Author Topic: Crap hits the fan in Moscow  (Read 2004 times)

Offline Bodhi

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8698
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2004, 06:44:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wotan
Nope all the noise from the flight sim communtiy directed at them could do the reverse by demonstrating the size of the market. It may be a niche market compared to other game types but its still large enough for them to claim a small royalty on every aircraft they hold the rights to.

HT may want to put them p38s on hold!!!

:p


last I checked, most WW2 a/c mfg's have long since given any concern over the use of anything associated with them.  Hell, my corporate logo has the likeness of an F4u and a 38 in it, and both Vought and Lockheed know it's in there.  They could care less, and have actually begged us to look at some of our restoration processes...

My bet is this is something as stupid as Ubi not wanting to pay the price to continue add ons, or there is a copyright infringement that exists between the renderings of the aircraft and someone else's code....  thats more likely the problem.
I regret doing business with TD Computer Systems.

Offline mars01

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4148
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2004, 06:46:07 PM »
What a bunch of BS!  If the aircraft manufacturers are behind this it is rediculous.  Greedy fks!  As if they don't make enough money.

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2004, 06:49:35 PM »
Well if you believe what folks say on the intardnet (like I was killed in a car accident after getting bit by a scorpion; but now I am back, resurrected if you will) then read this thread:

http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=114;t=002248

Like I said who knows, its not like anything released in Russian won't be on a 1000 thousand web sites as a 'free download' or at the very least 1000 chinese web sites...

Offline Furious

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3243
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2004, 06:53:19 PM »
It would be funny if the manufacturers were pissed about the poor* modeling of their respective aircraft.






* I don't actually know whether Il2 has these P&W aircraft modeled poorly or not.

Offline AKS\/\/ulfe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2004, 08:28:00 PM »
Well, I dunno... but to cancel all American planes but leave the rest open, that doesn't indicate to me UBI troubles with selling PF.
-SW

Offline Jester

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2753
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2004, 10:28:46 PM »
I heard something similar about this in the plastic model kit community.

Though I can't remember what it was exactly one of the aircraft producers wanted to charge royalties to a model company for building a model kit of their aircraft!

I am with the above that this seems like a really "SILLY ASS" thing to do as flight sims, model kits, games, toys, etc. does nothing by get FREE advertising for the particular aircraft company. Seems to me they would try cultivate this as much as they can by providing information (Long as it isn't classified in any way).

I can't see what they could carp about as they pattent on about every piece of WW2 aircraft has long since expired.
Lt. JESTER
VF-10 "GRIM REAPERS"

WEBSITE:  www.VF10.org

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #21 on: December 17, 2004, 12:19:56 PM »
I do know that if they dont defend their copyrights, they are deemed to have expired.

Offline brady

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7055
      • http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/t/y/tyr88/JG2main.html
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #22 on: December 19, 2004, 01:35:57 PM »
Check this link out and tell me I am corect in the understanding that this whole thing is BS based on this passage:

http://www.train-sim.com/dcforum/DCForumID3/25853.html

"On Dec 8 the U.S. Supreme Court decided, 9-0, that plaintiffs in trademark disputes bear the entire obligation to show how the defendants product descriptions, based on fair use, confuse consumers about the originating company.
IOW, it strikes a massive blow on behalf of common sense: the burden of proof now falls upon the plaintiff to show (a) consumers are confused and easily mistake goods from company ABC to be from company DEF and (b) economic harm has occured as a result.

The case originated over descriptive text that included a trademarked phrase. The defendants have won.

What it means to folks like us here is if you write "Not affiliated with the Union Pacific Railroad or General Motors Corporations, or the transportation industry in any way" you've erected a fairly good defense against confusion when you go on to describe your product as "An artistic intrepretation represented by an electronic image of a locomotive produced by General Motors from 1959 to 1967 as used by the Union Pacific RR in 1965, for use only as an add-on enhancement to MSTS".

Because such a description of your product is not only completely accurate but has established the nature of the product and the marketplace in which the product is distributed, both of which are not really relevant to the mentioned corporations, their marks, or their products.

