Candy Crush Studio" Banner Saga Complaint Is To Fight "Real Copycats" - UPDATED

[Kargathia]

Doesn't this mean that King just admitted that their action against the Banner Saga is frivolous and a waste of the court's time? Does that open them up to some liability?

Judging by how copyright law indeed requires you to defend yourself against everyone who even remotely looks at you sideways... not really.

Which is a bloody shame, as consumer electronics companies alone are occupying massive amounts of court time with pretty frivolous claims.

 

[Weaver]

What do they think of the Square Enix "SaGa" series that started coming out in 1989? (14 years before King was even founded).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SaGa_%28series%29

I hold no love for Squeenix, but at least they're not running around suing everyone like a bunch of cunts because people used "Saga" in their game title. Explicitly, games with it at the end of the title

Romancing SaGa - 1992
Romancing SaGa 2 - 1993
Romancing SaGa 3 - 1995
Unlimited SaGa - 2002
Emperors SaGa - 2012

Why do they get ANY claim on the word "Saga"?cal

 

[Chareater]

isn't candy crush saga a "Real Copycat" of bejeweled?

 

[Clovus]

This story isn't an example of a failed trademark system. King does not actually have a trademark on "Saga" yet, and they probably never will. They don't even have a trademark on "Candy" yet, but that keeps showing up. The trademark system is not broken, it is not outdated, and it doesn't not need massive changes. Don't confuse it with copyright (which works but is just way too long) and the very messed up US patent system.

Do you really want to go to the store to buy Coca-Cola and walk out with something made down the street that tastes like sewage? The ability to trademark a brand is pretty useful.

Also, King.com is not "trolling" here. "Trolling" is when you go after money for some kind of IP infringement (normally patents) and that is your sole source of income. King actually has a successful product they are trying to protect from real threats. They're definitely going way overboard though.

 

[Clovus]

isn't candy crush saga a "Real Copycat" of bejeweled?

Yeah, in the same sense that Half-life 2 is a clone of Doom. There are tons of match-3 games out there. I don't think Bejewelled is even the original. There are actual board games from the 1800s that use the basic concept. I've never played it, but the big difference is that the game is played across levels that require reaching different goals. Eventually the players runs out of lives and needs to pay or the levels get so hard that they need to pay for special items. They seem to have refined the art of catching "whales" that Zynga created. So, most people play for free on facebook fueling the few people who get obsessed with the game to pay out hundreds of dollars to continue to progress.

Also, game rules are not covered by patent, copyright, or trademark, so it doesn't matter if they "cloned" Bejewelled. This is a good thing since the entire games industry would be a disaster if someone could own the idea of an RTS or whatever.

 

[RaikuFA]

So are they gonna go after AKSYS for Sorcery Saga next? Cause that game needs publicity.

 

[Dark Knifer]

Fuck off king and your ruination of a great word like saga.

Hope the courts throw this legal bullying out but I doubt it.

 

[Sir Pootis]

Spoiler

So yeah. King tries to take legal action, while admitting they have no legal standing. I don't see how this can benifet them in any way, shape or form. Good work, King, you made yourself look like an absolute bastard and are likely to have a lost court case in your near future.

As for The Banner Saga, I wasn't really going to get it, but now I think I might, come next steam sale.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Keep digging your hole, trolls. You'll be buried in it soon enough hopefully.

 

[chimeracreator]

Hmm, they aren't suing they're filing a motion of opposition to Banner Saga gaining an official trademark. That said, their claim is bogus and shouldn't be hard to refute for any competent attorney. That said it is a shame they aren't being sued because that would open the door to said attorney crushing them in front of a judge and having King pay for the privilege, but that doesn't seem doable in this case.

