Licensing - Clamp Down On Graphics

[Smurf]

23 minutes ago, 99 said:

 If for some reason these add-ons get forbidden, I'll try to do them on my own, no one's gonna check my personal computer to see if I'm using real logos or real names in my game...

Personal use is perfectly fine. It's when they are on websites that advertised them and this brings in people, and more web traffic means an increase in advert revenue, so they are profiting from the sale/distribution of a logo/trademark that is protected by copyright and law. 

[RBKalle]

3 ore fa, styluz05 ha scritto:

I really don't understand the "need" for all the official logos doesn't change the actual game just the look of it. Seems pretty petty for people to not play it of they can't get there favourite teams logo lol 

It's not a "need", it's a nice thing we've had for many years to improve the immersive factor of a game that makes of immersion its biggest selling point... Of course it's not the end of the world and the game would still be the same in terms of gameplay etc... but it wouldn't be as immersive.

Sure, back in the good old CM days there weren't logos and it didn't bother us. Even earlier, plenty of footie games were fully unlicensed with fake or altered names. And with only a handful of basic kit designs.
Still, after so many years and with the immense advancements in graphics (even in a data-oriented game like FM), it's not as easy and painless transitioning back to the mid 90s...

On my MegaDrive I didn't care playing Sensible Soccer with the likes of "Iric Centona", "Merco Ven Besten" or "Jyrgen Klonsmann" against "Glaswegian" or "Milano". And the fact Italy, France and Scotland played in the same bright blue plain shirt wasn't much of an eyesore.
But nowadays? Sorry but nope...

If FM's future consists of the same logos you find on cheap-ass mobile games, generic kits and an increasing amount of names like Zebre and Jens Mustermann, it's likely a future I won't be part of. And it'd sadden me a lot.

Edited November 14, 2019 by RBKalle

[Amarante]

All this comes down to is greed my friends plain and simple, but these companies won't understand is that gamers will unite to help gamers. All it takes is one email to one of thoes youtube channels and bam you have a 100k people who would never play FM or even heard of it helping us out.

 

Gaming is a community and when we realize that our freedoms are being taken or we're being charged too much we revolt and fight back. 

 

The issue of trying to stop these logo packs and face packs are complete and utter rubbish. I am a chelsea fan and one of my biggest point is being able to see my club badge and kit, it makes me feel more involved, the game is more immersive why are you trying to take that away. I am sure if SI could afford these licenses fee they would but they understand that for us the players we want to have these things becuase we are fans of the game. Also if they really want to fight about this then they haven't learned anything if the DRM vs Pirates fight is anything to go by you will always lose. Don't take on the PC community you will lose the sooner companies start understanding this, the better. 

 

FM is like total war, it makes good numbers but its a niche game with only a few million who will ever take it up and i doubt you have causal FM players  a think we're hardcore as we're trying to emulate being a football manager which most persons would find boring. 

[Smurf]

4 hours ago, Amarante said:

All this comes down to is greed my friends plain and simple, but these companies won't understand is that gamers will unite to help gamers. All it takes is one email to one of thoes youtube channels and bam you have a 100k people who would never play FM or even heard of it helping us out.

Gaming is a community and when we realize that our freedoms are being taken or we're being charged too much we revolt and fight back. 

It's not greed - it's copyright and trademark - and it's lawful. It's nothing to do with greed.

In relation to your youtube channels - will I just download your content and put it on vimeo under my own name and start making money from it? Because I can do that. 

Or I can embed your youtube channel in my website and make money from the adverts shown on my site - start getting traffic and make money from your content.

But you know what, your youtube content is your copyright and your intellectual property - so you have the same protection as these football clubs in relation to your content. 

 

It has nothing to do with greed. If they let one group of people do it for free then they have to let the rest of the world do it for free - and if everyone is doing it can be misused and ultimately end up being misused and damaging the club and it's reputation, which has serious financial implications. 

And these clubs employ 1000's of people across the world. So protecting their brand, their copyright, their trademarks and protecting their intellectual property is paramount to their financials that allow them to employ 1000's of people around the world, locally and support their communities. 

If you think it's greed - you are sorely sorely mistaken.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Smurf

[Smurf]

10 hours ago, RBKalle said:

It's not a "need", it's a nice thing we've had for many years to improve the immersive factor of a game that makes of immersion its biggest selling point... Of course it's not the end of the world and the game would still be the same in terms of gameplay etc... but it wouldn't be as immersive.

Yeh - I don't get it either - I barely look at the faces in the game, the logos or anything else. 

Colours and a vague logo are good enough for me. I couldn't care less if it was the real logos or not, or the real faces. It really doesn't impact my immersion. I'm not looking at the graphics really.

[forameuss]

13 hours ago, RBKalle said:

Likely EA couldn't bother...

They could easily purchase the entire Juventus FC if they felt like, so it's definitely not about the cost but the perceived worth of the deal. How many FIFA players would switch to an "inferior" product only to be able to play with the official license of their favourite club?

Yeah, that's what I meant.  It's not like they're strapped for cash, and despite often seeming like they're incompetent, they know exactly what they're doing.  Having Juventus fully licensed in the game likely has a theoretical "worth" to EA.  If that ends up being less than the money it would have cost to purchase it, then it's a no brainer to just let it slide.

