BANDAI NAMCO sued game machine manufacturer for copyright infringement of 'Pac-Man' series


by

Peter Burka

Bandai Namco Entertainment America (Bandai Namco Entertainment America (BNEA)) was founded on September 20, 2019, against an American gaming device manufacturer AtGames . According to the indictment filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, the reason for the lawsuit is due to the copyright infringement of the character related to the masterpiece game ' Pacman '.

Bandai Namco Entertainment of America vs. AtGames, 2019 complaint | Copyright Infringement | Lanham Act
https://www.scribd.com/document/427639682/Bandai-Namco-Entertainment-of-America-vs-AtGames-2019-complaint

Bandai Namco sues throwback console maker over Ms. Pac-Man mini-cabinet-Polygon
https://www.polygon.com/2019/9/25/20884111/bandai-namco-atgames-lawsuit-ms-pac-man-pac-man-flashback-blast-copyright-infringement

The rights to Ms. Pac-Man are caught up in a messy legal battle | Ars Technica
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/09/the-rights-to-ms-pac-man-are-caught-in-a-messy-legal-battle/

The issue of the BNEA and AtGames litigation issue is the “ Ms. Pac-Man ” game developed in 1981 as a pacman clone game. Ms. Pacman was originally a game called “Crazy Otto” that was developed as a variant of Pacman by Kevin Karan and Steve Golson, founders of the American game maker General Computer Corporation (GCC). However, GCC was charged with ATARI for another game variant, and despite being settled, it was prohibited from developing game variants without ATARI's permission.


by

Andrea Vena

GCC, who couldn't give up on Crazy Otto's release, contacted Midway Games , which at that time had a Pacman license in the US, and asked about the officialization of Crazy Otto. Realizing that Crazy Otto is a great workmanship that has significantly improved Pacman, Midway Games has signed an agreement to acquire Crazy Otto rights from GCC.

Later, Midway Games realized that Pac-Man was popular with female arcade gamers and changed Crazy Otto's name to “Miss Pack-Man”. Furthermore, because it was found that Pac-Man had children, Ms. Pac-Man released “Miss”, which represents an unmarried woman, by changing it to “Ms.” regardless of whether it was unmarried or married. Released as an official sequel to Pac-Man, Ms. Pac-Man was a big hit as expected by GCC and Midway Games, and became a pandemic that surpassed Pac-Man in the United States and was called the “most successful arcade game”.

The story of the release of Ms. Pac-Man has also reached the ears of President Masaya Nakamura of Namco (later Bandai Namco Entertainment), the creator of Pac-Man. Miz Pac-Man is also officially certified by Namco , and Ms. Pac-Man is also included in the Namco Museum that Namco later released.


by

Gamerscore Blog

Ms. Pac-Man, who has such a full history, has been involved in trouble because AtGames began producing Ms. Pac-Man's small enclosure without permission from BNEA. In 2012, AtGames applied to BNEA for permission to sell game consoles containing Ms. Pac-Man, but BNEA did not. Nonetheless, AtGames turned out to manufacture Ms. Pacman's small enclosure prototype and sold it to supermarkets Walmart and GameStop , a game store. Mr. Karan, who was consulted by AtGames about the release of Ms. Pac-Man, reported this to BNEA, and BNEA has decided to take this lawsuit.



In fact, AtGames has released “ Bandai Namco Flashback Blast! ”, Which includes Namco's retro games including Pac-Man in 2018. At this time, BNEA allowed the use of Pac-Man, but as a condition he requested to record a high quality arcade version. However, what was recorded in Bandai Namco Flashback Blast! That was actually released was a version developed for the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES) whose specifications are lower than the arcade, and it was said that the operation was unstable thing.

BNEA, who worked hard on these troubles, said, “AtGames is critical to BNEA's trust and reputation, as it misrepresents the current and future retail business of BNEA, the use of intellectual property rights, and the good relationship between our company and distributors. 'We're damaging the game,' he accused AtGames and stated that he would not accept the release of Ms. Pac-Man by AtGames.

Meanwhile, Ping-Kang Hsiung, CEO of AtGames, who was sued, said, “We have the right to use Ms. Pac-Man, its iconic presence, as part of our work to protect the work, which is also a cultural asset. We are announcing a statement that we are not giving up.

In fact, it has been reported that AtGames has already contracted with seven former GCC executives and acquired Ms. Pac-Man's rights, so the trial over Ms. Pac-Man's complicated rights relationship will become muddy in the future It is expected that.

in Game, Posted by log1l_ks