-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Can Studios lose the license to their own IP's?
- Thread starter Nardy_19
- Start date
A license is permission granted to use something an IP holder owns. IPs are things like trademarks or patents. What you describe in the topic title is in a literal sense impossible, as they don't need a license. They own the IP and thus don't need a license to use it. They grant others licenses to use their property.
If you file or renew a trademark, then you own that IP for the foreseeable future.
Sega has surrendered trademarks before, however. They lost the trademark to Wonder Boy for a while. Certain patents regarding Sonic the Hedgehog have also expired, notably the patent for the corkscrews:
It expired in 2012.
A bunch of patents regarding the SNES and NES also have expired.
A patent is not the same as a trademark or copyright, however. That's why clones of these consoles can exist, but not use the name "NES" or "SNES" or any other copyright or trademark nintendo owns.
Copyrights, at least in the west, are being eternally pumped indefinitely by Disney. The copyrights to things like Super Mario or Sonic the Hedgehog will not expire in our lifetimes because of this.
If you file or renew a trademark, then you own that IP for the foreseeable future.
Sega has surrendered trademarks before, however. They lost the trademark to Wonder Boy for a while. Certain patents regarding Sonic the Hedgehog have also expired, notably the patent for the corkscrews:
US5411272A - Video game with spiral loop graphics - Google Patents
A method is provided for controlling the appearance of a video game game character, as the character traverses a path displayed on a display screen; wherein the method is used in a video game system which includes a graphics controller, digital memory and a display screen, the method comprises...
patents.google.com
It expired in 2012.
A bunch of patents regarding the SNES and NES also have expired.
A patent is not the same as a trademark or copyright, however. That's why clones of these consoles can exist, but not use the name "NES" or "SNES" or any other copyright or trademark nintendo owns.
Copyrights, at least in the west, are being eternally pumped indefinitely by Disney. The copyrights to things like Super Mario or Sonic the Hedgehog will not expire in our lifetimes because of this.
OP
OP
That's what i thought and i knew i wasn't crazy. There's more to this but i probably can't say in here.
Nintendo is the publisher of their own properties. Historically a lot of studios got investment from a publisher for their projects, which means they end up not owning the IP. So, it can depend on any deals they've signed.
Keep in mind that IP (whether copyright, patent, or trademark) can be transferred, so an IP owner could sell their IP to some other entity.
OP
OP
But if that happened, wouldn't it show up in the trademarks files? As the "OWNER" would change.....
The three major types of IP that can realistically be "lost" are:
Copyright. This is a general protection of the right to control the spread of copies of a work (hence the term "copy" in the name). A work can be just about any kind of art - writing, music, painting, sculpture, movie, etc. Games are definitely included. Although you can formally file a copyright, you don't need to. When you create anything protected by copyright, you automatically own the copyright to that thing (as long as you live in any of the countries coloured blue on this map).
Losing copyright by accident is basically impossible. Copyright expires by itself, but not for many years after the death of the copyright holder, so the expiration of copyrights is not really relevant to video games.
Trademarks protect the words and images used to distinguish a product in the marketplace. You can't trademark a video game. However, you can trademark the name of it, the logo (separately from the name) and you can trademark designs used to mark the game (or other product) as distinct from others. For example, Nintendo will have trademarked the name Nintendo, the Nintendo logo, the name Super Mario (and each version that they've used) and probably a few other Mario-related marks and images. Trademarks only apply to specified business domains, so Nintendo having a Kirby trademark for games doesn't stop a guy called Bill Kirby opening a bike shop and calling it Kirby's Bikes (although quick note: companies can file for trademarks across lots of domains - for example, Nintendo have a Super Mario trademark that apples to vitamins).
Trademarks need to be used so you can lose trademarks by not selling products that use them. If a trademark is lost, however, that doesn't mean that the whole IP related to that trademark is in danger. Nintendo, for example, keep renewing the Eternal Darkness trademark without using it. It's possible they will lose it eventually, which will allow someone to make a video game called "Eternal Darkness". That won't, however, allow them to use the story, characters, or setting of Eternal Darkness, as those are all protected by copyright, not trademark.
Patents protect specific implementations of ideas (not ideas themselves). So Nintendo had a patent on how to implement a specific type of d-pad. That meant that nobody could exactly copy their d-pad, but didn't stop other companies from having d-pads of different types. Patents most obviously apply to hardware, but some gameplay mechanics have been patented in the past. For example, Sega patented the mechanic of displaying your button presses on the screen after you pressed them in a fighting game training mode, which meant that Namco had to remove that feature from the Practice mode in some versions of Tekken 3. Namco themselves patented a mechanic for playing games while another game was loading.
Patents automatically expire, usually after 20 years.
Modern major publishers do not tend to lose their own IP. However, two common practices in the past often resulted in issues (that in some cases persist to the present). Firstly, it was common for developers to grant publishers full rights to their IP as part of a publication deal. It was therefore not unusual for a developer to create an IP, sell it to a publisher, and then for the developer to never have anything to do with that IP again. One ongoing example is Far Cry, created by Crytek and published by Ubisoft, and owned by Ubisoft since then.
