MightyJordan Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 When you have an intellectual property ? especially one that?s worth millions of dollars ? you want to protect it. But can such protections ever go too far? That?s the question a lot of industry watchers are asking this morning, as developers far and wide whose games include the word ?candy? are getting emails from Apple on behalf of King, the makers of Candy Crush Saga. In a filing with the US trademark office dated February 6, 2013, King.com Limited registered claim to the word ?candy? as it pertains to video games and, strangely, clothing. On January 15, 2014 the filing was approved. And now, a mere five days later, reports are coming in from developers that they?re being asked to remove their app (or prove that their game doesn?t infringe upon the trademark). ?Lots of devs are frustrated cause it seems so ridiculous? says Benny Hsu, the maker of All Candy Casino Slots ? Jewel Craze Connect: Big Blast Mania Land. Benny?s game, which shares no similarities with King?s properties aside from the word ?candy,? is one of a number of games that have been targeted by King. Hsu contacted Sophie Hallstrom, King?s IP paralegal, to discuss the matter further. Rather than the simple ?oops, our mistake? that Benny was hoping for, he was given a very finite response. ?Your use of CANDY SLOTS in your app icon uses our CANDY trade mark exactly, for identical goods, which amounts to trade mark infringement and is likely to lead to consumer confusion and damage to our brand,? reads Hallstrom?s reply. ?The addition of only the descriptive term "SLOTS" does nothing to lessen the likelihood of confusion.? So how does a word like ?candy? get trademarked? According to Martin Schwimmer, a partner at the IP legal firm Leeson Ellis (and the man behind The Trademark Blog), it?s all about how strong a connection the claimant has to that mark when it comes to a particular good or service. Think of Apple, for example. Nobody is going to expect the electronics giant to lay claim over the fruit, but if someone were to try to market an electronic device under that name, you?d better believe their lawyers would swoop in. So the question then, is whether or not there?s a strong enough connection between the word ?candy? and video games as it pertains to Candy Crush Saga. According to the US Trademark Office, the answer is a bona fide yes. Still, holding a trademark and being able to enforce it are entirely different things. Schwimmer is quick to point out the difference between suggestive marks and unique ones. ?Someone can't plausibly claim that they came up with the term TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES on their own. An incredibly unique trademark like that is somewhat easy to protect.? But something generic ? a dictionary word like candy? That can be a lot trickier. ?Suggestive marks are protectable, but the problem is that third parties can claim that they thought up their mark on their own.? And in the case of something as generic as ?candy,? it doesn?t seem that farfetched to think that a lot of developers may have. ?As to how far King can enforce its rights, it will be a function of how strong its mark has become, and how similar the third party name is. It would likely be able to enforce its rights against marks that are connotatively, phonetically or visually similar, for games that are conceivably competitive,? Schwimmer tells us. ?King can't go after candy companies because candy companies don't use the term CANDY as a trademark ? they use it to identify their product.? If you?re a developer who has received one of these letters from King, Schwimmer?s advice is simple: call a lawyer. ?A trademark lawyer can be very useful in obtaining a coexistence agreement. Often a trademark owner will accept a settlement in which the possibility of confusion is mitigated, perhaps because the developer will not expand into areas more directly competitive with the trademark owner.? But in an App Store littered with small indie developers, this is an option that seems out of reach for developers like Benny Hsu. ?Myself and other indie developers don't have the money or resources to fight back? I plan on changing the name if that is what I must do.? With Apple seemingly complicit in King?s claims ? the letter Tsu initially received came through the iTunes legal department ? one can?t help but wonder what the future of the App Store and suggestive trademarks might be. ?Last year I learned I couldn't use the word MEMORY because it was trademarked,? said Hsu. ?Now I wonder what other common words will be trademarked in the App Store.? Source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compl3x Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Isn't there an argument to be made that if you decide to use a common, everyday word then you run the risk of others piggybacking off of your success? Don't want someone to vamp your cred? Don't choose to name your company after a common thing. Don't call your company Flower, genius. Call it Flowerescent! A made up word you can freely patent. Or they could do like that game show where they say the word candy and see how many people responded with "crush"; essentially word association. If enough people do, you get the patent, if they don't you don't. Every few years you have to redo the test, if your thing is no longer associated with the word, you lose your patent :laugh: :rofl: astropheed 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted January 21, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 21, 2014 The trademark system is broken. Nothing new there. If only Bejeweled had the trademark on match type 3 and crushed them :whistle: MightyJordan, Romero, WAQT and 1 other 4 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Meh, this is stupid, Candy Crush should be thrown out for not being a game. a game should allow you to get better and you get better skills, not the case with candy crush, it's all luck and random. a game should ALWAYS be possible to beat. not the case with candy crush, levels aren't pre calculated to always be beatable. Candy crush isn't a game, it's like going to Vegas and playing one armed bandits, only there's no prices, only you paying them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techbeck Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 another dumb trademark. Shouldnt be able to protect common words. DConnell and Romero 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Observer Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Here in NZ coke came out with a drink call LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Eternal Tempest MVC Posted January 21, 2014 MVC Share Posted January 21, 2014 Meh, this is stupid, Candy Crush should be thrown out for not being a game. a game should allow you to get better and you get better skills, not the case with candy crush, it's all luck and random. a