Square is risking BIG lawsuit with pictomancer...

Troll thread do be trollin'

You are not their legal team. I'm sure they researched this just fine. Stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistakeNot

Good thing your opinion about this is completely irrelevant then.

---

Not like you lawyer either?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DamianFatale

You are not their legal team. I'm sure they researched this just fine. Stop.

---

Yes duh, they researched Lost Ark classes to copy Artist design..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Not like you lawyer either?

---

I am not a lawyer, no. So it is not like my opinion would matter much either.
But, unlike you I have at least some knowledge of how copyright law works, so my opinions on this subject are far more likely than yours to be correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistakeNot

I am not a lawyer, no. So it is not like my opinion would matter much either.
But, unlike you I have at least some knowledge of how copyright law works, so my opinions on this subject are far more likely than yours to be correct.

---

Unlike you, I've done 10 hours of research to compare notes and analyze similarity of Artist and Pictomancer, and the "History" of Nixon's suing. (Nixon has more than 20 lawsuits).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Unlike you, I've done 10 hours of research to compare notes and analyze similarity of Artist and Pictomancer, and the "History" of Nixon's suing. (Nixon has more than 20 lawsuits).

---

Who the heck is Nixon? You keep mentioning that name like some mantra. A 1 minute search shows absolutely zero connection between Lost Ark and this non-entity.

Didn't SE face a big 'ol lawsuit for Fiend? They pretty much ripped it from Powerman 5000's World's Collide? What exactly happened here?

FF entire history lacks originality, but that by itself is not a crime. There's nothing wrong with putting your own spin on an existing cliche, or stereotype. But that's not the same as straight up ripping off someone else's idea. Had it not been pointed out, I would have thought the LoA artwork on the first page was associated with pictomancer. But this comes from a view of not knowing LoA existed previous to this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Didn't SE face a big 'ol lawsuit for Fiend? They pretty much ripped it from Powerman 5000's World's Collide? What exactly happened here?

FF entire history lacks originality, but that by itself is not a crime. There's nothing wrong with putting your own spin on an existing cliche, or stereotype. But that's not the same as straight up ripping off someone else's idea. Had it not been pointed out, I would have thought the LoA artwork on the first page was associated with pictomancer. But this comes from a view of not knowing LoA existed previous to this thread.

---

Please read the whole topic before responding. You wouldve learnt that this is a troll and you just fell for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Unlike you, I've done 10 hours of research to compare notes and analyze similarity of Artist and Pictomancer, and the "History" of Nixon's suing. (Nixon has more than 20 lawsuits).

---

I have indeed not wasted my time on such a pointless pursuit. Mere similarities does not constitute copyright infringement. As for number of lawsuits - anyone can sue anyone for anything, so that does not mean much.

If this "Nixon" you keep blathering about has competent lawyers, then they won't sue FF over Pictomancer since they would know they have no chance of winning such a lawsuit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Not like you lawyer either?

---

Well, I am. And I took courses in both US Copyright law and International Copyright Law when in law school (a T14 law school, if that matters to you).
Two points I want to make:

1. You cannot copyright an idea or a concept, only expression, and even duplicate expression may not be actionable under copyright law, depending on ... a lot of things.
2. Copyright law is subtle and complicated, and even lawyers who don't specialize in it should leave it to the lawyers who do.

And because my expertise is patent law, not copyright, and even more importantly because I do not know the dispositive facts about this particular alleged copying, that's all I'm going to say about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patesaupesto

Please read the whole topic before responding. You wouldve learnt that this is a troll and you just fell for it.

---

I've actually been around awhile. Perhaps not as much recently as in previous years, but still enough to know that the OP has no love for Pictomancer and is constantly called a troll for his views, and an unpopular view does not necessarily make someone a troll. Especially if it triggers overly sensitive people with too much time on their hands.

But for the sake of argument let's say OP is a huge troll. This thread has reached 10 pages. Mine being in the latter half. Why did you choose mine to single out? Especially considering that it asks a genuine question that places accountability on SE for copyright infringement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

I've actually been around awhile. Perhaps not as much recently as in previous years, but still enough to know that the OP has no love for Pictomancer and is constantly called a troll for his views, and an unpopular view does not necessarily make someone a troll. Especially if it triggers overly sensitive people with too much time on their hands.

