Can Rockstar get sued for doing this?

[Giantsgiants]

I was looking at various footage of driving games on Youtube, and there's this one game called Drift City. Apparently, Drift City has a car called the Acrobat, and it looks pretty much exactly like the Batmobile.

 

 

 

This leads me to some questions I have. Can Rockstar get sued for putting in such copyrighted/trademarked vehicles from movies and TV shows (vehicles like the Batmobile, Mach 5, Ecto-1, etc)? If so, will they be able to get away with altering their appearance and giving them a different name (like they do with the rest of the GTA cars)?

 

Also, this may be off topic, but if Rockstar can get sued, then how does Drift City get away with putting the Batmobile in their game?

 

If Rockstar won't get sued for putting these cars in their game, then would you want unique vehicles from movies and TV shows to be added to GTA Online?

 

Edit: The cars in the video aren't mine. I don't play Drift City.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Giantsgiants

[A Maned Wolf]

Nope.

Creative liberties and such.

[Mathew442]

They'd probably avoid copyright issues by not directly copying it. Like they do with their current vehicles.

 

I'd like the Inteceptor (Or Rockstar equivilent)

 

 

Edited August 19, 2014 by Mathew442

[Stephen]

OP they never use an exact replica of a car, it might be based off one particular model, but then they add features from other makes and models to it.

Edited August 19, 2014 by SteveNYC81

[Ezza.]

Drift City is an undiscovered Indie game, no wonder it's not been sued.

And Rockstar wouldn't if they changed it or merged it with another car. I think it has to be 30% different to the original or something. Same way that Samsung gets away with blatantly ripping off Apple's design then improving a couple of irrelevant features.

[garvdart]

In illustration there are rules too follow to avoid copyright/ trademark infringement. If you manipulate a object by 80% your in the clear. This can be done in so many ways, color inversion, renamed sprite becomes sprunk, corvette > coquette, a font change, etc. Trust me the design team at any company knows this and have taken appropriate actions.

[sultangris]

nope, every single car in the game is based on and looks very much like the real ones but they are called something different and have small differences for just that very reason.

[The Angel King]

Drift City is an undiscovered Indie game, no wonder it's not been sued.

And Rockstar wouldn't if they changed it or merged it with another car. I think it has to be 30% different to the original or something. Same way that Samsung gets away with blatantly ripping off Apple's design then improving a couple of irrelevant features.

I agree. However Apple makes crap products. Chinese piles of crap. I will never buy anything apple again. Anyways,

Apple made a product, then it gets copied. Now Apple is copying them now because they do it better. This is nothing new. Car companies do this all the time. If no one "copied" anyone there would be no progress.

[sultangris]

 

Drift City is an undiscovered Indie game, no wonder it's not been sued.

And Rockstar wouldn't if they changed it or merged it with another car. I think it has to be 30% different to the original or something. Same way that Samsung gets away with blatantly ripping off Apple's design then improving a couple of irrelevant features.

I agree. However Apple makes crap products. Chinese piles of crap. I will never buy anything apple again. Anyways,

Apple made a product, then it gets copied. Now Apple is copying them now because they do it better. This is nothing new. Car companies do this all the time. If no one "copied" anyone there would be no progress.

 

samsung didnt actually get away with it, they had to pay apple quite a bit for a couple things but since they make a much better product and continually improve it unlike apple which is the same sh*t it was 5 versions ago they sell more devices every version cause smarter people who want more better features dont keep buying apple when they 3 versions or more behind the samsung when it comes to features and functionality. The amount that the apple changes between each version is so minimal no one but a completely retarded fanboy type who eats up all the hype would rush right out to spend 700$ or whatever on the new one out of contract like people do with samsungs which are usually quite a bit better than the last one with many improvements and options like the the galaxy S, galaxy s mini, galaxy note, and so on vs apples one sh*tty offering with a screen so tiny and non upgradeable small memory size its virtually worthless as a smartphone when the samsung galaxy note is so awesome with swype and the large screen and ability to add a MicroSD card to expand your file storage size that i use it so much i never use a laptop and barely ever use a desktop computer even when im home for browsing the internet, forums or emails anymore as its just so easy to do on the phone from anywhere. I cant believe anyone even buys ipads anymore, they were pretty cool when they first came out but compared to other tablets they are pure garbage with no usb slots and ability to do anything other than browse the internet watch movies and play games when the 1000X more feature rich tablets cost less and do so much more useful stuff they basically replace laptops as well.

