12 replies to this topic

[ollybobbles]

Just a quick question to the developers

With the power of course forge enabling us to import any course from worldwide, will there be some form of trademark/copyright issue when attempting to import and update a famous course, lets say St Andrews Old Course.

I am interested in this side of things and would like to know how course forge interacts with the worldwide course database and if we will also have the facility to import our local courses.

Looking forward to a detailed response.

Thank you

[IanD]

Ambiguous question to say the least.... and I'm no developer, but I am intruding...

 

The power of CF is immense but your understanding of the program enabling us to import courses worldwide....???

It will allow you to create any course you decide.... Unity will assist with it's own unique tools too. You may find the ability to import the terrain information needed from various locations across the world too... but only you can create the whole project.

 

In my eyes, you've created something entirely by yourself and unique. It's not editable by anyone else either because the final file created isn't the same as the working files used to create it.

[shimonko]

Coincidentally I've just brought up something similar in the private forum.

 

Trademark infringement is avoided by calling the course something else. But architecture, including course architecture, is inherently protected by copyright. Old courses that predate copyright or now have copyright expired and public courses I suggest would be fine, but the others?  Architectural copyright gives the architect an exclusive right to produce the design - whether a 3d version for game is violating that would be for the courts to decide.  From experience I can tell you digital copyright is a mess, the laws years behind and no-one has any firm answers.

 

We would probably be ignored or get away with a simple C&D because of the unpredictability of court with no guarantee we have enough money to go for. But even poor companies typically have liability insurance to target.

 

Edit: I have since learned that because the main purpose of a golf course is utilitarian rather than just being a work of art, it is ineligible for copyright protection.

[sirputterman]

Coincidentally I've just brought up something similar in the private forum.

 

Trademark infringement is avoided by calling the course something else. But architecture, including course architecture, is inherently protected by copyright. Old courses that predate copyright or now have copyright expired and public courses I suggest would be fine, but the others?  Architectural copyright gives the architect an exclusive right to produce the design - whether a 3d version for game is violating that would be for the courts to decide.  From experience I can tell you digital copyright is a mess, the laws years behind and no-one has any firm answers.

 

We would probably be ignored or get away with a simple C&D because of the unpredictability of court with no guarantee we have enough money to go for. But even poor companies typically have liability insurance to target.

You would be surpirised what will not go unnoticed.CGX formally PGAX had to change the name after many years of operation because the PGA Tour got wind of it. They felt it was an infringement on the PGA tour name. Of course the name had to be changed rather then go to court and incurr costly lawyers. So if a small golfing community can show up on the radar you can be assured they will have an eye on this too. 

[Richard]

There are currently approximately 1.27 million lawyers in the U.S. (ambulance chasers). How many are intellectual property attorneys I don't know, but you can be assured that it's too 'damn' many and will go after the 'small guy' because most can't afford the legal expenses involved with the fight. Any settlement to those 'vultures' is a win. I just hope that PP has their 'butt' covered and I also want them to play by the rules. The day of the people honoring 'verbal contracts' and handshakes is long gone!!

[shimonko]

Ah, I remember having troubles trying to find the PGAX library not too long ago actually.

Not sure if US trademark law is the same as here in Australia, but here you have to challenge unauthorized use of names you hold trademark for, otherwise you can lose them. So even if you're some nobody not causing any harm, you can find yourself with a letter.

[ollybobbles]

What I will say, now I have opened a can of worms, is if we look back at the courses created for Links 2003. We had the likes of Augusta, a better old course than what Microsoft created and many other classic courses throughout the world, and we were ok. Hopefully this will fall on the same kind of line and the courses created will live and grow to form a special library like we had in the days of Links .... here's hoping !!

[Jim Boags]

I have 2 points. 

 

When the courses come out with PG will they have have a different name attached to them. For example TPC Boston. I see in videos that some of the guys are putting up. And, if so will there be a way to change them back within PG once they are downloaded.

 

And,

 

As Richard has stated, I to hope that the PP team have their butts covered by leaving 'no bloody in the water'. By doing this I'm sure that it will deter the 'sharks from circling'. I would be a sad day both for the PP team and the community if Perfect Golf was disrupted for these reasons.

Jim Boags

[shimonko]

I'd say back in the days of Links everything was a bit less exposed and unprofessional. Be good to hear if Andrew/Mike had any issues with Augusta, as Augusta in particular were very self-protective (as Gary McCord well knows).

I beta test CF using Olympic Golf Club as my guinea pig, but wouldn't spend the time making it a releasable course knowing WGT would have spent a ton of money making their version and probably pay good money to license the rights to it. If PG posed a threat to them, I can't imagine not receiving a C&D.

[RobC]

At CGX we Run 2 tours PGA and European Tour for TW 2008 and build all the tour courses for both the tours After we had the C&D to stop being called PGAX we called the PGA Tour The US Tour and The European is called the WT we use different tournament names but use the actual course name and have not had any problems since changing from PGAX...part of the problem was we used to come up in google searches before the PGA Tour...I have built loads of real courses but they are never exact replicas as we are limited in the detail we can do so maybe we are clear because they are not perfect copies I dont know

[brandyyy67]

over on the other golf game off the moment TGC the general public are creating real courses  with  there real names  with  no  probs  although the game  makers hbs  official courses  are all fictional,so  im geussing it will be  the same here,pp  will probably release only courses with made up names although they will be based on actuall real courses,  where as joe public can release and name the course what ever they want,as long as it is a free download  and the are no pay to play aspects,  the only real problem i do forsee  is if this game gets a console release  and starts to eat into EA SPORTS market and profits,they might object to the pga  courses being recreated and used  as they will probably  be paying a fee  for the use of these and if this game is competing with theres id imagine they wll try to put a stop to it

[Richard]

At CGX we Run 2 tours PGA and European Tour for TW 2008 and build all the tour courses for both the tours After we had the C&D to stop being called PGAX we called the PGA Tour The US Tour and The European is called the WT we use different tournament names but use the actual course name and have not had any problems since changing from PGAX...part of the problem was we used to come up in google searches before the PGA Tour...I have built loads of real courses but they are never exact replicas as we are limited in the detail we can do so maybe we are clear because they are not perfect copies I dont know

 

 

over on the other golf game off the moment TGC the general public are creating real courses  with  there real names  with  no  probs  although the game  makers hbs  official courses  are all fictional,so  im geussing it will be  the same here,pp  will probably release only courses with made up names although they will be based on actuall real courses,  where as joe public can release and name the course what ever they want,as long as it is a free download  and the are no pay to play aspects,  the only real problem i do forsee  is if this game gets a console release  and starts to eat into EA SPORTS market and profits,they might object to the pga  courses being recreated and used  as they will probably  be paying a fee  for the use of these and if this game is competing with theres id imagine they wll try to put a stop to it

 

Rest assured that one of these days, regardless of which company it may be, one of them will clearly hear,

http://youtu.be/3hIcKkKID8k

 

That's my statement and I'm sticking to it!!!!

[shimonko]

Sony and Microsoft would immediately delete any content that a copyright/trademark owner claimed infringed their IP, even if the claim had no merit. It's how they protect themselves against distributing infringement material.

I haven't heard if PG plans to centralise download of user created courses (via Steam or other) or leave it to enthusiast sites.

Brandy or any TGC regular, any idea if HB Studios are releasing real courses with names changed?