Zynga Accused of Cloning Hit Indie iPhone Game Tiny Tower

marketing.. by ardiri · 2012-01-25 22:37 · Score: 5, Insightful

Nimblebit just got a tonne of marketing over this - who cares about the ripoff? marketing 101 => success!

Re:marketing.. by jones_supa · 2012-01-25 23:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's so often how these days the winner is the one who has the biggest muscle to shove the product down the people's throats.
Re:marketing.. by Svippy · 2012-01-25 23:33 · Score: 2

Nimblebit just got a tonne of marketing over this - who cares about the ripoff? marketing 101 => success!
Yes, but Zynga just gave it to them. People listen because it is a good story (David vs Goliath). Since the games are practically the same, users have a choice. And most are likely to go with the one by the people who (understandably) feel cheated. In essence, Zynga brought this upon themselves. All they could have hoped for would have been Nimblebit A) saying nothing or B) being complete dicks about it.
I am not saying Zynga is going to be losing any sleep over this, but they did hand over free marketing to Nimblebit. You may then wonder whether Zynga and Nimblebit are secretly working together to steer up more noise about the already popular game.

--
Clicked pie.
Re:marketing.. by Johann+Lau · 2012-01-26 00:06 · Score: 1

right. while zynga would have no reason to rip off, since there is no money in that.
Re:marketing.. by hairyfeet · 2012-01-26 00:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yeah but it is kinda sad a guy can bust his ass making something unique only to have some scumbum company like Zynga bold face copy the thing. it looks like they only gave it a little graphical polish and called it a day, pretty obvious ripoff IMHO. hopefully the guy can get a good lawyer that will rip Zynga a new one.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:marketing.. by MysteriousPreacher · 2012-01-26 01:22 · Score: 1

It's a shame, yet what's the alternative? Software patents or something similar that'd cover look and feel, or even game concerts. To go down that route would be like allowing authors to have a monopoly on the murder mystery in which the the ostensibly bumbling detective unmasks the criminal through a gradual process incessant badgering and questioning. Sure, if code or other copyrightable assets are being swiped, then yes, get the lawyers in. Other than that I see more problems created than would be solved by allowing a game concept and basic appearance to be protected. Let's be clear though, I have absolutely no love at all for Zynga. They're the "copy it, pile it high, and sell it cheap" of the gaming world.

--
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Re:marketing.. by Seumas · 2012-01-26 01:47 · Score: 1

I believe Tiny Tower was the #1 official iPhone game of 2011. I don't really know that they needed the marketing. What they need is to take Zynga to court. And what needs to happen to Zynga is that they need to be held accountable, rather than being treated like valley innovators and having dinners at the whitehouse.
Re:marketing.. by Moryath · 2012-01-26 02:25 · Score: 2

After all it's not like Zynga hasn't been caught ripping off games before.
Oh wait.
Mafia Wars vs Mob Wars?
Cafe World vs Restaurant City?
Farmville and Farm Town?
Oh and don't forget there's an "expansion for Frontierville" coming soon that's blatantly ripping off Oregon Trail, but they changed the name to "Pioneer Trail"...
Re:marketing.. by leonardluen · 2012-01-26 02:27 · Score: 4, Informative

I am not saying Zynga is going to be losing any sleep over this
oh i very well doubt Zynga will lose any sleep over this...
ex staffer says "zynga's motto is 'do evil'". also "the source said that staffers were, and are still, instructed to blatantly steal the idea of competitors. He recalls a time when founder Mark Pincus spoke on the subject, allegedly saying “I don’t f**king want innovation. You’re not smarter than your competitor. Just copy what they do and do it until you get their numbers.” "
Re:marketing.. by leonardluen · 2012-01-26 02:30 · Score: 1

heck here is an old slashdot article about it also
http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/09/13/1752230/copying-trumps-creating-for-farmville-creator-zynga
Re:marketing.. by Theaetetus · 2012-01-26 03:06 · Score: 1

I believe Tiny Tower was the #1 official iPhone game of 2011. I don't really know that they needed the marketing. What they need is to take Zynga to court.
On what grounds? Copyright? Not going to succeed, since the game has a different look and feel (that's also similar to games going back to SimTower). Trademark? Same problem. Patents? That would work, if they have any. But of course, Slashdot hates software patents, so I can't imagine this site would be cheering on such a case.
Re:marketing.. by MaWeiTao · 2012-01-26 03:24 · Score: 1

What's funny is how they can't even invest effort in coming up with a new name. Zynga clearly crosses the line from inspiration to blatant copying.
Re:marketing.. by BasilBrush · 2012-01-26 03:36 · Score: 2

Thing is, Tiny Tower looks like it was inspired by Zynga games in the first place. The look of it, the gameplay, the business model. It looks like Farmville goes high-rise.
So the copying here isn't just one way. And It wasn't initiated by Zynga.
Not that I want to defend Zynga. From previous stories they come across as scumbags. But an indie copying from Zynga isn't exactly on the moral high ground either.
Re:marketing.. by ganjadude · 2012-01-26 04:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

pretty much. I was working for the game dopewars, which was bought out by zynga and reskinned as mafia wars and other clones, pushed to the side, i never even got paid for any of my work (granted i was admin/maintenance not programming but it was for a good 2 years)

long story short, zynga is a parasite, its a bad company that does shady business practices and we can only hope it will be gone in the not so distant future

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:marketing.. by ganjadude · 2012-01-26 04:24 · Score: 1

Actually maffia wars is a literal port of dope wars which was run at the time by what is now clipwire games. Read my other post up above to see the crap that they pulled on us

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:marketing.. by Tharsman · 2012-01-26 06:06 · Score: 1

They did not get a ton of marketing over the ripoff, they got a ton of marketing over their action of mocking the rip-off.
Had they shut up and allowed the rip-off to just waltz by, they would had received no marketing at all.
They got good marketing in the end, yes. But only because of their own actions. Also note: Nimblebit didn’t really go out in a rant either. They just tossed a few jabs about how their 3 man studio is proud to know they are worth being copying by a large studio and how they look forward to being ripped-off in the future.
It is precisely their casual and passive approach that gave most execrators the sympathy that propelled this news across the gaming press.
Re:marketing.. by poity · 2012-01-26 06:30 · Score: 1

That is assuming Farmville was an original Zynga creation. It's not. There were a handful of highly successful virtual farming games before it, the Chinese game Happy Farm being one example.

--
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Re:marketing.. by s73v3r · 2012-01-26 07:30 · Score: 1

And most are likely to go with the one by the people who (understandably) feel cheated.
I highly doubt that. I think most people are going to go with the company they already know and are invested in (I'm fairly certain that most of their games can use a common currency thingy, where your money from FarmVille can go into their other games), Zynga.
Re:marketing.. by BoberFett · 2012-01-26 13:05 · Score: 1

And probably before that (because I've never heard of Happy Farm, don't know when it was created) was Harvest Moon.
And long before Tiny Tower was SimTower. Maxis should sue this little company out of existence, if we're going to be even handed about things.
The world is going to have to face the fact at some point that copyright is ridiculous because there's nothing new under the sun. Almost everything (almost being the keyword) has been done, and most "new" things are an old idea with a fresh coat of paint.
Re:marketing.. by BitZtream · 2012-01-26 17:15 · Score: 1

Whats funny is that you think you posted about Zynga copies of original games and you're just ignorant of the fact that the all games you listed are copies of earlier versions. None in that list are originals in any way, unless you include 'being on facebook' as original.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:marketing.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-31 03:55 · Score: 1

Wait, let me get this straight, you were a supervisor/tech and your bitching because you didn't get a percentage? So, the head mechanic at my local Chrysler dealer should have been REALLY pissed that he didn't get a cut of THAT sale.

Game rules do not underlie copyright by Kirth · 2012-01-25 22:39 · Score: 5, Informative

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html

--
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse

Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by Lumpio- · 2012-01-25 22:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

Perhaps not, but then again nobody is suing them either. This is more about moral rules than the law.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-25 22:50 · Score: 1

But the game is software, surely they can patent this!
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by DrXym · 2012-01-25 23:33 · Score: 4, Informative

Perhaps not, but then again nobody is suing them either. This is more about moral rules than the law.
Zynga has no morals.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-25 23:45 · Score: 1

The point isn't that games, art or music is worthless, but that the worth is the cultural importance which builds only through inspiration. We wouldn't be talking about the internet age today if there was only one website in the world that allowed people to communicate with each other because noone else was allowed to copy that idea, we wouldn't have a gaming industry if the cathode ray tube amusement device was _the_ end all interactive game. If you could completely ban the spreading of ideas then they would become worthless.
Nimblebit is just a bunch of whimps who are whining about others from being inspired because they are afraid Zynga will do it better then them. They themselves also took inspiration from others, and just like everyone else in the business they will go to their grave claiming that their copying was inspiration and a compliment to those they copied while anyone who copies them is a gutless thief who should burn in hell for trying to destroy the gaming industry.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-25 23:48 · Score: 1

No, but they likely have a 'look and feel' claim. The game rules are identical, the stats are identical, the interface is identical... looks like the only change is graphics.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by delinear · 2012-01-26 00:28 · Score: 1

I'm with you that ideas should be free, I do wonder what would happen if Nimblebit started copying Zynga games from now on though. I suspect we might see some hypocrisy in Zynga's response, but I'd be happy for Zynga to prove me wrong and put out a statement that this is fine in their opinion.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by sohmc · 2012-01-26 00:49 · Score: 2

I highly doubt it. A large majority, if not all, games that Zynga has are copies/clones/remixes of existing games. Zynga just has a better marketing department and a bigger advertising budget.

