The Lawbringer: Dispelling the panda myths

With the announcement of Mists of Pandaria and the inclusion of the Pandaren race in World of Warcraft, the most-asked question that I received was "How is this possible with the laws in China against killing pandas in video games?" The second most-asked question was "How is this possible when Kung Fu Panda will just sue Blizzard?" After I got over the initial hilarity of imagining the actual Jack Black-voiced Kung Fu Panda taking a dude to court, I realized that the myths about China's involvement with pandas in games, as well as what constitutes a real cause of action in terms of copying characters, are finally issues at the forefront of WoW topics.
The Lawbringer is all about pandas today. You might be sick of them, you might love them, or heck, you might be on the panda fence. I can promise you that even if you aren't a Pandaren fan, you just might learn a little something or two from today's all-panda fun. Sit back, relax, get all Zen-like, and let's see what the Pandaren have to offer us.
Why not sooner?
There are a lot of myths out there about why Blizzard never introduced the Pandaren race earlier than now. The Pandaren has been and still was one of the most requested races by players to be added to the game. Their Blizzard origins come from artist Samwise Didier, who originally used his Pandaren creations on greeting cards and personal drawings for his family. The Pandaren made their way into Warcraft III on Illidan's glaives as well as through Pandaren hero Chen Stormstout, friend of Rexxar during the Orc campaign in The Frozen Throne. Pandaren have also been the stewards of the Blizzard April fool's jokes in years past, so many people considered them a joke, all things considered.
One of those prevailing myths about why Pandaren haven't been fully realized in game sooner was that the Chinese governmental body that approves games for distribution, the Ministry of Culture, had some sort of rule or law that the panda should not be depicted in media being hurt or killed. This is just not true. In fact, there really isn't any type of law like that. There are some crazy laws on the books with regards to pandas, like the millions of dollars in fees zoos have to pay to keep pandas out of China, but not anything with regards to media. In fact, there are a bunch of Chinese-made games with Asian-inspired expansion packs, races, and entire MMOs based around panda people.
So why did China have a problem with Pandaren?
The root of the Pandaren problem wasn't in a law or regulation. Many have speculated that Chinese aversion to the original Pandaren drawings by Samwise had to do with the Pandaren being characterized as samurai in traditional samurai clothing. The panda is inherently Chinese, but the samurai armor and styles that Samwise had drawn them in had the trappings of Japanese culture. The Chinese and Japanese have a long, storied, and problematic history that makes this type of cross-culture expression somewhat looked down upon.
After a while, the Pandaren characters lost their samurai warrior clothing and instead donned the traditional black and white Chinese linen garb and conical straw hat. This, presumably, made the Pandaren more palatable for the Chinese and paved the way for the Pandaren we see today. If you've ever wanted a more clear-cut, teachable moment in video game translation and localization, this is it.
So no, the Chinese authorities and ministry of culture do not have a law on the books banning panda people from getting popped with some magic spells or beaten down in PVP. WoW's troubles in China with releasing expansions, content, or other related products are merely political in nature, having to do with their relationship to the companies that they have contracted with for distribution and development. The ministry of culture does have laws that forbid foreign companies from engaging in joint partnerships, and the NetEase/the9 debacle surrounding the release of Wrath of the Lich King was definitely attributable to "laws on the books." Pandaren? Nope.

The other email I got in droves (and I wish I were using this word in an inflated sense, hyperbolically, if you will) was what Kung Fu Panda thinks of all of this. Well, for one, Kung Fu Panda doesn't think anything about this. He's off saving the world from Ian McShane. He did the voice of the villain in that movie, right? I love Ian McShane.
No, if anyone would be upset, it would be Dreamworks Animation, the company that produced the film, as well as its distribution partner Paramount. The real question is whether or not enough of Mists of Pandaria looks too much like Kung Fu Panda for there to be a cause of action against Blizzard for ripping off Dreamworks' film. There are a few factors to consider:
- Is the work in the same medium?
- Could a consumer get confused as to which brand is being represented?
- Can you even own the concept of a kung-fu-fighting, anthropomorphic panda man?