I expect there are some people out there who it mattered to, and maybe they moved to PES.  But them buying the game likely wouldn't have recouped the money EA would have to put down.  

It's only going to get worse in future, in my opinion.  I expect more clubs will go down the route of licensing their own stuff, and we'll start to see a patchwork quilt effect in games, with some being present in one game and not others and vice versa.  Yay modern football.

13 hours ago, Brendever_ said:

EA didn't "balk" at the charge. What happened was their exclusive licensing deal ended and Konami came forward with a better offer. Don't forget that Konami dropped a massive license (UEFA competitions) to be able to afford these exclusive partnerships.

I'm not sure why there was a change in terms of FM of the naming deal, given that it wasn't a problem in the past for them to use the name Juventus, whereas PES and FIFA both were unable to.

...and EA balked at bettering the offer.  EA could have likely dwarfed any offer that Konami put on the table, but they decided not to.  Likely because the price it was going to cost far outstripped its worth.

[sporadicsmiles]

The fact is, if you are making money from offering downloads from copyrighted material, you are leaving yourself open to such things. As someone who is not an expert in copyright law, I have no idea why making such things freely available and not gaining profit from them would be a problem. I mean, I can google and download all these images from google as I like. The only different between this and a graphics pack is the convenience of someone packaging it. I am surprised it took so long if people are making money from this, however.

There is not really much we, as users, can do about this. It is not the fault of SI games, or any content creator. Not buying the game doesn't hurt the team who sent the legal files.

 

[dannysheard]

On 11/11/2019 at 11:27, kevhamster said:

Interesting - so it could be Konami rather than the clubs themselves.  

Is it not a Stadia thing as well, as their product will be massively inferior to most if it doesn’t have any proper logos and face packs?

I would probably pay for the speed benefits of Stadia if you could mod it... but would definitely not play any FM if there were no logos.

I could live without facepacks but not the logos.

[kevhamster]

35 minutes ago, dannysheard said:

Is it not a Stadia thing as well, as their product will be massively inferior to most if it doesn’t have any proper logos and face packs?

I would probably pay for the speed benefits of Stadia if you could mod it... but would definitely not play any FM if there were no logos.

I could live without facepacks but not the logos.

I don't believe for a second it's Stadia - they have the selling point of being able to play through a hell of a lot more quicker.  There is a large number of users who don't give a hoot about the logos etc.

Plus, Stadia have much larger titles on their service (Red Dead 2 for instance), which will be larger selling points than FM to the wider gaming audience.

I have no concrete info obviously, I'm just an average player.  But I believe all this suggestion that this is over Stadia is no more than a conspiracy theory.

[RBKalle]

4 ore fa, Amarante ha scritto:

All this comes down to is greed my friends plain and simple, but these companies won't understand is that gamers will unite to help gamers. All it takes is one email to one of thoes youtube channels and bam you have a 100k people who would never play FM or even heard of it helping us out.

 

Gaming is a community and when we realize that our freedoms are being taken or we're being charged too much we revolt and fight back. 

Your optimism in quite endeading...

Gamers won't do a damn thing about it besides MAYBE a tiny tiny contingent of like-minded fans of a niche game (like us). And whatever we could do, it won't affect the scenario one bit. Elsewhere gamers are among the most toxic and divided group of people ever.

How do you think gaming has gone from "purchase a finished, and usually polished, game for N money, play it til you're bored and then sell it" to "download a digital copy that can disappear at any time, it's likely in a half-playable Beta-state, wait for patches, grind or pay to unlock content, purchase DLCs for extra cash, spend on microtransactions to be competitive or to bypass the purposedly designed sloooow grind required to advance. And of course you can't resell it because you don't own the copy you paid for".?

It has happened because companies have realized a big portion of their customers are so obsessed and competitive they'll eat crap and pretend it's chocolate. And some will ask for more.

Should FIFA decide to raise their prices for FUT packs, which scenario is more likely?

A) Players realize it's a scam and stop playing FUT and/or FIFA altogether
B) They'll rant for a while, swear to never buy a pack til they realize for a small extra fee they can climb the ladder (because some poor sods will have indeed to stop buying packs)

 

BTW, I know not all gamers are like that and casuals aren't as toxic. But casuals being casuals don't care much about anything. Casual FM'ers are those who don't add logos and kits and maybe aren't even aware it's possible to add them. So, for different reasons, they're not gonna fight our losing war.

Gamers' biggest enemies are other gamers (Big Whales mainly) not gaming companies. Those are greedy because they know their audience...

 

4 ore fa, Amarante ha scritto:

they haven't learned anything if the DRM vs Pirates fight is anything to go by you will always lose. Don't take on the PC community you will lose the sooner companies start understanding this, the better. 

PC community is a drop in the ocean compared to the console one.

The war between DRM and pirates is kinda lost anyway, as PC gaming has been constantly overlooked by big companies. Most PC games are either niche ones or sloppy ports of console AAA titles. ANd I'd say DRMs are alive and kicking... Actually with the rise of Steam and similar platforms, DRMs are almost an obsolete concept.
If you need to download the game from a server and must be online to activate and run it, it's gonna take much more than a NO-CD fix to bypass all of that.