game should ALWAYS be possible to beat. not the case with candy crush, levels aren't pre calculated to always be beatable. Candy crush isn't a game, it's like going to Vegas and playing one armed bandits, only there's no prices, only you paying them. It is a game, but a game designed to frustrate you to do buy microtransactions. For what the game is designed to do, it's rather effective at it. Think about how much money the game is generating when they have frequent tv commercials for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted January 21, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 21, 2014 It is a game, but a game designed to frustrate you to do buy microtransactions. For what the game is designed to do, it's rather effective at it. Think about how much money the game is generating when they have frequent tv commercials for it. I've never played CCS myself but a friend has explained it to me previously. Am I right in thinking you have to match 3 in so many moves, and it needs to be done in a particular order or you lose? Bejeweled and other match type 3 games have similar modes and nobody has an issue with them. Only when you throw micro-transations in does it become an issue for people evidentally. That and having to bug people to get more attempts/lives/etc etc through social media. It's viral and for their benefit at the end of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Lyons10 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 That is just absurd. The PTCO must be run by a bunch of idiots... Romero 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninja502 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 someone should try and trademark crush ( as used in video games, board & card games, and plastic & stuffed figures ) , that would put a big bite into them on expanding product lines . you can then send them nasty letters for using your trademark in there game title DConnell and Romero 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKay Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Can they really go after these games if they've existed longer than Candy Crush? Or before the trademark date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomoko Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I think Hasbro might not be amused at their shenanigans DConnell 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astropheed Veteran Posted January 21, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 21, 2014 I think Hasbro might not be amused at their shenanigans Heh, I just thought the exact same thing. When I think of a "Candy" game I immediately think of Candy Land. Although, when I think of Candy Crush I think of Facebook (and the people I've deleted on it for inviting me to play Candy Crush, to be fair I give them two stern warnings). soniqstylz 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninja502 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 pogo had sweet tooth along time and also popcap games had a clone of some kind pogo is owned by EA and they wont roll over very easily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Eternal Tempest MVC Posted January 21, 2014 MVC Share Posted January 21, 2014 I've never played CCS myself but a friend has explained it to me previously. Am I right in thinking you have to match 3 in so many moves, and it needs to be done in a particular order or you lose? Bejeweled and other match type 3 games have similar modes and nobody has an issue with them. Only when you throw micro-transations in does it become an issue for people evidentally. That and having to bug people to get more attempts/lives/etc etc through social media. It's viral and for their benefit at the end of the day. It's a lot like the bejeweled, combine gems earn points, then it starts adding in more difficult. ex. you have to pop candy over certain areas to clear a layer below the grid. You get a certain amount of tries before you run out. You have to wait or purchase go again now vs latter. There's permanently unlock to give permanent x number of extra turns. Other types of power ups / pseudo cheats you can pay for. The levels before you transition zones seemed to brutally hard. They have the social network thing so you can see how far behind you are with your friends. It's a brilliantly designed seductive game. I will give kudo's for the music score as well. (edit) Or if you watched the Penny Arcade, perfect example of a skinner box game Operant Conditionin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbtAn3dic-g I don't play, but my wife does, she doesn't buy unlocks / purchases but can spend days, or a week stuck on one level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Heh, I just thought the exact same thing. When I think of a "Candy" game I immediately think of Candy Land. Although, when I think of Candy Crush I think of Facebook (and the people I've deleted on it for inviting me to play Candy Crush, to be fair I give them two stern warnings). People who delete or complain that their friends send game invites are amusing. FB has a function to simply block all game invites you know so you don't have to ever see them. except for the rare few games who breaks the FB TOS by sending game invites/requests as direct requests to friends. But you can block these to easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exotoxic Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I read today they are going after "banner saga" because it contains the word "saga" :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I read today they are going after "banner saga" because it contains the word "saga" :laugh: Apparently they're going after ANY game with the word Saga... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xilo Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I've never played CCS myself but a friend has explained it to me previously. Am I right in thinking you have to match 3 in so many moves, and it needs to be done in a particular order or you lose? CCS is designed to where generally the only way you will beat levels legitimately is if you get extremely lucky with pieces and board layout. Most of the time you will get to where you will need a couple moves, swap or break some candy to beat it. Therefore you're more inclined to say screw it and pay the $1 for some boosts to beat it when you're that close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyJordan Posted January 22, 2014 Author Share Posted January 22, 2014 I read today they are going after "banner saga" because it contains the word "saga" :laugh: Indeed. The rumours surrounding King contesting the title The Banner Saga - over its use of the word "saga" - have been confirmed. A firm "Notice of Opposition" has been filed with the US Patent and Trademark Office on behalf of King suggesting that "The Banner Saga mark is confusingly and deceptively similar to Opposer's previously