See: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=03-409

The ruling does not change any legal understanding about the validity of registered trademarks, the plaintiff's use of economic harm actually done to over-ride a fair use defense, or the ability of the plaintiff to show overwhelming evidence of priviledged prior use in the same markets to overturn a fair-use defense.

Dave Nelson

WP mainline, Oakland-Stockton: 100% complete;
SP mainline, Oakland-Stockton: 20% complete;
Aug 1950"

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #23 on: December 19, 2004, 02:16:54 PM »
There is an opinion that Oleg's reason is that Ubi makes him focus on work for BoB project.

http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=114;t=002250

I don't have enough time to watch this stuff, some of you know - i have my own reasons to be interested in this story....

Offline 214thCavalier

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1929
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2004, 03:30:29 PM »
Well Brady looks to me that is a good get out of jail free card as long as a similar phrase describing your product is included.

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #25 on: December 20, 2004, 03:29:36 AM »
The latest word circling around is as follows:

Quote
It seems that Northrop/Grumman demanded payment for trademark licensing fees from IC Maddox.

IC Maddox would not or could not pay so the publisher and distributer, UBI, got involved and paid the fees with out a fight.

UBI then said to IC Maddox that UBI would re-coop these licensing fees from future payments to IC Maddox from the sales of IC Maddox games.

Northrop/Grumman already got paid. The fight between IC Maddox and Northrop/Grumman is over, Northrop/Grumman won out by pressuring UBI.

IC Maddox is left in the position of arguing with UBI over the fees and thus risk losing them as the distributer and publisher of future IC Maddox games or just accepting UBI's terms.

IC Maddox can't afford to lose its distributer nor can it afford to pay out any future licensing fees to Northrop/Grumman.

IC Maddox has no choice but to exclude Northrop/Grumman aircraft from any future patches or add-ons. The Northrop/Grumman aircraft already in the game have been paid for.

The issue also arises in how much money is UBI willing to put out for future FB/AEP/PF add-ons. With out funding for future add-on development IC Maddox may just have to move on with BoB. There's has been no talk of the 'upcoming' patch and there have been no "Friday Development Updates" over the last few weeks.


I wouldn't swear that nay of the above quote is correct. Take it with a grain of salt...

Offline 214thCavalier

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1929
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #26 on: December 20, 2004, 04:52:38 AM »
So what your saying is UBI rolled over apparently without a fight or even researching into the legalities of the claim ?
They appear to have sold Oleg down the river, on the grounds that if we pay Northrop its no skin off our nose we will just charge it to Oleg.

UBI is a french company correct ?

Well thats a shame because this will only reinforce a lot of peoples views.

Offline StarOfAfrica2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5162
      • http://www.vf-17.org
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #27 on: December 20, 2004, 05:34:06 AM »
Also, if you read the entire thread at SimHQ, it was was a stated opinion by people who understood the situation fairly well that UBI had a good case to fight this but simply chose not to, deciding the legal fees weren't worth the gain.  I also believe this had more to do with the aircraft depicted on the boxes of the IL2 series games, and less with the modelling of a/c within the game (at least as far as getting them noticed by Northrop/Grumman anyway).  They already had a shaky case to start with, not sure how much of a legal leg they would have to stand on with a game like Aces High (where there is no "box", and thus very little advertising artwork).  Their arguments would have to be based almost solely on ingame renderings of a/c (IMHO).  Since plane skins are not "generic" and are based on historic planes that celebrate the pilot or the squadron, and not just the ride, I'd think they have a tough battle to prove TM infringement.  Also, HT doesn't use company names in identifying a/c, only the military designations and/or "nicknames" (at least not in the game).

Just my .02 worth.

Offline Fruda

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2004, 07:30:32 PM »
Sounds like Star's got it.

Seems to me that UBI didn't pay royalties to the various A/C companies for putting their planes on the Il-2 boxes. The companies could also be upset that they didn't model their aircraft correctly... Either way, it's a case against UBI, not HTC.

Offline mars01

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4148
Crap hits the fan in Moscow
« Reply #29 on: December 21, 2004, 09:27:27 AM »
If this was about the Box, then you just remove the plane from the box and not from the game.  There has to be something more to it.

Honestly if I knew all of this I would have passed on PF.