German release/translation gaff

[Dr. Nick]

I'm just wondering what's going to happen with the whole "best of the net" modding and scenario making... if they clarify and offer to publish your scenarios, copyright them and demand money for them!

[Olaf the Bold]

What do we need with European publishers anyway. Throw them all out on the street and let the fans do it. Or even better throw out the proffessional programmers at Firaxis and go back to the good old days when games were written by spotty teenagers in their bedrooms.

Harsh Economic Truth: If companies don't protect their investment they disappear.

[madmario]

Originally posted by CyberShy
One day the pres and me got a notification from a lawner from the company that has copyright on "The Riddler" and he told us to cease using their products.

These situations are apples and oranges. Kai was immediatly threatened. The financial well being of his family was at stake. In the case you describe, someone recieved a letter. Just a letter. There is a big big difference there. No, clearly you have not been in this situation beforeif this is the best example you can bring up. The breadth of what Kai was threatened financially (right up front, no friendly letters, which was my point elsewhere) was akin to hitting a pedestrian with your car while you have no car insurance. They said, "sign this paper that says you are guilty and take all responsibility right now." Do you have any idea what the long term legal ramifications for that could be? I certainly don't. The situations are very very different.


You still haven't answered my questions, and I can only suppose that is because you cannot, which is my point. You can only make assumptions, based on no kind of legal language or precedent - but only on faith and expectation, and Firaxis' reputation. Exactly, exactly like Kai did.


-mario

[Robert]

The letter we got told us we would be sued if we wouldn't have removed all riddler-orientated stuff from our website.
Is that treated enough ?

If Kai would've signed the thingy immediately he wouldn't have had any problems.

What was your question ?

[madmario]

Originally posted by Olaf the Bold
Harsh Economic Truth: If companies don't protect their investment they disappear.

Of course. But it's not like Kai and his crew made something that didn't require the purchase of a copy of the game. They followed the directions on the box to modify and customize exactly how they wished, and obeyed the endorsements by the developer to hack away. Nor was the company required to act as harshly, or with as broad a course of action, as they did. There seems to have been no friendly letters or phone calls.

-mario

[madmario]

Originally posted by CyberShy
The letter we got told us we would be sued if we wouldn't have removed all riddler-orientated stuff from our website.
Is that treated enough ?

Did the letter say:
Pay us $850 right now for our lawyer.
Sign an admonission of guilt or else we will sue you for gobloads.


No, it said, remove, or else. There was no immediate threat. You were able to respond rationally, and have that be that. Kai was not. It sounds like the company you dealt with was much more reasonable than IGG.


And my point is that Kai may not have even understand what the "thingy" meant. Maybe it meant that they could send him to jail. Maybe it meant Kai admitted financial responsibilities (without trial) if IGG had a poor financial quarter.

You were not required to sign anything in your situation. Kai was. That is the critical, huge difference.


My questions on pg8, were:

Please explain the difference (between a mod and a translation)to me. Pretend I am a judge, not a gamer. How is it different than, say, changing the text in the game to be more flavorful? (In another post) why are you so sure, and where in the text of the game or the box is this distinction made clear? I am talking about textual evidence here, not assumption or supposition.

And, remember, IGG now demands permission for ANY mod.

-mario

[SKev]

Man, this is why I probably should have kept quiet. I'm already sick of hearing myself ramble on and I've just started. I’ll try and respond in order:

Jimbo: My post was not intended to silence critics of Infogrames. I think, from a PR standpoint, they screwed up…bad. Anyone who disagrees with the action taken should most definitely let Infogrames know. While everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I doubt many of the avid posters on this subject understand the subtleties of U.S. Copyright law, how that law is applied internationally and legal procedure in Germany. While I know something in general about the laws of intellectual property, I’m certainly not in a position to conclude what Infogrames did was legally right, wrong, proper or necessary. I’d also be willing to bet most people (if not all) are as poorly equipped as I to render useful opinions on the subject. How much stock would you put into a movie review from a person who based it solely on the one-sheet outside the theater? The main point of my post is to try and correct what I perceive to be a faulty premise—a translation is not a MOD.


