In a previous blogpost - The 2006 Pac-Man Licensing Fiasco - I talked about how the rights to Ms. Pac-Man were turned over to General Computer Corporation in 2006, and Namco had to pay G.C.C. every time they used the character or any of her games. Believe it or not, that contract was supposed to end just a few days ago. Namco was about to get the Ms. Pac rights back permanently, without copyright issues getting in the way.
And that all came crumbling down, from a company every single video game fan despises.
This company is AtGames. You know them from scamming you out of $20 on a falsely advertised Pac-Man console. *THAT* Atgames. Right before this contract that has been plaguing the Pac-Man franchise was about to end, AtGames sent a mini Ms. Pac-Man arcade machine to a "Curran" (I believe this is Kevin Curran, one of the original 1981 Ms. Pac devs). They then convinced the GCC team to grant them the "license" to produce the Ms. Pac machine...but they didn't say anything to Namco, and AtGames didn't even have the Pac-Man rights anymore.
This wasn't GCC's fault. Keep in mind that AtGames had already released Namco-licensed Pac-Man products. Why would they think anything of some stupid Arcade1UP wannabe? It makes sense to just license it and move on...
Now here's where things get interesting. After showing Curran the machine, AtGames asked to BUY the royalty interest of Ms. Pac-Man from GCC, for god knows how much money. The worst game company in the universe, buying one of the greatest video games of all time. My god.
So. What happened? Truthfully, we...don't know yet. AtGames claims they DID acquire the royalty. GCC has said nothing. Namco STILL has no understanding what the fuck is even going on. And even if AtGames DID buy this royalty, they STILL can't do anything with it, because they wouldn't be able to release anything under the Pac-Man name anyway (Namco's still a required party for that).
This is a court case that was filed less than a week ago. Everything will be answered in due time, and I'll update this post overtime to reflect that. This could go down as one of the most horrifying things in the entire fucking copyright system.
As a PSA to everyone: do NOT buy anything AtGames-branded. Maybe don't even buy anything Ms. Pacman-related for a while. Root for Namco to win this case, and get the rights back to something they should've owned for the past 13 years. There's nothing we can really do physically, but the information needs to be out there. I shouldn't be using a Wikia for something like this, but I think its VERY important that Pac-fans know about this and are aware of it. (and hey, we're branded as "FANDOM" now, right?)
(Information was sourced from this video originally, but since then the full court document has been posted here. I haven't made any guesswork here like I did on the previous post - this is seriously, verbatim, what's going on right now...)
UPDATE 9/26/2019: AtGames has released some stupid press release thing claiming they have aquired "Ms. PAC-MAN-related rights". This is still GCC's rights only, thus the suspicious "related". They also mention a game called "Pac-Baby" (Baby Pac-Man?), which they...say is actually Jr. Pac-Man? Great job, you don't even know anything about what you just fucking bought.
The most disgusting part of this page is this quote: "As part of our ongoing initiative to be caretakers of important cultural touchstones, we are privileged to gain these valuable rights [.]" AtGames has NO care for anything they've ever released, and they only bought the Ms. Pac-Man """rights""" in attempt to fuck over Namco for not letting them release some garbage arcade machine. Keep in mind that Namco WAS about to get the rights back before AtGames snuck in last minute, making it HARDER for this "important cultural touchstone" to ever be seen again.
Obviously, this press release is still mostly a bullshit lie. Even if they had GCC's rights, they most certainly don't have Namco's. Namco still has the upper hand in this case, no matter what AtGames says. All hope is not lost yet...
As an exciting side note, AtGames is now being sued by Walgreen's as well. This is a completely unrelated thing, but hopefully its another opportunity for AtGames to get completely torn to shreds, as they deserve. :)
UPDATE 11/1/2019: After taking literal ages, AtGames has released their response to Namco regarding their submitted court document (thanks for wasting money on all these documents, Madlittlepixel). And to be honest? I can barely understand the damn thing. All they really say is that Namco is only suing them in order to "punish" them for buying the Ms. Pac-Man rights, which...yeah, was pretty clear from the beginning. Obviously that's their point, and Namco can legally persue that, just as AtGames can pointlessly buy a contract from some idiot game programmers from 1981.
