sales. If they had an objection to the games being sold this is something that could and should have been addressed before we were ever involved.
Second, we have stated, repeatedly and consistently for over four years that we are not using any of the aliens from the classic series. As we have stated, our position is that, to the best of our knowledge, the classic alien IP is owned by them.
We have also discussed, at length, why it wasn't commercially viable for us to attempt to continue or retell the Ur-Quan story. 25 years is just too long of a gap. This is one of the reasons why we have been so excited about Paul and Fred's project. Their game frees us to introduce new characters and a new story into the new Star Control while allowing fans of the classic series a way to continue the classic story. This strikes us as a win-win situation.
Lastly, when we acquired Star Control from Atari in 2013, many assets were transferred to us including the various publishing agreements to the Star Control franchise. The short version is that the classic IP is messy. We understand that this makes them "really really angry" but we weren't a party to that agreement. All we can do is try to put something together that releases them from the restrictions placed on their IP that they agreed to and transfer any and all rights and responsibilities to them. We want them to make Ghosts but we don't want any liability or association with it.
Given the disturbing and unanticipated post by Paul and Fred, we are persuaded more than ever that a clear and irrefutable document that makes it clear that we are not associated or involved with their new game is needed.
We have nothing but respect and admiration for Paul and Fred and wish them well in their new project.
Update 12/4/2017:
Paul and Fred continue to make unsubstantiated claims regarding the DOS-based Star Control games. If they have any documentation to provide evidence to their assertions, we have yet to see them.
Stardock, by contrast, possesses a perpetual, exclusive, worldwide licensing and sales agreement that was explicitly transferred to us by Atari who in turn acquired it from Accolade that has Paul Reiche's signature along with a signed distribution agreement between Atari and GOG for the DOS Accolade Star Control games.
The tone of their blog posts is similar to the kind of correspondence they had with us since the announcement of their Ur-Quan Masters successor, vague, full of demands and without any documentation.
With all due respect to Paul and Fred, they really should talk to competent legal counsel instead of making blog posts.
Update 12/5/2017:
Dealing with the sales and distribution of 20+ year old DOS games is an unusual way to spend a Tuesday afternoon. Nevertheless...
Atari had transferred to Stardock a signed agreement between Atari's President and GOG that we assumed was the agreement. Paul and Fred claimed they were the ones who had set up the agreement and upon verification with GOG, we instructed them to terminate this agreement which they have which we appreciate.
The games are now correctly transferred to Stardock and we will continue to ensue that Fred and Paul receive royalty payments for the games per the publishing agreement. We apologize if anyone was inconvenienced.
Old IP can be messy to deal with. The best way to deal with that is to have the parties talk to each other (as opposed to making public Internet posts) and work something out. We remain committed to dealing with this situation with as much restraint and gentleness as possible.
Update 2/27/2018
Added link to https://www.starcontrol.com/article/487690/qa-regarding-star-control-and-paul-and-fred to address Paul and Fred's latest complaints.
At this stage, the parties are seeking to resolve their disagreements in court. Stardock wishes this could have been resolved otherwise.
For the record, if Paul and Fred had simply announced their game as a sequel to Ur-Quan Masters and requested Stardock to remove the DOS games from distribution, Stardock would have complied out of respect, even if we would have been unhappy that they chose now, after 25 years, to jump back in the middle of Stardock's efforts to bring Star Control back.
However, by promoting their new game as a "direct-sequel" to Star Control (and in other places as the "true" sequel) while using the Star Control box art (which is owned by Stardock) a great deal of consumer confusion has been created requiring Stardock to protect its IP rights.
Other links:
You are correct.
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.
If a new space game showed up with the Drengin Empire, Arceans, Yor and Torians Could people be misled into thinking that game is related to Galactic Civilizations? If so, the GalCiv trademark holder could choose to act to stop it.
What prevents Stardock from having the Vasari from Sins of a Solar Empire? The answer is that Ironclad has the trademark to Sins of a Solar Empire. We’d need their permission. It’s not copyright that prevents this, it’s trademark.
If the Vasari showed up in GalCiv would players be led to believe that the Sins and GalCiv are connected? If so, that’s consumer confusion. Ironclad would have a solid trademark infringement case.
You may have heard that the Mickey Mouse copyright will be expiring soon. What can Disney do? You may have noticed that Disney films now start with the Steamboat Willey animation. Why? Because they want to strongly associate that classic Mickey Mouse with Disney. Trademarks can last forever if they continue to be used in commerce. Copyrights, by contrast, eventually expire.
Thanks for the clarification.