Mario: I have never personally translated anything, but I’ve watch “battling translators” try and reach agreement on the meaning of the simplest of phrases. It was not fun. I believe I conceded the act of translating is difficult and, because it is virtually impossible to literally translate any large work, the end result is something like an original artistic work. While all that’s true, the measure of creativity is not the only test for determining whether something is a MOD.

I don’t have any definition of MOD (and don’t know of any legal definition), and that’s one of the problems when dealing with this issue. The dude in Germany called his work a MOD; Infogrames felt otherwise (and so do I). To me, MOD means minor variations in the program to alter gameplay—stats changes, graphics changes, custom maps, new units, new Civs, scenarios, etc. While those can be sweeping in scope and effect, they are still a minor part of the overall program. And before I’m attacked on this, I know that definition could include translations. I’ve tried to be clear as to why I think a translation is not a MOD based on copyright law. It may also be, as I noted before, as simply as Infogrames wanting to protect their right to sell their own German-language version of the game, something they have every right to do.

“Derivative work,” however, is defined by the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 USCS SS 101. “A ‘derivative work’ is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a ‘derivative work.’” Again, before I’m attacked I think this definition could include any MOD.

Can I explain why I think there is a like to be drawn to the satisfaction of everyone here? No. I try to think of is this way: Firaxis’s (or Infogrames) rights to the game are like a bundle of sticks. They can give some sticks away and they can keep some sticks solely at their discretion. They’ve decided to “give away” the sticks which protect the rules, stats, graphics, etc. (There may also be an issue that the stats are not, by themselves, copyrightable, but that is getting off the point.) They’ve decided to “keep” the sticks which relate to translating the game into other languages. Does this make sense? Hey, there’s money to be made by customizing the game for each country. Is there any way for you to have known what you were doing was contrary to the rights conferred on you by Infogrames? I’m not sure. I have no desire to wade through the copyright statements/license that came with the game to figure out whether the line I’ve drawn is actually there. Plus, I’ve already noted that I don’t know enough about programming to apply the license to any particular MOD. All I know is what has occurred—Infogrames allows and encourages MODs which change graphic, stats and gameplay but have stopped any effort to translate the game. I can induce (or deduce, I can never remember) that Infogrames considers the former a true MOD and the later a copyright violation. The law (and probably the license agreement) can be read to support that conclusion.

I don’t know what a Judge would do in this case. Based on everthing I’ve already said, I this a Judge would agree with me: The Judge would rule a “translation” is not a MOD (because it is expressly defined as a “derivative work,” unlike other MODs), the translation is a clear copyright violation and that Firaxis’s pro-MOD statements, while probably in violation of the documentation sold with the game, did not waive their right to enforce the copyright on the text of the game. If Firaxis tried to stop someone from freely distributing a new unit MOD however, I think a Judge would rule against Firaxis.

Greg: Your comments show the problems with any analogy—change one little fact and the end result could be completely different. Yours are not analogous to the situation. The German dude wasn’t trying to write in just one book, he was offering to write in all of them simultaneously. A better analogy is if he translated the one book by writing in it but then copied the entire translation and gave copies of it to everyone who asked and could prove they also bought the book. That’s a copyright violation. The person who reads the book out loud does not violate the copyright because it is a “transitory performance” of the work. (I can’t remember the precise term, but it’s something like that.) If, however, he decided to tape his reading (place it in some sort of permanent medium) and then give it away to the blind, that’s a violation. I think that is more like what happened here. (See, now I’ve fallen into the trap of trying to spin an analogy my way. Analogies are just like statistics….)

Nemo: I’m not an Infogrames attorney or marketing hack. I’m simply a casual gamer and big Civ fan who, up until yesterday, didn’t have anything of value to say. Some would argue I still don’t. I don’t know much about programming or making MODs and by the time I figure out something about strategy or the AI it is already common knowledge. So I usually just lurk about and read. I registered because I know something about this topic.

