Backbreaker Preview (Xbox 360 Magazine)

[CharleyDanger]

Quote: Originally Posted by BrianFifaFan

I'm gonna have to disagree with this. PES has had option file capability forever. And I'm sure that the EA suits would have loved to shut down the capability to be able to make real kits and logos. They (EA) paid a lot of dough to have authentic stuff. But they couldn't shut PES down. 2k just didn't want to offend the NFL hoping that they could get back in the game during APF development. BB's parent company doesn't have that type of worry, EA already has said no on buying the tech, so Natural Motion has nothing really to lose beng diplomatic.And it would be a stretch for the NFL to cry copyright infringement. BB has different uni's that in no way look like a NFL uniform. Now the logos would be user created and shared, so they'd have a hard time trying to push that angle. So the NFL is gonna leave it alone, as will EA. Unless they wanted to risk their ability to offer editing in NCAA..... IMO, not worth it for EA to try and set legal precedent.

I think you made some solid points but I respectively disagree.

First I think companies being liable for UGC is pretty clear cut with the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) The below is a link to an article written by a lawyer that specializes in interactive entertainment.

http://www.lawofthelevel.com/2009/07...bility-claims/

With that said, a company has to have motive to to take legal action right?

Well you made a good point about PES, but it would not be EAs fight in the NatMo case. The NFL owns the rights, EA is just allowed to use them. Now the fact that the NFL sold exclusive use of the rights to EA makes the NFL legally obligated to make sure no one else is using those rights. So the NFL is not just motivated, but obligated. Also I think the NFL has already taken note to the fact that the NCAA is in court for not protecting its players names and likeness, and the NFL will take steps to prevent such future liability.

NCAA case: http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/200...e-rabbit-hole/

First, I think your right about logos and jerseys not being accurate enough to be called infringing, but I dont think logos will be the issue. I think it will be the infringement of players names and likeness that leads to legal action. Now NatMo has very generic player models, but proving name and info to be infringing is 10 times easier than proving likeness.

Now you spoke of EA not wanting to set a precedent. Well the above NCAA lawsuit also includes EA. The below is a quote from the suit

"EA Sports "intentionally circumvents the prohibitions on utilizing student-athletes' names by allowing gamers to upload entire rosters, which include players' names and other information, directly into the game in a matter of seconds."

EAs case:http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4151071

So the cat is already out of the bag really. I actually think that EA will be pushing the NFL from day one to prevent an illegal recreation
of the NFL in BB.

I will admit that the EA/NCAA lawsuit is still pending, but the judge in the case has already dismissed all attempts by EA to have the case thrown out. If a single former NCAA player has gotten that far, imagine what a fortune 500 company and one of most powerful sports league in the world could do.

[bill2451]

well just for the record, based on a previous court ruling w/ regards to fantasy sports, players names (and by extension biographical info like age, hometown, etc) and statistics, are considered public domain and therefore their use is protected by the first amendment

anyone can use them

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by CharleyDanger

I think you made some solid points but I respectively disagree. First I think companies being liable for UGC is pretty clear cut with the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) The below is a link to an article written by a lawyer that specializes in interactive entertainment. http://www.lawofthelevel.com/2009/07...bility-claims/ With that said, a company has to have motive to to take legal action right? Well you made a good point about PES, but it would not be EAs fight in the NatMo case. The NFL owns the rights, EA is just allowed to use them. Now the fact that the NFL sold exclusive use of the rights to EA makes the NFL legally obligated to make sure no one else is using those rights. So the NFL is not just motivated, but obligated. Also I think the NFL has already taken note to the fact that the NCAA is in court for not protecting its players names and likeness, and the NFL will take steps to prevent such future liability. NCAA case: http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/200...e-rabbit-hole/ First, I think your right about logos and jerseys not being accurate enough to be called infringing, but I dont think logos will be the issue. I think it will be the infringement of players names and likeness that leads to legal action. Now NatMo has very generic player models, but proving name and info to be infringing is 10 times easier than proving likeness. Now you spoke of EA not wanting to set a precedent. Well the above NCAA lawsuit also includes EA. The below is a quote from the suit "EA Sports "intentionally circumvents the prohibitions on utilizing student-athletes' names by allowing gamers to upload entire rosters, which include players' names and other information, directly into the game in a matter of seconds." EAs case:http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4151071 So the cat is already out of the bag really. I actually think that EA will be pushing the NFL from day one to prevent an illegal recreation of the NFL in BB. I will admit that the EA/NCAA lawsuit is still pending, but the judge in the case has already dismissed all attempts by EA to have the case thrown out. If a single former NCAA player has gotten that far, imagine what a fortune 500 company and one of most powerful sports league in the world could do.

At the moment, the only reason the NFL's attempt would fail and probably never go to trial, is because the abilities to recreate are all tied into tools controlled by the end-user. NCAA Football got into trouble because the players they shipped were'nt generic enough and as the claim shows a lot of players were accurate down to height, weight, and city of birth. You have to wonder what the NCAA team and the legal department were thinking? They were just asking for it.

Part of the NCAA suit, however, is quite stupid but frightening at the same time. The idea that the NCAA should be penalized for END-USERS editing names is ridiculous. If Keller wins, that means editing names and various other attributes may be prohibited, meaning companies will no longer include this indispensible function. That's scary.

