These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Alliance Logos & You - Clarification on submissions

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kismeteer
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#21 - 2014-02-13 18:16:12 UTC
Why are you going after goonswarm's logo?

In your list of example logos, all of these are dead groups. That is, except for Goonswarm's, which lives on under Goonswarm Federation. And I know that someone paid for a copyright on it as well.

KenZoku. - Dead 2009 - eve wiki on Ken ,evewho
Ascendant Frontier - Dead 2011 - eve wiki on ASCN, evewho
Veto Corp - Dead 2012 - TMC article on Veto closing, evewho
Mercenary Coalition - Dead 2009ish - eve wiki on MC, evewho
Goonswarm - Dead 2010 - (Lives on as Goonswarm Federation, same logo evewho )
Morsus Mihi - Dead 2011 - eve wiki on MM , evewho
Lotka Volterra - Dead 2007 - eve history on LV, evewho
Electus Matari - Dead 2012 - Went to faction warfare, 18 people evewho

Just kind of strange that goonswarm seems to be singled out here, since we're the only one you specifically listed still using our logo actively. (courtesy of Avalloc)
Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#22 - 2014-02-13 18:17:47 UTC
Uma D wrote:
Bagehi wrote:
Ortho Loess wrote:
Quote:
CCP’s ownership of everything used in the game client is necessary under current intellectual property law

Could you expand on this?

The argument for pursuing a policy that is so clearly against the interests of your users seems to hinge on this point, but it's not explained why you need to own the logos.

This is IP law. CCP can't use a copyrighted name/image in a product/service they sell to customers. This isn't true in some case (eg parody, news reporting, etc) but it wouldn't stop CCP getting dragged into court proceedings because some genius makes a "Ford Sucks" alliance or something along those lines. Basically not even touching copyrighted material at all means much less legal costs for CCP, even if they are in the right.


Still they do not need the ownership of IP. All they need is the usage rights. And since i need to be the owner of any IP i send to ccp anyway I can give ccp the right to use it and that is what the EULA also should reflect.

As long as i do not reference eve in anything i create I do not see why i should need a license to sell something i own. No matter if I sent it to ccp and allow them to use it for anything related to eve. I agree that they can use any material i create and submit to them... not the other way around.

Sorry but this whole devblog smells really fishy.


Giving them the right to use it opens up the fact that you would also have the right to tell them to cease and desist the use of it later. Enter the crazy land of Eve drama mixed with silly IP law where I can claim the rights to your alliance logo and CCP would have to respond. It would be a nightmare. Hard to fault them from staying as far away from IP issues as possible.
Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-02-13 18:23:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Fix Lag
e: let the lawyers sort this **** out.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.
Uma D
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2014-02-13 18:25:23 UTC
Bagehi wrote:


Giving them the right to use it opens up the fact that you would also have the right to tell them to cease and desist the use of it later. Enter the crazy land of Eve drama mixed with silly IP law where I can claim the rights to your alliance logo and CCP would have to respond. It would be a nightmare. Hard to fault them from staying as far away from IP issues as possible.


This could easily be solved by setting up a license prototype the other way around, which could state that ccp gets the right to use the material as long as they want to, as long as they only use it for eve related things. That way they are safe and ownership stays untouched.

And just because they want to make things easier for them it still does not give them the right to steal the ownership of my IP.
Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#25 - 2014-02-13 18:33:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagehi
Uma D wrote:
Bagehi wrote:


Giving them the right to use it opens up the fact that you would also have the right to tell them to cease and desist the use of it later. Enter the crazy land of Eve drama mixed with silly IP law where I can claim the rights to your alliance logo and CCP would have to respond. It would be a nightmare. Hard to fault them from staying as far away from IP issues as possible.


This could easily be solved by setting up a license prototype the other way around, which could state that ccp gets the right to use the material as long as they want to, as long as they only use it for eve related things. That way they are safe and ownership stays untouched.

And just because they want to make things easier for them it still does not give them the right to steal the ownership of my IP.

I'm assuming there is fine print in the submission stuff that says the image you are submitting does not contain copyright material and you give CCP full rights to any image you submit. So they aren't "stealing" the IP, you are agreeing to give it to them. That said, it may not have always said that. So, there might be some problems with old logos based on what Kismeteer said here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4232406#post4232406

So it will be interesting to see what comes of old logos that CCP may (or may not, I'm just guessing) not have obtained the rights to.
RDevz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-02-13 18:34:49 UTC
Why, precisely, can't CCP instead be given a universal, assignable, non-revocable, royalty-free licence to use alliance logos as part of the submission process, and avoid this blatant copyright land-grab that will just lead to lawyers getting richer if ever used in anger?

