Jump to content
Pantera

Selling Constructs based on existing IPs

Recommended Posts

So I was thinking about the fine print of designing and selling blueprints. I did search for this but didn’t come up with anything so if I’m rehashing a past topic I apologize. Maybe I used the wrong terms when searching.

 

I have come to think of DU as a Ready Player One of sorts. Be who you want to be. Build what you want to build. Fly around in the Serenity and park it in your personal Battlestar. 

 

Now that being said, people are going to build X-wings, Normandys, Sulacos and Gunstars. That can’t be stopped. 

 

BUT...

 

Part of the idea of the game is to build and SELL blueprints to make a galactic living. The price of things in game can go back to being able to exchange for DACs which have a real world cost. That being said, what’s the legality of someone selling in game assists that are based on an existing IP being that in game items can eventually be traced back to real world costs? It’ll cost you 5 DACs for a blueprint of an Enterprise with a shuttle craft. 

 

Anywho.. those are my current thoughts.

 

Peace, love and “For Science”! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NQ has said something along the lines that no copyrighted works should be recreated in game, and if it was reported or a copyright owner made a complaint then it would have to be moderated. So it's probably best not to recreate them in game, at least not obvious replicas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stuff like that should fall under parody and fair use. I'm not sure how the rules will work in the future for the EU, with the new controversial copyright law proposals, but as of right now all that kind of stuff is open to recreation in game due to Fair Use law.

Its still not best to recreate any copyrighted material in game until NQ gives the okay for it, but so long as NQ is okay with it, there should be no problems. My guess is that NQ is waiting for the EU copyright law situation to be resolved before telling people that they can create whatever. Currently the EU is preparing for a redraft of the proposal, so hopefully things go the way we want it to.

 

Here is a link to an article describing the specifics of the EU copyright law situation: https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/5/17535874/eu-copyright-law-article-11-13-rejected-first-vote 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because DAC have a real world value you can't make the argument that what you sell in game has. Putting a $$ tag on in game items is just  a thing that looks good on paper and in news articles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

Just because DAC have a real world value you can't make the argument that what you sell in game has. Putting a $$ tag on in game items is just  a thing that looks good on paper and in news articles.

Making a profit also isn't considered when looking at if something is fair use or not. Even if you are making money, plenty of people already do that with lots of copyrighted material. That's the world of parody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot be sued for using an idea in this way, as this qualifies as fair use. However, I recommend you you disclaim this information when you post images and stuff of your ship on the Internet to make it clear that you don't claim ownership of the ideas.

 

This sort of thing is classified the same as modding. You may notice, there are all sorts of games out there with mods based on other company's IPs. The only time that a modder needs permission, is if they want to use assets owned by the company, like textures, models, and other things used in other games. Making your own assets based on their creations constitutes as fair use, as long as you don't use it for anything that will earn you a profit. Freeware fan games are another huge example of this. The only ones that get in trouble and get shut down, are the ones that use assets without permission.

 

Another game where this sort of thing can be seen is Empyrion: Galactic Survival. I find this game to be a bit buggy so I refunded it, but this game has a ship building system very similar to the one advertised publicly for Dual Universe (never been in the game, so I have no idea what its actually in our game like due to the NDA). On the Steam workshop for Empyrion, many players upload ships that are based on the designs of ships from Star Wars, Star Trek, and other Sci-Fi IPs. This is fine, since these ships are free for anyone to obtain. However, the development team of Empyrion will never add one of these ships as an official prefab found in the main game, because by including it in a sold product, they are breaking copyright rules and may be sued.

 

If a player sells a blueprint with real world money or transferable money, this is a gray area. You might be sued, but I doubt that the owners of each IP will notice or even care enough to sue you. For an IP owner to care, they need to see huge amounts of money being made on their idea, in a way that harms their own reputation. Players selling ships to other players in a different game, is actually a good thing for them because it is free advertising. Also, it would make themselves look really bad for suing players who copied their ideas because they liked them so much.

 

Hope this explanation is helpful. Good question!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2018 at 6:37 PM, Lockethot said:

You cannot be sued for using an idea in this way, as this qualifies as fair use

 

Please read up on what fair use is. It is only applicable if a judge rules it is, you can't use the term upfront as an excuse for using copyright material. You can certainly be sued and be on trial for this. It is upto a judge to determine if fair use applies or not.

