Tetris Clones Pulled From Android Market

sbrubblesman writes "The Tetris Company, LLC has notified Google to remove all Tetris clones from Android Market. I am one of the developers of FallingBlocks, a game with the same gameplay concepts as Tetris. I have received an email warning that my game was suspended from Android Market due to a violation of the Developer Content Policy. When I received the email, I already imagined that it had something to do with it being a Tetris clone, but besides having the same gameplay as Tetris, which I believe cannot be copyrighted, the game uses its own name, graphics and sounds. There's no reference to 'Tetris' in our game. I have emailed Google asking what is the reason for the application removal. Google promptly answered that The Tetris Company, LLC notified them under the DMCA (PDF) to remove various Tetris clones from Android Market. My app was removed together with 35 other Tetris clones. I checked online at various sources, and all of them say that there's no copyright on gameplay. There could be some sort of patent. But even if they had one, it would last 20 years, so it would have been over in 2005. It's a shame that The Tetris Company, LLC uses its power to stop developers from creating good and free games for Android users. Without resources for a legal fight, our application and many others will cease to exist, even knowing that they are legit. Users will be forced to buy the paid, official version, which is worse than many of the ones available for free on the market. Users from other countries, such as Brazil in my case, won't even be able to play the official Tetris, since Google Checkout doesn't exist in Brazil; you can't buy paid applications from Android Market in these countries."

Comments

Re:17 USC 512(g)

[Rockoon]

Where do you draw that conclusion? From the statute, 512(g)(4): "A service provider's compliance with [the counter-notification procedure] shall not subject the service provider to liability for copyright infringement with respect to the material identified in the [original takedown] notice."

Ok, so sneak scenic-vistas picture-app onto iStore which downloads pictures from your own web site, immediately file a DMCA as a pretend 3rd entity, then file a counter-claim and Apple *has* to allow users to download it.. meanwhile you start putting kiddy porn or other shit up which the app now downloads and shows users?

Nice try. Your claim fails a simple logic test.