Wasteland Inxile forces One-Man Studio to Change the Name of their game

[eric__s]

Same thing happened to us. We made this tiny little game over the weekend for a game jam called Stellar Wanderer and put it up on the internet. A few months later, we get this cease and desist letter telling us to take it off the internet from some company making another game called Stellar Wanderer. We refused to take the game down, but we did decide to change the name because we didn't want to deal with the hassle. It turns out this game is some iPhone piece of shit.

 

[Infinitron]

In other news InXile retroactively sue T.S. Eliot over his poem The Waste Land.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/316970/

(I showed this one to Brother None too btw. Different trademark, no C&D.)

 

[Lurker King]

Posting in this legendary thread.

It's like I'm surrounded by people who know nothing of philosophy of law and are just spouting gibberish.

The question of how people should have copyrights safeguarded by law is a question of ethics and political philosophy, because our laws are naturally inspired by our moral beliefs. Philosophy of law has nothing to do with it. What some people here are arguing is that there should be some reasonable requirements to proceed with suits regarding copyrights, and that these reasonable requirements were violated in this particular case. “Wasteland” is a bland and common word associated with an obscure cRPG that most developers ignore. Nobody should be sued for using this word in a bigger title, in a different genre. Besides, Fargo was already perceived by many as a snake-oil salesman, now he also looks like a douche. InXile won’t see my money ever again, that is for sure.

 

[AngryEddy]

I'm gonna make a game called Angry Pepsi-Cola's new Barbie adventure.

Yeah bro and you'll be dealin with my legal team.

 

[Mexi]

Besides, Fargo was already perceived by many as a snake-oil salesman, now he also looks like a douche. InXile won’t see my money ever again, that is for sure.

True that.

:mrpresident:

 

[Mustawd]

But it's a calculated risk to do this if it bothers people. Look, I'm not saying you all should not care. I'm just explaining why I don't.

Mugging people on the street is also a calculated risk. Either you get caught or run away with money.

Yes, but mugging is illegal.

 

[Mastermind]

Reminds me of bethesda suing some small TCG game devs because it was called Scrolls.

Fargo's whining about fallout 4 workshop makes it even funnier, what a cunt.

The "small TCG game dev" was the developer of Minecraft

The developer also isn't "small" in any sense of the word.

 

[Mastermind]

Reminds me of bethesda suing some small TCG game devs because it was called Scrolls.

Fargo's whining about fallout 4 workshop makes it even funnier, what a cunt.

The "small TCG game dev" was the developer of Minecraft

There were like two people working on it, That Scrolls game never had any exposure to begin with, I learnt about after the whole suing business. AFAIK it had steady online of 500 people and either died or on it's way out.

Point is, it had nothing to do with TES and wasn't even competing with it for the same market and yet..

There's a TES TCG in closed beta right now. It's possible they've been planning it for a while.

 

[Bumvelcrow]

Wasteland™ fighting the good fight for all of Codexia.

In b4 Zed and DU have an awkward conversation.

 

[Zed]

hey guys

im happy to announce my next great game

Wasteland: New Fallout

look forward to it

 

[mutonizer]

Lol Zed

Can't wait, especially the "Free DLC" only available via a yearly $99.99 multipass: Wasteland - The Angry Fallout Scrolls Saga.

 

[Lucky]

It's not just this particular company. By leaning on the dev to change his name it sends a message to other devs who might go much farther than the dev in question.


And as far as the "bullying" goes? I just don't buy it. When you go into business you enter in a world of competition, limited resources, and a field of competitors that knows more about the business, laws, and regulatory requirements than you do. Are they supposed to not be able to compete with you effectively through price wars? Are they not allowed to use their influence to get better deals with suppliers than you, as a sole business owner, can get? Are they not allowed to offer exorbitant salaries to potential employees to gather the top talent? Are these tactics bullying? To others, maybe. Not to me. If I had to make the decision if I was inXile, I would do it. Yeah, send them a C&D. F' him. He decided not to do it himself, so I'll try and force him to. If the community balks, probably try and minimize it and leave other devs alone, and hope this one is a deterrent. If the community doesn't care as a whole, then keep doing it as long as I feel it is truly necessary.

When you run a business your success is not just profits. It affects the ability to engage in other projects, to hire more people, to pay employees well, etc. etc. As long as it's within the law, I say it's fair game to at least do it. If it's an ethical gray area, proceed with caution, but it does not automatically mean do nothing. And in my opinion, they are well within their rights, and IMO well within ethical standards. So yah, it doesn't really bother me.

That's a particular viewpoint in business culture and has more to do with what businesses perceive themselves as being allowed to do than what they'd be empowered to do if put to the test. For example, depending on how its phrased those better deals would have you run into antitrust laws. The devil is in the details, which is why the wording goes through legal teams when you're open about such practices. Much of legal tango that game companies such as InXile dance involves giving the appearance that the law as written is on their side while avoiding being challenged in court - giving the appearance of having rights that they likely don't have. They're behaving dubiously and I doubt they'd ever be ballsy enough to take a court case all the way as they stand to lose much more than whomever they're suing.

The question of how people should have copyrights safeguarded by law is a question of ethics and political philosophy, because our laws are naturally inspired by our moral beliefs. Philosophy of law has nothing to do with it. What some people here are arguing is that there should be some reasonable requirements to proceed with suits regarding copyrights, and that these reasonable requirements were violated in this particular case. “Wasteland” is a bland and common word associated with an obscure cRPG that most developers ignore. Nobody should be sued for using this word in a bigger title, in a different genre. Besides, Fargo was already perceived by many as a snake-oil salesman, now he also looks like a douche. InXile won’t see my money ever again, that is for sure.

Philosophy of law has a lot to with questions like that, but it's not those that I was objecting to. It's when contradictions arise from how people perceive the intersecting systems of law to work that the discussion becomes unnecessarily confusing. The case itself is weak and InXile should not have been granted the trademark to begin with. What bemuses me though is their incompetence. They're damaging the InExile brand over nothing as a tiny developer that cannot afford to do so, while they have the experience needed to know better. They were fortunate that Vlambeer went along with their request and spun it a way that made InXile look sympathetic because that would have made them look even worse at a more crucial time. I can't imagine that whomever is responsible for their marketing strategy is to happy about this after all the effort that went into the kickstarter campaigns.



Oh, and Brother None. Good to see that you're trying to explain the situation to you're homeguard, but it's a shame that they don't see it your way. Not at all, in fact. Awkward!

 

[Lucky]

hey guys

im happy to announce my next great game

Wasteland: New Fallout

look forward to it

Code Red, Brother None. Code Red!

 

[Zewp]

And this is why I pirate inXile games.

 

[Metro]

InXile goes after these guys instead of Bethesda because they could probably afford a legal fight with a smaller developer. Bethesda? Not a chance.

 

[HoboForEternity]

wow that sucks.

c'mon, i expected something like this from bethesda, or other AAA bullshit.

 

[Kem0sabe]

That's a particular viewpoint in business culture and has more to do with what businesses perceive themselves as being allowed to do than what they'd be empowered to do if put to the test. For example, depending on how its phrased those better deals would have you run into antitrust laws. The devil is in the details, which is why the wording goes through legal teams when you're open about such practices. Much of legal tango that game companies such as InXile dance involves giving the appearance that the law as written is on their side while avoiding being challenged in court - giving the appearance of having rights that they likely don't have. They're behaving dubiously and I doubt they'd ever be ballsy enough to take a court case all the way as they stand to lose much more than whomever they're suing.




Philosophy of law has a lot to with questions like that, but it's not those that I was objecting to. It's when contradictions arise from how people perceive the intersecting systems of law to work that the discussion becomes unnecessarily confusing. The case itself is weak and InXile should not have been granted the trademark to begin with. What bemuses me though is their incompetence. They're damaging the InExile brand over nothing as a tiny developer that cannot afford to do so, while they have the experience needed to know better. They were fortunate that Vlambeer went along with their request and spun it a way that made InXile look sympathetic because that would have made them look even worse at a more crucial time. I can't imagine that whomever is responsible for their marketing strategy is to happy about this after all the effort that went into the kickstarter campaigns.



Oh, and Brother None. Good to see that you're trying to explain the situation to you're homeguard, but it's a shame that they don't see it your way. Not at all, in fact. Awkward!

Yeah, when the posters there started bringing up valid examples of the term wasteland used by other developers, where inxile did nothing... Sea and brother none suddenly went silent.

What a bunch of cunts.

 

[Lurker King]

Philosophy of law has a lot to with questions like that, but it's not those that I was objecting to. It's when contradictions arise from how people perceive the intersecting systems of law to work that the discussion becomes unnecessarily confusing. The case itself is weak and InXile should not have been granted the trademark to begin with.

In the strict sense of the term, philosophy of law is about the nature of law and other related questions. It’s an area about general and abstract questions. However, I understand that some philosophers of law, and jurists, may have an interest in debates of that nature.

What bemuses me though is their incompetence. They're damaging the InExile brand over nothing as a tiny developer that cannot afford to do so, while they have the experience needed to know better.

That happened because Fargo has illusions of grandeur about his game.

 

[Lucky]

In the strict sense of the term, philosophy of law is about the nature of law and other related questions. It’s an area about general and abstract questions. However, I understand that some philosophers of law, and jurists, may have an interest in debates of that nature.

It's a matter of perspective here as there's different angles of approach on an issue such the ethicality of copyright. In other words, what aspect of it are you emphasising (which would probably involve avoiding the term ethicality to begin with). This area gets muddy due to overlap between the different disciplines, though.

 

[WhiteGuts]

InXile goes after these guys instead of Bethesda because they could probably afford a legal fight with a smaller developer. Bethesda? Not a chance.

nowai men

 

[Bubbles]

If they launch another Kickstarter, they should explain exactly what kind of game names it will make unavailable in the future. If Bard's Tale 4 means that any indie developer who makes a new game with "Tale" in the title will be sued into oblivion, then I think we can just make do without BT4 instead.

 

[Mustawd]

If Bard's Tale 4 means that any indie developer who makes a new game with "Tale" in the title will be sued into oblivion, then I think we can just make do without BT4 instead.

I hope they sue Undertale.

 

[Turrul]

If they launch another Kickstarter, they should explain exactly what kind of game names it will make unavailable in the future. If Bard's Tale 4 means that any indie developer who makes a new game with "Tale" in the title will be sued into oblivion, then I think we can just make do without BT4 instead.

They can't since Oblivion is a trademark of Bethesda, have to find a new term for that.

I suppose they can trademark some other random word for that, then bully some other minor dev(s) with it too

 

[HoboForEternity]

Fargo and inexile seems suffer for little man syndrome.

 

[Hoodoo]

Whoever gave money to this snake oil salesman in the first place deserves eggs on his face.

This is the guy that managed to run two major game publishers to the ground and blame the french for it.