Candy Crush Studio Denies Cloning Games, Pulls Cloned Game

[Andy Chalk]

Candy Crush Studio Denies Cloning Games, Pulls Cloned Game

Candy Crush Saga publisher King says it doesn't clone games and has removed the game that's allegedly a clone of Scamperghost from its website.

Candy Crush Saga studio King was accused yesterday of cloning a game [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/131606-Dev-King-Made-a-Blatant-Clone-of-Our-Game] called Scamperghost a few years ago, after negotiations to publish it fell apart. Scamperghost creator Stolen Goose got a better offer elsewhere, so King hired another indie studio to make a quick copy of the game to get it to market first.

There's a particular ugliness (and irony) to the matter because King, as you've no doubt heard, recently trademarked [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/131556-Candy-Crush-Studio-Banner-Saga-Complaint-Is-To-Fight-Real-Copycats-UPDATED] the word "candy" and is attempting to do the same with "saga" in order to ensure that nobody else can try to piggyback on, and profit from, its work. The validity of its trademark claim doesn't seem entirely unfounded but it's losing the PR war rather badly, as it hasn't been able to effectively shake the image of a billion-dollar company using the system to screw the little guy, and the rather well-supported accusation that it has cloned games in the past - again, in an apparent attempt to put the gears to a smaller player - hasn't helped.

King said in a statement today that it doesn't clone games, and at the same time promised to remove Pac-Avoid, the Scamperghost clone, from its website. "King does not clone other peoples' games. King believes that [intellectual property] - both our own IP and that of others - is important and should be properly protected," a rep told VentureBeat. "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."

The rep said that before King releases a game it does a "thorough search" of other games and trademark filings to make sure it's not stepping on someone's copyright. "However, for the avoidance of doubt, in this case, this game [Pac-Avoid] - which was coded by a third party developer five years ago - has been taken down," the rep added.

Ironically, it was that third-party developer who confirmed to Matthew Cox of Stolen Goose that Pac-Avoid was an intentional clone of Scamperghost and that King wanted it done quickly in order to beat Stolen Goose to the punch. Pac-Avoid no longer turns up in a search at King's where to look [http://www.royalgames.com/].

Source: VentureBeat [http://venturebeat.com/2014/01/24/candy-crush-saga-publisher-says-it-will-take-down-one-of-its-games-after-indie-studio-accuses-it-of-copying/]


Permalink

 

[RaikuFA]

Man has King gone full retard. Anyone want some popcorn? This gonna be good.

 

[Luke Sawicki]

I just want King to go away =___= I am aware it is not that simple, but as of now they are hurting game industry.

 

[Barbas]

I cannot recall the last time I have witnessed such incompetence.

EDIT: This article's title is amusingly well worded.

 

[Alexander Kirby]

Aahh, if only the Namco had trademarked the word 'Pac', it would have been hilarious to watch them tear King apart.

 

[weirdee]

That was about as useful as one of those settlements that companies pay in order to not be officially on record as having committed any wrongdoing, but with less bribery, and about as legally useless when they could still get burned on it if they were actually sued, using the Nintendo 3DS case as a precedent.

 

[Madd the Sane]

I just want King to go away =___= I am aware it is not that simple, but as of now they are hurting game industry.

I'd say they're hurting the casual gaming industry, like what Yahtzee said about PopCap in his Peggle review. This company, however, seems to be worse than PopCap due to blatant copying.

Although copying a well-established IP like Pac-man? Some people will do anything for money. Especially if they have to feed themselves.

 

[dragongit]

I just want King's "saga" to be "crush"ed... and then after I shall eat some "candy"...

 

[Hero in a half shell]

"We don't create clone games, that's why we are removing this game we cloned."

No King, that's not how reality works, just because you no longer are selling the bad thing you created, doesn't mean it magically disappears from the timeline. Who taught you about life? Marty McFly?

