Games violating copyrights on app store

I saw many games like this one on App store:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/danielkibblesmith/let-it-grow-let-it-grooow#.qxKkbjz2B
I thought Apple was very rigid on the app review, but how come they approve games that are clearly using licensed characters?
This one is #1 in the educational chart.

And it's not like they are mistakenly approved and short lived, Super Saga has been on the app store for a long time now:

So is apple fine with it?

 

Who's to say they didn't get legal permission then?

 

I worked for a brand as licensing manager, no brand would grant you the license with:
1-no mention of the brand in the app name
2-no mention of the licensing company anywhere
3-A license to an individual, not even a company?! no way
See the developer of Super Saga:
https://itunes.apple.com/it/app/super-saga/id913960569?mt=8
TE CHUAN LI is not a company name.

 

It's not Apples work to do a background check for every possible character, music piece, car etc. when they can appear anywhere in the content like last level. I think it works about the same as in youtube, some license holders monitor for their own stuff and send take down reports and possibly handle the rest with author (like take it to court, demand all the money he got + fee).

Both App Store and Google Play all full of stuff that break the rules.

 

Apple doesn't know what is and what isn't used legally in a game you submit.

Can you imagine how long the submission process would be if they had to verify every brand and character in a game was used legally with written permission?

If a company does use IP illegally it is up to the IP holder to initialise a takedown notice and get Apple to remove the product from the store.

 

Protecting IP has always been the responsibility of the IP owner. You have to track down each person who infringes it and have it taken down. Some companies are diligent with this. Some are not.

 

TotalBiscuit did a video about one that was put on steam called "Spartans Vs. Zombies Defense". Basically a terrible port with in-game purchases that uses actual audio from the movie "300" with Leonidas face on the cover.

so it's not just the app store... it's going to become an epidemic! Run!

 

when i saw that video i just kept thinking "what about Broforce!!??" its the same thing..
they changed the names Hardly, and the graphics are 'crappier' .. but its the same

 

Well I think Broforce is different. Even if they did use retro graphics they did the character looks more own and did not try to copy them too much. Also the names have their own style and not riding with known SEF-names like the video in 1st post or the spartan vs zombies.

 

Well I just find strange that they are so strict when it come to their app policy, and then let everything in when it's clearly violating copyrights.

Staying in topic, I wonder if the creators of Crossy Roads asked PewDiePie permission to insert PewDiePie dog as character or simply went through with it.

 

It's not really that strange, they can set the rules and inspect what they can and list the rest of not allowed things which include using trademarked, licensed etc. stuff without permission. Enough copyright infringements means account will be closed for good and for individuals that means for life unless they use fake or someone elses id papers.

For using PDP's dog they would not have needed to ask anything cause it's not and individual and not an IP property or etc. but I think they probably did a pm to him or something.

 

http://trademarks.justia.com/857/27/pewdiepie-85727147.html
PewDiePie is a trademark, he's the #1 youtube channel worldwide, it would be surprising if it wouldn't be a trademark.

 

Yep but the dog ain't and they did not use the full trademarked name

 

The thing I find insane is not the app reviewers not blocking all of these apps but all of these developers just grabbing whatever they want, brands, assets etc and using them even basing their whole game around them. Kongregate has its share of this kind of thing too. It is just weird that so many people would do it period. It makes me think a lot of these devs must be kids who just grab whatever they want and use it. Lol

 

lol yeah right? ... i spend a heck of a lot of time trying to come up with my own ideas...i even go out of my way, when i come up with some idea, and then i look around and some1 has something like it im like... aahhh dang, cant do that then (but really its my own pride, and wanting to be different) ...
-----
but then theres the other side... where, sometimes i think, for all the computer work people have done... its already done, so why should i have to do it over again? .. i mean like lets say, a 3d model of a german tiger tank... once one person made such, it should be there for Everyone to use, why make people work when the work is already been done? .. youre just being greedy and making people work twice.. really by keeping it to yourself you are being a real scumbag, hindering the advancement of all the peoples works... okay.. well.. the thing that gets to me is they go out of their way to make encryptions and compiles, to make the files secure... thats just weeiirdd ... i guess this viewpoint is like communist vs capitalist???... i mean.. ive always thought i should help my fellow people and not work against them.. i understand protecting against ripoff etc etc.
. but the real truth of the situation is, if it has been created, why make another person HAVE TO create it again?? you take a pain to create something great, why should everyone take a pain, ease peoples pain..
Anything you make has NO VALUE AT ALL unless people get to see it and use it, the real value of Anything is the Number of people that can enjoy it... and not money... money is a corruption in this realm.

with this kind of thought in mind, i heard of china hacking usa alot... and i thought, hmmmm.. i wonder, if they are hacking trade secrets from companies... information that would help humanity, but the greedy idiots are keeping it to themselves.. and so, if china uses that knowledge in a good way, then iam all for it... i mean.. keeping valuable information to oneself, is like the most evil thing a person can do, i think ... its comparative to killing people... i mean, if your information would take a lifetime to come up with, then that is a person youve killed by keeping the info.. not to mention pharmaceutical companies and the whole deal there...

i never understood why people can value money so much i guess.. its too evil...

i guess.. money makes sense for goods... but for information, money should be rewarded to the informers, but not pursued by the informers ... ?

 

Ha ha. I think it is just the principle of if YOU spend your time making some awesome work such as your German Tiger Shark model example then it is YOURS. Why should you have to spend all of the time and money acquiring the skills necessary and then the time and money to actually create this model... and then everyone else just be able to take it and use it.

So you are the only one who had to actually invest anything probably in the hope of being unique. And then a hundred other people just take it with no expense of time or money or skill required to produce it. So, multiply that by the assets in a game and then imagine trying to make a living or otherwise run a successful business. It would be like your hands are tied. You have to buy or build everything new that you need and a hundred others just take what you build. So they actually can get to the market faster than you can and yet have no "skin in it" at all.

It is virtually no different than working hard on a job buying a nice tv and a nice car and a nice house and then your neighbors all stop by invite their friends over have parties and such enjoying your house, your tv, your car. It just seems different because the stuff is easily copied but the same thing in the end.

 

What's the name of the game Aurore?

 

Heres a good side question to this:

If i make a Unity 3d Asset package and used a movie or a game as an example of how it could be used, but not sell the example do i need a license?

 

Yes, you are using their IP.

 

I read a little further into this, So that i don't run into an Intellectual property issue. You have to state that the character, likeness, music, etc. are owned by "x" similar to the way you have to state ownership rights when you make music / movie mixes on Youtube.

 

Most of those statements have no legal stand and depend on context such as the use could be classified as fair use in some countries. On Youtube pretty much all music uploads get instantly tagged and all ad revenue goes to the label owner and they still might take the video down. Also Youtube videos are not classifies business in a way Asset Store is.

 

Even if the Demo is posted on Youtube? I see plenty of people in the Asset store post there Demo's onto You Tube that clearly have IP and don't make any mention to there proper owners. But as you mentioned it can be taken down.

 

Well if the video on Youtube is promoting something that is sold its business. Do you have any clear examples?

The thing is that most don't even understand that they are doing wrong and no one is reporting so it's happens often. I've seen Youtube videos in asset store where people had Hans Zimmer playing on the background of the feature video or models ripped out of other games.

Someone might notice it after few months or years and just force takedown it. Some will have more (legal or etc) actions executed after the takedown.

 

Well i wouldnt actaully be selling anything that is there IP. It will be showing an example of how the program package can be used. For a fake example.

I make a Asset package that works with the Xbox one w/ camera, and as an example on how it "could" be used on You Tube using Pirates of the Caribbean characters as the stand-ins (not to be sold).

 

A legal case could certainly be made against you. You are using someone else's IP to promote your product - that's a clear copyright violation.

I'll let you argue my point for me - Why do you need to use Pirates of the Carribean characters to demo your product? Is it, perhaps, because using over generic types them will attract more customers? You are profiting off of Disney's IP, even if you aren't directly selling it.

If I created a toy and created a commercial with Elsa from Frozen playing with it and advertising it, and tried to throw that on TV, you can bet it would be taken down in a heartbeat.

