Lucas Confuses ScummVM With Abandonware

Anonymous Coward writes: "Seems LucasArts finally noticed ScummVm although they seem to be confused about what it is. ScummVM is a 'virtual machine'(yes like Java) that allows you to play scumm games (Monkey Island, for example) in modern OS (Linux, BSD, err Windows XP) and weird machines like PDAs and the Dreamcast, but Lucas have confused them with an abandonware site."

Comments

Original software still required

[Twylite]

An unfortunately oversight on the part of the ScummVM representative, was the failure to mention that to use ScummVM you still require the original (LucasArts) software!

Had this be pointed out, along with the fact that ScummVM extends the accessibility of the original software beyond its original platform, it may make it less likely that the lawyers will respond with tougher measures.

Re:Original software still required

[Ndr_Amigo]

I believe I did mention both of these points, in the second paragraph... In any case, this first volly seems to be a simple misunderstanding regarding the nature of ScummVM... However I fully expect LucasArts to probably persue legal action now they are aware it's more than simply abandonware. I'm being hopeful that they will just drop it, but the legal teams of the wonderful Lucas group of companies seem to be very trigger-happy when it comes to lawsuits. This first letter wasn't actually a legal threat. They have already asked SourceForge to remove our site, but hopefully it won't come to that. Their original letter was asking for the removal of something that simply doesn't exist - downloadable copies of LucasArts software. At least that wonderful four letter acronym we all have come to love and hate (you know, the one beginning with 'D' that sounds like a Village People song?) hasn't come into it. Yet. (Oh, and to reply to another reply regarding my grammer and spelling.. hey, I wrote the response after waking up at 6am, rolling over and noticing the flashing message in my ssh session :) - James 'Ender' Brown Project Leader, ScummVM (Doesn't this sound all official?)

Sounds like the work of a legal ASSITANT

[mekkab]

INSERT IANAL DISCLAIMER.

This is a boiler plate letter. They had a legal assitant (billing rate: usually under $100. Pay rate: $15? plus overtime.) do the research on the web. Criteria: does this allow someone to play LEC games? If yes, fill in the blanks and send the letter. Charge the client. Go home happy.

Given the response, this may get boiled up to a summer associate (hasn't passed the bar but has somewhat of a clue regarding the law) (bill rate: $125) or (egads!) and associate (a *real* lawyer) (bill rate $150 min.) who will weigh the ScummVM developers claims and decide wether to persue.

If they investigate the research on the "applicable state laws" will be given to a Legal assistant or a summer associate and that will determine the amount of work necessary to determine if ScummVM is an actual infringement.

I'm not saying LEC is poor, but I doubt they will waste their money past here.

Any IP lawyers who would like to clarify?

The reply mentions that

[Manic Miner]

The reply to lucas arts states:

We mean no ill harm to LucasArts, and it is well known that many people (at least 50 to my knowledge, although I am sure there are many more) have brought classic LEC games simply to play them using our software.

which clearly mentions that people purchase the original software to play using ScummVM. And...

ScummVM is a valid clone of the SPU engine, designed to facitiate the playing of LucasArts adventures on modern machines and operating systems.

Which I think also clearly states that ScummVM is a clone of SPU, and not the original engine, or any original game content.

Also their FAQ clearly states in section 2:

1. Do I need original CD or Floppy disks?
Most definitely. ScummVM won't work without them. If you would like to buy these games, we suggest you browse Ebay. Do not ask the ScummVM team where you can download the full versions of Lucas Arts games. These requests will be ignored.

What else should they have done? A little "research" into the site would quickly have shown that this is not an abandonware site.

Copyright expired = Public Domain

[MEK]

But there are no provisions in Copyright law which force material to be placed in the public domain when it is no longer being used (or even when Copyright expires!).

The intent of the Constitutional provision that allows (but does not require) the government to afford copyright protection (for a limited time) to authors was to ultimately increase the amount of material in the public domain. When a copyright expires, the material previously protected belongs to the public.

It's Not the Size of the Ship

[Rayonic]

Sorry, Offtopic, but anyone else remember when Lucasarts games were this funny? Heck, I don't think you can even put that third line of text in a game nowadays.

(IIRC, what Elaine had asked Guybrush in that screenshot was something like "What have we learned from all of this?" at the end of the game.)

Re:My favorite part..

[Ndr_Amigo]

They already have :)
Roblimo himself sent a nice e-mail to me with suggestions (plus the warning that the site would vanish if I didn't reply to him in 72 hours).
I've asked SF not to remove it, as what the letter cites is on our site.. obviously isn't. We arn't distributing any software by LucasArts themselves on there.

- James 'Ender' Brown
Lead ScummVM Developer
Slashdot Troll of the Hour :)

Re:Here's The Lawyer's Response

[Twylite]

Sorry, I'm talking bullshit, and so is the laywer. DMCA doesn't cover this AT ALL, as the software in question does not have access control mechanisms that are being circumvented. Even if you would like to argue that it does, ...

DMCA, Section 1201
(f) Reverse Engineering. -
(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.

So even if it can be shown that the DMCA applies, there is a legitimate reason (interoperability) for the creation of this software.

Confusion of Copyright and Trademark

[crisco]

As explained to me by our attorneys when we were confronted with issues of how and where to protect ourselves with trademarks and copyrights, a copyright holder is required to make a reasonable effort to prevent infringement. Failure to do so weakens the copyright and may set a precedent that will be damaging in a different case. Hence, if the company perceives infringement, they essentially must pursue it even if they don't actually mind that it is going on.

You're confusing the principles (as codified into law) of copyright and trademark, in fact, the example you go on to give is of trademarks and not copyrights.

Copyrights are automatic and do not need to be protected, Trademarks have to be applied for and do need to be protected.