I think your post demonstrates the substantial gray area when it comes to MODs and the law. My opinion is that most MODs technically violate copyright laws but the copyright holder won’t do anything about it. I don’t know if just internally changing the icons in the game but not adding anything else violates the copyright or would even be considered a MOD, and that’s the problem. As I said above, the amount of creativity in the “MOD” is simply one factor in determining whether it is actually a MOD. It doesn’t take much creativity to give an Immortal one more defense point but it takes a lot of creativity to change one of the advisors to Elvis. The former is a MOD, the later is also a MOD but may violate the likeness rights of the Estate of Elvis Presley. (That’s actually a poor example because I don’t think there’s a violation unless the likeness is sold, but you get the idea.) Similarly, if your MOD is to take (i.e. steal) the city graphics from SMAC and put them in Civ 3, you’ve probably violated the SMAC copyright. Will anything ever be done about it (or most other MODs)? Probably not. The MOD is not being sold and it is not affecting Infogrames rights in the future (unless, of course, they were planning on issuing an expansion pack which added those graphics—then I bet you’d see a C&D Order on the MOD.) Here, regardless of whether the translation is considered a MOD, Infogrames is working on the same thing. It was simply protecting its future product.

I’ll only briefly add to what I’ve already said about the translation issue. Most works over 100 years old (the age can vary) are in the Public Domain (not protected by copyright law) and can be freely copied. That is why anyone can translate “The Odyssey” from Greek (Latin?) to English. But if you tried to translate Robert Fitzgerald’s English translation of “The Odyssey” into German, you’d be violating Mr. Fitzgerald’s copyright. The translation of a work in the public domain (or any other derivate work from the unprotected source) is independently copyrightable because of its original artistic merit. (And I agree translating is an art form.) The underlying source is not protected. That’s why when Disney puts out “Hercules” it is called (and copyrighted as) “Disney’s Hercules.” Further, that’s why you seen dozens of knock off Hercules products in a remora-like effort to latch on to the Disney marketing machine. There’s nothing Disney can do about because the Hercules story/character is in the Public Domain and so long as the competing work has its own measure of artistic merit.

To throw gas on the fire (and to keep Nemo wondering whether I’m just some Infogrames shill), I’ll end with this: Everyone here has criticized Infogrames for hiring lawyers to harass the German dude before asking him nicely to stop. What world are you living in? This assumes that the German dude would, when politely asked, stop his illegal project and simply go away. No disrespect intended, but I doubt that would have happened. I can't help but think about those "Warez" or "Cracked" sites (as you can see, I'm not quite hip to the lingo). It does no good to ask those people to stop. Here, the German dude clearly was so intent on producing a German version of the game he was going to do it whether or not Infogrames approved. Just asking him to stop would have sent the project underground, with the illegal “MOD” appearing when it was completed. With the file out there, Infogrames would have suffered the alleged damage it was trying to avoid when it asked the German dude to stop. The only way to effectively reach its goal was to take legal action.

Does that stink? Yes. Did the guy get screwed for trying to do the right thing by asking Infogrames about it? Probably. Is this a PR nightmare? Definitely. Is the harsh reaction understandable from a company in an industry where there are horrible problems with international copyright protection? I think so. I don’t like it, but I understand it.

Kev

[yin26]

This assumes that the German dude would, when politely asked, stop his illegal project and simply go away. No disrespect intended, but I doubt that would have happened.

So shoot first and ask questions later? That's murder. Ask the guy to put down his weapon AND THEN shoot him if he refuses? That's self defense.

[solops]

Consumers who have bought Civ III and its predecessors are used to doing extensive modifications to games of the Civ series, adding shelf life to the game and value to the seller at no cost to the seller. Suddenly, these consumers have been told that they may no longer do what they have been doing for years, things that they were encouraged to do, things that Civ III was advertised to support. This is both stupidity and duplicity on the part of Infogrames.

I suspect that Infogrames has mortally wounded themselves and will die a slow death as whatever money they make from Civ III is depleted. If they do, I shall not lament their passing. This entire episode is a textbook case of bad management and abysmal public relations work. Indeed, as events have unfolded, I have had a hard time believing that a company would go so far out of its way to insult and antagonise its customer base.

Infograme's rights, as well as those of Firaxis, are whatever they can get enforced in court. I question how successful they would be in a suit over mods. Whether they win or lose in court, the fact that they are in court suing a customer and fan means that they have already lost a larger battle.

