Buddy of mine wants to make a game, but wants to copy a movie for the story. Is this frowned upon?

[JB08]

So we got to talking and he wants to turn a movie he likes into a game. I know taking inspiration from something is fine but surely not an almost 1 to 1 ripping off. Of course turning a 90 minute movie into a long VN isnt going to work so there will be name changes and adding material between things and some changes so the game is *technically* different, but I would hesitate to call it "inspired" or "based on X" instead of whatever he is trying to pull.

Legally I dont think its an issue even if it were a straight clone, or for posting on F95, but if he goes Patreon route, subscribestar and all that he might encounter problems right? How close to the sun can he fly here basically lol.

What are some other taboos to avoid? Things that are not rule breaking but sort of bro code unspoken rules kind of thing.

 

[mickydoo]

Its called plagiarism, if someone complains to patreon they may remove it, you may get into trouble, I dunno. Your buddy should come up with his own idea.

 

[GNVE]

Ehh it depends on what you mean by ripping it off 1 to 1. If you mean use the dialogue verbatim and/or stills from the movie etc than no you can't do that. He must transform the work in a meaningful way to create something original. (beware that logo's and names often fall under trademark law which means you just can't use those).
If he wants to use the movie as a basis for his own project (e.g. follow the general plotline) than it is probably permitted. You cannot copyright general plotlines (e.g. Boy meets girl. Boy messes up. Girl almost chooses the wrong person. It works out in the end and they live happily ever after.) The closer he follows the movie the more likely it is he will infringe.
He could also make a parody of the movie which, under US copyright law, is an affirmative defence. Porn movies use(d) this a lot to make rip offs of well known movies. I do not know however what you'd need to do to qualify as a parody. He'd have to look into that on his own.
He could also use the project as a critique of the movie but he'd need to be careful not to use more than necessary or risk becoming infringing. Again, this would be an affirmative defence.
Lastly a lot of movies are based on an underlying work that is in the public domain (i.e. no longer under copyright) Think Shakespeare, H.G. Wells (depending on where you live), Jules Verne, the Iliad and many more. He could use the underlying work as his basis as it is free to use for anyone.

If he wants to know more. Youtube has several copyright lawyers delving into this in more detail. I suggest searching there for more information.

 

[anne O'nymous]

Note: I'm not a jurist, just a regular guy who happen to have not so bad knowledge regarding this kind of laws.

He could also make a parody of the movie which, under US copyright law, is an affirmative defence.

But for this to apply, he must be an US citizen, or the movie must fall under US Laws. Yet, he would be safe only if the two are true. Else, he could be sued by the right owner(s) on his country if he's not US citizen, or sued on the country where the movie was made if it's not the USA. In both case, the US parody laws wouldn't apply. Be noted that on the second case, there chance that the sentence stay a simple annoyance, since the Justice of his country will not necessarily decide to apply the decision.
Also be noted that this obviously doesn't mean that the USA is the sole country with such laws. It's just that in terms of law application, the context is really important and it should be seen in its whole.

Lastly a lot of movies are based on an underlying work that is in the public domain (i.e. no longer under copyright) Think Shakespeare, H.G. Wells (depending on where you live), Jules Verne, the Iliad and many more.

It don't depend on where you live, but on where the rights have been registered.
Be also noted that all countries don't apply copyright (or corresponding in the country) in the same way. In the UK, among others countries, the rights will stand until between 50 and 70 years after the death of the author. But it's the USA the copyright stand for 90 years after the first publication date.
Therefore, knowing where the rights have been registered is important not only to know how long they apply, but also to know when you need to start counting. Take H.G. Wells "The Time Machine" by example. Published for the first time in 1895, under US laws it would have fallen in public domain in 1985 (in fact before this date, since at this time the rights were granted for less than 90 years). But since he died in 1946, under UK laws it's in public domain since between 1996 (50 years) and 2016 (70 years).

