Should there be an In-Game Copyright/Patent System?

[Stigmatax]

An in game patten or copyright program would be an excellent idea if it's used under the strictest of terms.

i.e. Mech design modifications - Weapon upgrades. A mech engineer player can "create" a brand new uber weapon, he can then have the option of his designs licensed to his faction or to anyone in game who wished to purchase the license to build that weapon and sell it to the highest bidders. This guarantees income for the player that created the weapon and limits the amount of manufacturing players who can make the weapon, bringing some realism to the game.

The item to be developed would probably be a rare world drop or uber boss drop that has to be reverse engineered. The player can modify the engineering based on his engineering skills to make a slightly better weapon that the boss or rare drop was in the first place. There would have to be a length period of time for development and testing to make these uber devices which allows the creating player to charge a rather hefty licensing fee so not just any player can purchase the license and build the product to sell. The materials will need to be rather extremely hard to find or very difficult/costly to acquire.

The need to patent the design gives game developers to review the player design and approve it for game play if they feel the part or component can be incorporated into game play safely. Don't want something that when someone fires the damn weapon or turns on the shields that the server crashes.

This is also based on the games physics, if the game can support the design and the design is a leap from existing devices of similar type but it does fit within the games physics and will not cause problems with the server it adds a new dimension to the game.

One thing I always wanted in WoW was a special item or consumable item that had either limited use or limited life but would allow a single player to walk into an instance and just friggin own the entire place all by his/her self. Once the item is consumed it can never be used again by that player. One of the many reason I no longer play WoW... there just wasn't any way to do something like that.

But if your planning to use the patent/copyright system for t-shirts or texture maps or mech designs to be incorporated into the game. ARE YOU ALL MAD!!!
That's where lawsuits come from! Lets not be a sci-fi fantasy version of second life! I'd rather gouge out my eyeballs with an olive fork first!

Just my two cents. 

[Cavadus]

If the sole purpose is to copyright artwork than this system would rely entirely on the personnel involved with this game who evaluate artwork submissions.  I don't think it would even be possible to hard code this into the game besides "model and texture provided by XXX" when you go to examine a piece of equipment using that mesh.

[Sturm Kintaro]

I think in game copyright/patent is a good idea in some circumstances, for both financial & game world aspects.

If a player spends (for example) 20 hours in game and ends up with a discovery of FTL drives, only to have 30 people the next day copying his work and reaping the benefit of his labor, I can't see that as a big incentive for wanting to do all that grunt work for limited/no gain.   What I can see is perhaps 1 of the following:

1) The player who makes the discovery can make say, 100 of the item that *cannot* be reverse engineered or used to create blueprints of their own.   This gives the player a nice financial boost. . .  for a while.   Those first 100 items are going to give a big advantage to a faction/corp that has them, and conversely the person who holds it can charge a premium for it.   After that, all bets are off, and reverse engineering items becomes possible.   This suggests to the engineer that being a prick and charging 100 times what the item is worth will come back to bite them in the ass in the long run.   

The major con of this method is the person could intentionally slow-roll the items (make 99 of an item, then never make another one, thus having ridiculous control of the market and be a true monopoly)

2)  The player who makes the discovery has a patent that lasts a set period of time.  (30/60/90 days)  During that period, the patent owner has exclusive production rights to the item.   As in the pharmaceutical industry, once your patent expires, other, generic brands can come on to market.   The Patent holder could then offer say, 20 liscencing agreements that cannot be traded, but can be renewed/voided that allow the license holder to make that item.   Patent holders charge a fee for the license (allows them to recoup some of the lost income from not being able to make the items) but ultimately the price of the item drops as competiton begins.

With regard to the game world effects. . .  either of these methods means that players will have a direct impact on the game's progression. . .  If I, a Lukron-supporter didn't want to sell FTL drives to Senka, I wouldn't have to.   But if Senka offered me stupid money for a FTL drive in the hopes they could reverse engineer it and be able to make it themselves; is my sense of patriotism to my faction enough to withstand my greed?  Especially when your faction finds out you've been dealing material to the other side. . .  Money doesnt' buy much when you're 6 feet under.   Allows for a lot of potential for both RP & Conflict.

Thoughts?

[VorpalSpork]

Well the reason for all that is because in second life players can actually cash in their virtual currency for real money.  For a law suit to carry any kind of validity, there has to be some kind of real loss associated.  FoA doesn't offer any oppurtunity for any sort of real loss because it's in-game currency isn't exchangable for real money.   

