I would buy it if the asking price isn't too high,

PM'd TheEnigmaticT ... it's 2 AM in Poland so I guess he will answer in the morning :)

Okay my 2 cents on this.

Fair use only extends so far and by the sounds of it these are not parodies they are copies, a parody would be like this episode of the Simpsons where they did a parody of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves they did not use the actual trademarked names or likenesses of the copywrited Disney characters but it was obvious what they were poking fun at the Disney film, now another example would be when South Park did their parody of Family Guy they looked similar to the characters but they were different enough in appearance and art style to be considered not a blatant copy and thus were safe from copy-write infringement. Yet another example would be having the Star Trek the next generation version of the enterprise in the intro Quest for Glory 2: Trial by fire, it wasn't marked as being the enterprise so Sierra could just go "oh it's just a ship that looks like it but it's not the enterprise", another example is Space Quest 5 which was a giant send up of Star Trek but everything in it was diffrent enough to not be a copy.

What I am trying to say here is what I am seeing is would not fall under fair use or considered a parody it's more like what Sega did with Revenge of Shinobi where they had the Terminator, Godzilla, Spiderman and Batman, without permission of Marvel, DC, Toho, and Origin pictures and so had to go back at least three times and alter the game to remove the copyrighted characters save for Spiderman as they got Marvel to sign off on it.

So yeah it sounds like the creator of Unepic is hoping that their game is small enough to fly under the ip holders radar.

That's mostly bullshit right there. Unless of course the UK is really that backwards. The reason why they don't use the real names of players and things like that is that it can be very expensive to litigate it to the point where the plaintiff loses the suit. Meanwhile you're bankrupt despite being legally in the clear. And you may or may not receive compensation for having a fraudulent suit filed against you.

Changing names has never been required, that's what fair use is all about. That's why we have paraody exemptions to it.

Also, player names have never been subject to copyright protection. Any attorney claiming otherwise could easily wind up being disbarred.

You're misunderstanding trademark law here. If you're not using the name Snow White and the Seven dwarfs or whatever Disney has a TM on, then there's no need for a fair use exemption.

The reason for using a fair use defense is because you are using the names or materials that belong to somebody else, but qualify to do so even though it infringes.

The reason why they settled and removed those things likely has more to do with a backwards court or it being cheaper than defending their use. Which happens a lot, TM owners are required to defend their marks and often times people will acquiesce because it's cheaper even though they may be legally in the right.

Hence why you get the funny renaming going on, you get a joke and an easier time in court.
At least we both agree that you don't know what you're talking about. That's such a relief.

Really? I'll start looking up articles against your argument, you start looking up for. I reckon I'll win.

Here's one: http://www.reghardware.com/2012/04/25/fifa_fans_fume_over_ea_euro_2012_rip_off/

Another, nicely concluding that you can't use the names, but you can use their image: http://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/footballers-names-in-computer-games.htm

Names of people cannot be trademarked and they cannot be copyrighted either. Anybody claiming otherwise is completely full of it. There are cases where celebrities sue because it's implied that they have endorsed a product, but they don't get special protections on their names.

And no you won't win, because it's clearly codified that you can't copyright names and trademarks cannot be applied to people's names.

So, I added a couple of links to my last post for you. You're partly correct, you cannot register a trademark of your name in relation to a particular service or profession. However you can get them on passing off. Which is where they win (as do I right now).

That wasn't trademark though, that was contractual.

Yes but the point is Fair Use is not this magical defense that protects someone when they use a copywrited or trademarked thing. If that was the case then we would be seeing alot more of people doing these kind of things. That is my point here's a more detailed explanation of Fair use and Copyright law

Source: http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/copyright.cfm

Fair use is the most significant limitation on the copyright holder's exclusive rights (United States Copyright Office, 2010, para. 1). Deciding whether the use of a work is fair IS NOT a science. There are no set guidelines that are universally accepted. Instead, the individual who wants to use a copyrighted work must weigh four factors:

The purpose and character of the use:

Is the new work merely a copy of the original? If it is simply a copy, it is not as likely to be considered fair use.

Does the new work offer something above and beyond the original? Does it transform the original work in some way? If the work is altered significantly, used for another purpose, appeals to a different audience, it more likely to be considered fair use (NOLO, 2010, para. 6). Recent case law has increasingly focused on transformative use to make fair use determinations – for a discussion of this topic see Lultschik, 2010.
Is the use of the copyrighted work for nonprofit or educational purposes? The use of copyrighted works for nonprofit or educational purposes is more likely to be considered fair use (NOLO, 2010)

Basically Fair Use only applies to works that are not blatant copies of the copywrited or trade marked worked or image that being used or "parodied" or if it's being used for educational and/or non profit fashion which Unepic would most certainly not qualify for and by what I am reading nothing that is being added to Unepic would be different enough to fall under that exception especially if these items are going to look like their name sakes.

So yeah the games creator can not claim "Fair Use" and if any copyright holder get's wind of this he's in some trouble.

read it the first time, was referring to your other link.

I know, I already knew. Sol Campbell was not pursing trademark rights. That is my point. He was pursuing contractual agreement, it's a very different area.

Ok then mate: Make a T-Shirt with Cristiano Ronaldo name on it and sell it online... I put my money on in less than a month you will hear from at least 5 different companies.
They have contracts and that contracts protect their names ;)
And yes you can be sewed for using somebodys name wihout his permition.

Here is an idea for a test. Send the link for Unepic Items to either Lucas Arts or Marvel... and let's see if the names stay the same ;)

Um no that is not true,well to a extent anyway you can't prevent someone using a name like say Bruce Banner which is trademarked by Marvel, you can use the name to your hearts content but if you use the name for a character that is a scientist who has a Jekyll and Hyde complex then yea your looking at a lawsuit. Hell just do some research on WWE/WWF they trademark the names of their "stars" which is why they often give them a new ring name when their signed, they own the name "Danial Bryan" in that Brian Danielson(his real name) should he leave WWE he can not use that name but someone else can call themselves that, there are some exceptions if it's their birth name or their well known by that name case for example Rey Mysterio and Eddie Guerrero but in those cases they usually add something to the name that they can trademark but either way they have shown that they can trademark names.

Another Example is "Hulk" Marvel owns the Trademark on the name Hulk so Hulk Hogan and any promotion using him has to get permission from Marvel comics since Hulk is a trademark of Marvel.

A better explanation from Legal Zoom

"A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of them, that identifies and distinguishes the source of a trademark. Names of people and companies, business logos and symbols, and particular sounds can all be trademarked. Everything from Julia Roberts' name, the Nike "swoosh," and the NBC chimes are registered with the US Patent and Trademark Office. Trademarks identify a product, service, person, or thing from others in the same field, and trademark infringement has, and always will be, a serious offense."

So what I am saying is if you use the name of something or someone that is trademark, fictional or otherwise using their likeness or being it(the likeness) being similar enough to be considered a blatant copy without permission then your violating their copyright or trademark.

Another example Wrestler Chris Jericho had a band named Fozzy Osbourne he got into trouble with Ozzy over it and had to drop the Osbourne from the bands name as he was using a trademarked name of a musican and group for a musical band.

They have both name & image rights.