GAME | LIFE

It appears that patent issues between Activision’s new Guitar Hero III title and Konami’s Guitar Freaks may have been resolved.

The 9 patents listed on the Official Xbox Magazine demo version of Guitar Hero III are split into two sets - one group relating to the MTV Drumscape electronic arcade machine (which patents were recently acquired by Activision in August, 2006), and a second set that are known to be owned by Konami. Though neither Activision or Konami have commented, the reference to the Konami patents has led industry commentators to speculate that a licensing agreement must be in place between the two companies.

It appears that patent issues between Activision’s new Guitar Hero III title and Konami’s Guitar Freaks may have been resolved.

The 9 patents listed on the Official Xbox Magazine demo version of Guitar Hero III are split into two sets - one group relating to the MTV Drumscape electronic arcade machine (which patents were recently acquired by Activision in August, 2006), and a second set that are known to be owned by Konami. Though neither Activision or Konami have commented, the reference to the Konami patents has led industry commentators to speculate that a licensing agreement must be in place between the two companies.

Back in July we mentioned a Florida lawsuit by Eros LLC, who sells “virtual adult-themed objects” in Second Life (see previous post). Eros sued someone for selling unauthorized copies of its SL products.

A number of SL merchants, including Eros LLC, have recently filed a similar action in the US Federal Court against Thomas Simon (”Rase Kenzo” in SL) and other unidentified parties for making and selling unauthorized copies of the plaintiffs’ virtual products. The lawsuit is for copyright and trade-mark infringement.

Again, the mainstream media seems a bit perplexed by it all. “How can they sue over virtual property that doesn’t actually exist?” is a common refrain. But IP is all about protecting intangible rights, and the fact that the SL lawsuits are couched in understandable IP terms means that the lawsuits aren’t as crazy as some might think. Really this lawsuit is just an IP infringement lawsuit — it’s the setting that’s unusual, not the legal principles involved.

The more interesting issue, and the one that hasn’t really been addressed or resolved, is how do non-IP laws apply to virtual property? For example, do traditional causes of action like conversion or trespass to chattels apply to virtual property? Should they? If so, how? It’s questions like these that drive video game lawyers.

Game publisher Atari Inc. has announced that it is in danger of losing its licence to the Dragonball Z franchise.

In a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Atari disclosed that FUNimation Production, Ltd. (“FUNimation”) delivered a notice to Atari purporting to terminate the licences granted to Atari to distribute Dragonball Z titles.

FUNimation has reportedly accused Atari of breaching the terms of the licenses granted to it.

While Atari is disputing the purported termination, it acknowledges that if FUNimation is successful in terminating the licenses this could have a material adverse effect on Atari’s operations and financial position.

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been busy investigating video game companies including Take-Two Interactive, Activision and Electronic Arts. The investigation into EA’s stock option practices has now ended, and EA is no doubt relieved to learn that the SEC will not be recommending any enforcement action against SEC.

Word to all video game companies: before you set up your stock option plans (and in particular, if you’re thinking about backdating any options), talk to a securities lawyer first. And hey, whaddaya know? We have some