3 ms·

You can't copyright a procedure or process, but you can copyright the text of the instructions for the procedure. That doesn't stop someone writing an original

by simonh 6y ago

You can't copyright a procedure or process, but you can copyright the text of the instructions for the procedure. That doesn't stop someone writing an original text of instructions for doing the same thing though. That's how come there are clones of Monopoly. https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/20311/horse-opoly https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/20311/horse-opoly

shagie 6y ago
Board games are protected with patents. For example, with Khet ( https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/16991/khet-laser-game https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/16991/khet-laser-game ) there is https://patents.google.com/patent/US7264242 https://patents.google.com/patent/US7264242 which was upheld - https://www.generalpatent.com/professor-s-company-wins-1-6-million-patent-infringement-lawsuit-over-board-games.html https://www.generalpatent.com/professor-s-company-wins-1-6-m... The patent for Monopoly is https://patents.google.com/patent/US2026082A/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US2026082A/en which expired in '52 There is also issues of trademark on the '-opoly' games... which was settled in '83 with https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law/publications/landslide/2014-15/march-april/not-playing-around-board-games-intellectual-property-law/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law... > Finally, in 1983, the Supreme Court let stand an appeals court ruling that the word “Monopoly” had become generic, because purchasers associated the name with the product rather than with the source.7 Specifically, evidence showed that purchasers of Monopoly were motivated by their knowledge of the game, and not by its association with Parker Brothers. Directly as a result of this case, Congress amended § 14(c) of the Lanham Act, which addresses cancellation of a registered mark, later that year. Congress added language clarifying that a mark becomes generic only if its “primary significance . . . to the relevant public” is as the generic description of the particular goods or services, and that purchaser motivation is not used as the test. --- There are clones of Monopoly because the patent expired long ago and the trademark was lost in 83. ... Which is also why McDonalds did its Monopoly game in '87.
- joombaga 6y ago
  > Which is also why McDonalds did its Monopoly game in '87. Are you saying McDonald's needed to wait for the trademark to expire? Or that they had to wait for a new trademark to be established? Wasn't the promotion collaborative? Looking at McDonald's Monopoly commercials from 87 [1] and 88 [2], there's a Parker Brothers TM in both years. [1] https://youtu.be/F737BVBKMCE?t=4 https://youtu.be/F737BVBKMCE?t=4 [2] https://youtu.be/KmV5O06McZk?t=14 https://youtu.be/KmV5O06McZk?t=14
  - shagie 6y ago
    The Parker Brother's trademark they had to license... probably to get specific imagery. However, the suffix "-opoly" as it refers to games was lost. McD's probably waited until the trademark on Monopoly was sufficiently weakened for them to go out, license the other parts of it (as it was Parker Brothers(TM). https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4803%3Aqpmmx2.1.1&p_search=searchstr&BackReference=&p_L=100&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=Monopoly&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24FM&expr=PARA1+and+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=Parker+Brothers&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24ALL&a_default=search&f=toc&state=4803%3Aqpmmx2.1.1&a_search=Submit+Query https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4803%3A... In particular - https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:qpmmx2.4.2 https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:qp... is likely the one that they're referring to which covers the trademark on the board and game pieces - which is different than the game name. Also note that many of those (now dead) trademarks were all filed in '85 - '87... after they lost the trademark in '83.

by simonh 6y ago

shagie 6y ago

Board games are protected with patents. For example, with Khet ( https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/16991/khet-laser-game https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/16991/khet-laser-game ) there is https://patents.google.com/patent/US7264242 https://patents.google.com/patent/US7264242 which was upheld - https://www.generalpatent.com/professor-s-company-wins-1-6-million-patent-infringement-lawsuit-over-board-games.html https://www.generalpatent.com/professor-s-company-wins-1-6-m... The patent for Monopoly is https://patents.google.com/patent/US2026082A/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US2026082A/en which expired in '52 There is also issues of trademark on the '-opoly' games... which was settled in '83 with https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law/publications/landslide/2014-15/march-april/not-playing-around-board-games-intellectual-property-law/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law... > Finally, in 1983, the Supreme Court let stand an appeals court ruling that the word “Monopoly” had become generic, because purchasers associated the name with the product rather than with the source.7 Specifically, evidence showed that purchasers of Monopoly were motivated by their knowledge of the game, and not by its association with Parker Brothers. Directly as a result of this case, Congress amended § 14(c) of the Lanham Act, which addresses cancellation of a registered mark, later that year. Congress added language clarifying that a mark becomes generic only if its “primary significance . . . to the relevant public” is as the generic description of the particular goods or services, and that purchaser motivation is not used as the test. --- There are clones of Monopoly because the patent expired long ago and the trademark was lost in 83. ... Which is also why McDonalds did its Monopoly game in '87.

joombaga 6y ago
> Which is also why McDonalds did its Monopoly game in '87. Are you saying McDonald's needed to wait for the trademark to expire? Or that they had to wait for a new trademark to be established? Wasn't the promotion collaborative? Looking at McDonald's Monopoly commercials from 87 [1] and 88 [2], there's a Parker Brothers TM in both years. [1] https://youtu.be/F737BVBKMCE?t=4 https://youtu.be/F737BVBKMCE?t=4 [2] https://youtu.be/KmV5O06McZk?t=14 https://youtu.be/KmV5O06McZk?t=14
- shagie 6y ago
  The Parker Brother's trademark they had to license... probably to get specific imagery. However, the suffix "-opoly" as it refers to games was lost. McD's probably waited until the trademark on Monopoly was sufficiently weakened for them to go out, license the other parts of it (as it was Parker Brothers(TM). https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4803%3Aqpmmx2.1.1&p_search=searchstr&BackReference=&p_L=100&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=Monopoly&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24FM&expr=PARA1+and+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=Parker+Brothers&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24ALL&a_default=search&f=toc&state=4803%3Aqpmmx2.1.1&a_search=Submit+Query https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4803%3A... In particular - https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:qpmmx2.4.2 https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:qp... is likely the one that they're referring to which covers the trademark on the board and game pieces - which is different than the game name. Also note that many of those (now dead) trademarks were all filed in '85 - '87... after they lost the trademark in '83.