Really, the only notable thing here is an e-mail which Namco sent out when they first learned that AtGames bought the royalty rights. In it, they write:
"AtGames has the opportunity to preserve its current relationship [...] with Bandai Namco, so long as AtGames complies with Bandai Namco’s request, i.e. that AtGames rescinds whatever offer it has proposed to GCC relative to assignment of the agreement between Bandai Namco and them, and refrains from any other efforts to interfere with the contractual relationship between Bandai Namco and the GCC successors. If that commitment is not forthcoming by close of business today [,] BNEA will immediately terminate its current license agreements with AtGames, and will permanently remove AtGames as a partner with which it conducts business."
Then they hilariously follow up with:
"In the meantime, to help AtGames make its decision, we take this opportunity to reiterate that, should AtGames acquire GCC’s interest in Ms. PAC-MAN, pursuant to current agreement with GCC, Bandai Namco can ensure that AtGames investment will be useless. AtGames can be promised that continued actions will be taken by Bandai Namco to ensure that there is zero income stream delivered pursuant that agreement, as has already been contemplated and decided by Bandai Namco, even prior to AtGames involvement in the situation."
To summarize, AtGames will earn literally nothing from Ms. Pac-Man, and Namco will go out of their way to make sure that's the case. Which effectively means that if AtGames doesn't somehow lose the rights in court, Ms. Pac will disappear forever, outside of dumb loophole handheld games and whatever else. That's been the reality for over a decade; its really not surprising. Although I wouldn't be surprised if the very few non-loophole versions of the game left (iOS, Android, Xbox, etc.) are taken down soon, as money still went to GCC over those.
However, now we know that Namco has completely terminated their contract with AtGames...and by that logic, why the hell did they release a new Pac-Man console LAST WEEK!? This console HAS to violate some sort of copyright infringement. Hopefully Namco catches this before the trial starts, as this alone could probably make them win the case.
UPDATE 11/20/19...and a bad one... After denying Namco a preliminary injunction, the court has claimed that Namco is is unlikely to win the case, with AtGames being in favor.
So basically, this is the end. From my gut feeling, I'm almost certain Pac-Man as a whole (not just the Mrs.) will be over from this. Namco isn't gonna continue a barely-selling franchise when every element of it could just be stripped away by greedy American corporations. Unless Namco has a complete turnaround in court...Pac-Man is gone.
Is there still a chance this could work out? Maybe. But don't get your hopes up. And just as a reminder: since 2002, U.S. companies have been fighting over rights they can't use for a fucking yellow sphere from the 80s wearing lipstick. Its just a title to have - "I partially own a vaguely important video game now!" - that they can use to impress investors or something. And no one will just fucking give or sell the rights to Namco - the only company who deserves them.
The court case should be next month. AtGames filed a counter-lawsuit against Namco as well though, presumably just to stall time, so who knows when this will really be over...
UPDATE 12/17/19: So maybe my last update was a *bit* melodramatic. Maybe. I honestly don't even know anymore. What I do know is that tomorrow, the Initial Case Mgmt. Conference (ICMC) is taking place between Bandai Namco and AtGames.
In an ICMC, all of the parties meet with the judge together for the first time. In stupid copyright cases like this, its possible everything could be settled here; but that's only if AtGames gives up their royalty rights. Will AtGames give back something that they obtained through extremely shady and possibly illegal business practices? Or will they refuse to give up an agreement that has literally no benefit on anyone's behalf? Only time will tell...if even, because sometimes this stuff isn't even made public until ages later...
UPDATE 12/19/19: Surprise! AtGames *didn't* just give the rights back yesterday. Shocker, I know. And the trial will start on...April 26, 2021. Literally a year and four months from now. Whoopee...
It is stated that the case schedule had to be elongated because "The parties will have to do some discovery overseas", which I presume means that Bandai Namco's Japanese division is getting involved - and if that's the case, its a good thing. Namco of Japan is the one who signed this royalty agreement, intentionally disguised as a full rights turnover agreement, in nineteen-eighty-fucking-three. They know more about it than anyone, and could outright prove its deceiving nature. But we still don't know for sure, and likely won't for months on end.
New information on the case will likely come to a complete halt at this point. But the moment anything new happens, I'll be sure to update here again.
(And to the kids reading: make sure you ask your parents to return any AtGames products you receive on Christmas. Dig the receipt out of the trash, if you have to. Do it for Pac-Man!)
UPDATE 1/24/20: For the past few weeks, Namco had been begging the court to let them respond to/disprove claims made in AtGames' response to them. They eventually agreed, and Namco updated their initial court document to have several more pages added.
If Namco is to be believed, practically everything AtGames said in their response was a complete lie. For example, AtGames claimed that Namco approved a Ms. Pac-Man plug & play of theirs...except said plug & play never existed. Namco said they would review it and consider licensing it, but AtGames never even developed the damn thing.
