Frogboy

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="631" id="3712109"] Quoting Jafo, reply 627 Quoting Elestan, reply 626 Brad could retire, or change his m

Reply to Q+A regarding Star Control and Paul and Fred in Star Control Journals StarControl Forums

Making a claim doesn’t make it a fact. The lawyers were referring to the creation of the Star Control product. That was Accolade, the guys with the big logo on the front of the box. They weren’t commenting on the creation of the content that made up the product because the specific authorship was unknown. Paul and Fred do make a lot of claims that people, like me, took to be true. The fact they now claim that Galactic Civilizations borrowed heavily from

Reply to Intrigue Expansion feedback in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

Thanks for posting this.

Reply to Fix the Bugged/Cheating AI (Range issue). Updated with new information. in GalCiv III Support GalCiv3 Forums

As a reminder, the AI was using food to build cities. That was repeatedly demonstrated to be the case.

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control GalCiv3 Forums

This thread has survived starfleet Battles, it can survive anything. That said, please stop trying to litigate the case as if you have litigation experience. It’s misleading and unhelpful. For instance, UQM isn’t engaging in commerce. That’s a fact. Not an opinion. The case laws you bring up have nothing to do with UQM. There isn’t even a business entity behind UQM. It’s a fan community. Stick with broad topics. Example, copyri

Reply to Q+A regarding Star Control and Paul and Fred in Star Control Journals StarControl Forums

It’s not about insulting or not. It is the ridiculous nature of suggesting Galactic Civilizations borrowed heavily from Star Control. No one who plays GalCiv is going to think Star Control. They have almost nothing in common.

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="604" id="3711965"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 602 UQM is explicitly not engaging in commerce via its license. I assumed that was the case in my earlier post. However, I'm no longer sure that "non-commercial" products (generally meaning available for free) can't be consi

Star Control: Origins - April 2018 Screenshots in Star Control Journals JoeUser Forums

Greetings! As Star Control gets closer to release, we want to share with you some screenshots so that you can see how things are progressing. If you have any questions, let us know in the comments. <img style="display: inline;" title="image" src="https://draginol.stardock.net/images2018/Star-Control-April-Screenshots_951F/image_thumb.png" alt="image" width="512" heig

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="wibblenz" reply="598" id="3711918"] There is precedence for free distribution via the internet to constitute "transport in commerce, resulting in the creation of trademark rights and priority" : https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-11th-circuit/1481575.html Being free does not appear to preclude something from using (or infringing upon) a trademark. [/quote] I can't comment on that c

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="556" id="3711828"] Quoting SirPrimalform, reply 553 Hmm. But doesn't that mean that the UQM project was already a violation of the SC mark despite not actually using the name? (not a lawyer) I don't know. It's not being used in commerce and would fall in the s

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="562" id="3711838"] Right...that was my point. The UQM project can't engage in commerce, because (aside from any trademark issues) its license terms prohibit it. [/quote] I am glad to see you recognize this. There was a side discussion on the UQM forums implying that the UQM had trademark rights which, of course, it does not as it has not engaged in commerce.

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="SirPrimalform" reply="582" id="3711877"] I think most people's understanding of the situation was the latter, but according to Brad he thinks that UQM does use the SC trademark (either fair use or infringement). [/quote] I'm pretty sure I said "I don't know". I do know there would be a problem if it was being used in commerce.

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="SirPrimalform" reply="565" id="3711842"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 557 Words fall under trademark. Not exclusively. The contents of a book are copyright, not trademark. I see no difference between that and the words in a game, but perhaps the law does? [/quote] Words as in

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="564" id="3711841"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 556 There isn't really confusion because UQM is most definitely associated with Star Control. That's my uneducated opinion on the matter. I don't think I agree there. The UQM project rigorously scrubbed any mention of

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Lakstoties" reply="555" id="3711826"] That would be the territory of copyright. Copyright covers the representations/instantiations of an idea. So protection against someone trying to duplicate the Drengin Empire or Arceans in a very similar or derivative way would be protected by copyright laws. The Galactic Civilizations trademark DOES NOT protect the actual contents of a product, just the branding/labeling of a product's source. [/quote] <

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="SirPrimalform" reply="553" id="3711822"] Hmm. But doesn't that mean that the UQM project was already a violation of the SC mark despite not actually using the name? [/quote] (not a lawyer) I don't know. It's not being used in commerce and would fall in the same category as fan films and such. There's a cottage industry of Star Trek fan films for instance. There isn't really confusion because UQM is most definitely associated with Star Control.&n

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

You are correct. What would prevent a third party from having the Ur-Quan in their game would be the Star Control trademark. You’d need the trademark holder to cooperate. If a new space game showed up with the Drengin Empire, Arceans, Yor and Torians Could people be misled into thinking that game is related to Galactic Civilizations? If so, the GalCiv trademark holder could choose to act to stop it. What prevents Stardock from having the Vasari

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="539" id="3711775"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 537 As someone who has spoken at length with counsel on this particular matter, that argument is beyond a stretch. Filing a false trademark renewal would amount to fraud. Unless you want to go on record accusing the individuals at Infogrames who si

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="517" id="3711719"] That's interesting; so are you saying that most game developers only yield the trademark to their publisher, while retaining the copyright? If so, that's quite different from what I've seen in other parts of the software industry [/quote] Who said anything about games? I'm talking software. WindowBlinds. Fences. ObjectDock. Start8. Multiiplicity. IconPackager, etc. All have contracts very similar to wha

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="524" id="3711750"] The consensus on the UQM board was that this would be considered a token use of the trademark. Since 1988, token uses are not considered bona fide uses capable of protecting a trademark against abandonment claims. [/quote] The consensus of an Internet forum has no legal meaning. As someone who has spoken at length with counsel on this particular matter, that argument is beyond a stretch. Filing a false

Reply to Stardock response to Paul and Fred [UPDATE] in Star Control StarControl Forums

[quote who="Elestan" reply="507" id="3711654"] Quoting Pyro411, reply 506 Unless somebody can successfully locate and represent a previous precedent for Paul & Fred, where assets owned by a publisher would revert back to a contractor and/or their subcontractors, things will not look good for Paul & Fred. Now u

Reply to Star Control: Secret Briefing #2 - The Precursors in Star Control Journals StarControl Forums

[quote who="Kelfka" reply="4" id="3711344"] I'm looking at the sketches found in the caves. Have we been able to determine if they are perhaps farm animals or sentient beings? Did these sketches come with an extensive dossier with long descriptions? (even if indecipherable) Or were they found with simplistic text as if in a children book. [/quote] So far, it almost appears like they were imprinted via a machine.

Reply to Founders Status: April 2018 in Founders Starbase StarControl Forums

It's hard to even put up screenshots because a week later, they're outdated because things are moving so fast.

Reply to Founders Update: March - Legal stuff in Founders Starbase StarControl Forums

[quote who="ShadeMeadows" reply="66" id="3710916"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 65 Yes. Stardock owns all elements of SC3 except whatever material Paul and fred can show was licensed. Keep us updated on those... Wanna know what elements these are! [/quote] Probably not