EA Suing Zynga For Great Justice

[Friendly]

http://es.scribd.com/doc/101954002/EA-v ... aint-Final

[Shatterhand]

Did any game company actually win any lawsuit like this in history?

[EmperorIng]

The response of every gamer on the planet.

This will surely make everyone forget that EA's stock is no longer worth the paper it's printed on.

[BPzeBanshee]

Not that this takes away from the obvious idea stealing but I noticed this section at the beginning of the document you linked:

4. As The Sims Social increased in popularity and visibility, Zynga turned to its well-known competitive playbook: “Steal someone else’s game. Change its name,” then cross-promote the Zynga clone to its extensive user base.

It cites this page, but the quote isn't even mentioned there. It's actually part of the subtitle of the news article: "Steal someone else's game. Change its name. Make millions. Repeat".

I'd lose marks if I did that kind of misconstruing of source info for a fucking school assignment - if this is seriously a document by EA using third-party sources to disown a company *via court*, they're not being very professional to me at all. I might as well just talk crap about my next door neighbour because he's stealing my house renovation ideas, and do sloppy written down quotes of what all my friends think as evidence along with taking a couple of photos of said houses.

I do think there was a case like this before though. Forgot all the specifics though.

[Ed Oscuro]

I didn't actually take the time to look to the source, but I would have been damn surprised if that had gone through from a discovery process. Obviously, others will see it as just the EA legal team fleshing out their story that Zynga is well-known for this sort of thing - and the article does say that. It doesn't seem unprofessional to me.

[Friendly]

I didn't actually take the time to look to the source

There you go. Thanks for informing us of your opinion anyway.
Excellent idea of the day: Look at the source before making up your mind. There are nice colorful pictures inside, too.

Zynga pretty much copied everything, even the 8 different RGB values of the character's skin tones (page 19 of the legal doc). There's probably a 1 in a trillion chance of that happening by chance. They also used identical personality types, they just obviously used a thesaurus to generate different sounding names (page 16 of the document). Layouts, graphical assets and menues/options are identical, too, just with some tiny alterations. Zynga's game is the same damn thing, with some miniscule changes. Like with everything else, it is obvious they only did the changes so they could claim it to be a different game. Zynga has been doing this for years (as is also shown in the document); only this time they did it to a publisher with the resouirces to take them on.

This is another nice exaple of Zynga's standard way of "creating" games:


This quote by Zynga's founder and CEO Marc Pincus says it all: "I don't fucking want innovation," a former senior employee recalls Pincus saying. "You're not smarter than your competitor. Just copy what they do and do it until you get their numbers."

[Shatterhand]

Wasn't Marc Pincus who was once quoted saying something like: "Our consumer policy is very simple: Fuck the consumer, I want my money" ?

The real funny thing is that this company:

http://www.vostu.com/

Is shameless copying Zynga , and Zynga actually sued them.

[Ruldra]

Kinda funny to see everyone supporting EA now after all that "worst company of America" thing.

[Friendly]

The lesser evil. I don't mind that for once EA using its evil power for good.

Zynga is the scum of the gaming industry, a malignant tumour that needs to be removed.

[GaijinPunch]

The lesser evil. I don't mind that for once EA using its evil power for good.

Zynga is the scum of the gaming industry, a malignant tumour that needs to be removed.

What's your Words with Friends name?

[undamned]

http://es.scribd.com/doc/101954002/EA-v ... aint-Final

Holy cow. Granted my only exposure to Zynga was those "Billy just found a rare chicken!!!" messages on FB, but I had no idea that was their MO. Sadly, whatever EA tries to take them for will likely barely make an impact as they are probably wiping their behinds with all the money they make off those clones.
-ud

[Vexorg]

At this point, I think the question will be whether or not there's anything left for EA to take when the whole Zynga insider trading thing blows up. If the allegations that have come out are true, then it was so egregious they didn't even bother trying to hide it.

[TransatlanticFoe]

At least EA and their studios create the games they put out, even if it's the same thing every year with minor tweaks/stat updates/reskins. That's a bunch better than ripping off everything under the sun and not actually creating anything new.

EA probably have the legal might to bring them down, unlike the little guys they've ripped off to this point.

[FIL]

Is there some way both parties could lose?

[Ex-Cyber]

In the US there's generally nothing illegal about cloning a game's concept, mechanics, or "feel" unless the originator got a patent (which is difficult, slow, and expensive). Plagiarism is not illegal per se. The only reason EA has a case is that some of the stuff in the complaint borders on tracing their assets. Some of the other stuff is ridiculous, like EA basically claiming that they invented the idea of taking your clothes off before taking a shower.

[Drachenherz]

In the US there's generally nothing illegal about cloning a game's concept, mechanics, or "feel" unless the originator got a patent (which is difficult, slow, and expensive). Plagiarism is not illegal per se. The only reason EA has a case is that some of the stuff in the complaint borders on tracing their assets. Some of the other stuff is ridiculous, like EA basically claiming that they invented the idea of taking your clothes off before taking a shower.

