Rip-off tossers

[Alex W.]

This isn't some esoteric title that has been cooked up and could only have reasonably been copied from someone else's work. It's a fucking trainspotting game. As anyone in any part of the industry how it would work, and they'd probably describe a game exactly like the one you made- creating a very real case for creative convergeance, something which, in spite of your ear-plugging and la-la-laing, is a very real occurance.

There was a thread on it back on Edge when I was horrified to discover that just about every good idea I'd had in the last year had materialised in someone else's work.

Therefore, not only is this a massive waste of everyone's time, there would also be a very good case for the defense if you were to take them to court, and an unbelievably strong case for the prosecution if you were to pirate their code.

[Guybrush]

Would it be deserved income if they credited Sensible for the game mechanics?

[Alex W.]

If it were proven that they nicked the idea? No, they'd still need some sort of permission.

[Guybrush]

I meant in terms of Rev Campbell's personal ideology over the matter.

[Alex W.]

Who knows?

[whohe]

You CAN'T sue for copying an idea because that isn't a breach of anything (except possibly a Patent).

So it would seem:

"According to court documents, Sega is alleging that Simpsons Road Rage was designed to "deliberately copy and imitate", citing several reviews. Sega, it seems, holds a patent on the style of gameplay in Crazy Taxi"

And in response to RSC's comments...

So, it would seem that unless Codemasters hold a patent for the style of gameplay for trainspotting games (sounds unlikely, but I guess anything's possible), the two scenarios are not remotely related.

Starting this thread, moaning about it on your website - that's an over-reaction. Particularly (unless you want to correct me otherwise), considering the fact that none of this appears to be any of your business whatsoever.

Regarding you predictable "RLLMUK suspects" comment, I think that has been answered pretty well by other people already, so no need for further comment.

And the victims here?

Well, two that I can see.

Firstly, Demon Star, who are now potentially suffering from your copyright infringement by putting their code up for free.

Secondly, you. For wasting so much time and effort on something so trivial.

The mere suggestion that one of the options you were considering was to inform Codemasters about this situation is laughable. Score one for the "cunts in suits" eh? Except of course, if their lawyers did become aware of the situation, they'd probably have a quick look in their patent drawer, realise they didn't hold a patent for Trainspotting games, and quickly move onto their next assignment.

Sure, if Demon Star did get a threatening legal letter (or, potentially, even a threatening letter mentioning the possibility of legal action), they'd probably cave in on the spot. There is of course the slight chance that they are aware of the law surrounding this issue, and send a letter straight back telling CM's lawyers to go take a flying jump.

What would make the story very interesting of course, is if Demon Star's lawyers decided to go after you for what is a clear case of copyright infringement. Not much to argue about in court on that one.

Still, seeing as it's highly probable that both CM and DS are aware of the situation now, let's just hope they realise what a complete non-event this matter is, and ignore it completely.

Edit -

Oh, just a quickie. I see from your website that you have the original Sensible Trainspotting game available to download. Is this such a wise move considering a couple of points you made in your first post in this thread? -

"sold all Sensible game rights to Codemasters some time ago, he couldn't directly do anything about it himself and would have to leave it to the Codies."

"Codemasters... are notoriously intolerant about infringement of their IP in any circumstances at all"

[whohe]

Whohe, Many of the arcade games cited were made in tiny numbers, or sold in China or countries where lawsuits would not have made a difference.

All of the examples quoted were Acornsoft games made for the BBC micro, selling in pretty significant numbers in the UK.

[Boyatsea]

It's just turned into a Campbell-hater thread, and he's never going to win those arguements, however right he might be.

Seeing as the record now seems to demand it, I should clarify that I'm not a "Campbell-hater" either, even though I probably should be (him largely being the reason I pursued a career in games journalism, only to find it a fetid, rotting shadow of the world exhibited by the likes of AP.)

IP breaches are matters of civil law. Civil law exists to settle disputes between parties that are unable to come to an agreement between themselves, the inference being that, as a member of society, you have at least some obligation to make a genuine attempt at an independent resolution. Not waiting a reasonable amount of time for a response (and Demon Star's cited 24hrs is absolutely beside the point) before making a retaliatory IP breach in no way fulfills this obligation and Stu has done nothing but weaken his own position by taking this approach. What saddens me most is that the hot-headed attitude he's adopted totally ignores and negates the opportunity for constructive dialogue that notable figures like himself have with small, independent outfits.