Once running a pirated copy of a game becomes too convoluted or difficult, many will just give up and purchase the game (on sale).

 

4 ore fa, Amarante ha scritto:

FM is like total war, it makes good numbers but its a niche game with only a few million who will ever take it up and i doubt you have causal FM players  a think we're hardcore as we're trying to emulate being a football manager which most persons would find boring. 

Casual FM players do exist, and they aren't invested enough to know or care about the graphic packs I suppose.

And FM being a niche game means whatever EA/Konami/some football leagues will want to do with this debacle, SEGA/SI will have to comply. A FM v Copyright Owners has only one possible ending. And not just because by the letter of the law they are right.

If SI can negotiate a fair deal to get more licenses, they'll likely have to retouch the price tag, likely getting complaints and losing sales. If they can't get a deal, they'll lose some sales too because the Vanilla game is, well, vanilla and lacks immersion.
Even in the worst worst case scenario: FM folding some years down the line due to declining sales and interest, Clubs and Leagues will lose some money but I bet they'd rather have their egg today than worry about the hen dying in 5 years.

 

40 minuti fa, Smurf ha scritto:

It's not greed - it's copyright and trademark - and it's lawful. It's nothing to do with greed.

In relation to your youtube channels - will I just download your content and put it on vimeo under my own name and start making money from it? Because I can do that. 

Or I can embed your youtube channel in my website and make money from the adverts shown on my site - start getting traffic and make money from your content.

But you know what, your youtube content is your copyright and your intellectual property - so you have the same protection as these football clubs in relation to your content. 

Hmmm, it's not exactly the same though.

It's more like you taking his YouTube profile picture and username to put in a video about YouTubers or something. Or, if you want to stretch it, reposting his videos on a platform for those who don't have access to YouTube (be it because it's not available or it's a premium feature).
You're not stealing his entire content, you're sort-of-stealing his name and likeness to improve your own project.

Still illegal? Probably so, but not the same as, say, selling or distributing FIFA 20 Juventus Edition or FM20 EPL Deluxe mock copies of the original game with modded material.

PES would have been dead a loooong time ago hadn't it been for the unofficial Megapatches that violated a truckload of intellectual properties.

40 minuti fa, Smurf ha scritto:

It has nothing to do with greed. If they let one group of people do it for free then they have to let the rest of the world do it for free - and if everyone is doing it can be misused and ultimately end up being misused and damaging the club and it's reputation, which has serious financial implications. 

And these clubs employ 1000's of people across the world. So protecting their brand, their copyright, their trademarks and protecting their intellectual property is paramount to their financials that allow them to employ 1000's of people around the world, locally and support their communities. 

If you think it's greed - you are sorely sorely mistaken.

How come I can:

purchase a fake Juventus CR7 shirt literally everywhere? Likely even a few blocks away from their very stadium... Isn't it a BIGGER violation and financial loss?
purchase all sorts of fake club merchandise and paraphernalia, of varying degrees of quality and shadiness, all around the world, online and offline?
modding has been around for ages, with much bigger games receiving unofficial additions "fixing" much bigger things than a tiny logo or a barely visible 3D kit
YouTube and similar services are flooded with match highlights and other stolen material whose existence and distribution damages much more the club and the rightful owners of the (expensive) TV rights

I don't think a few thousands of FM nerds playing their LOCAL GAME with Juventus real name and with Man Utd kits and logos are damaging the club's finances and reputation (how is it even possible? IMO having a game where you're called Zebre or Mancunian Devils is far more damaging because it's goofy and cheap). Surely not as much as hundred of thousands of "fans" walking around infake shirts, watching the games on illegal streams. Not to mention the actual fans being involved in despicable or very illegal activities.

And no, it's not "whataboutism", it's called putting things in perspective. Us having a namefix for Zebre <<<<< ultras having ties with mafia and basically blackmailing the club into giving them free stuff and free rein inside the stadium.

 

7 minuti fa, dannysheard ha scritto:

Is it not a Stadia thing as well, as their product will be massively inferior to most if it doesn’t have any proper logos and face packs?

Stadia's biggest selling point is players not needing to fork out good money for hardware upgrades or on a brand new machine in order to keep on playing new titles.

Mods are a nice bonus for PC players but if the choice is between unmodded game for a nominal fee and modded game for £5-600 in hardware, I guess many will happily play a vanilla game remotely with some extra money in their wallet.

[bigmattb28]

1 hour ago, RBKalle said:

Elsewhere gamers are among the most toxic and divided group of people ever.

 

Come join me in the wrestling community, we are more toxic and divided than I don't know what!

[kevhamster]

6 minutes ago, bigmattb28 said:

Come join me in the wrestling community, we are more toxic and divided than I don't know what!

Tell me about it, I dared to tweet to Jim Ross that Jimmy Havoc and Orange Cassidy were s***e, and got quite a lot of abuse for that.  I think people were jealous that he actually replied to me lol.

[forameuss]

2 hours ago, bigmattb28 said:

Come join me in the wrestling community, we are more toxic and divided than I don't know what!

