Is it necessary to license your game?

What do you mean, "license my game"? License to whom or from whom, to do what?

It is implicit that everything you are the author of, you are also the exclusive license owner of.

You need to rather license onto yourself things you are not the author of, what would rather be the creations of your music/sound composer for example.

The authorships and licenses/exclusive licenses attributions, are also the topics to solve in front of all potential law suings. You need to document, that if you contracted someone, that he has been understood with license/exclusive license attribution onto you for the particular creation for the compensation delt.

So carefully license things you incorporate to your game that has been crated by someone else, there are cases of hobby/indie teams unable to release a game becouse some ex-workers left the team and does not alllow for usage of their work anymore.

Clarification is needed. Your composer tells you to license your game, and you didn't do that with your previous one.

That means that you made a game and...

• didn't show it to anyone? That is, you did not publish/distribute it?
• gave it away for free, and didn't make mention of a license?
• sold it, but didn't specify a license?
• something different?

Or, the composer wants you to buy a license for the music he made for you?

These are all very different things. Some are more harmless, some are mostly harmless, and some are outright troublesome.

For example, simply not distributing your game is harmless, it's just a shame you made it and nobody gets to see it.

Distributing a game for free without a license is "mostly" harmless. For the most part, no evil things will happen except you don't get any money (which you didn't ask for anyway) and people can do just what they want with your software (they can, and will, do what they want anyway, so who cares!). Be however aware that it is still possible to ask for damages (for moronic reasons such as fitness for an implied use, and for other more valid reasons) in some countries with cowboy laws, even if you gave it away for free. Which means in the most extreme, most perverse possible case, someone might infringe you for causing that meltdown in the city's nuclear powerplant because everybody was busy playing your pong game instead of responding to blinking red lights. Or a car driver might blame an accident on you because he was too busy looking at his phone with your game on it.

Now, selling a game without a license (or rather, selling the game) is another thing. This is very bad. You do not normally sell software, never, not ever (well, except when a big $$$ company buys it from you). Instead, you sell a license, which is a limited (usually non-exclusive) right to use that software. Use, not own.

This is usually explicitly stated in the lengthy lawyerese of the license agreement, and often part of the "by doing XYZ you agree..." clause on the sticker on the shrinkwrap (or above the download link), too.

If you don't do that, someone might argue that they bought the software (that is, all rights to it) instead. Which, although every sane person would agree that this is nonsensical, is technically true. Now, in states with cowboy laws, this would allow someone to successfully draw you to court (and win the lawsuit) because you later sold the game (which you no longer owned) to someone else.

What do you mean, "license my game"? License to whom or from whom, to do what?

Clarification is needed. Your composer tells you to license your game, and you didn't do that with your previous one.

That means that you made a game and...

• didn't show it to anyone? That is, you did not publish/distribute it?
• gave it away for free, and didn't make mention of a license?
• sold it, but didn't specify a license?
• something different?

Apologies for being vague guys, this is something i wasn't taught about or knew a lot about, i'd appreciate if you could be patient with me.

The last game was 'Only If' that i gave away for free on Steam, it is decently popular and used a few contents from (ex: famous animes & popular pop songs without permission) I had no financial gain from it & after many millions of views, there was no harm done. (it was unethical but http://bit.ly/1uWoVoN)

@Tom Sloper, Thats exactly what i thought, at max i'd license my game just to keep the title/product from being manipulated, i can't seem to understand any further just yet.

My emails aren't fully professional yet and i worry i seemed 'needy for the track'. So from him asking about the licensing of the game like that i assume he may attempt to ask about making profit out of monetization. Im not entirely sure Phil Fish handled it correctly.

Initially, I was curious if there were fundamental requirements i didn't know about when distributing my game, and the email worried me.

Thanks for the responses by far guys.

Thats exactly what i thought, at max i'd license my game just to keep the title/product from being manipulated, i can't seem to understand any further just yet.

My emails aren't fully professional yet and i worry i seemed 'needy for the track'. So from him asking about the licensing of the game like that i assume he may attempt to ask about making profit out of monetization.

You're using the wrong word - "license" is not what you mean. Licenses don't prevent things*, they do the opposite: They give permission to do things. Your Driver's License gives you permission to drive a car. A Liquor License gives you permission to sell alcohol. A Gun License gives you permission to own and carry a gun in public.