It's for these reasons only that I believe this fandango to have been a risible, premature waste; it's hardly going to stop me picking up Zone to check out his regular slot.

Since when did two guys disagreeing and swearing at each other automatically indicate hatred, anyway? That circular never reached my desk.

"Fuck off."

I don't hate you, but it's hardly an act of kindness, is it? Not even in the commons do they resort to swearing at each other when disagreeing which each other.

"Have a wank. That'll sort your problems."

Now, I'm guessing you're kinda getting the impression that maybe I'm not too fond of you. (Either that or I'm coming onto you.)

There is no circular, though you may have a desk. It's simply not nice, and it seems to happen everytime Campbell touches the keyboard. I don't even know the bloke, but I'm buggered if I know why he puts up with this place.

It's not even about the issue of to sue or not to sue anymore; it's the fact that he doesn't seem to be able to open up a question to people without it getting slammed back in his face, and I haven't even been posting here for that long.

I have a feeling that if the people who disagreed with Campbell so strongly had one of their (either partial or whole) ideas stolen, they'd be feeling the same as he does now.

[Sledge]

"Fuck off."

I don't hate you, but it's hardly an act of kindness, is it? Not even in the commons do they resort to swearing at each other when disagreeing which each other.

Which might explain why you are here and not watching the Commons on the telly... we're more colourful and interesting. Man, if you were cynical enough you might even suspect we only did it for notoriety. Imagine if we were perfectly civil in private, eh?

Anyway, the worst thing I've done by far during this thread is compare Stu to a normal, flawed human being... which serves him right for acting like one by reacting in such a petty, impatient manner. It's unbecoming.

There is no circular, though you may have a desk. It's simply not nice, and it seems to happen everytime Campbell touches the keyboard. I don't even know the bloke, but I'm buggered if I know why he puts up with this place.

It's not even about the issue of to sue or not to sue anymore; it's the fact that he doesn't seem to be able to open up a question to people without it getting slammed back in his face, and I haven't even been posting here for that long.

It's tradition, which you'll be blissfully unaware of being new and unacclimatised. The man is notoriously unsympathetic to anyone or anything that doesn't measure up (crappy ports of Dragon's Lair and shit mini-game compilations aside), so nobody is going to feel inclined to hold back. Except me, of course -- you should see me when I really get going with actual idiots.

I have a feeling that if the people who disagreed with Campbell so strongly had one of their (either partial or whole) ideas stolen, they'd be feeling the same as he does now.

That's an interesting point. There's no question that IP should be defended where it's right and proper... but should that defence involve a public, retaliatory breach against an inexperienced novice, with scarcely a pause, when one enjoys a sufficiently high status for other more conciliatory avenues to first be explored? I don't think so, and I don't believe we should lower our standards to match those who offend us.

"Have a wank. That'll sort your problems."

Now, I'm guessing you're kinda getting the impression that maybe I'm not too fond of you. (Either that or I'm coming onto you.)

That "wank" remark wasn't made by me, although I certainly wish solving problems were that simple.

[Dimahoo]

It's tradition, which you'll be blissfully unaware of being new and unacclimatised. The man is notoriously unsympathetic to anyone or anything that doesn't measure up (crappy ports of Dragon's Lair and shit mini-game compilations aside), so nobody is going to feel inclined to hold back. Except me, of course -- you should see me when I really get going with actual idiots.

Unsympathetic is a little unfair.

People tend to bite a little to hard just for the sake of biting and will delibrately argue against what he's fighting for.

Completely off topic Sledge, but two of the main stories this week are student loans and the massive increases in poll tax. Lets not forget that morgage rates are increasing too. Petrol is also on the rise.

All minor points alone but together they are going to take a substational sum off many members earnings.

As you are no doubt aware Stu tried to champion the campaign for cheaper games and failed because of the critisism it brought from industry minds and other forum members.

If someone is that driven to trying to save you money (especially in todays climate of massive morgage repayments) and improve your enjoyment, shouldn't they be supported instead abused?

Its not about being unsympathetic to people, its about a passion of one person, so if this is attacked, you can hardly blame them.

Sadly of course, its this passion that tends to drive people too away, as i'm sure many passionate gamers on this board know all to well.