Secondly, companies used to cease to exist a lot, by merger, acquisition, bankruptcy or sometimes just closure. Their IPs might be sold to others or sometimes just vanish. Complicating that, often games were licensed differently for different regions or platforms, so a company ceasing to exist might disrupt a license in unpredictable ways. Sometimes that means a smooth transfer of an IP (like Mortal Kombat which became a Warner IP when they outright purchased the remnants of Midway), sometimes not so much (a company collapsing can lead to its rights being auctioned off, like we saw with Acclaim and THQ and Data East, among others).
Copyright. This is a general protection of the right to control the spread of copies of a work (hence the term "copy" in the name). A work can be just about any kind of art - writing, music, painting, sculpture, movie, etc. Games are definitely included. Although you can formally file a copyright, you don't need to. When you create anything protected by copyright, you automatically own the copyright to that thing (as long as you live in any of the countries coloured blue on this map).
Losing copyright by accident is basically impossible. Copyright expires by itself, but not for many years after the death of the copyright holder, so the expiration of copyrights is not really relevant to video games.
Trademarks protect the words and images used to distinguish a product in the marketplace. You can't trademark a video game. However, you can trademark the name of it, the logo (separately from the name) and you can trademark designs used to mark the game (or other product) as distinct from others. For example, Nintendo will have trademarked the name Nintendo, the Nintendo logo, the name Super Mario (and each version that they've used) and probably a few other Mario-related marks and images. Trademarks only apply to specified business domains, so Nintendo having a Kirby trademark for games doesn't stop a guy called Bill Kirby opening a bike shop and calling it Kirby's Bikes (although quick note: companies can file for trademarks across lots of domains - for example, Nintendo have a Super Mario trademark that apples to vitamins).
Trademarks need to be used so you can lose trademarks by not selling products that use them. If a trademark is lost, however, that doesn't mean that the whole IP related to that trademark is in danger. Nintendo, for example, keep renewing the Eternal Darkness trademark without using it. It's possible they will lose it eventually, which will allow someone to make a video game called "Eternal Darkness". That won't, however, allow them to use the story, characters, or setting of Eternal Darkness, as those are all protected by copyright, not trademark.
Patents protect specific implementations of ideas (not ideas themselves). So Nintendo had a patent on how to implement a specific type of d-pad. That meant that nobody could exactly copy their d-pad, but didn't stop other companies from having d-pads of different types. Patents most obviously apply to hardware, but some gameplay mechanics have been patented in the past. For example, Sega patented the mechanic of displaying your button presses on the screen after you pressed them in a fighting game training mode, which meant that Namco had to remove that feature from the Practice mode in some versions of Tekken 3. Namco themselves patented a mechanic for playing games while another game was loading.
Patents automatically expire, usually after 20 years.
Modern major publishers do not tend to lose their own IP. However, two common practices in the past often resulted in issues (that in some cases persist to the present). Firstly, it was common for developers to grant publishers full rights to their IP as part of a publication deal. It was therefore not unusual for a developer to create an IP, sell it to a publisher, and then for the developer to never have anything to do with that IP again. One ongoing example is Far Cry, created by Crytek and published by Ubisoft, and owned by Ubisoft since then.
Secondly, companies used to cease to exist a lot, by merger, acquisition, bankruptcy or sometimes just closure. Their IPs might be sold to others or sometimes just vanish. Complicating that, often games were licensed differently for different regions or platforms, so a company ceasing to exist might disrupt a license in unpredictable ways. Sometimes that means a smooth transfer of an IP (like Mortal Kombat which became a Warner IP when they outright purchased the remnants of Midway), sometimes not so much (a company collapsing can lead to its rights being auctioned off, like we saw with Acclaim and THQ and Data East, among others).
Others have already addressed the language regarding "licenses," but I wanted to talk about actual duration of copyrights.
Under current U.S. law, copyrights for works of "corporate authorship," which covers most games and movies, last for 95 years. For example, that means that Pong won't enter the public domain until 2067. It also means you shouldn't expect any work published during your lifetime to enter the public domain before you're dead (one of many problems I have with copyright law, but that's for another discussion). For works made by individual authors, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. For any invention, patents will last for 20 years, so any old hardware designs for consoles or their components enter the public domain in just two decades.
Companies that own an IP will retain that IP until it reaches the aforementioned expiration dates, and not a day before. When a company goes belly-up, it's IPs are still covered by that copyright duration, so even abandoned titles are covered. The only way a company can "lose" an IP is if they sell off their IPs to another company, or they are bought out by another company altogether, but the original copyright terms still apply. So, a creative work published in 1980, will, under current law, enter the public domain until 2075 and not a day before, regardless of if the publisher still exists or not, or if they were bought out by another company, or they sold the IP to another company. The reasons don't matter. Copyrights cannot prematurely expire.