*I'm simplifying the explanation here. License agreements can prevent things, but mostly through threat of removal of the permission granted.

Without using legal terms, and speaking only plain english, what is it you are wanting to do? What is it you are wanting to prevent other people from doing? Be specific please, using english only.

The last game was 'Only If' that i gave away for free on Steam, it is decently popular and used a few contents from (ex: famous animes & popular pop songs without permission) I had no financial gain from it & after many millions of views, there was no harm done.

Just because you made zero profit doesn't mean other companies suffered zero loss.

At an extreme example, if the band U2 was about to release a major new album, and I copied the album and manufactured a disc and mailed it for free to everyone in the United States, they would suffer a major loss in sales even though I didn't gain any money.

As another example, if U2 released a popular song, and I took that song and attached it to philosophy, politics, morals, or any content the song author disapproves of, people may associate that song with what it was attached to (without U2 even knowing I attached it to anything), which is almost the same as if I said, "Murdering babies is great! - U2 and Bono approve of this message" and posted it on public billboards.

There was no financial gain for you, but there could very well be harm done to others - it's just incredibly hard to detect and measure. Also, you did benefit from using their property - you gained pats on the back, good feelings, pleasure at releasing a product, popularity and recognition from 'many millions of views', etc... So even though you had no "financial gain", you still had non-financial gain. And that non-financial gain may even turn into financial gain when you release your next product, based off of any recognition from the first product ("From the makers of 'Only If' comes a new game!").

In law, whether or not I made direct, immediate, financial benefit isn't the only thing that matters. And whether or not I think no harm was done, in my opinion, by my definition of harm, matters even less.

I'm not saying this to browbeat you or make you feel bad, but because you said it was "unethical", in such a casual way, that I thought you might want to understand why it's a problem legally. It's not merely in the legal system just for fun, it actually has some semblance of sense behind it.

A composer who has much experience in the films industry and none in the games industry insists that i license the current game I'm developing.

it is decently popular and used a few contents from (ex: famous animes & popular pop songs without permission)

Based on these, looks like he's using unlicensed music.

Don't do that.

If all you got was some warnings and told not to do it again, consider yourself lucky.

I had no financial gain from it & after many millions of views, there was no harm done.

Ahh, the Robin Hood defense. I stole from the rich and gave it to the people without profiting myself, so everything is good.

That defense doesn't work. You'll still be found liable if they push back legally. If your actions cause damages you can be liable for those damages.

If the can document their sales dropped by $1M/month because of your unlicensed use of their product, the courts can demand you repay those damages. If you don't have that kind of money, expect to have assets seized, wages garnished, and your credit ruined. Debts for restitution and willful/malicious injury generally cannot be discharged through bankruptcy, so you'll be facing those debts for as long as the law allows.

A composer [...] insists that i license the current game I'm developing.

The composer is correct. Either license the music or don't use it. Don't use other people's property without permission.

Consequences can be severe, including both civil penalties (money) and criminal penalties (jail time).

I'm not saying this to browbeat you or make you feel bad, but because you said it was "unethical", in such a casual way, that I thought you might want to understand why it's a problem legally. It's not merely in the legal system just for fun, it actually has some semblance of sense behind it.

Not at all, I've a habit of speaking light heartedly most of the time.

Appreciate the feedback, learnt something of good value today.

Ahh, the Robin Hood defense. I stole from the rich and gave it to the people without profiting myself, so everything is good.

Apologies if i may have conveyed my words the wrong way, It merely confused me earlier when the composer vaguely asked for me to license my game for a reason i couldn't understand.

Thanks for the feedback frob.

The main confusion here comes from that you use "licence" incorrectly.

What your composer asks you to do is not to "license your game" (well he might, but then he too isn't using the word correctly), but he ask you to "licence the music (for your game)"

Licensing immaterial goods like music and software means getting permission to use it.

Apologies if i may have conveyed my words the wrong way, It merely confused me earlier when the composer vaguely asked for me to license my game for a reason i couldn't understand.

Well, the thing is that what you've been doing is totally illegal. The question is not about licensing your game, but about licensing the stuff that you use in your game.

You probably didn't mean any harm, but that doesn't make a difference. Not meaning any harm doesn't protect you from prosecution. You've been lucky since you neither went to jail nor did you have to pay 50 million in damages. Either way, your composer friend's advice is a truly good one. You should most definitively license what you use (or only use freely available material, or generate it yourself).

