游戲開發(fā)合同的談判

1、2019 年游戲開發(fā)合同的談判本文主要介紹了開發(fā)商在與發(fā)行商簽訂發(fā)行協(xié)議時需要注意的事項。本文的原作者為艾倫。伯赫和凱瑟琳 M.華萊士。艾倫.伯赫是Alston & Bird公司紐約辦事處法律顧問,專注于知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法和娛樂相關(guān)法律，他曾任GT互動軟件公司（現(xiàn) Atari公司）首席法律官。凱瑟琳M.華萊士是Alston & Bird公司亞特蘭大辦事處合作人，專注于知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法。盡管主機生產(chǎn)商和大型游戲發(fā)行商均擁有自己的內(nèi)部開發(fā)團隊，獨立開發(fā)工作室仍是娛樂軟件業(yè)的主要創(chuàng)作力量。在與游戲發(fā)行商達成授權(quán)關(guān)系之前，開發(fā)工作室及其法律顧問必須面對一些財務、市場和法律方面的獨特問題。本文主要介紹

2、此種類型的授權(quán)關(guān)系：開發(fā)工作室保留游戲的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)，而把特定地區(qū)和特定時間內(nèi)的發(fā)行及相關(guān)權(quán)力授予發(fā)行商，由發(fā)行商負責在 PC平臺或單個/多個主機平 臺上發(fā)行游戲。文中還將提及開發(fā)商從主機生產(chǎn)商手中獲取游戲開發(fā)工具以從事開發(fā)，而發(fā)行商則成為該主機的授權(quán)第三方合作伙伴，為該主機提供游戲的情況。財務方面的考慮在開發(fā)過程中，開發(fā)商通常希望盡早簽下發(fā)行協(xié)議，一旦確定了發(fā)行商，從策劃初期到最終壓盤這段時間內(nèi)的費用，按慣例就將由發(fā)行商以版稅預付金的形式承擔。此時開發(fā)商將遇到第一個需要考慮的問題：發(fā)行商可能會要求開發(fā)商將所有預付款用于支付游戲的實際開發(fā)費用，而不能用于支付工作室的經(jīng)常性支出。如果開發(fā)商同意這一條

3、件，那么它只有在游戲的版稅金超過預付款后才可能獲得利潤，而且它會發(fā)現(xiàn)自己在獲得第一筆版稅金之前將無力承擔日常運營的支出（房租、電費、電話費）。在這種情況下，一家依靠單一產(chǎn)品為生且沒有成功作品的工作室很快就會遇到資金上的困擾。（開發(fā)商也可以自主投資以獲取更大的開發(fā)控制權(quán)和更高的版稅收入，但由此而增加的風險是大部分較小的獨立開發(fā)商所無法承受的。）更糟糕的是，對于開發(fā)商來說，由于很少有游戲能夠真正賺回其預付款并獲得額外的版稅金，這筆預付款很可能就是開發(fā)商所能獲得的所有收入。因此，開發(fā)商必須爭取將工作室的經(jīng)常性支出以及每個項目的利潤計入預付款。為了減少風險，開發(fā)商還可以在發(fā)行協(xié)議中進一步明確：當項目被

4、終止時，發(fā)行商必須支付一筆“解除費”（ kill fee ）給開發(fā)商，解除費通常是游戲的當前開發(fā)階段以及下一階段根據(jù)協(xié)議發(fā)行商所應支付的款項。開發(fā)商還可以爭取在發(fā)行協(xié)議中加入“轉(zhuǎn)變”（ turnaround ）條款，以允許開發(fā)商將被終止的項目“出售”給其它發(fā)行商。對于開發(fā)商來說，第二次交易往往比第一次交易更有利可圖。開發(fā)商最關(guān)心的問題通常是版稅率，但這種關(guān)心是沒有必要的。開發(fā)商依據(jù)凈營業(yè)額的一定比例獲得版稅金，電腦游戲的版稅率一般為凈營業(yè)額的20%至 25%，高水準的電腦游戲開發(fā)商可以要求30%到 35%甚至更高的版稅率。與之相比，游戲機游戲的版稅率通常較低，因為利益分配方包括開發(fā)商、發(fā)行商和

5、主機生產(chǎn)商三方，并且主機生產(chǎn)商為了以軟件銷售收入彌補主機銷售的虧損，會要求較高的分成。問題在于，人們對“凈營業(yè)額”的不同理解導致了最終結(jié)果的巨大差異。與好萊塢相比，游戲業(yè)的情況還不算糟糕。在好萊塢，工作室從影片的毛利中扣去多如牛毛的各種費用，最后，即便是一部成功的影片也無法顯示出任何“利潤”。合理的扣除應包括產(chǎn)品成本、運輸費和保險費，而發(fā)行商則會要求把合作廣告費、不限量的供宣傳和贈送之用的游戲光盤的成本也一并扣除，發(fā)行商還會要求賒銷的權(quán)利，這些都需要在簽訂協(xié)議時多加注意，否則開發(fā)商很可能會發(fā)現(xiàn)自己根本無法從銷售收入中獲得任何好處。(為了避免被發(fā)行商所提出的各種克扣項目弄得不知所措，最好在授權(quán)協(xié)

6、議后面附上一份空白的、格式經(jīng)雙方同意的版稅聲明。)還有一個相關(guān)問題是退貨預留金( reserve for returns )，盡管游戲被送到了商店，但可能乏人問津，因此發(fā)行商會堅持預留一部分版稅金，以應付游戲被銷往零售商但最終未能售出而是被退回的情況。授權(quán)協(xié)議如果只是提到對預期退貨給予“合理的預留金”，則顯然沒有多大意義。10%的預留金是否足夠？發(fā)行商可能會認為某類特定游戲的真實退貨比例在40%以上。對此，開發(fā)商及其法律顧問應該問問自己：是否有了較高的退貨預留金，發(fā)行商就愿意承擔風險為這款游戲進行包裝，或者發(fā)行商在需要提升底線或發(fā)布新聞稿時把游戲一腳踢出門外，又或者發(fā)行商的律師希望無人提及此事

7、？無論預留多少，開發(fā)商必須要求在一段規(guī)定的時間內(nèi)對預留進行清算，按慣例為每年清算。開發(fā)進度表：開發(fā)階段發(fā)行協(xié)議列有一份開發(fā)計劃，整個開發(fā)周期通常被劃分為 8 至 15 個階段，開發(fā)商必須按照這份進度表開展工作，每到達一個新的階段都要由發(fā)行商對上一階段進行評估，通過后再行付款。盡管很少有兩份開發(fā)進度表完全一致，大部分進度表都會包含一些特定的標準內(nèi)容，例如最初的設(shè)計文檔，列出游戲的故事情節(jié)、玩法、目標、謎題、關(guān)卡設(shè)計、技術(shù)能力、配置，以及初期的一些美術(shù)。在接下去的一個階段里還會提供游戲原型，游戲初期的一小段試玩內(nèi)容。在基于游戲原型的交易中，開發(fā)進度表很難在原型本身獲得認可前被通過。無論進度表的結(jié)構(gòu)

8、如何變化，最后三個階段是固定不變的： alpha 測試版、 beta 測試版和壓盤版。 alpha 版的完成度通常達到95%，部分關(guān)卡和細節(jié)可能尚未完工，并且該版本可能藏有不少bug.beta 版是用于接受全面質(zhì)保測試的版本，該版本中的任何重大bug 必須在交付壓盤前解決。當然，要清除游戲中的所有bug 幾乎不可能，因此開發(fā)商必須在合同中注明什么樣的 bug 才是質(zhì)保測試中不允許出現(xiàn)的。在制作開發(fā)進度表時，開發(fā)商應該為自己確立一個現(xiàn)實的目標，因為發(fā)行商有權(quán)認為，任何沒有正當理由的延遲都是對合同的違犯。發(fā)行合同中有時會加入擱置否決權(quán)，在這種情況下，即便發(fā)行商沒有明確否定開發(fā)商某階段的工作成果，也

