Online Game Shutting Down All User Created Levels That Reference Someone Else's IP
from the IP-enforcement-gone-mad dept
Plenty of video games have the ability to create user-modification and user-made levels. Back in the 80s and 90s, this was made popular with games like Castle Wolfenstein and Doom. Many of these user-made versions involve famous characters. In fact, one of the first such cases was when some high school kids remixed the original Castle Wolfenstein to create Castle Smurfenstein, replacing all the Nazis in the original game with smurfs. In Matt Mason's book The Pirate's Dilemma, he talks about how these early mods helped shape and grow the video game industry.But, apparently, some game makers either don't know their video gaming history, or are too afraid of lawyers preventing similar things from happening again. The makers of the game LittleBigPlanet, which allows users to create their own levels, have apparently started deleting any and all levels that include any mention of anything that might be construed as someone else's intellectual property. This seems both extreme and unnecessary. It's certainly not going to keep fans particularly loyal to the game.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, games, user-made levels
Companies: littlebigplanet
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Irritating your customers..
Irritation may work in the short term (See Music Industry) to make you money.
Even forms of government must follow this mantra. You irritate the customer or people with the power/money and they will go somewhere else no matter how much you try to lock them in. Whether that is communism or DRM, the results are the same.
Irritation is never a good long term model for success.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ahh, watch littlebigplanet go poof
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lost a sale of game and console
360 here I come
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sad and stupid, but not surprising
In the case of Guitar Hero, the fan-made songs will never sound as good as the originals (especially since you can't include vocals; but even the instrumentals I've heard so far haven't been all that great). The smart thing to do would be to see what songs were getting made and what fan-based songs were getting the most downloads, and using that as a gauge for what "real" songs to license. If people are downloading a crappy fan-made version of a certain song, don't you think it's because they'd really want the real thing?
In the case of LittleBigPlanet, there are "tribute" levels that, come on, really aren't any worse than fan-made web sites honoring the game. (Although I guess some companies try to shut those down, too.) And for games that try to recreate other games, you're not going to be able to create a perfect 1:1 reproduction of Super Mario Brothers in LittleBigPlanet, certainly not one that is going to make you think, "Hey, this is great, I have no need to pick up the original SMB." On one end, you'll create something that'll spark memories and generate interest in actually getting the original game; on the other end, maybe you'll create something that is based on the original, but actually brings something new and unique to the game. Progressive innovation. Go figure.
(Nixing a level just because the title happens to share the title of an unrelated movie, though, e.g. the "Failure to Launch" level, is just profoundly stupid.)
Then again, it's hard to blame Sony and Activision for just deciding it's easier not to get involved in the law suits that we all know would come from the IP holders. They already have the money from the fans who bought the games. Why risk losing it to the companies with the lawyers and the history of using them?
What's interesting is comparing this to the apparent stance that Microsoft will be taking with their XNA Community Games. According to a 1Up podcast, an XNA spokesperson said they plan on letting the XNA community completely control what goes online and what doesn't, that they will not be doing any moderation of their own. It'll be interesting to see if they truly stick to that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I too am like number 3
So they just lost the sale of 2 games and a console, 360 here I stay.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not 1 cent!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Some of the best videos I've seen were the ones modeled after Mario levels and such.
I'll still get the game... I love World of Goo on the Wii, and I love the cheapo online game Fantastic Contraption. I have hopes for LBP being the granddaddy of casual physics-based games. This will detract from the game.
This is one thing bad about the trend of centralized servers. When you play Quake (or even OpenArena) online, you don't have this problem. If someone wants to create a level that looks like someone's IP, no problem, because it's not a centralized server, and ID can't do anything about it. That's why those older ID games got away with it, too. If people could set up their own WOW server, COH server, or LBP servers, or whatever, this wouldn't be an issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If I was in their shoes I would rely on safe harbors and if someone complains of a specific level and files an actual take down, then I would point that the level falls well under a little something we call 'fair use'. then I'd publicize every time someone does something like that and get more attention based on a mix of standing up for users rights and saying "look at all these cool levels we have"
most companies don't press a lawsuit if you look ready for a fight and fans/users/customers will love the who 'sticking it to the man' image you project.
look at Pirate bay, that is almost exactly how they do it, but in this case it isn't illegal to keep the levels up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Seriously, lawyers. Think about them. They're running around shutting down fanfic sites (see the Chilling Effects site for details).
Given a choice between annoying a portion of the fans by removing some content or annoying all of the fans by, you know, not existing because some Fox lawyers start screaming about IP rights and how they're owed a bizillion dollars, what's the rational choice?
To mix metaphors, a company isn't going to throw itself on a sword while bending over backwards to please fans.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Certainly you aren't so stupid to think that Sony would just let people include protected, copyrighted, or trademarked materials in the user created content? Why can't you seem to understand that if someone else makes something they have the right to determine how it is used? Why is that concept so hard for you to comprehend?
