4 ms·
They are protecting their brand, and are trying hard to create a strong trademarkable portfolio. Copyright expires, yes, but none of the case as I understand it
by simonlc 7y ago
They are protecting their brand, and are trying hard to create a strong trademarkable portfolio. Copyright expires, yes, but none of the case as I understand it really brought copyright infringement into question. Instead it was about trade dress and trademark. Those don't expire. Xio created all their own assets and material, and only reused ideas to make a game. People reuse ideas to make games all the time.
They're a smart business, and very tactical. I think when they do decide to drop the hammer on someone it's because they know they can win.
They also don't do it if they don't need to. If you beat them in a search engine ranking, you better believe they'll come knocking.
- missosoup 7y agoHow does "infringed on the Tetris Company's copyrights by replicating elements such as the playfield dimensions and the shapes of the blocks" fall under protecting the brand?
- defertoreptar 7y agoThe brand, the IP, is the whole company. Once a court rules that people can recreate the rules of Tetris and make money, then they will have to compete against generic brands, and probably lose millions of annual revenue. The thing is that they don't have copyrights on playfield dimensions and the shapes of the blocks, since those are actually functional elements of the game. However, they have been able to protect their brand by claiming that these things fall under trade dress. What they've argued in court is like Ford saying that Chevy infringed on their trade dress by also using wheels, an engine, a steering wheel, etc.
- simonlc 7y agoWhy would I even answer you if you're downvoting me? lol