Say I ran a track contest....

[Voutare]

Or even the tracks themselves. Can you register a track as a trademark? Or a piece of land for that matter?

But since Budds and Red Bud are already in the game, I doubt that's a problem.

[jlv]

First off, I'm not a lawyer so take this for what it's worth.

Trademarks are for protecting a brand identity. If I started selling soda under the name 'Pepsi' that would be a trademark violation because I'm pretending to be Pepsi. If I sold artwork that depicted Pepsi cans, that wouldn't be a trademark violation since I'm not claiming the artwork is from Pepsi. It might be a copyright violation on their logo though.

My best guess would be that if someone sued you for using their logo in your track you would win. But it isn't something that's important enough to be worth the hassle.

As for track replicas, to protect a track layout the creator would have to claim it was copyrighted. I don't think anyone has ever sued over that before so I wouldn't worry about it.

For the contest rules, I don't think I will ban replica tracks or real logos. I would prefer it if the tracks didn't use real logos, but I can always remove them if I get a complaint.

[Voutare]

Fair enough. That does make sense.

I've got a question relating to all this copywrite stuff, because you have the big 4 manufacturers and their bikes, but not their actual names (I.E. instead of Kawasaki KX 125, you just have kx125), would that also classify as copywrite, because I think rainbow and many other studios have to get licences from the companies.

Sure your not a lawyer, but its just curiosity. I want to know why Untamed didn't have real brands for bikes.

[ddmx]

I'm pretty sure a company like rbw has to pay for the rights to those names for the bikes. I remember talking to checkerz about this once.

[jlv]

Once again, I am not a lawyer but here are my dumbass legal opinions.

I'm sure Rainbow's lawyers decided it wasn't worth fighting over. Although checkerz told me they do copy real bikes and then mix up the parts, which seems like it would have just as much potential for trouble since it would still be a derived work if you buy the idea that the form of a bike can be copyrighted.

Here are some articles on a recent case involving 3d models:
http://www.schwimmerlegal.com/2008/06/i ... _case.html
http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2006/1 ... ision.html
Meshworks, Inc. v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A.: Good News and Bad News for Creators of New Media Works
Basically, Toyota contracted Meshworks to make a model of a Toyota car. Toyota then used the models without permission and Meshworks sued Toyota for using Meshworks' copyrighted models. The court decided the models weren't original enough to be copyrighted. I don't think the decision said anything about Meshwork's right to distribute the models. It sounds like those models are now in the public domain based on that decision.

So if Yamaha steals DJ's yz125 he's screwed, but he can still distribute it until the next goofy decision says he can't.

I also noticed the copyright office specifically mentions architecture -

Does copyright protect architecture?
Yes. Architectural works became subject to copyright protection on December 1, 1990. The copyright law defines “architectural work” as “the design of a building embodied in any tangible medium of expression, including a building, architectural plans, or drawings.” Copyright protection extends to any architectural work created on or after December 1, 1990. Also, any architectural works that were unconstructed and embodied in unpublished plans or drawings on that date and were constructed by December 31, 2002, are eligible for protection. Architectural designs embodied in buildings constructed prior to December 1, 1990, are not eligible for copyright protection. See Circular 41, Copyright Claims in Architectural Works

If you read Circular 41, you will find this:

Ineligible Building Designs
The following building designs cannot be registered:
- Designs that were constructed, or whose plans or drawings were published, before December 1, 1990.
- Designs that were unconstructed and created in unpublished plans or drawings on December 1, 1990, and were not constructed on or before December 31, 2002.
- Structures other than buildings, such as bridges, cloverleafs, dams, walkways, tents, recreational vehicles, mobile homes, and boats.
- Standard configurations of spaces and individual standard features, such as windows, doors, and other staple building components, as well as functional elements whose design or placement is dictated by utilitarian concerns.


So if the track was made before Dec 1, 1990 you have no worries. If it was built after Dec 1, 1990 you're still good because it's not a building.

[ddmx]

Everything sounds good jlv. I say get this thing started so we have some definitive guidelines to work by. I'm already well underway with my track and need to know what restrictions I need to abide by.

[ddmx]

bump, any updates?

[jlv]

I'll post the rules soon. But first I'm going to make the game output geometry stats so I can set a reasonable limit on track complexity.

[totorox]

I'll post the rules soon. But first I'm going to make the game output geometry stats so I can set a reasonable limit on track complexity.

Could you let a HD export mode also ? ^^

[yzmxer608]

What do you mean by HD export? You can just make it HD by having a high resolution disp map with a lower track scale.

[Garasaki]

I'll post the rules soon. But first I'm going to make the game output geometry stats so I can set a reasonable limit on track complexity.

wtf

There goes Cedar Terrace

[Garasaki]

I'll post the rules soon. But first I'm going to make the game output geometry stats so I can set a reasonable limit on track complexity.

(apologies for double post)

Ya know I've been thinking about this.

The purpose of a track contest should be to challenge the trackmaking community to push their limits and develop creations that go beyond the typical day-to-day tracks they would create. To make tracks that are new, original, and polished in every aspect.

I have a fundimental principal difference of opinion with the idea of "setting a limit" (reasonable or not) "on track complexity".

[FactoryBR21]

I'll post the rules soon. But first I'm going to make the game output geometry stats so I can set a reasonable limit on track complexity.

(apologies for double post)

Ya know I've been thinking about this.

The purpose of a track contest should be to challenge the trackmaking community to push their limits and develop creations that go beyond the typical day-to-day tracks they would create. To make tracks that are new, original, and polished in every aspect.

I have a fundimental principal difference of opinion with the idea of "setting a limit" (reasonable or not) "on track complexity".

[2]

[jlv]

As long as you make low detail versions of your models you will be fine. The geometry limit will just prevent you from blowing 10,000 polygons on something halfway across the map.

A track that wastes thousands of polygons on something that is 10 pixels high on the screen isn't a polished track. If you look at a well optimized track like Broadmeadow, you will see it uses LODs to get good detail while still getting a solid 128 fps.

[ddmx]

So I guess my 30,000 poly hay bale is gonna have to need a lod huh? dang dude, it was freakin lifelike!