Guild Wars 2

I’m not sure how many off you have Xbox live accounts so I took some screenshots for comparison
Screenshot comparison

For you Xbox Live account owners you can see how much of a ripoff they are:
Sunrise ripoff
Twilight ripoff

Light and Dark swords.

Indeed a ripoff.

Swords of light and darkness is a very old trope.

http://imgur.com/LrlEm

Gotta admit, they look very alike, despite light and dark swords being a common thing in fantasy.

I mean really. The plating at the base of the blade is just so close.

that’s pretty bad if they didn’t get anet’s permission for it.

You know, mimickry is the oldest form of flattery…

Yeah, I think people are missing his point. It’s not that they’re ripoffs because of the concept, it’s that they actually look an awful lot like a graphically-reduced version of those two swords.

It’s hard to miss the resemblance.

Oh no, I got the point as soon as I looked at them; I even laughed at it. But I don’t think it’s worth, anyone outside of Arenanet, getting upset about.

That’s kind of messed up, but it’s just a few weapons, so it’s not a big deal.

I agree…those were ripped.

vespers.1759:

that’s pretty bad if they didn’t get anet’s permission for it.

They don’t need to have permission.

The weapons are not exact copies of the ones in GW2. They are very similar, like a cheap knockoff, but they are not the exact same.

Thus no permission is needed as they are MS’s weapons (no matter how similar they look).

The sky-like details on the blade and the guards are way too similar to be coincidence. Probably a rip-off.

there far to alike to just be coincidence but than there not exactly brakeing any laws I think as they changed them up a bit.

that said looks like some one is a GW2 fan

SpyderArachnid.5619:

vespers.1759:

that’s pretty bad if they didn’t get anet’s permission for it.

They don’t need to have permission.

The weapons are not exact copies of the ones in GW2. They are very similar, like a cheap knockoff, but they are not the exact same.

Thus no permission is needed as they are MS’s weapons (no matter how similar they look).

knock offs are illegal…

If you are able to log into Xbox live you can see that the animations are similar to… as in the blades leave a trail behind them.

vespers.1759:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

vespers.1759:

that’s pretty bad if they didn’t get anet’s permission for it.

They don’t need to have permission.

The weapons are not exact copies of the ones in GW2. They are very similar, like a cheap knockoff, but they are not the exact same.

Thus no permission is needed as they are MS’s weapons (no matter how similar they look).

knock offs are illegal…

And if you would read the whole thing instead of just skimming, you would see that I said they are LIKE knocks offs, but they are not the exact same. Please actually read before responding.

They can be as similar or almost the same as they want. As long as it is not the exact copy/replica of the one in GW2, there is no law or anything stating they can’t have it. While I admit that they are very similar and it’s kind of low for them to do such a thing, they are not breaking any laws or stepping on any toes.

SpyderArachnid.5619:

vespers.1759:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

vespers.1759:

that’s pretty bad if they didn’t get anet’s permission for it.

They don’t need to have permission.

The weapons are not exact copies of the ones in GW2. They are very similar, like a cheap knockoff, but they are not the exact same.

Thus no permission is needed as they are MS’s weapons (no matter how similar they look).

knock offs are illegal…

And if you would read the whole thing instead of just skimming, you would see that I said they are LIKE knocks offs, but they are not the exact same. Please actually read before responding.

They can be as similar or almost the same as they want. As long as it is not the exact copy/replica of the one in GW2, there is no law or anything stating they can’t have it. While I admit that they are very similar and it’s kind of low for them to do such a thing, they are not breaking any laws or stepping on any toes.

knock-offs don’t have to be the exact same to be illegal.

vespers.1759:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

vespers.1759:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

vespers.1759:

that’s pretty bad if they didn’t get anet’s permission for it.

They don’t need to have permission.

The weapons are not exact copies of the ones in GW2. They are very similar, like a cheap knockoff, but they are not the exact same.

Thus no permission is needed as they are MS’s weapons (no matter how similar they look).

knock offs are illegal…

And if you would read the whole thing instead of just skimming, you would see that I said they are LIKE knocks offs, but they are not the exact same. Please actually read before responding.

They can be as similar or almost the same as they want. As long as it is not the exact copy/replica of the one in GW2, there is no law or anything stating they can’t have it. While I admit that they are very similar and it’s kind of low for them to do such a thing, they are not breaking any laws or stepping on any toes.

knock-offs don’t have to be the exact same to be illegal.

Uh… that is what a knockoff is. A copy of a popular product at a reduced price. If it wasn’t the exact same, then it wouldn’t be a knockoff.

In your definition, that would mean everything in the world is a knockoff. Cause while they are not the exact same, they are all similar. Which is simply untrue. For something to be a knockoff, it has to be the same thing.

Cause what would be the point of buying a knockoff Gucci bag if it is different from a regular Gucci bag? Then it wouldn’t be a Gucci bag at all and be something completely different. Thus, not a knockoff. It has to be the same to be considered a knockoff.

