Game show segments

[clemon79]

So basically they're saying you're cutting into their profits with your game? I don't see how that could be an issue, if you're not getting any financial gain from it yourself...

Then by all means, lawyer up and fight them. Let us know how that works out for you financially.

[clemon79]

BigJon's Price is Right is far and away better, customization and details wise, than anything Fremantle has released in the last five years.

<cough>

[trainman]

It seems to me that Food Card Sharks or even the more faithful recreations on Jimmy Fallon would be covered as "fair use" under the same general guidelines that allow Weird Al to have a career.

Weird Al gets permission from the original artists/songwriters and licenses his content (Coolio-related misunderstandings aside) -- at least for his officially released material -- so he may not actually be the best example to cite when looking at a potential "fair use" situation.

[Jimmy Owen]

Do you think Fremantle is aware they own Second Chance?  Or don't they own it?

[parliboy]

BigJon's Price is Right is far and away better, customization and details wise, than anything Fremantle has released in the last five years.

<cough>

To be fair, he did qualify and limit his statement.  Noone's going to deny that BJ's stuff is buggy.

[clemon79]

To be fair, he did qualify and limit his statement.  Noone's going to deny that BJ's stuff is buggy.

Where I come from, bugs are a detail.

[dazztardly]

This is the letter me that and Christopher received last year...

"We are counsel for Hasbro, Inc. (“Hasbro”), the owner of the copyrights and trademarks in the United States and Canada for the famous SCRABBLE® crossword game.  Hasbro recently became aware of your online crossword game called “Scrabble Sprint Challenge”.

Your unauthorized “Scrabble Sprint Challenge” game infringes Hasbro’s copyrights in violation of 17 U.S.C. 501, and also violates the federal trademark laws, including 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1) and 1125(a) and (c), by creating a likelihood of confusion with respect to Hasbro’s authorization, sponsorship of or association with your commercial activities.

We therefore demand that you immediately remove the “Scrabble Sprint Challenge” game from your website and provide Hasbro with written assurance that you will not make any further unauthorized use of the SCRABBLE property.

Please remove the game and confirm to me within ten (10) days your agreement to the above.  This letter does not purport to be a complete statement of the facts or the law and is without prejudice to Hasbro’s legal and equitable rights."


We know we didn't have the rights to do these replica games, but at the time it was the chance that we had to take. It was a way to get recognition and attention to show what each of us were capable of doing. Even though it wasn't kosher, it paid off in spades. It scored each of us work in the industry.

-Dan

[TLEberle]

Forgive what might sound like a stupid question: Hasbro has rights to the TV show from twenty years ago? I thought some dummy corporation scooped that in the 80s.

(If you had called the game "Sprint Challenge," changed up some of the graphics, sounds and such, could you have successfully defended your game?)

[clemon79]

(If you had called the game "Sprint Challenge," changed up some of the graphics, sounds and such, could you have successfully defended your game?)

Certainly. Could they afford to, though?

People seem to be missing that part: the issue is not whether the Little Guy is in the right, because our legal system is such that Big Business can be bullies and there really isn't anything we can do about it. The issue is not getting noticed by the bully in the first place. Once you are on their radar, that's it, regardless of whether you are legally in the clear or not.

[Matt Ottinger]

(If you had called the game "Sprint Challenge," changed up some of the graphics, sounds and such, could you have successfully defended your game?)

As always, the problem with the hypotheticals is that we don't know.  Maybe if their game never had the word Scrabble in it, Hasbro would never have found out about it and never written the letter.  But say all that was true and Hasbro sent them a letter anyway?  Do they really want to fight the big giant company because they may be marginally, just-on-the-edge right?

[irwinsjournal.com]

In general, I think there's a lot more vigorous defense of trademarks and other intellectual property now than there had been in the past.  "Everything" can now be "monetized" so "everything" needs to be "protected." 

A non-GS example: The Union Pacific Railroad started painting the heralds of its predecessor lines on a few freight cars, so that they could say that the trademark was still in use and therefore remained their intellectual property.  This prevented just anyone from using, say, the Missouri Pacific Railroad trademark on a model train, or a calendar, coffee mug, whatever.   There was a huge flap over this with respect to licensing demands and eventually UP backed down at least in terms of model train royalties, but there's still a licensing agreement that has to be signed.   UP isn't so nice with other items like calendars and T-shirts, as far as I know.

Getting back to GS, I can't imagine that Fallon et al wouldn't have approached Fremantle to get permission to do "Password."  And they do a nice job as well.  If it had been a one time "parody" then I could see them asking for forgiveness later.

[PYLdude]

It seems to me that Food Card Sharks or even the more faithful recreations on Jimmy Fallon would be covered as "fair use" under the same general guidelines that allow Weird Al to have a career.

Weird Al gets permission from the original artists/songwriters and licenses his content (Coolio-related misunderstandings aside) -- at least for his officially released material -- so he may not actually be the best example to cite when looking at a potential "fair use" situation.

Weird Al has also said that he is under no obligation to do that, because he does it as a courtesy.

IIRC, as long as he gives credit to the people who wrote the song he is parodying, it's okay.

Besides that, I don't see even if he does give credit, it's an issue- radio stations do parodies all the time.

/Ludia's original TPIR game was better than BigJon's
//So was the 2010 update
///they really dropped the ball with the TPIR decades release

[Jeremy Nelson]

Forgive what might sound like a stupid question: Hasbro has rights to the TV show from twenty years ago? I thought some dummy corporation scooped that in the 80s.

(If you had called the game "Sprint Challenge," changed up some of the graphics, sounds and such, could you have successfully defended your game?)

So there's a game on the Windows 8/ Windows Phone store called Wheel of Wealth. It uses the Wheel of Fortune font, puzzle board, and the same "Hangman+Wheel" format. It was pulled at some point from the store, but was brought back with a disclaimer saying that the game was not affiliated with Sony Pictures or Wheel of Fortune in any way.

Here's the point- I've seen Fremantle slap people with C&D letters for properties they haven't seriously monetized in decades. Wheel has been selling branded merchandise of all sorts since day one and seemingly just asked the developer to add a disclaimer. Maybe it's the rewording of the game's title, maybe each legal department's mileage varies as to how they handle these situations, or maybe it's a little of both.

[BrandonFG]

Here's the point- I've seen Fremantle slap people with C&D letters for properties they haven't seriously monetized in decades. Wheel has been selling branded merchandise of all sorts since day one and seemingly just asked the developer to add a disclaimer. Maybe it's the rewording of the game's title, maybe each legal department's mileage varies as to how they handle these situations, or maybe it's a little of both.

I'm thinking this is how Joytube has still been around, and I was playing that back in the mid-2000s.

For those who are unfamiliar, the site features games just like the ones that used to be on Flash Games - recreations of popular shows. Except...the rules and titles are altered to where it's not infringing on copyright, as it doesn't use the title, music or sound effects.

Not sure if that's what's allowed it to keep going after close to a decade, or if no one has caught on, but it is still kicking (heads off to play)...

[J.R.]

I'm thinking this is how Joytube has still been around

Oooh, just found a new timewaster. Thanks for the suggestion!