While most of the other changes are just talking about more stupid plug & plays, there is one line in this document that is VERY important, and likely VERY bad for AtGames:
"AtGames has also breached its obligation to timely provide [Bandai Namco Entertainment America] with royalty reports during the term of the contract pursuant to [...] the 2018 Agreement. In fact, AtGames has not provided any royalty reports to BNEA for the 2019 calendar year. Further, following BNEA’s termination of the 2018 Agreement, AtGames has failed to comply with its obligations under [...] the 2018 Agreement."
Now, I am not 100% certain on this. Legal terms are confusing, and there aren't textbook definitions for them. But to my understanding, this means NAMCO was not paid royalties for AtGames' Pac-Man plug & plays. The company who is demanding Namco to pay royalties based on a confusing 40-year old agreement...was not paying Namco's own royalties from a simple 1-year old agreement. Holy. Fucking. Shit.
It would be EXTREMELY hypocritical for the court to not give back the Ms. Pac-Man rights to Namco from this alone. What AtGames has done is the exact equivalent of what Namco accidentally did, but instead was done intentionally. Things are looking brighter in this case for Namco; hopefully it will stay that way.
UPDATE 3/5/20: Would you believe me if I said this case is getting even MORE stupid?...actually, you probably would. But its officially reached a state more idiotic than I could ever believe.
Firstly, for those who didn't see my comment from a few weeks back, AtGames has confirmed the amount they paid for the Ms. Pac-Man "rights"...TEN MILLION DOLLARS. That is an ABSURD price for something like this, especially since it relies on Namco making Ms. Pac-Man products - something they've barely done in over a decade - for AtGames to earn anything from it.
...But according to Namco, AtGames' purchase actually means...nothing! At all! The details are very confusing, but it seems that whatever AtGames spent ten million on...it wasn't the Ms. Pac-Man royalty rights. I have no idea WHAT it was. And AtGames probably doesn't know either. But I do have a theory: whenever AtGames mentions them aquiring the rights, they exclusively name Kevin Curran in relation to it. Curran was only one out of a dozen (or so) people who earned royalties from Ms. Pac-Man, which makes me believe that AtGames actually only bought his royalty stake, and not anyone else's. AtGames presumably thought that accounted for all of Ms. Pac-Man's royalties, when it was really only a TINY fraction of it, while Curran took the money and ran.
This case has officially gone beyond the point of comprehension. I don't even know what to *think* anymore. But uh...I'll update here soon, maybe? If I can even make out what nonsense will inevitably happen next time?
UPDATE 6/10/20: Literal minutes ago, to everyone’s shock, Ms. Pac graced us once more...as a newly-announced Arcade1UP in IGN’s Covid-alternative E3 livestream. If you’re a Ms. Pac-Man legal knowledge expert, you’ll know this means...absolutely nothing. Arcade machines without coin slots are a bizarre legal loophole for Ms. Pac-Man, which Namco doesn’t have to pay any royalties for releasing.
However, this announcement...actually has me fearing for the worst. Keep in mind that this entire dispute started because AtGames was trying to release a nearly-identical crappy arcade machine themselves. This makes the Arcade1UP seem like the final “fuck you” to AtGames; as if Namco has finally given up on trying to get the rights back, but made sure to deal a major blow to AtGames in the process.
Another odd thing I noticed was that in IGN’s written article about the 1UPs (but *not* the livestream), they actually mention the Ms. Pac-Man legal issues; effectively as a SELLING POINT. It reads “Ms. Pac-Man has been at the centre of licensing battles over the years, making this a major coup for Arcade1UP”. They know exactly what they’re doing; appealing to the HIGHEST of Pac-Maniacs who know this buried info (let alone care). It’s honestly hilarious, my fears aside.
Whatever the case, things are not over yet. Namco and AtGames will have their 874th “Settlement Conference” soon. But even if Ms. Pac-Man never escapes copyright hell, at least AtGames’ worst nightmare ended things off.
UPDATE 10/6/2020: Not sure if this really warrants an update, but I may as well put it here anyway. The AtGames lawsuit was recently filed under seal, meaning information can no longer be seen by the public. As such, there probably won't be a proper update here again, unless info leaks out from a fluke or something. I uh...kinda wonder if I'm the one that caused the seal to happen with this very blogpost...