--
We don't live in Shouldland.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by tepples · 2012-01-26 01:25 · Score: 1

Based on your prior posts it sounds like you would prefer that society shares wealth, so if that is something you believe why not give me some?
Because you haven't yet proven that you are likely to share it on sound principles.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by tepples · 2012-01-26 01:28 · Score: 1

they likely have a 'look and feel' claim
Which would likely be quashed by Lotus v. Borland among other case law. Game rules and other methods of operation aren't copyrightable (17 USC 102(b)), and any aspect of look and feel that follows directly from an uncopyrightable idea is likewise not copyrightable.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by gman003 · 2012-01-26 02:31 · Score: 1

Businesses have no morals.
ftfy
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by kiwimate · 2012-01-26 02:40 · Score: 2

This is more about moral rules than the law.
Whose morals? My morals happen to include "it's wrong to infringe copyright by illegally downloading music/software". I'm clearly outnumbered here on Slashdot by people who, even if they agree it's technically wrong, nevertheless believe it's morally justified because of the evilness of the MPAA/RIAA.
I don't bring this up to get into an argument about copyright and piracy, but to point out that adhering to "moral rules" first requires you define whose moral rules you are using as your measure.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by FooAtWFU · 2012-01-26 04:04 · Score: 1

I was riding Caltrain the week that the whole "we're clawing back your RSUs or you're fired" thing went down, and met some Zynga employees. The good news is that it didn't damage morale too much; the bad news is that it's because said employees had a rather mercenary holding-out-for-the-big-bucks attitude of "as long as it doesn't happen to me". Sounds like they were a perfect fit.

--
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by psydeshow · 2012-01-26 06:37 · Score: 1

I highly doubt it. A large majority, if not all, games that Zynga has are copies/clones/remixes of existing games. Zynga just has a better marketing department and a bigger advertising budget.
And, most importantly, graphic designers with a mass-market sensibility.
I mean, I looked at the screenshots of both games, and the Zynga clone looked much more fun and intuitive because I could actually read the damn thing.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by yurtinus · 2012-01-26 06:49 · Score: 1

Businesses are just organizations of people. A blanket statement that "businesses have no morals" does no justice to the amoral activities of the *people* making those decisions for the business.

There are plenty of moral businesses, they just don't make the headlines.

--
+1 Disagree
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by s73v3r · 2012-01-26 07:34 · Score: 1

There's a HUGE difference between taking someone's idea and running with it (it's partly how we got Minecraft from Infirmer), and taking someone's idea, slapping a new coat of paint on it, and calling it a day. The former should be encouraged, as most innovation happens in incremental steps, while people who do the latter should be demonized and shamed.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by gman003 · 2012-01-26 07:36 · Score: 1

See, now you're making the assumption that people have morals.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by s73v3r · 2012-01-26 07:36 · Score: 1

And in the society you seem to prefer, those who are rewarded are those who can lie, cheat, and steal the best.
Re:Game rules do not underlie copyright by yurtinus · 2012-01-26 09:10 · Score: 1

I'm not making assumptions. I will plainly state that I have morals and you likely do as well.

--
+1 Disagree

So what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-25 22:39 · Score: 3, Insightful

Making similar games is perfectly fine. If the basic idea is good, why not have multiple games implement it? Nobody is claiming that every single shooter is a Doom ripoff or that every single strategy game is a Dune ripoff.
Ideas have to be free so they can be used by everyone for everyones benefit.

Re:So what? by MDillenbeck · 2012-01-25 23:52 · Score: 5, Interesting

This may be a good time to use the low-tech equivalent to check the validity of the arguments. I don't know anything about the two apps in question, but ask yourself this: at what point would a variant of the board game Monopoly be different enough to ensure Parker Brothers couldn't sue you? Would be keeping the same rules, same basic board layout, and same "props" (player tokens, money, property cards, dice, and two decks of event cards) while changing the color, name, and art style of those keep you from being sues? For example, could I make the tokens space ships, the properties different star systems, the money "space credits" that use plastic coins instead of paper bills, and use public domain images of the star systems and call is "Stellar Baron" and not get sued?
Now back to the user interface. If this was the user interface of an operating system, would the original OS UI maker have a court case? What if it was a general application interface? What about making a knock-off of Farmville in the same manner... or replicating its mechanics with a new graphical interface and naming convention - would the developer of the game get sued, and would it be successful?
Finally, if there is a lawyer in the house, what court cases have set precedent in these areas? Honestly, I do not know the answer to these as law is not my field of study. However, I do know I need to know the history of how courts have ruled before I can say whether this is a legal violation or not. (My personal bias: I believe large companies have successfully sued, while small independent game developers of boardgames often have not - but this is based only on a one week investigation into the board game developer career.)
Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 00:50 · Score: 1

That's okay.. FarmVille was on of Zynga's first "rip off" games.. nearly identical in looks, game play, etc as FarmTown (if I'm remembering the name correctly).
It was close enough in play and appearance (as in almost looked like a direct copy) that it was a closer match copy wise than any of the banned/pulled/sued monopoly/scrabble/etc clones
Re:So what? by ehlo · 2012-01-26 01:14 · Score: 2

I couldn't find a case concerning Monopoly in general but here is one by Hasbro on copyright infringement for Play-Doh that is good law (precedent), on which the facts seem similar enough to apply.
Status: Positive or Neutral Judicial Treatment Positive or Neutral Judicial Treatment
*474 Hasbro Inc, Hasbro SA and Hasbro UK Ltd v 123 Nahrmittel GmbH and Marketing & Promotional Services Ltd
High Court of Justice, Chancery Division (England and Wales)
11 February 2011
[2011] EWHC 199 (Ch)
[2011] E.T.M.R. 25
Floyd J. :
February 11, 2011
Confusion; Declarations of invalidity; Descriptive names; Honest practices; Infringement; Passing off; Revocation; Trade marks
H1 Community and national trade marks—PLAY-DOH (Classes 16, 25, 28—toys and modelling compositions)—Use by competitor of strap line “The edible play dough”—Action for trade mark infringement and passing off—Counterclaim for declaration of invalidity and revocation—Mark held validly registered—Counterclaims rejected—Infringement found—Whether defence of honest commercial use—Defence dismissed.
H2 The claimant companies, which made and sold among other products a children’s pre-mixed modelling composition, marketed that product under the trade mark PLAY-DOH for which the first claimant was the registered proprietor of one Community trade mark in Classes 16, 25 and 28 and two United Kingdom trade marks, dating back to 1970 and 1986 respectively, for goods in Class 16. The first defendant manufactured abroad, and sold in the United Kingdom, a powdered dough mix under the name YUMMY DOUGH. The YUMMY DOUGH product was promoted in the United Kingdom as “The edible play dough”, these words being printed in a single strap line across the bottom of the packet (illustrated in the judgment). In addition to the strap line, the words “PLAY DOUGH MIX” appeared in the top left-hand corner of the YUMMY DOUGH packet and the words “COLOURED EDIBLE PLAY DOUGH MIX” appeared in a smaller type size than that of the strap line on the side of the packet.
H3 Alleging that the defendants’ importation and sale of its YUMMY DOUGH in packaging that alluded to their own PLAY-DOH trade mark constituted an infringement of the rights in their mark, the claimants commenced infringement proceedings against the defendant. Following an application for interim injunctive relief a consent order was made in which each of the defendants gave temporary undertakings “not to undertake any material re-brand prior to judgment or further order in this action ”. The undertakings were very wide and, if they were to be made permanent at trial, their effect would be to freeze the defendants’ marketing of YUMMY DOUGH within very tight constraints in perpetuity. *475
H4 At trial, the claimants’ case rested on two separate bases: (i) infringement of each of their registered trade marks; (ii) passing off, this claim being based on the goodwill which the claimants maintained that they had acquired through use of the PLAY-DOH mark in the United Kingdom. The defendants counterclaimed for: (i) a declaration that the claimants’ registered trade marks had been invalidly registered because they lacked distinctiveness or were descriptive, and (ii) revocation of the claimants’ registered trade marks on the basis that the words “play dough” had become a common term in the trade for the products in question or on account of the claimants’ inactivity. The defendants also raised a defence to the action for trade mark infringement that their use of the signs complained of was an indication of the kind of goods they sold and that such use was in accordance with honest practices in industrial commercial matters under art.6 of the Trade Mark Directive .
H5 Held , by the High Court, that the claimants’ trade marks were valid and that they had been infringed.
Re:So what? by edxwelch · 2012-01-26 01:24 · Score: 1

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/4242-monopoly-clone-outrage
Re:So what? by Rolgar · 2012-01-26 01:36 · Score: 1

Aren't all RTS games alike? Aren't all FPS games alike? Aren't all boardgames alike? Similarity is just a matter of degree.
Re:So what? by Seumas · 2012-01-26 01:49 · Score: 1

This isn't a mere issue of "we made a game in the same genre!" or "we evolved the idea sufficiently enough to be different". This is an issue of saying "we took The Office and changed Michael's name and called it The Workplace".
Re:So what? by residieu · 2012-01-26 03:03 · Score: 1

FarmTown was a more social game. To get people to work on your farm you had to actually go to a communal chat room and ask people for help, not just post "Please send fertilizer" messages on their facebook wall.
Re:So what? by Enderandrew · 2012-01-26 03:15 · Score: 2

Doom is a Wolfenstein 3D rip-off.

--
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Re:So what? by Hydian · 2012-01-26 03:51 · Score: 1

Aren't all boardgames alike?
I think you either got a little too excited or have no clue what a boardgame is. That's like asking if all videogames are alike or if all mammals are alike.
Re:So what? by Schnapple · 2012-01-26 08:14 · Score: 1

at what point would a variant of the board game Monopoly be different enough to ensure Parker Brothers couldn't sue you?

I don't know for certain, but it appears that as long as you don't call it "Monopoly", don't feature the same graphics and fonts (i.e., the train logo), and don't use the same street names, you can do whatever you want.