Copying a few sounds or images looks like a crime without victim and is easy enough to do (and it really doesn't hurt anyone, does it?), but it is a thing that can easily screw up your entire life and get you into a situation where you can just as well buy a piece of rope and hang yourself. Don't risk that.

Well, the thing is that what you've been doing is totally illegal. The question is not about licensing your game, but about licensing the stuff that you use in your game.

The Soundtrack was licensed to the game, Graphical Assets were bought from developers who hoped other devs would use them in their game, additional commissions were paid for, Additional music was added with permission, and from those musicians 2 tracks were remixed/altered versions of famous songs that had a good few thousand plays that SoundCloud seemed to not have had an issue with.

Additional artwork were fan art (or traces) of famous animes that were also used with permission. I don't understand why they may remix original content with no issues, but when i used (already altered) content by themselves with permission i may

buy a piece of rope and hang yourself.

The original question was if there was some kind of global license for all game developers that i might've not known about, the question is already answered.

The Soundtrack was licensed to the game, Graphical Assets were bought from developers who hoped other devs would use them in their game, additional commissions were paid for, Additional music was added with permission, and from those musicians 2 tracks were remixed/altered versions of famous songs that had a good few thousand plays that SoundCloud seemed to not have had an issue with.

Additional artwork were fan art (or traces) of famous animes that were also used with permission. I don't understand why they may remix original content with no issues, but when i used (already altered) content by themselves with permission i may

This does not agree with your earlier posts where you wrote you used "famous animes & popular pop songs without permission"

It merely confused me earlier when the composer vaguely asked for me to license my game for a reason i couldn't understand.

There is no ambiguity or vague situation in real life.

You contact the composer, the corporation, or the appropriate rights-holding organization. You license a specific thing for a specific purpose, for a specific number or range of uses.

For example you might want to use a specific catchy popular song, so you get a license through ASCAP (clicky). For example, you might have an agreement that requires $0.10 per game sold, or perhaps $2500 for 0-250,000 gameplays on your website for up to five years, or whatever.

That results in a written contract and a transfer of money, and the contract gets filed in a drawer.

Again it is absolutely clear: You either have the written contract with the rights holder in your possession or you do not. There is no ambiguity, there is no "I think it might be licensed", there is no case of "I think it is legal".

Even if that document is a printout from the original creator's web site where they declare it is placed in the public domain, you absolutely need that paper document showing what is covered and that you have rights to do it.

If you do not have the contract for your "famous animes & popular pop songs" you mentioned, you are likely in violation of various IP laws. Penalties for infringement can be severe, including prison time.

This does not agree with your earlier posts where you wrote you used "famous animes & popular pop songs without permission"

I'll re-qoute,

Additional music was added with permission, and from those musicians 2 tracks were remixed/altered versions of famous songs that had a good few thousand plays that SoundCloud seemed to not have had an issue with.

Additional artwork were fan art (or traces) of famous animes that were also used with permission. I don't understand why they may remix original content with no issues, but when i used (already altered) content by themselves with permission i may

The popular content was altered without permission by others (fan art/remixes) on sites like DeviantArt & Soundcloud.

I've used the remixed content they've created with their permission but they haven't asked permission to alter the original content.

Keeping my light hearted behaviour in mind, i haven't assumed i'd need to get so in depth. I was proven wrong. I made a mistake in being vague.

I understand what you're saying, no need reinforce, thanks for the advice.

I've used the remixed content they've created with their permission but they haven't asked permission to alter the original content.

So, someone took popular music and remixing it and you want to take this remix and use it, right ? You ask the one who do the remix and he told you, that you could use the remix, but you need to license the original music, right ?

There are some issues:

1. The one who remix the original music can get in trouble, because he derived work of content without the legal permission to do so, he can be sued for this.

2. If you use the remixed content, you are using derived work of content without the legal permission, that is, you can be sued for this.

3. If you have been sued for this, you can try to sue the one who remix the music.

4. The dilemma of the one who remixed the sound is, that once you carry his remix into the public, the chances to get sued increases.

Keeping my light hearted behaviour in mind

Sorry, but ignorance is not execuse, you can get in real trouble, especially if you don't own a license or contract with the one who do the remix and for using the original music.

The popular content was altered without permission by others (fan art/remixes) on sites like DeviantArt & Soundcloud.

I've used the remixed content they've created with their permission but they haven't asked permission to alter the original content.

