Takedown Letters For WP7 Tetris Clones

karios writes "Today I received a takedown letter from a law firm representing the Tetris Company for copyright violations involving my game Tetrada, which I published on the Windows Phone 7 marketplace. The witch hunt, after hitting Android, iOS and other platforms, continues on Windows Phone 7. It's a pity, since some of the tetromino games in the Marketplace were pretty decent."

Comments

This is called...

[dnaumov]

...willful infrigement.

Re:This is called...

[ozmanjusri]

..willful infrigement.

Fortunately neither WP7 owner was particularly interested in the game, so not much was lost.

Re:This is called...

[lazlo]

Well, I had to look at this because I thought the "WP7" in the title would be WordPerfect 7. I don't know if WP even exists anymore, or what version is latest, but I remember my dad writing an accounting and payroll package in WP5.2 macros, so writing tetris didn't seem like much of a stretch.

I know I've met several people, lawyers mostly, who will not part with WP5 until they pry it from their cold dead fingers... be interesting to see the size of that userbase relative to Windows Phone...

WTF?

[igomaniac]

You copied the game and even made the name of the game sound similar to the original, and you call it a 'witch hunt' -- man, you need a reality check.

Re:WTF?

[KiloByte]

Since when game rules are copyrightable?

He didn't copy the code nor the graphics so he is clear of copyright, and the name is different enough to be clear of trademark. The Tetris company bastards are abusing the law, counting on people's inability to afford defending themselves.

Re:WTF?

[gl4ss]

what's more is that the guy who invented tetris never invented anything else after that. the basic concept of the game is pretty obvious once you get to certain type of programming the idea would pop up(shapes would have differed, the concept not).

and if someone doesn't believe that, check some documentaries about the tetris guy and tetris - trolling for status and money whilst producing nothing of interest for the past 25 years(the docs paint a rosier picture of his accomplishments, but if you watch them you can decide for yourself) .

besides, they should have cloned panic bomber instead. more fun.

Re:WTF?

[pokyo]

I'd have to disagree. What is the intent of copyright? If it is to prevent consumer confusion then I would have to side with The Tetris Company. I took a look at Tetrada and it is a clear duplicate, and if I was younger I wouldn't know any better and assume that this was Tetris. You have to take into account the sum of what you mentioned. If there was a game called Tetrada, and it didn't look the Tetris, then fine. However, you have a game that looks like Tetris *AND* a game name similar to Tetris. Personally, I like this action. The 'indie dev scene' is being taken over by developers intent on copying others ideas to make quick profit. I suppose this was popularized by Zynga. Don't get me started on Angry Birds...

Re:WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when game rules are copyrightable?

This is not the word you're looking for *hand wave*
This is a pretty clear trademark issue.

Even if it wasn't a trademark issue, just going to the tetris Wiki page reveals it to be "owned" by a very litigious company.

I'm starting to wonder if the people making these clones have a business plan which goes something like this:
1) Copy someone's "here's how to make tetris" sample code (there's countless samples out there)
2) Post the game to the latest appstore
3) Wait for takedown notice
4) Put up a "donation" page to "provide for legal defense"
5) Whine about takedown notice too all the geek-friendly websites
6) Profit!

Re:WTF?

[alexhs]

You're confusing Alexey Pajitnov and The Tetris Company, co-founded and managed by Henk Rogers

If you're not mistaken thinking that Henk Rogers is the author (as you didn't bother to give names), you're probably trolling. What are your sources ?

Along many Tetris variants, Alexey Pajitnov conceived El-Fish, Clockwerx, and other puzzle games.

Trademark confusion

[pieterh]

You deliberately chose "Tetrada" to sound similar to "Tetris" and on alone the basis that the software is a video game (no matter what else it does), that's grounds for a take down letter, and a civil court case if you don't comply. You are deluded if you think you can play the victim here, and adding your tragic story to the Wikipedia article on the Tetris Company doesn't make your case stronger.

Is it really so difficult to be original?

Honestly, it really annoys me to see your mediocrity dressed up in self-justification and misplaced outrage. You are not a victim, you are an idiot.

Re:Trademark confusion

[Junior J. Junior III]

You deliberately chose "Tetrada" to sound similar to "Tetris"

Tetris derives its name from the word tetra, the ancient Greek word for four. The Tetris Company should not be allowed to have a trademark on the number four, or the word four, in any language.

I haven't seen the game, so I can't comment as to its originality, but it seems to me that there are potentially many variants of tetris rules which are sufficiently original that they should be allowed to stand on their own.

Re:There is no space in ICT for individuals

[angel'o'sphere]

Add the fact that every year half of the knowledge you had is just become useless and ...

If that is the case for you ... then frankly I have to say: "you seem not to know much!"

A solid IT background never gets obsolet, only technologies / languages / paradigmas do. And the latter only in limited cases.

There are hundreds of working opportunities in IT which NEVER get obsolet and are completely disconnected from technologies. E.g. requirements engineering, software processes (like SCRUM or XP), software architectures (finding a suiting one, describing it in UML or something else), the art of programming, may it be assembler or an oo language or the fancy languages we have right now like functional or functional / oo hybrids (Scala e.g.)

All that knowledge will never be obsolet. Knowing how a relational data base works, how to design a data base, the limits of it, the options for using No-SQL DBs or prevalent Systems (in memory databases) will never be obsolet.

Understanding the differences between REST / SOAP / Corba or any other "distribution" technology ... that will never be obsolet, regardless what "App Server" you use, if any.

System Architecture, Software Architecture, Architecture Patterns, Design Patterns, Language Idioms ... that won't ever die out, it only will fluctuate slightly.

The way how a unix like operation system works (my it be a comercial one or linux or a future one like Plan 9 or Hurd) ... that knowledge will never be obsolet.

