Points taken, and by the way, I like your writing
style. But before I roll over and die....
> Unless Hasbro owns the home computer distribution
> rights, or whatever it is
> Hasbro feels these products are infringing. In that
> case it's perfectly
> within their rights to pursue legal action.
But I haven't seen Atari do anything regarding Pac-Man
in ages. On the 2600, I know they had the rights up
to Pac-Man Jr. Also, I'm not sure of how the company
split, but I recall Tengen was one of the two daughter
companies when Atari broke up. They did NES versions
of Pac-Man, Ms. Pac-Man, and Pac-Mania and a Genesis
version of Ms. Pac-Man and Pac-Mania (which I can't
recall seeing in arcades), and shortly afterward,
Namco released it's own versions, most recently one on
the N64. The timing struck me as being roughly about
when the licensing agreements with
Atari/Tengen/whoever expired. The release of games
implies to me that ownership of Pac-Man (or licensing
rights) is something Atari no longer has any claim to.
Just because someone files a lawsuit doesn't mean it
actually has any basis to be acted on; judges throw
them out once in a while (more often if you are
Mexican and get a traffic ticket in Mt. Prospect,
IL...but I digress). They might be doing it as a sort
of legal version of "Chicken", hoping that the lawsuit
will scare the game makers into falling in line. It's
not often I do this, but I admit I may have shot off
my mouth with the statement. This is obviously a
legal question, and my area of experience is in the
humanities. I just don't see anything suggesting that
Atari has a legal leg to stand on. But, yes, I could
be wrong.
> Warner Atari almost successfully stopped
> Sierra/On-Line from distributing
> Jawbreaker, a blatant Pac-Man clone. Instead they
> were forced to change the
> maze and character graphics.
Really? I didn't know that. I appreciate the
information, but now my curiosity is peaked. Do you
have any details? I have Jawbreaker for the 2600 and
Jawbreaker II for my TI99. Do you know where I can
find details of the case? The arguments used? Why
this was changed while some other Pac-Man clones left
alone? I recall one in the arcades where you were a
frog running around the maze, but the details are
fuzzy. And finally, do you know where I can find
information on things like the original layout of the
maze and stuff?
Anyway, even if that is true, I'm wondering if the
environment has changed. Capcom tried to sue Data
East over a game called Fighter's Destiny (or
Fighter's something-or-other, another person on this
list corrected me before and I've completely forgotten
the true title), but it was thrown out. Of course,
that could just mean suing for copyright infringement
is as complicated as the code going into the game.
> Apple and oranges. A flight sim (or any true sim)
> is based on reality, and
> you can't copyright reality (well, not
> military-hardware reality anyway,
> even though NovaLogic tried to a couple years ago).
This goes under the "piling it on" heading, so don't
read a serious challenge into this. It might be
possible to sort of copyright reality. Map makers
occasionally put phony cities on maps to catch
copiers; if a phony city they put down is on another
map, they got them. Since maps have to be simillar,
people come up with ways to enforce their claims.
Amazon, I think, has a lawsuit against someone for
allegedly copying its "one click" technique (I don't
shop Amazon, so I don't know what this is about). It
seems that, if enough money was at stake, a company
could try to argue that their sim of whatever was
unique and someone else was infringing. Anyway, I'm
not sure I agree with the apples and oranges thing.
After all, sims might be different from regular games,
but games are games, after all.
> No. But I did notice a similarity to Popeye. Anyway
> they're both inspired
> by the original platform game, "Space Panic".
First things first: "Space Panic" was the first
platform game? I always wondered what started it all.
Okay, next: now that you mention it, I do see a
resemblence to "Popeye", but the whole "climb the
ladders to the top while outwitting a primate" strikes
me as more "Donkey Kong" than "Popeye". And with the
boxing gloves, you have a hammer-type attack at your
immediate disposal instead of just at certain points
and for a certain time. Personally speaking, I found
Roc 'N Rope to be a much better twist, and it took a
bit more thinking to succeed with, too.
> Only as far as the view angle was concerned. A
> choice of perspective does
> not a copyright make.
The speeder bike levels and flight through the Death
Star felt like Zaxxon, only you moved along the
horizontal plane instead of the vertical. Just my
impression.
> I hate to break it to ya Cletus, but first-person
> corridor shooters were
> around for a long time before Doom, and even before
> Wolfenstein 3D (which
> AvP more closely resembles).
Oops. That was my goof, but I wish to plead "force of
habit." I knew about Wolfenstein, but Doom is usually
my point of reference when it comes to first-person
shooters.
By the way (you seem to have more background than me,
so you better believe I'm asking questions), what WAS
the first first-person corridor shooter? And did it
predate or follow "Tunnel Runner" from CBS?
Cletus? Who, me? That's not the name sewed into my
underwear. ;-)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
--
Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsub & more at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/
