Copyright is copyright. If you make something on BYOND like an icon, or a program it is yours. You would have to have proof that you made it of course.

A method called "the poor man's copyright" is to mail yourself the creation and not open the envelope. The envelope would have a date stamp on it, proving estimated time of creation.

Also, if you are just taking the idea and making something new out of it that shouldn't violate copyright laws. Otherwise anyone who has made a video game would be stealing the idea to make a video game. Even less absurd, all games pretty much use something from previous games. I have yet to see a game created in the past 10 years that didn't use an idea, system, monster, etc from another game.

Though if you were to call the game "Scarey Game" and it was exactly like the original there could be some problems. Most of the time though you could get away with simply giving it a different title. That might go into the world of trademarking, though. I'm not sure as I'm not an expert on the subject.

This is correct. You cannot copyright an idea, concept or even a name.

You can trademark an identity, usually a name and/or logo. Though to establish a trade mark it depends on where you live. Usually this involves registering it.
Also, for a trademark to remain valid, it has to be used. You cannot trade mark something, leave it, comeback in 5 years an expect it to still be valid.

The end summary: You can't copyright fangames. That itself is illegal. That's like saying the Dragon Ball Z franchise is your own.

Plus this copyright obviously isn't real.

It's illegal to use content someone else owns. It's legal to use someone else's gameplay, because that cannot be copyrighted.

If it could be patented, we wouldn't have tetris clones. You can probably patent specific designs, algorithms, etc., but not gameplay.

Software patents in the US are pretty all over the place, I wouldn't put it past the patent office. The reason you won't patent some gameplay process is because you still have the Japanese and European markets where you couldn't enforce it and US enforcement would get you a bad reputation with customers, it's just not worth the money.

Well, that's pleasantly pragmatic.

A patent must be a specific methodology, not a general concept.

The requirements a patent must meet are somewhat vague. This has led to several lawsuits. One noteworthy one involved a failed lawsuit against several MMO developers who were in violation of a copyright involving a method to connect multiple independent server machines into one contiguous gameworld.

This concept is too general to qualify for a defensible patent.

This is why you see games like Grand Theft Auto and Saints Row.


Copyrighted material works somewhat differently. If you can prove that the intellectual property is yours, whether or not you have registered anything, you can defend it legally.

These things are generally defensible:

Artistic works: Music, Graphics, Literature.

Character: Fictitious characters themselves are covered, but not necessarily their likeness, or qualities. Names are not necessarily covered either. Depictions qualify under artistic works.


These two categories pretty much cover anything you can copyright within a videogame. There are some exceptions in copyright law.


1) Fair use policy.

Any product that is not for profit and uses copyrighted works without the intent of replacing or detracting from the original is generally covered.

2) Parody.

Any product using copyrighted material, or depictions of persons or copyrighted material is granted the exemption of parody. One must however, prove that the entire work conveys a certain message. Proving the intent or message is rarely something the courts can do adequately.

3) Reasonable doubt.

If there is reasonable doubt that two seemingly similar works derived of totally separate sources, there can be no indication of violation, therefore both works are considered to be free of violations.


But these laws change regularly, and depending on your country. Most of the eastern world has no copyright laws. Britain's laws emphasize a lot more intent and artistic expression, but in general are more strict. Particularly their stipulations on what constitutes fair use and parody. (parody and slander/libel are interesting topics in British law.)

Sweden doesn't respect most copyright laws, etc. Each country does things differently. Also, violations in one country may not be punishable by another, however, some countries, like the United States have really botched legal jurisdiction issues, to include guilty verdicts on foreign nationals who were never brough to bear witness in a trial.

Seriously messed up stuff, I know. But it's not the American legislature that's to blame, is the American entertainment industries' lobbying that is to blame for these things being so convoluted.