Going to emphasize Ostwind's point that just because you see someone else doing it doesn't mean it is legal. You honestly might never get in trouble for it. But.... why not just use some generic characters instead?

Edit: Depending on how your product is used, you MIGHT be ok. If this package could, say, render yourself into scenes from movies, then obviously you NEED to use movies to demo it. IINAL, so all advice can be taken with a grain of salt, but generally i advise away from using other IPs unless it is somehow critical to the nature of your product (such as the example I gave).

 

It would really depend heavily on the source (and license) the asset you using. Say you bought some models from the asset store (you can't redistribute them), and used them in your video that would be fine, and expected.

If you ripped models out of an existing game, or downloaded models some ripped out, then its a big no. Doesn't matter that it is a video and things like fair use wouldn't even come into play. Damages don't have to proved, if they were ripped from a source, the fact that they were extracted is a DMCA violation. (there are exceptions, but nothing remotely close to your usage). If you are showing that you have ripped assets, legal action can be taken against you pretty quickly, as is simple to prove. You definitely to post on something that shows proof you are using ripped assets.

If the are models you made or are going to make, then just make them generic and remotely similar to PoTC or whatever. Use some the assets in the Unity provided packages (stealth, angry bots, etc). they are high quality and they can actually be included in your packages.

 

Ok Sounds like i will change our models (that we made) and skin them so there not a direct IP source. Unless our lawyer gets permission which im still waiting word.

Thank you guys for talking it out.

 

So i have to wonder Zombiegorilla. Your Meme is clearly the Hulk with a Mickey hat on. How is that not IP infrigement even though your not selling anything related to your Meme.

 

He's employed at a magical place.

 

Really? because that would be awesome.

 

It is probably infringement in the strictest sense, possibly be considered editorial.

Which reminds me, I never uploaded the updated version:

And yes, I'm sr dev and Disney. I do mid-core, so Star Wars and Marvel games, hence the icon (plus I love LEGO).

 

Lol... nice......

 

You know... you may be onto something there. I wonder how many times a person is legitimately using IP because of their job or some other affiliation and then other people see that usage and just grab whatever they want thinking "well they did it, why can't I?" Then it just escalates from there with others copying the unaffiliated people and still more copying them and so forth. Lol

 

I'm going to take the safe route and post the Demo onto YouTube so the IP gets its recognition and pay, on top of getting permission from Warner Bros. The Demo im making is technically going to presented to them anyways.

 

Just to be 100% clear, I am NOT legitimately using the IP in my avatar. With the exception of my portfolio, I have no special rights to use any of our IP outside of work unless it is approved.

 

If the presentation is for a company that owns IP like that, it is pretty common to use their IP for demonstration. Prior to purchasing Lucasfilm, we did a few game pitches to them and always used their IP. Though, I wouldn't post it on youtube without their permission to do so, that may not go over well.

 

In my non-lawyer opinion your use would be treated VERY differently than someone making a game using Mickey, the Hulk and SW lego characters.

First, you are using only a single image that is overall representative of different IPs. Second, you are doing so (it seems) simply to illustrate your connection with the company and personal interest in those specific IPs. Third your use is not intended in anyway to bring you profit from those IPs. Fourth your use as far as impact on the brand does nothing more than to provide free marketing for them in what I see as a completely neutral and harmless manner.

All things considered this is a drastically different use case compared to someone making a game featuring The Hulk rescuing Mickey from Sith Lords.

 

Of course, I was speaking only the context of the avatar. I am not aware of any company preventing usage of their IP in a way like an avatar. Any legitimate use of our IP is always very clearly branded as such, as pretty much all IP. I would hope that someone wouldn't jump the conclusion that because they saw it somewhere else it would be ok. But honestly, wouldn't be that surprising.

Though, if I were to release a game or something else of that nature using our IP without permission, I would be in a lot more trouble than someone not affiliated.

 

Of course, people could see an avatar and think there really is a lightsaber fighting game set in Disneyland/world, involving Marvel heroes and villains. It's all too believable, because Kingdom Hearts exists

 

@zombiegorilla Can you please pull some strings and get this game made, please?!