Your views guys on this - my app - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9_Wq5gSbM8 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/scrambleface/id394830799?mt=8 theirs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NG5r4KFlW-A http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/videopuzzle/id417372287?mt=8 - cheek of the guys too claiming their app is the 1st video puzzle app on the iphone!
While I appreciate the hard work that's gone into this and can imagine the technological challenges I personally don't think this constitutes copyright infringement. While the gameplay seems fairly identical the presentation does not. Also: Apart from any technological wizardry aren't they both slide-puzzles at heart? If any copyright-infringement has taken place I would guess whoever came up with the first slide-puzzler is the one who should really complain. In general you can't copyright an idea, just the execution. The video-game industry is built on "inspiration" and if a high-level concept like this could be copyrighted we would probably only ever have seen 5 video games.
You can't copyright gameplay mechanics or rules. Otherwise we wouldn't have genres. If they haven't directly taken language, art, or code from your app then there's no copyright issue. Trademark can protect the name and look of your game. But that only goes so far... look at Gameloft games for how close you can cut it and be in the clear.
You can't copyright a gameplay mechanic but you can patent them... though I'm guessing you haven't and I'm not sure they'd allow it on this.
this is one of those times where you sadly got ripped off. simple as that. now, it could be that two companies developed the same idea independently - as with tiny wings / dillo hills / penguin something or other. What you can do is polish up your product and learn from what they did better than you. It's the same in any business. Like the Xoom didn't rip off the iPad? or every smartphone trying to be like the iPhone?
Its definitely disheartening - I had my app in the store for about 5 months before theirs appeared. When the camera appeared on the iPhone 4 and the APIs were released I thought that a game such as Scrambleface of Videopuzzle! was possible. I obviously spent a large amount of time researching if it was possible. If the guys from Videopuzzle! saw my app they would know it was possible and worth taking their time to overcome the challenges presented. The situation has obviously given me a unique perspective on their marketing campaign. Their budget is sizeably bigger than mines. They have therefore been able to pay big. I know they have paid for reviews (on the sites that charge for review), their graphical interface looks nicer than mines, and they've went the Free App A Day route (paid) - all this got them a front page Apple feature. I think its safe to say position on the store counts a lot more than the app when Apple consider a feature. My gui is being improved as we speak, I'm adding more levels as I know they are getting a lot of requests for more levels (p.s. guys mines has 21 already - lots more than theirs) so I'm acting constructively to overcome this setback. I've also asked a lawyer to look over my case just to be sure. Does anyone know how to get them to remove their claim that they are the app stores 1st video puzzle - I've contacted them twice and they haven't removed it - Apple seem to be slow at responding to this (I sent an email to the appstorenotices email address).
this is sad and funny at the same time.. no one got ripped off.. what the heck, this is not even a copyright issue.. so what.. another puzzle game?! wow.. amazing.. what in the world was stolen from scambleface? the logo, the looks? the name? what.. and even their "claim" is what wrong? they say video.. what is video? how do you define that.. from the trailer scambleface looks like a live camera feed.. and not a video.. which for me is a saved.. well video.. what i see here is no copyright issue but an jealousy issue.. they made something similar, bigger, better and got more out of it than me.. wow.. now even lawyers get involved.. this is pretty low.. go out and create a decent product, polish it till it shines and maybee with some luck you get the success you think you deserve. this is getting ridiculous.. copyright infringment... jeez.. sorry if it reads harsh.. but a reality check would be in order.. maybee rovio should sue everybody who has a physics based shooting game on the world.. even thoose that came before them.. and definatly thoose that came after them.. and igor and his doodle jumper should bring back his lawsuite against everything doodle and everything jumpy.. i would even try to go that faar and to sue everybody on earth who jumps... like kids.. hey.. and then i would forbid kids to draw.. because that usualy ends up like doodles... thoos kids are monsters.. copyright infrigin jumping doodle makers.. sue them all!!! oh.. wait.. yes.. ridiculous.. ok thank you good bye
It looks pretty obviously ripped off to me. What the law says is another matter entirely, but as an independent witness, if I saw both games I would assume one of them got their idea completely from the other and decided to copy it.