I'd say certain gaming communities still trump that.  For the most part, wrestling fans are usually a good bunch, all VLs together and will bond over liking such a niche pursuit (with obvious exceptions).  Gaming communities seem far more chock full of absolute morons who are happy to post death threats for delayed games, and generally be attention-seeking, entitled, awful little bawbags.

I'd take the most heated discussion about AEW vs NXT over a lot of the stuff you get on dedicated gaming communities.  Brother.

[bigmattb28]

2 hours ago, kevhamster said:

Tell me about it, I dared to tweet to Jim Ross that Jimmy Havoc and Orange Cassidy were s***e, and got quite a lot of abuse for that.  I think people were jealous that he actually replied to me lol.

Whoa there dude, Orange Cassidy isn't sh*te, Jimmy Havoc is a but, meh. But yes some people in the online wrestling community are either so overboard with their vile-ness (is that even a word?) or you get the over zealous people who just like everything. Can't win half the time.

[bigmattb28]

5 minutes ago, forameuss said:

I'd say certain gaming communities still trump that.  For the most part, wrestling fans are usually a good bunch, all VLs together and will bond over liking such a niche pursuit (with obvious exceptions).  Gaming communities seem far more chock full of absolute morons who are happy to post death threats for delayed games, and generally be attention-seeking, entitled, awful little bawbags.

I'd take the most heated discussion about AEW vs NXT over a lot of the stuff you get on dedicated gaming communities.  Brother.

I think the majority of people in gaming forums are younger, and I'd say around 70% of people in wrestling communities are in their mid 30's or up, that be why in gaming forums you hear the endless 'I've sh*gged your mam' replies to 80% of anything, and the tripe about how great games are today versus when we, intellects, started gaming back in the day.

The AEW v NXT stuff is a right laugh sometimes though, 'yeah well AEW is better because NXT is a development center and is sh*t' 'Oh yeah well when the NXT guys get called up to the main roster raw and SD are gonna wipe the floor with professional wrestling'. Love it. Absolutely love it.

 

Oh, and by the way, AEW > NXT

[kevhamster]

6 minutes ago, bigmattb28 said:

Whoa there dude, Orange Cassidy isn't sh*te, Jimmy Havoc is a but, meh. But yes some people in the online wrestling community are either so overboard with their vile-ness (is that even a word?) or you get the over zealous people who just like everything. Can't win half the time.

I just don't get the pockets thing.  People have tried to explain it to me in a bid to get me to appreciate it.  I still think it looks incredibly stupid!

And I watched that match between Havoc and Darby Allin a few weeks back, and the Havoc inset promo was one of the most cringe inducing bits of verbal diarrhoea I've seen on a wrestling show in a while (save the current Rusev/Lashley thing which is the absolute pits).

Edited November 15, 2019 by kevhamster

[bigmattb28]

Just now, kevhamster said:

I just don't get the pockets thing.  People have tried to explain it to me in a bid to get me to appreciate it.  I still think it looks incredibly stupid!

That's the beauty, its so stupid it's funny, well I think so. That suicide dive through the ropes with his hands in his pockets is funny, you gotta admit. It's either stuff like that or ***** like the dark order, or the god awful back yard wrestling crap that's forever being shared online. Give me an Orange Cassidy 5 minute joke skit over a 15 minute dark order match any day

[kevhamster]

7 minutes ago, bigmattb28 said:

That's the beauty, its so stupid it's funny, well I think so. That suicide dive through the ropes with his hands in his pockets is funny, you gotta admit. It's either stuff like that or ***** like the dark order, or the god awful back yard wrestling crap that's forever being shared online. Give me an Orange Cassidy 5 minute joke skit over a 15 minute dark order match any day

There is that.

The problem with AEW is the inconsistency.  The great stuff (ie, anything with Cody or Jericho mostly) is fantastic, and the bad stuff is beyond awful.  I am glad they appear to be giving MJF a more prominent role as I've heard great things about him.

[Smurf]

4 hours ago, RBKalle said:

Hmmm, it's not exactly the same though.

It's more like you taking his YouTube profile picture and username to put in a video about YouTubers or something. Or, if you want to stretch it, reposting his videos on a platform for those who don't have access to YouTube (be it because it's not available or it's a premium feature).
You're not stealing his entire content, you're sort-of-stealing his name and likeness to improve your own project.

Still illegal? Probably so, but not the same as, say, selling or distributing FIFA 20 Juventus Edition or FM20 EPL Deluxe mock copies of the original game with modded material.

PES would have been dead a loooong time ago hadn't it been for the unofficial Megapatches that violated a truckload of intellectual properties.

It's the exact same thing - if you take something that belongs to somebody else and make profit from it you are violating copyright. 

Whether it's his video blog - or his actual video, embedding it in your own site and driving trafic to get more paid adverts - you are stealing. 

It's violation of copyright. The only way to do it would be to start my own video blog - but even if I copied your style and content word for word, or even loosely word for word - then it's violation of copyright. 

This happened in the music industry in the last few years, even a few notes or a tune or an air to a song have been awarded to the original creator in recent times. 

You just cannot take someone else's property and purport it as your own and make money from it. 

