Some of you may remember many years ago, when a group advertised in the Help Wanted forums to find people to help them with a fan-made addition to the Kings Quest series of games, the project was called "The Silver Lining". It boasted quite impressive graphics for the time it was announced, and looked in every way to be a great follow-up to the classic series. Some of you may have played the demo they released not too long ago. In 2005, Vivendi Universal issued them a Cease and Desist notice, as they owned the IP and justifiable sought to protect it. After a few negotiations back and forth, however, the team managed to hammer out a non-commercial agreement with Vivendi that allowed them to continue working. Those of you who have followed similar endeavors in the past can appreciate how incredibly rare this agreement was. Last month, after doing nothing more than getting a basic outline of what the project was about, Activision (the current owner of the Kings Quest IP) issued the team a non-negotiable Cease and Desist order nullifying the standing non-commercial agreement. 8 Years of dedication from fans with no monetary gains on the table, washed away due to corporate greed. You can read more here: http://www.incgamers.com/News/21502/activision-never-seemed-to-show-any-interest-in-tsl And Here: http://www.incgamers.com/News/21482/how-you-can-save-the-silver-lining Fan outcry saved the game in 2005, but I highly doubt that anything like that would sway the cold corporate culture that now rules Activision. If Bobby Koticks attitude towards games and their developers had not already caused you to swear off buying their games, please, let this be the straw that breaks the camels back.

They also signed a contract that could be nullifed from either party at any time. Which was very stupid on their part.

Sucks it took them eight years and got nothing to show for it. But thats the problem with stealing other peoples IP is it can all be taken away in an instant. And what is wrong with Activision protecting their interests? If the game turned out to be a complete crap fest it would completely tarnish the Kings Quest series because it would have been the first game released in years. They could have just as easily made a game that was similar and never had a problem. Can't really feel bad about people who knowlingly tread on thin ice and then have it break on them.

Quote: Original post by jtagge75
They also signed a contract that could be nullifed from either party at any time. Which was very stupid on their part.

It was also the only option that allowed them to continue working for the past 5 years, better that then nothing, right?

Quote: Sucks it took them eight years and got nothing to show for it.

Well, it was a fan made endeavor. Considering the high quality of the assets and implementation that was demonstrated, by a very small team with no budget working in their off hours as a hobby, it was pretty damn impressive. If you look at most major fan remakes, they have an average 5-10 year lifespan, because the people making them have lives y'know ;)

Quote: But thats the problem with stealing other peoples IP is it can all be taken away in an instant.

Indeed, however it wasn't theft as they were sanctioned by Vivendi. Part of the conditions of that agreement was that the game would no longer be associated with the Kings Quest brand. It shared similar themes and components, but Kings Quest was removed from the title.

Quote: And what is wrong with Activision protecting their interests? If the game turned out to be a complete crap fest it would completely tarnish the Kings Quest series because it would have been the first game released in years. They could have just as easily made a game that was similar and never had a problem. Can't really feel bad about people who knowlingly tread on thin ice and then have it break on them.

Nothing's wrong with Activision protecting their interests. I think the way they dealt with this, mixed with their packaged goods approach to the industry and deplorable treatment of employees is a pretty great indication of Activisons nature as a company, however. It's just cold to cut a group like that down after 8 years and a standing agreement, with no consideration at all. Game companies used to have a bit more consideration and humanity in them...

In regards to making an entirely different game, you can see above where I mention the terms of the Vivendi agreement. And really, with 8 other fan remakes already released or in production, and the last official game having been released in 1998, do you think Activision stood to lose that much? It wasn't even for commercial gain.

This is just IP hoarding, on the same moral level as the Tim Langdell tomfoolery, and elevated legally only by the fact that Activision legitimately owns the IP.

Quote: Original post by jtagge75
stuff

Nicely said.

It looks like their contract was fatally (and somewhat obviously) flawed.

ALWAYS make your own IP. If for some reason you choose not to, get proper written licenses that are written by competent lawyers BEFORE you begin in earnest. Make sure the agreements have proper survival clauses, and that you can live with the termination clauses.


They knew when they started the project that it was an IP violation. They got lucky (perhaps) with Vivendi five years ago, but failed to negotiate a reasonable contract. That was probably because they knew they were infringing and were begging for any deal they could get.


They also signed a contract that could be easily nullifed. Which was very stupid on their part, or possibly the only thing they could work out.


Moral of the story: Create your own products, don't take IP that doesn't belong to you.

Quote: Original post by rian carnarvon

Quote: Original post by jtagge75
They also signed a contract that could be nullifed from either party at any time. Which was very stupid on their part.

It was also the only option that allowed them to continue working for the past 5 years, better that then nothing, right?

Was it? The project is again dead, although there is still a chance it can be revived.

People sunk another five years of their lives into a project that is gone. They could have spent the time on a different project. They could have re-tooled the project into their own IP. But they chose not to.

It is only "better than nothing" in that they can possibly redirect the project to their own IP.

Quote:

Quote: But thats the problem with stealing other peoples IP is it can all be taken away in an instant.