Meet Late for the Sky Games. They are a company that, as near as I can tell, is 100% Monopoly clones like you describe. They make them for colleges (Aggieopoly, Longhornopoly), cities (Miamiopoly), little kids (Pirateopoly) and apparently they'll even make a custom version for you if you'll buy 1,000 units. As you can see, they even use the "-opoly" suffix. They've been doing this for decades now.

I believe it's that the rules of a game can be patented, but patents expire, and Monopoly is an old game. That's how they "get away" with it.

Also I believe that this is the reason that Parker Bros. went hogwild on the licensing thing (Star Wars Monopoly, Dallas Cowboys Monopoly, Hello Kitty Monopoly, etc.) because they saw companies like LFTS (who have apparently sold 7M copies of their games) and said "well shit, we should get in on that"

--
Schnapple
Re:So what? by harl · 2012-01-26 08:48 · Score: 1

You mean Dune 2.

Dune was an adventure game in the style of King's Quest or Sam and Max.

--
I find being offended by me offensive.
Re:So what? by BitZtream · 2012-01-26 17:24 · Score: 1

I'm not really sure you can say Doom was a rip off of Wolfenstein when Wolfenstein 3D and Doom were both made by iD. I'm really not sure how you would rip yourself off.
Of course, you're ignoring the fact that neither were originals and in fact 'rip offs' as well, since you're using the term so loosely.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager

Too bad Nimblebit is hypocritical by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-25 22:40 · Score: 4, Informative

http://i.imgur.com/ajaYt.jpg

Re:Too bad Nimblebit is hypocritical by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-25 22:59 · Score: 2, Informative

drumscowski admits within that he hasn't even played tiny tower - if he had he'd realise it's not a vague 'influence' that nimblebit is pissed off about - such as he took from similar games - it's essentially a direct clone with a new skin on top of it.
Re:Too bad Nimblebit is hypocritical by grumbel · 2012-01-25 23:19 · Score: 4, Informative

Don't make a judgment until you have actually played all the games. I haven't, but at least from what one can read on the Internet from people who have: SimTown plays quite different, TinyTower and Zyngas game almost identical and it's not like this is the first time Zynga has done something like this, see FarmTown vs FarmVille.
Re:Too bad Nimblebit is hypocritical by dr_blurb · 2012-01-26 01:51 · Score: 1

Crush the Castle is great, I've always liked it much better than Angry Birds.

(what are their numbers compared to Angry Birds?)
Re:Too bad Nimblebit is hypocritical by Theaetetus · 2012-01-26 03:15 · Score: 1

+5 informative, really?
It isn't about "similarities" between the 2 games, it is that their game is an absolute direct rip-off of his game with a different skin, basically.
And before people start, no, I am not one of those people who say that games such as the ones that came after Minecraft became popular are "all clones". Minecraft is a pretty piss-poor voxel world in fact, inefficient as hell and has been loaded with modcode that they never even bothered to test much. (McRegion for one absolutely destroyed Minecraft from being playable on netbooks) They just made other developers realize that, yes, voxel worlds can work for a game fairly well now.
Perhaps you also missed the part where Zynga tried to acquire the guys BEFORE THEY RIPPED HIS GAME OFF. So, it is either join us or be destroyed. No, just fucking no. Fuck Zynga and fuck anyone who supports them in this. Even jokingly. That company needs to be wiped out by some violent fire or flooding incident, or just a really bad electrical storm. They are a plague on the industry.
So the moral is, "never attempt to buy your competitor, just crush them?" I'm not sure you've thought your cunning plan all the way through.
Re:Too bad Nimblebit is hypocritical by Tharsman · 2012-01-26 06:20 · Score: 1

Ah that Kotaku bs.
The game you link is simply litterally The Sims in an office setting.
Tiny Tower is Yenga with time management and money instead of physics.
Insanely different games that only a troll would dare compare.

immoral but probably not illegal by tebee · 2012-01-25 22:45 · Score: 1

OK it does look like they cloned the game but you can't copyright the ideas behind a game only the artwork and the like. Though there are people who would like to extend copyright in this way and are to a certain extant succeeding.

See the thread a few hours ago on Similar, but not copied, image found to breach copyright.

--
N.B. this user is far too lazy to write a witty and intelligent sig.

Re:immoral but probably not illegal by TrekkieGod · 2012-01-26 02:59 · Score: 1

OK it does look like they cloned the game but you can't copyright the ideas behind a game only the artwork and the like. Though there are people who would like to extend copyright in this way and are to a certain extant succeeding.
See the thread a few hours ago on Similar, but not copied, image found to breach copyright.
I don't even think it's immoral. And the comparison image by Nimblebit isn't accusing them of being immoral either, it's accusing the of being unimaginative, which is hard to argue against.
All in all, it's not something to be outraged about, and it was a very good response from Nimblebit. "You have 2700 employees and can't come up with a better idea than what our 3 guys came up with. This is why we rock, and we're looking forward to continue to be ahead of you creating new ideas that will inspire your next games."
Way to go Nimblebit. Classy response, and they get good marketing off it.

--
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
Re:immoral but probably not illegal by residieu · 2012-01-26 04:02 · Score: 1

I don't even think it's immoral. And the comparison image by Nimblebit isn't accusing them of being immoral either, it's accusing the of being unimaginative, which is hard to argue against.
It's hardly newsworthy, though. Zynga has been doing this for a long time.

Sim Tower by Voxol · 2012-01-25 22:46 · Score: 5, Informative

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SimTower

Or as they say, 'everything is a remix'.

Re:Sim Tower by duk242 · 2012-01-25 23:31 · Score: 5, Informative

I found TinyTower whilst looking for something similar to SimTower for my iPhone. It's quite obvious that TinyTower is inspired by SimTower, however it's not really all that much like what SimTower was. Zynga's version however is a direct copy of everything from TinyTower.
Re:Sim Tower by MachineShedFred · 2012-01-26 00:18 · Score: 4, Informative

I've played both SimTower and Tiny Tower. They can only be described as a "remix" if you go to a high enough level that all you can see is that both games have commercial tower construction involved.
In Tiny Tower, you manage all of the people in the building, as well as what each floor is doing - what the stores stock, who works where, who lives where, etc.
In SimTower, you just put in the "zoned" space, and people move in and pay you rent. You manage the building from a facilities perspective, screwing about with elevator timings and where the box stays in the shaft when no one's in it. You manage traffic flow within your building so you don't end up with pissed off people that just want to get out of your building at the end of the day.
They are quite different games. In fact, after finding Tiny Tower, it inspired me to fire up DOSBox with Windows 3.1 and play some SimTower.

--
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Re:Sim Tower by CriminalNerd · 2012-01-26 02:37 · Score: 1

SimTower is an elevator simulator and Tiny Tower is a video game. Having the word Tower in their name doesn't make them similar.
Re:Sim Tower by FooAtWFU · 2012-01-26 04:10 · Score: 2

Tiny Tower is in the class of games which I personally think of as "real-time impatience machines". There are a couple of iffy mechanics at work, but the most insidious is the dual-currency model. One currency (coins) you get by playing normally. The other (Towerbucks), which makes useful things happen faster, you only get occasionally or at random, but they can be bought with real money. So the point of the game is essentially to addict you and then make you impatient enough to spend real money.
I hate this game mechanic.

--
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Re:Sim Tower by kiwimate · 2012-01-26 06:58 · Score: 1

Looks like a rip-off of Little Computer People from 1985.
What? Different game play? More options? Still the same basic premise of a sim game, looking sideways on a building.
Re:Sim Tower by imunfair · 2012-01-26 11:06 · Score: 1

From the description it is probably more like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoot_Tower - which is a SimTower sequel. You can apparently set what shops sell, etc - though I've never played it myself. I looked at buying it a while ago but couldn't find a decently priced digital copy.
Re:Sim Tower by Suddenly_Dead · 2012-01-26 12:00 · Score: 1

That describes some 90% of "Free" mobile games, it seems. It's a "freemium" model. And people just eat this stuff up; the "Top Free Games" on the Android market is just chock full of this junk.
Re:Sim Tower by gullevek · 2012-01-26 17:01 · Score: 1

Actually you do not get the Towerbucks so much at random. You get them when you full stock a store, add new floor. The only random Towerbuck is from people who ride the elevator.
Plus the only need for Towerbucks is to get faster elevators, other is just to get more coins to build floors faster. But for the elevators, you really can get the towerbucks very fast, and for the other part, unless you are super impatient, you do not need it either.
Actually, from all those game types, Tiny Tower is the least "you need to buy shit with your real money". Plus there is no need to get "friends" to actually get anything going. Those are the most annoying free games.

--
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919

What? by ledow · 2012-01-25 22:48 · Score: 1

Sorry but "that" screenshot just destroys their case for them. The Zynga version has more options, extremely different options, totally different graphics, different UI, everything.

I don't think they have a case here, and it's NOT like their game was new and building a genre of its own (I hereby give you SimTower / Yoot Tower, which lets you upgrade elevators and put shops on the floors too - from fecking 1994).

You expect me to get all riled about Zygna ripping off your game, but actually I'm more riled that you *THINK* they are ripping off something that you *THINK* is somehow *your* game. They're not, and it isn't.