And they sure better not try this in front of a Texas jury.

solops

[Olaf the Bold]

Originally posted by madmario


Of course. But it's not like Kai and his crew made something that didn't require the purchase of a copy of the game. They followed the directions on the box to modify and customize exactly how they wished, and obeyed the endorsements by the developer to hack away. Nor was the company required to act as harshly, or with as broad a course of action, as they did. There seems to have been no friendly letters or phone calls.

-mario

OK you have to buy the US/UK version, so the company gets some money from that. However they would lose the money they have invested in producing an official german version. The result of this is that on the next game they might not bother with non-English versions, which would be a dis-service to their many fans outside the English speaking world.

I agree a friendly letter would have been better PR than setting their lawyers on the guy.

Query. Is it ok to produce a translation for a language that Infograms/firaxis is never going to produce, for example Welsh, Latin & Klingon.

[dr.charm]

Olaf,

Unfortunately, based on Infogrames statement, you may not mod the game, translate the game into any language, or with a liberal reading of the statement, actually play the game.

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

[madmario]

Originally posted by SKev
the German dude clearly was so intent on producing a German version of the game he was going to do it whether or not Infogrames approved.

I have to leave town shortly, but please explain why this is a "clearly." How in this heavy handed approach have they saved money, product, or face? Why couldn't IGG have tried to send a nice letter or phone call first? Why did they have to use such a heavy hand, and a blanket threat? I don't think you are being fair to Kai, who probably could have gotten away with the whole debacle if he hadn't told IGG his name and address in the hopes of helping them.

I do appreciate your largely intelligent and reasonable response, though I find your distinction between MODification (code and number based) and text enhancing/translation modification (text based) rather artificial, which is my point.

-mario

[Robert]

Did the letter say:
Pay us $850 right now for our lawyer.
Sign an admonission of guilt or else we will sue you for gobloads.

you really do not know what's going on, do you ?
The 'admonission of guilt' thingy you're talking about is nothing more then, after being signed, a clarification that Kai wouldn't be involved with any civ3 altering process or otherwise accepts the punishments as described in the 'admonission of guilt'

THAT's what it was for, nothing else.
and now we're on it, it's not an 'admonission of guilt' since Kai isn't guilty for something he didn't finish / distribute yet.

AND AGAIN: IG paid it's own lawyer and didn't told Kai to pay $850 for the IG lawyer. The $850 is the money Kai has to pay to his own lawyer, and again, no lawyer was needed. Just sign it and return it. If he wouldn't have signed / returned it, THEN a lawyer would be needed since then IG would've sued him.

But again, you do'nt know what you're talking about, why do I take the time to explain it to you in such a polite and informing way.

Yin26: So shoot first and ask questions later? That's murder. Ask the guy to put down his weapon AND THEN shoot him if he refuses? That's self defense

Another big mouth person that doesn't know what he's talking about. It's your hobby uh Yin, big mouthing about something you don't know anything about.

in fact this 'injunction order' is the 'question to put down the weapon' to Kai. IG didn't shoot yet, and didn't sue Kai, neither did IG ask for any money. They just said: If you shoot, we will shoot back.

translation: If you finish your translation project and spread it over the net, then we will sue you. Sign this 'injunction order ' to promise not to 'shoot' and accept the punishment if you shoot anyway. If you won't sign it, we'll sue you ot make it clear.

That's CLEARLY asking to put down the weapon.

IG didn't sue Kai, neither did IG ask any money for Kai, IG even paid the costs they made themselves. Kai has to pay the money for hiring a lawyer himselft, but there was no reason to hire a lawyer, for sure since all the lawyer said was: sign it and return it. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT KAI COULD'VE DONE WITHOUT ANY LAWYER

And again: changing files with any external editor IS NOT the same as using the civ3 editor to change files. That's SO obvious.

I dislike the fact that civ3 doesn't contain mp for suspicious reasons, I really dislike IG for taking that decision, but that doesn't mean I lose my head and yell at IG at anything they do.

I know it would be easier to voice the simple 'IG sucks' opinion, and I could get away easy with playing 'yin', but I decide to actually THINK about my opinion instead of screaming with the majority.

