Duck and Cover

If a person used their own code, graphics, and sounds to build a fan-based Fallout sequel with no plans to charge money for game distribution/use, would they be within the legal boundaries to release this game to the community? Or would IPLY/BIS throw a hissy fit?

Fallout is Copyright 1997 Interplay Productions. Fallout is a trademark of Interplay Productions. All Rights Reserved.

That means you can do a game based in post-apocalyptic retrofuture but it should not be named Fallout as that is a registered trademark. It wouldn't be an official sequel and I doubt it would be any good either.

call it fall0ut or f4ll0t or tollaf

I don't think they would mind if it's free(and it is possible they're covered by law in a way that as soon as you released it, it would become "theirs"), but to be sure name it something like "Whatever: A post-apocalyptic RPG" make it available for the community and say it's Fallout inspired. Also you don't have to use Fallout names-places etc.

If you do, they might still think it's some kind of their property theft and go with that. I don't see why someone can't built a Fallout-clone without using Fallout elements like chars or city-names. The game is more than the parts. It's the story and gameplay that count the most(and the '50s feel but possibly you can invent something similar).

A fallout inspired post-apocalyptic adventure is acceptable, but no sequel for the Fallout series, that's against copyright laws.

Of course you could modify the names of known NPCs and locations, like many games without a licence do.

Interplay has fired off homing lawyers against "Fallout" fan projects in the past. Really, it's a totally stupid idea because you are using a licensed and trademarked thing that another entity owns. That means that entity has every right to shut you down and even sue you whenever they wanted.

They could agree to let you do it one day, then lawyers show up at your door the next.

Actually, SP, if they agreed to let you do it, and you kept the contract/document stating that they will allow you to, unless you were stupid and let them include a backdoor clause, they can't quite send lawyers after you.

But the things you couldn't include from Fallout are as such:
-SPECIAL
-Ghouls and super mutants (Technically, you could, if you changed the names.)
-The weapon names (Wattz Laser Pistol, etc.)
-Town names, NPC names

Other than that, much of it could be the same. I mean, look at Fallout. It took a lot of ideas from Wasteland, an EA game.

Hmm... what about Wasteland Half-Life, the Fallout PnP game, and all the fanfic? I'm sure not everything is endorsed by IPLY/BIS. If I'm not mistaken, Wasteland HL is using weapons and items from the game, too.

Anyway, I just figured I'd ask. A small group of friends and I were going to venture into making a CRPG, and we're big fans of Fallout. Seeing as how it's going to be a long while before BIS makes Fallout 3, we were considering a Fallout game as a possibility.

me and my friend should make a fallout mod for some quake engine FPS.
hehe, we could model the guns and make some maps. that would be pretty cool.

you can be super mutants, and vault people. or 2 warring ghoul gangs, or thugs vs. caravans, in special online missions... ect... dont listen to me

Wasteland Halflife uses Fallout as an inspiration, but it's not first person Fallout.

The fanfics are an entirely different form of media, and therefore I don't think IP really cares.

Since there's no way in hell anyone would ever pay for something as *awful* as the average fanfic. Also, since most authors tend to start writing 200-part epics and give up after page three, finished projects are rare.

As for Fallout PnP (thank God for Jason Mical), I do remember MCA saying something about releasing a free Fallout PnP game in the future, so maybe they're planning to take Jason Mical's game and slap the Interplay name on it.

Blacken wrote:Actually, SP, if they agreed to let you do it, and you kept the contract/document stating that they will allow you to, unless you were stupid and let them include a backdoor clause, they can't quite send lawyers after you.

Do you honestly think that BIS is stupid enough to give permission to people to make a Fallout game without paying money to license everything in Fallout?

Even if there's an email agreement on the subject, i.e. Bob mailed Feargus, "Can we make a fan created Fallout?" and Feargus said, "Sure, go for it." There's nothing legally binding there. They most certainly wouldn't sign a contract for that.

Like you said, there's way too many trademarks involved in such a thing. SPECIAL, all the trademarked creatures, weapons, and so on, all the trademarked factions and NPCs, etc. Giving permission to make such a thing would be like making every one of those thing public domain.

Interplay is extremely unlikely to allow you to use their intellectual property for a non-profit cause. Think about it, even on the Fallout Tactics editer they stated that you have no right to anything you create using their software and interplay can conviscate any and all of your work for public sale without your permission or paying you anything. I assume the same can be applied to any allowance to use anything related to Fallout in a fan built game.

When a company starts to go belly up it wants to make money from any source and anything made without costing them a penny is a sure to get them interested.