Re:What? by SuricouRaven · 2012-01-25 22:51 · Score: 2

I remember simtower and the condo bug. If you pause a game, find an unsold condo, drop the price as low as you can, raise it back up again and unpause, it'll immediatly sell for full price. A way to cheat your way out of the dreaded Condo Price Crash.
Re:What? by duk242 · 2012-01-25 23:33 · Score: 1

I'm assuming you're trolling. TinyTower may be inspired by SimTower, but it's not as if it's a complete copy of the game (SimTower for example you didn't manage anything to do with the people, you handled the tower, they handled themselves). Zynga's tower is a complete ripoff of TinyTower, even down to the 'tiny' details.
Re:What? by jonnythan · 2012-01-26 01:13 · Score: 1

What different options? I've played Tiny Tower, and looking at the Dream Heights screenshots is like looking at Tiny Tower with different graphics. All the gameplay elements are 100% identical. I see absolutely nothing whatsoever in Dream Heights that isn't in Tiny Tower.
Re:What? by BeardedChimp · 2012-01-26 01:55 · Score: 1

I remember something similar for championship manager. Another team would approach you to buy your player at some low price you have set. You clicked "I will consider it", then went onto the players options and set their sell price to 50 million. A few minutes later they would ask again to buy even at the inflated price. Fun times.

Intellectual property laws in action by slasho81 · 2012-01-25 23:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you copy a big company, the big company will sue you out of existence.

If you copy a small company, the small company will complain so hard you better watch out!

Re:Intellectual property laws in action by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · 2012-01-25 23:52 · Score: 1

Unless the one being sued is in China where free software (as in free beer) are flourishing everywhere.

--
New Economic Perspectives

And they all rip off SimTower by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-25 23:30 · Score: 1

Get over yourself. You're all just trying to make a quick buck doing the same stuff all over again on a new platform. Also, careful with the sarcastic messages to the future defendant. Why exactly aren't you already suing Zynga? No case? No guts?

GNU/Cloning by tepples · 2012-01-25 23:36 · Score: 5, Interesting

This is more about moral rules than the law.

So should Linus Torvalds and the GNU project "morally" not have cloned UNIX when making GNU/Linux?

Re:GNU/Cloning by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 00:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

No, they should have, because they did morally copy it and then gave it away for all of us to share and benefit. This is not what Zynga is doing. Zynga does not care about the community and society, they only care about their own coffers.
Re:GNU/Cloning by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 00:24 · Score: 1

Torvalds didn't clone UNIX, he cloned Minix.
Re:GNU/Cloning by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-01-26 06:51 · Score: 1

At the very least, when you copy, you are expected to acknowledge that you're copying, and credit the original authors. Pretty sure that anyone who graduated had the definition of "plagiarism" drilled into them.
Re:GNU/Cloning by tepples · 2012-01-27 01:59 · Score: 1

and credit the original authors.
So what's the proper way to credit the original authors that does not imply any endorsement of your clone by the original authors?
Re:GNU/Cloning by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-01-27 05:36 · Score: 1

I am not a lawyer, but I'd imagine something like what you see in games these days - "some images (c) US DoD; use of DoD imagery does not imply endorsement of this product by DoD".

Re:marketing?! by TaoPhoenix · 2012-01-25 23:44 · Score: 4, Insightful

Can we pair stories and see what happens?

X stories down we just had "Your photo infringes on his photo because it contained similar design elements". Now we have "Zynga accused of infringing on Nimblebit's version because it contains similar design bits"? Yet our reactions are *different*?

Why aren't that first photographer happy that the second one "handed over free marketing"?

I think we just stumbled on a new flaw in copyright besides the other famous ones: That there are *different classes* of works, but only one copyight law! So we have the same law handling Red Buses In Photos and Nimblebit Games and Twilight Movies. So the judges are handing down rulings that almost make sense for one class of works, and lead to frightening results in the other classes, with lawyers eating it all for dinner.

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine

Re:Happens all the time. by teg · 2012-01-25 23:56 · Score: 5, Informative

Let's see... when I was a kid in the days of Apple ][, these neighbors of ours (Stoltzfus family) came up with a graphical programming language.

They showed it to Apple, hoping that Apple would buy. Apple strongly considered it, and then returned it, saying that they weren't interested.

A year later, they came out with Apple Logo, which was immensely popular.

Logo was created in the 60s, turtles and all. It was popular on other systems as well in the early 80s, so it doesn't really seem to me that they did anything wrong here?

Sun came up in the East today, too.... by sjpadbury · 2012-01-26 00:00 · Score: 1

Zynga? Copy someone else's Game?

I'm Shocked! Shocked, I say!

--
We're all full up on Crazy here...

This neatly ties into the copied photo composition by SmallFurryCreature · 2012-01-26 00:00 · Score: 1

Just a few stories below is the story about a judge claiming that a similar composition is copyright infringement, while clearly insane, how would this ruling apply to these two games? Well BOTH are first and foremost SimTower ripoffs. And that just asumes that SimTower was not based on something else.

Every idea is based on another idea. Where do you stop with copyright infringement when somebody copies an idea? Where would /. be if the idea of a forum was granted copyright?

As bad as it may be to swallow, for a large part this is just life and we got to accept it. If I open a bakery with real bread in the US, I just got to accept that then anyone from the EU can do the same and start selling real food in the US (I been to the US, god knows there is a market for it).

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:

You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

SimTower by rbpOne · 2012-01-26 00:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

Both games pretty much look like SimTower to me.

Re:SimTower by Blackwulf · 2012-01-26 05:40 · Score: 1

Except Tiny Tower plays differently and has different game mechanics than SimTower. But you're right, they LOOK the same. But that's about it.

Re:Happens all the time. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 00:15 · Score: 1

So either he showed them Logo and they ripped off "his" idea to implement an ancient LISP-based graphical programming language. Or he showed them something that wasn't Logo, and they decided to do Logo instead. Neither of these is particularly bad behaviour on Apple's part.

But it's not entirely tangential to the matter at hand. The idea of "doing a graphical programming language" is not protected, and nor should it be, just as the idea of "doing a Zynga-esque game about building towers" is not protected.

But design work is protected, which is why Apple has a case against Samsung (I presume you mean Samsung?)

Not the first time for Zynga by tnerb123 · 2012-01-26 00:17 · Score: 4, Informative

They have been ripping off other games forever! Farmville was a rip off of FarmTown. Mafia wars was a rip off of MobWars! This company is only a copy cat company that can not create its own games!

Re:marketing?! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 00:23 · Score: 1

The reaction is about the big 500lb gorilla of mobile gaming copying the little indie's idea, not necessarily about the copying of ideas in general. I think most people here would say in an ideal world ideas shouldn't be copyrightable and whoever comes up with the best implementation deserves our money. However, in the world we live in these things are copyrightable and the injustice that the bullies of the industry get away with copying yet come down hard on those who copy them is what provokes the reaction.

It is obvious by maroberts · 2012-01-26 00:24 · Score: 1

..that the Zynga game is more polished, with better graphical presentation. Maybe they had more drones to work on it.

Many games boast similar ideas and the original game looks so like Theme xxxxxxx or Sim xxxxxx played on a PC, they can hardly claim originality.

--

Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon

In Related Old News: Zynga Sues Vostu for Cloning by famazza · 2012-01-26 00:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

I remember very well. In the remote year of 2011 Zynga was accusing Vostu of cloning some of their game.

Also in 2009 Zynga was sued for Copyright infringement, this time the settlement was filled by Psycho Monkey, due to the game Mafia Wars.

It seems that there is something very supicious happening with Zynga.

--

-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?

MAXIS is going to be pissed by skine · 2012-01-26 00:28 · Score: 1

When they hear about this.

News? by flimflammer · 2012-01-26 00:30 · Score: 1

This is pretty much business as usual for Zynga.

Re:In Related Old News: Zynga Sues Vostu for Cloni by goose-incarnated · 2012-01-26 00:57 · Score: 2

It seems that there is something very supicious happening with Zynga.

Well? Spit it out then - your post gives very little indication of what it is you actually suspect.

--
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.

Re:And they all rip off SimTower by Riceballsan · 2012-01-26 00:58 · Score: 1

In general a small development house cannot successfully sue a multi million dollar company, whether the case is valid or not is irrelevant as multi-million dollar lawyers will pretty much tweak any law to permit just about anything.

And MINIX in turn is a clone of... by tepples · 2012-01-26 00:58 · Score: 1

What did Andrew S. Tanenbaum clone? From the front page of the MINIX web site: "MINIX 3 is a new UNIX clone".

Thompson and Ritchie by tepples · 2012-01-26 01:03 · Score: 3, Interesting

Yeah but it is kinda sad a guy can bust his ass making something unique only to have some scumbum company like Zynga bold face copy the thing.

Likewise it's kinda sad that Ken Thompson and Dennis Ritchie can bust their asses making something unique only to have some scumbum company like FSF bold face copy the thing. Or are you trying to say cloning the functionality of a computer program is OK as long as the publisher of the clone is one of Slashdot's darling companies?

Re:Thompson and Ritchie by hairyfeet · 2012-01-26 02:07 · Score: 1

Uhhh...are you stoned? Seriously...are you? Linux was an x86 version of MINIX not unix, they used some of the POSIX conventions but that's all, as SCO found out. And having similar functionality is NOT the same as copying all the levels of a program and just sticking a new picture on it, a better example would be me just copypasta-ing all the levels in BioShock and calling it BioSmack. This isn't "similar" its a level for level, page for page, feature for feature bold faced ripoff. And you CAN shut down blod faced ripoff you know, see Rolex crushing Romex watches or MSFT shutting down Lindows.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:Thompson and Ritchie by mypalmike · 2012-01-26 02:17 · Score: 4, Informative

I can't stand it any more! Three posts in a row! I must say something!
It's "bald faced", not "bold faced"!
OK, I feel a little better.

