Split: Blood TM cancled

Discuss and hash out the Blood universe here.

Moderator: General Discussion Moderators

User avatar
zZaRDoZz
Acolyte
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 03:13 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by zZaRDoZz »

cruxdustrial:
Oh god. When you said words like draconian, puritan and policies. And also censoring the artist. I immediately thought of this picture.
Pic left unquoted

One of the problems everyone is familiar with is the ability to miss-communicate tone on the web. We are all also familiar with the psychology of mild hostility that can occur with the small degree of anonymity that the internet provides. One of the fail-safes put in place to counter these inevitable factors is a system of rules that the end user must agree to in order to form an account at this and other forums. Some forums do away with such rules, using what amounts to a trust system or even a "use at your own risk" policy.

I for one am glad that the community has a choice between both methods of forum interaction.
User avatar
DustyStyx
2D Artist
Posts: 2038
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 02:12 am
Location: Salt Lake
Contact:

Post by DustyStyx »

Some one really needs to make a clarification about the difference between Copyright and Trademark, before you guys get to wild eyed.

A Trademark allows an entity to procures the exclusive right to use a specific NAME for a product. These can last indefinitely, but after the 5th year, a company must pay a fee to keep the TM alive.

Transfusion is called Transfusion and not qBlood because we were asked directly not to use the trademarked name "Blood" in our work.

About's page on TMs: http://inventors.about.com/od/inventing ... ration.htm

A Copyright grants the exclusive right to modify/publish a given media. Although it is recommended that a piece of work be registered, under current US law, copyrights are automatically generated in theory, once the pen is off the paper. They also last for a very long time; currently it is 70 years AFTER the death of the author.
The author can transfer these rights to another entity, in the case of work done for a corporation, or to transfer the works into Public Domain, or something between the two such as Creative Commons/GPL/etc.

About's page on Copyright: http://inventors.about.com/od/copyright ... t_last.htm

Blood's storyline and game media are still under copyright, and working off that storyline still falls under the terms of a "derivative work". Whether or not these derivative works are licensed or not determine if those works are legal or not. If you guys want to continue your mods LEGALLY, you can keep them under Blood, or Blood2 (not Doom, or Jupiter, or HL, or Build, etc...). I believe you can also use Transfusion but I'm not 100% certain, I still need to ask a lawyer about it.

The Unfortunate Bystanders section of the forum is a DIRECT result of the bickering and squabbling between the representatives of Blood2Resurection and Hypertension. If you force some one to have to make a decision, don't be surprised if they take the time to do their homework and use their own initiative.
User avatar
kurt
master of the universe
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 01:16 am
Location: vancouver canada
Contact:

Post by kurt »

Perhaps you may view it as bickering Dusty, but a public forum should be a place of free and open discussion. In this case the community is built around what some people refer to as "dead games". That is the reason why we're all here after all. But if someone from outside of this community came onto the forum and began insulting those games, and the entire community, then it would not be unreasonable that some people might express their disapproval. That is exactly what happened in the Postmortem forum earlier this year, and personally I don't believe that silencing people is the correct option. But we all have the right to agree or disagree, and that is what promotes discussion in a public forum.

Personally I'd like to see the Blood community and the Blood series prosper and grow and be true to its origins. That is the reason I began my project. But in a "draconian" environment no one is permitted to express any opinions that may instigate any kind of difference of opinions. It is safe here because no controversy is permitted.

As I previously stated though, I will always hope for the best, and I wish the entire Blood community, and the Blood series a long and prosperous future.

__________________________________

Image
User avatar
DustyStyx
2D Artist
Posts: 2038
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 02:12 am
Location: Salt Lake
Contact:

Post by DustyStyx »

If you guys really want to secure a footing for Blood's community and future, start up a Blood inspired media repository under a Creative Commons license. There is plenty of room for people to play with the genera. Half the ideas folks come up with are well away from the Blood mythos as it is. It doesn't all have to be derivative work.

