Slashdot Mirror


'CandySwipe' Crushed: When Game Development Turns Nasty

Nerval's Lobster writes "King, the gaming developer behind the monster hit Candy Crush Saga, has attracted a fair amount of criticism over the past few weeks over its attempt to trademark the word 'candy,' which isn't exactly an uncommon term. The company followed up that trademarking attempt by firing off takedown notices at other developers who use 'candy' in the titles of their apps. But things only got emotional in the past few days, when indie developer Albert Ransom published an open letter on his Website that excoriates King for what basically amounts to bullying. Ransom claims that he published CandySwipe in 2010, a full two years before Candy Crush Saga hit the market, and that the two games bear a number of similarities; after opposing King's attempts to register a trademark, Ransom found that his rival had taken things to a whole new level by purchasing the rights to a game called Candy Crusher and using that as leverage to cancel the CandySwipe trademark. Ransom claims he spent three years working on his game, and that King is basically robbing his livelihood. King was not effusive in its response. 'I would direct you to our stance on intellectual property,' a spokesperson for the company wrote in an email to Slashdot, which included a link to a letter posted online by King CEO Riccardo Zacconi. 'At this time, we do not have any comment to add beyond what is outlined in this letter.' Zacconi's various defenses in the letter seem a moot point in the context of CandySwipe, considering how Ransom has already abandoned the prospect of fighting to protect his intellectual property. But the two developers' letters help illustrate how downright nasty the casual-gaming industry has become over the past several quarters, as profits skyrocket and people attempt to capitalize on others' success."

23 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. Tango DropBox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://tangodropbox.com

    DropBox trampled all over them; so they gave up.

    1. Re:Tango DropBox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Tango DropBox was made YEARS before DropBox existed.

    2. Re:Tango DropBox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      DropBox.com was founded in 2007
      TangoDropBox was written in 2005.

      DropBox "dropped a word" from the title and trampled the existing product with lawyers. First doesn't mean you get the trademark, the one with the most lawyers gets it.

    3. Re:Tango DropBox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I learned the hard way about fighting larger companies with legal teams on staff. After about $5k in lawyer fees, we were left with no resolution to the conflict. I know this is 'Merica and the legal system is our crown-jewel, but it's not an environment where the "little guy" has a chance...

      DropBox literally has 14 people on-staff in their legal team, not to mention their main legal contact JOHN L. SLAFSKY is with "WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI" and is giant:

      https://www.dropbox.com/about
      http://www.wsgr.com/WSGR/DBIndex.aspx?SectionName=attorneys/BIOS/3391.htm

    4. Re:Tango DropBox by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Same thing happened to Samsung. Here's a digital picture frame they made in 2005 and sold in 2006. Long before Apple even came out with the iPhone much less the iPad. (Yes the back doesn't look like a tablet - that's beside the point since it wasn't a tablet.) After you've seen the picture frame you realize Samsung didn't copy the iPad's appearance when they made the Galaxy Tab 10.1. They just took their old digital picture frame design (black face, silver/white trim, and yes rounded corners) and repurposed it as a tablet. Even their name/logo is in the same location.

      But because almost nobody saw/bought their digital picture frame, they just assume the iPad was first and anything that looked like it must be a copy. I'm of the opinion that with minimalist designs like this, pretty much everyone will come up with the same design. But if you insist there was copying, it's far more likely that it was Apple who lifted Samsung's digital picture frame design when they were settling on the iPad's appearance.

    5. Re:Tango DropBox by farble1670 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A picture frame is a picture frame. A phone is a phone.

      so you are one of those people that think that if you append "on a phone" to any patent it becomes unique.

  2. Someone should write a game about this by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Funny

    Someone should write a game about Thieves, Lawyers and Thieving Lawyers.

    and the stupid people who love them

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Someone should write a game about this by Yahooti · · Score: 3, Funny

      It should be called Candy Thieves.

    2. Re:Someone should write a game about this by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Funny

      It should be called Candy Thieves.

      Perhaps a Candy Follow-up, where the player collects dentures and insulin credits.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  3. Irony by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd like to see a real candy company sue King for using the word "candy".

    Hell, even funnier would be a real King suing him for misuse of the title "King" by a non-royalty.

  4. Rate by WPIDalamar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just rated several of king's games 1-star, no idea if that helps, but made me feel better.

    1. Re:Rate by portwojc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I removed it from my mobile device just now. I too feel better.

  5. Or by Pope · · Score: 5, Funny

    you could just go back to playing Bejeweled for free.

    --
    It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  6. Goldmine by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Candy Crush has made a TON of money.

    Since there's another developer with a similar product and a similar name that shipped well before, you think he would have no end of lawyers offering up services just for a cut of the juicy Candy Mountain they can take a big chunk from.