I wouldn't mind if Keller got a victory on the likeness part pertaining to attributes and looks, because he does have a valid case there, but the name editing part is a very irresponsible claim that could be potentially disastrous, because all it takes is one judge who doesn't understand the implications or simply doesn't care about them, and we're all screwed. The minute you take end-users right to do what they want away, you've crossed the line. There are some franchises that such a ruling could set a precendent where they'd be crippled just because a major buying factor would be gone and gamers wouldn't be nearly as interested. This could kill games like Maximum Football, PES, and BackBreaker.

I'm all for the NCAA being taken to task, but the editing angle of the claim puts me on the NCAA's side this time. If Keller wins, Football gamers lose again (how many devastating blows can we take?) and this time it may be a fatal blow for some franchises that rely on allowing the end-user to edit players.

[GlennN]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

I wouldn't mind if Keller got a victory on the likeness part pertaining to attributes and looks, because he does have a valid case there, but the name editing part is a very irresponsible claim that could be potentially disastrous, because all it takes is one judge who doesn't understand the implications or simply doesn't care about them, and we're all screwed. The minute you take end-users right to do what they want away, you've crossed the line. There are some franchises that such a ruling could set a precendent where they'd be crippled just because a major buying factor would be gone and gamers wouldn't be nearly as interested. This could kill games like Maximum Football, PES, and BackBreaker. I'm all for the NCAA being taken to task, but the editing angle of the claim puts me on the NCAA's side this time. If Keller wins, Football gamers lose again (how many devastating blows can we take?) and this time it may be a fatal blow for some franchises that rely on allowing the end-user to edit players.

Actually, it would seem success by Keller could kill any edit or create player/team function at all. Even a licensed game, like Madden, only has a certain license. Creating a player, or editing a player, could lead to the end user creating a real rookie, or a real former player, neither of which would be covered under the license, and, thus, would be unlawful (or at least actionable) under a potential Keller victory. You are correct, a Judge who does not fully understand the ramifications could make all edit and create player/team functions obsolete.

[ronnieb]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

At the moment, the only reason the NFL's attempt would fail and probably never go to trial, is because the abilities to recreate are all tied into tools controlled by the end-user. NCAA Football got into trouble because the players they shipped were'nt generic enough and as the claim shows a lot of players were accurate down to height, weight, and city of birth. You have to wonder what the NCAA team and the legal department were thinking? They were just asking for it. Part of the NCAA suit, however, is quite stupid but frightening at the same time. The idea that the NCAA should be penalized for END-USERS editing names is ridiculous. If Keller wins, that means editing names and various other attributes may be prohibited, meaning companies will no longer include this indispensible function. That's scary. I wouldn't mind if Keller got a victory on the likeness part pertaining to attributes and looks, because he does have a valid case there, but the name editing part is a very irresponsible claim that could be potentially disastrous, because all it takes is one judge who doesn't understand the implications or simply doesn't care about them, and we're all screwed. The minute you take end-users right to do what they want away, you've crossed the line. There are some franchises that such a ruling could set a precendent where they'd be crippled just because a major buying factor would be gone and gamers wouldn't be nearly as interested. This could kill games like Maximum Football, PES, and BackBreaker. I'm all for the NCAA being taken to task, but the editing angle of the claim puts me on the NCAA's side this time. If Keller wins, Football gamers lose again (how many devastating blows can we take?) and this time it may be a fatal blow for some franchises that rely on allowing the end-user to edit players.

oh men you just scare the hell out of me
is there a video gamer judge in the supreme court we can rely on ?
just in case ....

[jyoung]

So did anyone else read the part on page 3 were it says "Full FIFA-style, 11-versus-11 online play"?

Does that mean we are finally getting some full-team online action ala FIFA, NHL and NBA Live?

That would be huge if true.

Edit: on page 4, it also says the game supports 1 -22 players! This could be happening!

[allBthere]

Quote: Originally Posted by GlennN

Actually, it would seem success by Keller could kill any edit or create player/team function at all. Even a licensed game, like Madden, only has a certain license. Creating a player, or editing a player, could lead to the end user creating a real rookie, or a real former player, neither of which would be covered under the license, and, thus, would be unlawful (or at least actionable) under a potential Keller victory. You are correct, a Judge who does not fully understand the ramifications could make all edit and create player/team functions obsolete.

That's craziness. If that were to go down, it would be illegal for me to draw a picture of Donovan McNabb and give it to a friend.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by GlennN

Actually, it would seem success by Keller could kill any edit or create player/team function at all. Even a licensed game, like Madden, only has a certain license. Creating a player, or editing a player, could lead to the end user creating a real rookie, or a real former player, neither of which would be covered under the license, and, thus, would be unlawful (or at least actionable) under a potential Keller victory. You are correct, a Judge who does not fully understand the ramifications could make all edit and create player/team functions obsolete.

Yes, that's exactly what I was saying, we agree. But I'm looking more at NCAA and non-licensed Pro games across all sports (like when I mentioned PES) because they rely heavily on player editing. Madden will still survive just fine without it because having the likenesses and attributes of the real NFL players is paramount and it's already part of their license, but the other games could be finished without editing. I personally couldn't imagine playing an NCAA Football game without being able to edit names and other things.