
The intriguing legal ramifications of Pokémon Go - ingve
http://brettterpstra.com/2016/07/25/the-intriguing-legal-ramifications-of-pokemon-go/
======
yaur
> Let’s take the example of a restaurant that advertises itself as a “Poké
> Stop” and utilizes a game image in connection with the stylized “Poké Stop”
> mark in its store window. That is arguably an instance of both copyright and
> trademark infringement.

It seems crazy to me that a developer can put a pokestop(or w/e) inside of a
store with no notification or permission from the property owner, but the
property owner can't put up a sign indicating that a pokestop has been created
inside of their store without getting a license. If that's really how the law
works we've already reached the dystopian future.

~~~
freshyill
Are there any Pokéstops (and gyms) in stores? Almost all of them that I've
seen are public art, plaques, signs along nature trails, etc. Some of these
are on private property, but I haven't seen any that you'd need to actually
enter the property to use. One near me is literally a mailbox. The closest I
can think of as a business is a church. All of these things are accessible
from sidewalks. They're not really "putting" anything any properties; they're
just marking things on a map.

~~~
nickysielicki
I was at Providence hospital at the University of Alaska Anchorage campus for
the past week and a half, I had family that was there.

I wanted to get outside and walk around for an hour out of the day, so I
downloaded the game and wandered around for a while.

Amazingly, there is a gym right at the ER entrance. (Their hockey arena is
also right across from the ER, which strikes me as a poor decision considering
how traffic could result in someone being delayed in getting to the ER but I
digress.) There is a pokestop outside at the non-emergency drop off cul-de-
sac. And to top it all off, there is a pokestop at a piece of art in one of
the hallways in what should be a secure area-- there was zero security between
my family members room and that pokestop.

The hospital is pissed about it, and rightfully so imo:
[http://www.ktuu.com/content/news/Providence-asks-Pokemon-
Go-...](http://www.ktuu.com/content/news/Providence-asks-Pokemon-Go-players-to
--386729991.html)

The issue is that the pokestops are really just the portals in ingress, and
ingress was a low-traffic game where people weren't trying to come in every 30
minutes, so inappropriate locations could fly under the radar. Now that it
went mainstream, they're being noticed.

Even outside of populated areas, the choices are bad. The closest pokestop to
me currently, no longer in Anchorage but now in Fairbanks, is about a
kilometer deep into private property.

------
freshhawk
I'm curious why so many of these issues seem to differ so greatly from any
other reason people may be doing something in public.

Does it really matter if they are using an app on their phone instead of
reading Yelp or listening to a podcast while they crash into someone, act like
an idiot, etc? If I put out a podcast that is meant to be listened to as a
walking tour of somewhere do I have these same liability concerns since I'm
suggesting locations to the user?

How random would an app maker have to make their AR game to make it clear they
just want to make a game that people can play by moving around, without being
liable for everything stupid people do in public while they happen to be
running the app?

~~~
jerf
A sufficient difference in quantity becomes a difference in quality. Some of
these concerns are merely amusing now, but could conceivably become real
problems at scale.

I'm hedging, because I think this is likely to be a fluke event and be a non-
issue for a long time. Even if AR games become big, this is probably the first
and last time we're all playing the exact same one. Plus over time this sort
of thin connectivity to the real world may be seen as a fluke; AR may require
much stronger computer vision and real-world understanding to take off in a
non-fluke way.

Pokemon Go reminds me a lot of the GPS unit my father had 20 years ago, where
all it knew about was cities. I'm not even sure why he bought it, the most
interesting thing you could do is zoom out in the Chicago area and roughly see
Lake Michigan. Prior to GPS units being hooked up to road databases and able
to give directions, they were not that useful. Similarly, for all the flash
and pizzaz Pokemon Go may superficially seem to have, all it really has is
your coordinates.

This doesn't make it "bad" but it's not clear to me this is going to be a new
genre. It may just be one cool fad game, with the "real" stuff still to come
in what could even be another 10 years.

~~~
maxerickson
I used a GPS that barely had a map. It was still useful. It was nice for day
hiking in unfamiliar areas, just record a track and it's easy (within reason)
to get back to where you started. I also used it as a "compass", where I set
it to point at the destination and then chose a route that tended to head in
that direction (say I didn't feel like driving on the busy freeway).

