Taconic 0 Posted December 20, 2004 If a company tries to sue someone for using something that looks, sounds, and acts like their product -BUT- lacks their trademarked name then they've got no case. Nothing to fret about, P51D Mustang just becomes P51D and Heckler & Koch MP5A3 becomes MP5A3. That is false. A distinctive look or sound can be protected by trademark law. These laws have been used by everybody from Harley Davidson to guitar manufacturers to protect their products. If you look at the fine print on the sites of corporations like Boeing and Pratt & Whitney, you'll note that they mention that the look of their products are trademarked. As for the situation with Il-2... The word from Oleg (through Ivan) is that nobody is being sued (yet.) This was an issue that was never supposed to see the light of day for the public, so that is why very little is being said. Nobody really knows anything about the current situation beyond the fact that modeling work has stopped on aircraft related to Northrop Grumman (this includes the planned flyable TBF, by the way...) Anything else beyond that is conjecture. It's a damned shame that we won't be seeing the P-61 or P-47N any time soon, though... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpongeBob 0 Posted December 20, 2004 That's it, I'm never going to buy a Northrop Grumman product ever again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BraTTy 0 Posted December 20, 2004 YIKES! /me cancels his order for 60 year old Grumman's How about all the Grummans at the bottom of the ocean.Shouldn't they be cleaning up their mess,scattered pieces all over this world.Oh wait,that costs money,they only wanna make money Makes me wanna build that Air Recycling plant I had in mind in my backyard,then sue all my neighbors for breathing my air! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ares1978 0 Posted December 20, 2004 It's all so clear to me now. We have to hang the lawyers. All of them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr_Tea 0 Posted December 20, 2004 It's all so clear to me now. We have to hang the lawyers. All of them. Don`t hang them. But, there must be a way, to make clear this could not work this way. They must be stopped! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cozza 24 Posted December 21, 2004 Operation Flashpoint 2: world lawyer crisis. Â Might not be real buts its a start. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nemesis6 0 Posted December 21, 2004 About this whole copyrighted names and whatever else they can copyright thingy - Look at Counter-Strike:Source - Wrong weapon names, incorrect models(on all models, the right side of the weapon is on the left), and only few weapons bare any resemblance, graphical AND name-like to their real-life counterpart. What's the story with the changed weapon names, anyway? I mean, they changed names such as "Heckler & Koch MP5N", and "Kalashnikov AK-47" to "KM SUPER 90" and "CV-47". What's up with this? Also, what about the weapon models? Totally incorrect. And it IS on purpose. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apollo 0 Posted December 21, 2004 The next level of this is Ex-Ronin claiming he's a decendant of pythahoras and by this claiming money for each use of his mathematical intellectual property. Nasa here he come's. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Supah 0 Posted December 21, 2004 As for the situation with Il-2...The word from Oleg (through Ivan) is that nobody is being sued (yet.) This was an issue that was never supposed to see the light of day for the public, so that is why very little is being said. Nobody really knows anything about the current situation beyond the fact that modeling work has stopped on aircraft related to Northrop Grumman (this includes the planned flyable TBF, by the way...) Anything else beyond that is conjecture. It's a damned shame that we won't be seeing the P-61 or P-47N any time soon, though... Nobody is being sued but we are not going to see planes from one specific corporation, no matter how far these had progressed? Somehow this sounds very "Two weeks ! Be sure!" It would have been better if there had been CLEAR communication for just once instead of the typical "Be sure" response. If this whole affair had never broke publicly then all people would have know was that some of the best allied fighters were being kept out for some reason, "Very serious reason be sure". The Il-2 community being what they are, a tiresome bunch of whiners, this would have lead to whinefest2k4/5. The patch has been "Two weeks be sure" for the past 3 months (how long has it been since the launch of Pacific Fighters?), delays are not bad as long as their explained. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhoCares 0 Posted December 21, 2004 ... I mean, they changed names such as "Heckler & Koch MP5N", and "Kalashnikov AK-47" to "KM SUPER 90" and "CV-47". ... Same with Football Managers. I remember one from 1998 where the company didn't want to pay the fee to use the proper team and player names. What did they do? They used the proper names but exchanged all vowels, a to e, e to i, i to o, o to u and u to a. And as kind as they were, they put it all in a plain text file. And not a day after the game was released there were already scripts and copies of the text file available on the internet which fixed the names... Meybi UFP2 woll cumi woth e Hicklir & Kuch MP5N end e Keleshnokuv EK-47 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
der bastler 0 Posted December 21, 2004 What do you call a thousand lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? A good start! *duckandcover* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stag 0 Posted December 21, 2004 What do you call a thousand lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?A good start! *duckandcover* Amen; but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater; This, I would really like to see: For example; Are there any Native Americans here? Just wondering if you want to make a few billion sueing the Defense Establishment for the misuse of your cultural trademarks; eg. "Apache"? Anyone think of any more? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shinRaiden 0 Posted December 21, 2004 Or the OH-58 "Koiwa", or the H-46/7 "Chinook", or the (forgot model number) "Iroqouis", or the H-60 Blackhawk (I guess "Seahawk" is safe though)... What about the "Comanche"? That was a management disaster... Now consider how in Hollywood an actor or actress' name and persona are heavily restricted by agents and licensing. For example, there is a new aircraft carrier, the USS (Ronald) Reagan. Does merchandising of any and all logo materials relating to the carrier, as well as the designation of the carrier itself, violate any prior exclusivity legal restrictions? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted December 21, 2004 Quite absurd. I think certain people should make such fees impossible and illegal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sepe 1 Posted December 22, 2004 Didn't some Australian try to trademark the tire some time ago? Sounds pretty horrible, this means that any realism is banned from games etc. Now, who's the first one to trademark um... let's say, a T-shirt? Or hmm, I think i'll trademark snow and take fees from anyone stepping on it or editing (=ex. making a snowball) it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted December 22, 2004 Yeah, there was always the issue of trademarked names in games, but never to the extent of historical aircraft, weapons and military objects. This is so silly, if I were a judge in a court I would immediately not recognize such a case and tell people to go home and learn some humanity. I hope all courts ignore any such fees and make sure to laugh at these manufacturers. But hey, since when did we ever have jsutice on this here rock. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