used Saga Marks." It further adds "The use and registration by Applicant of the mark The Banner Saga for Applicant's goods is likely to cause confusion or to cause mistake or deception in the trade, and among purchasers and potential purchasers, with Opposer's Saga Marks, again resulting in damage to Opposer." Uh huh. The document fails to consider that one of these games is a turn-based strategy affair featuring Norse vikings while the other is a casual puzzler about using colourful sweets to battle less colourful sweets (i.e. chocolate). We're still awaiting comment from King on this one, while The Banner Saga developer Stoic Studios is keeping mum at the moment. King sent a statement out to Eurogamer which can be read at the top of that article. Guess this whole saga (no pun intended) reaffirms my belief that's projected ever so eloquently through this video... astropheed 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astropheed Veteran Posted January 22, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 22, 2014 People who delete or complain that their friends send game invites are amusing. FB has a function to simply block all game invites you know so you don't have to ever see them. except for the rare few games who breaks the FB TOS by sending game invites/requests as direct requests to friends. But you can block these to easily. Invite me to play Candy Crush once, shame on me. Invite me to play Candy crush twice, shame on you. Invite me to play three times, delete you from existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praetor Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 it's the office that issued that patent that's at fault here, how can a company patent a word like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted January 25, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 25, 2014 King: We do not clone other people's games By Brendan Sinclair Fri 24 Jan 2014 7:49pm GMT / 2:49pm EST / 11:49am PST Candy Crush company denies accusations but removes game in question "for the avoidance of doubt" King has removed the game Pac-Avoid from its website after a developer accused the Candy Crush Saga company of basing it off his own game, Scamperghost. "King does not clone other peoples' games," the publisher said in a statement. "King believes that IP - both our own IP and that of others - is important and should be properly protected. Like any prudent company, we take all appropriate steps to protect our IP in a sensible and fair way. At the same time, we are respectful of the rights and IP of other developers. Before we launch any game, we do a thorough search of other games in the marketplace, as well as a review of trademark filings, to ensure that we are not infringing anyone else's IP. However, for the avoidance of doubt, in this case, this game - which was coded by a third-party developer 5 years ago - has been taken down." The cloning accusation was just the latest in a series of IP controversies for King this week. First came news of the company's recently filed EU trademark on the word "candy," a trademark it was enforcing against the developer of Candy Casino Slots - Jewels Craze Connect: Big Blast Mania Land. The publisher said it would not be enforcing its trademark against all uses of the word, just those it felt were infringing on its rights or in danger of confusing players. Shortly after that news broke, King challenged a trademark filing by developer Stoic for the name of its debut game, The Banner Saga. In its challenge filed with the US Patent and Trademark Office, King alleged that The Banner Saga was "confusingly and deceptively similar" to King's own use of Saga in its games. Following some outcry over that decision, King released a statement saying it was not trying to stop Stoic from using the Banner Saga name, but had to file a challenge or else it would have been easier for other companies to make illegitimate use of the word. "This is an important issue for King because we already have a series of games where 'Saga' is key to the brand which our players associate with a King game; Candy Crush Saga, Bubble Witch Saga, Pet Rescue Saga, Farm Heroes Saga and so on," a representative said. "All of these titles have already faced substantive trademark and copyright issues with clones." http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-01-24-king-we-do-not-clone-other-peoples-games So What is King's Contribution to the Games Industry, Anyway? With King in the news over its ongoing trademark disputes, we take a look at its five most popular games so you don't have to. By Pete Davison. King's been in the news a lot recently, largely due to its attempts to claim ownership over the "Candy" trademark and, subsequently, accusations of cloning. Prior to this, if you're not big into the world of free-to-play social and mobile games, you may have only had a passing familiarity with King through mentions of Candy Crush Saga -- or, indeed, the advertising for said game that's been plastered everywhere. And yet King is one of the biggest names in free-to-play social gaming right now -- Candy Crush Saga alone attracts over 150 million players every month as the top-ranked game on Facebook, and its other titles also ride high in the charts. So who are King, why should we care about them, and exactly what have they given to the games industry as a whole? Well, before we get on to their top five games, it's important to at least acknowledge one thing: like their precursor Zynga, King has done a lot to make the concept of video games an accessible and desirable pastime for a much broader spectrum of people, including those who would never consider purchasing a piece of dedicated gaming hardware. King's games aren't "by gamers, for gamers" as the old clich? goes; they're by business people, for everyone -- and the sheer number of people playing each of their games seems to suggest that they're doing something "right," at least from a business perspective. More importantly from our perspective, though, are their games actually any good? I played their five most popular titles (as ranked by metrics service AppData) so you don't have to. And... well, read on. http://www.usgamer.net/articles/so-what-is-kings-contribution-to-the-games-industry-anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted January 27, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 27, 2014 King.com CEO responds http://about.king.com/about/our-approach-to-ip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domboy Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Indeed. King sent a statement out to Eurogamer which can be read at the top of that article. Guess this whole saga (no pun intended) reaffirms my belief that's projected ever so eloquently through this video... That is hilarious!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(480p).thumb.jpg.2ac315e4c5c69cd7a06c4ee447dab4ca.jpg)
Recommended Posts