Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

8-Year Fan-Made Game Project Shut Down By Activision

Posted by Soulskill on from the of-doors-and-ways-out dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Activision, after acquiring Vivendi, became the new copyright holder of the classic King's Quest series of adventure game. They have now issued a cease and desist order to a team which has worked for eight years on a fan-made project initially dubbed a sequel to the last official installment, King's Quest 8. This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission. After the acquisition, key team members had indicated on the game's forums (now stripped of their original content by order of Activision) that Activision had given the indication that it intended to keep its current fan-game licenses, but was not interested in issuing new ones."

33 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. Boo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's good to know who are friends of gamers. Activision clearly isn't among them.

    1. Re:Boo by sopssa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's good to know who are friends of gamers. Activision clearly isn't among them.

      With Ubisoft pushing its always-online DRM and Activision doing this and releasing just something along the lines of Guitar Hero 28 and new WoW expansions, it's really surprising EA has become the good and innovative guy. They've dropped DRM in many games too and are developing innovative and new IP games like Mirrors Edge, Mass Effect, Dragon Age..

    2. Re:Boo by eonlabs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They got the slap on the wrist good and early. They're turning it around. Wonder how much noise it will take to get Activision back into shape.

      Last games by Activision I really enjoyed were Earthworm Jim, Civilization II, and Tony Hawk II (stopped playing the series after that).
      Heck, gotten more use out of a free bottle opener from them than any of these games combined.

      Wonder if they'd be up to push trademarks on this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_(interactive_novel)

      --
      I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
    3. Re:Boo by LBt1st · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think MechWarrior 2 was the last thing Activision ever did that I cared about. I certainly won't be buying anything from them anytime soon.
      And they'll be crying when this fan made game leaks out accidentally onto the internet and is enjoyed by all and they get absolutely nothing.

    4. Re:Boo by eonlabs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the issue really is with one dude, you never know, splinters have a way of getting squeezed out.
      Disney had the same problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Eisner
      It resolved itself.

      --
      I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
    5. Re:Boo by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you think that you have "friends" in the corporate world, you are quite naive. The only friends that corporate executives have, go by names like "Dollar", "Yen", and "Euro".

      The previous owners thought that their "generous" licensing to fan groups might net some money in the long run, the current owners feel that locking things up will make more money. There's the story in a single sentence.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    6. Re:Boo by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Disney had the same problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Eisner
      It resolved itself.

      That won't be clear until 2023. If Disney has turned itself around after having lost Eisner, it won't have bought another copyright term extension from the U.S. Congress.

  2. Never build a house on another man's land... by JPLemme · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...unless you're willing to use it.

    I'm not really familiar with this project, but couldn't they just call Princess Rosella like "Princess Rosetta" and so on? It's not like Activision can lay claim to the entire swords and sorcery genre.

    1. Re:Never build a house on another man's land... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No doubt. And if you don't actively attempt to defend your trademarks... you can lose them.

      So basically these fan devs picked a fight with Activision and put Activision's back up against a wall.

      Very, very stupid on the developers part. I can't blame Activision at all.

      I may be putting too much faith in the summary but it specifically says they were licensed by Vivendi.You can't lose your trademarks by giving specific groups permission to use them. Quite the opposite, this demonstrates control over the mark. In any event, it's hard to see how getting permission from Vivendi, and then discussing with Activision once they'd taken over Vivendi, represents picking a fight.

    2. Re:Never build a house on another man's land... by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sounds like open-and-shut breach of contract, and Activision will get their asses handed to them if this fan site can find a good lawyer.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:Never build a house on another man's land... by Mathinker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > ... you're in a pretty favorable legal position.

      Except when the other party has lots of money and you don't. Welcome to the realities of our legal system.

    4. Re:Never build a house on another man's land... by Mathinker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Activision will get their asses handed to them if this fan site can find a good lawyer.

      You meant: "Activision may get their asses handed to them if this fan site can find a good lawyer who will agree to work for a contingency fee."

    5. Re:Never build a house on another man's land... by adminstring · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We're talking about trademarks in this thread, not patents. There's a different set of laws for those.

      Zipper was a trademark which wasn't enforced, and thus it became genericized. If it had been enforced, we'd have to call zippers "sliding fasteners" or something equally awkward. The physical design to which the trademark refers could or could not be patented, that's a completely different issue from whether or not the brand name that refers to the design is trademarked.

      You could trademark a non-patented design, or patent a design and not trademark a name for it. Patents and trademarks are apples and oranges.

      --
      My truck is like a series of tubes.
    6. Re:Never build a house on another man's land... by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Trademarks which have lost their legal protection in the US due to a lack of zealous lawyering include...

      And we're all better off for it too.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  3. Was it in writing? by zalas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This stands against the fact that Vivendi granted a non-commercial license to the team, subject to Vivendi's approval of the game after submission.

    So, did they actually get this in writing, with a contract signed by both sides? Would such a contract survive an acquisition?

    1. Re:Was it in writing? by davester666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "it's better than anything we can produce"

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  4. if Activision isn't actively using the IP... by Tokerat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...they should lose it. Are they still actively marketing this game? Do they still sell it? Is there a new version in the works? IP really needs to have a "use-it-or-lose-it" clause.