Blacken wrote:But the things you couldn't include from Fallout are as such:
-SPECIAL
-Ghouls and super mutants (Technically, you could, if you changed the names.)
-The weapon names (Wattz Laser Pistol, etc.)
-Town names, NPC names

I was just wondering, how strict the copyright laws are considering these 'minor' things, such as locations, NPCs and such? Many post-apocalyptic games that are in development have mutants and I assume San Francisco isn't copyrighted. Of course it isn't, but would it be illegal to use it in a post-apocalyptic game?

Using the SPECIAL system or naming the game 'Fallout: A post-apocalyptic RPG' are not acceptable, that I understand, but how strictly are for example NPCs from Fallout or the FEV -concept copyrighted? Is it OK to use a location named The Glow in a PC game?

VasikkA wrote:...I assume San Francisco isn't copyrighted. Of course it isn't, but would it be illegal to use it in a post-apocalyptic game?

Using San Francisco in a PA game wouldn't be a violation of intellectual property laws. Using San Francisco in a PA game where the town was the product of the survivors of a Chinese submarine or something similar would be. (The "similar" part is where you'll likely get in trouble.) Of course, you could use the town of Bakersville, CA in a PA game, but don't call it "Necropolis", or even "City of the Dead" or anything remotely similar.

Intellectual property laws are some funny things. For instance, a year or two ago an Israeli professor of antiquities sued another professor over uncredited - and worse: unpaid - use of the former's translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The court ruled in the former's favor because the actual surviving text constituted only 60% of the translation, and the other 40% constituted "creative work". So when dealing w/these types of laws it's really best to err on the side of caution.

Remember also that even if FU, MCA and other BIS employees wouldn't mind seeing fan-created material, there are people at IPLY that have nothing better to do than to hound you into bankruptcy.

OTB

Firebrand wrote:Hmm... what about Wasteland Half-Life, the Fallout PnP game, and all the fanfic? I'm sure not everything is endorsed by IPLY/BIS. If I'm not mistaken, Wasteland HL is using weapons and items from the game, too.

Anyway, I just figured I'd ask. A small group of friends and I were going to venture into making a CRPG, and we're big fans of Fallout. Seeing as how it's going to be a long while before BIS makes Fallout 3, we were considering a Fallout game as a possibility.

The Fallout P&P game is not quite endorsed by Interplay, but they have pretty much given it the OK. Wasteland HL is very different from Fallout. The fanfics are a gray area.

Also, if you're interested, I'm working on a character creation system and battle system very similar to SPECIAL. Go here.

VasikkA wrote: I was just wondering, how strict the copyright laws are considering these 'minor' things, such as locations, NPCs and such? Many post-apocalyptic games that are in development have mutants and I assume San Francisco isn't copyrighted. Of course it isn't, but would it be illegal to use it in a post-apocalyptic game?

Using the SPECIAL system or naming the game 'Fallout: A post-apocalyptic RPG' are not acceptable, that I understand, but how strictly are for example NPCs from Fallout or the FEV -concept copyrighted? Is it OK to use a location named The Glow in a PC game?

The bit about The Glow, for example, is a gray area. If you changed enough of the specifics and kept a similar name, it would probably be unable to be contested. If you had a biker-ish NPC named Ian or a sex-crazed NPC named Myron, then you'd have issues. But the names can't be copyrighted in and of themselves.

Saint_Proverbius wrote:Even if there's an email agreement on the subject, i.e. Bob mailed Feargus, "Can we make a fan created Fallout?" and Feargus said, "Sure, go for it." There's nothing legally binding there. They most certainly wouldn't sign a contract for that.

Not quite true. If both parties authenticate it (as long as it's beyond a reasonable doubt that the writers of the emails really wrote them) that is considered the same as a verbal contract, IIRC.

Spazmo wrote:Since there's no way in hell anyone would ever pay for something as *awful* as the average fanfic.

Hey! I resemble that remark! (This may be arrogant, but I think the one I'm working on is a cut or three above average )

Since the value of the materials in question is over $500, the contract must be in writing and signed to be valid. That's a federal law.

Then why do verbal contracts in the vein of "Do you want to buy my car for $500?" "Sure." hold up in court?

If a transaction is completed and there are no complaints until after it's finished, it doesn't matter. In other words, what's done is done. However, in this situation you're talking about a completely different beast with regards to copyright liscensing. I can't really explain it well, but this definitely would not hold up in court.

Well, thanks for clearing it all up for me, gentlemen. I guess my team and I will have to make either a game with a different theme and story, or go with a Fallout-inspired game, or the like. We tossed up quite a few ideas when we decided to work on a project, and it came down to a Fallout/post-apocalyptic game, or a techno-fantasy RPG in the vein of Final Fantasy IV and Phantasy Star IV in visual style only.

If anyone's got any other ideas on how we could go about doing a Fallout-clone, I'd love to hear them. I have to admit, though, this slightly turns me off to the idea, but I'm aching for a post-apocalyptic RPG like the rest of you. Maybe if IPLY goes under, we could get away with it.