~
Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2014-02-13 18:37:11 UTC
RDevz wrote:
Why, precisely, can't CCP instead be given a universal, assignable, non-revocable, royalty-free licence to use alliance logos as part of the submission process, and avoid this blatant copyright land-grab that will just lead to lawyers getting richer if ever used in anger?


Because it's CCP.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.
Darius JOHNSON
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2014-02-13 18:40:28 UTC
Kismeteer wrote:
Why are you going after goonswarm's logo?

In your list of example logos, all of these are dead groups. That is, except for Goonswarm's, which lives on under Goonswarm Federation. And I know that someone paid for a copyright on it as well.

KenZoku. - Dead 2009 - eve wiki on Ken ,evewho
Ascendant Frontier - Dead 2011 - eve wiki on ASCN, evewho
Veto Corp - Dead 2012 - TMC article on Veto closing, evewho
Mercenary Coalition - Dead 2009ish - eve wiki on MC, evewho
Goonswarm - Dead 2010 - (Lives on as Goonswarm Federation, same logo evewho )
Morsus Mihi - Dead 2011 - eve wiki on MM , evewho
Lotka Volterra - Dead 2007 - eve history on LV, evewho
Electus Matari - Dead 2012 - Went to faction warfare, 18 people evewho

Just kind of strange that goonswarm seems to be singled out here, since we're the only one you specifically listed still using our logo actively. (courtesy of Avalloc)


Just going to quote this and let you know that CCP owns neither the Goonswarm logo, 'nor the name. Putting a name in a videogame doesn't make it yours and if you think for a minute that's an arguable case then your lawyers might want to have a chat with some other lawyers. These rights were purchased long ago and it's pretty disgusting to try and assert any form of control over the art. You don't need to do this and any argument that you do is patently false.

It's nice to see the gloves coming off though and that all pretense of being a decent business are being thrown to the side.
Darius JOHNSON
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2014-02-13 18:43:45 UTC
Bagehi wrote:
Uma D wrote:
Bagehi wrote:


Giving them the right to use it opens up the fact that you would also have the right to tell them to cease and desist the use of it later. Enter the crazy land of Eve drama mixed with silly IP law where I can claim the rights to your alliance logo and CCP would have to respond. It would be a nightmare. Hard to fault them from staying as far away from IP issues as possible.


This could easily be solved by setting up a license prototype the other way around, which could state that ccp gets the right to use the material as long as they want to, as long as they only use it for eve related things. That way they are safe and ownership stays untouched.

And just because they want to make things easier for them it still does not give them the right to steal the ownership of my IP.

I'm assuming there is fine print in the submission stuff that says the image you are submitting does not contain copyright material and you give CCP full rights to any image you submit. So they aren't "stealing" the IP, you are agreeing to give it to them. That said, it may not have always said that. So, there might be some problems with old logos based on what Kismeteer said here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4232406#post4232406

So it will be interesting to see what comes of old logos that CCP may (or may not, I'm just guessing) not have obtained the rights to.


There are a number of logos that have been registered outside of CCP because guess what? CCP didn't make them. That's common practice. CCP didn't make the identity and doesn't own the identity. Any claims otherwise are false as evidenced by prior registration of many of these logos to submitting them to CCP.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2014-02-13 18:44:19 UTC
you do not need the ownership of the IP, you need a non-revocable licence to the IP

you need better lawyers

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Darius JOHNSON
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#31 - 2014-02-13 18:46:54 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
you do not need the ownership of the IP, you need a non-revocable licence to the IP

you need better lawyers


CCP's business minds seem to have a hard time discerning the difference between what they "need" and what they "want". Frankly this is the kind of patent-trollesque IP behavior people are railing about in other areas of the industry and it's flat out despicable.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#32 - 2014-02-13 18:49:04 UTC
here goonswarm we're offering you a license to use the IP you own the rights to

wait what

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
Coalition of the Unfortunate
#33 - 2014-02-13 18:49:21 UTC
Seems bizarre to me, what CCP claims it needs.

I work with client logos quite a bit, and all that is required is a permanent, non-exclusive, non-revocable license with permission to use and redistribute for service provision, commentary and marketing.

