Main Menu

The Silver Lining - Cease and Desist

Started by Yonkey, February 27, 2010, 08:59:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Boogeyman

I would like to see a leak, but I wish to have it wait a few weeks, to see how things turn out.

If all ends up being hopeless, I would like to see an immediate leak.
I don't narrate for stinky kings!

Anon

For the record, I'm not talking about leaking it onto some seedy torrent site, I mean continuing this project as it currently exists, with a wesite and community.

Tage7

Let me just say that although leaking is the easiest solution to a truly unfair situation, it does not make it the best solution. Choosing to explore more agreeable avenues is not the same as wimping out as human beings or abandoning the project as developers.

I also believe discussing its feasibility and morality is futile. I will, however, gladly spend my time here discussing technology and ethics; so feel free to continue the discussion.

crayauchtin

Xizer:

The only option? Really? Aside from an online petition, there's been about four other suggestions of other courses of actions other than leaking -- offline petition, letter-writing campaign, boycotting Activision, and tweaking it to make it an original IP. Seems like you're kind of jumping the gun.
(And while you may scoff at that idea, as someone who didn't start posting today I can assure you that a large number of the people in this community all have WoW accounts... with many WoW-playing friends... and all of us might just suddenly find, I dunno, Everquest maybe just as exciting. As Activision *does* care about the almighty dollar, that might ring a few alarm bells.)

Aside from that, the TSL team has already said they will not be leaking it. So, basically, we get it. You want to see it leaked. Thanks for the input.
"If your translation is correct, that was 'May a sleepy hippopotamus lie down on your house keys,' but you're not sure. Unfortunately, your fluency in griffin-speak is too low."

We're roleplaying in the King's Quest world: come join in the fun!

oberonqa

Quote from: Anon on March 01, 2010, 01:50:53 AM
The fact is that this law is being used wrongly, in a way that is completely out of tune with the concept of intellectual property and copyright. And, as such, I see no moral issue in breaking it, if that is feasible (and on the Internet, it is indeed easily feasible).

Perhaps you can explain how copyright and intellectual property law are being used wrongly and in a way that is completely out of tune with the concept of intellectual property and copyright?

Here are the facts about The Silver Lining:

1)  It is based on characters from the King's Quest series.
2)  It takes place in locations from the King's Quest series (most notably King's Quest VI).
3)  It is a completely new story taking place at some unspecified time after the events of King's Quest VII but before King's Quest: Mask of Eternity.

These 3 facts are undisputable and if you care to dispute that, then I fear it might be a waste of time continuing this discussion because these facts are well known.

Now then... that out of the way... time for some questions:

A)  Did Phoenix Online Studios create any of the branded King's Quest games?
B)  Are the copyrights for the characters and locations in the King's Quest games owned by Phoenix Online Studios?
C)  Is Phoenix Online Studios the current Intellectual Property owner of the King's Quest franchise?

The answer to these questions is also equally obvious.  Phoenix Online Studios did not create any of the branded King's Quest titles.  Nor does Phoenix Online Studios own any copyright on any element of a King's Quest title.  Nor do they own the Intellectual Property known collectively as King's Quest.

At what point is copyright and intellectual property law being used wrongly?  I'm not playing devil's advocate here... but you have to understand Phoenix Online Studios have no rights where copyright and intellectual property are concerned.  There is no way around that.  And if The Silver Lining is ever going to see the light of day legally... it's going to be with the consent of the copyright and intellectual property owner... which is Activision.

And I'm not going to continue arguing semantics with an obvious troll (Xizer).  All I see out of Xizer (and I'm starting to suspect his sock-puppets) is inflammatory drivel that is designed to promote self-gratification.

If you don't agree with the laws of the land, that is your right as a human being (depending, of course, on where you live)... but society as a whole does not subscribe to the same credo.  A mass murderer may feel that it is perfectly OK to murder people because people are just animals... but that doesn't make it OK.  A software pirater may feel it's OK to pirate commercial software because he/she feels companies charge too much for inferior products... but that doesn't make it OK.  And likewise... just because you feel Activision is just a magnet for bad press and therefore is not worthy of equal representation under the law.... doesn't mean it's OK to disregard their wishes.