And yes, most of the time you guys are just bickering. I've been dealing with it ever since you had the HT guys run out of Posty.
User avatar
zZaRDoZz
Acolyte
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 03:13 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by zZaRDoZz »

Not that I would ever do anything so drastic as to knock the thread back on track but is it possible for Atari to keep it's rights as publisher and use a different company to produce a Blood game? Say for example, a Raven or some other outfit?
User avatar
DustyStyx
2D Artist
Posts: 2038
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 02:12 am
Location: Salt Lake
Contact:

Post by DustyStyx »

Sierra Games tried doing that for FEAR2, and Monolith started up Project Origin. Apparently, Monolith still held copyright to the media and maybe the storyline, but Sierra held the TM. Sierra's version didn't go anywhere and they finally relinquished the ability to use the name FEAR back to Monolith/WB.

I'm not sure if Atari or Monolith set Blood up as a franchise. But I'm sure if some one wanted to throw money at it, they'd have all ears.
User avatar
kurt
master of the universe
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 01:16 am
Location: vancouver canada
Contact:

Post by kurt »

DustyStyx wrote: I've been dealing with it ever since you had the HT guys run out of Posty.

They actually demanded to be banned from the Postmortem forum, and they created a thread just for that purpose. They then fought with everyone until they got their wish. So please don't spread misleading information by saying that I had them run out of the Postmortem forum. Perhaps if you had actually done your "homework" you would have already been aware of that fact.

But for once I will agree with Zardoz that this thread should be kept on topic because I do not want to instigate any controversy here.


__________________________________

Image
User avatar
DustyStyx
2D Artist
Posts: 2038
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 02:12 am
Location: Salt Lake
Contact:

Post by DustyStyx »

BWAH-AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sure, I come on, clarify that Blood's copyright hasn't indeed lapsed and NOW you want it back on topic.

You crack me up.

And I said "guys" kurt, it wasn't just you that ran them off Posty. I'm not defending that HT was "spot on, ducks in a row" but they didn't just leave Posty on their own, and they didn't start showing up here until after that.

But seriously, if you have to call the kettle black check the mote in your own goddamned-eye
User avatar
zZaRDoZz
Acolyte
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 03:13 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by zZaRDoZz »

I couldn't quite understand how a copywright lapse or cancillation on WB's part automatically would translate to Atari losing their rights, but I'm not an expert on these things, you are more up to date on this stuff than most of us Dusty. My problem has always been the perception that the source release or Blood3 is just around the corner. While it is an understandable mistake and one easily made. It has hurt the community by-in-large. It leaves people with the impression that we are not on our own.

We are. We have been since J Hall sent an email to Greg Ernright saying he wouldn't interfere with qblood's efforts to port Blood to the quake engine (2000). So having the proper perspective is always key on this issue. It is within that framework we can have fun speculating about b3 or the source. If on the other hand, it creates the attitude that the calvery is just around the corner for Blood then it becomes a problem.
cruxdustrial
Cultist
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 12:19 pm

Post by cruxdustrial »

There are three types of intellectual property (IP). Trademarks, copyrights, & patents. zZaRDoZz says that he does not understand how WBIE's cancellation leads to Atari's loss of rights. Atari does not have the rights to the Blood series, WBIE obtained the rights to the blood series from Atari. Just as Blizzard obtained the rights to the Redneck Rampage from Vivendi. Just as Bethesda obtained the rights to Fallout from Interplay. Just as Inxile obtained the rights to Wasteland from Electronic Arts. And so on and so forth. Atari is no longer part of the equation and literally and legally, has nothing to do with Blood. It is through the trademark records that we see this transference of rights. If you still have questions, you can check the COPYRIGHT records to Blood, which will confirm and verify everything I have said. It is a legal witness to what I have said. I cannot, sadly, directly link you to the records because of session limitations and expirations, I can give you this link.

http://www.copyright.gov/

Go there and click on 'Search Records' which is a tab at the top which is farthest to the right. Two options will appear 'Online Records' & 'Other Services'. Click on 'Online Records', ignore 'Other Services' as that is for records prior to January 1, 1978. When you click on 'Online Records' (or rather 'Search the Catalog' which is in the Online Records section) you can preform basic or extensive searches. I have provided you with both the Trademark & Copyright records to the Blood series.