But for the sake of argument let's say OP is a huge troll. This thread has reached 10 pages. Mine being in the latter half. Why did you choose mine to single out? Especially considering that it asks a genuine question that places accountability on SE for copyright infringement?

---

It's a troll thread when it's obvious bait from someone who is already well known for posting stuff like this. If you're having trouble deciding, you can check the OP's character and they will likely only have 1 DoM/DoW at 90 but full DoL/DoH 90s.

As far as the content of the thread, there's no actual genuine anything. It's already been pointed out that Relm from FFVI and Pictomancer from both Bravely Default II and Brave Exvius Season 3 all predate the artist class from LoA. There's been whole threads in this forum asking for pictomancer to be a playable job that are older than the artist class from LoA. If anything, they would have more likely taken the idea from SE instead of the other way around.

Art magic has been around in media for a long long time anyway. You can't copyright throwing fireballs so I don't understand how you could copyright paint magic.

time to call for the man . . .

https://media.tenor.com/ZhPXIXnMc4YA...com-marvel.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

Who the heck is Nixon? You keep mentioning that name like some mantra. A 1 minute search shows absolutely zero connection between Lost Ark and this non-entity.

---

It's the Korean game company... they own maple stories, lost ark, and deep dungeon fighter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Didn't SE face a big 'ol lawsuit for Fiend? They pretty much ripped it from Powerman 5000's World's Collide? What exactly happened here?

FF entire history lacks originality, but that by itself is not a crime. There's nothing wrong with putting your own spin on an existing cliche, or stereotype. But that's not the same as straight up ripping off someone else's idea. Had it not been pointed out, I would have thought the LoA artwork on the first page was associated with pictomancer. But this comes from a view of not knowing LoA existed previous to this thread.

---

Exactly, in the law court. They will show a jury an Artist and a Pictomancer, and ask: who is who, when the jury all fail SE will be in DEEP "Trouble".,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bun_Vivant

Well, I am. And I took courses in both US Copyright law and International Copyright Law when in law school (a T14 law school, if that matters to you).
Two points I want to make:

1. You cannot copyright an idea or a concept, only expression, and even duplicate expression may not be actionable under copyright law, depending on ... a lot of things.
2. Copyright law is subtle and complicated, and even lawyers who don't specialize in it should leave it to the lawyers who do.

And because my expertise is patent law, not copyright, and even more importantly because I do not know the dispositive facts about this particular alleged copying, that's all I'm going to say about it.

---

You can self study law on the internet, there's a thing called online research, did u know? I researched into Nixon's lawsuits, and let me tell you, they are AGGRESSIVE, and it doesn't matter if it's win or lose, it will drag Square into legal trouble and distract them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

You can self study law on the internet, there's a thing called online research, did u know? I researched into Nixon's lawsuits, and let me tell you, they are AGGRESSIVE, and it doesn't matter if it's win or lose, it will drag Square into legal trouble and distract them.

---

Congregations on your Google degree! May the colorful crayon doodles never fade!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

You can self study law on the internet, there's a thing called online research, did u know? I researched into Nixon's lawsuits, and let me tell you, they are AGGRESSIVE, and it doesn't matter if it's win or lose, it will drag Square into legal trouble and distract them.

---

It doesn't matter how aggressive they are, you can not overcome copyright law with aggression.

Quote:

---

Who the heck is Nixon?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

You can self study law on the internet,there's a thing called online research

---

Hello, professor Google Search, and my esteemed keyboard lawyer. Pleasure to meet you. Here's your 100th reply for your honest work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Unlike you, I've done 10 hours of research

---

Yet you still spelled it wrong. It's Nexon. It seems your ten hours of research has gone straight to trash can, professor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Nixon put a huge copyright disclaimer

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Yes, but Nixon has sued many people before

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

the "History" of Nixon's suing. (Nixon has more than 20 lawsuits).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

I researched into Nixon's lawsuits

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

BIG lawsuit coming from Nixon. Since Nixon owns LoA

---

https://i.imgur.com/4mzaxKE.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

BIG lawsuit coming from Nixon. Since Nixon owns LoA

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

It's the Korean game company... they own maple stories, lost ark, and deep dungeon fighter

---

Do they really? Are you sure?

Weird.

The information presented to me by your trusted google search tells me otherwise. Lost Ark is developed and published by Smilegate. Amazon is the publisher for western countries.
What does Nexon have anything to do with Lost Ark anyway?


