5 ms·

Why can't we use other people work to create our own. If someone took my thesis and turned it in and got an A, I would be psyched for them and happy they used m

by Splines 15y ago

Why can't we use other people work to create our own. If someone took my thesis and turned it in and got an A, I would be psyched for them and happy they used my work. It doesn't hurt me at all. The problem is that Zynga isn't operating in a vacuum. Sales lost to Zynga do hurt someone else. In the University paper example, how would you feel if the number of A grades available were limited, and because someone copied a previous year's A-paper, someone who deserved an A now received a B? What if that person was you? There's a spectrum between inspiration and impersonation, and Zynga is clearly on the impersonation side. IMO, it's extremely disingenuous of Pincus to try to pass of his game as somehow derivative of Sim Tower or Yoot Tower. I'm surprised he wrote a memo at all, considering that Zynga employees aren't stupid - they know what brings in the money, and it isn't coming up with fun, novel, interesting games that are built upon the shoulders of giants.

ryanjmo 15y ago
So would it be ok to copy a site/game that doesn't have much traction if you have a better distribution channel and can get the copy traction? In this case the original creator isn't hurt at all and actually may benefit. Would you consider this ok? If it is ok, where do you draw the line? So far from people's answers to my question "what is so morally wrong with this?" I do not think the reaction that it is so wrong is as cut and dry issue as we want it to be. But, if I am missing something obvious, I would actually really appreciate the insight!
- Splines 15y ago
  So would it be ok to copy a site/game that doesn't have much traction if you have a better distribution channel and can get the copy traction? In this case the original creator isn't hurt at all and actually may benefit. Would you consider this ok? Generall, IMO, if you're literally cloning someone else's game (or other content), it would be very difficult to justify. I think the only time I could see this working is if you're bringing the cloned game to another platform that is not being served by the original creator, with the original creator's blessing. So far from people's answers to my question "what is so morally wrong with this?" I do not think the reaction that it is so wrong is as cut and dry issue as we want it to be. But, if I am missing something obvious, I would actually really appreciate the insight! Most people wish that effort=reward, and it is aggravating to see Zynga do well in spite of their apparent lack of effort, at least in the game design department. What makes it worse is that at this stage of Zynga's existence, they have the resources to create original IP. One could conclude that their game design decisions are driven purely by a backwards-looking perspective, instead of a forward-looking one.

by Splines 15y ago

ryanjmo 15y ago

So would it be ok to copy a site/game that doesn't have much traction if you have a better distribution channel and can get the copy traction? In this case the original creator isn't hurt at all and actually may benefit. Would you consider this ok? If it is ok, where do you draw the line? So far from people's answers to my question "what is so morally wrong with this?" I do not think the reaction that it is so wrong is as cut and dry issue as we want it to be. But, if I am missing something obvious, I would actually really appreciate the insight!

Splines 15y ago
So would it be ok to copy a site/game that doesn't have much traction if you have a better distribution channel and can get the copy traction? In this case the original creator isn't hurt at all and actually may benefit. Would you consider this ok? Generall, IMO, if you're literally cloning someone else's game (or other content), it would be very difficult to justify. I think the only time I could see this working is if you're bringing the cloned game to another platform that is not being served by the original creator, with the original creator's blessing. So far from people's answers to my question "what is so morally wrong with this?" I do not think the reaction that it is so wrong is as cut and dry issue as we want it to be. But, if I am missing something obvious, I would actually really appreciate the insight! Most people wish that effort=reward, and it is aggravating to see Zynga do well in spite of their apparent lack of effort, at least in the game design department. What makes it worse is that at this stage of Zynga's existence, they have the resources to create original IP. One could conclude that their game design decisions are driven purely by a backwards-looking perspective, instead of a forward-looking one.