4 hours ago, RBKalle said:

How come I can:

purchase a fake Juventus CR7 shirt literally everywhere? Likely even a few blocks away from their very stadium... Isn't it a BIGGER violation and financial loss?
purchase all sorts of fake club merchandise and paraphernalia, of varying degrees of quality and shadiness, all around the world, online and offline?
modding has been around for ages, with much bigger games receiving unofficial additions "fixing" much bigger things than a tiny logo or a barely visible 3D kit
YouTube and similar services are flooded with match highlights and other stolen material whose existence and distribution damages much more the club and the rightful owners of the (expensive) TV rights

I don't think a few thousands of FM nerds playing their LOCAL GAME with Juventus real name and with Man Utd kits and logos are damaging the club's finances and reputation (how is it even possible? IMO having a game where you're called Zebre or Mancunian Devils is far more damaging because it's goofy and cheap). Surely not as much as hundred of thousands of "fans" walking around infake shirts, watching the games on illegal streams. Not to mention the actual fans being involved in despicable or very illegal activities.

And no, it's not "whataboutism", it's called putting things in perspective. Us having a namefix for Zebre <<<<< ultras having ties with mafia and basically blackmailing the club into giving them free stuff and free rein inside the stadium.

Just because you can buy fake jerseys doesn't make it right - that's a separate issue - they are tackling this too on a grand level - much in the same way of tackling illegal sharing of their copyrighted and trademarked brand.

It's not that the fact the logos are used in the game - it's the fact that someone is offering them to download from a website, that website is generating revenue - and therefore they are making profit from trademarked materials - which is violation of the law. 

 

Where do you think they got the graphics and logos for the fake jerseys? Did they download graphics packs shared by the FM community? 

Maybe?

 

 

 

[samuel888]

41 minutes ago, Smurf said:

 

 

Where do you think they got the graphics and logos for the fake jerseys? Did they download graphics packs shared by the FM community? 

Maybe?

 

 

 

you really are an apologist for these greedy corporate bastards and promoting falsehoods. anyone can download Juventus logo from Juventus website,  not from FM packs.   Distributing packs for personal use is completely legal no matter what some corporate lawyer tells you and is impossible to stop anyway as it can be hosted in Russia, China and numerous other countries. SI has every right to let people mod their games like other publishers. 

Edited November 15, 2019 by samuel888

[kevhamster]

18 minutes ago, samuel888 said:

you really are an apologist for these greedy corporate bastards and promoting falsehoods. anyone can download Juventus logo from Juventus website,  not from FM packs.   Distributing packs for personal use is completely legal no matter what some corporate lawyer tells you and is impossible to stop anyway as it can be hosted in Russia, China and numerous other countries. SI has every right to let people mod their games like other publishers. 

More like he's a realist.

Not sure why you're directing the vitriol at Smurf when all he's doing is explaining why things are happening in real terms.  Whether you agree with it or not, I'd say what he's said is spot on.

[Smurf]

28 minutes ago, samuel888 said:

you really are an apologist for these greedy corporate bastards and promoting falsehoods. anyone can download Juventus logo from Juventus website,  not from FM packs.   Distributing packs for personal use is completely legal no matter what some corporate lawyer tells you and is impossible to stop anyway as it can be hosted in Russia, China and numerous other countries. SI has every right to let people mod their games like other publishers. 

Distributing packs and making a profit from it is the problem. Not the actual personal use of it. It's fine for you to have it and download the packs and do all that - you can do it personally.

The issue comes when someone sells them/makes profit from distributing them. That's the problem.You can mod the game anyway you like - of course you can -

Go ahead and download the logos and make your own mods for the game - it's not an issue. 

 

you just can't profit from distributing the packs - which is the problem.

 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Smurf

[Smurf]

58 minutes ago, samuel888 said:

you really are an apologist for these greedy corporate bastards and promoting falsehoods. anyone can download Juventus logo from Juventus website,  not from FM packs.   Distributing packs for personal use is completely legal no matter what some corporate lawyer tells you and is impossible to stop anyway as it can be hosted in Russia, China and numerous other countries. SI has every right to let people mod their games like other publishers. 

I can only imagine how you feel - but I can also only imagine how Taylor Swift feels! 

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/14/entertainment/taylor-swift-scooter-braun/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=link&utm_content=2019-11-15T06%3A01%3A08&utm_source=twCNN

This is copyright and law - same thing applies - if you don't own it you can't sell it.

[kevhamster]

3 minutes ago, Smurf said:

I can only imagine how you feel - but I can also only imagine how Taylor Swift feels! 

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/14/entertainment/taylor-swift-scooter-braun/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=link&utm_content=2019-11-15T06%3A01%3A08&utm_source=twCNN

This is copyright and law - same thing applies - if you don't own it you can't sell it.

I know it's all about rights etc, but the Taylor Swift thing seems a bit harsh as she wrote the bloody songs!

I guess, in that respect though, it's no different to Paul McCartney and Michael Jackson falling out back in the 80's when MJ bought the rights to the Beatles back catalogue even though PM was trying to buy it himself.