--
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
Re:Thompson and Ritchie by tepples · 2012-01-26 03:23 · Score: 2

Linux was an x86 version of MINIX not unix
And what is MINIX other than a clone of UNIX?

they used some of the POSIX conventions

Why aren't the POSIX conventions copyrightable? Because they're a method of operation.

or MSFT shutting down Lindows
For one thing, that's trademark. For another, you appear to have got that one backward: Microsoft ended up settling out of court and paying Lindows Inc. for the right to the "Lindows" trademark because Microsoft risked a ruling that "windows" was too generic.
Re:Thompson and Ritchie by DemonGenius · 2012-01-26 05:58 · Score: 1

Wouldn't the likeness of Tiny Tower be considered trademark? This without even considering the level for level copy and paste would be considered sleazy if not outright copyright infringement. There's way too much of the same game in the Apple App Store anyway (yeah, I'll admit, I sold out, albeit jailbroken :P). Clones, while legitimate, are sleazy if you're charging for them and are more legitimate if you're cloning GameBoy Advance or other mainstream console games which typically aren't marketed and are often open source. You'd know about that, eh tepples?
Re:Thompson and Ritchie by Black+Cardinal · 2012-01-26 09:04 · Score: 1

Maybe the original poster was trying to say "have some scumbum company like Zynga copy the thing" and forgot that Slashdot isn't LaTeX.
Re:Thompson and Ritchie by astrodoom · 2012-01-26 10:59 · Score: 1

Actually, they're both correct. One is a reference to how business men used to wear mustachios to cover facial expressions, thus a bald-faced (or bare-faced if you really want to be originally accurate) liar was a good liar because he didn't need a mustache. Or so the legend goes.

A bold-faced lie is believed to be a reference to the typeface, something written in print for emphasis yet known to be a lie.

If I'm not mistaken both actually go back to Shakespeare, so I'll leave you with the pun, have it As You Like It.
Re:Thompson and Ritchie by IceCreamGuy · 2012-01-26 11:03 · Score: 1

Actually, according to Merriam Webster, "bold faced" is 400 years older than "bare faced," see http://www.mtannoyances.com/?p=384. They are both commonly used today.
Re:Thompson and Ritchie by qxcv · 2012-01-26 19:48 · Score: 1

Ugh. That comparison is wrong on so many levels. Let me demonstrate:
GNU: Project members like the UNIX philosophy put forward (and built on) by the UNIX operating system, but dislike the fact that users are not free to use/modify their programs and are instead bound by overly restrictive licenses. They decide to write a UNIX-style operating system (taking inspiration from the *many* UNIX-style operating systems around at the time), but make it "Free as in Freedom" for the betterment of computer users everywhere. They don't have the resources of the big companies like AT&T/Bell, but through sheer persistence and determination they finally create the GNU operating system (paying homage to its UNIX heritage with the reverse-acronym GNU's Not UNIX). True to their original vision, they circulate it for free and start what could best be termed a "F/OSS revolution".
Zynga: Realise that their income stream from years of cloning games like "Farm Town" is beginning to dry up. As they have done in the past, they simply take a successful game (from a company small enough that it does not have the resources to take legal action, of course) and make a clone with a slightly improved user interface and the sort of graphics that only a 7,000 person company can produce. They sell their blatantly plagiarised game and refuse to acknowledge the original game in any way, shape or form.

--
"The most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough." -- Eric S. Raymond

Re:Happens all the time. by dietdew7 · 2012-01-26 01:10 · Score: 5, Funny

It's a well documented fact that while Steve Jobs was at Parc stealing the GUI for the Mac, he also stole an office chair, a box of copy paper and a red Swingline stapler.

Fair Game by derek5432 · 2012-01-26 01:13 · Score: 1

I had a lot less sympathy for nimblebits when I read the part about how Zynga tried to buy them first.

Marsh also said on Twitter that Zynga "did try to go the honest route and try to acquire us first."

I'm an indie game developer, and if a giant like Zynga approached me wanting to buy my company or the rights to the game, I could either:

1) Take the pile of cash, then go start another company.

2) Refuse. After all, the game is my baby, right?

If I took route #2, I should not at all be surprised if the megacorp then decided to clone my game. In fact, I'd be surprised if they didn't. Zynga certainly seems like a seedy company, but in this case it looks like they deserve some kudos for actually approaching the devs before cloning the game.

Re:Fair Game by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 02:15 · Score: 1

So if I ask you for money on the street and you say no then I mugged you and took your money I suppose we should have a lot less sympathy for you? After all, you shouldn't be surprised that I was going to take your money anyway but I did the right thing and deserve some kudos because I asked you nicely first.
Sorry but I'm just not buying that reasoning, regardless of the offer Zynga shouldn't have just cloned the game. The truly sickening part is that they've made as much as they have with no original ideas of their own.
Re:Fair Game by gl4ss · 2012-01-26 04:06 · Score: 1

well, I think what he should have done would have been to sell out to zynga. better analogy would be a guy coming to you with a pile of money and saying take this bribe and don't go to work - then when you refuse they start selling copycat products that put the factory you were working at out of business.
and then make a better clone of tiny tower. he didn't sell out probably because he thought tiny tower will keep making him more money for a long time, except that there's no reason why it really would go like that. I mean, tiny tower is probably raking in the money right now but that just can't continue - or could but that wouldn't be probable, it's not like you're that probable to see too much tiny tower merchandise etc...
the problem it seems that there's no secret sauce in tiny tower at all and not having patents on it like certain 'ris game? though I don't see that as that much of a problem.
zynga usually sucks.. but you know what, if someone made an open source tiny tower clone I doubt many people would be complaining so wtf? tons of projects featured on slashdot are just opensource clones of commercial games.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Re:Happens all the time. by voss · 2012-01-26 01:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

Actually Apple did steal a lot of their ideas for the Mac from the Xerox Parc

"No, Steve, I think its more like we both have a rich neighbor named Xerox, and you broke in to steal the TV set, and you found out I'd been there first, and you said. "Hey that's no fair! I wanted to steal the TV set! - Bill Gates' response after Steve Jobs accused Microsoft of borrowing the GUI (Graphical User Interface) from Apple for Windows 1.0* "

http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa043099.htm

Re:so whos the one witb this game for android? by nanoflower · 2012-01-26 01:19 · Score: 1

They aren't worried about Mobage because that game IS Tiny Tower. As it says on the web page https://market.android.com/details?id=com.mobage.ww.a560.tinytower_android "The #1 iPhone Game Tiny Tower comes to Android for the 1st Time" so there must be some sort of licensing between the two companies. Zynga could have taken that approach after the company decided not to be purchased but instead of working out some sort of licensing that would have benefited both companies they decided it would be cheaper to copy the game. I'm sure there are some differences (that's natural unless two people are forced to build the same product) but those two games look almost exactly the same. Far too close for it to be anything other than an intentional copy.

Methods of operation by tepples · 2012-01-26 01:20 · Score: 2

Methods of operation are explicitly not copyrightable in my country (17 USC 102(b)). I'd assume that game play mechanics are methods of the game's operation. Nor are any graphical elements that necessarily follow from the method of operation, per the merger doctrine.

So? by Digital+Vomit · 2012-01-26 01:22 · Score: 1

So what if one company's software got "ripped off" by another company? That's a good thing; it promotes competition between the two companies to create a better version of the game.

--
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.

Re:So? by Zaphod+The+42nd · 2012-01-26 02:58 · Score: 1

Every platform game was copying from Mario and the other pioneers. Asteroids copied SpaceWar. RTS games copied Dune.

Hell, I remember when FPS games were called doom-clones. And they *really* were. There's no denying doom's influence. Some games paid money to licence the engine from Id, but many others merely built their own versions.

Did that mean Id should have a right to sue every video game company? No. And did they try? NO. Id was totally cool with it. They were just glad to have been so successful, and they were totally cool with it.

Duke Nukem 3D's Build Engine is pretty much a direct knockoff of Doom. Did Id sue 3DRealms? No, I'm pretty sure they were on good terms.

This is part of game development.

You make the best game you can. Somebody makes a better game, you don't try to sue them. You try to do better.

--
GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-

Copyright != trademark by tepples · 2012-01-26 01:30 · Score: 2

one by Hasbro on copyright infringement [...] "The YUMMY DOUGH product was promoted in the United Kingdom as 'The edible play dough'"

I don't see copyright infringement there, just trademark infringement, despite that the two have been conflated of late into "intellectual property".

KBlocks by tepples · 2012-01-26 01:33 · Score: 1

All the gameplay elements are 100% identical.

But would you agree that gameplay elements are the "methods of operation" of a game?

I see absolutely nothing whatsoever in Dream Heights that isn't in Tiny Tower.

And I see nothing in Free games like KBlocks that isn't in Tetris.

Re:KBlocks by jonnythan · 2012-01-26 02:49 · Score: 1

Whoever owns the copyright on Tetris could probably sue whoever made KBlocks without much issue. However, KBlocks is not developed by a massive corporation making fistfuls of money on the game.
If Zynga released KBlocks as a Facebook game then the Tetris people would sue them and win.

Re:Happens all the time. by Pieroxy · 2012-01-26 01:36 · Score: 4, Informative

Well, except for the fact that they didn't steal anything, you're right. Xerox gave it away. Willfully.

--
Write boring code, not shiny code!

Re:This neatly ties into the copied photo composit by Talderas · 2012-01-26 01:39 · Score: 1

Tiny Tower, while inspired by SimTower, definitely expands upon SimTower by adding in people management. SimTower was strictly a tower building sim. If Dream Height is identical to Tiny Tower in features and UI with the only difference being a difference in graphics this would be very much like the photo case from earlier. The question is whether the different graphics is sufficient enough to make it a true derivative work rather than creating a clone of the original work or basically does it satisfy the originality requirement.

--
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork

Re:marketing?! by ildon · 2012-01-26 01:41 · Score: 1

One is about the government passing judgement on the issue. One is just about a dick company continuing to be a dick.

Re:Happens all the time. by nedlohs · 2012-01-26 01:49 · Score: 1

That's a great source!

Do you ask the CEO of Ford whether that Toyota car you are thinking about getting is any good?

Re:Happens all the time. by gtall · 2012-01-26 01:55 · Score: 2

He also stole a box of raisins.