Think about it this way: I can copyright specific works of fiction and certain specific aspects of that story that go along with the whole, but general concepts and story tropes are not protectable. If I wrote a story about two star-crossed lovers who can't be with each other because of familial tensions and fighting, the corpse of Shakespeare isn't going to take me to court. Similarly, if I wrote a book about zombies, author Max Brooks won't have anything to sue me over. However, if I wrote a book about a roving reporter during the zombie war, there might be something there, à la World War Z (which you should all read). Remember when The DaVinci Code hit it big and authors from all around the world came out of the woodwork to say that they already came up with the idea of a super-smart symbologist who tracks down the lost heirs of Jesus Christ? I actually worked on one of these cases, and it was truly an experience.
Copyright lawsuits come about when two pieces of art or media are too similar to a consumer such that the copies could be mistaken for the original or as a derivative work of the original. Let's stay with the Kung Fu Panda example. If you're a Netflix Instant Watch subscriber, you've most likely seen a movie called Chop Kick Panda show up in one of your queues. Chop Kick Panda is about as rip-off-y as you get in terms of story, character design, and tone. The characters in each film are practically the same. Seriously, go watch the first three minutes of Chop Kick Panda and tell me someone didn't watch Kung Fu Panda and just happen to make their own movie.
Is that a comprehensive look at the copyright issues dealing with story tropes? Nah. Is it enough for this particular topic? It sure is. Mists of Pandaria and Kung Fu Panda can live in harmony and peace, together in a world where pandas doing martial arts don't infringe on each other. Balance in all things, etc.
See you guys next week.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, The Lawbringer, Mists of Pandaria
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 7 of 7)
Kurash Oct 28th 2011 7:01PM
"It's meant to fool grannies into buying 'that karate panda movie' for their grandchildren, that's about it."
You may have missed Mat's three points regarding justifiable litigation. One of them was:
"Could a consumer get confused as to which brand is being represented?"
So... if the movie was, in fact, intended to mislead the public then it certainly could be grounds for a lawsuit.
Silversol Oct 28th 2011 11:47PM
I started to google for the puss in boots knock off but while typing the first word, the suggestions google threw at me made me cry.
Seth Oct 28th 2011 6:49PM
Of course, Activision (owners of Blizzard) made the Kung Fu Panda video game back in 2008. That previous working relationship suggests there may have been talks that we don't know about... even if it was just to give Dreamworks a heads up and let the respective legal departments exchange memos. If anybody could sue someone, Activision-Blizzard has the argument that Dreamworks took the idea of fighting pandas from Warcraft 3. Neither case holds much water though. Dreamworks suing is like saying nobody else can make a video game starring a WWII soldier as a playable character because there already movies and video games with that premise.
No matter what, it is pretty well guaranteed that Blizzard's legal team was put to the task of ensuring the concept wouldn't cost the shareholders a bundle of cash before a single line of code was written. They wouldn't spend all the money on development without considering the possible legal costs.
Clansey Oct 28th 2011 6:49PM
Pandaren were introduced in WC3: Frozen Throne, which came out in 2004. Kung Fu Panda came out in 2008. If anything, Dreamworks took the Pandaren idea from Blizzard...
Cyno01 Oct 28th 2011 8:21PM
No mention of the obvious Prior Art argument either, that Pandaren were used in a Blizzard video game in 2002 and Kung Fu Panda came out in 2008?
Sven Oct 29th 2011 2:40AM
Speaking of potential lawsuits.
A comment from last gold capped is something like "pet battles is not like pokemon. It IS pokemon"
Are you aware of any copyrights that might stop pet battles making it into MoP after all?
Suzaku Oct 29th 2011 6:13AM
Considering that the video game systems of "capture or recruit other characters to your team, raise their stats, and then make them fight" is a long-established one dating back to the 80s, at least, I'm going to say no. Digital Devil Story: Megami Tensei, for example.
And of course, Pokemon itself was trying to recreate the popularity of bug collecting / bug battling, which is a pretty major hobby industry in Japan.
krislen Oct 29th 2011 4:30AM
It should also be mentioned that even if dreamworks filed suite Blizzard could and would most likely counter sue as the idea of pandaren and their lore, even in the current chinese based implementation, was around LONG before kung fu panda.
FireMaster Oct 29th 2011 12:44PM
Yeah, I get the point, Jully.
So I hope they sell it to us afterwards, because I want the mount so bad.
Another thing I think that influenciates this is the monthly fee, as here in Brazil it will costs almost US$9, so it's a great diference...
sobocop Oct 29th 2011 1:51PM
Definitely one of the clearest and informative Lawbringers I have ever read. Thanks for putting an end (hopefully) to some of the nonsense around MoP.