Whether or not the game is actually inspired by IKEA (clearly it is) has no legal bearing on the matter. What matters is confusion. The factors include: "(1) s

Whether or not the game is actually inspired by IKEA (clearly it is) has no legal bearing on the matter. What matters is confusion. The factors include: "(1) similarity of the marks; (2) strength of plaintiff's mark; (3) sophistication of consumers when making a purchase; (4) intent of defendant in adopting the mark; (5) evidence of actual confusion (or lack thereof); (6) similarity of marketing and advertising channels; (7) extent to which the targets of the parties’ sales efforts are the same; (8) product similarity; identity/function/use; and (9) other factors suggesting that consumers might expect the prior owner to manufacture both products, or expect the prior owner to manufacture a product in defendants market, or expect the prior owner is likely to expand into defendant’s market." While true that IKEA has a strong brand and the in-game store uses very similar branding, they lose on every other factor. It is very unlikely that anyone will reasonably wonder if the game is an IKEA product, or officially sponsored by IKEA. Unfortunately it sounds like the developer doesn't have the resources to defend it, so they'll likely be bullied into changing it unless they get some pro bono legal counsel.