Up until now i thought they could use those classic races in their game, since they apparently hold copyrights to that stuff... and that would be enough, as long as their game is called differently.
I fail to see any benefits to them keeping those copyrights back then - if they cant use them within their own game without a trademark. I would think it was for opportunity like this then, when a holder of SC trademark wants to create a new SC game and use their copyrighted stuff within - so needs to buy license from them. But then again, thats not really happening, instead they announced their own game - it is quite bizzare.
Hmm. But doesn't that mean that the UQM project was already a violation of the SC mark despite not actually using the name?
What would the copyright to Galactic Civilizations for OS/2 do for us? I didn't even bother copyrighting it. The art, source code, etc. are worthless today.
The copyright was granted automatically by United States Copyright Law the second it was put into a tangible form. Explicit registration just allows added legal precedence and the ability to claim more damages upon.
https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html
That would be the territory of copyright. Copyright covers the representations/instantiations of an idea. So protection against someone trying to duplicate the Drengin Empire or Arceans in a very similar or derivative way would be protected by copyright laws. The Galactic Civilizations trademark DOES NOT protect the actual contents of a product, just the branding/labeling of a product's source.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cIBcl7dD4w#action=share
"Galactic Civilizations" trademark keeps people from creating another computer entertainment software product called "Galactic Civilizations". Unless Stardock has trademarks for Drengin Empire or Arceans, then these elements of lore and story would fall under copyright. (I've checked the USPTO system and no trademarks exist of the Drengin Empire or Arceans.)
So, based on arguments made in relation use of the Star Control 1 and 2 aliens names... So long as they are different enough to avoid a similarity check by under copyright law or are under parody/fair use under copyright law... Other games can have Drengin Empire or Arceans.
People in this debate have demonstrated they have no idea what a trademark is. They think it's about a name. They're to protect consumers from confusion. If another game came out and claimed to have the Drengin Empire and we could show that gamers might be confused into believing that game was related to Galactic Civilizations that would be trademark infringement.
It IS about a name, that is used as a label or mark upon the goods or services. They do protect customers by using that name as a identification of the product's origin. Trademarks are about namesakes and identities around a mark, that's often a name. If another game came out and claimed to have the Drengin Empire in it... The "Galactic Civilizations" Trademark would provide hardly any protection, if any, so long as the game didn't market, brand, label, or title itself as a "Galactic Civilizations" game. Copyright would come into play at this point. In theory, a turn-based empire building computer game could have the Drengin Empire in it, in these situations:
Parody. Protections are in place for both Trademark and Copyright Law.
Drengin Empire in the game is too dissimilar to the automatically and explicitly copyrighted material of Galactic Civilizations series and the game is not titled "Galactic Civilizations" in any way, shape, or form that would confuse the origin of the product. Since copyright does not protect a name by itself, (that would be closer to trademark territory IF the name is used as a mark of origin upon a good in trade)... Games can have Drengin Empires or Arceans in name alone.
Copyrights are VERY important in software. Companies and individuals have been decimated in court cases due to copyright infringements. And copyright is primarily the way that developers and publishers prevent unauthorized distribution of of their material, since distribution rights is one of the rights explicitly protected by copyright. Developers and Publishers don't take pirates to court for trademark violations, they take them to court for copyright violations and use the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) to get unauthorized distribution taken down.
Trademarks are important to indicate who is making the game and the market identification of the product.
Patents are weird things in software. Very weird and strange at times.
So, if Stardock wants to protect the names of the races in Galactic Civilizaitons, then... They probably need to be individually federally registered trademarks, and those trademarks would probably be granted fully due to active use in a current product series.
(not a lawyer) I don't know. It's not being used in commerce and would fall in the same category as fan films and such. There's a cottage industry of Star Trek fan films for instance. There isn't really confusion because UQM is most definitely associated with Star Control. That's my uneducated opinion on the matter.
Now, if UQM wanted to start engaging in commerce (i.e. making money) then we'd care (or Atari before us).
No one is suggesting differently. I said Drengin Empire, Arceans. I said nothing about how they were expressed. If someone made an alien race that looked substantially similar to the Arceans, we might have a copyright claim. But someone including the Drengin Empire, Arceans, etc. in their game would fall under trademark. Words fall under trademark.
If I can show likely confusion that someone will believe that the two products are related, I have a trademark claim.
You are incorrect. Trademarking the Drengin Empire would not protect the lore or story. Trademarking the Drengin Empire would perfect the protection of them in commerce (i.e. strengthen the claim in the event of litigation).