Keeping my light hearted behaviour in mind, i haven't assumed i'd need to get so in depth. I was proven wrong. I made a mistake in being vague.

I understand what you're saying, no need reinforce, thanks for the advice.

If you buy a stolen cellphone or car, what do you expect will happen when the original owner approaches you about it? No matter what you paid or what contract you got from the thief, the car or phone is still property of the original owner. If he goes before court, you will be forced to return his property, and maybe also need to pay an additional fine for buying stolen goods.

As in ashamans answer above, you can TRY to sue the thief.... but while the thief will also be punished, most probably you will not get your money back.

Stolen IP is stolen IP. If you use other peoples IP without their permission, you are infringing, no matter if somebody else did the crime and you now just use the fruits of this crime for your own good. You are still infringing.

The creators of this images or music tracks most probably didn't get into trouble because their work didn't reach a big enough audience for the original IP holder to notice. Could you get away because your work will not get enough fans and nobody notices? Of course. Do you really want to be caught in a tough decision between failure to reach an audience or risk of being sued?

There is only one thing to do, the right thing: don't use unlicensed IP, be it music, or images, or stories. If you cannot live without it, try to get permission to use it, and pay whatever the original IP holder asks you to pay. If you cannot afford it, cannot get permission (because the IP holder doesn't want to sell his IP to you for example), or do not want to go through all this trouble, come up with your own stuff.

Its simple really. You can create a game about a ninja village, battling other ninja villages, and make the hero a red haired young boy. Nobody can patent or trademark broad story concept, nobody can claim the word "Ninja"....

If you call your hero Naruto, use the same village and clan names as in the anime/manga of the same name, or make your hero too similar (ninetails stuck in him, yaddayadda), you are infringing someones IP.

You can use much more than you think... "Ninetailed foxes" are actually chines / japanese folklore, feel free to use that as long as your story does not resemble Naruto too much. You can take a famous symbol and alter it a little bit, and you might be good to go... BUT: nobody can guarantee you you will get away with it if you walk that thin line between looking very similar and obvious plagiarism.

AFAIK apple has sued many companies over their lifetime for using a Logo with an apple. Most of the time they didn't had to sue them, they just told them "change it, or else...". In the end it doesn't really matter if they would or even could win this case. Almost no company could survivea legal war of attrition against the company with the biggest cash reservers in human history.

And yes, I brought up Naruto because this thread is like THE MIRROR IMAGE of a similar thread we had in these forum some weeks ago... which was about stolen IP from Naruto if I remember correctly.

TL;DR: Just come up with your own Stuff. Don't infringe on other peoples IP.

Sorry, but ignorance is not execuse, you can get in real trouble, especially if you don't own a license or contract with the one who do the remix and for using the original music.

I took and still would take full responsibility of my actions. Regardless of ignorance or not.

Keeping my light hearted behaviour in mind, i haven't assumed i'd need to get so in depth. I was proven wrong. I made a mistake in being vague.

The reason i mentioned that in particular to him is because i felt frob was accusing me of dishonesty.

The thread went from asking if there was some kind of global license for distributing games to 'This kid is trying to use other people's content and get away with it'

If you are using a remix of music, and you have properly licensed it, then your license should include a section about indemnification, and a section assuring ownership of rights.

That part of the written contract you've got with the remix group ensures that if you get sued for IP infringement, you can immediately turn around and recover those costs from the group who told you they had the rights.

Again, this is an area of written contracts, of signed papers rather than email, and an area where you need an actual business lawyer.

A composer who has much experience in the films industry and none in the games industry insists that i license the current game I'm developing.

Any thoughts?

Trying to get back to the original question.

I believe what you meant to ask is "the composer wants me to license the music he writes for the game."

When you hire a composer, there are 2 possibilities:

1) you pay him/her, and then you own the music s/he writes for you

2) you pay him/her, but he continues to own the music s/he writes for you, but they give you permission to use the music in your game

#1 is called "Work for Hire." (you own the music)

#2 is called "licensing the music." (you are given permission to use the music)

Obviously it costs more for #1 than #2, because you get more (the ownership of the music)

In small indy games that don't pay a lot, licensing is not uncommon. And in small films it is very common.

So my thought is that what the composer is asking for is not unusual, but you should understand exactly what it is you are getting for paying him/her.

Thanks for the info bschmidt!