Now then.... if you cannot abide by the development teams wishes to comply with the C&D while they pursue their options... that's your choice.  But I'm telling you right now the game will not be leaked.  They will release the game with Activision's blessings... or they won't release it at all.  If you can't accept that, then I'm sorry.  But demanding they leak the game like a petulant child who wants to get even with his/her dead beat drunk father by disobeying him and going out with friends isn't going to save the child from getting a whooping when he/she gets home.
 
Chronicling the history of Sierra through the conversion of it's premiere magazine into an easy-to-use, searchable wiki format.

Xizer

Well, first of all, I'm not even going to bother responding to the dipshit troll directly above me... his wall of words spewed forth from an illogical mind is not worthy of further comment.

As for my response to people who are not complete douchebags like oberonqa...

Quote from: crayauchtin on March 01, 2010, 02:13:56 AM
Xizer:

The only option? Really? Aside from an online petition, there's been about four other suggestions of other courses of actions other than leaking -- offline petition, letter-writing campaign, boycotting Activision, and tweaking it to make it an original IP.

Three out of four of these options involve Activision caring - something which may be the case in an alternate reality, but certainly not in this one.

So if they're not going to leak it - they're going to have to make it an original IP - which is going to damage the project. A large part of its appeal is that it is an unofficial sequel.

We will see what happens in a few weeks after your "petition" turns out fruitless... until then, peace out my niggas.

Werner

Ok dont get me wrong here, but maybe you all look at the issue from a different angle. First of all Kings Quest itself while being protected by IP laws is by far not the only game in town, it is almost entirely based on figures by now in plublic domain, the settings the substories etc... Thats all based upon it. So why not simply change everything namewise, then you should be probably safe. Insgead of Daventry make it something along the lines of country behind the seven hills. Instead of Princess Rosella, give here another name....
It is not like the entire setting is so unique that it still falls under copyright law just the names and graphics of the original kinqs quest are. (and even the graphics are arguable if you push them into the modern age, because castles kings etc... have been done for hundreds of years)


crayauchtin

While you may think that Activision is not going to respond well to fan-input and that they are a magnet for bad press (they are), very little of that press has been brought on by the fans being in an uproar. There is a BIG difference between bad press brought on by rival companies and bad press brought on by the consumers -- and while the big shots within Activision may not care, their stockholders certainly will.

Again, the almighty dollar holds a LOT of sway. We are a portion of the consumers of the gaming industry, and many of us know others who also are Activision consumers. Creating a big enough dent in their profits to make them notice and make them care may be a challenge -- but it's called a challenge because it's not impossible.

You want to see an evil corporation crumble? Leaking a game that wouldn't make them money anyways will *not* do that.
"If your translation is correct, that was 'May a sleepy hippopotamus lie down on your house keys,' but you're not sure. Unfortunately, your fluency in griffin-speak is too low."

We're roleplaying in the King's Quest world: come join in the fun!

Aurora

Sorry to hear you guys got shut down again.

Quote from: Xizer on March 01, 2010, 12:15:12 AM
Anyone who knows what they're talking about and reads my posts will think to themselves "welp, that guy knows what he's talking about." Then they're going to read posts like yours and go "Ugh... *facepalm*... why does this Xizer guy even try arguing with these people? lol),

It's really the other way around.  :suffer:

Tage7

Quote from: Werner on March 01, 2010, 02:27:25 AM
Ok dont get me wrong here, but maybe you all look at the issue from a different angle. First of all Kings Quest itself while being protected by IP laws is by far not the only game in town, it is almost entirely based on figures by now in plublic domain, the settings the substories etc... Thats all based upon it. So why not simply change everything namewise, then you should be probably safe. Insgead of Daventry make it something along the lines of country behind the seven hills. Instead of Princess Rosella, give here another name....
It is not like the entire setting is so unique that it still falls under copyright law just the names and graphics of the original kinqs quest are. (and even the graphics are arguable if you push them into the modern age, because castles kings etc... have been done for hundreds of years)

I personally think changing the IP-related names and locations is not so easy in TSL's case. The reason being: voice acting. There's no telling how many dialogues contain IP-related proper nouns. All of the voice actors would need to be recontacted to revoice several dialogues. Either that or completely new voice actors would need to be casted. In the last case, several dialogues would have to be scrapped. It's just a difficult route to take in my opinion.