All game currency is exchangeable for real money.  Maybe not through official channels, but just try and find me a game without some company selling it's money, particularly in free games where it's impossible to ban spammers.

[Lethn]

Why not give the option for players to copyright their content themselves instead of enforcing it? So for instance you could have some sort of info tool where you could mouse over and it would show who the original creator or uploader of the object was, but if your talking about things like in game items then I think it's just silly you can easily have the object that shows the players' name like in Pre-Cu SWG.  

Unless your talking about peoples own player created content on the level of using a 3D editor like Maya or Max and uploading it into the actual game then I don't think it's necessary. 

[Sturm Kintaro]

Letting players copyright their own content is a BAAAD idea.  On an individual scale, people are calm and rational, and can make informed decisions.  On a global scale, those same people will create a veritable ARMY of patent infringement complaints in game, and create a ton of extra work for either devs or members of the community who have to police that nonsense.  I think limited patents from discoveries is a better plan, because then you can see where the items originated from, and it gives either single or at least a starting point for following the trail of objects.

[Hamilton]

When I first posed this topic, it was in regards of how Second Life conducted their system with player created content.  Which finding out more about it, is that system is very unregulated, where anyone can upload essentially anything without review (correct me if I am wrong).

Sense we are to have a review system in place, copies or items close to copies can be rejected, thus protecting the original content that the player created.  This applies for items such as models that are to be used within the game environment (player created Mechs as an example).  So a patent or copyright system would not mater (but legally there will be a legal agreement of use between the company and the creator).

Now as for items that are created within the game environment, I think some reward should be in place for the original creator/inventor.  The ability to have a monopoly over a given product for a certain time and/or number of units seems right.  Though most likely to only be done within each faction and not overall.  This would not prevent another player from creating the same item, just unable to sell (legally) while the patent is in place.

That reminds me of some old game...

[Sturm Kintaro]

That's my point Hamilton, 'cept we're approaching it from 2 different avenues.  You're speaking in terms of work that someone else has done (models, textures, ect) that are being used within the game world, essentially with permission from the user.  That I totally understand and support.  If someone's spent 50 hours making a transport model, they should have some say in how that model gets used... Perhaps having an "Initial License" as discussed before, where the owner can sell rights to make the vehicle, either on a per unit basis or as a run # basis.  Then if someone tries to get around it, it should be relatively easy to track by the player if they sold the right to make that unit or unit(s) to said player.

All my discussions were centered around the technology discoveries in game, not anything that was player created.  There should be 2 separate systems, but they should talk together in terms of what each is doing, to prevent either conflicts of interest or licensing issues down the line.

[TheWanderingJew]

How about letting a player discover a "lost technology" somewhere in the FoA world and exploiting that one?

In-game patent system might only produce confusion and misunderstanding most especially on the pricing of mechs/vehicles.

Me: How much is that mech?
Another Player: 1B credits
Me:  Expensive! Give me a reason why I should buy that?
Another Player: (in a snobbish way) I DESIGNED it!

[Sturm Kintaro]

Well, he'll find out quickly enough that when no one buys it, "his" mech is going to go the way of the Trebuchet (Trash Bucket!)

Overpriced, and ultimately worth less than the metal it's built from

[Deft]

Being a craft monkey on pretty much every game I have ever been through, I can see so much potential for extreme good and disastrous bad. The good that like in the real world someone that works their tale off trying to invent the next super gadget that everyone will have(I.E. I-pod, Cell Phone, Etc) should be known and rewarded. I think the way I would try it would be to have the player that has "invented" the said product be able to sell schematics to other crafters for a fee. This is where it could go so badly wrong. Depending on how the player thinks and such they could in essence bottleneck the market to their favor. The solution I see to this is to set a cred limit on said schems unless it is of such grand importance to the story and development then I would let them go higher but have it in the code that it could still be limited. Like said player makes a gauss cannon of better and newer design.. so gausses have been around forever.. cap it there. Now if they come up with a new type of weapon system that will impact the game and have everyone going... ahh wth was that.. That would be something that could go higher.. I have seen so many auctions and markets in games that have little or no limit to them and it gets scary very quickly once people figure out what can be truly exploited.

Just my thoughts.
D

[Kellzz]

(Okay, i dont think i will be repeating myself in this post. Went back and re-read what i posted previously )




Here is an idea for a system that allows for control over what gets in and what is removed.