    If one side is going to play the legal angle then have no qualms about doing the same.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  7. One of life's great mysteries by Tanman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of life's great mysteries is how achieving wealth tends to make people more greedy. For example, studies have shown that, as a percentage of income, charitable giving tends to be inversely proportional to income. Here you have a company that has found tremendous success, and in response to that success they become more greedy and try to shut everyone down.

    I think human nature is not to just want success. Human nature is to want to win and stomp on the corpses of your competition.

    1. Re:One of life's great mysteries by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's just an indication that the biggest and most ruthless pricks are the most likely to get, and stay, rich.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  8. Re:Dumbest thing is by similar_name · · Score: 3, Informative

    Game mechanics can't be copyrighted.

  9. I had this experience with Google by spiritplumber · · Score: 5, Interesting

    and their Cellbots project -- I scooped them by around six months, and even offer to share my code with them. What I got was a project manager telling me that I was just a hobbyist and my product didn't exist. What he got was me giving him one of my PCBs to him, then closing his hand around it, and asking him if this doesn't exist why is it causing you pain? When they started giving out the Google ADK board at Maker Faire 2011, I made the rounds to give my board to people half an hour before... including to the Google guys. If anyone was at the Bay Area Maker Faire, they probably will remember how the Robots Everywhere Antbot worked, and the Google Cellbot sat there victim of wifi overload. If something's bigger than you, and you want to win, bite the shins and punch the nuts. Only way.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  10. Casual gaming dominated by criminal thugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Betas are told that everything happens by accident, and criminals are only really found amongst the working classes. The reality is very different.

    When casual gaming was discovered to be the new growth area for gaming, very serious criminals took interest in the market, and became their MOBSTER-IDENTICAL methods to gain control of the action.

    Their experts noted that most casual games (at the time) were 'published' (to use the word very lightly) by individuals and tiny companies with no real clout. So, the experts advised the criminal thugs to simply STEAL the current games considered to have the best prospects. Steal the design. Steal the assets. Hell, even steal the code if possible.

    The experts advising the criminal thugs argued thus. Focus on getting as rich as possible, as quickly as possible, by turning the 'amateur hour' of casual gaming into something as big as organised gambling or AAA console game publishing. "Use your lawyers to threaten the people you steal from, and then, if needed, to delay court action by as many years as possible."

    "In the meantime, use your gigantic profits to buy off most of the people you steal from. After all, they were making pennies from their work, whereas you, using their stolen games, will be making so much money, a tiny fraction of your income will seem like an astonishing windfall to the people you may have to eventually pay-off. "

    Now the criminal thugs have long since established themselves, and have the income to place politicians, computer companies and law enforcement into their pockets. America was built on such corporate criminality. America LOVES profit, not whining by little guys who never really made much money, but whose ideas and work had so much potential when illegally transferred to ruthless crooks.

    The legal system, especially the civil side, is designed to reward successful criminality, so long as such criminality spreads the wealth to the 'RIGHT' people. Gaining general possession of the word 'Candy' was a simple consequence of money well spent. No legality, no justice, no morality- just money placed into the pockets of the 'right' people.

    But the thugs at the top of casual gaming publishing are pikers compared to the people that run Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Apple etc. Look what Microsoft intended to do with the Xbox One, before a massive backlash forced Microsoft to reverse every one of its obscene plans. Look at how Intel is PAYING companies to use its new Baytrail CPU, and PAYING legions of vile shills working for reputation management agencies to flood forums like this with the message that Intel's criminality is 'legal' and 'reasonable' (and this in the face of knowledge about how many times Intel has been successfully prosecuted in court).

    Only petty criminals get punished. The big boys are always an essential part of the 'elite' that rule over you. Go read some history, if you are foolish enough not to believe this.

  11. Who knew... by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 5, Funny

    Candy Crush Saga isn't just the title of their game, it's a description of their business.

    --
    People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
  12. Candy Drop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess I shouldn't make a new game named Apple Candy Drop Box then...

    1. Re:Candy Drop by fredprado · · Score: 5, Funny

      Probably not, but you may have a small chance of their killing each other whilst deciding who will sue you first.

  13. Re:No Such Thing by Valdrax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    George W Bush lost the popular vote in 2000, and many of the people on your list bear almost NO resemblance to a modern Republican in terms of political views (e.g. Roosevelt, Eisenhower).

    Still, the GP's argument is almost as bad for much the same reason, because if the current Republicans kept getting drubbed in the polls, they'd very quickly become a different party. The parties change their mix of positions about once every 2-3 generations or so -- sometimes much faster. Heck, just look at how different Republicans were today and in the 1990s, the 1970s, the 1950s, and the 1930s.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").