In either case, I am waiting to see where the team goes from here and hope for any good news--whether from the team or elsewhere. I highly doubt the project is completely dead. If it is, I will be right there with you guys completely depressed. :'(

a_quest_fan

I honestly didn't know of this project until I saw the Cease and Desist. I was a very big fan of all the Quest series in the day though including Kings Quest which was fantastic.

I've not read through all the comments but may I say that, and I am going to rant, this has just added ANOTHER reason for me to make a point of never buying a game developed my Activision in future.

I've been recently screwed by Activision on their "free to play spend only if you want" game Battlefield Heroes. I won't go into the details but there were/are a LOT of angry fans.

As far as I'm concerned I would rather eat dirt and gravel for a week rather than pay another cent to Activision for anything I don't care how good the game is.

I'd say it's probably good that you won't be associated to them. Any chance of releasing your title under another name?
 

XTrem

This is the first time that I hear about this project and as a old adventure game fan, it´s really sad.  >:( I hope you find another way to release that game and for the future long waited Diablo 3 and every other Activision-related game, will never get my dollars.

Ps. Keep your heads up and continue programming your game projects!

Best regards,

-XTrem

Joseph

Just change the name.

"Thy Quest of Kings"

"Behold thy Quest"

"Kingship"

"Monarchy Quest"

or approach another studio with a similar trademark, they could accept it, it could be a bit of a coup for them.

Anon

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMPerhaps you can explain how copyright and intellectual property law are being used wrongly and in a way that is completely out of tune with the concept of intellectual property and copyright?

Why does copyright exist? Why were these laws even created? There are basically two main reasons for that, which are to ensure that authors are able to make a profit from their hard work, and to prevent others from making a profit from creations that are not theirs (and subsequenty denying that profit to the real author).

That is the spirit of copyright law - to give value to an otherwise abstract "property", and protect its authors of a work from financial harm. I don't see how this project was in any way causing them financial harm, hence this takedown notice is not in the spirit of intellectual property law.

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMHere are the facts about The Silver Lining:

(...)

Not disputing that.

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMNow then... that out of the way... time for some questions:

A)  Did Phoenix Online Studios create any of the branded King's Quest games?
B)  Are the copyrights for the characters and locations in the King's Quest games owned by Phoenix Online Studios?
C)  Is Phoenix Online Studios the current Intellectual Property owner of the King's Quest franchise?

The answer to these questions is also equally obvious.  Phoenix Online Studios did not create any of the branded King's Quest titles.  Nor does Phoenix Online Studios own any copyright on any element of a King's Quest title.  Nor do they own the Intellectual Property known collectively as King's Quest.

I won't dispute that either. But does it matter? If they are not harming the profits of the current owner or profiting from their work, why should it matter?

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMAt what point is copyright and intellectual property law being used wrongly?  I'm not playing devil's advocate here... but you have to understand Phoenix Online Studios have no rights where copyright and intellectual property are concerned.  There is no way around that.

Again you seem to be confusing morality with law. Copyright law exists to ensure content creators can make a profit from their work and to prevent people from making a profit from someone else's work, and to allow the creator. This project was in no way in conflict with either of those aims.

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMIf you don't agree with the laws of the land, that is your right as a human being (depending, of course, on where you live)... but society as a whole does not subscribe to the same credo.

Curious that you should say that. I'm actually confident that that if you showed this forum thread/news article to random people in the street, the vast majority would be in agreement with me.

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMA mass murderer may feel that it is perfectly OK to murder people because people are just animals... but that doesn't make it OK.

I agree that it's not OK, but not with your reasoning for why it's not okay. Your implied reasoning is that murder is wrong "because it's the law"; does that mean that murder would be right is it WASN'T against the law? Anyone with a sense of morality would disagree - murder is wrong for fundemental reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that "it's the law". Killing someone is morally wrong no matter what the law says, and likeway, making a non-commercial fan project like this is NOT morally wrong, no matter what the law says.

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMA software pirater may feel it's OK to pirate commercial software because he/she feels companies charge too much for inferior products... but that doesn't make it OK.

Agreed, because that is actually in the spirit of copyright law.

