PIXELS Video Game Playing Cards by Alex Padilla (KS)

[Rob Wright]

PIXELS Video Game Playing Cards

[Don Boyer]

Hmm...  Isn't there a movie coming out soon that has the same title and a similar theme?  I don't want to be that project's creator when the lawyers smell the blood in the water...

[Justin O.]

I like this. The problem I have with most pixel art decks is that it's too self aware, this deck doesn't tip it's hat to itself tryng to say 'look at how pixel I am, isn't that trendy. look, I incorporated joysticks and neon colors because 80's, isn't that clever?'. This is keeping the fourth wall in tact, even if the execution isn't the best I think it is worth supporting just for that.

edit
*sees price per deck* HAHAHAHA, nevermind. Maybe I will make my own pixel deck.

[LilRogue]

Hmm...  Isn't there a movie coming out soon that has the same title and a similar theme?  I don't want to be that project's creator when the lawyers smell the blood in the water...

This is Alex, the guy that made the deck. I actually researched that same thing, because although "pixels" is only one word and very generic, I was worried about that movie too.

I looked into it, and movie names can only be trademarked if they are sequels or series. The Pixels movie is based on a short french film made 2 or 3 years ago. So given how it's not a series and its not based on any book series - think harry potter, hunger games- it's in clear waters.

Also, all movies have to register with MPAA and new movies have to make sure they don't infringe on somebody's previous title, BUT this only applies to the film industry. So it's clear on that end as well.

Believe me, I did not want to be sued for any project, specially considering I'm not gonna make millions of off it lol I did my research, and made sure everything was good before starting the project! 

I like this. The problem I have with most pixel art decks is that it's too self aware, this deck doesn't tip it's hat to itself tryng to say 'look at how pixel I am, isn't that trendy. look, I incorporated joysticks and neon colors because 80's, isn't that clever?'. This is keeping the fourth wall in tact, even if the execution isn't the best I think it is worth supporting just for that.
edit
*sees price per deck* HAHAHAHA, nevermind. Maybe I will make my own pixel deck.

Oh and sorry about the pricing Justin! I'm fairly new to the playing cards community and don't know if this matters, but they are going to be printed in 310mgs linen stock. Just recently upgraded it from the original stock being offered. So they will be looking pretty slick IMO, I'm receiving them soon, so I'll be posting pics. Anyways the pricing was based on what they charged me for this kind of stock, shipping costs, supplies, etc. I've seen other kickstarters charge less and others more for their decks, so I tried to be in the middle and offer the best quality possible for the price and goal.

[Justin O.]

... I tried to be in the middle and offer the best quality possible for the price and goal.

It's not the drop downs you choose on their site that makes the difference, makeplayingcards.com produces a product that I wouldn't pay more than $10 a deck for, they have inferior printing on only adequate stock to create a product that feels like it is produced by a company who's name is their URL. My blatantly disrespectful laughing at your price isn't a criticism of you, it is a citicism of makeplayingcards.com.
I rather like your design and style, but for your first deck, with no name for yourself or sucessful projects under your belt your pricepoint is too high, especially going with a second rate card manufacturer that doesn't even have the charm of a small local printer to make up for lower quality.

A lot of people don't agree with me though within the community, so take me in stride, and ultimately you need to choose what your work is worth to you. But there is a magic number for every project that will get people buying, or make people decide not to back, and I don't think you have found yours yet.

[Don Boyer]

This is Alex, the guy that made the deck. I actually researched that same thing, because although "pixels" is only one word and very generic, I was worried about that movie too.

I looked into it, and movie names can only be trademarked if they are sequels or series. The Pixels movie is based on a short french film made 2 or 3 years ago. So given how it's not a series and its not based on any book series - think harry potter, hunger games- it's in clear waters.

Also, all movies have to register with MPAA and new movies have to make sure they don't infringe on somebody's previous title, BUT this only applies to the film industry. So it's clear on that end as well.

Believe me, I did not want to be sued for any project, specially considering I'm not gonna make millions of off it lol I did my research, and made sure everything was good before starting the project! 

I don't know where you got that information from!  Movies don't have to have sequels to be trademarked!  If that was the case, many classic films would never have any trademarks associated with them, not the least of which being "Casablanca," "The Wizard of Oz," "Gone with the Wind," etc. - there's just so many of them!  And bear in mind, there's not just trademark law to consider - there's copyright law as well.

The creator of the Bicycle "Army Men" deck thought he was fine, too; he probably assumed that "Army Men" was simply a generic term - until the company that owns the product and the brand name contacted him after the project closed.  It ended up never getting produced because of the legal issues combined with a few financial missteps by the creator, but to his credit, he did reimburse his backers.  The design never saw the light of day and the creator lost a lot of cash.  Kickstarter, naturally, got their percentage and after that, well - they consider it a done deal, over, finished, only thing left to do is take the cash to the bank...

And no, I wouldn't pay that much for an MPC deck.  But then again, I'm a collector, and collectors tend to be fussy.

[LilRogue]

Great points, and I'm not 100% on the wizard of oz, gone with the wind, etc. I read a little on the Wizard of Oz and the USPTO is defending people that reference the title or characters.

