There is a clock ticking quietly in the background of one of the oldest disputes in video game history. Richard Garriott, the man who created the Ultima series of role-playing games more than four decades ago, is approaching a legal moment that could hand him back the rights to his own work, whether the publisher that has held them for over thirty years likes it or not.
Garriott sold those rights to Electronic Arts in 1992. At the time, he was one of the most celebrated names in the games industry, and Ultima was one of its most important series. The deal made business sense, but it set in motion a long and largely fruitless relationship that Garriott has tried repeatedly to repair, without success.
The company has done little with the Ultima name in the decades since. The games stopped coming. Garriott, who takes on the in-game persona of Lord British in his work, watched his creation gather dust while he moved on to other projects and other ventures. He has described approaching EA roughly once every ten years in the hope of working together on something new. Each time, he says, the conversations would start promisingly and then simply stop. “They always seemed interested enough to start talking, then abandoned talks just as quickly,” he told interviewer Brian Gaar of Inside Games. The cycle repeated itself without resolution.
Now, however, Garriott has something other than EA’s willingness to rely on. United States copyright law contains a provision that allows creators to reclaim rights they transferred to someone else, provided thirty-five years have passed. The rule was designed to give artists and writers a second chance at benefiting from their own work, rather than having the rights remain permanently in the hands of publishers or studios that acquired them in deals struck long ago. For Garriott, the key date is 2027, thirty-five years after EA took ownership. “And so, I have been waiting,” he said. “Finally, the time has come.”
The picture is not entirely straightforward, however, and the details matter. Copyright and trademark are two different things, and they do not move together in this situation. Even if Garriott successfully reclaims the copyright over the original creative elements of his games; the characters, the world, the stories. EA would still hold the trademark over the Ultima name itself. Trademarks do not expire in the same way that copyright can be reclaimed. They remain active as long as the holder continues to use and defend them. EA has recently filed new trademark applications linked to Ultima, which suggests the company has no intention of letting the brand go.
What this means in practice is that a strange fork in the road may be approaching. Garriott could, in theory, build a new game drawing on the creative foundations he laid over decades of work, but he could not call it Ultima. EA, meanwhile, could continue to develop games under the Ultima name with or without him, drawing on the trademark it still controls but potentially without access to the creative rights Garriott is seeking to recover.
It is an unusual arrangement, and Garriott appears to be thinking carefully about how to approach it. He has spoken about plans under the banner of “Lord British’s Ultima,” describing it as a chance to “regain all the copyrights of my original work.” But he has been cautious about saying exactly what comes next. “What it will become is the next challenge,” he said, suggesting the shape of any new project is still being worked out. He is expected to say more at Dragon Con later this year, where he has indicated he hopes to have “more thoughts together about what that will actually mean.”
As TechSpot reported, the two sets of activity, EA’s trademark filings and Garriott’s copyright manoeuvre, arrived around the same time, though there is no sign that the two sides are working together or that any negotiation is under way. They appear to be moving independently, each watching what the other does.
EA’s trademark filings do not point to any specific project. The company has not announced a new Ultima game, and there is no indication one is in development. The filings serve primarily to protect the name from lapsing, which would otherwise happen if the trademark went unused for too long. Whether they signal genuine creative ambition or simply a determination to hold onto valuable intellectual property remains unclear.
The history of Ultima gives some sense of what is at stake. The series helped define the role-playing game as a form, establishing conventions and setting standards that later games built on. It was one of the first game franchises to develop a rich, persistent world that players could explore across multiple entries. At its peak, it was as significant to its genre as any name in the medium. That legacy has been sitting largely untouched for a generation.
What neither side has yet resolved is whether the franchise is better served by returning to its roots or by being rebuilt from scratch. Garriott’s approach suggests he wants to go back to the original ideas rather than simply repackage the old name. EA’s interest, at least as expressed through trademark activity, appears focused on the brand. Whether those two approaches ever come together, or end up producing two entirely separate things, is a question that 2027 will begin to answer.
About the Author
Marcel Chidozie is a tech analyst and writer covering foreign news, fintech, and emerging technologies at TechRegard. Based in Nigeria, He's passionate about translating complex tech developments into compelling, accessible stories for diverse audiences. His work focuses on how technology shapes innovation across Africa and globally.