Re:Happens all the time. by msauve · 2012-01-26 02:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

"Actually Apple did steal a lot of their ideas for the Mac from the Xerox Parc"

If, by "steal," you mean "bought and paid for with pre-IPO stock shares," you're right.

--
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law

Re:Happens all the time. by Pope · 2012-01-26 02:11 · Score: 1

Hell, Apple paid for it with by allowing Xerox to buy a million buck of pre-IPO stock. The "Stolen" story is for morons.

--
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.

Re:Happens all the time. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-26 02:22 · Score: 1, Insightful

Stolen is the kids word for plagiarized. Apple started out doing it, and they still do it today. Just like every other company.

Re:Happens all the time. by realityimpaired · 2012-01-26 02:36 · Score: 2

Do you ask the CEO of Ford whether that Toyota car you are thinking about getting is any good?

Actually, I would. I would probably already know the answer, and the honesty in the answer from the guy from Ford might make me consider his products as an alternative.

Sadly, I have never gotten a straight answer like that from the actual salespeople who work for Ford... when I was buying a new car last February, I was treated like a piece of meat by the Ford folks. I had really one requirement in my car: full time all-wheel drive. A manual transmission was wanted, but wasn't a deal-breaker. I live in a northern part of the world, and not having it isn't an option in the winter. And rather than trying to sell me on the benefits of their system (not to mention why I should spend twice as much for their car that had it than I ended up spending on a Subaru), they proceeded to tell me everything that was wrong with Subaru's system. (completely ignoring the fact that the Ford system actually *is* the Subaru system, technology that they licensed when they part-owned Volvo). End result: the salesman lost a commission, and I ended up getting a car better suited to my needs for half the cost. I got my 4-wheel drive, my manual transmission (which I couldn't get in the Ford), and as an added bonus it's a more efficient engine, and it has a traction control off button that actually turns the traction control off. I call it the "let me have fun" button. /rant off

Re:Happens all the time. by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2012-01-26 02:36 · Score: 2

It's a well documented fact that while Steve Jobs was at Parc stealing the GUI for the Mac, he also stole an office chair, a box of copy paper and a red Swingline stapler.

Not to mentioned that he copied a XEROX. Or XEROXed a copier.

--
Fandroids hate facts.

Re:Happens all the time. by deathguppie · 2012-01-26 02:50 · Score: 1

The claim that the south fought the civil war over slavery is not made because President Lincoln viewed the war that way. It was because in almost every southern secession speech "preserving the institution of slavery" was given as a main reason for secession.

People only claim that Steve Jobs stole technology because he said so himself

--
once more into the breach

Re:In Related Old News: Zynga Sues Vostu for Cloni by NewWorldDan · 2012-01-26 03:16 · Score: 1

There's nothing suspicious. Zynga is fairly straightforward about what they do: take existing popular games and clone them. Zynga has the R&D muscle to polish up the graphics and get them out the door in a fairly expeditious fashion. Now, at times, they will simply buy out these games. They tried to buy Tiny Tower before cloning it. Frankly, there's no shortage of earlier games that Tiny Tower is imitating either. All this is right now, is free publicity for both Tiny Tower and Dream Heights. As long as this battle is fought in the media and not the courts, they both win.

Common method of operation by tepples · 2012-01-26 03:20 · Score: 1

However, KBlocks is not developed by a massive corporation making fistfuls of money on the game.

Yet the Fedora project funded by Red Hat distributes both KBlocks and Quadrapassel.

If Zynga released KBlocks as a Facebook game then the Tetris people would sue them and win.

As far as I know, every case brought by The Tetris Company has settled out of court. But how are the similarities between Tetris and KBlocks not a consequence of their common method of operation?

Re:Common method of operation by jonnythan · 2012-01-27 01:27 · Score: 1

These aren't patents. It's copyright.
Re:Common method of operation by tepples · 2012-01-27 02:04 · Score: 1

Copyright explicitly does not protect methods of operation. From Title 17, United States Code, section 102(b):

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.
Nor does it protect any similarities that are unavoidable consequences of shared uncopyrightable elements (the "merger doctrine"). So what protected parts of Tetris do clones copy?

Re:Happens all the time. by BasilBrush · 2012-01-26 03:26 · Score: 1

I'd like to see that complete interview. There's another clip from the same interview where he talks about Xerox Parc. There's also a clip from the interview where he has a go at Microsoft for having no taste, and saying that Apple got the idea for proper typography on the Mac from looking at beautiful books.

I have a feeling this clip refers to the latter rather than the former. But without the whole interview it's impossible to tell.

Modus Operandi by dr_leviathan · 2012-01-26 03:32 · Score: 1

I thought it was well understood that this was Zynga's business model:

(1) look for and coming mobile games
(2) quickly copy found game and throw a big stack of servers at the back end so that its online play will scale
(3) profit!

Oh yeah, and there was something in there about flogging your workers in a very typical game industry sweat shop. All the stories I've heard coming out of Zynga was that it truly is crunch mode 100% of the time there.

"Yeah, I'm going to need you to come in on Saturday, mkay? Oh yeah, I almost forgot, we're still behind schedule so I also need you to come in on Sunday."

--
Religion is poison to rationality, and we lose sight of that at our own peril. -- Lurker2288

Re:Happens all the time. by Xoltri · 2012-01-26 03:32 · Score: 1

My Rav4 doesn't have a button to disable traction control, and it's resulted in me being stuck one or two times in snow over the last few years. The tires will just refuse to spin with it enabled. You can disable it, but the procedure is ridiculous:

http://www.spokanister.net/vehicles_RAV4_VSC_TC.htm

--
-Xoltri

Re:Happens all the time. by ynp7 · 2012-01-26 03:38 · Score: 1, Troll

I think that people use the word "stole" because of the way that Apple fanboys pretend that Apple invented everything great about computing, when in fact they've mostly taken everything from someone else (nothing wrong with that) and made it crappy and hard to use. That they've managed to sell that crap to millions of idiots with poor aesthetic sensibilities is irrelevant.

I'll pretend to be shocked about this... by Mysticalfruit · 2012-01-26 03:45 · Score: 1

Zynga has a well storied and much written history of taking other people's games, cloning them and then making a bundle of cash. Basically every *ville game they make is a virtual ripoff of someone else's initial idea.

This does not surprise me, not one bit.

Somewhere, a lawyer is filling his fountain pen and getting a hungry gleam in his eye... a hunger for suing that is...

--
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.

Sim Tower? by kpatient · 2012-01-26 03:55 · Score: 1

Nimblebit accused of cloning Sim Tower.

Yes by geekoid · 2012-01-26 04:03 · Score: 1

because Tiny Tower is so original.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Re:Yes by prezkennedy.org · 2012-01-26 05:52 · Score: 1

You sir, deserve some mod points!

--
It started back in Team Fortress Classic

Re:Happens all the time. by realityimpaired · 2012-01-26 04:11 · Score: 1

How odd. In my 2011 Subaru Impreza, it literally is a button. It's down and to the left of the steering wheel, near where the hood release is (but several inches from it, and a completely different action to activate it). You press the button, an idiot light lights up on the console indicating that TC is disabled, and it remains disabled until either you press the button again, or you turn the car off.

Your instructions are for a 2007 Rav4. Do you know if the later models have that same limitation? That's an utterly ridiculous series of steps to follow to disable something that won't let you start uphill on an icy road. Even more stupid when you consider that you'll almost certainly run into the same problem in any kind of serious off-roading, and the Rav4 is supposed to be an off-road car.

Re:Happens all the time. by desdinova+216 · 2012-01-26 04:29 · Score: 1

no one ever does...

Re:Happens all the time. by msauve · 2012-01-26 04:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

You've never seen/used a Xerox Star/Alto, have you, Troll? I have. They were much more like Windows 1.0 than Lisa/Mac.

--
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law

but zynga are paragons of virtue by Surt · 2012-01-26 04:36 · Score: 1

How can this be true?

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking

Re:Happens all the time. by the_B0fh · 2012-01-26 04:41 · Score: 1

And what's the word for Idiot?

After *PAYING* for it, how the fuck is it stolen or plagiarized? Hell, Apple even ended up hiring some of the Xerox programmers to work on the GUI.

Re:Happens all the time. by the_B0fh · 2012-01-26 04:43 · Score: 1, Funny

You know, when you alone are ranting against the rest of the world, it might be you who is the one with crappy aesthetics.

Thought you should think about it.

Re:Happens all the time. by Pieroxy · 2012-01-26 04:55 · Score: 1

Modded Troll? What the hell is wrong with these people? Surely there must be a way to mod a Troll-modder?! Take away all their mod points and cookies too, damnit!

And as I learned in Sesame Street, without cookies, there is no joy !

--
Write boring code, not shiny code!

Re:Happens all the time. by ArmchairGeneral · 2012-01-26 05:04 · Score: 3, Informative

So the lawsuit that Xerox brought against Apple says it wasn't stolen? http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/24/business/most-of-xerox-s-suit-against-apple-barred.html I think those who believe it wasn't stolen are morons.

Re:This neatly ties into the copied photo composit by prezkennedy.org · 2012-01-26 05:51 · Score: 1

When you say Tiny Tower "expands" upon SimTower, you must be using the word in a manner I'm not familiar with. SimTower was fun, and always gave you something to do. You could build your tower however you liked, and you could have more than one elevator. It wasn't just trying to get you addicted to fork over money for "Tower Bux". Also, there isn't much "management" in Tiny Tower. The game (if you want to call it that, I wouldn't) is simplistic and more of a chore than anything else.