I’m not an XBox person but it looks to me like these are produced by an “avatar store” which is a third-party seller, not MS. This “Avatar Toy” store seems to produce a number of replicas from different games, some of which are tagged with the actual game it is taken from, and others not (and MS probably has rules about tagging non-Xbox games).

Legally, the question is whether the design contains specifically copied elements, as to be considered a derivative work. It’s up to Anet to get upset about this, and subsequently to argue their case, which would be for a jury to decide. It’s an interesting find for sure, and if it upsets you personally, you should send it directly to Anet.

SpyderArachnid.5619:

Uh… that is what a knockoff is. A copy of a popular product at a reduced price. If it wasn’t the exact same, then it wouldn’t be a knockoff.

In your definition, that would mean everything in the world is a knockoff. Cause while they are not the exact same, they are all similar. Which is simply untrue. For something to be a knockoff, it has to be the same thing.

Cause what would be the point of buying a knockoff Gucci bag if it is different from a regular Gucci bag? Then it wouldn’t be a Gucci bag at all and be something completely different. Thus, not a knockoff. It has to be the same to be considered a knockoff.

Suffice to say that your assumptions are wrong. Here’s a trivial counterexample. If something has a Gucci logo on it, but it isn’t made by Gucci, then it’s an illegal knockoff, no matter how original the rest of the bag is.

vespers.1759:

knock-offs don’t have to be the exact same to be illegal.

You need an education on what a “knock-off” is.

A knock-off claims to be the same as in made by the same people.

A good example would be a Louis Vuitton purse. The knock off isn’t exactly the same, but it still claims to be a LV purse.

This doesen’t claim to be a GW2 sword hence its not a knock-off and if Vanilla Ice can get away with that sample in ice ice baby, then this is a kosher pickle.

If i were Anet and they didn’t have my permission, i’d sue their pants off them for that..

Dante.1508:

If i were Anet and they didn’t have my permission, i’d sue their pants off them for that..

Except it’s not illegal, that’s the problem. If this was illegal we could sue furniture makers because their chairs ‘kind of’ look like some other chair made by some other company. Jeans? Totally knockoffs, they look almost the same no matter what company it is!

It just doesn’t work like that. It made me lul to see I’ll agree, but’s it’s just microsoft being microsoft.

why do we, the players even bring this up?

Who cares what MS is doing?

If it becomes a legal thing, persons with far more knowledge than us will be all over it.

What else is on TV, dad?

Umm, you didnt know GW2 was going to xbox live in 2013 ?

I think those swords were added prematurely, oh well bad MS they let the cat out of the bag.

I have committed 2 seconds of rage toward OP’s discovery.

Leablo.2651:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

Uh… that is what a knockoff is. A copy of a popular product at a reduced price. If it wasn’t the exact same, then it wouldn’t be a knockoff.

In your definition, that would mean everything in the world is a knockoff. Cause while they are not the exact same, they are all similar. Which is simply untrue. For something to be a knockoff, it has to be the same thing.

Cause what would be the point of buying a knockoff Gucci bag if it is different from a regular Gucci bag? Then it wouldn’t be a Gucci bag at all and be something completely different. Thus, not a knockoff. It has to be the same to be considered a knockoff.

Suffice to say that your assumptions are wrong. Here’s a trivial counterexample. If something has a Gucci logo on it, but it isn’t made by Gucci, then it’s an illegal knockoff, no matter how original the rest of the bag is.

You didn’t counter-argue at all, you actually proved his point. The logo was the knock-off in that case, also called counterfeit. Seriously, the point is that similarities themselves are NOT illegal. Imitation and copyright infringement on the other hand are.

1. If the swords were per-pixel identical, it’d be imitation and illegal.

2. If the swords were branded with GW2/Anet logos, it’d be illegal.

Really though, this kind of “like a knock-off” situation is not bad for anet anyway.

I didn’t believe this, but I just logged into my account, looked for the two swords, and holy hell they are EXACTLY the same.

Gilgamesh.2561:

I have committed 2 seconds of rage toward OP’s discovery.

Yeah exsept the names have been changed and there flaver text says ther “ninja” grateswords

SpyderArachnid.5619:

They don’t need to have permission.

The weapons are not exact copies of the ones in GW2.

Isn’t that what Vanilla Ice said about the bassline in Ice Ice Baby? It’s not an exact copy of Bowie/Queen’s Under Pressure?

XD

Yeah, there are certain types of intellectual property rights that apply and it’s hard to see how any would be infringed.
Copyright: Is only infringed by an exact reproduction of the work – like a photocopy – not a reinterpretation of the same thing.
Registered designs: Can be infringed in manners like these, but the designs do have to be registered and it has to be described what makes them so unique. The chances that this is the case are astronomically low since they’re expensive to apply for so people typically do so for major parts of products, not single sword skins like this. And they may already be sufficiently dissimilar that they wouldn’t be found to infringe anyway.
Trademarks: Can also be infringed when they’re substantially similar, but pretty sure these sword skins are not considered trademarks since they’re not used to sell GW2.