Since Hamilton has expressed great interest in making the game accessible off-line, Perhaps a page/site could be devoted to the submission and approval of player created items.
This site would be restricted to those with active, paid accounts.
The basic format would be as follows.

Whenever an item is submitted, it is posted on this site under the "new items" section. Here, the item sits for a set amount of days to see if it is approved by the player base, or rejected. This of this area more as a pre-approval area. During this period, the item is not implemented in the game. Players then either vote yes, or no (Each account can only vote once per item). (1-10 or 5 star ratings dont work as most people either vote at one end or the other end of the system).  Should said item fall below a certain threshold for X days, (for sake of discussion, lets call it 40%) the item is rejected and removed from the site.
Each item will also have a "Report copyrighted materiel" button. Again, to prevent abuse, should a player feel that the item in question is a copy of their design, they will have to fill out a form explaining why they feel they are being wronged, along with the original file they submitted to Wardog. (So make sure you back up those skins!) If you dont have the original anymore, too bad. The form will not go through and you will just have to deal with it. (Also, the fact that there is no original file prevents further abuse from people flooding the server or an entire guild/clan filing a complain on a single item).
Also, while the item is waiting to be approved and once it has been approved, the author's name will be anonymous to prevent people who might have a grudge for whatever reason against the author from voting no. This way, players are voting on the item, not the author.

Once the item is approved, it is placed in its respective category (weapons/mech/accessories/etc). Even though it might be approved, the item still must maintain its 40% or higher approval rating. Should it fall below the 40% threshold for X days, the item is removed from the site and the game. However, those who might already have the item will be grandfathered in and be able to keep it.


Another way to prevent some abuse is to also hide what the item's approval rating is. As some people might see that one item is at 42% and simply vote no because they think its funny.



My opinion now, but i think a system like this would take a lot of the work load off of Wardog and place it with the players. So instead of the devs being bogged down with needing to worry about player made objects, the players would then take care of the bulk of it.

[Xenodamus]

i agree with the websie thing but i also think think shouldnt be allowed to vote until they have submitted somthing theres selves that way when it comes time to vote people wont just say no to be funny. It would also get people incentive to wanna try there hand at making somthing. as far as takign the stress from wardog you would still have to have a wardog employee to handle the passed subbmission on the website and xfer them to ig.

[Mazzdreg]

There is one option to all of this that may be a good middle groud point.  Put it in place on whatever items you deem necessary but put a timer on it, i.e 60 days, 120 days, whatever (keeping in mind it is a game).

Example:
Mazzdreg develops a 3 barrel repeating particle accelerator plamsa cannon at 120mm fed by 1 ounce of copper per shot with a R.O.F. of 120 shots per minute. (Yes already done this one, just not in this game so calling it now!!  ).  I did the research, the mechanics, everything, trials, testing, bore plating ect...  I keep my information locked up and get a patent.  My patent is good for 60 days.  I can sell the items or not, my choice.

Kellzz wants the weapon and puts his own R&D dept to wrok and develops the same base function item.  He goes to build the item but the blueprint is "locked" by the patent office for 60 days (minus the time lapsed in game from the time Mazzdreg recieved his patent).

So on day 61 "ANYONE" that has developed this base item can then put it into production and the base item cannot be patented ever again. 

The purpose is to avoid someone having a money printing machine in the form of a unique item, (BoB and T2 bpo scandal come to mind (EvE)), while still providing a limited monetary/tacticle edge as a reward for spending the time to make a viable item.  It also makes the work load a bit easier on the devs since this can all be automated.

Beyond this, i think a patent system would be too cumbersome, albeit pretty sweet, but just not cost effective from a dev point of view.  A time sink if you will.

[Fritzgryphon]

Wouldn't developing an item require the same investment from a player, regardless of whether another player had developed a similar item?  So copying an item wouldn't be any cheaper than making a different one?

for example:

Player A spends 2 billion credits and a month to develop a Donut Gun.

Player B wants to make a Donut Gun for himself.  Player B also has to spend 2 billion credits and a month to develop it.

So why wouldn't Player B just buy a Donut Gun from Player A, for much less cost (Player A would be keen to sell them, or license the blueprint, to recoup his costs)?  Or alternately, why wouldn't Player B develop something unique for a similar investment, that he might like better than a Donut Gun (Like a Croissant Gun)?  Or maybe I'm not familiar with how crafting unique items works in a game.