Plus, it's not just the story that is protected ; or more precisely all stories are protected independently, even when they are a derivative adaptation from another one. Most of H.G. Wells books have had numerous movies, all presenting the story in their own way, all being protected independently of the book's story. Therefore, it's legal to use the story as in the book, and even adapt it. But it's not legal to use, even if adapted, the story as in one of the movies ; unless this story is itself now in public domain.
By example, you can adapt Jules Verne's "From the Earth to the Moon" story, as in the book or as in George Méliès' "A Trip to the Moon" movie ; both are registered in France, that have a 70 years after the death protection (Méliès movies are in public domain since 2008). But you can't adapt your story from the Warner Brothers' 1958 movie, because of the 90 years after first publication rights in the USA.

This mean that you've to be careful. Your freedom to adapt the story will be limited by what others have done as adaptation. Of course, you can genuinely have came to the same variation than in a movie you never saw nor heard about. But you would be a insignificant indie author who face a movie studio. Even if you're lucky and finally recognized as none guilty, it would still be at the end of years of legal procedure during which your opponent would use all the possible moves to win.
Obviously, being an insignificant indie author also mean that you'll probably stay all your life under their radar. But you've to know that, as unlucky to happen as it is, it's still a possibility.

 

[GNVE]

Note: I'm not a jurist, just a regular guy who happen to have not so bad knowledge regarding this kind of laws.



But for this to apply, he must be an US citizen, or the movie must fall under US Laws. Yet, he would be safe only if the two are true. Else, he could be sued by the right owner(s) on his country if he's not US citizen, or sued on the country where the movie was made if it's not the USA. In both case, the US parody laws wouldn't apply. Be noted that on the second case, there chance that the sentence stay a simple annoyance, since the Justice of his country will not necessarily decide to apply the decision.
Also be noted that this obviously doesn't mean that the USA is the sole country with such laws. It's just that in terms of law application, the context is really important and it should be seen in its whole.




It don't depend on where you live, but on where the rights have been registered.
Be also noted that all countries don't apply copyright (or corresponding in the country) in the same way. In the UK, among others countries, the rights will stand until between 50 and 70 years after the death of the author. But it's the USA the copyright stand for 90 years after the first publication date.
Therefore, knowing where the rights have been registered is important not only to know how long they apply, but also to know when you need to start counting. Take H.G. Wells "The Time Machine" by example. Published for the first time in 1895, under US laws it would have fallen in public domain in 1985 (in fact before this date, since at this time the rights were granted for less than 90 years). But since he died in 1946, under UK laws it's in public domain since between 1996 (50 years) and 2016 (70 years).

Plus, it's not just the story that is protected ; or more precisely all stories are protected independently, even when they are a derivative adaptation from another one. Most of H.G. Wells books have had numerous movies, all presenting the story in their own way, all being protected independently of the book's story. Therefore, it's legal to use the story as in the book, and even adapt it. But it's not legal to use, even if adapted, the story as in one of the movies ; unless this story is itself now in public domain.
By example, you can adapt Jules Verne's "From the Earth to the Moon" story, as in the book or as in George Méliès' "A Trip to the Moon" movie ; both are registered in France, that have a 70 years after the death protection (Méliès movies are in public domain since 2008). But you can't adapt your story from the Warner Brothers' 1958 movie, because of the 90 years after first publication rights in the USA.

This mean that you've to be careful. Your freedom to adapt the story will be limited by what others have done as adaptation. Of course, you can genuinely have came to the same variation than in a movie you never saw nor heard about. But you would be a insignificant indie author who face a movie studio. Even if you're lucky and finally recognized as none guilty, it would still be at the end of years of legal procedure during which your opponent would use all the possible moves to win.
Obviously, being an insignificant indie author also mean that you'll probably stay all your life under their radar. But you've to know that, as unlucky to happen as it is, it's still a possibility.

Excellent additions. Public domain is however dependent on where you live. A story can be in the public domain in one country and not in another country. There are actual calculators online to determine whether a story is in the public domain where you live or not. I know that LTT got a bill because they used a work that was in copyright in Europe but not in Canada where he lives (so he didn't pay).
And yeah copyright lawsuits are expensive $20.000 dollar if you get sued in the US for a simple case easily (which can escalate easily from there.) But technically you are not limited by what others have done with their adaptation. Two people can come to an original idea that is identical and both works would be protected. Though you may have to prove you did not know about the other work, which might be more difficult.