Under current U.S. law, copyrights for works of "corporate authorship," which covers most games and movies, last for 95 years. For example, that means that Pong won't enter the public domain until 2067. It also means you shouldn't expect any work published during your lifetime to enter the public domain before you're dead (one of many problems I have with copyright law, but that's for another discussion). For works made by individual authors, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. For any invention, patents will last for 20 years, so any old hardware designs for consoles or their components enter the public domain in just two decades.
Companies that own an IP will retain that IP until it reaches the aforementioned expiration dates, and not a day before. When a company goes belly-up, it's IPs are still covered by that copyright duration, so even abandoned titles are covered. The only way a company can "lose" an IP is if they sell off their IPs to another company, or they are bought out by another company altogether, but the original copyright terms still apply. So, a creative work published in 1980, will, under current law, enter the public domain until 2075 and not a day before, regardless of if the publisher still exists or not, or if they were bought out by another company, or they sold the IP to another company. The reasons don't matter. Copyrights cannot prematurely expire.
It would, but understand that the trademark database is very legalistic and you might not be searching or interpreting your search results correctly. Trademark lawyers exist for good reason.
OP
OP
OP
OP
Say it.
Feel free to DM me , but this was a very specific conversation and if it gets out then surely it'll be linked back......and posting this in a public forum , with thousands of hourly traffic. No way lol.
i wouldn't share the info with anyone if i were you, private or public...
Last edited:
OP
OP
This title is still registered and owned on : WIPO, Euipo and Just Trademarks....as well as a few other similar locations.
Yeah, Disney will not let Mickey Mouse fall into public domain as long as the company exists.
Ok, and what do those say?
If the IP is shown on those as being owned by someone other than the original studio/developer, the reasonable assumption would be that the original studio/developer transferred the IP in exchange for something.
In cases where ownership is disputed, it gets very complicated, you would need to look in to the contracts related to the transfer.
They can't lose the entire set of IP that way, but there is an expectation for trademarks that the holder of a trademark will actively defend against infringement. If competing products with similar names exist without any action being taken by the trademark holder, a court may decide to throw out future cases against other infringements. I'm not familiar with the Halo mod you're talking about, but it may have been closed down for that reason.
Additionally, if a trademarked term becomes too generic - as in, it enters common usage and stops being a mark of distinction for a product - it can be cancelled. Cancellation for this reason doesn't exist in all countries, but even where it doesn't exist, a trademark entering common usage can make trademark infringement cases much more difficult for the mark holder to win. As an illustrative example, if "Halo" became a commonly-known generic term for any kind of large ring in space, it would be more difficult for Microsoft to stop companies making games with a similar setting and calling them things like "The Halo Saga" or "War on Halo".
Mickey Mouse will not fall in public domain, but Steamboat Willie and its version of Mickey Mouse is likely to. As long as nobody calls that character Mickey Mouse. And 2019 was the first time since 1998 something happened public domain. Activists are making life harder for companies. As such, when the 2019 deadline loomed, the MPAA, the RIAA and the Author's Guild gave up. They haven't started any campaign for 2024.
Thanks.
This was it.
Halo News - ElDewrito & Community Content
Today we want to let our community know that Microsoft has initiated actions to protect its Halo intellectual property in the wake of the recent “ElDewrito” PC release. While community created content is and continues to be an important part of the Halo franchise, this particular project doesn't...
Good to know that Disney's grip on copyright laws isn't as absolute as I previously thought.
Sega did it twice, they sold back the Guilty Gear X/XX series back to Arc System Works and later on sold The Rumble Fish back to Dimps.
As reference how significant it is at the moment, Gone with the Wind and Wizard of Oz have gone public domain in most EU countries this year. For US, this year could be a big test. On 1st of January 2021, The Great Gatsby becomes public domain.
Oh okay, so it was pretty much all the code and assets for a whole game that somehow got into the wild. Yeah, Microsoft were always going to shut that down. All the assets would be copyrighted and any use of the Halo name would be a trademark infringement. The code might also reveal some Microsoft trade secrets (another type of IP, though that kind doesn't have any kind of protection other than how well the secret is kept).Thanks.
This was it.
Halo News - ElDewrito & Community Content
Today we want to let our community know that Microsoft has initiated actions to protect its Halo intellectual property in the wake of the recent “ElDewrito” PC release. While community created content is and continues to be an important part of the Halo franchise, this particular project doesn't...www.halowaypoint.com
OP
OP
All 3 sites have the same owner and shows recent renewals by that same company. No changes in over a decade to the IP.
If you're looking at trademarks, don't stress. Just because someone hasn't updated their trademark doesn't mean someone else can or will necessarily use it. Like, someone might decide to abandon it, but in the meantime nobody else releases a product using that trademark because they wouldn't be able to get a trademark. After a time the original owner can re-register if they decide they want to use it and it hasn't become generic I think.