The design of the board is copyrightable. On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Kevin Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Those dudes are b.a.n.a.n.a.s. for not taking $10millie if it were > indeed offered but I am not sure about the infringement here. There's > definitely trademark confusion (check out the board, dogs!) but game > rules aren't copyright protected. I believe they fall under patent. > > I am consulting with some of my gamer colleagues in GAMBIT to find out. > > I used to play Literati all the time on Yahoo games. It was very > similar to Scrabble... but perhaps not similar enough? Or maybe it was > 2002 and Hasbro wasn't yet hip 2 da scene? > > Kevin > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Oliver Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What about the trademark issues though? I forget what the extent of > > trademark allows but I was under the impression it is protected for as > > long as the product is on the market. And as much as I love Scrabulous I > > can't help but notice that the colors, layout, etc of the board are a > > nearly exact match. > > > > O > > > > On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, Nelson Pavlosky wrote: > > > >> Elizabeth Stark wrote: > >>> > >>> And Nelson, just to play devil's advocate here, isn't this just a clear > >> case > >>> of infringement of the Hasbro's copyright (and the Scrabble trademark > for > >>> that matter)? Should Hasbro not hold the copyright to scrabble? What is > the > >>> scenario we'd like to see? Should board games not be copyrightable > matter? > >>> Should naming a game with such a similar name not be trademark > >> infringement? > >> > >> Well, ideally copyright would be shorter so that a game created in 1938 > >> would be public domain by now. > >> > >> Failing that, I think we should put pressure on companies not to enforce > >> their copyrights to the hilt. Just because you have the legal power to > >> do something doesn't make it the right thing to do, either for your > >> business or for the public good. Working with "pirates" in a civil > >> manner instead of trying to sue them out of existence might have given > >> us a healthy online music business back when Napster was created instead > >> of like a decade later with iTunes, Amazon etc. A legitimized Napster > >> I think would have been a seriously good thing. Similarly, working with > >> Scrabulous might have been more productive than suing them. As the > >> Economist article I linked to suggests, perhaps companies should > >> consider more seriously whether the "piracy" is actually a bad thing > >> before sending in the lawyers. > >> > >> We have carrots and sticks, folks. We can boycott companies that don't > >> play nicely with others, and we can do things like CarrotMob > >> <http://www.carrotmob.org/> to benefit businesses that are friendly to > >> their fans and customers instead of suing them. Let's encourage people > >> and companies to share more and to hoard less, because generally in the > >> information economy, it's not a zero sum game, when you share frequently > >> everybody wins. > >> > >> Peace, > >> ~Nelson~ > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > > -- > )_)_)_)_)_)_ > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