Lore is also very hard to get a copyright on because it has to be pretty substantial. My lore and backstory for the Drengin Empire would probably not be protected under copyright beyond the overall work itself (i.e. if I have a 3 page article on the history of the Drengin Empire, that specific work would be protected but I doubt it would stop someone from creating their own lore that is "substantially similar" to my lore because there's not enough there.
When I speak of putting the Drengin Empire into a game, I mean literally, the phrase, Drengin Empire.
That's incorrect. The test for trademark confusion is confusion. Trademarking the individual races would help perfect this protection but it's a requirement.
But don't take my word for it. Announce a new game with the Drengin Empire, Arcean Empire and Yor in them and see what happens.
I don't need to register a copyright to use a DMCA. Copyrights exist at the moment of creation. Registering your copyright allows you to gain statutory damages. As I mentioned, I didn't even bother to register copyrights on the GalCiv games.
As someone who has been developing commercial software for decades (feel free to visit www.stardock.com for part of my portfolio) I'm pretty familiar with the value of copyright, trademarks and patents as my companies have all three types of protection in various circumstances.
Unless someone is pirating my software copyright has very limited benefit. Trademarks are what protect us from unfair competition. You know, like someone trying to claim their competing game is a sequel or something.
That can't happen; UQM's artistic content is licensed under CC-BY-NC-SA.
Don't trademarks have to be defended or risk being lost though? Whenever a fan project is shut down by Megacorp X, there's always a couple of people going "Well they had to shut it down, because otherwise they'd lose the trademark".
I'm not making assertions either way, just noting the discrepancy.
That can't happen; UQM's artistic assets are licensed under CC-BY-NC-SA.
Don't trademarks have to be defended or risk being lost though? Whenever a fan project is shut down by Megacorp X, there's always a couple of people going "Well they had to shut it down, because otherwise they'd lose the trademark".I'm not making assertions either way, just noting the discrepancy.
Which is sorta kinda the whole crux of Stardock's actions.... they had to protect their TM even if doing so seems like dirty pool...
Right...that was my point. The UQM project can't engage in commerce, because (aside from any trademark issues) its license terms prohibit it.
I'll add that if anyone has a legal citation for whether non-commercial use triggers an obligation to defend a trademark, it would be great to read it, rather than speculate on the question.
I don't think I agree there. The UQM project rigorously scrubbed any mention of "Star Control" from the project specifically to avoid any potential accusation that it might be creating confusion by saying that it was associated with that mark, and it has never had any contact or association with Accolade or its successors. If we wanted to associate ourselves with "Star Control" (and thought Accolade would permit it), we wouldn't have bothered.
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?
Tell that to the fan productions I've seen shut down.
Yet Atari could have sent a cease and desist letter to UQM or sue them. As many other developers do like with fan projects of Pokemon, Chrono Trigger among others.
It's a gray area, there are no laws with specifically protect UQM, if it was a parody then yes but it isn't. So in case they go to court we don't know for sure who would win.
Words as in names.
Yet Atari could still send a cease and desist letter to UQM or sue them.
Sure, they could have...but they didn't, which (it seems to me) means that they either:
It's a game company.. some embrace fan projects, others don't.
It's not even based on company but who is in charge and who is in charge may change with time.
Being a weak claim is not an assumption we can make because this wasn't tested enough for us to know, gray area. Why? Because fans aren't going to risk themselves by going to court, they don't have the resources to begin with.
I'm pretty sure Paul and Fred have said, many many times that if you want to play Star Control II now you can just go play UQM.
In fact, I am pretty sure countless examples can be found of people suggesting people to play UQM rather than Star Control II because it's the "Best version".
I don't know who the "we" you refer to above. UQM would fall under fan works I would imagine and no sane company would target their own fan communities.
Nintendo, Sony, EA, and CBS have all made a pretty big hobby out of it. >.> <.< But I guess that's where the "sane" company comes in....
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, individual words or short phrases.
I can trademark the word Drengin or the word Drengin Empire. I cannot copyright them.
I am confused for sure now One cant use Drengin Empire in their game cause of the GalCiv trademark, or cause there is separate trademark specifically for Drengin Empire too?If the former is true, does this mean that even if P&F did not call their game direct sequel to StarControl, which, if i understood that correctly, started all the issues, but called it sequel to UrQuan Masters (or simply did not call it anything), would they be free to use Ur-Quans and Spathi and other StarControl races in their game? Even without owning SC trademark? Now i suppose not, because it would be the same thing as using Drengin Empire without GalCiv TM - but as i said, now i am confused.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