I like that you use the correct spelling of "per se"... And not the oh-so-common "per say" (yuck).

[Ed Oscuro]

I didn't actually take the time to look to the source

There you go. Thanks for informing us of your opinion anyway.

Calm the hell down. I didn't need to research the source because BPzeBanshee found the link (which I did click on after he found it), and until then I wasn't going to write anything at the time. I just thought it was intere-

Actually, why don't you try reading the fucking post before you rip on it, next time? It's pretty fucking clear you didn't because your response isn't addressing what I wrote at all (I'm disagreeing with BPzeBanshee's argument that the tactic is lame). I explain pretty clearly what was going on. Don't be in such a rush to alienate everybody and embarrass yourself.

In the US there's generally nothing illegal about cloning a game's concept, mechanics, or "feel" unless the originator got a patent (which is difficult, slow, and expensive). Plagiarism is not illegal per se. The only reason EA has a case is that some of the stuff in the complaint borders on tracing their assets. Some of the other stuff is ridiculous, like EA basically claiming that they invented the idea of taking your clothes off before taking a shower.

Do you have any references for that assertion? There are plenty of cases where things very much like the equivalent of "concept, mechanics, or 'feel'" have resulted in successful lawsuits: Character types, types of locations or plot devices in fiction; and there have been lawsuits over music that doesn't actually sample other music. And, of course, there was the whole Capcom U.S.A. Inc. v. Data East Corp. suit over Fighter's History back in 1994.

In the US there's generally nothing illegal about cloning a game's concept, mechanics, or "feel" unless the originator got a patent (which is difficult, slow, and expensive). Plagiarism is not illegal per se. The only reason EA has a case is that some of the stuff in the complaint borders on tracing their assets. Some of the other stuff is ridiculous, like EA basically claiming that they invented the idea of taking your clothes off before taking a shower.

I like that you use the correct spelling of "per se"... And not the oh-so-common "per say" (yuck).

It would be nice if some part of that post was right.

[Op Intensify]

And, of course, there was the whole Capcom U.S.A. Inc. v. Data East Corp. suit over Fighter's History back in 1994.

You know that Data East won that, right?

[FIL]

If Capcom had won there wouldn't be any other 2D fighters.

[Ex-Cyber]

Do you have any references for that assertion? There are plenty of cases where things very much like the equivalent of "concept, mechanics, or 'feel'" have resulted in successful lawsuits:

Citation needed. In particular, a suit is not "successful" just because it was documented as making it into a courtroom. Probably the most infamous case in this vein is Lotus v. Borland (at least for computer programs). That case established that menu structure and hotkey assignments were not eligible for copyright. However, the more categorical citation is to the law itself, which states

(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.

Character types, types of locations or plot devices in fiction

All typically unprotected under the scènes à faire doctrine.

and there have been lawsuits over music that doesn't actually sample other music.

I assume you're referring to cases like Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music and Fantasy Inc. v. Fogerty (not to be confused with Fogerty v. Fantasy, which is directly related and widely cited but addresses very different legal issues). Musical compositions are eligible for copyright even if they're never recorded; a recording is considered a derivative work that also carries its own distinct copyright. I recall that one of the circuit courts relied on this very distinction to rule that there is no such thing as a de minimis defense of sampling, because the creative expression in a sound recording is distinct from the musical notes of the composition (I don't remember the case; sorry).

If Capcom had won there wouldn't be any other 2D fighters.

Not exactly, but there probably wouldn't have been any other 2D fighters with wandering Japanese karate masters, precocious Chinese girls, American military men, or quarter-circle motions.

[BPzeBanshee]

I didn't actually take the time to look to the source, but I would have been damn surprised if that had gone through from a discovery process. Obviously, others will see it as just the EA legal team fleshing out their story that Zynga is well-known for this sort of thing - and the article does say that. It doesn't seem unprofessional to me.

Fair game. The sources certainly support the general idea as you said, but it still seems odd to me that they're misquoting in 'Nature of the Action' - which I would've could make a real difference to the outcome under court scrutiny.

I don't like either of these companies but EA's not exactly doing the best job at making themselves seem like the good guys when the first part of the legal document sounds like a childish whinge. At least the 'Factual Allegations' and the rest actually reads like you'd think it does.

[Op Intensify]

precocious Chinese girls

Precocious? I'm pretty sure that Chun is in her thirties!

[Hagane]

She sure looks pretty good for a 44 year old. Though she has football player legs as of late.

[Moniker]

I've been trying to come up with a Star Wars analogy for this epic battle. At first I was thinking Empire vs Ewoks. But Sand People vs Jawas sounds about right.

Tangentially, Marc Pincus does remind me of a Space Balls quote: "Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

[FIL]

I think it's more Empire vs people cosplaying as Darth Vader.

[undamned]

I think it's more Empire vs people cosplaying as Darth Vader.

Ha!
-ud