However, it probably won't be hard to tell what the end result is - though it will take a matter of time. If Ms. Pac-Man shows up in a new Pac-Man game? Namco won. If Ms. Pac-Man continues to only be used on mountains of mediocre loophole arcade machines? Namco lost. I believe that Namco will make the most of Ms. Pac if the royalties are out of the picture, and that it would be the telltale sign to show if the rights were finally turned over.
In some better news, most (if not all) Pac-Man-related products produced by AtGames have officially ended production. The AtGames website lists them as "discontinued"; this is only stated on the Pac-Man ones, so it's pretty obvious the lawsuit led to the takedown. For some inexplicable reason, they still...heavily advertise them though? It's possible they're sitting on old stock that they're still attempting to sell. Either way, it's a good sign for Namco, if nothing more.
UPDATE 11/2/2020: ...Well, the case is over. On October 28th, 2020, Bandai Namco and AtGames settled out of court. As to what the results are? Absolutely no idea. No actual info is turning up, and nothing even hints at what either party chose to settle on. It's a complete 50/50 chance as to who got the better outcome here - and as with everything else, we'll only learn with time.
Did AtGames return the rights, putting us on the cusp of a much-needed Ms. Pac-Renaissance?...or did Namco give up, and we've reached her absolute final day? I wish I could say. Not knowing is the worst part out of all of this. But I'll be hoping for the best, and keeping close track of anything Ms. Pac-Man-related in the near future.
UPDATE 11/4/2020: AtGames is currently getting hardcore roasted over their newest press release: AtGames Reintroduces Bandai Namco Arcade Classic Games. Those consoles that were previously removed from the market last month? They're back, and as terrible as ever. Greeeat...
The way the article describes the consoles is so over-the-top that it's downright embarrassing. Calling it "innovative", when it's a bunch of games from literally 40 years ago? Calling it "popular", when Walmart and Walgreens had to reduce the price to literal cents per system? The ending, though, is the cherry on top of the shit-sundae - "This announcement comes after a U.S. federal court dismissed Bandai Namco's lawsuit against AtGames over IP rights in Pac-Man and Ms. Pac-Man games last week [.]"
Many people are under the impression that our worst fear took place. That AtGames genuinely owns, at least a portion of, the Ms. Pac-Man rights...but I don't think that's necessarily the case. It still could be, but we can't say for sure yet. Remember that this was a settlement; it's possible that AtGames was willing to trade their Ms. Pac royalties away in exchange for renewing their stupid plug-and-plays' license. The main key to look out for is some sort of "removal" of a Ms. Pac-Man product - which would be the most definite proof that AtGames is permanently involved. (Or for someone to actually, y'know, say it instead of making it so confusing to figure out the truth, but we know that will never happen...)
I encourage everyone to contribute by posting your "kind" words in the @AtGamesGaming comment section on Twitter. They get particularly "happy" if you send a photoshopped logo saying "AssGames". Even if the rights were returned, they don't deserve forgiveness for what they caused in the first place. So get in there and have some fun!
Ireallydontcare123456789 (talk) 20:00, 4 November 2020 (UTC)ireallydontcare123456789
UPDATE 4/6/2022: ...Well. It's been a while since I've updated this blogpost. In fact, I haven't updated here since the lawsuit's settlement, and AtGames' illogical press coverage of it. But with something I became aware of a mere three minutes ago, we're definitely due for an update.
Before we get into the...main talking point here, let's go over some basics. Since the lawsuit, a few Ms. Pac-Man-related products have been released: the Ms. Pac-Man Arcade1UPs are still flooding QVC, though as we know, this is a court-defined "loophole" with Namco's contract. There is also a Ms. Pac-Man "SH Figuarts" action figure in the works; this is somewhat of a big deal, as it's actually produced by Bandai Namco themselves, rather than licensing it out to a third-party like Arcade1UP. However, I'm inclined to believe this would be some sort of technical loophole too. There was also a single tweet showing the Mrs. recently, who had otherwise not been seen on the Pac-Man Twitter account since literally the day of the lawsuit's filing (a move I've always assumed was out of resentment...). All in all, these could be seen as good signs; but really, none of these would be outright violating their AtGames contract, and are effectively all working around it, in a way.
...But now, let's get to the big stuff. Pac-Man Museum +, launching this May; a compilation of classic Pac-Man games including...well, a pretty stellar line-up, but no Ms. Pac-Man. (and no Pac-Man World games, but that ship has long sailed by now...) However - as some of you are likely aware of right now - the majority of the Pac-Man family surprisingly appears in the compilation, as a series of collectible "trophies" to decorate the arcade room. There's Chomp-Chomp, Professor Pac-Man, Jr. Pac-Man, a...somewhat off-looking Baby Pac-Man, and then uh...as somewhat expected, none of Ms. Pac-Man.