It would be like me taking the content from TechDirt and republishing it without crediting you or your site. I don't think you would appreciate it. Or worse still, copying your comments and putting someone else's name on them. In fact that is what is happening, they are taking someone elses property, and in effect using it without their permission and further slapping them in the face and not even giving them credit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
This mod didn't just modify the weapons and monsters, it included soundclips from the movie, levels based on the movie and such.. It was truly one of the best mods for doom I had ever seen, hands down.
I've been debating on buying doom and hooking it up to run on my system if I was ever able to find this mod again. Unfortunately, I think it has disappeared forever.
It's a shame that software companies are forcing this same issue again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
first sites don't get shut down, the owners choose to take them down instead of fighting.
second if a company dislikes something, they don't say 'shut down the entire site' they say 'remove all content referring to X'.
third the one of the biggest and oldest fan fiction sites appears to still be up and running, with hundreds of thousands of stories in the harry potter section. Isn't Rowling a bit over protective of her IP? in fact looking at the site I can find fan fiction for anything I think of off the top of my head. the way you talk there should be at least one author on a crusade to stop fanfiction ready to sue that site into oblivion. that obviously hasn't happened and there is LOTS of content, and that site is the first to show up in nearly any search that has 'fan fiction' so it is a pretty big target. so it can't possibly be as black and white as you are trying to make it seem.
speaking of fox that site has simpsons, family guy, and futurama stories.
add to all of that the fact that sony is a big company and expects lawsuits, and you get a situation where the most benneficial thing to do would be to fight tooth and nail against the (usually toothless) threats that you may receive instead of incurring the people's wrath.
to put it another way, which is better, telling your customers that you are preemptively covering your own ass at their expense or wait for a take down and even if you don't fight it you can point and say that the big mean bully over there made you take it down? the first option just pisses everyone off, the second earns you sympathy and turns the anger towards fox or whoever told you to take it down. neither results in a lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Simple. They don't have said right.
Besides the argument about the difference between "Rights" and "Legal ability to do something", you may want to look up "First sale" law. If Sony makes something that users can create things, they really have no say on what is created with the tools provided.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
A few things about this remark:
1) It's not as though users are selling these mods within LittleBigPlanet, so there's no harm done. As for the company who may complain, screw them on free advertising.
2) MOST IP is recognizable. No one can mistake Homer Simpson, for say, "some fat dude". Recognizable IP is why these companies advertise, to make sure you KNOW the brand. In the few cases where IP isn't recognized, I highly doubt "up-and-coming" businesses/owners would complain as their IP is hitting more audiences.
3) Many businesses don't even understand what copyright protection is, and instead, are turning around and suing the hell out of everyone "just because we can". Worse, businesses are now trying to encapsulate more into the whole "IP" bucket (such as facts from sports) just so they can claim ownership.
You can whine about "protection" all you want, but given the status of IP issues in the past few years, companies only go to prove they don't care about consumers, only profits and will continue destroying options for us to the point in which we'll go elsewhere to get what we desire.
If you're in a business where one of your CUSTOMERS takes it upon themselves to give you free advertising and you screw them over by suing them, guess how long your business will survive.
I fully understand your argument if I were to take your copyright material and profit from it, but other than that, I will dismiss your position.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Aliens doom TC
That mod was awesome, and is available here:
http://gzdoom.doomwadstation.com/class.html#atcud21
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
first, trademark doesn't come into it. there is nothing wrong with creating a level based off of any trademarked material. trademark applies only in limited settings, which can be summed up int he phrase "would an idiot in a hurry mistake this as the same thing being sold by XXXX?" but since the levels are not for sale and no one would mistake the nike swoosh level with the nike shoe, no problem.
second, your analogies suck and don't represent the situation at all. a better analogy is if you saw a really awesome house that someone else made and you decided to paint the house as you remember it. only after you finish the museum where you had the painting hanging burns it without the maker of the house (who likely wouldn't care, or may have even been honored someone like it that much) even knowing the painting existed in the first place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Aliens doom TC
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The Internet has all things, you just need to know how to phrase your request.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Aliens doom TC
http://www.doomsdayhq.com/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Actually, we don't mind. We've said this so many times that this is getting ridiculous. I'll repeat it for you again, since apparently you're new:
http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20070412/183135#c612
---
And as we've said repeatedly, we have no problem with people taking our content and reposting it. It's funny how many people come here, like yourself, and assume you've found some "gotcha." You haven't. There already are about 10 sites that copy Techdirt, post for post. Some of them give us credit. Some of them don't. We don't go after any of them.
Here's why:
1. None of those sites get any traffic. By itself, they offer nothing special.
2. If anything, it doesn't take people long to read those sites and figure out that the content is really from Techdirt. Then they just come here to the original source. So, it tends to help drive more traffic to us. That's cool.