9、可以通過擱置而達到同樣的目的。如果發(fā)行商否定了開發(fā)商某階段的工作成果，開發(fā)商唯有返工，這將令項目的實際進度落后于最初制定的時間表，從而影響開發(fā)商預付款的到位情況。因此，在由于某階段工作未被發(fā)行商通過而不得不返工的情況下，開發(fā)商必須爭取把進度表上的所有截止日期向后推延。與此同時，合同中必須有一項專門的條款，要求發(fā)行商以客觀的技術(shù)指標或合理的商業(yè)指標作為衡量某階段工作合格與否的標準。續(xù)作的權(quán)利以及未來的項目游戲業(yè)內(nèi)可以出現(xiàn)最終幻想11這樣的名字而不令人覺得滑稽，這說明續(xù)作在這塊市場上有著相當?shù)牡匚?。開發(fā)商會堅持保留續(xù)集的權(quán)利，發(fā)行商則認為自己花費了時間和金錢用于支持原作的成功發(fā)售，無論最終能否成為

10、續(xù)作的發(fā)行商，都應該享有分成權(quán)。雙方最終可能會達成一項約定，即雙方都有權(quán)要求開發(fā)續(xù)作，另一方可以以投資的形式參與，雙方的具體關(guān)系如下：開發(fā)商制作續(xù)集并由原發(fā)行商發(fā)行；開發(fā)商制作續(xù)集并由另一發(fā)行商發(fā)行；另一開發(fā)商制作續(xù)集并由原發(fā)行商發(fā)行。此外還有一個替代方案，即在續(xù)作問題上賦予原發(fā)行商以有限的權(quán)利，例如在原作發(fā)售后的一段特定時限內(nèi)有效。此外合同還必須考慮另一種可能性：發(fā)行商不僅索取續(xù)作的權(quán)利，還要求獲得圍繞原作產(chǎn)生的所有授權(quán)產(chǎn)品的經(jīng)營權(quán)。開發(fā)商未來的其它項目所涉及的問題更為寬泛，如同音樂業(yè)和圖書業(yè)，娛樂軟件的發(fā)行商常常持有這種觀點：他們投資的是人才，而不僅僅是一個特定的項目。這一觀點暗示，用戶不

11、再是根據(jù)發(fā)行商的品牌選擇游戲，正如他們不會根據(jù)唱片公司的品牌選擇唱片或根據(jù)出版公司的品牌選擇圖書。（ EA Sports 是一個例外，對于玩家來說，該品牌的知名度遠比游戲開發(fā)者的品牌高得多。）因此，開發(fā)商在與發(fā)行商簽訂其第一份合同時，可能會吃驚地發(fā)現(xiàn)其中竟然列有賦予發(fā)行商從自己的一個或多個未來項目中獲利的條款，即便這些項目與目前的項目毫無關(guān)系。開發(fā)商至少可以要求這些未來的項目應根據(jù)其實際工作量獲得一筆合理的預付金。交叉擔保如果發(fā)行協(xié)議涉及多款游戲、游戲的多個版本，或是續(xù)集以及未來的作品，發(fā)行商可能會要求所有這些項目的權(quán)利金必須“交叉擔?！?。這個古怪的名詞聽起來似乎更適合于出現(xiàn)在一份債務合同中，

12、它給開發(fā)商的感覺是自己成了發(fā)行商的債務人。交叉擔保是指某產(chǎn)品的版稅金在抵消完預付款后必須用于彌補另一款版稅金未能達到預付款的產(chǎn)品的不足部分。理論上，在這一條款下，始終為某一固定發(fā)行商制作游戲的開發(fā)商可能最終會發(fā)現(xiàn)自己一無所獲，因為本應支付給自己的一款已上市一段時間的游戲的版稅金，將被用于抵扣一款剛剛上市的游戲的預付款。解決的方法是要求發(fā)行商至少在部分產(chǎn)品上不要實行這種交叉擔保制度，一旦游戲的版稅金收入超過了該項目的預付款，則此收入不應再用于償還其它游戲的預付款。這樣，即使只有一款游戲開始賺取版稅金，而其它兩款游戲尚未補足預付款，開發(fā)商仍然能夠從中獲利。由此可以看出，開發(fā)商只有仔細審核并思考合同

