Hebo video removed for copyright infringements?

Thread in 'Discussion' started by cdsboy, 23 Apr 2008.

  1. Altimor

    Altimor a.k.a. Ghett0

    The origin of these modes are the following:

    Cascade - One of the '03 games

    Sticky - LJ

    Square - TNT
  2. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    And actually, i think that particular copyright wisdom is being misapplied.

    It's clearly intended to apply to board games, and i think case law will back me up on this.

    A video game is an interactive audio-visual work for entertainment purposes.

    What that law boils down to is the only thing you can copyright is the specific audio-visual portions of the game, and not the whole game. Anyone else can make a game that plays the same way, as long as they don't copy the pictures and unique pieces. that's why we can have aggravation, trouble, parcheesi, sorry, etc. They all have the same basic game, but they look different.

    The question is whether a video game is legally defined as a game (which cannot be copyrighted), or as an interactive audiovisual work for entertainment (which most certainly CAN be copyrighted).

    The other possible issue is this. The Grade Recognition System probably qualifies as a software patent. [​IMG]
  3. Muf


    Where does it say G.R.S. is a patent ? TGM states that I.R.S. is "patent pending" (which we know fell through in the application process and is now invalid), and that G.R.S. is "Design by Arika, co.". Nowhere does it say G.R.S. is patented or even patent pending.
  4. tepples

    tepples Lockjaw developer

    If it's "sticky", it's Blastris A and Bombliss. If it's "sticky by color" with multicolored tetrominoes, it's The Next Tetris (PS1) and Tetris Worlds.

    That's why people took down their videos of Heboris with TGM skinning.

    Quinn, DTET, N-Blox, Lockjaw, etc.

    A video game contains elements of both: the tetromino game rules (no , as they're a process), plus the menu text (no per Lotus v. Borland), plus block textures, backgrounds, and sounds (, which is why I never incorporated most of Rich Nagel's work into lj-contrib). Just because a work is in a new medium doesn't make uncopyrightable elements copyrightable.

    Somebody get the number of that patent? Mufunyo and I would like to look at the claims to pick them apart.

    In the 1980s and early 1990s, when you powered on an arcade machine, it had an ordered set of ten preset scores. Beat one of those, and you have a grade based on a score threshold. And I remember Balloon Trip (part of Nintendo's Balloon Fight) displaying a similar "rank" in real time based on the current score. I'm 90 percent sure that this prior art makes GRS1 too obvious for a valid patent.

    A patent on GRS2 (fill with score, drain with time) might more likely succeed. That's one reason I haven't put GRS2 (used by TAP and in part by Ti) into LJ. There are probably better ways to grade the combination of lines cleared with a single piece and stacking speed.

    A patent on IRS probably fell through for good reason. It's possible to implement IRS by simply not updating the last-pressed state of the rotation keys during ARE, and that's likely to happen at some point in the development of a clone even on accident. Besides, as Americans were reminded on April 15, the U.S. Treasury owns IRS.
  5. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    IRS fell through because the invention is obvious. At least that's why it should have fallen through.

    And i believe that grs mk 1 also would fall through for the same reason, and also from prior art.

    However, G.R.S. mk2 amd mk3 (gain grade points which decay by time, and update grade when you gather enough of them and reset) are probably unique enough to deserve a software patent, as i dont' think there is prior art.

    Hebo's sticky is definitely a tetris worlds sticky mode clone.

    Ok, just checked, and i'm not seeing any mention of GRS in the materials for TAP and TI. if they didn't bother they've got no leg to stand on.
  6. Deniax

    Deniax Blockbox developer

    And what about the timings & level advance used in the TGM series, can these be patented?
  7. Muf


    I believe a lot of those are derived from how Sega Tetris works. More prior art there.
  8. Altimor

    Altimor a.k.a. Ghett0

    The MASTER curve is from the unlicensed Sega Tetris. That speed curve belongs to no one. Grading system is not protected by copyright, as it's a system involved in digital media.

    So basically, we can file a counter-claim against Arika.

  9. Sega Tetris is NOT unlicensed.
  10. Altimor

    Altimor a.k.a. Ghett0

    I know there's an unlicensed version.
  11. kiwibonga

    kiwibonga Unregistered

    Back then, they were all "licensed" [​IMG]

  12. A Megadrive version went unreleased because they couldn't secure the license. All released Tetris games by Sega are licensed.
  13. If you're talking about Shimizu Tetris, it is the first game to feature 20G but I don't think it shared the same exact speed curve as TGM.
  14. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    Sega tetris (arcade) IS licensed, and introduced the following.

    1) lock delay.

    2) ARE

    3) 1G autorepeat.

    4) Sega Rotation system, which never lifts a piece up other then I.

    5) Slow/fast/slow/fast speed curve.

    Shimizu's Tetris (unofficial) took stuff from sega tetris, and added 20G, and a bunch of configurable options.

    Arika did develop the following.

    1) Initial Rotation System.

    2) the Arika level counter, where pieces placed and lines count towards level.

    3) The arika grading system.

    4) Added kicks to Sega Rotation.

    Pretty much everythign else was taken from Shimizu's Tetris, or one of sega's games.

    The only unliscensed sega tetris was the megadrive version, which is horrible anyway.
  15. Zeta

    Zeta Unregistered

    1, I believe, has already been discussed, but once again, it's a quirk that could be introduced at any time in any tetris variant, and the exact means of reproducing it could vary. for starters, another possibility is to have the player press the rotation buttons before the next piece comes in and the piece preview would rotate to show the rotation. Is that not also Initial Rotation?

    2 is one I'd give Arika, since it's not so much the combination of pieces placed and lines counting towards levels as it is the requirement that you clear a line to advance past level XX99. that part I will give them. the rest of it, not so much. the rest of it, not so much, since it basically adds pieces placed to line clears and subtracts one for each piece placed if you're at level XX99 when you place the piece.

    3, that's a gray area.

    4, not exactly patentable, so copyright law can't cover it. especially if the clone in question breaks mihara's conspiracy.

    anyways, 24 seconds of Heboris for you guys to trim down:


    [edit: update: only 1 Heboris and 1 Texmaster video are still viewable on youtube]
  16. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    i wasn't stating whether or not they had a case for anything, but simply the things that they actualyl came up with themselves. (which wasn't that much, honestly)
  17. Zeta

    Zeta Unregistered

    Point taken.

    also, I asked Ema if he (she?) had any ideas as to why Arika had the videos pulled from Youtube. no clue there.
  18. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    I honestly think that arika believes that a specific implementation of a game is copyrightable, and that if someone clones their gameplay, that it is a violation.

    I'm not familiar with japanese copyright law, and that may actually be the case in their country.

    However, in the US, only patents can do what they want.
  19. Zeta

    Zeta Unregistered

    yeah, that may be the case. BEMANI had to file patents for DDR before they were able to bar RoxoR from making any more rhythm games, and the only reason they were able to do (I believe) was because of release dates for US versions of DDR - they have an arcade US DDR game dating back to pre-MAX times.
  20. All reasoning aside I guess this is - somehow - a presumed guilty unless proven innocent situation, with the burden of proof on us, not them. Wherever did the principals of the modern judicial system go?

Share This Page