Sorry ... I just scratched the surface. There dozens if not hundreds of "knowledge areas" which will always be useful for an "developer" ...

angel'o'sphere

Copyright and Innovation

[Anonymous Coward]

Seeing the flurry of comments mocking the submitter of his copying Tetris makes me realize how successful the corporations have been in their propaganda.

Copyright has evolved from a concept conceived to protect the temporary financial incentive of inventors as encouragement of advancing humanities to a god-give right for corporations to hold indefinitely the exclusive right to monetary gains regarding anything they find a way to copyright or patent. Musicians pride themselves in their own rendition of Fantaisie-Impromptu, but programmers cannot be allowed to remake a game that has been known and enjoyed world-wide for decades. Is there anyone on Slashdot that doesn't know the basic formula to a Tetris game? Once something has become as common place as Tetris is, you have to step back and realize that it has become the possession of man-kind. Using copyright as a tool to limit people's freedom to reinvent or recreate a knowledge known to all is exactly the opposite of what copyright laws should have been made to protect.

Re:Copyright and Innovation

[RogueyWon]

Yes and no.

I think you're absolutely right to say that copyright has gotten out of control. I think pretty much anybody who reads slashdot regularly would acknowledge that.

However, that's not to say that there isn't a case for copyright, in its original form. I think what the comments on this thread - which at first glance look quite uncharacteristic for slashdot - show is that a lot of people have a gut instinct for what is right and wrong in relation to copyright (which may vary from person to person) and that for most people, the submitter falls on the wrong side of it.

Tetris is still relatively recent (less than 30 years old) and the submitter doesn't seem to have actually tried to add any value. My instinct is that in a world with good and sensible copyright laws, this would fall on the wrong side of them. The problem is that in the absence of such laws and the absence of a sensible political debate on said laws, we're left just feeling a bit muddled about it.

Re:Copyright and Innovation

[devman]

Clearly anyone who doesn't agree with you is a sock puppet. Seriously how hard is it to make a clone and then call it something that doesn't sound like Tetris, its not a hard concept to grasp. The problem here isn't that he made a clone or called it something similar to tetris it is the fact that he made a clone AND called it something similar to Tetris. This is something that trademark law was designed to prevent and has nothing to do with copyright.

Re:Copyright and Innovation

[master_p]

Once something has become as common place as Tetris is, you have to step back and realize that it has become the possession of man-kind

You can't be serious, can you? under your reasoning, Microsoft Windows is now a possession of mankind, because it is commonplace. Namco's Pacman is a possession of mankind, despite the fact that Namco still puts out Pacman games, because it is commonplace. Mario Bros is a possession of mankind, because it is commonplace...Star Trek is not Paramount's, it's mankind's, because it's common place...

I am sorry, but your argument is totally illogical. It's the most pathetic excuse I have heard about copyright infringement.

Re:Did you copy their code?

[DarthJohn]

IANAL... not legal advice... etc.

(patent) Even if the game rules of Tetris were patented, that would have expired by now.

(copyright) I remember Scrabble clones having problems because they copied the game board too closely, used the same layout, colors or fonts or something. This might be a problem here... maybe not.

(trademark) The strongest argument they (Tetris IP owners) probably have is that the name is too similar and refers to a video game.

So, pull it down, rename it and put it back up.

Re:There is no space in ICT for individuals

[Eivind]

Add the fact that every year half of the knowledge you had is just become useless and ...

If that's the case for you, then frankly, either you don't know much, or else you're doing it wrong. (i.e. constantly jumping on the latest fad, and having few or no skills in the underlying fundamentals)

Algorithms. Program-organization. OO-principles. Functional programming. MVC. Data-structures. Relational databases. Key-value-stores. User-interface-principles.

Most of what you need to know about any of these, is literally decades old. Even programming-languages, which are a lot more faddish than fundamentals of programming, don't have a turnover-rate of 50% a year.

Most of the languages popular 5 years ago, still are. And several languages popular a decade ago, also still are. Java. C. C++. PHP. Python. (and swapping one language for a different one with similar fundamentals, is a simple thing to learn - if you are a guru C++ developer, learning Java should be pretty simple. And if you're a guru Python-programmer, you should be able to adapt to Ruby with no big problems.)

Re:There is no space in ICT for individuals

[rainmouse]

I am a small consultant, finding work is more and more difficult. Big companies do not consider me since I am too small...

Its a sad day when even oompa loompa's are being laid off.

Personal vs commercial infringement.

[the_raptor]

Slashdot in general is fairly sympathetic towards individual copyright infringement for personal use. However that does not mean any significant portion of readers is sympathetic to wilful copyright infringement for commercial purposes, especially if you are dumb enough to drag trademark infringement into it as well.

Releasing an open source clone of an old game will get a completely different response then making a commercial clone of an old game.

Someone needs to fight these morons

[wizkid]

Everything I've read indicates these cases have no basis in law to support them. They're going after the little guys that can't afford a lawsuit.

I hope someone chokes up the money to fight these guys.

Atari v. Philips and Capcom v. Data East

[tepples]

Compare Atari v. Philips, the KC Munchkin case, to Capcom v. Data East, the Fighter's History case. Atari, the exclusive licensee of Pac-Man, won because KC Munchkin copied more of the original appearance than is necessary to represent the uncopyrightable game rules. Capcom, on the other hand, lost because any similarities between Street Fighter and Fighter's History are scenes a faire, that is, they are expected in the genre and follow from the similarities in uncopyrightable aspects.

Re:if they did it for android

[t0p]

Maybe he figured they wouldn't look at the Windows Phone market place. I mean come on, who looks at the Windows Phone market place?