so if I create something do I have to pay royalties to everything that has inspired me? ex. if i make a film were a group of soldiers have to go save another soldier i have to pay dreamworks since they made saving privet ryan (that film was probably not the first one with the concept anyway)?i know they are very similar but this seems dumb to me.

If Capcom actually went and lifted the complete story and lines of dialogue, I could see them having a case, but simply the premise? That seems like stretching it, really.

Wow, took them long enough to notice.

But I think they missed their chance. Zombies in malls are like zombies in amusement parks. They gotta go somewhere!

Not so, ShawnKelfonne. Depending on how much of Dawn of the Dead's "creative essence" was lifted for use in Dead Rising (and from the half hour I played of the game I'd say a lot) the courts could easily rule in favor of MKR. And rightfully so.

That's the whole purpose of copyrights and IP protection. They are in place to protect people who come up with original ideas.

And, at electristan, you very well may need to pay the makers of SPR for your theoretical film, pending how much of that same essence is derived from the previous work. It's just the way it is nowadays. If you were to go out and make a movie or write a book about a female witch who goes to school and lives in the UK, although your work may be pretty different than Harry Potter, many people would be able to see that you pretty blatantly ripped off the essence of the story (which is funny, 'cause J.K. Rowling ripped it off of another writer from the early '80s but they settled out of court).

Intellectual Property rights are a tricky thing these days because of the vast influx of information being shared and content being created.

Personally, I think Capcom shot themselves in the foot on this one by even acknowledging the movie at all during the opening sequence of the game's boot-up. The fact they admitted there was enough of a connection as such people may see a passing resemblance or even mistake it for a DotD game is probably grounds enough for them to lose the suit. Had they not included that statement they could have easily feigned ignorance on the matter. As it stands, they sort of backhandedly admitted it's so similar to DotD it could be mistaken for it, which means they will more than likely lose.

If this goes through than any company, whether it's book, film or music, could sue another company just because the second company's product is similar in some way.

That's just stupid. I mean, we all know movies rip off idea from each other all the time and no one gets mad. It's part of the business. Same thing with authors.

But why isn't anybody suing over Snakes on a Train or Transmorphers?!

well if that's the case, Why hasn't someone sued Capcom for the resident evil series? that's just about touched all sides of dark comedy.

As I recall it, MKR and Capcom have been discussing this since before the game released and the disclaimer was placed on the packaging and in the intro as an attempt to appease MKR. I can't remember if it was at their request or not.

Regardless, this is a pretty vague set of charges and it's hard to imagine victory for MKR in this suit.

didn't this happen like two weeks ago?

I'm certain Necros did a blog on this a while back.