Pretty sure a knowledgeable copyright expert like you can enlighten me as to why Nexon isn't on the list.

https://i.imgur.com/1Td17jz.pnghttps://i.imgur.com/6zKuXfP.png

https://i.imgur.com/SZNcWkF.png
https://i.imgur.com/oNGOS7F.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

You can self study law on the internet, there's a thing called online research, did u know?

---

You dismissed someone else's remarks because they weren't a lawyer.
Why shouldn't people dismiss your remarks for that same reason?

Unless, of course, you care to cite the sections of the pertinent statutes that support your allegation, why those statutes from that nation apply, and the relevant court decisions interpreting them ? Surely if you're well versed in copyright law, you can do that, right? In the US, it will be in Title 17 of the United States Code, but it has not been established that US copyright law applies to your allegations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

Exactly, in the law court. They will show a jury an Artist and a Pictomancer, and ask: who is who, when the jury all fail SE will be in DEEP "Trouble".

---

Nope, that's not how copyright law works, at least, not in any signatories to the Berne Convention that I'm aware of. You're making me doubt that your "study law on the internet" was at all productive. Did it include reading a court's opinion in a successful suit for copying a class in a video game? Does such a precedent even exist? I didn't encounter it in law school, but that was quite a while ago.

Hey! Did you know you can’t copyright game mechanics? Wild, isn’t it!?

This includes board games, video games, etc etc. while you can copyright UI, art assets, etc..the concept of “character that uses painting to attack” is simply not a copyright-able thing. They could copyright how that specific mechanic is used, if it is a novel and specific thing…but it ain’t.

Examples outside, you could make a Tetris clone as long as it was different in some way (not having the exact same pieces, different shapes or grid size). It’s the same reason why we had both Doom and Wolfenstein. Or why command and conquer is essentially a Dune clone.

If enough has been done to make it distinct, it’s not infringing on an “idea”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kaynide

Hey! Did you know you can’t copyright game mechanics? Wild, isn’t it!?
... It’s the same reason why we had both Doom and Wolfenstein.

---

Not to disagree with your point, but "Doom and Wolfenstein" is a bad example, since they were both made by id Software.

I'm not sure which is funnier: The dude trying to turn Pictomancer into a copyright issue or the people who are still taking him seriously in their replies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bun_Vivant

Not to disagree with your point, but "Doom and Wolfenstein" is a bad example, since they were both made by id Software.

---

Good call; Quake and Unreal are probably better comparisons.


Or Lucasart’s Outlaws from the 90s (doom, but cowboys)

Why is there 11 pages on a troll thread...

But no, there's nothing there. It's literally based off a character from FF6, from 1994.

This isn't *entirely* true. It's not a copyright, but Square Enix, for example, has a patent on the ATB battle system.

This thread in general is ridiculous, though. OP has no idea what he's talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

It's the Korean game company... they own maple stories, lost ark, and deep dungeon fighter

---

Congratulations. You managed to identify Nexon, the producer of MapleStories. However, you failed to identify the actual producer of Lost Ark, which is definitely not Nexon. Smilegate RPG/Tripod Studio and Amazon Games own Lost Ark.

You've managed to ignore this for over a week now: https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...ancer.../page3

Give it a rest. Your ten hours of Google-Fu were worthless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

https://i.ibb.co/nmFhsBB/IMG-1464.webp

https://i.ibb.co/pQtvK9t/IMG-1465.jpg

I don't know if they took inspiration from Artist from LoA, but I'm worried about BIG lawsuit coming from Nixon. Since Nixon owns LoA and has been very aggressive about lawsuit before. The only saving grace is that they are in Korea and Square is in Japan so it will be harder for them to sue. I think Square made a huge mistake because Pictomancer is too like Artist... If Nixon sues Square successfully they may need to delete Pictomancer from the game as a settlement, so hold off on leveling it for now... Wait and see.

---

Not really, it is an old concept, and that is all you can say about that and if anything, then they are going to lose the case and that is all that can be said about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

Give it a rest. Your ten hours of Google-Fu were worthless.

---

He got you to give him attention. That's all he was ever really after with this thread anyway.

