Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
05-20-2012, 07:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkfat View Post
But they don't really define it. What if the eyes are likeness?
Can you customize eyes in the game? Can eyes alone identify someone in the game?

More to the point, I think the issue is covering lawsuits.

If I recreate Shatner (and you know I can), someone COULD associate my (hypothetical) "Kirk kills a puppy" mission with Shatner killing puppies. It might influence their opinion of Shatner if they saw him on the street.

If I create Dukat, nobody will mistake him for Marc Alaimo on the street. If Dukat kills a puppy, it doesn't reflect on Marc Alaimo or create associations that would make it difficult for him to sell puppy chow with his likeness.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
05-20-2012, 07:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathan99
Can you customize eyes in the game? Can eyes alone identify someone in the game?

More to the point, I think the issue is covering lawsuits.

If I recreate Shatner (and you know I can), someone COULD associate my (hypothetical) "Kirk kills a puppy" mission with Shatner killing puppies. It might influence their opinion of Shatner if they saw him on the street.

If I create Dukat, nobody will mistake him for Marc Alaimo on the street. If Dukat kills a puppy, it doesn't reflect on Marc Alaimo or create associations that would make it difficult for him to sell puppy chow with his likeness.
The kill the puppy part doesn't matter. These actors want money, especially if they are Trek actors who haven't worked since Trek.. They get money for their image. If they don't get money when their image is used, they sue. It doesn't matter if they are killing puppies or promoting Heinekin beer (as Nimoy sued).

There is a dukat in the trek universe. If the actor found out that he was in a video game without getting royalties, he could sue. He wouldn't really care whether he was killing puppies or not.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
05-20-2012, 07:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkfat View Post
The kill the puppy part doesn't matter. These actors want money, especially if they are Trek actors who haven't worked since Trek.. They get money for their image. If they don't get money when their image is used, they sue. It doesn't matter if they are killing puppies or promoting Heinekin beer (as Nimoy sued).

There is a dukat in the trek universe. If the actor found out that he was in a video game without getting royalties, he could sue. He wouldn't really care whether he was killing puppies or not.
I think the point of Brandon's answer is, we're currently allowed to do it. If that becomes an issue, the EULA will change.

Alaimo is not entitled to royalties when Dukat is used. Another actor could put on the makeup and he wouldn't get paid either. As long as you can't tell whether it's his face or someone else's under the makeup, Cryptic should be safe and if they aren't, the EULA will change.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
05-20-2012, 08:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathan99
I think the point of Brandon's answer is, we're currently allowed to do it. If that becomes an issue, the EULA will change.
But the question was "What if the actor is unrecognizable?" They don't define what that means. The actor that crawled around in the Horta suti, sure. The actor who played Dukat, I doubt it. In "Far beyond the Stars," I clearly recognize Dukat.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
05-20-2012, 11:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkfat View Post
But the question was "What if the actor is unrecognizable?" They don't define what that means. The actor that crawled around in the Horta suti, sure. The actor who played Dukat, I doubt it. In "Far beyond the Stars," I clearly recognize Dukat.
David Warner was considered unrecognizable enough to circumvent the internal "no reusing actors who are recognizable" rule. The series producers didn't consider Madred recognizable as Warner... and they cast J.G. Hertzler and Jeffery Combs in multiple roles. I recall, specifically, that they allowed this because the side roles they played were considered to look distinct enough from the actor's own face that they believed the average reasonable person would not recognize them... which sounds like the bar we have to hit here.

If we had to get a hard clarification, I'd probably push for it to be by species or by percentage of face covered in makeup.

No Ferengi is really recognizable at all. Neither are Klingons or Changelings or Jem'Hadar.

I THINK what is being said is, "Could it easily be mistaken for the actor on the street?"

That seems to be the same standard for how and when Cryptic has used canon characters, outside of deceased actors where they got special permission.

The fact that Cryptic used Madred without David Warner's involvement and Warner was allowed to be cast in the role in spite of the two year role says to me that Cardassians are probably distinct enough that actors would have no claim to the likeness.

