The Rage Over Streets of Rage Remake

-- By AustinLeach - 25 Oct 2011

Introduction

The Copyright Act of 1790 gave exclusive control of works to their creators for 14 years with 14-year renewals. Due to corporate special interest groups, copyright extensions have culminated in The Copyright Act of 1998, with copyrights generally lasting for the life of the author plus 70 years, and up to 120 years for anonymous works, pseudonymous works, and works for hire. Arguments favoring laxer copyright laws center on increasing the public good and recognizing there is no economic value to a work a few years after creation. This article supports laxer intellectual property laws by focusing on the videogame software industry and looking at SEGA’s threats to a fan-made freeware PC game based on SEGA’s Streets of Rage franchise.

Background

Streets of Rage (SOR) is a videogame released in the US in 1991 that spawned two sequels in 1992 and 1994. The games, originally developed by SEGA for its Genesis console, have since been ported unchanged to other devices as late as 2011. SOR, an action game in the “beat ‘em up” genre, has a loose plot told mostly through gameplay images of three characters who combat the crime syndicate plaguing their city. The sequels feature slightly enhanced gameplay and new characters, with SOR 3's plot expanded to feature cut-scenes with written dialogue between levels.

Streets of Rage Remake (Remake) is a game for PC created by developer BoMbErLiNk? and was offered on www.bombergames.net. The project, which commenced in 2003 and was released in 2011, is not reverse engineered and contains no code from the original games. It was developed based on "visual interpretation, logic, and comparison of states." The game is free to the public, but its resources (the custom sprites, remixes, artwork) belong to their respective artists. Remake looks and plays like a modern throwback to the original games, with updated models and remixed music. Its original story is told through cut-scenes resembling SOR 3.

According to BoMbErLiNk, Bombergames contacted SEGA about the project in 2007 by email and sent a formal letter notifying them of the game's development. Within a week of Remake's release, SEGA issued a cease and desist letter. In [[http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-04/13/sega-shuts-down-streets-of-rage-remake][statements] to videogame websites, SEGA expressed its need to protect is IP rights.

Bombergames has complied, and the game is "officially" unavailable.

The IP at Stake

Videogames may be covered by the traditional forms of intellectual property—copyright, trademark, patent, and trade secret—but only copyright and trademark apply to Remake. Copyright could protect the code, the resulting images for the characters and backgrounds as they appear on screen, the music, the sound effects, and the story. Trademark may also protect the "Streets of Rage" brand, the images and likenesses of SOR's characters and game backgrounds, and perhaps any attributable sound effects.

SEGA has strong infringement claims against Bombergames under current law. However, is the public good served when SEGA seeks to sit on a franchise for 20 years without producing new content, and when it prevents a developer’s efforts 8 years in the making? Is there a better IP regime?

The Public Good and Resolution for the Consumer

Copyright's dual nature of promoting the arts for the public good while giving the creators exclusive rights for limited times is in constant conflict with itself. Current copyright law weighs heavily on the "exclusive rights" side of copyright. Under current law, videogame characters and franchises won't see the light of day unless the original developing company allows it—unused franchises will completely lose relevancy. Videogames are complicated by the fact that they can be trademarked too. Videogame companies not only trademark their company names (SEGA is a registered trademark), but also their games ("Streets of Rage" is a dead trademark), and in some cases, presumably their characters. Should no one be able to use those marks unless they pay for a license? Isn't one company's trash another's treasure? In the interest of promoting the arts for the public good and consumption, would a more flexible regime be appropriate?

Perhaps a shortened trademark/copyright regime is the answer. Since videogame development cycles—the start of development until release date—are about two years, a regime that gives parent developers/companies 10 years from the release date of a game to make a new franchise-related game may be more appropriate. The cycle would reset each time the parent released a new game (not for ports of old games or downloadable content to existing games). If the parent decides to let the franchise die in those 10 years, a new developer/company could, in the interest of progress and innovation, develop their own game in the franchise. This would essentially be a free license. Should the parent want the franchise back, they need only release a new game, and the clock is reset.

The 10 year regime would allow companies to keep their franchises as long as they developed for them, and would allow new developers to step in should the parent deny their child. In this way, the nerd rage over the pulling of Streets of Rage Remake could be alleviated.

---

You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" on the next line:

# * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, AustinLeach

Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of that line. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated list