[quote who="Elestan" reply="1" id="3712252"] One point of correction: "Toys for Bob" isn't involved in this. Paul and Fred are working as individuals outside their company, presumably because if they didn't, Activision would own the game. [/quote] The UQM project attributes copyright to Toys for Bob, so it is not completely disassociated from the whole mess.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="644" id="3712144"] But that isn't the same as saying that they could just do it without coordinating together in some fashion to avoid confusion. The Star Control aliens are part of...duh...the Star Control universe. This isn't remotely controversial. If someone else wants to use the aliens associated with Star Control they have to coordinate with us to communicate to the fans how the games relate to one another. You can't u
[quote who="Elestan" reply="614" id="3712033"] Quoting wibblenz, reply 611 Personally I am confused as to how "Spathi" can be a trademark at all right now - there is no product called "Spathi" being sold or distributed - there is only copyright, protecting the depiction of the Spathi as they appear in the existing games, but not
[quote who="Elestan" reply="611" id="3712024"] Quoting wibblenz, reply 610 I agree - assuming the UQM project is not also the rights owner. So, this is where another question creeps in: Let's assume that at the moment that the last SC3 sale was made (around 1999?), Accolade did have a common-l
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="602" id="3711959"] Quoting wibblenz, reply 598 There is precedence for free distribution via the internet to constitute "transport in commerce, resulting in the creation of trademark rights and priority" : https://caselaw.fi
There is precedence for free distribution via the internet to constitute "transport in commerce, resulting in the creation of trademark rights and priority" : https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-11th-circuit/1481575.html Being free does not appear to preclude something from using (or infringing upon) a trademark.
StarControl Forums
Stardock.net Forums