Nelson doesn’t need the license.
The license is only needed if you intend on making money directly off the gun.
Nelson will only be selling unrelated $5 “premium passes” which abides to non-licensing rules.
Explain a bit.
Basically if Nelson were to use trademarked names in the manner that is suggested by OP, then he is not protected under copyright law by Fair Use and is liable to being sued. Despite OP’s claims that
the trademark is not being used in a casual manner, and use of it could possibly misrepresent the company and suggest sponsership or endorsement.
3 Likes
This is pretty much correct. If the inclusion can be mistaken as sponsorship/endorsement because it’s not explicitly stated otherwise (or easily assumed otherwise), then, yeah.
imo, I don’t find the “real weapon names” all that enticing to begin with. As a core part of the game, I don’t think it’s that important, even with modular components that’d only be interchangeable between certain lines of firearms.
The game was already planned to have weapon manufacturers listed in the descriptions of guns, which is something relatively minor but also probably worth mentioning here.
But contrary to what some people have said, most companies don’t pay for licensing. That applies to indie studios and Triple-A studios. It’s usually not worth it.
1 Like
Best to have both and if they sue him just use the names that we had originally.
The problem with caliber based ammunition, is that for example, 9×19mm Parabellum has more in common with 7.65×21mm Parabellum than it does with 9×39mm, which is in-turn, more sensibly grouped with 7.62×39mm Soviet and .220 Russian.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.