If they have the money for it the hilarious long-term, albeit expensive, fix for this is to seek an injunction against King to prevent them from filing such claims in the future based on their explicit statement that they intentionally filed them against marks that they knew did not conflict with their own and have a history of making such claims that the courts and USPTO has thrown out. That said, this would be more expensive and would likely fail unless you did some very good discovery.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

This is ridiculous, plain and simple. It's already been proven that you don't lose your rights to your copyright/trademark just because you don't chase after every single possible case. Seriously, all I heard from this was "Yeah, we know we have no legal standing here, but we're doing this anyway because, uh... because if we bully everyone who's innocent that means people who are actually trying to steal from us will be too scared or... something".

 

[Pyrian]

If I make a game, I'm going to name it "Scroll's Edge Saga".

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

Good work, King, you made yourself look like an absolute bastard and are likely to have a lost court case in your near future.

That's assuming Stoic actually takes them to court, which they might not do, being a tiny indie dev with limited funds that they'll probably want to use to make more games.

On the other we have King, which earns several million dollars daily [http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-01/20/free-to-play-profits] just from Candy Crush Saga alone. Should Stoic sue them, all King has to do is send in a whole bunch of lawyers to bog down the court case with legal shenanigans until Stoic has to give up from attrition.

They're assholes because they think they can afford it. And they probably can.

 

[rcs619]

Doesn't this mean that King just admitted that their action against the Banner Saga is frivolous and a waste of the court's time? Does that open them up to some liability?

Objectively and morally? Totally. They're straight-up admitting "Yes, we know they aren't trying to infringe on us and there is no actual copyright infringement in this case. But we're trying to block them from using the name anyway."

Technically and legally, they are actually probably in the right. Under US copyright law, if a studio doesn't defend their copyright against ALL potential infringement, it actually weakens the copyright and their ability to protect it down the road. Or that is the reasoning a lot of big companies use, at any rate. It's the same reason that a lot of the big videogame companies go around shutting down fan-projects, no matter how respectful to the material they are, or how much the makers assure that it is non-profit. It isn't actually about whether or not someone does damage to your IP, it is about the legal perception of how strong your hold on the IP is. It's all very dumb.

In this particular case, it's a staggeringly wealthy company (these Candy Crush guys literally make millions a day on their game) being patent trolls simply because they can. They probably make more in a week than The Banner Saga will ever make in its entire release lifetime, and they know it.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

So "these guys aren't infringing, but we want to hurt them anyway, just in case someone does infringe in the future".

What a fuckin' load of horseshit. What kind of idiot thinks like that? And then to go online and flat-out admit that you're wrong and don't care? Double idiots.

 

[synobal]

I'm going to make a game called "The Candy Scroll Saga of Edge"

Set in a nation where Candy making is considered an artform and the scroll is the collected recipes of the greatest candy Chef Ramsey Edge. You play a young Chef named Apple who has left his home seeking to become the very best candy chef the world has ever known, to bake them is his test, perfection is his cause.

Then watch the lawsuits pile in.

 

[Whytewulf]

I suspect they want to "settle" with them, so they can show they are protecting their copyright. It does happen that if you don't continuously enforce it, you lose it. With that said, I am sick of companies trademarking common words. With all that said, I dislike King and will look at Banner Saga!

 

[direkiller]

What do they think of the Square Enix "SaGa" series that started coming out in 1989? (14 years before King was even founded).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SaGa_%28series%29

I hold no love for Squeenix, but at least they're not running around suing everyone like a bunch of cunts because people used "Saga" in their game title. Explicitly, games with it at the end of the title

Romancing SaGa - 1992
Romancing SaGa 2 - 1993
Romancing SaGa 3 - 1995
Unlimited SaGa - 2002
Emperors SaGa - 2012

Why do they get ANY claim on the word "Saga"?cal

Another funny thing, there are about half a dozen Table games that I know of with the name Saga made anywere from the 1980 to 2011. Most have nothing to do with each outer made by different people and Artist.
I don't think any of them have sued each outer, or over this.

 

[Lunar Templar]

wow ...

If I ever need a legit reason to not play that stupid bejeweled knock off, this would be it. I sincerely hope they pick a fight with some one like Squar Enix over this though, I'd love to see then grind them into a find powder

 

[MCerberus]

When you can't make a good game, just stick a skinner box behind an army of lawyers.