Game Site Legal Issues

daedelus

So I'm starting a game-review site.

There are a lot of game-review sites out there, and most of them contain things like screenshots, release dates, strategies, maps, etc. My question concerns the legality of using these kinds of things. Do I need a lawyer? (if so, the site won't be going up, heh) Is it legal to put up screenshots if the site has no way of making money? What if I put up an option to donate? I don't plan on offering ads anytime soon, and probably never will. The site could of course totally flop, but in case it doesn't and it develops a decent audience, I'd like to avoid legal issues. Any suggestions on who I could ask about this? Anyone out there a lawyer, or run a game review site? Any advice would be appreciated.

BomanTheBear

What would the draw be? By which I mean what could you offer that other sites don't already have?

Lewisham

Ignoring Boman's asinine question of why you want to write about games (newsflash: because he wants to, so that's fair enough)

Screenshots are considered to fall under Fair Use. I certainly had no problems when I got screenshots when I interned at a magazine. If you are leaking information, that's a different kettle of fish.

For almost everything, like screenshots, press releases, and quotes, you are covered under Fair Use. Most people would like you to attribute things where possible, which you should do, to be nice.

I am not sure about the extent of the DMCA in this area, but it might well cover you if you do have something a publisher finds objectionable: they'll always send a Cease and Desist before actually taking you to court. Unless you've leaked information. In which case, they might get very upset.

BomanTheBear

It's not an asinine question at all. He said game review site, not game blog. Depending on how big he intends to expand, he's going to need to pay for bandwidth or find an ISP that will sponsor him. To do that, he's going to need to do something different. I just skipped the middle steps and asked what I figured to be a question that will come up down the line.

daedelus

Thanks. I'll look up the Fair Use policies concerning this kind of thing. I was actually so ignorant I wasn't sure what to look up, heh. As for Boman's question, well... I'll put a link in my profile when the site comes up, and hopefully it'll become a smash. There are a few things I'd like to put on the site that I haven't found elsewhere, but I'm not sure what features I'll include yet.

Again, thanks for the advice. Now I just need to find a web designer and I'll be all set.

Edit: I know, it was a valid question to ask; it just wasn't the subject of the thread. I'll just say that those are things I've considered and I think I have some pretty good ideas. I guess we'll see. As for the bandwidth and domain name registration, I've already set money aside to start the site up and keep it going for a few months (provided I don't exceed bandwidth limits by a *lot*, which is unlikely). Wish me luck.

BomanTheBear

Alright, I'll be interested to see it. You have any idea of the timeframe?

DrFrylock

Lewisham wrote:

For almost everything, like screenshots, press releases, and quotes, you are covered under Fair Use. Most people would like you to attribute things where possible, which you should do, to be nice.

Disclaimer: IANAL.

Note: my advice applies to the United States only. Other countries, such as the UK and Canada, have similar but not identical laws.

Lewisham is basically right, but screenshots are not fair use per se. Fair use is a somewhat subjective judgment and the law and the courts have intentionally been less than 100% clear about what constitutes fair use and what doesn't. The Wikipedia article on it discusses some of the indicators of fair use. The only way to determine absolutely whether a use of copyrighted material is fair use is by taking it to court. However, there are certain things that have been historically protected as fair use, and therefore bringing a lawsuit about them would be silly and counterproductive.

The use of a screenshot in a review (even for commercial purposes) is likely Fair Use, because criticism and education have traditionally been two well-supported indicators of Fair Use, and you're only using a small portion of the work to illustrate your point. If you posted, for example, the entire code of the game for download, that would almost certainly NOT be fair use (even if accompanied by a review). The fact that your site would be noncommercial is a third indicator, but again this isn't strictly necessary. Likewise, just because your site is noncommercial doesn't mean you have free reign to do what you want.

As Lewisham said, posting screenshots of an unfinished game, or leaking information is a different situation and that's a whole other mess. At that point you may also be running afoul of Trade Secret law, which is a completely different area of intellectual property law.

Do you need a lawyer? No, probably not. But again, nothing is ever 100% certain here. There is nothing stopping some company from sending you a C&D letter or from filing suit against you (although the odds of them succeeding would be very unlikely). Nonetheless, some unscrupulous people and companies have used these mechanisms to attempt to silence critics. These uses of lawsuits as intimidation tactics are often known as SLAPP lawsuits, and some jurisdictions (e.g., California) have enacted anti-SLAPP legislation that lets you basically stop the suit cold and recover your attorneys' fees with special motions done early in the process. The Chilling Effects Clearinghouse has some more information about this. But we all take risks every time we get in a car and it doesn't stop us from driving to work.

daedelus

Yeah, been reviewing wikipedia's stuff on fair use and the implications and ramifications of leaning on it too heavily. A further complication is that I'd like to be able to put up a link for people to donate to the site at some point. I'm not sure if that makes it a commercial venture or not, but I'm inclined to think it does. Maybe this warrants more research. I was hoping to get the site launched by the end of March, but it might be later now; I'd really like to do this right. A C&D in the first month would basically kill the idea. Thanks for pointing out the potential hazards, Frylock. Looks like I have a bit more research to do.

Still, it's going to happen.

Lewisham

Why would a C&D kill your idea? You take down the offending shot, and move on.

Just use screenshots that publishers actually release.

I've interned for a magazine, we didn't do anything in regards to copyright on screenshots. We took them with our capture software, and published them if the build we had was one allowed to be shown.

You are worrying about this far more than you need to.