3 ms·

I don't agree ethically with what Zynga's strategy is but I would not go so far as to say... "The guys who they're ripping off are the ones deserving of all th

I don't agree ethically with what Zynga's strategy is but I would not go so far as to say... "The guys who they're ripping off are the ones deserving of all the money Zynga is making off them." Zynga outsourced being innovative to the market and focused their resources on building distribution. You have to work hard to build distribution and it is an important part of a business strategy. It is not enough to just design a great game and expect it to be a huge business success. It might be a huge creative success but that is different from being a business success. Lets use Mcdonald's as an example (I am not a fan of their food but I think they illustrate a business that is built on distribution not quality product). People were making hamburgers before Mcdonalds, no innovation in the product. The value of the Mcdonalds business is in the vast network of restaurants that they built to deliver their product. Does the person who made the first hamburger deserve all the money that Mcdonalds is making? I would say no. I think a lot of people on HN ignore the importance of the simple fact that distribution is a competitive advantage in business and it is something you have to work hard for. I think Zynga is taking advantage of a resource they worked hard to build, their distribution.

ashishgandhi 15y ago
This model would leave no incentive for anyone to innovate because the big bullies will take your lunch anyway. Hence, intellectual property protection (or whatever legal term is right here). If the current framework can't penalize Zynga for ripping off someone else's hard work, I would say the system is broken for this use case at minimum. There's a line between inspiration and stealing, and I would say Zynga isn't on the right side of such a line in this case. Apple, when launched the iPod (could take many Apple examples but this is from the letter) didn't make a more-or-less copy of an existing successful product. Took inspiration from the idea of portable digital music and took it to the next level. Significantly better product. Google didn't copy Yahoo!, seriously now! They took the idea of searching for pages and took it to the next level. Significantly better product. To say they copied is like saying anyone who invents a new dish has copied the very first cooked meal in history. Seriously? People have just gotten amazing at gaming the system than playing the game.

ashishgandhi 15y ago

This model would leave no incentive for anyone to innovate because the big bullies will take your lunch anyway. Hence, intellectual property protection (or whatever legal term is right here). If the current framework can't penalize Zynga for ripping off someone else's hard work, I would say the system is broken for this use case at minimum. There's a line between inspiration and stealing, and I would say Zynga isn't on the right side of such a line in this case. Apple, when launched the iPod (could take many Apple examples but this is from the letter) didn't make a more-or-less copy of an existing successful product. Took inspiration from the idea of portable digital music and took it to the next level. Significantly better product. Google didn't copy Yahoo!, seriously now! They took the idea of searching for pages and took it to the next level. Significantly better product. To say they copied is like saying anyone who invents a new dish has copied the very first cooked meal in history. Seriously? People have just gotten amazing at gaming the system than playing the game.