List of "forbidden things" to help avoid stepping on EA property rights

I wasn't sure the appropriate place to ask this; I figured it would be relevant to a forum discussing fan fiction, though.

Many on the SotA team have worked on a Property That Shall Not Be Named that is currently owned by Electronic Arts, and the devs are being careful not to step on that. Is there a formal list of terms/concepts/etc. that creators of fan art should avoid in order to avoid running into trouble with EA regarding copyright, trademark, etc.? I presume it would be the same sort of list that the SotA developers follow, if there is one.

In most cases, it's obvious; in other cases, not so much. For instance, there's a standard set of reagents in the Property That Shall Not Be Named: Black Pearl, Blood Moss, Garlic, Ginseng, Mandrake Root, Nightshade, Spider Silk, Sulfurous Ash. I can't imagine that any of these terms by themselves is "owned" by EA. But in combination, are they?

One could flip the question around: what aspects associated with the Property That Shall Not Be Named *are* usable in SotA lore?

 

I don't think this is necessary. Copyright is complicated and Portalarium have their own lawyers. Since the only real risk is stuff that ends up, officially, in-game, they can catch this from anything they review.

Fan Fiction/Art or user generated content (content not reviewed by Portalarium directly) is usually covered under fair use. Although different creators have different standpoints on these issues, however in reality the worse it would get is a cease and desist. As long as you don't take credit for creating the source material or accept money for you work, Fan Fiction is normally not a legal issue for most people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_issues_with_fan_fiction

Portalarium is the one with most of the risk, but I am sure they have it under control.

 

Right, they deal with it as follows:

DON'T LAWYER ME BRO!

Works everytime.

 

Cloning game systems is a murky aspect of copyright law. Historically, courts have allowed one company to practically copy an entire game and make just slight changes to it, but in more recently rulings, they've ruled against full clones.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/187385/clone_wars_the_five_most_.php

If SotA copied a bunch of game systems and design from Ultima, EA could complain that their IP is infringed. I don't think Portalarium wants a legal battle in the first place (especially when they'd be on the defensive) and I don't think RG wants to burn every bridge at EA. I think he wants to get the Ultima name back some day if he can.

He may have a handshake agreement with EA right now and what he plans to re-use (Lord British, virtues, Shamino, etc) but for the most part, it behooves Portalarium to blaze a new road and not copy too much from Ultima.

 

Nightshade is used as a magical reagent in the Elder Scrolls games too, IIRC. Whether that is just a coincidence or has to to with the Elder Scrolls games having some inspiration from the Ultima series, I do not know. But I guess the term should be OK to use.

 

Some of the Ultima and Elder Scroll reagents are archetypical magical reagents.

 

I'm not certain if you realize this, but Nightshade is a real plant. Same with mandrake root, garlic, ginseng, etc. I doubt that there would be any copyright issues.

 

Any copyright concern would be on the specific system of these specific reagents, keeping the same spell designs, etc.

 

Yeah, I agree.
It'll be interesting to see if there will be any other hints at the old Ultima Lore (apart from Lord British, of course), e.g. why the world is called New Britannia - are they somehow aware of Old Britannia, i.e. do the worlds exist in the same universe?

 

If this game outright cites that events from previous Ultima games are part of its history, then EA might have a reasonable argument in court that this game is presenting itself as a direct sequel (and not merely a spiritual successor) to Ultima.

 

Eh, yes, that's kinda why I wrote 'hints'.

 

From various interviews I've heard Richard give, I get the impression that they are meant to be the same universe, and that Richard and the player interacted several centuries ago in that world (him as LB and you as the Avatar), and you are now interacting again. But, of course, he has to be oblique about everything. The idea of your avatar being uniquely *you* and not some alter-ego seems central to his thinking.

Like most, I've been annoyed at EA holding on the the Ultima IP so tightly, especially when they just sat on it so long, wishing they would just give it back to Richard. But I now think of it as possibly a blessing in disguise; it may have been creatively useful for Richard to have to "burn the diskpacks" (in the words of Alan Kay) and create something new.

 

Yes, that's something like that I had in mind.

 

I doubt your Avatar in SotA will be THE Avatar from previous Ultima games. For one, note the ending of Ultima IX. Not to mention that there is a story expectation that there are several Avatars in NB at the same time.

 

He/she/it certainly will not be. Ultima is now owned by EA.

 

Heh... EA. They certainly have a zillion Avatars running around Ultima Forever! (Which, to be fair, as far as click-on-monsters-and-chests mobile games go, is reasonably well done; alas, the microtransactions for "keys" to open the chests and the need to always be online kills it for me. I'd happily buy it outright, but there's no option for that. Although, at this point I've successfully gone off-topic on my own post so maybe I should be quiet now...)

 

Tons of creatures of Ultima lore are ancient and not owned by anyone, just recently found an old source for a headless it has a different name but looks exactly like a headless, could list off almost every creature and come up with the same, will post the headless info later when I'm at my computer, there's plenty of room to use ancient myth and legend w/out stepping on anyone's copyright

 

Right, the idea that we are avatars isn't a problem. The idea that each of us is the Avatar (of the Ultima series) would be.

 

I think EA would be hard pressed to even make the case for reagents being linked to certain spells, as most of them are already linked to those capabilities, if not 'real' spells. Add in the words of power, and yeah, I think then EA would have a foot to stand on.

As for what Portalarium has avoided... so far as I can tell, the only thing they have stayed away from is specific mention of events that have "happened" in previous iterations of Ultima, and the word "Ultima" itself. Companion's names have been used, a direct reference to Britannia of old is in place (if only because SotA has a New Britannia), even the old map of Britannia (with a huge, post-cataclysmic change) appears to have been used.

As for avoiding anything as a fanfic author, I would have to agree with the "fair use" issues cited earlier.

 

I think that UO had a lot of generic creatures. Like most of fantasy games really. So, I'm sure that we will see some in Sota.