--
It started back in Team Fortress Classic

I'll go ahead and state the obvious... by prezkennedy.org · 2012-01-26 06:06 · Score: 1

... but honestly, there isn't much to copy. Tiny Tower is a very simplistic "game" that has so few things to do, it would take long to copy and improve upon. This is the extent of the game:

1. Click on roof to build floor... wait for floor to build or rush it for a fee.
2. Click to build one of a few different types of businesses or apartments... wait for business to build or rush it for a fee.
3. Wait for person to move into apartment or rush it for a fee.
4. Click on person to have them work at business. Have them stock business... wait for stocking to complete or rush it for a fee.
5. Wait for stock to sell or rush it for a fee.
6. Wait for more people to move or rush it for a fee.
7. Play the equivalent of Where's Waldo occasionally to earn a Tower Bux.
8. Move the elevator with a passenger in it occasionally to earn a few coins or sometimes a Tower Bux.
9. Repeat steps 1 through 8 repeatedly for longer and longer periods of time or costing more and more Tower Bux.

It's important to note that when you first start playing, Steps 1 through 5 are rushed for you in order to get you hooked, otherwise you'd be waiting for awhile with nothing to do and think the game was a stupid, boring, waste of time.

Not hard to copy, and not much of a game to begin with.

--
It started back in Team Fortress Classic

Re:Happens all the time. by Tharsman · 2012-01-26 06:09 · Score: 2

Bull! We all knwo he paid hard stock for that chair, the box of copy paper was taken out of the garbage, the red stapler never existed and the GUI was traded for a used pack of chewing gum!

Re:Happens all the time. by Tharsman · 2012-01-26 06:11 · Score: 1

Well, except for the fact that they didn't steal anything, you're right. Xerox gave it away. Willfully.

Not only that: a lot of what they "stole" was just design that Parc never managed to get to work (like the design for overlapping windows.) An apple dev (forget the name) killed himself "inventing" the code to make the overlapping windows work simply because he thought Parc had done it so it had to be possible.

Functionality doctrine by tepples · 2012-01-26 06:18 · Score: 1

Wouldn't the likeness of Tiny Tower be considered trademark?

Trademarks don't cover methods of operation either. See Functionality doctrine.

level for level copy

I agree that a level-for-level copy is more likely copyright infringement.

Re:Happens all the time. by Xoltri · 2012-01-26 06:20 · Score: 1

Google says they put a button in in the 2009 model year. Press and hold to turn traction control off. Although the Rav4 has AWD, I wouldn't necessarily call it off-road. It doesn't have a lot of ground clearance and when the snow blows high in my back alley I've gotten it stuck a couple of times and had to dig it out.

--
-Xoltri

There is no argument by roguegramma · 2012-01-26 06:21 · Score: 1

Fact is that unless you copy a new design of monopoly or use a similar name to "Monopoly" (which is trademarked), Parker Brothers has no legal argument.

The game principle was patented in 1904 and 1924.
Clearly, the patents duration has ended by now.
Also, game rules are not enforcable as rights in many countries, although a particular rule text might be still under copyright.

However, I can say that I'm sure that a court would rule sensibly, I mean, when Apple suing Samsung for copying a form factor (i.e. the dimensions of a device) can result in an injunction, what other sillyness can pass by a court?

--
Hey don't blame me, IANAB

Prior Art by Nos9 · 2012-01-26 06:28 · Score: 1

EA should sue both of them, that looks like a stripped down version of SimTower.

Re:Happens all the time. by The+Archon+V2.0 · 2012-01-26 06:28 · Score: 1

"No, Steve, I think its more like we both have a rich neighbor named Xerox, and you broke in to steal the TV set, and you found out I'd been there first, and you said. "Hey that's no fair! I wanted to steal the TV set! - Bill Gates' response after Steve Jobs accused Microsoft of borrowing the GUI (Graphical User Interface) from Apple for Windows 1.0* "

You sure Bill Gates said that? Because when I saw him say it, he looked a lot like Anthony Michael Hall.

Re:Happens all the time. by jbolden · 2012-01-26 06:31 · Score: 1

Logo was invented in 1967. Apple Logo was a fairly standard Logo.

Mobile Games by KDingo · 2012-01-26 06:57 · Score: 1

Meh, they're all stupid flash games in the end.

Murder analogy by tepples · 2012-01-26 07:01 · Score: 1

If you know who committed a murder, you provide this information to the police, and the D.A. prosecutes. We know who cloned UNIX; why haven't Andrew S. Tanenbaum, Linus Torvalds, and the FSF been prosecuted?

Re:Happens all the time. by Grishnakh · 2012-01-26 07:24 · Score: 1

If you actually believe that most SUVs are really supposed to be used off-road, then I have a bridge to sell you. The marketing may say so, but "marketing" is just another name for "lying".

Re:Happens all the time. by s73v3r · 2012-01-26 07:24 · Score: 1

Unless you can give a citation for Microsoft paying Xerox for access to that technology, like Apple did, then that line is full of shit.

Re:Happens all the time. by s73v3r · 2012-01-26 07:25 · Score: 2

Buyer's remorse.

Re:Happens all the time. by Frosty+Piss · 2012-01-26 07:46 · Score: 2

If, by "steal," you mean "bought and paid for... "

Well, that's how Microsoft "steals" their ideas, according to the Slashdot Group-Think... Microsoft stole this, Microsoft stole that... Actually they *buy* a lot of their ideas, but that doesn't stop the accusations of theft here...

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.

Re:Happens all the time. by Coren22 · 2012-01-26 07:50 · Score: 1

I walked into a Volkswagen dealership after doing research, I asked the salesperson for a:
Jetta
coupe
6 cyl
manual tranny (if possible)

the salesperson pulls around:
Jetta
Wagon
4 cyl
automatic

That's when I went to the Toyota dealership, paid 5k less for a Camry and the salesperson actually listened to the words I spoke, instead of utterly ignoring me.

My next vehicle, I am looking at a light truck (Ranger, Tacoma, etc.) talked to a Ford dealer, and they no longer sell the Ranger, rather than suggesting I go to another manufacturer, they direct me to the F-150, which is most definitely not a comparable truck, guess which one I'm buying...

--
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?

Re:In Related Old News: Zynga Sues Vostu for Cloni by scot4875 · 2012-01-26 08:28 · Score: 1

Zynga has the R&D muscle to polish up the graphics and get them out the door in a fairly expeditious fashion.

R&D? Retread & dupe?

--Jeremy

--
Jesus was a liberal

Re:Happens all the time. by LoverOfJoy · 2012-01-26 08:43 · Score: 2

And a handicapped parking space!

Requires Sharing of Contact List to Play! by harl · 2012-01-26 08:43 · Score: 1

Fuck them. They demand your complete phone contact list in order to play the game.

--
I find being offended by me offensive.

Maybe not, but then again no one is filing a lawsuit against them either. This is more about ethics than legality.

--
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."

Ugggg...I clicked on that link, and you... by Slutticus · 2012-01-26 10:18 · Score: 1

...know what? I'm so sick of this "angry birds is a ripoff of crush the castle" bullshit. The first time I saw a thread complaining about this, I went out and purchased crush the castle to see for myself. Bullshit. CTC is a fucking shitty game with 0-style and 0-replay value, sloppy implementation of touch controls and sloppy design. Saying angry birds is a ripoff of CTC is like saying a Nissan GTR is a ripoff of 1971 Ford Pinto. Bullshit.

Re:Ugggg...I clicked on that link, and you... by BitZtream · 2012-01-26 17:27 · Score: 1

CTC isn't original either.
You kids these days, you think the first thing you played is the original and are just too silly to know its all been done multiple times before.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:Ugggg...I clicked on that link, and you... by Slutticus · 2012-01-27 11:26 · Score: 1

Kid? Ha! I wish. My first ballistics game was scorched earth (DOS prompt and all...maybe around high school i think.....). I suspect there were games even before that (actually chucking shit at other shit with a real tank or trebuchet for instance).
My point was, however, being made in terms of TOUCH input games, not necessarily ballistics games in general.

BS by Slutticus · 2012-01-26 10:22 · Score: 1

I find this almost impossible to believe. crush the castle is terrible. It's a terrible, terrible game. I want my 0.99c back. I can't believe I paid the same price as angry birds.
It is a terrible implementation of the ballistics game concept. I call Shenanigans on your reply.

Copying ideas by chrismcb · 2012-01-26 11:40 · Score: 1

Now if only there was something about ideas not being copyrightable.. I wonder if there was some significant precedent set over copying "look and feel?" I wonder if a video game has ever been copied before?

Re:Happens all the time. by cynyr · 2012-01-26 15:41 · Score: 1

Who besides Audi(some cars not the A3 at least) and Subaru has full time AWD with LSDs so that it actually works? Using the brakes to transfer power around with 3 open diffs, isn't really what I would want. Nor is Audi's Torsen/Haldex system where the rear wheels are clutched in when the fronts slip.

--
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.

Re:Happens all the time. by cynyr · 2012-01-26 15:46 · Score: 1

Also if you believe your RAV4 has all wheel drive (as I define it) I have a large orange bridge to sell you.

Does your Rav have 3 LSDs (Front, rear, and center)? or some sort of torque/speed sensing diffs? Unless Toyota is using it's part share in Fuji heavy industries to get a hold of Subaru's tech I'd doubt it. Most AWD systems use the brakes to shift the power around when needed.

--
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.

Re:Happens all the time. by cynyr · 2012-01-26 16:13 · Score: 1

To be fair, Manuals are hard to find on lots these days. Especially in some classes of cars... I'm surprised you can get a decent trim level Camry with a manual.

Also, there is no 6 Cyl or 4 Cyl Jetta in the current models, just the 2.5L 5 Cyl. Well there is the 4 Cyl TDI, and the 2.0T (in the jetta GLI), but I assume you were not looking at the diesel or the turbo. Nor are there jetta coupes... At least not here in the USA... Other countries may have those options.

Anyways, I'm not sure how that got messed up.