Quote from: oberonqa on March 01, 2010, 02:17:45 AMAnd likewise... just because you feel Activision is just a magnet for bad press and therefore is not worthy of equal representation under the law.... doesn't mean it's OK to disregard their wishes.

It's nothing to do with the fact that it Acticision, it's simply that their wishes are IMMORAL. I don't feel that the law should be supporting ANYONE'S immoral wishes.

Tage7

Quote from: Joseph on March 01, 2010, 03:08:53 AM
Just change the name.

"Thy Quest of Kings"

"Behold thy Quest"

"Kingship"

"Monarchy Quest"

or approach another studio with a similar trademark, they could accept it, it could be a bit of a coup for them.

Unfortunately, changing the title would not help in this case as the title is not affiliated with the King's Quest franchise. Most people just hearing about the project might not be aware of this. Thought I'd mention it.

Volomon

Anon your just arguing moral principle, which is on the same level as arguing religion.  It's pointless.

For more substance in the matter, what was the non-commercial agreement about?  Do you have it on paper or any meaningful digital format?  

A company who is absorbed by another must fulfill it's contractual obligations even when they no longer exists in full rights as a company, except when declaring bankruptcy.  As far as I can tell they did not declare bankruptcy.  So what's the issue?

Either this non-commercial licence was given verbatim, which in this case it would be TSL's fault or you have a genuine case to continue the project.

I would take the non-commercial agreement to a copyright lawyer.  Take donations for this court fight, you have no idea how many people hate Activision right now, even if you don't win the heavy press might force them to agree.  No one even cares about this project or most people, I don't.  However I hate Activision just as much as anyone else.  Even I would donate.

Joseph

What DOES infringe on the copyright!

That should be able to change. You should turn it into your own IP. I'm sure characters looking like kings and princesses is not their property.

Change a few names and garb colors, and names of places.

Think of what Bohemia Interactive did :)

and the Farcry/Crysis split.

You would have to break from the initial project while you change the assets, and try to emerge without any mention of this project.

Peter Pears

I'm a newcomer to this forum, though I've been following this project for years with interest. I'm an avid adventure fan, and now an avid text adventure fan.

Activision holds the rights and trademarks for every game Infocom made. Infocom, for those who don't know, was THE text-adventure company, churning out such masterpieces as A Mind Forever Voyaging and Trinity. They had nothing to do with the development of those games, and they hold the copyright because they bought Infocom, and now the games are off-limits because Activision doesn't care about them. Impossible to obtain legally.

Now I see them doing the same to King's Quest?! The series started by Roberta Williams, the co-founder of Sierra Online?! The series whose copyright belonged to Vivendi?! They're getting the franchise *third-hand* and they have the verve to just stop nine years of intense work, work of love, just because they legally can?! A work of a fan?!

Some game industries love games. Infogrames did. Sierra did. Infocom did. Lucasarts did, but I'm not sure it does anymnore. Telltale games certainly does. Quantic Dream does. I don't think Activision does, and that would account for their behaviour.

Practically speaking, is there any way in which Activision could be boycotted? Petitions don't hold much water with these things, these guys are stubburn. Legally they're in their rights. Boycots are usually better, and they've been asking for it. But short of not buying their products (I don't even know what products they are, lately!) I see no way to.

PS - Oh, I see boycotting has been suggested. Nice. :)

crayauchtin

The only real way to boycott would be to not buy their products -- which is sad because I'm so psyched for Diablo III, Starcraft II, and WoW: Cataclysm.
However, I'm more pissed off than I am psyched, so I would probably not purchase the games and I would most likely cancel my WoW account as well.
The tricky thing would be that every game you thought of purchasing, you'd have to Google and see if it was connected to Activision/Blizzard/Vivendi in any way. If it was, you'd have to give it up. It'd be tough, it'd be sad, but it might be worth it.
"If your translation is correct, that was 'May a sleepy hippopotamus lie down on your house keys,' but you're not sure. Unfortunately, your fluency in griffin-speak is too low."

We're roleplaying in the King's Quest world: come join in the fun!

Xizer

You don't have to give up every Activision game by not purchasing them... as you can see by my previous posts... well... you know what way I endorse acquiring Activision products... ;)