[Monkichi 2.0]

Sorry to go slightly OT but what were the arguments against the Fari Play Campaign? I can't think of any sane ones of the top of my head.

[Alex W.]

There weren't any to the pricing one, apart from the difficulty in shifting the industry to start lowering prices, and the gambling machines one was more or less bullet-proof, apart from the detail of the validity of the percentages (which could be determined only if the machines paid out according to a mathematical algorhythm, as it happens, going some way to proving Rev's point).

[DarhkFox]

No offence, i have not played the game.

But it doesnt look very good to me (as in the graphics). Do you really think people are gonna pay £16 for this?!?

I really wouldnt worry. Its not like he is a huge company, cashing in on something that your trying to sell to.

[Sledge]

Its not about being unsympathetic to people, its about a passion of one person, so if this is attacked, you can hardly blame them.

We are in agreement. Sympathy for a cause must, quite naturally, counteract one's ability to sympathise with its opposition... quite right to expect the most passionate campaigners to be the most offensive, then.

As you are no doubt aware Stu tried to champion the campaign for cheaper games and failed because of the critisism it brought from industry minds and other forum members.

If someone is that driven to trying to save you money (especially in todays climate of massive morgage repayments) and improve your enjoyment, shouldn't they be supported instead abused?

Define "support." To me, pointing out that Demon Star has a possible case for a convergence defense and giving my honest opinion on a situation when asked is providing support. Just agreeing with everything someone does because they happen to have done a lot of sterling work previously would be really dumb... but hey, I'm all for ending the IP breach in question (again, if that's what it is), I'm just not cool about the methods this time. Totally not my style.

As for abuse? Well, wouldn't you know it, I'm a passionate campaigner too. He can handle it (and does, in fact, get to fine-tune his position by having it scrutinised so thoroughly... we should charge).

gambling machines one was more or less bullet-proof, apart from the detail of the validity of the percentages

To add some detail, one argument the operators concocted (preempted, of course, by my good all-seeing self) centered around the fact that players don't know whether they're due a win or not, so technically it's still a gamble even though the result is predetermined. The position that things have to be this way in order to guarantee a certain level of profit/payouts certainly has some merit, but it's equally clear that the nature of the gamble is misrepresented to players and therefore of questionable legality.

[Alex W.]

Interesting interpretation.

[Dimahoo]

Define "support." To me, pointing out that Demon Star has a possible case for a convergence defense and giving my honest opinion on a situation when asked is providing support.

I delbrately went off topic as i think the Demon Star thing is small game too.

I don't disagree with your support stance at all but thought it was fair the case went to poll.

Given the amount of games (as in different genres) Demon Star actually sell, i'm not suprised they're not that bothered.

Define "support." To me, pointing out that Demon Star has a possible case for a convergence defense and giving my honest opinion on a situation when asked is providing support. Just agreeing with everything someone does because they happen to have done a lot of sterling work previously would be really dumb... but hey, I'm all for ending the IP breach in question (again, if that's what it is), I'm just not cool about the methods this time. Totally not my style.

I think they could have at least replied to the emails.

But otherwise, see above.

As for abuse? Well, wouldn't you know it, I'm a passionate campaigner too. He can handle it (and does, in fact, get to fine-tune his position by having it scrutinised so thoroughly... we should charge).

Of course, but the total disrespect (and his replies) split the forum somewhat. I don't dispute the attitude proberly played a part too but the nature of a forum is that true feelings/passions towards a cause are never portrayed to well.

If we were in a hall, i'd guess the support would be better.

Nobody wanted to do or couldn't do anything about it for whatever reasons.

As this was the case then the frustrations are vented on the relevent forum and so he was further ridiculed.

As you say, he can handle it, and the result at present is that gamers are still paying over the odds.

I will hazard a guess that piracy will further increase, partly as a result of the recent goverment news and partly because games are still to expensive.

[whohe]

but it's equally clear that the nature of the gamble is misrepresented to players and therefore of questionable legality.

Were it not for the "Get out of jail free" notice on every single fruit machine in the country of course.

(old news, I know).

[SaintM]

I hope to god that the SEGA lawsuit against Acclaim (or whoever made the Simpons game in question) fails. It would set a precedent for all sorts of frivilous lawsuits upto and including: Acclaim vs Neversoft for Dave Mirra vs Matt Hoffman, Neversoft vs Disney for Tony Hawks vs Disney Skateboarding, SC vs CrappyIndieDeveloper for Train Spotting Sim etc etc...