[Svenc]

19 hours ago, RBKalle said:

On my MegaDrive I didn't care playing Sensible Soccer with the likes of "Iric Centona", "Merco Ven Besten" or "Jyrgen Klonsmann" against "Glaswegian" or "Milano". 

Apart of the flopped "3D" 1998 Edition, I didn't even know there was any Sensi game with faked Players. Actually, the database it carried was one of its selling Points, in particular later on with Sensible World Of Soccer, with Teams being properly replicated in all of the World, including lower divisions. 

As to where FM's headed Long-term, who knows. These News seem to be About a couple Major fansites. Subtle "Bonus" were lost in the past already though. F'r instance, a couple years ago SI themselves still used the actual results in European / World Cup qualifiers. Ever since due to legal reasons, they are randomized at the start of the game. That has an Impact on the actual Simulation since.
 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Svenc

[puffascruffowitz]

If true I imagine there will be workaround figured out quickly. I would bet money that dozens, if not hundreds of people will take their existing face/logo packs and keep them updated on their own. These would then easily be shared around. It won't be as accessible as it is now, but with a little digging you could easily get it. 

[RBKalle]

3 ore fa, Svenc ha scritto:

Apart of the flopped "3D" 1998 Edition, I didn't even know there was any Sensi game with faked Players. Actually, the database it carried was one of its selling Points, in particular later on with Sensible World Of Soccer, with Teams being properly replicated in all of the World, including lower divisions. 

It was the Sega 16-bit version that got fake names (first vowel changed into the next one).

Amiga and later PC releases, including the magnificent SWOW had real-life names. No idea about the reason, as both Sensis were available at the same time on most markets, so who knows why the MegaDrive/Genesis game had to alter names

3 ore fa, Svenc ha scritto:

As to where FM's headed Long-term, who knows.
 

Well, SI were also forced to remove red cards for violent conduct, real players' personalities can't have negative descriptions (so the likes of Joey Barton and Mario Balotelli get vague labels like "Fairly ____" instead of "Utter Bellend" and "Delusional"

Didn't know about the fixtures issue... But it's indeed a problem and sooner or later more unreasonable demands will be made and SI will have to comply .

5 ore fa, Smurf ha scritto:

You just cannot take someone else's property and purport it as your own and make money from it. 

It's not that the fact the logos are used in the game - it's the fact that someone is offering them to download from a website, that website is generating revenue - and therefore they are making profit from trademarked materials - which is violation of the law. 

But since no website is selling them directly, and add-ons websites also host plenty of other content, it's technically impossible to prove they have profited from the graphics pack.

Sure, you can count the hits on the specific page and the number of downloads, but there's no way to find out how many of the user would have NOT visited the website or downloaded other files if the graphics megapacks weren't available to begin with.

For the Nth time: I understand the technical side of the issue, but I still find it very specious and, basically, a colossal dick move/a waste of time.

It's as if Metallica decided to go after CDcovers.com instead of after Napster... I mean, footie games have been pirated for decades, and now the issue is a bunch of fansites hosting logos and kits made by 100 different dudes and available on plenty of other places?!
Unless Top Leagues and Clubs (and Konami/EA) find a way to lobby for SI/SEGA to make modding unfathomably difficult and cumbersome, logos and kits will keep on existing online. The likes of FMScout and similar sites will lose some clicks and marginal click/ad revenue, but the clubs won't get the sweet license money as long as those packs will get hosted somewhere and links will get shared by hook or by crook.

 

5 ore fa, Smurf ha scritto:

Where do you think they got the graphics and logos for the fake jerseys? Did they download graphics packs shared by the FM community? 

Maybe?

FM logos are way too small to be usable as printing template for shirts...

Google Image search is all kit fakers need. And so do pack makers...

[Archibalduk]

5 hours ago, Smurf said:

Distributing packs and making a profit from it is the problem. Not the actual personal use of it. It's fine for you to have it and download the packs and do all that - you can do it personally.

The issue comes when someone sells them/makes profit from distributing them. That's the problem.You can mod the game anyway you like - of course you can -

Go ahead and download the logos and make your own mods for the game - it's not an issue. 

 

you just can't profit from distributing the packs - which is the problem.

 

That's not quite accurate. The Trade Marks Act simply prohibits "use". Its doesn't distinguish between those making a profit and those that don't. Same with copyright - hence why it is/was illegal to rip your CDs as MP3s (I think an EU regulation has since ironed out that particular point though).

IIRC a holder of a trade mark can lose their mark if they acquiesce to other people using it unlicensed. So I think they do have to enforce their rights.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Archibalduk

[99]

Aren't we --- maybe --- exaggerating a bit with this issue?

Because what I see is that sortitoutsi keeps having everything they had before, no problems. And I hope it keeps being that way, obviously.

[Nonlondoner]

I'm not sure what the panic is. Frankie Goes To Hollywood's Relax would have remained a dance club obscurity had the BBC not banned it.  

Someone has already worked out a loophole. You can be sure of that. 

 

[Smurf]

10 hours ago, RBKalle said:

But since no website is selling them directly, and add-ons websites also host plenty of other content, it's technically impossible to prove they have profited from the graphics pack.

For the Nth time: I understand the technical side of the issue, but I still find it very specious and, basically, a colossal dick move/a waste of time.