13、內(nèi)容所可能產(chǎn)生的財務后果，才 能最大程度地避免未來的損失。版權(quán)、商標、廣告和包裝在本文討論的此類授權(quán)協(xié)議中，開發(fā)商擁有游戲的版權(quán)。不過發(fā)行商可能會要求開發(fā)商將游戲的商標所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓給發(fā)行商。如果開發(fā)商擁有游戲的版權(quán)而發(fā)行商擁有游戲的商 標（如游戲標志和游戲角色），情況可能會變得復雜；如果協(xié)議上并未清楚地列明雙方的 權(quán)利，一旦出現(xiàn)創(chuàng)意或商業(yè)上的不和諧，情況甚至會變得非常惡劣。包裝、廣告和公關(guān)等事宜的決定權(quán)通常掌握在發(fā)行商而非開發(fā)商的手中，發(fā)行合同可能會禁止開發(fā)商未經(jīng)發(fā)行商同意而發(fā)布任何與產(chǎn)品相關(guān)的新聞稿，可能會要求核心開發(fā)成 員必須在發(fā)行商組織的促銷活動中到場。這些細微而略顯苛刻的要求比其它條款更

14、為個人 化，它們看上去可能并不像其它直接影響收入的條款那樣重要，但開發(fā)商仍應對此給予充 分的考慮。結(jié)論對于希望收獲與自己的辛勤勞動相等值的回報的開發(fā)工作室來說，一份可操作的開發(fā)合同非常重要。在簽訂合同前仔細審核并思考所有問題，將有助于規(guī)避不必要的風險，令 自己能夠?qū)⑷烤ν度胗螒蜷_發(fā)這一最重要的任務上。Negotiating Development Contractsby Alan Behr and Katherine M. WallaceAlthough console manufacturers and the major game publishers have in-house ga

15、me development talent, independent development studios remain the core creative force of the entertainment software business. When entering into a licensing relationship with a game publisher, the development studio, together with its attorney, must address unique financial, marketing and legal chal

16、lenges. This article addresses the situation in which a development studio retains the copyright in its game but licenses the publishing and related rights to a game publisher for a specified territory and a specified duration. The publisher, in turn, either publishes the game for play for the PC or

17、 for one or more game consoles. In the latter instance, the developer will have received an software development kit from the console manufacturer and the publisher will have been accepted as an authorized third-party provider of software for the console.Financial ConsiderationsDevelopers generally

18、seek to enter into a publishing contract as early in the development process as possible because, once a publisher is on board, the fare for the ride from concept to gold master is customarily borne by the publisher in the form of an advance really a loan repayable solely from future acquired royalt

19、ies. The first financial challenge for the developer will come if the publisher should demand that the developer use all advance payments directly for the actual costs of the game being developed and not for the general overhead of the development studio. If the developer agrees to those financial c

20、onditions, not only will the developer show no profit until the game recoups the amount of the advance( and the publisher at last beginsmaking royalty payments ) , the developer also may find itself unable to meet general operating expenses ( rent, electricity, telephones ) while waiting for the fir

21、st royalty check. As a result, a development studio without multiple( and successful) projects, and with only a lean advance, can quickly finditself in financial difficulty.( The alternative self-financing in exchangefor greater creative control and potentially higher royalties increases riskto a le

22、vel that most smaller, independent developers hope to avoid.)To add insult to injury, because few games actually earn back their advances and harvest additional royalty payments for the developer, the initial advance provided by the publisher may be all the money the developer will ever receive for

23、its troubles. The developer should therefore attempt to build not only coverage for overhead, but also a measure of profit into its advance for each project.A developer can further limit its financial exposure by having the publishing contract provide for payment to the developer in the event that t

