Why no official game?

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Really? How did they come in? They entered the chat room? Why didn't everyone in the chat room just say no?

Paramount can't stop you playing Star Trek themed games.

Not at home - but they can stop you doing so publicly using the righteous might of things like C&D and takedown orders upon service providers. They told AOL they had to cleanse it of their IP or face legal action. AOL told the people running the chat sims - comply or get shut down. Paramount was not OK with people "playing Star Trek" in publicly accessible chat rooms. Compliance was coerced and it all became a lot less fun. I moved on to other entertainments not long after.

 

[Morrus]

Not at home - but they can stop you doing so publicly using the righteous might of things like C&D and takedown orders upon service providers. They told AOL they had to cleanse it of their IP or face legal action. AOL told the people running the chat sims - comply or get shut down. Paramount was not OK with people "playing Star Trek" in publicly accessible chat rooms. Compliance was coerced and it all became a lot less fun. I moved on to other entertainments not long after.

As I said, you can intimidate people into compliance with your wishes. Why AOL agreed is between them and Paramount, but it seems unlikely that other factors were not involved.

 

[billd91]

Nope. It isn't. You can play any game you like on a chat server. I can play my FASA 1980s Star Trek game at home, in public, at a convention, online, anywhere I want to. The impediment would be the venue's own policies, whether physical or virtual. There is no IP basis in preventing me playing a game I bought.

It may depend in whether playing in some public venues constitutes a "public performance" or redistribution of the IP. In a home game that is clearly not what's happening. But has any case law been established that makes it the same case for games that end up being stored in a public server? I can see a hostile publisher trying to pursue that line of reasoning, at least until a case closes it off.

 

[Deset Gled]

As I said, you can intimidate people into compliance with your wishes. Why AOL agreed is between them and Paramount, but it seems unlikely that other factors were not involved.

It's easy to say that in a post-Digital Millennium Copyright Act world, where the rights and responsibilities of posters and hosters are better defined. Before the DMCA, people knew that speech was free, but printed word for profit was not. This newfangled idea of text-without-print and profit-through-ads created a whole new palette of greys that courts hadn't considered before. And not everyone was excited to pay lawyer and court costs to figure out where the lines were drawn.

My understanding is that this story takes place well before the DMCA, when IP laws were both less clear and less commonly understood that they are now. Paramount would not be the only company that got a little overzealous in their policing. I've heard a number of stories about C&D orders for homebrew AD&D material as well.

 

[aramis erak]

As I said, you can intimidate people into compliance with your wishes. Why AOL agreed is between them and Paramount, but it seems unlikely that other factors were not involved.

AOL didn't comply until the judge signed the injunction order. AOL posted a notice about it at the time. which was, IIRC, 1997 or 1998. Right about the time LUG was securing the license. Pre DMCA. Once the injunction issued, it's not threat of suit, it's invoking the weight of the US government.

In the US, the injunction requires convincing a federal judge that (1) you've made reasonable attempts via C&D letter, (2) it's more likely than not that it's an unauthorized use of copyrights and/or trademarks, (3) that it's likely not fair use, and (4) they haven't yet complied with the C&D.

Paramount got a judge to agree it was more likely than not that an an authorized use of their IP was happening in a fixed medium (you could access the prior posts) and appeared to violate their IP. He also agreed that it likely wasn't a fair use.

 

[Morrus]

AOL didn't comply until the judge signed the injunction order. AOL posted a notice about it at the time. which was, IIRC, 1997 or 1998. Right about the time LUG was securing the license. Pre DMCA. Once the injunction issued, it's not threat of suit, it's invoking the weight of the US government.

In the US, the injunction requires convincing a federal judge that (1) you've made reasonable attempts via C&D letter, (2) it's more likely than not that it's an unauthorized use of copyrights and/or trademarks, (3) that it's likely not fair use, and (4) they haven't yet complied with the C&D.

Paramount got a judge to agree it was more likely than not that an an authorized use of their IP was happening in a fixed medium (you could access the prior posts) and appeared to violate their IP. He also agreed that it likely wasn't a fair use.

Did they attempt to fight against it? You say they didn't comply with the C&D, so clearly they disagreed. I did a Google search, but my Google-fu isn't good enough to come up with anything about the incident. I'd love to read it. How much do you actually remember?

 

[Beleriphon]

Nope. It isn't. You can play any game you like on a chat server. I can play my FASA 1980s Star Trek game at home, in public, at a convention, online, anywhere I want to. The impediment would be the venue's own policies, whether physical or virtual. There is no IP basis in preventing me playing a game I bought.

In the UK. An actual RPG is all fine an dandy, but doing some free form thing, that could qualify as writing new fiction which most certainly a breach of copyright. US copyright law is particularly arcane though, so your mileage may vary on what counts or not.

 

[Umbran]

In the UK. An actual RPG is all fine an dandy, but doing some free form thing, that could qualify as writing new fiction which most certainly a breach of copyright. US copyright law is particularly arcane though, so your mileage may vary on what counts or not.

You *do* know how much Star Trek fanfic is out there, right? And how much it has been out there, for ages, without being bothered by Paramount?

A bunch of people writing fanatic together is not something they'd have been concerned with.

 

[billd91]

You *do* know how much Star Trek fanfic is out there, right? And how much it has been out there, for ages, without being bothered by Paramount?

A bunch of people writing fanatic together is not something they'd have been concerned with.

And most fanfic would be viewed differently from a corporate-hosted RPG forum that has the potential to encourage subscription revenue.

 

[Morrus]

There's an awful lot of "could be" and "probably" in this thread.