In what is seemingly Ms. Pac-Man's place is an unknown Pac-Woman; wearing a pink hat, with what might be a bow on the corner of it. At first, I was convinced this was literally Ms. Pac-Man's mother, who is a close match for the design. In a later trailer, her name was announced as "Pac-Mom", which also somewhat implied this; though naturally, the role of being a mother much applies to Ms. Pac herself too.
However, there was one factor which I've been waiting on confirmation for. Just one little thing, which I couldn't figure out. In Pac-Man Museum +, there are two key games which feature Ms. Pac-Man in them extensively: Pac-Land and Pac-in-Time. Pac-in-Time is particularly notable, as she appears in the opening intro; practically being the first thing you see in the game as a result. With Pac-Land, she appears at the end of each round; possibly for this reason, Namco generally never edited her out, even following the 2006 GCC conflict.
The question has remained in my head for months. With the lawsuit long over, would Pac-Man Museum + be able to keep Ms. Pac-Man intact in these ports? Keep in mind, we still have no idea what Namco and AtGames' settlement was. With all the crazy loopholes, nonsensical workarounds, and everything in between...would Ms. Pac-Man, at the very least, reprise her role in a Pac-Land port, of all things?
...No. No she wouldn't.
In a launch I wasn't even aware was happening, Pac-Land has been released as a standalone download for the "Arcade Archives" line by Hamster Corporation. And for the first time in history, both Ms. Pac-Man and Baby Pac-Man have been outright replaced. Standing in their place are Pac-Mom and...well, whatever the fake Baby's name is. I don't know it yet.
Case in point, this is bad. REALLY bad. It's especially concerning seeing it from a company like Hamster, who are known for releasing games in near-perfect form; almost never making alterations to the original ROMs, even down to the most minor things. I think it's fair to assume that this release will reflect the Pac-Man Museum + version - and most likely, Pac-in-Time will receive similar alterations, along with any potential other (non-arcade machine without coin slot) Pac-Man game ports down the road.
A lot of people still try to cling on to any little glimmers of hope; myself included, truthfully. Though if Namco is willing to rewrite history and flat-out hack Ms. Pac-Man out of the original games, I'm not sure there's any hope left. In my eyes, this may genuinely be the end of Ms. Pac-Man's legacy. Perhaps one day, this one bullshit contract will expire, be rewritten, or something similar. But that takes time, and I'm guessing it wouldn't be any time soon.
Farewell, Ms. Pac-Man. May you one day be able to strip your legally distinct lavender hat off, and reveal the bright red bow that a scam company spent $10,000,000 U.S. dollars on. You will be missed.
UPDATE 4/17/2023: Since the Namco-AtGames lawsuit's settlement, AtGames has - technically speaking - been allowed to produce Pac-Man plug & plays. However, for a little over two years, AtGames played it safe; following the lawsuit, only the Flashback Blast system continued production (as it's what AtGames' court-ordered contract applies to), with nothing "new" being created featuring Pac-Man by AtGames.
...in North America, that is. In something I somehow missed by nearly half a year, AtGames has produced a new Pac-Man plug & play. Introducing the Legends Flashback 2022! In a badly-repurposed Sega Genesis shell, this horrific amalgamation of questionable license features the crappy PAL version of Pac-Attack, with Pac-Man - looking incredibly pissed off at what he's being subjected to - slapped on the front of the box.
Here's what I assume the catch is (there's always a catch); this console is only available in Europe. Additionally, I noticed that all Namco titles - despite the console releasing in 2022 - have a copyright date of "2019". If I had to guess, Namco's contract with AtGames was likely looser in Europe, and AtGames is feeding off of some old 2019 contract for the Pac-Man license (which is likely invalidated in America).
Honestly, I'd be surprised if this console doesn't break some sort of contract, even in Europe; but at the same time, I would fully expect AtGames to stretch anything just to get Pac-Man on the cover. It's just what they do. Did you know that AtGames relies on a contract from ColecoVision for games they don't own? Or that, upon the initial formation of the AtGames company, the first thing they did was stretch their newly-formed Sega contract to sue Radica in court? Since the very beginning of AtGames, they've had intentions of chaos; and it won't end unless every single contract they possess expires.
Ireallydontcare123456789 (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Ireallydontcare123456789