Link: http://cocatalog.loc.gov/
Not that I would ever do anything so drastic as to knock the thread back on track but is it possible for Atari to keep it's rights as publisher and use a different company to produce a Blood game? Say for example, a Raven or some other outfit?
No. The publisher either owns the IP or doesn't, if it is the developer, then the publisher has NO rights over the IP. For example, 3DRealms owns the rights to the Duke Nukem series. TakeTwo does not, therefore TakeTwo cannot act as a publisher and beseech another developer to develop a Duke Nukem title.
Some one really needs to make a clarification about the difference between Copyright and Trademark, before you guys get to wild eyed.

A Trademark allows an entity to procures the exclusive right to use a specific NAME for a product. These can last indefinitely, but after the 5th year, a company must pay a fee to keep the TM alive.
Yes, I've clarified this and provided people with the resource to verify it themselves. You'll see that what I've said about the Blood trademark AND copyright is true.

I saw this comment over at PostMortem forums.
As far as I understood, Monolith abandoned the Blood trademark, but Atari is still supposed to be the owner of Blood rights.
Atari is not the owner of Blood rights.

Wikipedia says
In terms of copyrights and ownership, Monolith sold the rights for Blood to GT Interactive who published the games; the company was later purchased by Infogrames which has since been renamed to Atari.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_(video_game)

This is a blatant lie. Wikipedia's statement is mostly false, while true that Monolith sold the rights, it fails to mention that Warner Brothers obtained them. And shows just how Wikipedia often lacks nuance and balance. It should read "In terms of copyrights and onwership, Warner Bros. has the rights to Blood."
Last edited by cruxdustrial on Tue Nov 17, 2009 03:44 am, edited 10 times in total.
User avatar
DustyStyx
2D Artist
Posts: 2038
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 02:12 am
Location: Salt Lake
Contact:

Post by DustyStyx »

Could you please outline exactly how you got the results for the lapse of Copyright?

I'm finding nearly 10,000 results when I do a basic search for the title "Blood". Perhaps you have the registration number?

I can see that the TM has been canceled, but the copyright should still stand even if only by the original author. If that's the case it might be worth trying to contact the original Blood development team to put the series under Creative Commons or something similar. If they can't do that legally, then we are still in the same place we were before the TM expired.
User avatar
Corbin
Zealot
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 09:48 pm
Location: california
Contact:

Post by Corbin »

It's like a merry-go round that won't stop spinning. I can't believe this has been going on for years.
cruxdustrial
Cultist
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 12:19 pm

Post by cruxdustrial »

Clari87,

I like your avatar/icon. I have that as a wallpaper. =]
User avatar
DustyStyx
2D Artist
Posts: 2038
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 02:12 am
Location: Salt Lake
Contact:

Post by DustyStyx »

Cruxdustrial, could you please reiterate what you said about Blood's copyright? Perhaps I've misinterpreted what you sated previously. I'm under the impression that you think that because the TM has been canceled, the copyright no longer is enforced. I apologize if this is not the case, I'm just trying to sort out what's right and wrong in this development.

Also, you can update wikipedia. I believe at the time it was write, the information was accurate.
buildgames
Axe Zombie
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 03:54 am

Post by buildgames »

I've been tracking the situation of the blood source code and I'm intrigued by this recent unregistering of the copyright. So, did WBIE release the rights to Blood into the public domain? Or did they just expired the trademark of the name Blood? Anything that is under a "cancelled" copyright by their owners has to go somewhere, rights speaking. The rights are either transferred to someone else, or they fall into the public domain.
Post Reply