 

[gigastar]

Lets see, develops and publishes games using the freemium model, uses lawmongering to crush competition, and makes shameless clones of smaller companies products.

Seems like King is becoming the new Zynga.

I wonder if they know what happened to Zynga.

Man has King gone full retard. Anyone want some popcorn? This gonna be good.

Its already been good, heres hoping it gets better.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Jesus Christ King, do you have no shame? Do you honestly think that everyone is simply going to take the tides of pure horseshit coming from your mouth at face value?

No, fuck you. You don't get to try to screw over indie developers and then say "Oh we're not trying to hurt anyone, we just filed a lawsuit saying otherwise". You don't get to make a blatant clone copy out of spite and then say "Oh we'd never try to copy anyone, that's why we're taking this copy of someone else's game down". You don't to pull those constant dick moves and still have anyone take you seriously.

Unfortunately, King, you probably don't care, because most of the people who play your games probably don't know or care about this entire debacle.

Captcha: American Cancer Society.

Do you lot deal with afflictions in the gaming community as well?

 

[dyre]

Not to support King, but:
It's been awhile since I took Business Law, but if I recall correctly, removing/resolving/fixing the object of contention explicitly cannot treated as an admission of guilt in a court of law. For example, if one of your porch stairs has a small dent and your neighbor tripped over those stairs and sued you for it, this doesn't mean that you're not allowed to fix those stairs now. It's more of a "why leave that problem out and invite more trouble" sort of thing, and courts recognize it.

After all, whether or not they pull the game won't help them in court anyway.

 

[dragongit]

So... can we declare worst company of 2014 yet? Let's give poor EA a break for a year and give the crown to a new "King".

 

[Ferisar]

Not to support King, but:
It's been awhile since I took Business Law, but if I recall correctly, removing/resolving/fixing the object of contention explicitly cannot treated as an admission of guilt in a court of law. For example, if one of your porch stairs has a small dent and your neighbor tripped over those stairs and sued you for it, this doesn't mean that you're not allowed to fix those stairs now. It's more of a "why leave that problem out and invite more trouble" sort of thing, and courts recognize it.

After all, whether or not they pull the game won't help them in court anyway.

To be totally fair, this isn't the same thing as the whole point of the claim is to make them admit to copying games.

This is more like, the neighbor tripped over your dented porch stair, then you fixed it and said "I don't have a dent in my porch stair, what are you talking about. Also, only I can own den-- I mean, porch stairs. Get wrecked."

Exactly like that.

Word for word.

In court.

... I'm going to bed.

 

[dyre]

Not to support King, but:
It's been awhile since I took Business Law, but if I recall correctly, removing/resolving/fixing the object of contention explicitly cannot treated as an admission of guilt in a court of law. For example, if one of your porch stairs has a small dent and your neighbor tripped over those stairs and sued you for it, this doesn't mean that you're not allowed to fix those stairs now. It's more of a "why leave that problem out and invite more trouble" sort of thing, and courts recognize it.

After all, whether or not they pull the game won't help them in court anyway.

To be totally fair, this isn't the same thing as the whole point of the claim is to make them admit to copying games.

This is more like, the neighbor tripped over your dented porch stair, then you fixed it and said "I don't have a dent in my porch stair, what are you talking about. Also, only I can own den-- I mean, porch stairs. Get wrecked."

Exactly like that.

Word for word.

In court.

... I'm going to bed.

I guess King could argue that "we didn't know that game was an obvious copy of your game, but now that you've enlightened us, of course we'll take it down! And of course we naturally expect people to do the same for our cease-and-desist letters!"

But yeah it's not looking good for them. But I think it's more bad PR than an actual civil "crime,"

 

[Neta]

But yeah it's not looking good for them. But I think it's more bad PR than an actual civil "crime,"

Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

Oh, this keeps getting better and better. Way to make asses out of yourself.

It's like the Zynga style of business and the Don Mattrick school of PR have merged and evolved into a terrible new form called King.