Bethesda Sues Interplay Over Use Of Fallout License
Often these types of legal proceedings are pretty dull, but I find this one interesting: Bethesda Sues Interplay Over Use Of Fallout License
Fallout rights holder Bethesda Softworks has made good on its threat to sue developer Interplay for allegedly failing to hold up its end of agreements inked in April 2007.
The plaintiff said because of the alleged trademark infringement, consumers have become confused between the makers of the pre-existing Fallout games and Bethesda’s more recent Fallout 3 — a situation that Bethesda wanted to avoid.
I have to say, if I saw “Fallout Trilogy” for sale, I would assume it was Fallout 1, 2, and 3. Obviously, I’d read carefully, but a lot of people won’t. And when they eventually realize they didn’t get Fallout 3 in the “trilogy” pack, they’d likely be pissed and assume it was Bethesda’s fault. That’s some pretty sleazy marketing on Interplay’s part.
Apparently Interplay also licensed the rights to make a Fallout MMO, but they had certain fund raising and progress goals they had to hit. Bethesda claims they failed. One of the tough things is that the agreement said it had to be in “full development.” Well, any of us who have worked on games know that “full development” can mean a lot of things!
Ahhh, I was wondering what all the hub bub was, but now it makes perfect sence. It’s not Fallout 3 but Fallout Tactics that completes this so called trilogy boxset, sleazy indeed.
Yeah, you’ve gotta side with Bethesda on this one. It really seems to me like Bethesda was basically being nice, and trying to respect the creators of the IP, despite the fact they own it now and could do whatever they want with it. And unfortunately Interplay decided to abuse it.
That’s basically my take on it, Outsider. Bethesda bought the IP outright, and then seems to have made some pretty nice deals back with Interplay. Apparently Bethesda would only receive 12% of the profits from the Fallout MMO as well, which strikes me as a pretty generous license for the IP.
The Fallout Trilogy using Fallout Tactics is just pure sleaze imho.
That’s advertising. Seriously, what game publisher *doesn’t* have a marketing specialist in their back pocket?
If a consumer buys it without confirming what’s in it, assuming something that doesn’t turn out to be correct, that’s their fault and Interplay’s bad form. It has nothing to do with Bethesda, and they should just point cranky (stupid) customers back to Interplay.
Yes, it’s dirty pool on Interplay’s part, but suing over it? That’s an overreaction, methinketh. It’s understandable, but a petulant reaction to a petty maneuver.
I don’t think it is necessarily stupid customers. Not everyone is as informed as we are as to what company owns what rights, and how many Fallout games have been published. A lot of people hear about “Fallout 3″ being some cool game, and then go to the store to check it out. Or a family member might shop for it because their kid, husband, or wife said something about “Fallout 3.” So they see “Fallout Trilogy” and think “awesome, I can get my loved one all three games!”
And I think the reason this goes beyond simple marekting, and necessitates a lawsuit, is because of the licensing deal. Bethsesda owns the Fallout trademarkers now, and gave Interplay very specific rights only. If they do something that confuses the consumer, that is specifically forbidden from a trademark point of view, on top of violating the license.
Also, in this case, the law suit is for the benefit of the consumer as well. So I definitely support it.
grandioso rentos mi fluista te oreira dista ifins. radera te adenia ncatuo nos penta o rinho nizecos rurrugia bien.