------
mijoharas
The very first point mentioned in the article is that pokemon go requests
access to too much data. This was a bug that has been (or is being?) addressed
by the developers [0].

I believe this is usually the occasion to cite Hanlons razor[1].

[0] [https://support.pokemongo.nianticlabs.com/hc/en-
us/articles/...](https://support.pokemongo.nianticlabs.com/hc/en-
us/articles/222648408-Permissions-update)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor)

~~~
gwern
Draft might've been written before the bugfix.

------
cheepin
> But now, the XYZ Candy Company building also has become a Pokémon Gym.
> Players from miles around aggregate to that location because the name and
> logo are depicted in the app as a Pokémon Gym location. At what point does
> this mean the app is using the copyrighted design in violation of the
> copyright registration?

All the pictures used are taken from public property iirc. Wouldn't the
copyright for the picture taken and the copyright of the building be two
separate things, the former belonging to the taker and licensed to the
company? If not, is Google Maps compelled to censor their street views of
copyrighted architecture?

~~~
hirsin
There must be a limit - otherwise video games like Grand Theft Auto could put
photos of say, McDonalds, in their game and not break any laws. I'm not sure
where I sit on whether that's right, but currently they shy away from it for a
reason.

An interesting corollary may be use of products in TV - at what point does
everyone using a MacBook or Windows (and then having problems with
beachballs/blue screens) count as copyright infringement?

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
There's a gap between "we can legally do this" and "we can legally do this but
we don't want to spend more money on lawyers."

~~~
hirsin
I suspect that's the biggest reason - lawyers are easy to throw at problems,
getting answers from them is hard, especially with settlements.

------
DINKDINK
>it can be irritating to suddenly have 50 people show up at a national
landmark because it has now become part of a video game

Do you know really need to know why someone is in a public space so we can
cast aspersions?

~~~
mikeash
As a DC area resident, the idea of getting upset at 50 visitors to a national
landmark is just _adorable_.

------
jondubois
I think things will get interesting when augmented reality becomes so
ingrained in our society that it becomes difficult to separate it from what is
real.

As virtual entities take over the mindshare of 'real entities' in our lives,
we might start integrating the virtual entities more into our thought
processes and into our artworks - Which would increase the frequency of
copyright infringement.

So basically, as the virtual world takes over the real world, companies who
produce virtual goods will be able to take over ownership of our reality and
therefore of our minds.

Combined with big data, companies will be able to monitor our usage of their
intellectual property as part of our lives and charge us for it.

~~~
tsunamifury
A) we already do, its called a "concept" \-- its pretty much the fundamentals
of how we see and understand the world around us. Concepts don't need a
physical manifestation to have real effects. (e.g. wave patterns)

B) This isn't much different than headphones, just for your eyes. Temper your
fears with what being able to take music everywhere did to make a dystopia.

~~~
SuperPaintMan
>Temper your fears with what being able to take music everywhere did to make a
dystopia.

A culture of self-isolation in public spaces where 50% of inhabitants are
stuck in semireality instead of a functional member of the environment? It's a
bit dystopic, just socially acceptable.

------
the_watcher
From what I've seen, many of these locations can be accessed without ever
actually entering the property. The name, description, and photos are user-
generated, and no more illegal than what Google Maps provides. Some locations
are unique (airports come to mind), but most of the IP risk seems completely
frivolous to me.

~~~
edmund_barton
There is a PokeGym smack-bang in the center of the pentagon. I don't think you
can't even enter the building without security clearance.

[https://www.inverse.com/article/18034-pokemon-go-in-white-
ho...](https://www.inverse.com/article/18034-pokemon-go-in-white-house-and-
pentagon)

------
prodigal_erik
I liked seeing a chiptunes musician and promoter promise "LURES ALL NIGHT!"
for his DJ set at jwz's new club:
[https://twitter.com/8bitsf/status/757067417910509568](https://twitter.com/8bitsf/status/757067417910509568)

------
Fej
This is an interesting article. I find it a bit curious though that Niantic
hasn't solved these problems for itself, given that they already had Ingress
before developing Pokémon Go. Of course, Ingress is miniscule in comparison; I
wonder if Google's legal team even bothered to take a look.