But they don't have to prove they are making money directly from it - it's not something they have to do.

It's their logo, it's their trademark and if they don't want anyone sharing them - they can ask you to stop.

A dick-move - yes! But it's their right.

 

10 hours ago, RBKalle said:

FM logos are way too small to be usable as printing template for shirts...

Google Image search is all kit fakers need. And so do pack makers...

Not really the point though is it - the fact that logo packs are shared online that are printable are the issue. 

And these may not be printable - but what is stopping someone taking that logo pack and making a game for Mobile Phones using the logos? 

Or stop other people using the logos to send out "official messages" from the clubs in emails and scamming people? 

There's more to it than just print. But misusing the logos can be done in so many ways.

Technically - with my skills as a Graphic Designer - I could write a script for the logo pack to generate an email and use the club logo - use a generic logo asking for subscription fees for the club.

I could buy an email database from a nefarious site online - and blast out emails to MILLIIONS of people purporting to be from A Club asking them to send money to my account asking for whatever narrative I can come with it.

 

That's something that can actually be done - easily. 

So can you blame them for protecting their logo and rights?

[rp1966]

On 10/11/2019 at 20:46, Archibalduk said:

Copyright and trade mark laws are intended to stop people from "using" logos and trade marks without their permission. 

They are intended to stop someone misrepresenting their product as yours through use of your trademark.  They were never intended to fuel the licensing scam that is now being run.  

In the case of logos in a football game, that should be 'fair use'.  

The problem is that the businesses that run these scams can bring so much legal firepower to bear that a company like SI just has to back down - they also have a tendency not to even try to fight their corner, which is how we ended up in this sorry situation in the first place.  So the scam rolls on.

Until some politicians start standing up to corporate power and set some hard limits on the money-grabbing copyright scammers (and patent trolls) this will only get worse. There need to be clearly defined areas where 'fair use' is 100% protected. The representation of the real world in any art form (including computer games) has to be one of them.  

Where does this  copyright idiocy stop?

Edited November 16, 2019 by rp1966

[RBKalle]

1 ora fa, Smurf ha scritto:

That's something that can actually be done - easily. 

So can you blame them for protecting their logo and rights?

You do realize there are logos and "reusable" material to scan on every club's official website? (where do you think the logos in the packs come from?)

Geez, you're clutching at straws depicting completely outlandish and unrelated scenarios to justify an exaggerated, overzealous and greedy practice by filthy-rich multinationals.

Is in their right to defend their IP? Yes.
Are FM graphics packs a big enough problem to take action? I'd say no way, but apparently I'm wrong and Man Utd feel having a 240x240px version of their kits added to a game is worth their legal department's time, because dammit, it's our intellectual property and some dudes are making 1p per click on their shady webpage by illegally distributing it.

1 ora fa, rp1966 ha scritto:

n the case of logos in a football game, that should be 'fair use'.  

Where does this  copyright idiocy stop?

Apparently it'll only get worse.

NFL don't allow to use SuperBowl in any commercial capacity unless you pay them. Are you a sports bar arranging a special night for the game? Can't use "SuperBowl" to promote it.

FIA insisted on having F1 (TM) as standard form for every single mention of th racing series' name. Anywhere. Maybe they've backed down since, but for a while it looked like they were determined to enforce it.

 

About "fair use", I can concede that gaming developers and publishers shouldn't slap logos they don't have the licenses for in their product. After all, official licenses mean less hassle for the players (and the modders) and they do add value to a game from the very beginning.
Take any F1 game: selling F12020 with Lewis Hamilton's face and official Mercedes car on the cover and on the promotional material looks so much better than having a cheap lookalike Lewis and a generic "but not too silver" car.

Still, whatever players decide to do with their game shouldn't warrant for such scrutiny, much less for the involvement of legal teams, cease and desist letters, thinly-veiled threats...

Edited November 16, 2019 by RBKalle

[bahrami]

**** copyright laws, especially football clubs who earn hundreds of millions anyway.

No access to editing graphics and I won't buy the game anymore, simple as.

Edited November 16, 2019 by bahrami

[Double0Seven]

6 minutes ago, bahrami said:

**** copyright laws, especially football clubs who earn hundreds of millions anyway.

No access to editing graphics and I won't buy the game anymore, simple as.

Copyright laws are in place everywhere. Not sure why ur so mad. Even small clubs not making millions need it. You can't have other people running around stealing your logo and making money off it. 99% of the football clubs don't make millions...

[bahrami]

23 minutes ago, Double0Seven said:

Copyright laws are in place everywhere. Not sure why ur so mad. Even small clubs not making millions need it. You can't have other people running around stealing your logo and making money off it. 99% of the football clubs don't make millions...

How have you come to the conclusion that I'm mad? Just weighing in with my opinion, sorry if the swear word offended you.

The 'small clubs' graphics are already in the game so not sure why you think i'm referring to them lol.

[Smurf]

3 hours ago, RBKalle said:

You do realize there are logos and "reusable" material to scan on every club's official website? (where do you think the logos in the packs come from?)

Geez, you're clutching at straws depicting completely outlandish and unrelated scenarios to justify an exaggerated, overzealous and greedy practice by filthy-rich multinationals.

