Recently a friend said that he had an idea which he was going to use as he is going into Game Design at the end of college. This idea involves the shoulder buttons on a pad such as a Gamecube or X-Box and that in a game, which features double-pistols, these would be used to fire each respectively. He also said that he was going to copyright this idea to make sure nobody could use it. This I thought was wrong. Surely you can''t copyright the use of a button, or someone like Nintendo who first used the D-Pad could copyright this. My question is.. can you actually copyright a function like this? and how much does copyright for a game, such as character names or weapons cost? What about me? What about Raven?

Its been said a lot of times on these forums that you cant copyright ideas, just the implementation of those ideas, so no he cant copyright that, if he made a special pad, he could copyright the shape or the name he gives to the pad, but he cant restrict anyone from using the ideas implemented by the pad.

I don''t know how much it costs to copyright a char name, but I doubt it costs much, in any case I believe you hold copyright for anything you create unless you give it away or renounce to it, yes, even if you do not put a copyright notice in your work, having a legitimate filed copyright would hold much better in court though.

You trademark a character name, by the by. It''s not that expensive.

It''s true that you can''t copyright an idea, but you could probably patent the interface style, if it had never been done before. This particular interface style has been done before, so there''s prior art. He can''t copyright it, and he can''t patent it.

You could not copyright the way the pad/joystick/mouse is used.

---
Make it work.
Make it fast.

"Commmmpuuuuterrrr.." --Scotty Star Trek IV:The Voyage Home

too bad that has been done already. unfortunatly i cant remeber the game off the top of my head, i know a few pc games have had dual weapons that can be fired independatly using the shoulder buttons of the controller (ie the idea your friend is trying to patent) since after all most pc games allow configurable controls. pretty sure a western mod for hl allowed this. if he had the idea of using dual mice (and implemented it) for aiming two pistols in a first person shooter. he might have something, but then again i just proved how trivial it was (dual mice support has been done in serious sam, as other games). using a even single mouse you could implement independent dual pistol aiming and firing (through the use of an alt key).

i think your friend should reconsider going into game design if he things insignificent ideas like button mapping are worth patenting for fear of them being stealed.

Halo springs to mind, actually..

There''s a number of IP protection schemes you can apply;

Patents: You patent an IDEA. The idea must be Innovative, Functional and Non-obvious (meaning it must be new, it must work, and it must be something an average member of your field would find obvious). This is essentially what your friend wanted, but it fails the NEW criteria, since multiple games put it in the prior art.

Trademarks: These are registered trademarks, and essentially protect a logo, or name. Examples here include the McDonalds logo, and the golden M.

Copyright: Anything you write is copyrighted, but you can formalize the copyright through the american library of congress, I believe. Be carefull; the copyright protects the content, not the idea. If I read your book, talking about A sad lovestory between a human and an orangutan, go home and write a sad lovestory between a human and a chimp, noone can complain... It may be plagerization, but it''s not copyright infringement.

There''s a couple of others (Design Templates), but those three are the main ones...

Allan

No, you don''t patent an idea, you patent an implementation.

For example, I couldn''t patent a TV, but I could patent using a CRT to project images nto a sheet of glass coated with different phospherous materials. Granted, this is being abused, but it still stands.

Amazon.com successfully sued Barnes and Noble for their Patented 1-click purchase.

Their computer keeps your address and billing information on their computer. When you click the 1-click purchase button, the book is immediately shipped to that address, and billed to you credit card.

Seems remarkably inventive, no one else would have ever thought of doing that right?! Well they patented it, and successfully defended that patent in court.

If your friend wants to patent something he can. Getting a GOOD patent is another story. The CHAIR is a patented device, and yet the patent is completely worthless (despite the fact that millions of people sit in them everyday) because the wording of the patent was weak. Plan on spending around $10k for something decent. Good luck trying to make that money back.

Some people DO get their money back (Kodak vs Polaroid ended up with $925 Million In 1991 over the patent rights to instant cameras and films). Having said that, the Patents Office make no assurances as to usefullness of said patent (only saying that it must be functional, not viable).

As for patents being ideas or implementations, here''s the UK patent office definition:

"Patents are generally intended to cover products or processes that possess or contain new functional or technical aspects; patents are therefore concerned with, for example, how things work, what they do, how they do it, what they are made of or how they are made."

The primary focus is on process, not the basic idea, not the final implementation. So you''re mostly right

Allan