Nainstalovat Steam
přihlásit se
|
jazyk
简体中文 (Zjednodušená čínština)
繁體中文 (Tradiční čínština)
日本語 (Japonština)
한국어 (Korejština)
ไทย (Thajština)
български (Bulharština)
Dansk (Dánština)
Deutsch (Němčina)
English (Angličtina)
Español-España (Evropská španělština)
Español-Latinoamérica (Latin. španělština)
Ελληνικά (Řečtina)
Français (Francouzština)
Italiano (Italština)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonéština)
Magyar (Maďarština)
Nederlands (Nizozemština)
Norsk (Norština)
Polski (Polština)
Português (Evropská portugalština)
Português-Brasil (Brazilská portugalština)
Română (Rumunština)
Русский (Ruština)
Suomi (Finština)
Svenska (Švédština)
Türkçe (Turečtina)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamština)
Українська (Ukrajinština)
Nahlásit problém s překladem
Zork is absolutely not public domain. Activistion bought Infocom and holds all of their trademarks.
EDIT: Turns out that Inform port is a bizarre mish-mash of the three games, not a direct port of the first one.
... and I just realized how old this thread is. Oh well.
Trademark/copyright law is infinitely more complex than that and has numerous jurisdictional differences. Many Ultima fan games have been operating with EA/Activision's knowledge. Many of the fan projects would have viable arguments for meeting fair use standards as well.
Given this title is offered for free (at least today it is), is transformative (there were no graphics in the original Zork nor any specific exact depictions, the gameplay mechanics are completely different, etc), and it's market penetration being so insignificant as well as the project being marketed differently as to not really be a competitor to Zork, it would have a potentially winnable case.
The only issue is if this game incorporates all of the text and areas from the original Zork game, which would be a debate mostly over text vs. visuals (this title doesn't actually copy all of the text itself from Zork, does it?)