Is in their right to defend their IP? Yes.
Are FM graphics packs a big enough problem to take action? I'd say no way, but apparently I'm wrong and Man Utd feel having a 240x240px version of their kits added to a game is worth their legal department's time, because dammit, it's our intellectual property and some dudes are making 1p per click on their shady webpage by illegally distributing it.

But this is where you're wrong. You can't steal someone elses property and make profit from it - even 1p. 

It's stealing. And their things are copyrighted.

Whether you like it or not - or agree with it or not - is completely beside the point - it's the law.

Deal with it.

 

[Smurf]

3 hours ago, RBKalle said:

You do realize there are logos and "reusable" material to scan on every club's official website? (where do you think the logos in the packs come from?)

To answer your question - you can get the logo from their website. I don't think they are objecting to people putting their logo into the game.  The logo packs come from people stealing the logos from websites, then putting them into a nice pack - then making money from it by hosting it on servers and offering it for download to people either through paid adverts on the site, or a small fee. 

Regardless - they have stolen and redistributed the logos. 

And it's the redistribution that is the main point here. Nothing else.

If you want to go ahead and do that you can. You setup a whole graphics pack for your favourite club - you just can't put that on the web for someone else to download, where you make a profit - even 1p.

You're not allowed to do it - that's why copyright is in place.

[CarlosEsDios]

Does this mean that FM2021 will include Merseyside Blue and West Midlands Claret?!

[SazoJohnno]

No. The issue here isnt with the names but with the third party venders profiting from people downloading the logos/kits and etc. Anything that came out as "vanilla" from FM game itself wouldnt change, only things you download such as logo, kits, facepack etc. 

[anitamui]

YES LOGOPACK IS NOT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 

#REVIVELOGOPACK

[Nonlondoner]

It won't be stopped. Distribution may change but there are always ways around it.

EG 1. Let's make up a website name, Mygame.com. A one stop shop for user generated content with all the usual patches all for free. Want an Arsenal badge? Download this one made by JimSortitout or Evan Scout. Want to install more than one at a time? Our Installer program is available for £5 and makes choosing what user generated content you'd like to download easier (i.e. in bulk)  
EG 2. Logopacks with club colours and the name of the club in them, downloadable for a price, then offer a free-to-download branding patch which puts the official logo over it. (this method is used by a well-known Plane sim vendor to legally circumnavigate EU branding laws) 

EG3. Offshore the website and make access only via VPN for an obscure country. Separately provide free VPNs. 
EG4. Sell them on the dark web.

The above are merely examples of online marketing methods and are in no way instructive or should be construed as legal advice.  But just as the company you bought your PC or phone from, the company that owns the bus you got into town or the coffeeshop you are reading this in are likely to have set up a corporate structure to ensure "tax efficiency", there will be loopholes and they're most likely there because the people in charge of us are on the take too. Mostly from Russia at the moment as it turns out. 

[Dreambuilder]

On 10/11/2019 at 13:54, Viking said:

Rumors... But yeah, without proper logos and league names I would probably shelve FM.

One workaround is to use your logo pack or pics from FM19. Works in FM20 too! I was lucky to have the rar file of the standard logo pack still there in the folder.

Edited November 17, 2019 by Dreambuilder

[bigmattb28]

2 hours ago, Dreambuilder said:

One workaround is to use your logo pack or pics from FM19. Works in FM20 too! I was lucky to have the rar file of the standard logo pack still there in the folder.

You can just copy your graphics folders from 19 across to FM20 folder you know

[99]

Just in case, download everything you can from Sortitoutsi, the last updated packs of faces, logos, kits, and store them in your computer. If something actually happens --- you already have them. I already did it.

[Martini]

SI, time to step up your game, give us an stadium editor, a better logo editor and a better kit editor, btw what you guys did to the J-League was insane (not being able to even mod the league as it's menus are crippled) but I understand that you were forced to do it

[Double0Seven]

On 10/11/2019 at 14:38, SortitoutsiVP said:

Obviously cannot say much but at the moment it isn't quite as bad as it may seem.

So how is the situation now after almost a month? 

[Gross_Ballon]

Some sites have the kits but no download button and some have the download version.

rather sad  

[Hadehariast]

Name and shame the parties who are pressuring these sites. Be sure to name the law firms involved as well-- their involvement needs to be documented and their behaviour corrected.

Beyond the Streisand effect, an active campaign to de-value the intellectual property can certainly be arranged. 

[Double0Seven]

12 hours ago, Hadehariast said:

Name and shame the parties who are pressuring these sites. Be sure to name the law firms involved as well-- their involvement needs to be documented and their behaviour corrected.

Beyond the Streisand effect, an active campaign to de-value the intellectual property can certainly be arranged. 

Their behaviour corrected? Afaik they are in their legal right (as discussed here) to complain about the sites uploading copyrighted material that is not theirs. 

Im just wondering what happened after only FMSCOUT seems to have been taken down. Despite two other sites (maybe more?) reacting to it as well.

So what has happened in the meantime? Is it solved? Did they get an answer? Is it ok? Would like to know just for the sake of the future of this franchise.