On 07/12/09 12:38, Warp wrote:
>    Historical pieces of art would be lost because it would be illegal for
> anyone to copy them in order to preserve them. There are *tons* of art
> out there who nodoby knows who owns currently the copyright (because the
> author has died and it's unclear who is currently the owner; even the
> legal owner himself may be completely unaware of the fact).

	Oh yes. Think vaporware. Lots and lots of games out there that people 
cherish and love, but that are protected by copyright and the 
people/companies who own that copyright aren't bothered to let people 
play those games legally.

	I could understand it if those companies were planning on marketing 
those games, or making remakes, etc. Then those older games would hurt 
sales. But in almost all cases that's just not how it is. The owners are 
often megacorps who, as a rule, just maintain the copyright.

	Anyone play the Sierra Quest games? King's Quest? Space Quest? Sierra 
stopped making such games in the 90's. I think the last one was in 1997 
or 1998. They then got bought. It was becoming clear they had no 
interest in those franchises (they didn't even before it got bought). 
Then it got bought again, ending up being owned by Vivendi. No plans 
whatsoever to continue the franchise. For a while, they contracted a 
company to make a new Space Quest, but that project collapsed (the last 
Space Quest game was released in 1995).

	Then some guys made a VGA remake of King's Quest 1 in about 2001.

http://www.agdinteractive.com/

	They then made a remake of King's Quest 2. Released in late 2002.

	Then they started making a remake of Quest For Glory 2.
	
	Then Vivendi's lawyers descended upon them. I don't know what 
transpired, but I think they made an agreement that Vivendi would own 
the copyright and the games were not allowed to be sold - only given 
away (which was the original plan any way).

	Another group was working on "King's Quest 9" - and unlike the above 3, 
they were working on a "high quality" (i.e. good graphics) game.

http://www.tsl-game.com/

	In 2006 or so, Vivendi descended upon them. The project came really 
close to being shut down. They fought hard and finally got permission. I 
forget the terms - wouldn't surprise me if Vivendi secured the rights to 
those as well.

	Finally, the bad news: Another group was working on Space Quest 7 (SQ7) 
- also meant to be of high quality. They'd been working on it since at 
least 2002. In 2007 or 2008, Vivendi went after them.

	Now I must point out that all of these groups were not doing anything 
in secret, and I believe had even informed (at times repeatedly) Vivendi 
of their project. Vivendi rarely acknowledged, and their responses were 
always noncommittal - not giving permission, but not forbidding the work 
either. The projects all knew the risks.

	They succeeded in getting SQ7 shut down. They wanted to own the 
copyright, but unfortunately some of the people who had contributed to 
the project had done so on the condition that the copyright will not be 
transferred to Vivendi.

	The SQ7 folks tried everything. They were willing to sell it and give 
Vivendi all the profits. They were willing to make many other 
compromises. But Vivendi just insisted on the copyright.

	Vivendi has no plans to make a Quest game. They don't even make 
anything remotely similar. There doesn't seem to be any hint of a plan 
that they'll ever get into this market. They also have nothing against 
those games - it's not like they have a reason to prevent people from 
playing. From the lawyer's perspective, Vivendi owns the copyright, and 
there's always a nonzero probability that *one day* Vivendi may want to 
make such a game, and SQ7's existence *may* dig into their profits.

	Now the SQ7 developers don't really have any complaints. They knew the 
risks, and they felt it was worth it to try. They're taking it well.

	But of course, all the fans of the franchise aren't. This is a clear 
case of "copyright abuse" - in the sense that it works against the 
stated purpose of copyright. It's using copyright to stifle art, not 
promote it.

	And of course, because of these cases, no doubt other groups will be 
less likely to produce works of art.


-- 
Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright 
ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little 
sign of breaking down in the near future.


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message