[livejoker]

There's some special cases where cars are used in movies but the manufacturer demands to remove their brand logo (Ferrari badge, etc.) on the car. So you won't see the name of the car on the trunk and that sort of stuff. As said, R* inspire themselves on certain cars and while some look like a clear copy of the real-life counterpart, they're usually mashed with another vehicle. One that comes to mind is the minivan which looks like a real minivan, not sure how different it is, though, but changing the name probably saved it from being sued.

[Kushology]

There's some special cases where cars are used in movies but the manufacturer demands to remove their brand logo (Ferrari badge, etc.) on the car. So you won't see the name of the car on the trunk and that sort of stuff. As said, R* inspire themselves on certain cars and while some look like a clear copy of the real-life counterpart, they're usually mashed with another vehicle. One that comes to mind is the minivan which looks like a real minivan, not sure how different it is, though, but changing the name probably saved it from being sued.

 

IMO: A lot of GTA cars I'd love to see in real life or prefer them to the real life counterpart.. I've always wondered if R* would ever become a manufacturer because of this.

[sultangris]

There's some special cases where cars are used in movies but the manufacturer demands to remove their brand logo (Ferrari badge, etc.) on the car. So you won't see the name of the car on the trunk and that sort of stuff. As said, R* inspire themselves on certain cars and while some look like a clear copy of the real-life counterpart, they're usually mashed with another vehicle. One that comes to mind is the minivan which looks like a real minivan, not sure how different it is, though, but changing the name probably saved it from being sued.

most manufacturers give them the car to use for free or pay them to use theirs instead of someone elses, product placement, advertising. Everyone wants the sweet car they saw doing stunts in a movie, lol!

[KornbreadMaf1a]

What Is Fair Use?

 

In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and transformative purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. In other words, fair use is a defense against a claim of copyright infringement. If your use qualifies as a fair use, then it would not be considered an illegal infringement.

 

So what is a transformative use? If this definition seems ambiguous or vague, be aware that millions of dollars in legal fees have been spent attempting to define what qualifies as a fair use. There are no hard-and-fast rules, only general rules and varied court decisions, because the judges and lawmakers who created the fair use exception did not want to limit its definition. Like free speech, they wanted it to have an expansive meaning that could be open to interpretation.

 

Most fair use analysis falls into two categories: (1) commentary and criticism, or (2) parody.

 

Commentary and Criticism

 

If you are commenting upon or critiquing a copyrighted work for instance, writing a book review fair use principles allow you to reproduce some of the work to achieve your purposes. Some examples of commentary and criticism include:

 

quoting a few lines from a Bob Dylan song in a music review

summarizing and quoting from a medical article on prostate cancer in a news report

copying a few paragraphs from a news article for use by a teacher or student in a lesson, or

copying a portion of a Sports Illustrated magazine article for use in a related court case.

The underlying rationale of this rule is that the public reaps benefits from your review, which is enhanced by including some of the copyrighted material. Additional examples of commentary or criticism are provided in the examples of fair use cases.

 

Parody

 

A parody is a work that ridicules another, usually well-known work, by imitating it in a comic way. Judges understand that, by its nature, parody demands some taking from the original work being parodied. Unlike other forms of fair use, a fairly extensive use of the original work is permitted in a parody in order to conjure up the original.

- See more at: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/#sthash.pFhJWyOt.dpuf

[hugh750]

OP they never use an exact replica of a car, it might be based off one particular model, but then they add features from other makes and models to it.

with the rhapsody they used the body from an amc pacer and the front end of a vw golf.

[sultangris]

 

IMO: A lot of GTA cars I'd love to see in real life or prefer them to the real life counterpart.. I've always wondered if R* would ever become a manufacturer because of this.

 

 

and start making and selling cars? lol, zero chance of that. selling a design to a current manufacturer possible but unlikely, they have many people working on new designs already and dont really care about anyone elses. they are far less concerned about what a car looks like and more about how it handles and its efficiency, most vehicles are pretty boring and drab cause it costs a lot of money to make them look cool but most people cant afford to pay that premium and the supercar manufacturers make those and they are unobtainable for 98% of the population. The most common car on the road is toyota corolla which is the ugliest little drab looking sh*tbox you will ever see because its cheap and efficient.

[Wheeling and Dealing]

Parody... nuff said

[G37]

Drift City is an undiscovered Indie game, no wonder it's not been sued.

And Rockstar wouldn't if they changed it or merged it with another car. I think it has to be 30% different to the original or something. Same way that Samsung gets away with blatantly ripping off Apple's design then improving a couple of irrelevant features.

 

That's a VERY argumentative number in creative fields. But yes, essentially make it different "enough" and copyright protections don't mean squat.

Parody... nuff said

 

Does not completely absolve you of everything, ever.