Just found out this old MMO called World of Warcraft (never heard of it) has Warrior and Paladin classes in it. Is Square in trouble? Are they going to be sued by Buzzard Entertainment (creator of Wow)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emitans

Just found out this old MMO called World of Warcraft (never heard of it) has Warrior and Paladin classes in it. Is Square in trouble? Are they going to be sued by Buzzard Entertainment (creator of Wow)

---

All the games from Baldurs Gate and similar from the past also has Paladin in them too... also BARD and Rogue.... uh... they don't complain either.... something with old folklore about Dark Knights too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emitans

Just found out this old MMO called World of Warcraft (never heard of it) has Warrior and Paladin classes in it. Is Square in trouble? Are they going to be sued by Buzzard Entertainment (creator of Wow)

---

I know you are just tongue-in-cheek, but anyway....

Paladin as a class goes back to the original "Greyhawk" supplement for Dungeons&Dragons, from 1975. But that version of paladins was in turn heavily inspired by the novel "Three Hearts and Three Lions" by Poul Anderson, from 1961.
But the word "paladin" and the whole idea of them can be traced back to at least the middle-ages, and originally referred to the legendary Twelve Peers at Charlemagne's court, and to the knights of the round table from Arthurian mythology.

As for "Warrior" .... that concept has existed for at least as long as written history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

I don't know if they took inspiration from Artist from LoA, but I'm worried about BIG lawsuit coming from Nixon. Since Nixon owns LoA and has been very aggressive about lawsuit before. The only saving grace is that they are in Korea and Square is in Japan so it will be harder for them to sue. I think Square made a huge mistake because Pictomancer is too like Artist... If Nixon sues Square successfully they may need to delete Pictomancer from the game as a settlement, so hold off on leveling it for now... Wait and see.

---

So first of all, you misspelled Nexon. Second of all, Nexon has nothing to do with Lost Ark (actually didn't know it was abbreviated LoA).
Third, who cares? A paintbrush-wielding artist class isn't exactly a novel concept.

Can't wait for Dynasty Warriors (Samurai Warriors? One of em) to get in on this, since they have a person who draws magical attacks with a paintbrush too!

Gonna be a paintbrush free for all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bun_Vivant

You dismissed someone else's remarks because they weren't a lawyer.
Why shouldn't people dismiss your remarks for that same reason?

Unless, of course, you care to cite the sections of the pertinent statutes that support your allegation, why those statutes from that nation apply, and the relevant court decisions interpreting them ? Surely if you're well versed in copyright law, you can do that, right? In the US, it will be in Title 17 of the United States Code, but it has not been established that US copyright law applies to your allegations.



Nope, that's not how copyright law works, at least, not in any signatories to the Berne Convention that I'm aware of. You're making me doubt that your "study law on the internet" was at all productive. Did it include reading a court's opinion in a successful suit for copying a class in a video game? Does such a precedent even exist? I didn't encounter it in law school, but that was quite a while ago.

---

Copyright applies to the entire game. When you sign the game you have to agree to their EUAL, which means you AGREE it's copyrighted...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

Congratulations. You managed to identify Nexon, the producer of MapleStories. However, you failed to identify the actual producer of Lost Ark, which is definitely not Nexon. Smilegate RPG/Tripod Studio and Amazon Games own Lost Ark.

You've managed to ignore this for over a week now: https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...ancer.../page3

Give it a rest. Your ten hours of Google-Fu were worthless.

---

You're wrong. Nixon owns Lost Ark. Nixon is a "Publisher", which means they have many subsidiaiaries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emitans

Just found out this old MMO called World of Warcraft (never heard of it) has Warrior and Paladin classes in it. Is Square in trouble? Are they going to be sued by Buzzard Entertainment (creator of Wow)

---

I explain for the one billion trillion quintillion millionth time XD

Warrior and Paladin are in the creative "Commons" so they can be used by anyone because copyright expire and turn into creative commons after a long time. Artist is not though since it's "New", so it isn't creative "Commons" yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea-Wolf

You're wrong. Nixon owns Lost Ark. Nixon is a "Publisher", which means they have many subsidiaiaries.

---

Nixon was a president of the United States the game publisher your talking about is nexon and no one owns copyrights to a class in a game that wields a paintbrush. Rem from ff6 used a paintbrush as a weapon maybe square enix should sue nexon if you think someone should get sued.

Why is there 12 pages over this nonsense?!? (i know it's ironic for me to post this here)
This is pointless.