Originally posted by endo
View Post
However, there are areas where this comes into question. For example, many games use off-the-shelf engines which might have specific terms of use. They might use SDKs or plugins for things like audio and physics, which they don't wholly own. In Japan especially, voice artists may have complicated contract terms.
Games made now tend to deal with all of these up-front, because companies know that digital can mean forever, or at least, a very long time, so they write up their contracts to take this into account - where possible. Studios are less likely, if the option is on the cards, to take a short-term agreement than maybe they were 10 years ago.
Take, for example, 1080 Snowboarding. The clothes the characters wear were made by Tommy Hilfiger, and the boards were by Lamar. I think the music was licensed too. Nintendo might own these lock, stock and barrel, like their contract may have given them carte blanche to do whatever they wanted with these re: future releases, but not every developer has that kind of foresight.
For a specific, real-world example, the writer's strike that ran a ramrod through the run of Battlestar Galactica was about something very similar, where loads of shows were making their way to the (upcoming) streaming platforms and their writers were on strike, because their contracts specified they were paid for TV airings and "videogram sales" (sales of the shows/movies on physical media) and the media companies claimed, therefore, they didn't have to pay the writers royalties for showings on Netflix.
Leave a comment: