CandySwipe Developer Surrenders to King in Rage-Filled Open Letter

[Eric the Orange]

snip

Did you look at the source article. He does site some precedent for his claims other than just the similar name. Primarily that the two game look very similar and this has caused people to mistakenly believe he copied them when in fact his game was made first. He shows evidence that could mean loss of business, and thus his case. I admit he's being a bit of a drama lama with that "my mom died" stuff, and them buying an earlier copyright to get rid of him is just conjecture with no proof. But the base case that there game has negatively effected his sales by being similar is pretty solid.

 

[Clovus]

Stupid patenting and copyright laws enable even stupider law suits and claims.
Shame for Ransom to be caught in this nonsense.

This does not involve patents or copyrights. It involves trademarks. If you actually look into trademark law you would find that it largely accomplishes what it is suppose to. Do you really want to go into a store and buy something labeled "Coca-Cola" and walk out with water? Well, that would probably be better for your health, but having confusing brand/product names is not a good idea. The majority of trademark cases are handled easily and really aren't very interesting. You occasionally have a company pushing things (like "Edge" or King.com trying to trademark "Candy"), but they usually lose in the end.

Ransom isn't "caught in this nonsense". He's the one doing the suing. He's upset because he "lost" by giving up on his claims. He was basically trying to do the thing that everyone is so made about King.com doing: he wanted to "own" the word "Candy" in app titles. Trademark usually works correctly, so, in the end, neither company should end up with that mark.

 

[TheDoctor455]

I've stated this point before, but I'd like to go ahead and give the crown of worst gaming company of the year to King, and away from EA. This is just sad.

Don't fret. I'm sure EA will do something to earn it back before the year's over.

OT:

This is just sad.

And if ever there were evidence that Copyright law needs to be rewritten to prevent bullshit like this happening... this is it.

 

[Clovus]

they bought it so that people couldn't do the same to them. if they used that defense without buying it, it would have also invalidated their own rights on their own game too, since the game predates both of their creations.

Yes, that's pretty much correct. They wanted control of their mark Candy Crush Saga, so they bought out the similarly named product. They probably didn't do it to specifically stop this guy though. They're just protecting the brand they created. So, trademark works the way it is supposed to. It sounds like whoever owned Candy Crusher might have been paid for this.

I can't tell by your response if you think this is bad or not.

Did you look at the source article. He does site some precedent for his claims other than just the similar name. Primarily that the two game look very similar and this has caused people to mistakenly believe he copied them when in fact his game was made first. He shows evidence that could mean loss of business, and thus his case. I admit he's being a bit of a drama lama with that "my mom died" stuff, and them buying an earlier copyright to get rid of him is just conjecture with no proof. But the base case that there game has negatively effected his sales by being similar is pretty solid.

Unfortunately, I can't follow the source link at work.

How similar the games look doesn't realy matter as far as the trademark goes. They would still both be in the exact same trademark category even if they were different types of mobile games. I guess it sucks if people think his game is a clone of theirs, but I don't think the courts can help him with that. Cloning games is not illegal.

But, yeah, he does have some basis that there is confusion here. The problem is that the solution he wants is to basically own the trademark for "Candy". If he were to win against King.com he could use that against any other app. The actual titles are not very similar outside of the use of the word "Candy". I'm sure he could make it to trial based on this, but I don't think he could win - something he appears to have realised.

I just find it odd how everyone cheers this guy on and acts like King.com is so in the wrong here. But this guy is doing basically the same thing.

 

[Johnson McGee]

It's probably hard to win litigation cases when your last name is Ransom.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

All Hail King! Heir to the Zynga throne!

May your stock price fall and and disappear into irrelevance.

 

[Clovus]

The hypocrisy here is sickening. Here is proof that intellectual property belongs not to who claimed it first but who is the biggest bully with the most resources. The fact that king used an older trakemake file to invalidate his slightly newer trademark file is actual PROOF that King's trademarks are invalid because there are many pre-dating them.

Actually they were pretty much required to pay the earlier trademark owner, especially since the titles Candy Crush Saga and Candy Crusher have such a similar name. I'd say Candy Crusher had a pretty excellent case, and it looks like they won it by being bought out. They got paid. It's possibly a heart-warming story of the little guy winning. Or maybe just two corporations shaking hands and exchanging a bit of money - normal business.

This guy's claim that they solely did this because of his case seems pretty unlikely. They were going to have to deal with Candy Crusher either way. The CandySwipe name is really not that similar to Candy Crush Saga. Do you really want the system to equate the two? Should Ransom own the trademark on "Candy"? Remember, he was the one doing the suing here, not King.com.

How is paying the rightful owner of something "bullying"? You're looking at this in a rather twisted way.

But King is able to have it both way; Keep it's bullshit recent claims and then buy claims that pre-date theirs in order to beat everyone who came before or since them with a big legal stick. It's a paradox, a blatant abuse of the law.

You could claim that King.com trying to trademark "Candy" or "Saga" are a "blatant abuse of the law", but anyone's allowed to attempt to trademark something. There's a pretty high chance that neither of those requests will go through. King.com will not "have it both way".

If you have more money than someone, you definitely have a big advantage in any civil case. However, I'm not sure there are a good number of trademark cases where someone with a clearly valid claim gets crushed by a bigger company. Usually the bigger company just pays up, which is what King.com did.

 

[EndlessSporadic]

Safe to say King is getting the Shittiest Company of 2014 award. They make EA look like saints.

 

[Clovus]

You could claim that King.com trying to trademark "Candy" or "Saga" are a "blatant abuse of the law", but anyone's allowed to attempt to trademark something. There's a pretty high chance that neither of those requests will go through. King.com will not "have it both way".

King.com has already been awarded the trademark for games regarding candy. I agree Candy Swipe has little or no case but he has little or no case for the same reason King.com has little or no case; because trademarking the word candy is fucking dumb.

If you looked hard enough you could probably find trademark files for candy regarding games going back decades; all the companies involved are in the wrong but King.com is already using it's trademark and high profile position to squat on all other mobile developers.

King.com has not finished the trademark process on "Candy" yet. The made it through the Trademark office part, but then it is open for objection*. Since there are a lot of businesses that are going to object, I don't think they are going to make it through the process. The initial decision by the office was terrible. They should definitely not own the word "Candy" in terms of the insane list they submitted.

King.com is already sending out cease-and-desist letters based on their hope of winning. I don't know if that is standard practice or not. I'm guessing they can't actually take any real legal actions until the whole thing is settled.

I would totally agree that King.com is taking things way to far with their trademark claims. They have a legitimate problem with many apps that are clearly banking on their popular titles, but owning the mark on "Candy" isn't necesary for them to fight the obvious ones.

This guy just doesn't really have much to do with all that.

* I'm not that familiar with the USPTO's trademark search tool, so I can't find their request. I did find the trademark application for "Candy Crush Saga", and that's not even fully approved yet - it states that there are objections. So, I'm pretty sure they do not own "Candy" yet.

UPDATE: Ok, I found it. It will be "published in the Gazette" on Feb. 25th. After it is published, objections can be made. That is guaranteed to happen.

 

[Neeckin]

Candy Crush isn't even that good of a game

 

[Eiv]

All Hail King! Heir to the Zynga throne!

May your stock price fall and and disappear into irrelevance.

This times 10. Companies like this should rot in the cesspool that they have created. Subverting a loophole to gain trademark assurance is beyond a fucking joke.

 

[synobal]

All ur candy r belong to us. At least I think that is King.com's new motto. This is why I couldn't be a lawyer I'd just start executing people when they try to own things like basic words.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Jesus Christ that's fucking horrible. I don't know how a court could rule in King's favour given the blatant predatory action they're taking. It's anti-competitive.

 

[mindfaQ]

People at King should feel bad and meet some very uncomfortable people. But then again, world and life isn't fair, so nothing will happen to them.

You could claim that King.com trying to trademark "Candy" or "Saga" are a "blatant abuse of the law", but anyone's allowed to attempt to trademark something. There's a pretty high chance that neither of those requests will go through. King.com will not "have it both way".

Yes, I don't think it is valid to trademark single words found in a dictionary, at least not in a way that other people can't use that word in combination with others in another context. Definitely should be readjusted.

 

[theSteamSupported]

I feel ashamed of being Swedish right now.

 

[Jennacide]

What, the little guy is crushed under a corporate bootheel? That never happens!

Welcome to trademark law, where you don't matter unless your lawyers say so.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I really want King.com to get some sort of failure I want something terrible to happen to those soulless fucks, but it's not going to happen, because that's the way the world works. EA blunders and makes some silly decisions, but I don't think they're out to ruin other peoples livelihoods... besides shutting down companies... never mind. Fuck, if they came together they'd make the Antichrist or something, like a fusion between Miley Cyrus and Justin Bieber.