While reading a somewhat used but new to me copy of DNA/DOA I happened to notice on the title page that it stated that Shadowrun and Matrix were trademarked to FASA. Is that still the case with FanPro?
Were there enough differinces that FanPro didn't feel threatened by the Movie Trilogy? Or were royalties paid?
Full Version: SR's Matrix vs. The Matrix
I don't know if it is by FanPro, but even if it is it's totally unrelated to the movie. It really only kicks in if it might cause genuine confusion between one product and another. If another RPG wanted to use the term and have it relate to a cyberpunk-style virtual reality similar to Shadowrun's, then they might have the need to defend their trademark. Otherwise, it would be a pretty lost cause, especially since it's neither an original term or a wholly unique one.
But the movie bears almost no resemblance to Shadowrun beyond the name and the fact that they both require a jack.
But the movie bears almost no resemblance to Shadowrun beyond the name and the fact that they both require a jack.
Gibson used the word Matrix first....I would expect that the copyright has/is becoming common use now
Actually, the rumor that I heard(from the friend of my cousins former roommates brothers dry-cleaner.) was that the movie had to pay royaltys for the use and that term and the success of the trilogy is what helped get all these new 3.5 and Shadows of... books published.
Course, the dry-cleaner could be full of shit.
Course, the dry-cleaner could be full of shit.
I have heard it claimed that the movie The Matrix was inspired by the story in the beginning of the original Virtual Realities book. It was a pretty long story, it was about half the book. It's a story about one of Dr. Halberstam's (sp?) first experiments, one where he raises a child from birth in the matrix. The decker he hires to train him thinks that he's an AI, but eventually find out the truth that he's a child and tells him about the real world. Dr. Hal gets pissed, and later they extract the kid. It's a pretty neat little story. If it is true, though, it's definitely "inspired by", not "based on"
The movies wouldn't have to pay trademark fees unless they published an RPG based on the movies, and even then, it's not a guaranteed win for FanPro. At least, that is my understanding of that part of copyright law. Could be wrong.
| QUOTE (Arethusa) |
| The movies wouldn't have to pay trademark fees unless they published an RPG based on the movies, and even then, it's not a guaranteed win for FanPro. At least, that is my understanding of that part of copyright law. Could be wrong. |
Does their upcoming MMORPG count?
Plus, you'd have to prove the brother actually read the story. Kinda tough to do since I know of a few folks that never read the VR book and had similair concepts before the first Matrix mook hit the theaters.
| QUOTE (Caine Hazen @ May 6 2004, 01:03 PM) |
| Gibson used the word Matrix first.... |
Too bad he didn't publish a game or even a product that uses Matrix as its identifying trademark, let alone one that could arguably be confused with Shadowrun or vice-versa.
He was also hardly the first person to use the word Matrix, even in relation to a computer. As the networks used for cyberspace? Perhaps, but see above. Also, just because you coin a word or phrase, that doesn't mean you have sole use of it. Else anyone who quotes this post and includes the word "fiddledeedumpoppoprock" owes me fifty bucks.
| QUOTE (A Clockwork Lime) | ||
Too bad he didn't publish a game or even a product that uses Matrix as its identifying trademark, let alone one that could arguably be confused with Shadowrun or vice-versa. |
Not entirely true:
"It is also possible to receive trademark status for identification that is not on its face distinct or unique but which has developed a secondary meaning over time that identifies it with the product or seller. The owner of a trademark has exclusive right to use it on the product it was intended to identify and often on related products. Service-marks receive the same legal protection as trademarks but are meant to distinguish services rather than products. "
http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/trademark.html
William Gibson - Neuromancer (1984)
Neuromancer Computer Game based on the Gibson Novel (1988)
Shadowrun (1989)
So had Gibson of trademarked it on his game... Shadowrun may have had an issue. However, the W Brothers used a remarkably similar concept for the word the "Matrix" used by both Gibson and Shadowrun, both of which capitalized on it in the form of a game, but AFAIK only FASA trademarked it, so technically the Matrix computer games could be in violation of FASA/FanPro/WizKids trademark if they still hold it. Or am I completely reading this wrong?
| QUOTE (Erebus) | ||||
Not entirely true: "It is also possible to receive trademark status for identification that is not on its face distinct or unique but which has developed a secondary meaning over time that identifies it with the product or seller. The owner of a trademark has exclusive right to use it on the product it was intended to identify and often on related products. Service-marks receive the same legal protection as trademarks but are meant to distinguish services rather than products. " http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/trademark.html William Gibson - Neuromancer (1984) Neuromancer Computer Game based on the Gibson Novel (1988) Shadowrun (1989) So had Gibson of trademarked it on his game... Shadowrun may have had an issue. However, the W Brothers used a remarkably similar concept for the word the "Matrix" used by both Gibson and Shadowrun, both of which capitalized on it in the form of a game, but AFAIK only FASA trademarked it, so technically the Matrix computer games could be in violation of FASA/FanPro/WizKids trademark if they still hold it. Or am I completely reading this wrong? |
...Dude...There was a Neuromancer computer game?!...The year after I was born?!...
w00t 1337! 
Neuromancer Game:
http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=761
http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=761
Computer games are not the same as roleplaying games. They're not even in the same category, despite the fact that some like to call themselves "roleplaying" games.
| QUOTE (A Clockwork Lime) |
| Computer games are not the same as roleplaying games. They're not even in the same category, despite the fact that some like to call themselves "roleplaying" games. |
Or that they're often published and distributed through the same folks and both have ISBNs(or at least used to)?
Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, computer games originally got their mass-market start from the publishing industry.
How would you explain them to someone who didn't understand either the computer or roleplaying worlds: they're games.
Its a matter of where you draw the line, it can be apples and oranges, or it can be fruit.
Does selling apples reduce the chances someone will buy an orange?
There is a reason you dont see Matrix merchandising all over the place. Who owns what and their ability to use it plays into that...
Can any of the SR/FanPro/FASA people weigh in on this?
I know you folks are out there...
And secondly, is there a Matrix RPG?
I know you folks are out there...
And secondly, is there a Matrix RPG?
I am not a lawyer, and do not have the time to do the necessary research, but I suspect that the trademarks filed that relate to Shadowrun do not matter when relating to those of The Matrix.
Thanks. Sorry to call you out.
Okay, consider this; the 2nd ed. chapter on the Matrix starts with what phrase?
"Hello Operator"
On the other hand, I can see SR rules working for replaying the films. You call up the operator and ask to upload kung-fu, he wanders over and slots it into your chip-jack. If you were playing the film rules though, dumpshock would kill.
"Hello Operator"
On the other hand, I can see SR rules working for replaying the films. You call up the operator and ask to upload kung-fu, he wanders over and slots it into your chip-jack. If you were playing the film rules though, dumpshock would kill.
Or the last adventure in Super Tuesday.... the "virtual" run.
What about Tron?
My understanding is that while names can't be trademarked, logos can. So, the movie logo can't be used for Shadowrun, and they can't use the Shadowrun Matrix logos, but other than that they can share the name all they like. For example, a guy named Bill McDonald can freely name his business "McDonald's", and even advertise as such; but he can't put out anything resembling the golden arches.
I'm also given to understand-- mostly rumor, now-- that the word "Matrix" is indeed trademarked for computer games. However, the holders of the game trademark is FASA Interactive, which means the Microsoft Games division. I don't think they'd pass up a chance to get a huge game for the X-Box, and probably allowed it to happen without raising a fuss.
I'm also given to understand-- mostly rumor, now-- that the word "Matrix" is indeed trademarked for computer games. However, the holders of the game trademark is FASA Interactive, which means the Microsoft Games division. I don't think they'd pass up a chance to get a huge game for the X-Box, and probably allowed it to happen without raising a fuss.
Trademarks can be just words, or can be logos, designs, even smells (as in channell no 5). The test to see if you have a trademark claim is to ask if a consumer would be confused as to the source of a product. Since the Matrix movies were sci-fi related entertainment a reasonable consumer might think that is was a shadowrun/FASA undertaking. (It doesn't have to be exacty the same thing...I can't make mcdonalds candy bars even though mcdonalds doesnt sell candy). I would definitely bet that Fasa and the Matrix people worked out a deal. The studio would have had a cadre of IP lawyers doing copyright searches before the movie was made, and they would surely have found FASA.
| QUOTE (Erebus @ May 6 2004, 11:55 AM) |
| While reading a somewhat used but new to me copy of DNA/DOA I happened to notice on the title page that it stated that Shadowrun and Matrix were trademarked to FASA. Is that still the case with FanPro? Were there enough differinces that FanPro didn't feel threatened by the Movie Trilogy? Or were royalties paid? |
I'm sure you meant Wizkids LLC owns the rights.
It was my understanding (since this topic has come up quite a few times on DR/DS/etc. since the Superbowl trailer for the first film in '99) that, basically, FASA's (now WK's) trademark didn't apply to film or related rights, but it does for RPGs.
[EDIT]
There was actually a NYT Magazine article about a month ago on the problem with creating names nowadays, including the various BS companies have to put up with (esp. in the U.S.) with WIPO members over who owns the rights to what names. And there were incidents similar to Firewall's post below with the McDonald's metaphor.
Maybe WK can sue over this RPG and become the SCO of the RPG world.
[/EDIT]
The UK rules on names say that you cannot have a name which may mislead consumers. So Mr McDonald would be in trouble if he started making burgers. Quite simply, anything where you could conceivably mislead even one customer into thinking that you were connected to another company is out.
So 'McDonalds Plumbing' would be fine, 'McDonalds Tasty Burgers' would be somewhat dodgy and 'McDonalds Burger Bar' would be asking for trouble.
Then again, look at White Wolf vs. Underworld...
So 'McDonalds Plumbing' would be fine, 'McDonalds Tasty Burgers' would be somewhat dodgy and 'McDonalds Burger Bar' would be asking for trouble.
Then again, look at White Wolf vs. Underworld...
| QUOTE (Firewall) |
| Then again, look at White Wolf vs. Underworld... |
Just curious, how did Underworld violate (or come close to) any of WW's trademarks?
Vamps and Werewolves are pretty much public domain being a part of societal mythology...
I think White-Wolf named something stupid like 30 terms used in the World of darkness that turned up in an identical situation in Underworld. Stupid ones like one character describes the half-vampire half-werewolf as 'an abomination' and WW used that term as the official term for a vampire-werewolf.
Then there was Penny Arcade's take on it - http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2003-09-08
Then there was Penny Arcade's take on it - http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2003-09-08
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.