You could buy the S4 to get up to a 6 Cyl.

Also, I'm not sure why you couldn't get a ranger... http://www.ford.com/trucks/ranger/ perhaps the 2011 is the last model year...

--
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.

Re:Happens all the time. by BitZtream · 2012-01-26 16:50 · Score: 1

Are you really trying to pretend someone is selling a car with LSD's and calling it traction control or are you just the stupid?

LSDs are in no way 'traction control' systems. They are LSDs, by the time they kick in, you're well past traction and into the 'oh shit please let me get out of this shitty situation without having to get out of my car and stop one wheel from spinning by forcing it to have traction'

Traction control works actively to prevent wheel spin. LSDs just try to keep the ratio of difference in wheel spin as low as possible, with allowing for some at the low end so you can actually turn without your tires wearing to nubs in a week.

In both cases, that has absolutely nothing at all to do with all wheel drive, if you think it does, your definition is wrong.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager

Re:Happens all the time. by BitZtream · 2012-01-26 16:52 · Score: 1

The ranger URL you list shows specs for the 2012 model, which has been out for a while already.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager

Re:Happens all the time. by tragedy · 2012-01-26 17:13 · Score: 1

Yeah, I remember going to a Ford dealership when I was shopping for a car way back. It was an almost surreal experience. There was such a huge disconnect between what I was looking for from the salespeople and how they acted. I remember a few things. One was when I commented on how high up the seat felt. I thought it was bizarre in a sedan. The salesman said something like "for that feeling of being up high, this is the best car in its class". The also told me that, for $300 more, the could stick mustang logos on the car. Just in every way, they managed to feel like the worst stereotype of the car salesman. Pretty much all of the other auto dealerships I went to made me feel like a car buyer, the Ford dealership just made me feel uncomfortable and dirty.

Re:Happens all the time. by tehcyder · 2012-01-26 21:08 · Score: 1

This. Thank you.

That post does not make sense in English. "This." is not a valid sentence. I do not come to slashdot to read posts written in text-speak, 1337-speak or other childrens' slang.

k thx bye

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it

Re:Happens all the time. by tehcyder · 2012-01-26 21:22 · Score: 1

You know, when you alone are ranting against the rest of the world, it might be you who is the one with crappy aesthetics.

Thought you should think about it.

He is not alone. Not all people define aesthetics as "simplified in function and coloured in pastel so as to appeal to teenage girls".

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it

Re:Happens all the time. by realityimpaired · 2012-01-27 01:33 · Score: 1

Electronic Stability Control is actually required by law in Canada, now, and since essentially the same cars get sold in Canada as the US, that will lead to it becoming more common in the US.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/roadsafety/tp-tp14651-vs200701-menu-738.htm

That means nothing for a 2007 MY car, but the 2011 Rav4 does have traction control, anti-lock brakes, slip control, skid control, and yaw control. That said, Transport Canada's website lists the 2007 Rav4 as having Traction Control as a standard option. It may be different in the US, but up here at least, it has it.

Trademark problems of giving credit by tepples · 2012-01-27 01:44 · Score: 1

In your paragraph about Zynga, it appears you're using plagiarism in the academic sense of "no credit" rather than in the copyright law sense of "infringement with no credit". But which is the key element that gets GNU off the hook? Is it giving credit to the UNIX heritage, or is it distribution of the result under a free software license? A problem with giving credit to the author of the older work is that unless it's done very carefully, giving credit can introduce trademark problems if there's any way for an end user to interpret it as implying an endorsement of the clone by the older work's author or publisher.

Re:Trademark problems of giving credit by qxcv · 2012-01-27 13:21 · Score: 1

But which is the key element that gets GNU off the hook? Is it giving credit to the UNIX heritage, or is it distribution of the result under a free software license?
A bit of each, really. Also the fact that several UNIX clones existed at the time, and that GNU was created as a response to a perceived ethical problem rather than a financial one.

A problem with giving credit to the author of the older work is that unless it's done very carefully, giving credit can introduce trademark problems if there's any way for an end user to interpret it as implying an endorsement of the clone by the older work's author or publisher.
The name "GNU's not UNIX" may well have been a very tongue-in-cheek response to this dilemna, but I can't say I know for sure. Zynga obviously knew that they were going to come up against this obstacle if they made a Tiny Tower clone, and rather than deciding to license the IP off Nimblebit (purchase the company, even) or simply make a different game, they opted to shamelessly rip off the game mechanics and give nothing back to Nimblebit (no attribution, no money, nothing). My qualm is that Zynga had the financial resources to go ahead with any of those alternatives, but instead went the blatant rip-off route.

--
"The most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough." -- Eric S. Raymond
Re:Trademark problems of giving credit by tepples · 2012-01-28 00:09 · Score: 1

Also the fact that several UNIX clones existed at the time
Likewise with SimTower and Tiny Tower.

and that GNU was created as a response to a perceived ethical problem rather than a financial one.
For one thing, might that be part of why among freeware Tetris clones, clones released as free software (such as M-x tetris) have historically been least likely to draw nastygrams from The Tetris Company? For another, iOS itself has the same ethical problem as any other platform without the ability to install self-signed software, and cloning an iOS-exclusive game frees its mechanics from being tied to that platform.

or simply make a different game
But how is that practical? After some point, all the possible mechanics within a genre have been tried. Everything is just a different combination of the same elements, and one might end up combining them the same way someone else did. The last genre launch I know of was a decade and a half ago with Parappa the Rapper.
Re:Trademark problems of giving credit by qxcv · 2012-01-28 01:36 · Score: 1

For one thing, might that be part of why among freeware Tetris clones, clones released as free software (such as M-x tetris) have historically been least likely to draw nastygrams from The Tetris Company? For another, iOS itself has the same ethical problem as any other platform without the ability to install self-signed software, and cloning an iOS-exclusive game frees its mechanics from being tied to that platform.
A valid point, but you contradict yourself. If there already exist two implementations of (roughly) the same game which both run on different platforms (presumably one of which is a Zynga target platform), Zynga aren't "freeing" anything.

As an aside, I was interested in the Tetris IP arrangements so I searched around and found this Quora question. Can you guess who wrote the first (and current top rated) answer?

Seth Sivak, PM / Designer @ Zynga Boston
Oh the irony. But I digress.

But how is that practical? After some point, all the possible mechanics within a genre have been tried. Everything is just a different combination of the same elements, and one might end up combining them the same way someone else did. The last genre launch I know of was a decade and a half ago with Parappa the Rapper.
To claim that Zynga were just "throwing shit at the wall" and managed to create a 1:1 copy of Tiny Tower strains credulity. I know getting past the "threshold of originality" is practical because so many game developers manage to do it year after year. As hardware and user interfaces evolve (think touchscreens and accelerometers), there are more and more opportunities for companies to put forward unique and original experiences tailored for new devices. I highly doubt that the pool of available original game ideas is even finite, let alone close to exhausted.
To compare operating systems with games based on the criteria of originality completely misses a key difference between games and operating systems. When it comes to OSes, most users absolutely *detest* change. They can, and *will* simply ignore your product in order to stick with what they feel comfortable with. Take a couple of Microsoft examples: Vista and the ribbon UI. Both of these were widely panned by users, to the point that many people threatened to do away with using Windows altogether. But they stuck with it. Why? Microsoft certainly didn't keep their customers because of a lack of worthy commercial and non-commercial competitors, and they didn't keep their customers by immediately caving in to user demands (even if they wanted to do so, their distribution mechanisms and release cycles were far too rigid to undo their UI changes at the click of a button). Microsoft kept their customers because they had a platform, and on that platform they and others had built applications which Windows users had become attached to. Sure, everyone could have switched to something other than Windows, but that would have taken time and had a steep learning curve. The real winner there was Windows 7, because it had the shallowest learning curve available and virtually zero cost of migration for most business-critical Windows apps (which are usually more expensive than the OS itself). The lesson is that if you want people to jump ship to your OS, you need to make it as easy as possible for them. This is why (IMO) GNU would have failed if it modelled itself on anything other than the dominant (or near-dominant) OS at the time.
Games are different; your average gamer doesn't care whether or not they'll have to upgrade to QuickBooks 2012 if they buy a copy of your new game. They just want something interesting that they haven't played to death yet. In addition, moderately steep learning curves for games are often valued (think StarCraft 2) as they reward players who put effort into learning the ropes. Zynga aren't going to sell their new game to any of tho

--
"The most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough." -- Eric S. Raymond

Re:Happens all the time. by Lord_Jeremy · 2012-01-27 02:37 · Score: 1

And as a bonus, you'll enjoy a great deal more reliability than the Ford!

Re:Happens all the time. by Coren22 · 2012-01-27 06:01 · Score: 1

The Jetta was back in 2004, there were 6 and 4 models, with the 6 having higher reliability ratings according to consumer reports. I am not sure what you mean by there being no coupe, all of them look like coupes, maybe you meant no wagon? As far as manual Camry, it only exists in the SE model, which is 1 from the top level.

--
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?

Re:Happens all the time. by cynyr · 2012-01-29 16:08 · Score: 1

Coupe to me means 2 door, sedan/saloon is the 4 door, and wagon/estate is a 4 door with a lifting tailgate (like a mini-van).

I can't seem to get toyota's website to let me pick a manual transmission for 2012 camry no mater what I pick. Also good luck getting a minivan in a manual, or most "sport" sedans/coupes (the BMW type 1M is a noteable exception, as is the Golf R).

--
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.

Re:xerox parc by oudzeeman · 2012-02-02 04:30 · Score: 1

you're assuming the stock never split when you say they could have bought the shares on the open market in 2002 for less

Slashdot Mirror

Zynga Accused of Cloning Hit Indie iPhone Game Tiny Tower

196 of 245 comments (clear)