7 ms·

I think Penny Arcade sums up best how ridiculous this whole issue is: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2014/01/24 http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2014/01/24

• clarky07 13y ago
  I saw that the other day, it's pretty fantastic. Trademarking "Candy" and "Saga" is pretty absurd. Trademarking "Candy Crush Saga" is perfectly reasonable. We'd also accept "Candy Crush".
  • batiudrami 13y ago
    I can understand 'Saga' because their grand plan is to have 25 x-saga games (like Zynga did with -ville). If they do that and other people start making similar facebook games called x-saga then that would be unfair to King. I don't know if they have any other recourse in that instance, but they should be able to protect their brand.
    • fragsworth 13y ago
      It's different from Zynga's "-ville", because Zynga creates new words that have never (or very rarely) been used. It's different from Apple's i-Things as well for the same reason. Both of those companies made prudent decisions about their brand trademarks by not treading on anyone else. The law should not allow companies to own common English words in perpetuity. If you want to make your brand a common English word, you should accept the fact that other people get to use it. I doubt King will win any lawsuits against others who use the words.
      • chilldream 13y ago
        > Both of those companies made prudent decisions about their brand trademarks by not treading on anyone else. Actually Apple ran into some trouble with, say, there already being software called IOS before any of the iThings existed. They've been to court over it a few times.
        • morganherlocker 13y ago
          They also license the name "iPhone" from Cisco. They reference it in the first few lines of the legal section in the settings panel.
      • MartinCron 13y ago
        There's a different takeaway here. There are lots of other companies that are using the i- prefix for their products and yet Apple continues to thrive.
    • Mikeb85 13y ago
      But 'Saga' is an old, generic word that can apply to any epic story, so giving them the trademark for x-saga wouldn't be right...
      • georgemcbay 13y ago
        Not only is it generic, but it is a word that has a long history of being used in the name of games well before "King" existed as a company: http://www.mobygames.com/search/quick?q=saga&x=0&y=0 http://www.mobygames.com/search/quick?q=saga&x=0&y=0 If Nintendo were to release a Mario and Luigi Superstar Saga sequel, would King be so "gracious" as to allow them use of the Saga term? This whole situation highlights how ludicrous IP law has gotten in the past decade.
    • vacri 13y ago
      Most games tell a story of some kind, and sagas are a type of story. The idea that one company gets a lock on that word is ludicrous. "A first-person fantasy-based RPG called 'Dragon Saga'? Sorry, you can't have it because a tile-matching game has trademarked the word 'saga'". It's a bit like being able to trademark the term 'movie' - should the makers of 'Scary Movie' be able to stop other films from having 'movie' in the title?
      • smoyer 13y ago
        I watched my son playing Candy Crush for a few minutes and I don't see even a hint of a saga in that game. Can you get a patent on the process of misusing English words to back up your trademark?
      • jere 13y ago
        The worst part is one of the main definitions of saga is "long story of heroic achievement, esp. a medieval prose narrative in Old Norse or Old Icelandic." Banner Saga is pretty much the perfect fit.
    • Natsu 13y ago
      They chose "Saga" knowing that it had a long history of use in a great many games that are very well known to gamers, so that's something they should have to live with. Stealing (i.e. actually depriving others of) the use of parts of language is not inherently reasonable to me. Also, what ever happened to trademarks? I thought they were defined as adjectives and 'Saga' is clearly a noun in every use I've seen....
      • Angostura 13y ago
        > Also, what ever happened to trademarks? I thought they were defined as adjectives Sorry? Apple is an adjective?
        • barik 13y ago
          > Sorry? Apple is an adjective? For purposes of a trademark, actually, yes. From Apple's own site [1], "Trademarks are adjectives, and should not be made into verbs or made plural or possessive." In addition, Apple specifies a list of suggested generic terms for each trademark. Under Guidelines for Using Apple Trademarks and Copyrights, some concrete examples are given [2]: "Correct: I bought two Macintosh computers." but "Not Correct: I bought two Macintoshes." [1] https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist.html https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/... [2] https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/guidelinesfor3rdparties.html https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/guidelines...
          • thaumasiotes 13y ago
            This is incorrect in multiple ways. - Apple says this because it doesn't want its trademarks to become common words ineligible for trademark protection (like what happened to xerox and kleenex). But it can't stop people from referring to things however they please; this is nothing more than a statement of how Apple wishes the world would work. - If I say "I bought two Apple computers", Apple is still a noun, not an adjective.
            • 13y ago
    • jasallen 13y ago
      You're trolling right?
    • venomsnake 13y ago
      Then they patent Candy xxx saga. And begin pumping Candy Crush Saga, Candy Punch Saga, Candy Throw Saga, Candy Jump Saga. But both candy and saga should be in the game title.
    • EpicEng 13y ago
      then that would be unfair to King Really? So, because a company wants to use the word "saga" in a line of products, they now own the word "saga"? Really?! Man, I totally should have grabbed the word "trilogy" last year before I wrote my last three apps.
    • r0s 13y ago
      "Saga" is far too broad, and they have no fair claim on that.
    • MartinCron 13y ago
      I can understand 'Saga' because their grand plan is to have 25 x-saga games (like Zynga did with -ville) I think that people can see that's their grand plan, but it's a bad plan that deserves neither respect nor trademark protection.
    • stonemetal 13y ago
      The only problem with that is Saga is a common word in video game titles -ville not so much. If you swing by a game related site like http://www.gamefaqs.com/ http://www.gamefaqs.com/ and search for saga it will turn up more than a couple hundred games with saga in the title(including more than one game titled "Saga")
  • higherpurpose 13y ago
    Or when Facebook trademarked the words face and book.
    • chris_wot 13y ago
      Did they?
  • georgemcbay 13y ago
    IMO even Candy Crush is pushing it, especially given there's a game called Candy Cruncher... which came out in 2002... and is a match-3 game....
    • matdrewin 13y ago
      Also that Candy Crush looks to me like a copy of Bejeweled.
      • DanBC 13y ago
        Bejeweled has square boards. Candy crush has shaped boards. There is not much variation in match three games but this is one of the big differences.
      • moistgorilla 13y ago
        They aren't copies. This is like saying that every fps after quake is quake clone.
        • Crito 13y ago
          I would feel comfortable calling FPS games "quake clones" if they have sufficiently similar gameplay to Quake. Painkiller or Serious Sam come to mind.
    • DougMerritt 13y ago
      The movie Wreck It Ralph rather centrally featured the fictional game Candy Rush -- prior to the release of Candy Crush. Might even be where King got the idea for the name of their game.
      • andrewfong 13y ago
        Sugar Rush, not Candy Rush
        • bitwize 13y ago