Earth May Inherit the Weak, but Fallout isn't for Weak of Heart
Read the article this discussion is about
- KaVir
- Dantessa
- KaVir
- Dantessa
- Wolvie27
- Dantessa
- xynix
- Dantessa
- kuehnau
- Falcontheawsome
This archived discussion is "read only".
« Previous 1 2 Next »
» Dantessa - Re: Re: Here's one for the mud..
Thanks for making the distinction 'tween copyright & trademark for this situation.Out of curiosity I just did a trademark search on the keyword "fallout" to see what would come up...and sure enough the video game name is there (obviously!), and a clothing line, etc...KaVir is right, as far as I know provided the trademarked thing is unique to other things using the same name, it's fair game. The only two cancelled TMs for "fallout" I saw in the search were for a defunct (at least I am assuming it's defunct) company that used to manufacture an oxidation remover for cars, and a company that made men & children's underwear............can anyone think of a logical reason why an underwear brand is labeled "Fallout"? Just seems disturbing to me. Anyone interested in taking a peek at the trademarks point your browser to CopyrightResources.com, and search...use the freeform search...which will take you to TESS, the government search for trademarks. Alternatively you can try just using this URL http://tess.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=doc... ...but it mightn't work, I have no idea if that's a static one or refreshed/changed depending on who accesses the script, and when. I love a bit o'sleuthing!
-- posted by Dantessa
» KaVir - Re: Re: Re: Here's one for the mud..
In response to message posted by Dantessa:>
> can anyone think of a logical reason why an
> underwear brand is labeled "Fallout"?
*grin* there's also a brand of underwear called "microsoft". Microsoft did actually take them to court over it, but it was thrown out because obviously they were completely unrelated.
Having said that, two computer games with very similar themes could potentially cause a problem. It really depends how similar they are I suppose.
-- posted by KaVir
» Dantessa - Re: Re: Re: Re: Here's one for the mud..
Very true, re: the similarity.In the longrun though, and in a court of law, I imagine the distinctions would be made clear enough to hold up. As pointed out earlier in the thread, the MUD was in development before the commercial marketing of the video game...but for all we know the video game could have been in development for many years...but most likely if so, under a working title.
The argument I think would come down to the difference in medium. Fallout the MUD is a text game existing on a server, relying on multiple players for its success. Fallout the video game is graphical, packaged and sold individually to run on individual PCs. I think that's where the crux of the defense for the MUD would lie, if ever given grief for their name.
But, at any rate, the two are coexisting in the games market quite happily at present...whilst loads of us MUDders also play video games, the two markets really don't cross over commercially...yet.
-- posted by Dantessa
» Wolvie27 - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Here's one for the mud..
In response to message posted by Dantessa:Yet another reply... 
RE: the two markets really don't cross over commercially...yet.
I would think Ever Quest would be where they did cross over, at least on a very largely noticeable scale for me. I'm sure there are other MU*s that have been sold and maintained at a profit, right? Well, here's to an on going discussion. ;)
-- posted by Wolvie27
» Dantessa - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Here's one for the mud..
Perhaps true! Though I wasn't even considering graphical MUDs when I made my statement...several of those, including but not limited to Underlight, The Realm, and of course the biggies like Everquest and UO (which I don't suppose are actually MUDs so much as multiplayer graphical games, but the chatting element is reminiscent). I should have made the distinction, thanks for the catch. What I had meant to say is that text games--traditional MUDs--and commercial video games hadn't really crossed over in the market, yet.-- posted by Dantessa
» xynix - Re: I do have *one* small point of concern about this MUD:
In response to message posted by Sarenthalanos:I started Fallout in 1996. Since then no one has bothered us in regards to the similarity in name between Fallout the RPG and our MUD. The MUD has been discussed on the RPG forum at Interplay many times. (I did send them a nasty Email saying that I would fight them if they messed with me) That was shortly before the release of their RPG.
Regardless, I am based in Ireland and there is no Fallout trademark here. Also since it's a dictionary word and the theme has a questionable start somewhere in the 50s they would have a hard case against us. Also, any court cases would have to be in Ireland, with Irish law and the ministers. Good luck Interplay :P
The game shares nothing at all with the RPG, no character similarities, the only weapons similarities that might exist would be purely by coincendence and only because they are based on real life.
In all, the games share only theme, and a theme can't be trademarked.
Regards,
Xynix
-- posted by xynix
» Dantessa - Re: Re: I do have *one* small point of concern about this MUD:
Thanks Xynix. I didn't know about the locale issues, but have continually believed that if Interplay did choose to make an issue of it they wouldn't have much of a case, owing to both the dates of release of your MUD and their game, and the fact that the medium is different.-- posted by Dantessa
» Falcontheawsome - Re: Re: Re: I do have *one* small point of concern about this MU
In response to Re: Re: I do have *one* small point of concern about this MUD: posted by kuehnau:Is the mud still up becuse i havent heard anything in a long ass time If so whats the address
-- posted by Falcontheawsome
« Previous 1 2 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.