But I actually went in various places to verify this. Here's a couple of them, there's many more that support this. It seems complicated (like all legal issues), however there is a consensus, a title cannot be trademarked UNLESS it identifies a unique physical product, i.e. clothes, toys, cars, etc. For some reason however, a single film or book is not covered.

http://www.ivanhoffman.com/protect.html
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=566d09e3-66ed-4068-a5c9-244c9238caf4

As for copyrights, they only protect physical creative works. i.e. a logo, design etc. but not the title of a work, that's trademarks.
http://copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#patent

Looking into Army Men, the toys were created in 1938, so the copyright protected the designs and the trademark protected the name. Yeah it's generic, but it's a series of generic words converted into one specific phrase, and they are representing toys, which is a unique physical product. But the separate generic words Army and Men cannot be trademarked.

I'm no lawyer, but I did my research. I love the art of the project (I'm an old school video gamer), so I wan't going to risk it.

[Don Boyer]

Great points, and I'm not 100% on the wizard of oz, gone with the wind, etc. I read a little on the Wizard of Oz and the USPTO is defending people that reference the title or characters.

But I actually went in various places to verify this. Here's a couple of them, there's many more that support this. It seems complicated (like all legal issues), however there is a consensus, a title cannot be trademarked UNLESS it identifies a unique physical product, i.e. clothes, toys, cars, etc. For some reason however, a single film or book is not covered.

http://www.ivanhoffman.com/protect.html
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=566d09e3-66ed-4068-a5c9-244c9238caf4

As for copyrights, they only protect physical creative works. i.e. a logo, design etc. but not the title of a work, that's trademarks.
http://copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#patent

Looking into Army Men, the toys were created in 1938, so the copyright protected the designs and the trademark protected the name. Yeah it's generic, but it's a series of generic words converted into one specific phrase, and they are representing toys, which is a unique physical product. But the separate generic words Army and Men cannot be trademarked.

I'm no lawyer, but I did my research. I love the art of the project (I'm an old school video gamer), so I wan't going to risk it.

Internet advice is a wonderful thing - but doesn't replace a consultation with a lawyer.  It would be a good idea to insure your concept is safe.

[LilRogue]

Great points, and I'm not 100% on the wizard of oz, gone with the wind, etc. I read a little on the Wizard of Oz and the USPTO is defending people that reference the title or characters.

But I actually went in various places to verify this. Here's a couple of them, there's many more that support this. It seems complicated (like all legal issues), however there is a consensus, a title cannot be trademarked UNLESS it identifies a unique physical product, i.e. clothes, toys, cars, etc. For some reason however, a single film or book is not covered.

http://www.ivanhoffman.com/protect.html
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=566d09e3-66ed-4068-a5c9-244c9238caf4

As for copyrights, they only protect physical creative works. i.e. a logo, design etc. but not the title of a work, that's trademarks.
http://copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#patent

Looking into Army Men, the toys were created in 1938, so the copyright protected the designs and the trademark protected the name. Yeah it's generic, but it's a series of generic words converted into one specific phrase, and they are representing toys, which is a unique physical product. But the separate generic words Army and Men cannot be trademarked.

I'm no lawyer, but I did my research. I love the art of the project (I'm an old school video gamer), so I wan't going to risk it.

Internet advice is a wonderful thing - but doesn't replace a consultation with a lawyer.  It would be a good idea to insure your concept is safe.

Well, Don, you made me want to be 200% sure about this, and this is something I was able to get from directly from the USPTO government website (United Stated Patent and Trademark Office":  "The USPTO will also refuse registration of a proposed mark for many other reasons, including but not limited to the mark being...the title of a single book and/or movie..."

But you know what, you are completely right, and if it comes down to it, I have no problem just changing the title. I really appreciate the advice.

... I tried to be in the middle and offer the best quality possible for the price and goal.

It's not the drop downs you choose on their site that makes the difference, makeplayingcards.com produces a product that I wouldn't pay more than $10 a deck for, they have inferior printing on only adequate stock to create a product that feels like it is produced by a company who's name is their URL. My blatantly disrespectful laughing at your price isn't a criticism of you, it is a citicism of makeplayingcards.com.
I rather like your design and style, but for your first deck, with no name for yourself or sucessful projects under your belt your pricepoint is too high, especially going with a second rate card manufacturer that doesn't even have the charm of a small local printer to make up for lower quality.

A lot of people don't agree with me though within the community, so take me in stride, and ultimately you need to choose what your work is worth to you. But there is a magic number for every project that will get people buying, or make people decide not to back, and I don't think you have found yours yet.

Justin, thanks for the honest feedback!

I agree with you point on being a newcomer, I wish I'd been doing this for longer so I'd have more of a track record, but if anything this makes me want to succeed with my first card project all the more. I know people can say anything over the internet, but if it helps, I've been designing and programming as a game hobbyist for about 4 years now. So this is a passion (hence the gaming theme), which really makes the project dear to me, it's not just a passing thing. I'll try to establish myself in the community with time

And yeah, I wish I had more professional and bigger local printers in my rural little town :/ I might look into some print shops in Denver (3.5 hours away), but even then it's too late to just switch printers now. But will strongly consider this for the next project! Again thanks!

[LilRogue]

Also, here's completed finished tuck box, in case anybody is interested in seeing it.
I just finished the final design yesterday.

[Don Boyer]

Also, here's completed finished tuck box, in case anybody is interested in seeing it.
I just finished the final design yesterday.

You might want to check that link a little closer - or better yet, just UPLOAD the image to the site.  People love to link images in their posts - and a year or two from now, when the links die, people look and just scratch their heads...

[LilRogue]

Weeeeird, it was working for like an hour. Thanks for the headup. Let me try to upload it directly!

[LilRogue]

Guys, I've been working on adding new thing to the KS, and just added a "Rogue Card".

What do you guys think?