SC, you are so right a lot of the time, but sometimes you really just miss the whole point and go off on some misplaced crusade making you look like a bit of a joke all in all.

Ah well, 75% right aint bad overall.

[Alex W.]

I'm still horrified that he didn't call his follow-up "redistribution" topic "Rip Tossers Off". That would've been inspired.

[Sledge]

I think they could have at least replied to the emails.

This is true, I've never once said Demon Star should not account for itself.

Of course, but the total disrespect (and his replies) split the forum somewhat.

Stuart set the tone for his threads long ago by establishing a habit of insulting people left, right and center... and what a boring place it would be were this not the case. My only suggestion to you is that you don't take the vitriol seriously (I know I don't) and concentrate on the underlying debate, which will usually be quite interesting beneath the cries of "fuck" and "twatty-bollocks." Me, I like to get into the rude, lewd and crude spirit of things... it's my repressed childhood you see.

Were it not for the "Get out of jail free" notice on every single fruit machine in the country of course.

From my shaky memory, at least one of the machines Fairplay covers on its site displays a "Gamble" prompt when you come to a Hi-Lo decision. This is just plain erroneous as the gamble really took place when you inserted your coin... you'd need a damn impressive "Get out of jail free" card to explain that away.

It would set a precedent for all sorts of frivilous lawsuits

Hopefully it won't... Sega is making use of a highly detailed patent and these still appear to be a rarity.

Rip Tossers Off

[epsilon]

The course of action to take depends on the exact nature of the situation. If this other company has created their own graphics, sound and code, they're perfectly within their rights to release this game. The entire videogame industry, PC applications industry, movie industry and others are all based on copying other people's ideas and changing them a bit.

If the other company has taken your code, sprites and/or audio data, then they would actually be violating copyright law. In that situation, the copyright holder should probably sue, or at least send a cease-and-desist letter. If you aren't the copyright holder anymore, there isn't much you can do from a legal-action point of view.

I wouldn't advocate buying a copy of their implementation and just copying it all over the web, because then they could then sue you for copyright violation, and have the law behind them all the way (because that actually WOULD be copyright violation).

What I would suggest is that you knock together another implementation of your idea, and release it as Free Software under the GNU General Public License. That way, if anyone tries to rip off your work in future, you would be entitled to access their modifications and be free to sell/distribute them yourself. You would also retain copyright ownership, and would have a right to be credited in all derivative works.

If the code you release is good enough, these other guys might be tempted to try to include it in thier version. Now, this is where the fun begins. Since their version would now include portions of your code, their version would automatically be classed as a derivative work, and would be subject to the viral licensing clauses of the GPL, namely that source must be freely available to anyone who obtains a copy of the binary executable. In other words, anyone who buys a copy must also get the source.

Secondly, the GPL forbids the restriction of others' freedoms, so anyone obtaining a copy of the source would then be permitted to sell copies, on the condition that they do not attempt to create an artificial monopoly by restricting anyone else's distribution rights.

Read the GNU General Public License at:

http://www.fsf.org/licenses/licenses.html#GPL

A legitimate free version of your game would probably put these guys out of business.

Problem solved.

Edit: Added FSF link, fixed a typo.

Edited again: Forgot to put the FSF link in. Removed the massive quote.

[Liquid Myth]

I hope to god that the SEGA lawsuit against Acclaim (or whoever made the Simpons game in question) fails. It would set a precedent for all sorts of frivilous lawsuits upto and including: Acclaim vs Neversoft for Dave Mirra vs Matt Hoffman, Neversoft vs Disney for Tony Hawks vs Disney Skateboarding, SC vs CrappyIndieDeveloper for Train Spotting Sim etc etc...

SC, you are so right a lot of the time, but sometimes you really just miss the whole point and go off on some misplaced crusade making you look like a bit of a joke all in all.

Ah well, 75% right aint bad overall.

Hmm, it's not like those kind of lawsuits are going to ever be in either party's favour.

Acclaim vs. Neversoft for bike game? It's a genre, and the games differ enough not to be infringing on either side's interests. Neversoft vs. Disney for skateboarding? Activision released both games, so there wouldn't be any ground for it, seeing as Activision probably gave explicit consent in allowing them to do so (and I'm sure they never expected it to sell better than an already well established franchise). Anything else?