    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    1. Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP... by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know what, I actually agree... There should be a limit. This was why the original copyright was for only a few years in the USA. While that original limit might be a little short, for some things I believe that there should be additional limits, especially for things like video games. Unless you are actively selling or have documented intentions (with writers, designers, and coders) actively working on the game, it should be opened up to allow the public to continue. I would say 10 years without being able to purchase or use the game on active consoles/hardware would be sufficient. Just look back on video game history and you would see that is probably a very legitimate timeframe which gives plenty of opportunity for the owners of the IP to keep their IP. The wording might have to be worked on and rules ironed out, because we would not want, say ID releasing "DOOM! Sudoku" to count for the FPS DOOM! franchise. Games that still have a large followings would definitely stay active. You would also see more old games get updated ports to new consoles and systems if/when it makes economic sense. There would be lots more Retro Remixes like "Bionic Commando Rearmed". We would see game franchises like Tie Fighter, Wingcommander, and even Mechwarrior continue (well, in the case of Mechwarrior, looks like its 7 year exile (and more of bastardization) under the hands of Microsoft is near its end).

      --
      We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
    2. Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP... by sopssa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To give an example for ruining the image and name - Do you really want 100 crappy games with Civilization or Baldur's Gate name slapped on it which have nothing to do with the original games or authors? Everyone would just try to cash in with the past good name and flood the market with shit games and decrease the general image of whole series, original games too.

    3. Re:if Activision isn't actively using the IP... by BenoitRen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's kind of a good idea, but 10 years is too short time, especially now that we've starting to see a lot more re-releases and ports to current generation PC's and consoles of old games.

      10 years is actually a long time in gaming. That's two generations.

      Yes, we're seeing lots of re-releases and ports. Do you really want to pay for the same game over and over? I still own the cartridges to many older video games. It doesn't make sense to me to have to buy them again to be able to play them legally on, say, my Wii.

  5. Exposure to the back catalogue? by werdnapk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wouldn't some of these fan made games get people interested in some of the originals again? You get enough people into a forgotten series who start asking for more and in turn the rights holder makes a new game of their own in the end with a healthy profit hopefully. Yes, I know... big business doesn't understand this type of thing.

  6. Fed Up with Bad Behavior by the_bard17 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One more gaming company to avoid. EA sucks because of the way they treat their programmers, not to mention milking every last drop out of each year's sports games. Ubisoft just announced draconian DRM. Now Activision is acting like a spoiled kid. They keep this up, and they can cry all they want to about pirates, lost sales, and stolen IP.

    They still won't be getting any of my money.

    1. Re:Fed Up with Bad Behavior by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ya, no shit. There are plenty of other hobbies to pursue in life. I've already dropped music collecting/purchasing and now perhaps gaming too if this keeps up. I refuse to reward bad behavior.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Fed Up with Bad Behavior by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've already dropped music collecting/purchasing

      The RIAA has got you to stop buying ALL music? Then they won, because they're not concerned with your copying their work, their concern is keeping music they don't control out of your ears.

      I buy a lot of music, just not from the major labels.

      --
      Free Martian Whores!
  7. Re:The rebels become the oppressors... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I remember a time when Activision made their own games, a personal favorite: Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 was one of them.

    Huh? I was playing Kaboom, Pitfall! and Laser Blast just yesterday and was going to check out Chopper Command tomorrow ... where did that game suddenly pop up from?

  8. what a modder thinks by GarretSidzaka · · Score: 2, Insightful

    this is serious bullshit. ive been a modder for years now and i know about fair use. the companies that hold the rights of the games i work on LOVE modding as it increases sales and replay value. Activision you are showing your corporate decay.

  9. How fuckin stupid can one be?? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They could have simply paid the team a bit of money to get it finished, and then offer them to do the distribution. Something like that.
    Which would basically resulted in free money from the work of others (for the service of distribution).

    But nooo...
    Idiots.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  10. Activision did not acquire Vivendi. by Shandalar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Activision did not acquire Vivendi. The merged company retained the ATVI stock listing, and Bobby Kotick is running the company, true; but VU got more board seats than Activision. If anything, VU bought Activision.

  11. WTF by Meneth · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They worked at it for 8 years, and now they just lay down and quit? Have these people NO self-respect?

  12. Just change the name so it doesn't violate the IP by elblanco · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Would that really be that much work? Call it's "Royal Adventure" or some such....change the character names, and be done with it. There's nothing that prevents them from making a Sierra "like" adventure game. I've always been mystified when some fan group works for years to build a game and gives up over a C&D because they are obviously violating the IP of the holder. Don't drop the project! Just change the particulars!

  13. Re:Vivendi and Activision... by jmauro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if Activision was bought by Vivendi it's which leadership is in charge after the merger. In this case Vivendi games leadership was replaced by Activisions so even though it was "bought", Activision effectively "took over" Vivendi's gaming division. It happens quite often really when the parent conglomerate likes how the bought company does business more than the already aquired company does business.

  14. Vaporware by samsmithnz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    8 Years without a final product?? Sounds like Vaporware to me.

  15. Lucas wanting to shut down Star Wars fan pages by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I recall mid 90's when Fox was trying to shut down every X-Files fan page, and Lucas wanted to shut down every Star Wars fan page. They felt they were copyright infringement. What they didn't realize is that fan hype is free marketing. It only increases the value of your intellectual property.

    An IP owner needs to protect their trademark, but they can issue a fan license to cover that.

    This isn't just mean, it is bad business sense.

    And while we're talking about old game properties that should be resurrected with a fan game, Commander Keen anyone?

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.