24、he project is canceled during development. Payment would be in the form of a kill fee, meaning a specific sum paid on cancellation. A typical kill fee is the amount due under the contract on completion of the milestone currently in production, as well as the subsequent milestone.( Milestone schedule

25、s arediscussed in more detail below. ) A developer also can seek to include a turnaround clause, allowing the developer to“ shop” a canceled project toother publishers. In fact, the subsequent deal made when the development ofthe game is further along is often richer for the developer than the origi

26、nal one.It is to the royalty percentage that developers usually devote their greatest financial attention, but that can be a mistake. The developer typically will be compensated with a royalty based on a percentage of netreceipts. While the developer of a computer game usually can expect royalties o

27、f about 20 percent to 25 percent of net receipts, top developers can command 30 percent to 35 percent, and sometimes more. Console-game royalties generally are lower because three parties developer, publisher and console manufacturer are involved and because console manufacturers, who need to make u

28、p on software the losses they suffer in selling consoles at below manufacturing cost, end up with a healthy piece of game-unit revenues.The problem is that just about everyone defines net differently, often with vastly different financial consequences. The game business, however, is not as bad as Ho

29、llywood, where studios have deducted so much from gross profits to cover expenses that even successful films have failed to show a “ profit ” for contract purposes. Fair and reasonable deductions from gross receipts include the cost of goods, shipping and insurance. Red flags in a publisher's fo

30、rm development contract include the deduction of cooperative advertising expenses from net receipts and deductions for the value of an unlimited number of promotional or giveaway copies. Developers also should beware of rights asserted by publishers to give credits to their customers rather than to

31、take payment ； the net effect could well be that the developer gets nothing for those sales.( A good way to keep from being surprised bywhat a publisher may consider deductible is to have an agreed-to form of royalty statement attached in blank to the license agreement.)A related issue is a reserve

32、for returns. Though many copies may be shipped to stores, few may be bought by gamers. The publisher therefore will rightly insist that it withhold a portion of royalties to cover for the likelihood that much of what it“ sells in ” at retail may not“ sell throughto consumers and may instead be retur

33、ned. The question is, what does a license agreement mean if it provides only for a“reasonable reserve ” for thoseexpected returns ？ Is 10 percent enough ？ A publisher may insist that even 40 percent doesn't represent its true returns figure for certain types of games.The developer and its counse

34、l should ask themselves whether a high returns reserve proves that the publisher is willing to take risks to build hits, that the publisher simply kicks product out the door whenever it needs to puff up the bottom line or issue a press release, or that the publisher's lawyer was just hoping no o

35、ne would ask. Whatever the reserve, the developer should counter that it be liquidated within a prescribed period. An annual liquidation is customary.Development Schedule ： MilestonesDelivery of the game is typically made in accordance with a multiphase development plan articulated in the publishing

36、 agreement, most commonly structured in the form of a milestone schedule. There are customarily between eight and 15 milestones. While the first milestone is often the execution of the agreement itself, each subsequent milestone will likely be for delivery of game work product, each to be presented

37、to the publisher by the developer for comment, approval and payment.Although well-written milestone schedules are rarely identical, there are certain standard deliverables that most milestone schedules contain. One is for the original design document, which outlines the story, method of play, object

38、ives, puzzles, level design, technical capabilities and specifications, and which contains preliminary artwork. There also may be a subsequent milestone for delivery of a prototype, which consists of a small segment of the game in its earliest, minimally playable form, filled with placeholders. Inde

39、ed, in a prototype-based deal, the balance of the milestone schedule may not even be agreed on ( and the project given the green light) until afterapproval of the prototype. Whatever the structure of the milestone schedule, the last three milestones will almost invariably be carefully defined： theal

40、pha, beta and gold master versions. The alpha version will likely be the game in a form that is more than 95 percent complete； some levels and detailswill be incomplete, however, and the version likely will contain bugs. The beta version must have the game in a form ready for full quality assurance

41、testing. Any major bugs in the beta version must be closed prior to the delivery of the gold master for distribution and sale. Given that the elimination of all bugs is almost impossible, it is important for the developer to ask for the contract to state clearly what constitutes an unacceptable bug