[The Liberal Elite]

I hope to god that the SEGA lawsuit against Acclaim (or whoever made the Simpons game in question) fails.  It would set a precedent for all sorts of frivilous lawsuits upto and including: Acclaim vs Neversoft for Dave Mirra vs Matt Hoffman, Neversoft vs Disney for Tony Hawks vs Disney Skateboarding, SC vs CrappyIndieDeveloper for Train Spotting Sim etc etc...

SC, you are so right a lot of the time, but sometimes you really just miss the whole point and go off on some misplaced crusade making you look like a bit of a joke all in all.

Ah well, 75% right aint bad overall.

Hmm, it's not like those kind of lawsuits are going to ever be in either party's favour.

Acclaim vs. Neversoft for bike game? It's a genre, and the games differ enough not to be infringing on either side's interests. Neversoft vs. Disney for skateboarding? Activision released both games, so there wouldn't be any ground for it, seeing as Activision probably gave explicit consent in allowing them to do so (and I'm sure they never expected it to sell better than an already well established franchise). Anything else?

Plus, Neversoft made the disney game! Looks like columbo here's got the case all wrapped up!

[Unsettled]

...GNU General Public License...

Beautiful.

Thats the way to do it.

[Hansel]

This isn't some esoteric title that has been cooked up and could only have reasonably been copied from someone else's work. It's a fucking trainspotting game. As anyone in any part of the industry how it would work, and they'd probably describe a game exactly like the one you made- creating a very real case for creative convergeance, something which, in spite of your ear-plugging and la-la-laing, is a very real occurance.

There was a thread on it back on Edge when I was horrified to discover that just about every good idea I'd had in the last year had materialised in someone else's work.

Therefore, not only is this a massive waste of everyone's time, there would also be a very good case for the defense if you were to take them to court, and an unbelievably strong case for the prosecution if you were to pirate their code.

Shut up. Please.

You're a waste of space and always have been. Ever since Edge where you deliberately chose the name "Alex W." so people confused you with Alex Ward from Criterion who used to post there.

"creative convergence"

Meaningless.

Go away.

[Alex W.]

Take a chill pill, my friend. You apparently missed the reasons why I changed my user name, and I must politely ask that you read the crossed histories of Newton and Liebnitz with regard to modern calculus. The afterword in A Brief History of Time discusses it somewhat succinctly.

[Harlen Quinn]

Back in the day, when I worked for Sensible Software, we put together an exclusive game for an Amiga Power coverdisk, called "Sensible Trainspotting". It was just a daft little thing, but fun nonetheless, and was obviously given away to the readers for free. Today, this thread:

<a href="http://www.rllmukforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23269" target="_blank">http://www.rllmukforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23269</a>

revealed that this company has directly copied the idea and gameplay mechanics, tarted up the graphics and is selling it for $16. Nowhere on the website, in the credits, in the readme or the scrolling message on the demo is there even the slightest acknowledgement of where the entire idea was swiped from. This pisses me off. Not so much the copying, but the lack of credit, and the charging money for a direct copy of a game which was created to be free.

I alerted former Sensible supremo Jon Hare, who described it as a "blatant fucking rip off", but said that having sold all Sensible game rights to Codemasters some time ago, he couldn't directly do anything about it himself and would have to leave it to the Codies. He invited me to have a go at them if I wanted, though. So I sent the company a short and not very rude note this morning, which has so far been entirely ignored.

So here's the question, because I'm genuinely a bit unsure. How heavily should I tackle it? The options are, as noted in the poll; to just hand it over to Codemasters, who are notoriously intolerant about infringement of their IP in any circumstances at all, and let their lawyers deal with it; to get stroppy with the company personally, but stop short of calling in the law (in other words, basically, bluff); or just let the whole thing go on the grounds that it's an ancient game, a trivial coverdisk freebie that's not worth protecting.

Be intrigued to hear the forum's opinions.

Oh, and Option 4, which I don't seem to be able to edit into the poll:

Buy it, then distribute it all over the web for free, and dare the fuckers to sue.

I dunno stu, I reckon you could recoup your losses by charging people to post on your forum. I reckon about 6p a day should do it.

[Alex W.]

OLDEST THREAD RESURRECTION EVER.

[Roboplegic Wrongcock]

Oh man.

[Alex W.]

*reads posts from 5 years ago*

*dies inside*