The rule of thumb is: "You can't copyright an idea, only the expression of an idea." For example, I can legally write a song about a sad breakup in which the girl tells me that there are many ways in which one can leave one's lover, and even do a chorus in which I sing some of those way with jocular rhymes. But I can't call it "50 Ways To Leave Your Lover," I can't use the melody from the Paul Simon song and I can't sing "Slip out the back, Jack... make a new plan, Stan." In your case, the idea is a slider puzzle that uses motion video. That idea is up for grabs: slider puzzles have been around since before computers. But they can't use your name, your graphical interface, your actual code, etc. As other have mentioned, the "rip off" actually seems to have a larger scope than your own game. There is no copyright infringement here.
well thats the sad part that you think its obvious a ripp off... as if video slider puzzle have never ever been around and scrambleface is the first of this kind.. you might want put your assumptions back where they came from and stop assuming. just google for minute.. i already found video puzzle games who predate both products by several YEARS!.. so what know?.. should i contact the creators of thoose unique games to sue both scambleface and the others..?! kindergarten it is.. there is no case here.. just a guy pointing a finger at someone else.. with a huge pile of jealousy on top of it.. its actualy sad that some think this might be even valid..
As far as I'm aware no one made a sliding puzzle that uses live cameras before me. Thats something Ideateca the creators of this clone cannot say. If you can find another app like this before me then obviously the developers of that can contact me and I'd look at their case. I was first on the app store with this idea. I spent the time innovating, overcoming the obstacles in my way to make it work. I have nothing to be jealous about apart from the cash they are making. I am the creator of the original live action sliding video puzzle on the iOS system. If you genuinely believe its ok for a developers work, time effort, research and development to be cloned then cool. Just don't expect anyone to spend time to innovate if they know someone can come along take their idea and profit.
You are missing the point. What you just described is an idea, which is not protected. Your expression of that idea is what is protected. For example, I composed the music for Mika Mobile's breakout game Zombieville USA. In the weeks that followed, there were several poorly-executed clones, with mummies or something filling it for zombies. Zombieville went on to have a long, profitable life, and the clones sank into oblivion, because it was the most appealing expression of the idea. Nobody is saying it's "okay" to be lazy and try to clone other games. I'm just explaining the law. And furthermore, even if the law did protect your idea ("I was the first to do the sliding puzzle with a live camera"), which it doesn't, you'd have a heck of a time proving that this game was a lift of yours when it does so much more than the live cam trick. Everybody who creates IP - music, art, lit, movies, games, whatever - knows this is the case, but it certainly doesn't prevent anyone from trying to make money in those industries.
so they stole your developement time? they stole your time effort? they stole your research? and they stole your developement? you don't even know what copyright is.. you did nothing really innovative, its a slider puzzle. its a nice game yes but thats it.. they have a nice game too with alot more content in a alot nicer package so what.. is it now forbidden to create video based sliding puzzles because you created one?.. are you the originator of the hole sliding games. there is NO innovation in your work.. yes there is work put in.. but nothing innovative at all. and since when is the platform the point ? so a tetris on iOS is something innovative? because its the first tetris on iOS? video puzzle are as old as computers got cams.. webcam games are nothing new, nothing innovative, only because you do it on iOS or they do it on iOS.. where is the innovation? your claims are baseless.. and since you claim you need to proove your claims not anyone else theirs... good luck with your imaginary thing you have going. and as faar as you know.. well apparently you don't know much.. or can't use google.. i found tons of such games within a few clicks.. but yes because you think your product is special it NEEDS to be special.. a quick search shows stuff like that being done 2005 with webcams.. wow innovation.. i would suggest get a lawyer, then go to court, all money in with your false claims.. good luck.. have fun loosing, and welcome to reality.