Your lawyers are telling you what they want, not what you need.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#34 - 2014-02-13 18:51:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
incidentally you probably don't actually own the copyright to any user-submitted logos under american copyright law whatever you try to say in your EULA because you didn't get a signed instrument of conveyance, note or memorandum of the transfer signed by the current copyright holder under 17 usc 204(a) and most of those were probably copyrighted under american law

stuff created in-game, you can probably swing under the eula: logos created outside the game and submitted, nope

fortunately for you i believe a failed attempt to transfer a copyright (like your eula) gives you instead the non-revocable royalty-free unlimited licence to do whatever you choose with it that you actually need

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
RDevz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2014-02-13 18:57:34 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
incidentally you probably don't actually own the copyright to any user-submitted logos under american copyright law whatever you try to say in your EULA because you didn't get a signed instrument of conveyance, note or memorandum of the transfer signed by the current copyright holder under 17 usc 204(a) and most of those were probably copyrighted under american law

stuff created in-game, you can probably swing under the eula: logos created outside the game and submitted, nope

fortunately for you i believe a failed attempt to transfer a copyright (like your eula) gives you instead the non-revocable royalty-free unlimited licence to do whatever you choose with it that you actually need


Similarly, in the UK, assignment requires a signed contract, something which unilateral modification of an end-user licence agreement can't effect.

~
Darius JOHNSON
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2014-02-13 18:57:48 UTC
What I want to know is why CCP wants to steal other people's IP? What's the business plan here? That's a good question and if you're going to go back to pretending to be decent you might want to explain to people how you're going to profit from their work and exploit them going forward.
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#37 - 2014-02-13 19:01:30 UTC
Quote:
Of course, if there are any alliances in game whom feel that they would rather not have CCP retain copyright ownership of their alliance logo, then the executor of any alliance who feels this is the case can feel free to submit a support ticket to us under the alliance logo submissions category to have their logo removed or replaced.
Question on this, will the replacement offer be given to alliances that currently have a logo, but does not meet the criteria of an alliance logo? There are some, let's say "similarities" regarding my own logos that for the sake of the IP discussion would perhaps be in need of a makeover.

However neither of the alliances I have, that have logos (since the old days) meet the requirement of a logo today - will I be offered to update my logo with a new version, or should I keep the current?

/c

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar
Pew Terror
All of it
#38 - 2014-02-13 19:06:06 UTC
Fun trivia: In germany the ONLY legal way intelectual property can be transfered is by heritage.

http://i.lvme.me/xmeh35.jpg
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#39 - 2014-02-13 19:08:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
RDevz wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
incidentally you probably don't actually own the copyright to any user-submitted logos under american copyright law whatever you try to say in your EULA because you didn't get a signed instrument of conveyance, note or memorandum of the transfer signed by the current copyright holder under 17 usc 204(a) and most of those were probably copyrighted under american law

stuff created in-game, you can probably swing under the eula: logos created outside the game and submitted, nope

fortunately for you i believe a failed attempt to transfer a copyright (like your eula) gives you instead the non-revocable royalty-free unlimited licence to do whatever you choose with it that you actually need


Similarly, in the UK, assignment requires a signed contract, something which unilateral modification of an end-user licence agreement can't effect.


It's a greedy move by CCP.

I think we can all agree on that.

Really CCP can't come after you from using your alliance logo for profit. A claim of ownership would never, ever be held up on court.

However, CCP could just delete your logo from EVE.

It's hilariously draconian from a company that is supposed to be progressive.

Quote:
While player-created Alliance logos are part of CCP’s IP


They'd like to think this is true - but it just isn't.

Pew Terror wrote:
Fun trivia: In germany the ONLY legal way intelectual property can be transfered is by heritage.

http://i.lvme.me/xmeh35.jpg


Bwahahahahhahaha Big smile
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#40 - 2014-02-13 19:13:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
oh i see what you did there:

Quote:
3.3. Licensee shall not:
3.3.1. challenge the validity of CCP’s rights to the Licensed Property or CCP Marks or any registration thereof;
3.3.2. contest the fact that its rights under this Agreement are solely those of a licensee;
3.3.3. attempt to register the Licensed Property or any of the CCP Marks absent of or contrary to direction from CCP;
3.3.4. use the Licensed Property or CCP Marks in any manner that would jeopardize CCP’s rights therein; or
3.3.5. knowingly do any act that would invalidate or be likely to invalidate the CCP’s copyright and/or trademark registrations.


your lawyers know your attempt to assert the eula transfers copyright is bunk so you basically make people promise they will not point out the emperor has no clothes

basically "sure we don't own it, but you agree you won't point that out to the court"

that actually might be enforceable, but your licence is clearly a trojan horse to cover up the faulty transfer of copyright to ccp and get 3.3.3.1 in there and not a friendly sure you guys can use your own alliance logo

i retract my comment you need better lawyers that's pretty cunning

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.