CyberShy

[SKev]

Mario,

The “clearly” is my opinion/conclusion based on my admittedly sparse knowledge of the facts and my own person experiences in similar circumstances. I’m sure Kai is a nice guy, but he appears to be fanatical (and I don’t mean that prejudicially) about his devotion to Civ. He got the game before the German release date. He wanted to help spread the joy of Civ to other non-bilingual German speakers. He decided to take on (ostensibly for no money) the huge task of translating the game to German. He enlisted help from others and offered to assist IGG with their translation project. Kai was on a mission to get a German language Civ 3 out there ASAP. With such a singular mind and purpose on the subject, I doubt a polite “no thanks” from IGG would have changed the course of this mighty river.

Yin26 has made a faulty comparison. This is not a criminal matter. Stopping Kai was not “murder” or “self-defense.” This is a civil matter. It is my experience that in these circumstances you must take quick and decisive action when the opportunity presents itself because you don’t get many second chances. People on the net can disappear without warning. It can be difficult if not impossible to find them. The problem is compounded when the person who disappears is in another country. Giving notice to Kai that his project was unwelcome could have caused him to stop. I don’t think so, but it could have. More likely, the polite call would have been ignored or caused the project to go underground. Kai and his translation project would simply “disappear” until it was completed and distributed. The only way to stop it is to nail Kai with the C&D Order while he was blissfully working out in the open. Was the action heavy-handed? Yes. But it was the only sure-fire option Infogrames had to reach its goal. Any other action and there was the significant chance of failure.

Kai probably could have “gotten away with it” if he just kept quite. Of course, that implies that he knew (and you admit) what he was doing is in violation of IGG’s rights. Why else keep it a secret? His heart may have been in the right place, and he may have been either naive or too honest when speaking with IGG, but the law does not create exceptions for these facts.

The more important question is whether this action has mortally wounded Infogrames. Will they really try and stop all MODs of Civ 3? I don’t think so. Is that how their poorly worded (and sometimes translated) documents read? Yes. Do they literally mean what they’re saying in the “heat of battle” or while in “spin control?” Probably not. Will people go on MODding regardless of the outcome of this case or whether Infogrames considers it illegal? Yes. Will this all blow over soon? Probably.

I don’t blame you for not being happy with my distinction between a MOD and a translation. I’m not that happy either. The distinction I have made is somewhat artificial. I have the feeling if I knew more about MODding, programming and the actual license (plus a brush up on the law), I’d be doing a better job of explaining my position. At a minimum, perhaps I’ve shed some light on the rationale behind the actions taken and the real problems in dealing with these issues.

How about this: If you don’t like the distinction between MODs and a translation, you can think of both as just a MOD. Others have tossed out facts or circumstances which I could use to make that point—I disagree, but the arguemnt could be made. If the game was translated into Klingon, Pig-Latin or Ebonics, I could see how it could be considered a MOD more similar to changing graphics than a complete translation into a real language. There’s no market for a Klingon version of the game. There is, however, a large market for a German language version of the game. Maybe in the end it is simply about money and none of the lines I’ve drawn matter. Don’t forget, IGG is in the business to make money—even if they cut off their nose to spite their face. They’ll use the law to its fullest extent to reach their goals.

Just because Infogrames (or Firaxis) has encouraged modification of the game, it still owns the rights to the game and can decide how far they want to let people change it. They have that right and they have drawn the line—no translations. They’re the ones who have done a poor job of explaining themselves in the context of their pro-MOD position. They’re the ones who have to explain how Kai should have known this in advance. They’re the ones who have to live with the consequences of their heavy-handed actions. They’re the ones who have to live with the consequences of pissing off the MOD community.

Unless someone is willing to fight Infogrames (or Firaxis) on and prove the MOD community has the “right” to do whatever it thinks it has the right to do, the community is basically stuck either with the limitations imposed by Infogrames or defying Infogrames in secret. No one wants to accept the former and if you admit to the latter you’ve answered your own question as to why IGG had to bring the hammer down on Kai. Kai had the chance to prove his translation project was legal and valid—he chose not to (I think) fight IGG’s assertion of its rights.

Kev

[MarkG]

Originally posted by CyberShy
AND AGAIN: IG paid it's own lawyer and didn't told Kai to pay $850 for the IG lawyer. The $850 is the money Kai has to pay to his own lawyer, and again, no lawyer was needed. Just sign it and return it.

i keep seeing you say this, and i really wonder about it. do you usually sign legal documents without asking a lawyer?