Indeed, however it wasn't theft as they were sanctioned by Vivendi.

No, it was not. Vivendi tried to shut them down.

It wasn't after the PR issue that Vivendi even considered letting the project live. The agreement was apparently flawed if it could be canceled like that, so it really wan't sanctioned at all. Its fate was simply delayed.

Quote: I think the way they dealt with this, mixed with their packaged goods approach to the industry and deplorable treatment of employees is a pretty great indication of Activisons nature as a company, however. It's just cold to cut a group like that down after 8 years and a standing agreement, with no consideration at all. Game companies used to have a bit more consideration and humanity in them...

Welcome to the harsh realities of the open market.

There are lots of expressions for it: "dog eat dog", "no holes barred", "hard as nails", "take what you can", "every man for himself".

Quote: ... do you think Activision stood to lose that much? It wasn't even for commercial gain.

This is just IP hoarding, on the same moral level as the Tim Langdell tomfoolery, and elevated legally only by the fact that Activision legitimately owns the IP.

You are right about the last part: Activision legitimately owns the IP and they can do whatever they want with it.

You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with it. You can call it "tomfoolery" or "hoarding" or other names. But you do have to respect ownership, or face the court battles and eventual judgment, however it lands.

Ultimately a software company lives and dies on its intellectual property. The physical assets are worth relatively little. All that software companies have are the copyrights on its source material, the ownership of the trademarks they develop, and goodwill based on the collective employee base.


The people in the Silver Lining project chose to disregard ownership. They had a warning shot when they were three years in. They could have redirected the project to their own IP, but chose not to. With the license canceled, they again have the option of redirecting to their own IP. It is probably the best course for them.

Quote: It was also the only option that allowed them to continue working for the past 5 years, better that then nothing, right?

Sure, and "better than nothing" is exactly what they got. The problem is that "nothing" is not a particularly high bar to shoot for.

Didn't we just have this entire discussion recently? Everyone should be well aware that 'fan projects' that involve remaking or imitating games is a bad idea and totally unnecessary. Nothing was stopping them from cutting ties with the King's Quest franchise and just making a similar style of game. People clone games all the time (see: Dante's Inferno).

Well, just thought I'd post it here since the team started out on Gamedev and we all have a vested interest in how aggressively restrictive companies are becoming. Glad I drummed up some discussion, although I did remember Gamedev as having a less draconian attitude back in the day.

Ah well, I'm sure it's every developers dream to work for Bobby "Taking the fun out of game production" Kotick after all nowadays. Just protecting their IP, no need to get into the deeper, more discomforting issues of how it reflects on the industry as a whole.

Cheerio =D

Quote: Original post by LockePick
Didn't we just have this entire discussion recently? Everyone should be well aware that 'fan projects' that involve remaking or imitating games is a bad idea and totally unnecessary. Nothing was stopping them from cutting ties with the King's Quest franchise and just making a similar style of game. People clone games all the time (see: Dante's Inferno).

Yeah there was another thread about something else that ended up on this Kings Quest remake. I was actually looking for it to link but I couldn't remember what the original topic was about. But as I recall the major idea of the thread was using other peoples IP is generally a bad idea all the way around.

Quote: Original post by rian carnarvon
Well, just thought I'd post it here since the team started out on Gamedev and we all have a vested interest in how aggressively restrictive companies are becoming. Glad I drummed up some discussion, although I did remember Gamedev as having a less draconian attitude back in the day.

Ah well, I'm sure it's every developers dream to work for Bobby "Taking the fun out of game production" Kotick after all nowadays. Just protecting their IP, no need to get into the deeper, more discomforting issues of how it reflects on the industry as a whole.

Cheerio =D

Don't get me wrong.

Game development is awesome. It is fun. It is an intellectual challenge.

You can be creative.

You can create your own universes. You can create all the rules of those universes. You can do anything you can imagine (up to the limit of your abilities).

What more power trip to do you want?




What you CANNOT do, however, is take other people's IP. I wouldn't call that draconian, just common sense. Even my young children know not to touch what isn't theirs.


If you want to expand on somebody else's world, you need to get lawyers involved to make sure you have proper rights. These guys didn't even do that until they had their first C&D order, and apparently didn't do it correctly.


Be creative and make YOUR OWN world, not somebody else's. Isn't that what the whole thing is about anyway?

Quote: Original post by LockePick

Quote: It was also the only option that allowed them to continue working for the past 5 years, better that then nothing, right?

Sure, and "better than nothing" is exactly what they got. The problem is that "nothing" is not a particularly high bar to shoot for.

Didn't we just have this entire discussion recently? Everyone should be well aware that 'fan projects' that involve remaking or imitating games is a bad idea and totally unnecessary. Nothing was stopping them from cutting ties with the King's Quest franchise and just making a similar style of game. People clone games all the time (see: Dante's Inferno).

I agree. Being a KQ fan myself, the story was never that compelling to me. They could have made a point and click style clone and called it Prince's Adventure and I don't think anyone would have cared.