The dividing line is probably Romulans with the forehead makeup, which Cryptic seems fine using without likeness permissions.

Vulcans and humans require likeness permissions unless there's aging applied. Which does get into the question of some of what we've seen onscreen with age makeup. Riker in All Good Things doesn't really look like Frakes; if anything, he looks more like Orson Welles. Picard as the end of The Inner Light really doesn't resemble Stewart either and is presumably what an in-game Picard would look like.

That is where you get into the real cutting edge of the issue.

If I were to set a policy, it would probably be:

1) It should not resemble an actor as they appear out of character, on the street. If it uses prosthesis, it's fair game.

2) In addition to the above, no humans or Vulcans.

Though, technically, the answer Branflakes gave us would allow for AGT Riker or Picard from the end of the Inner Light... as virtually none of the actor's actual face was visible, the makeup neither looks like the actor's real face at the time or the way it's aged, and there would be no mistaking the character for the actor on the street.


The bone structure is different. It doesn't really look like Patrick Stewart:
http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/5x...ght_hd_250.jpg

More pronounced with Riker. Different jaw shape, hairline, bone structure. Either than the actor at the time or the actor as he is now. It looks more like Orson Welles than Jonathan Frakes:
http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/...ker_(2395).jpg

These would both technically fall under Branflakes' answer.

Although I think a fairer cutoff would probably be to just exclude humans, Vulcans, Trill, or Bajorans.

Maybe, if absolutely necessary, have a checklist, like:

- Is there a prosthetic brow?
- Is the skintone a natural human color?
- Are there prosthetic ears?
- Is there a prosthetic nose?
- Is a wig or bald cap evident?

And you'd need clear evidence of 3 out of the 5. If 3 out of the 5 are in play, go for it. If not, don't.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
05-20-2012, 11:38 PM
It's nice to see all the ridiculous "clarifications" have been rescinded. A lot of stuff previously claimed as being against the EULA just wasn't.

I'm glad this has been posted, but at the same time I think it's a little silly to feel grateful to now know that the EULA says what it actually does.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
05-20-2012, 11:40 PM
Hurry, let's start working on our Quark, Rom and Brunt likenesses! It will be great to have those guys available.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
05-21-2012, 02:48 AM
Well since it hasn't been answered in the ask about the EULA thread, I'll ask here.


Can I use the Chodak in my mission? They were created for the game A Final Unity, which falls outside the tv/films thing? My chodak bears some passing similarities, in that they have pale skin and gold eyes, but other than that, look nothing like they did in those games. I do reference the events of A Final unity as being an Enterprise's mission in the past.


If I can't use this, I will need to seriously rewrite my mission. My other questions have been answered thanks to this thread, but the Chodak issue is still troubling me.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
05-21-2012, 05:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PWE_BranFlakes
Also, please note that this is not a Q&A thread
I wouldn't expect any answers anytime soon guys. Personally I'll probably just stick to making up my own stuff (mostly).

Grylak you could always do what they did in Avengers. They couldn't use the Skrulls cause they were licensed to Fox with the Fantastic Four property, so they used the same guys just an alternate name. You could make an "offshoot" of the Chodak, named something else and looking slightly different.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
05-21-2012, 07:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by drogyn1701 View Post
I wouldn't expect any answers anytime soon guys. Personally I'll probably just stick to making up my own stuff (mostly).

Grylak you could always do what they did in Avengers. They couldn't use the Skrulls cause they were licensed to Fox with the Fantastic Four property, so they used the same guys just an alternate name. You could make an "offshoot" of the Chodak, named something else and looking slightly different.

Would be helpful if the actual Q&A thread got some answers.


At first, I was thinking this would collapse my episode, but the more I think about it, and write out various responses, I think I can make it work. Keeping it generic on past events, but work it so the story remains. they were going to be modified chodak anyway, so I could say they take on a new name in honour of their superiority. Probably work in some more speech boxes to make the connection without connections.


Maybe the name Chozrak.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:05 AM.