3. As soon as the people realize the other sites are simply copying us, it makes those sites look really, really bad. If you want to risk your reputation like that, go ahead, but it's a big risk.
4. A big part of the value of Techdirt is the community here. You can't just replicate that.
5. Another big part of the value of Techdirt is that we, the writers, engage in the comments. You absolutely cannot fake that on your own site.
So, really, what's the purpose of copying our content, other than maybe driving a little traffic our way?
So, if you really want to, I'd suggest it's pretty dumb, but go ahead.
---
So, please don't create strawmen arguments that are wrong. You are wrong.
Why the hell would you expect them NOT to do this? Why would anyone expose themselves to infringment cases because some stupid 12 year old wants to put a logo from someone elses product in the game?
Because it will piss customers off and they'll go use other games.
Certainly you aren't so stupid to think that Sony would just let people include protected, copyrighted, or trademarked materials in the user created content?
Other games do it just fine, and it hasn't damaged anyone's brands. Is everyone just stupid then?
Why can't you seem to understand that if someone else makes something they have the right to determine how it is used? Why is that concept so hard for you to comprehend?
I would argue that I understand things just fine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Is the PSN ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Is the PSN ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lost a sale of game and console
What is with the red ring of death? One of the guys I work with has had to return his 360 4 or 5 times because they are made of crap but also sold for crap. Have fun with the clunker.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You REALLY expect?
the console companies have been TRYING to get GAMES OFF the PC.
With that they ALSO want control, OVEr HARDWARE and SOFTWARE.
Hardware,
CHANGE everything every 5 years to force you to UPGRADE to NEW units, that are at OVER INFLATED prices.
Software,
CONTROL CONTROL CONTROL...No one can take it away from you, and EVERY software company HAS TO go thru you to SELL their GOODS.. you get your 50% markup and the Maker gets SQUAT..
(lookup Atari vs Activision)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Is the PSN ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Lost a sale of game and console
1: this is not related to the actual conversation. I made a statement explicitly pointing out that Sony lost a sale due to their actions and implied that there would be other lost sales for the same reason. None of this deserved a fanboyish response that ignores the greater subject at hand.
2: the PS3 does not have more exclusive games than the 360, and the multi-platform games consistently under perform when compared to the other consoles, mostly due to the difficulty and expense in programming for the Cell processor.
3: many PS3 models aren't even backwards compatible anymore, further limiting the library to less than what the 360 has currently available
4: bringing age into this topic is completely irreverent as I never stated either my age or what games I would be playing except that I decided I was no longer interested in LittleBigPlanet. Further, any good game can be enjoyed by anyone no matter how old they are, implying that the 360 only have juvenile games fit for little kids is specious argument at best (and I'm being generous there).
5: Yes the 360s fried themselves a lot and it is one of the reasons I don't have one yet, but the hardware has gone through multiple redesigns and the failure rate is no longer a significant factor. additionally the warranty that the 360 comes with removes any remaining concern.
You are of course free to prefer the PS3, that is your choice, but please don't spread misinformation or shove your views down other people's throats.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Is the PSN ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Second this in no way falls under the first sale doctrine. I'd suggest you look that one up yourself...
And Sony isn't saying anything about what you can or can't create with their tools. They're dictating what they will host on their servers. They in fact have the ONLY say on that, thus their vulnerability - real or imagined, I wouldn't know - to lawsuits. I'm sure they could find a way to shield themselves similar to what youtube does, but considering their usual stance on these issues, I certainly wouldn't expect them to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Is the PSN ...
And I don't think it would be pointless if then did allow levels DL'ed from the net. It's a good way to cover their asses in this lawyer driven world we have. If some other site is offering PSN "banned" content then it's not their problem.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"Wolfenstein 3D" was the game by id that was one of the first to really allow (and promote) user mods.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
And that is the image us gamers love.
It is quite sad that more and more manufacturers are bought up by the likes of EA or run somewhere along the line by idiots who crap on their customers.
Why is it the bad ones that make it out on top?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
please go troll somewhere else.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The LBP people removed a level based around the PlayStation 3.
That's right, they removed a level based around THE GAME CONSOLE THE GAME WAS EXCLUSIVELY RELEASED ON.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
making a level shaped like a PS3 isn't copyright infringement.
naming a map "Failure to launch" is not a copyright issue,
even if you create material that would be infringing it falls under fair use if you don't share it with anyone.
yet all these examples and more were taken down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nk3M7pwchB0
one of the many MANY innocent things that sony deleted for no reason.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Wolfenstein
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The entire level itself actually IS someone else's intellectual property.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That's not true. Look up Castle Smurfenstein. Then look up the history of Wolfenstein, and how Smurfenstein was part of what inspired Carmack to do Wolfenstein 3D.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If people came up with their own characters/stories there wouldn't be a problem, use your own imagination people
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wtf
If anyone can help me find out whats wrong with my computer plz let me know. ty
[ link to this | view in thread ]