View Single Post
Old 10-25-2005, 06:44 AM   #161
After a brisk nap
Elegantly copy+pasted
 
After a brisk nap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,773
Default

I am not a lawyer either, but I'm fairly confident on this point. As long as there was anything in KQIX that Vivendi could argue was clearly identifiable as taken from the KQ games (even if appearing under a different name), they could stop the game's release.

One thing KQIX has going for it is that many elements of KQ are generic or taken from older stories. Obviously, Vivendi can't stop every game that features a king, for instance. On the other hand, it's not good enough to argue that "these elements have individually appeared outside of the KQ series, so when we are using them we're not ripping off KQ," because the unique combination of them is still copyrighted. Of course, the point at which a combination of generic elements becomes identifiable as something in particular is somewhat subjective. Since it's well known that this game was developed as a King's Quest game, it's not going to get any benefit of doubt: if something appears to be taken from the KQ games, the assumption will be that it is.

It is very frustrating that all the work is going to be wasted. The only faint hope I can see would be for the team to work out a deal with Vivendi, where they licensed the right to use KQ.

Meanwhile, Just Adventure+ reports: "There's more behind Vivendi's decision than has been revealed and we hope to soon impart more details."

An official KQ9? I don't really believe in it. Besides, I don't know that I'd get very excited about a King's Quest game produced by Vivendi anyway.
__________________
Please excuse me. I've got to see a man about a dog.
After a brisk nap is offline