It sounds like by “giving us more creative freedom with our IPs” we’re expected to have industry level knowledge on how to successfully get merchandise such as toys, figurines, etc, anything more high quality than shirts and stickers. When we don’t. That doesn’t seem very fair given most of us don’t know how to do that…?
You are right. The tilted square is just a simple geometric shape and is actually ineligible for copyright protection due to its simplicity according to the Threshold of originality as defined by copyright law.
TLDR: It’s not original enough to be copyrightable.
To note, we already had the freedom to make toys based of our IP before this update, so we haven’t been given any extra freedom, they just removed an option that was easier yet gave less freedom.
We actually probably have less freedom now as we can likely not partner with Roblox to give in-game items upon purchasing a toy (which some toys affiliated with Roblox in the past have done) Think toy-codes, etc.
Hard to be specific due to NDAs, but I have been a a part of a game team developing a sequel to one of the most popular event games on the website from 2017 with the name “Robloxia” in it where we use only blocky R15 avatars. As the lead character designer, I refuse to use anything but the classic blocky avatars because I don’t like Rthro, I would say most people don’t. Our logo has an altered version of the Roblox square. We’ve had toys in the Stars program for 5 years.
You’re telling me absolutely none of that will be acceptable now? We have to completely rebrand and redo years of work? Hundreds of characters have been designed, finalized. Promotional material with our logos, done ages ago, ready to go. We won’t be able to market what we see to be a highly marketable IP? EDIT: I should probably mention, several of these blocky characters are CONTINUOUSLY USED in OFFICIAL ROBLOX promotional material!
Or will we be allowed to if we discuss this with Roblox, grandfathered in or whatever?
I’d like to know how these new rules of IP will affect the UGC program and artists advertising their work on social media, as this post seems to focus specifically on experiences at the moment.
This update does not prevent you from using R15/R6 or any of the blocky avatars, to put it simply they don’t want you to use them commercially off-platform.
I don’t recall ever using “Roblox” itself in any of my game titles, but a long time ago (2009-2014 or so) I would frequently upload new projects over old ones that had been abandoned due to the system of limited place slots. As such, most of my games, even ones from just last year, are dated to 2009 for no good reason. I almost want to start moving things around to get old places back in the list just to see what happens…
You may advertise and promote your experiences with any avatar types. You do need to submit assets for approval if you are using the “On Roblox” badge and looking to do non-digital promotion (billboards, tv ads etc).
The restrictions are around off-platform commercial use (making products or doing something like a TV show that has characters that look like our R6 avatar type). Like some folks have speculated in the thread, this is to protect Roblox IP and association with commercial products not created by Roblox. The classic R6-style avatar is iconic, but R15 and Rthro bodies are more customizable and less recognizable.
If there are any specific questions or approvals needed please submit to the form on the Name and Logo Guidelines page and we can advise.
I don’t want to simply restate what has already been said, but this seems like a very rough idea for the platform as a whole. I can understand not wishing for Roblox IP to be used for unofficial and off-platform commercial products, but essentially banning the usage of Roblox IPs such as the tilt logo, the “Roblox”, “Blox”, and similar names, and other symbols that identify and are iconic to the platform from usage within Roblox experiences that are hosted entirely on the site is unacceptable. The argument for “growing beyond the platform” doesn’t make sense because many developers wish to stay on the platform. Are you saying that you’d prefer developers to use Roblox as a testing ground for games and then expand to a “real” game? Roblox is a platform, and even if it’s not perfect, hundreds of experiences are designed specifically for the platform and aren’t designed to leave it.
Additionally, while I’m not in the Stars Program, I know that it’s been helpful to many developers. Sunsetting the program doesn’t give any additional freedom; it simply removes another marketing option for developers.
Overall, I really hope Roblox heavily reconsiders these decisions. They do not help the platform, and may even actively harm it, especially for discovery and memorability. Making massive decisions internally like this without talking to developers is why so much backlash occurs, and the only way to push through is to let Roblox know how developers feel.
Will ROBLOX and its developer relations still provide support in the event of a creator with a smaller following planning to create merchandising? Unless you have alot of connections to the industry and/or money, this task seems very herculean for a sole creator.
Also, while the Stars Program is now officially over, will ROBLOX still be there to support the endeavours of up and coming creators? It would definetly make collaborations with mass produced merchandising much easier.
So to get this straight, we can ask for approval to not have to ‘fully follow these rules’, for example commercially making a toy based on an in-experience R15 / R6 avatar?