I have enjoyed video games ever since I was about 5 years old. But I can't fully support the side of video games here. I definitely wouldn't be surprised if violent video games negatively affect SOME people. Especially now that graphics are so realistic . Not that violent games should be banned, I'm just arguing that perhaps they should be handled a little more carefully. Years ago a relative of mine around the age of 10 came over and played Halo on my XBOX, which caused him to laugh like an absolute maniac as he shot aliens, and over the half hour or so that he played he almost went into some sort of crazy violent frenzy. It was bizarre and frightening to experience his transformation..
Dude, 10 years old? I think I'm a pretty good judge of character and there's no way in hell I'd let a 10-year-old play any first person shooter. And that's only because at that age they haven't fully come to realize the consequences when you do something dumb. Also, "crazy violent frenzy?" We're talking about Halo here, and not A Clockwork Orange.
also i don't now how this really harms legitimate players. i've been playing WoW for years and that requires a internet connection to play and so will Star Wars TOR.
First of all, you could play WoW offline if you wanted. It would just be a huge, empty world with nobody in it. Second, the reason that DRM harms the legitimate consumer is because the best we can hope for is that it affects nothing. If there is ever any problem, then the only people who are hurt are the people who actually bought it. Pirates have taken the DRM out so they don't give a crap. Any scenario that harms their legitimate customers while providing only a modest inconvenience to the hackers is inherently unsavory.
I closed my PayPal account after the shit that recently went down. It's not such a great leap from there to Ubisoft.
They really need to learn that the best business is in providing incentives for buying it, not trying to punish people for stealing it.
The fact that this is on the page immediately below the story about THQ shitcanning Red Faction does not really inspire confidence that we'll see anything interesting from this guy, even if he has good ideas.
IMO this sounds a lot like Obama saying the federal gov. isn't going after grandmas with cancer using med pot, only to go after grandmas with cancer using med pot.
It's even worse than that. All the terrible bills we see proposed these last couple of years are a direct result of lobbyists from big media companies. The same companies who have in the past hired those "rights protection" thug companies to blanket sue everyone who they know cannot pay and then slyly offer to go away quietly if they get paid off, which is immoral and reprehensible. These are the guys who are trying to pass this bill.
Why is everyone up in arms about this? This man has a right to protect his copyrighted work. Brand confusion could be a real issue with these products and his game was released well before Microsoft and Double Fine's. Trench and Trenched are not common terms, so he is well within his rights to have them change the name. It's really quite simple. This is business, not a scuffle among friends.
It's a trademark. That's a far cry from a copyright.
I know nothing of how the law actually works, but it's such a general term (like Tim Langdell's 'Edge) that the trademuch should not cover all derivations. An electronic version of a board game should not cover completely different game genre's conceptually. This whole thing is just a real shame and this guy has a right to defend something that is legally his, it should not work that way. Your board game is not this game, even if the naming is similar.
QUOTED FOR TRUTH. When the system lets Apple get a trademark on "App Store," we have serious issues. And yes, I know we have the goddamn Container Store, as well. That doesn't make it any less stupid.