42、for the purposes of quality assurance testing.When agreeing to the milestone schedule, a developer should set realistic goals for itself. That is because the publisher will almost certainly have the right to consider any unexcused delay in delivery to be a breach of the publishing contract. Publishi

43、ng contracts sometimes provide for a pocket veto, whereby the publisher's failure to approve a deliverable item( even ifdelivered on time by the developer ) has the same effect as an explicit rejection by the publisher.If the publisher rejects a delivery, the developer must resubmit the delivera

44、ble for that milestone, potentially placing the project behind schedule and further delaying the developer's receipt of crucial advancepayments. It is therefore in the developer's interest to press for a milestone schedule that pushes back the deadline for all deliverables in the event of re

45、asonable delay caused by the need to rework and resubmit any deliverable due to its rejection. Just as important is a provision in the contract requiring the publisher to accept a particular deliverable( where appropriate ) basedon an objective technical standard, or at least a standard based on rea

46、sonably acceptable commercial standards.Sequel Rights and Later ProjectsThe fact that this is an industry that can announce a major title called “Final Fantasy XI ” without a trace of irony indicates how important sequels are to the market. The developer may take the position that it should retain s

47、equel rights. The publisher will likely counter that having spent the time and money to launch a title good enough to warrant a sequel, the publisher deserves the right to participate in the revenue, regardless of whether it is ultimately the publisher of the sequel.The parties may agree to a provis

48、ion whereby either of them would have the right to call for the creation of a sequel and give the other an opportunity to participate financially under each of the following contingencies： Thedeveloper makes the sequel and it is published by the original publisher； thedeveloper makes the sequel but

49、another publisher picks it up； or anotherdeveloper makes the sequel but it is published by the original publisher. An alternative arrangement would be to grant a limited sequel option to the initial publisher, one that would expire within a certain period of time following the release of the initial

50、 game. The contract also should consider the potential that the publisher will seek the rights not only to a sequel or two, but to an entire franchise arising from a hit game.Related to the franchise question is the broader issue of later projects. As in the music business and the book-publishing bu

51、siness, entertainment software publishers often take the position that they are investing in talent, not merely a particular project. There is logic behind this： Consumersgenerally don't choose games based on the publisher's brand any more than they choose music recordings based on the recor

52、d label or select books based on the publisher's imprint. ( One notable exception is the EA Sports brand, which generally means more to consumers than the names of the development studios that create the titles. ) For that reason, a developer receiving its first contract from a publisher may be

53、surprised to find a clause that gives the publisher first dibs on one or more future projects, even if they are not partof the instant product's franchise. At the least, the developer should insist that future projects will have advances appropriate for the specific work required to develop them

54、.Cross-CollateralizationIf the publisher expects multiple releases, either through different versions of a game or through sequels or later projects, it may ask that royalties from most or all of them be“ cross - collateralized.” That odd termof art, sounding as if it more properly belongs in a cont

55、ract of indebtedness, could, at its worst, make the developer's employees feel that they have become debtors of the publisher. Cross-collateralization means that royalties for one project that has earned back its advance may be used to recoup advances on another project that has not yet earned b

56、ack its advance. The strongest kind of cross- collateralization clause makes every game in every version“fullycrossed. ” In theory, a developer that is steadily delivering games for a publisher could find itself being paid nothing under such an arrangement, because royalties that would have been pai

57、d to it for games that have been on the market for some time will instead be applied toward the recoupment of advances for games that have just been released.The solution for the developer is to gain at least a partial uncrossing. For instance, the developer could take the position that once sales o

58、f a game have allowed the publisher to recoup the advance for it, royalties from that game should no longer be applied toward any other advance. In that way, a developer with one game that is earning royalties and two that are not may continue to obtain royalties from the one game that is in the black. There are other possible compromises, but the main lesson to be learned from crosscollateralization is that careful drafting and knowledge of the financial implications of what has been drafted are the best protections against later disappointment.Copyright, Trademark, Advertising and P