 

https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/

 

While this article relates to US law, it is the same in Europe.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2018 at 10:16 PM, blazemonger said:

 

Please read up on what fair use is. It is only applicable if a judge rules it is, you can't use the term upfront as an excuse for using copyright material. You can certainly be sued and be on trial for this. It is upto a judge to determine if fair use applies or not.

 

https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/

 

While this article relates to US law, it is the same in Europe.

 

Ehrm... Europe does not really have a formal fair use doctrine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyways ...i think we should stay clear of copyrighted stuff.

Or atleast make it only slightly resemble it.

 

Why would you make a spaceship enterprise ingame here ... if you can just do that in a single player game too. Faster and easyer. Without the fear of deletion of 150+ hours of work.

 

There's alot of things one can take artistic inspiration from.

Just don't blindly copy it ^^. 

 

I take my inspiration of sci-fi ship artists too sometimes.

Specially these one, as they gave me a good idea how my transport ship will look.

(if i ever get enough ingame time to actually make it happen)

 

?format=300w

 

I loved the idea off unsymetrical spaceships .. since starwars 1.

 

This one has a interesting feral look.

 

concept_162.jpg

 

 

I by no means will copy these, but ideas like the general shape. Leg apendix and other things. Can give a builder quite alot of inspirations.

Credit to some neat artists! And if you recognize it ... the last one is from the Prometheus Alien movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what in game should be deal in game alone. NQ have say they create some way to protect the blueprint industry like prevent people from modified a little the copy construct then make a master blueprint from it.

So if there is  really a copy construct it mean other have break down it piece to piece to analyse everything and rebuild a new one from scratch. It maybe a copy but they have put their effort for it. So if they want the other to stop that ( stop who own the master blueprint to create sub blueprint ) it should go though the law of the Organization alone. If that person live in Terrain Union umbrella then you can sue them though the Department of Justice in TU to put and end to it and do the same with other Organization. It no help if they in an Org which don't care about product license but you can atleast put an end by prevent blueprint from enter other market place.

About DAC. I think once you give money to NQ and turn it into DAC, it didnt a real world money anymore. It like you pay for NQ to have a right to gain a DAC. But who know ... I think if someone sue someone else because something in game relate to the money they put in will harm the game more than the harm of the sue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ShioriStein said:

I think what in game should be deal in game alone. NQ have say they create some way to protect the blueprint industry like prevent people from modified a little the copy construct then make a master blueprint from it.

So if there is  really a copy construct it mean other have break down it piece to piece to analyse everything and rebuild a new one from scratch. It maybe a copy but they have put their effort for it. So if they want the other to stop that ( stop who own the master blueprint to create sub blueprint ) it should go though the law of the Organization alone. If that person live in Terrain Union umbrella then you can sue them though the Department of Justice in TU to put and end to it and do the same with other Organization. It no help if they in an Org which don't care about product license but you can atleast put an end by prevent blueprint from enter other market place.

About DAC. I think once you give money to NQ and turn it into DAC, it didnt a real world money anymore. It like you pay for NQ to have a right to gain a DAC. But who know ... I think if someone sue someone else because something in game relate to the money they put in will harm the game more than the harm of the sue.

 

About blueprint rights.

 

The last game i knew that had trouble with thiefs copying stuff. Handled it pretty simple.

When you buy a blueprint. You can use it and modify it to your liking. Then put it up again for sales.

 

Now someone buys your modified blueprint of "Space Truckers Delight Mk2".

12% of the Blueprints vol/ Objects came from you.

59% from someone else and  the others where split about a bunch of other guys.

Because the blueprint, when placed ... would remember the parts and who made them. Regardless if copyed or cut out and pasted.

 

The money from the sale, now gets put into the hands of people based on the % they attributed to that blueprint.

Yes someone could rebuild it 100% by looking at it ... but they could just make one themself too and possible sparetheself of devs deleting their stuff, if they do that to much.

 

 

What did the % Ownage solved? Someone that put into work, always would get money from anything that used his works. From candlesticks that you made too castles or wall segments.

Surely, a candlestick wont amount to much % wise if someoen decorated a house with it and sells the house + candlestick. But who would pay alot of ingame ressources for a single candlestick ...

 

 

The same for scripts.

If someone makes a script and uses a other script which is for sale as it's base, all people will be attributed to its sale based on contribution.

 

 

That method is alot easyer then denying re-sales and other things. Well scriptwise, these should have the option to be "non-editable" purchases too ... it's a bit easyer to copy + paste down a few code pages and resell that as their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sofernius said:

Because the blueprint, when placed ... would remember the parts and who made them. Regardless if copyed or cut out and pasted.

this doesn't work with voxels.