I'll just toss in that I've had two experiences with this. I wrote a game similar to Carcassonne and called it Starcassonne. Their lawyer wrote Apple and demanded I take it down. I refused. I knew my rights regarding copyright / trademark. I accepted my name was too close to their trademark, changed the name to Xeno Sola, and removed any mention of it as Starcassonne. End of story. The game is still up and no lawsuit to date. Clones are legal and a healthy iterative way toward better games. I also had a Mini Chess (6x5 board). Amazingly, someone actually patented chess on a small board -- I had no idea. They wrote me personally and demanded I remove the game or face a lawsuit. I talked to a lawyer and he agreed it was a bogus patent. The only issue was he estimated it would take $10k in court to challenge it. I figured the game wasn't that popular and the patent expires this Fall, so there was no reason to fight. I took it down from the store. I was very angry that someone used such a stupid patent to bully me out as the competition. But as mr.Ugly said, that's reality. So I'll just say, welcome to the jungle!
to the OP your question is (which is actually your thread title) Copyright infringement or not? Ans: NO Like many members here have said before, (but I am going to back it up this time with a legal document) take a look at 17 U.S.C Section 102 (b) http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#102 (for those who are lazy to click the link) here it is: (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. And FL-108 First paragraph (ESPECIALLY the last sentence) http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an authors expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. REMEMBER this 3 things: literary, artistic, or musical form and let's move on.. Now you can google ALOT of cases have happened before, Nintendo VS some guy, Pacman VS some guy.. At the end, the judge will ask the plaintiff to PROVE: a. (in regards of literary, a code is considered as literary work) IF the defendant have "hacked" into the plaintiff system and stole the code? and if not, the fair judge will ask if some effort of original work has been done in the defendant side <for example your sketches, game documentation, rule etc> then the judge will rule accordingly b. (in regards of artistic, which in here is basically the graphics) DID the defendant stole the graphics? Example if you put a mickey mouse in your game, then it is messed up but if you just draw a mouse there, and it has not been copyrighted or have any resemblance to any copyrighted mouse, then it is fine.. c. (in regards of musical form) Well, if the music is the same, does it mean the plaintiff can win? depends, IS the music in public domain OR it is a royalty free music? if yes.. which is most often the case, then no, the judge will favour the defendant.. don't go and put Eminem song in your game! that is plain stupid.. NOW OP said he wanted to contact a lawyer..WELL it is fine, but not advisable AT ALL a. it is a waste of time b. IF you decided to go to court or sue him, THEN check this out: 17 U.S.C Section 512 (f) http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#512 (f) Misrepresentations. - Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section (1) that material or activity is infringing, or (2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification, shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys' fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner's authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it. in a NUTSHELL, DMCA or copyright law protects both party, IF you decided to sue, a completely legitimate game (ie a game that do not infringe copyright law) and you go to court, BY LAW when you lose (which you will) you have to pay their legal fees, and any fees they claim as compensation as a result of your action.. this can range from a trip to see a shrink because you cause them stress, to pay them USDxxx because of you, they have to buy a copyright law book..(joking aside) (on a serious note) he/she will ask you to pay for the financial losses because apple pulled their app from the appstore (IF it got pulled off) To the OP: don't be sad..or discouraged.. don't stop innovating and creating concepts.. If you focus on pulling down some other similar games in the appstore, instead of spending that precious time finding a better graphic designer to work with, or coding, or anything more worthwhile, you are losing out my friend.. DMCA or copyright law are fair... (IN MY OPINION) because most importantly, it is there to preserve human creativity... and the spirit of human innovation.. Now, if the law forbids the creation of "similar concept" or "similar ideas" product.. Imagine.. there will be no google, which will result in no gmail or G products, because Yahoo can say:" oh they use a box to type in words and allow user to click search too , we feel violated" Imagine, Angry birds would not have existed.. because Crush the castle was first... Imagine.. You fill in the blanks.. Now why are you still reading, If you want to be successful in the appstore, start working! LOL.. for those who bear with me till the end of this reading, I thank you kindly.. Power be to the Indie developer, and to the greatness of the human innovative mind.
It's not copyright infringement as others have pointed out. You'd be wasting money on a lawyer (and I highly doubt a competent one would take your case). With so many developers in the app store, something similar to your game was bound to happen whether by happenstance or copying. The things I'd take away from this are: learn how the competitor improved upon the core idea. Take it to heart and improve yours! Copying (the non-infringing kind) is a two-way street. Your next game will benefit from this. There was another game similar to Fruit Ninja that came out a week before called Finger Cut!, but it flopped because of presentation among other things. That developer learned from his mistakes, and wisely did not try to sue the Fruit Ninja guys. In your case, you had quite awhile to popularize your game, so try to understand why it didn't take off (as much as you'd like). And the best course of action is to out-innovate them. Surely by now you've had time to think about ways to take your game to the next level?