Are they similar? Yes. But that’s not actually uncommon. It’s not a given that the GW2 swords even inspired these other designs – though it’s certainly possible – and even if they did there’s very unlikely to be any grounds for legal action here because the original work probably doesn’t have the relevant protection. Not only that, I don’t see any real chance of the “derivatives” causing material harm to ArenaNet or NCSoft.

vespers.1759:

that’s pretty bad if they didn’t get anet’s permission for it.

Nope.

You alter one part, and they are no longer the same, hence no need for permission.

I didn’t agree until I watched the animation and it is exactly the same as the animations from the game.

I’m looking at the name of the Twilight rip off and that too is too familiar I think (Orion to Orrian) apparently it is the name of a constellation but still of all the names they could choose

From Final Fantasy IV:
http://nintendookie.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/cecil-harvey.png

Does this mean ArenaNet copied Square Enix?

Microsoft likely didn’t directly copy ArenaNet. They just wanted to sell people digital stuff for their avatars.

It’s a brilliant strategy. Create a weapon model. Skin it a few ways. Sell for $5 each.

It just so happens that everyone loves huge greatswords (perhaps Freud could explain this) and, naturally, white/silver+gold is a popular combination.

They couldn’t very well give the white/silver blade a blue hilt. Then they’d be accused of stealing the Master Sword from Nintendo.

And black blades are very common in fantasy.

Heck, in Legend of Zelda games, Shadow Link uses a black sword (as he’s just Link with a black/shadow texture).

Minos.5168:

From Final Fantasy IV:
http://nintendookie.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/cecil-harvey.png

Does this mean ArenaNet copied Square Enix?

I don’t think you get the point.

WHAT!! Are you saying MS took someones elses design and made it their own. WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT IT POSSIBLE!!!!!!111

kingslayer.1342:

Minos.5168:

From Final Fantasy IV:
http://nintendookie.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/cecil-harvey.png

Does this mean ArenaNet copied Square Enix?

I don’t think you get the point.

The point being that “light” and “dark” greatswords are extremely common throughout fantasy games?

Yeah, I got that.

I was providing a counter-point. I’m glad you got my point.

Still doesn’t make sense. Sorry.

Minos.5168:

kingslayer.1342:

Minos.5168:

From Final Fantasy IV:
http://nintendookie.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/cecil-harvey.png

Does this mean ArenaNet copied Square Enix?

I don’t think you get the point.

The point being that “light” and “dark” greatswords are extremely common throughout fantasy games?

Yeah, I got that.

I was providing a counter-point. I’m glad you got my point.

Thing is those you linked look nothing alike to the GW or these MS swords at all. They have the light/dark theme and that is about it. No on here is claiming that is all to it, which you would know if you read through the topic and didn’t just post. The thing here is that not only the theme but the design is very very very closely resembling eachother, way beyond just having similar theme. So your counter-point doesn’t show anything, sorry.

Now on topic. They do indeed look awfully similar, but I will not pretend I know all the rules and how much/little something must look like something else to be a problem. Maybe Anet already know about these swords and well… if they don’t mind…

http://imgur.com/LrlEm

Thats what Eternity should look like, one half filled with darkness, other part full og lightning.

No suprise. I hope anet sues them.

Chuo.4238:

SpyderArachnid.5619:

They don’t need to have permission.

The weapons are not exact copies of the ones in GW2.

Isn’t that what Vanilla Ice said about the bassline in Ice Ice Baby? It’s not an exact copy of Bowie/Queen’s Under Pressure?

XD

Yeah Vanilla Ice won that lawsuit.

Should Arenanet seek to persue this they’d likely hold the cards in such a case. As it is clearly a derivative work of art.
Whether they’d win would be up to the court that hears the case however.

Great, legendaries are now $5, what has the GW2 endgame come to?! /joke

Well, if MS wants to sell them, fine, but they should just call them what they are. There is no problem with taking inspiration from somewhere, even the designs for Twilight and Sunrise came from somewhere, but it’s only a blatant ripoff and wrong if the designers refuse to admit it.

There’s a ton of misconception being posted about the copyright of the images, by armchair lawyers it seems.

Factually, it doesn’t matter if they were ripped off or not. In a court, it boils down to what a jury of joe schmos perceive in a case of pure form or imagery. If they believe the two items look “to be the same”, then somebody is in violation.

In the example above, yes I’d say there’s a case. Does Anet care? Maybe. More likely, they’d settle for some free bulk volume licences from M$.

If A-net sued them, It would make my day

to be fair, GW2 has a Red Ring of Death ring.

Probably not against the law in any way. Even if it was I doubt Anet has the time and money to go after Microsoft in a law suit just to have Microsoft claim that it’s just a generic sword that has a resemblance to the swords in GW2 because they are generic swords as well.

Xbox 360 gw2 confirmed.

Lorana.2468:

to be fair, GW2 has a Red Ring of Death ring.

lol i loled abit nice one