Because it is possible to make a negative mold of an item, then use that to construct a new 'totally owned' version of the same build. Thereby bypassing the protections.

 

The only option worth anything is to allow two types of blueprints, one type can be modified and edited, just like it was your own. The other type can be tagged deploy only. A 'deploy only' blueprint creates an in world item that can not be modified or edited in any way. Folks can then decide on a blueprint by blueprint basis which way to sell stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Sofernius That seem rely heavily on the dev to implement some script to control how the blueprint money worth. But i remember DU is where freedom for player is the most important thing, player have to deal with everything and their own mess. NQ have already implement someway to protect the owner of blueprint but didnt mean they have to interfere deep into it.

I will give example about it. In real world, if i buy a car from some factory or vehicle shop and modified into a cool car and resell with a higher value then did i have to give some of my money to the one who designed the car ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ShioriStein said:

will give example about it. In real world, if i buy a car from some factory or vehicle shop and modified into a cool car and resell with a higher value then did i have to give some of my money to the one who designed the car ?

 

So let’s break this down. You buy a corvette. You modify the corvette and sell it for more. That’s ok as long as you can do it once. The original designer got their cash. You got your cash for the upgrades and the cost of the core product. All is good. 

 

What you should NOT be able to do is buy 1 corvette, modify it then sell more then 1 copy. The cost should contain the cost of the core product which goes to the original designer and then what ever one may charge for the upgrades. You cannot sell 10 modified corvettes if your shop only bought one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pantera said:

What you should NOT be able to do is buy 1 corvette, modify it then sell more then 1 copy. The cost should contain the cost of the core product which goes to the original designer and then what ever one may charge for the upgrades. You cannot sell 10 modified corvettes if your shop only bought one.

So you mean. Owner who designed and build a A Ship. Then create A master blueprint from it and make copy blueprint to sell. Then someone got that copy blueprint, build into a A Ship then modify a little and then they can create a master blueprint from it ?

 


That function is include from what Dev have said to protect the blueprint industry by making a copy construct ( which build from a copy blueprint ) cant make into a master blueprint how ever they modify it.

 

 

But like Lethys have said somewhere i forgot it. IF they break down the ship to piece by piece, analyse everything and rebuild it then that is outside of the protect as they have put much effort to rebuild it. You have to deal in game with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Spock said:

So it's like China: buy product, take ita apart, build own cheap version based on oryginal design then sell cheaper :)

and therefore break international trade laws and should be punished for it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just went off of the 'Car' comparison which I actually like.  Buy a car or 10 or 100 cars from the factory. You pay for each one. You modify each one like Roush or Hennessey or who ever does.  You sell those 1, 10 or 100 ships for cost of ship + mods + markup.  That is a perfect model of what I believe should be.  Unless the seller purposely sold a multi use blueprint or an infinite use blueprint  which could allow whatever the buy wants.   I really do like the hot rod shop mentality though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People will be people in the end. If you place a restriction on something, there will always be someone out there that finds a way around it. Like DU, it's a race without a finish line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DarkHorizon said:

People will be people in the end. If you place a restriction on something, there will always be someone out there that finds a way around it. Like DU, it's a race without a finish line

True that. I mean you cannot stop everyone from doing everything. @Destrinmakes some beautiful ships. We cannot stop a person or org from trying trying to capitalize on his future success by making knockoffs. Hopefully people will know you’re buying fake Oakleys not the real deal. Again I really like the idea of the “hot rod shop”. Someone buys a ship and makes it ‘better’ and sells it for a profit. You can make the profit on that one ship you bought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pantera said:

Someone buys a ship and makes it ‘better’ and sells it for a profit

Or you can steal one and bring it to mod shop xD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2018 at 12:29 AM, ShioriStein said:

Or you can steal one and bring it to mod shop xD.

Grand Theft Starship: Alioth ?

 

can we steal? Will we be limited to hacking it up for parts? Can we destroy the core and put in yours? If you do that will it loose all that precious LUA code? Who knows. 

 

Or buy a bunch of ships. Chop off bits. Make a space ‘rat rod’. I’d make one if we get rusty/imperfect voxel materials. 

 

266567-19.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pantera said:

Can we destroy the core and put in yours? If you do that will it loose all that precious LUA code?

 

 

In LUA tutorial they said LUA is in cocpit not core.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...