Zynga Sues Brazilian Dev For Copying Its Games 115
An anonymous reader writes "In what can only be described as a case of the pot calling the kettle black, Zynga has launched and settled a lawsuit against Brazilian game developer Vostu after accusing Vostu of copying their games. The settlement resulted in the loss of jobs for many Vostu employees. How Zynga managed to carry out such actions while keeping a straight face after dealing with similar allegations remains to be seen."
oh the hypocrisy (Score:5, Insightful)
*sigh*.
Re:oh the hypocrisy (Score:5, Insightful)
Remains to be seen? (Score:5, Insightful)
Zynga has more money and better lawyers.
It's a business, duh! (Score:5, Insightful)
What a silly question. It's not about consistency, morality, or ethics. It's about what they can get away with, how far they can get away with it, and what happens if/when they get caught.
Gotta get with the times. There's no such thing as corporate responsibility. How the money is made, where it comes from, and what the consequences of making it are, are all problems left for everyone else to deal with. There's only quarterly earnings, year over year growth, and valuation. Get in, make a boatload, and pray to your local diety you get out before the whole system comes crashing down on the heads of all the less fortunate ones who couldn't get out in time.
Sort of, I suppose (Score:5, Insightful)
A predator kills and eats its prey while simultaneously doing everything within its power to make its own predators fail to kill and eat it. This is not hypocrisy.
If Zynga sees the illegality of its own practice of copying other people's games as a calculated risk of doing business, then suing others for doing to it exactly what it does to others is really no different than basic predator behavior (which is natural enough...humans are predators after all).
If you misinterpret Zynga's allegations to be some sort of political or moral statement about what kinds of business models/actions are not appropriate, then yeah I guess they are being hypocritical. But since when do large wealthy corporations bother with principles?
Re:Remains to be seen? (Score:5, Insightful)
It not how much money the corporation makes or loses, it's how much the psychopathic corporate executives can suck out of the investors before it all collapses, bonus if they get to keep their multi-million dollar golden parachute as for the coders at Zynga, if they print out their stock options, punch a hole in the corner and tie the bundle together with string, next time they go to the toilet, they'll have something to use.
Why is it that companies that behave like this so often go up in flames in the great bankruptcy fire sale while the corporate executives retire to their mansions in tax havens.
Re:No it's not like this everywhere (Score:5, Insightful)
Sound Legal Move (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see what the issue is here. Yes, Zynga copies other people's games. Yes, this company was just doing the same thing. What you people are all apparently are missing though is that Zynga is simply applying simple, well know, and accepted legal practice of "I have more lawyers so fuck you because I said so". I really don't see how you can argue with that.
Game rules are not copyrightable (Score:5, Insightful)
But lots of other parts are copyrightable. Such as some of the graphics and sounds.
The dream heights/tiny tower was an obvious copy of the gameplay. But the graphics were completely different. And you are alllowed to do that.
These ones look much closer to copying of elements like art, which you aren't allowed to do.
Of course once you introduce patents gameplay might end up protected - but I don't believe that's applicable in either of the cases.
its inhuman barbarism, evolution backwards (Score:5, Insightful)
and it smacks of a massively corrupt, medieval style social organization in which 'might makes right', and trial by combat was the norm. if we have 'trial by most lawyers', completely disregarding any principles of legal ethics or empiricism, we have not really advanced past the state described in the Viking Sagas of the 11th century .
Re:I Zynga win this. (Score:4, Insightful)
You wait for Zynga to win and set precedent. Then you sue using their own precedent against them.
That assumes that any lawsuit would actually get won. The majority of the time a company will settle the case if it looks like they are going to lose (or they deem it cheaper to settle than pay for a lengthy trial).
Re:Sort of, I suppose (Score:4, Insightful)
If you see the justice system as little more than "survival of the fittest" then you would be right in your statement. But that's not how the justice system is supposed to work or to be used.
The people behind Zynga are committing these acts wilfully and knowingly. There can be no hiding it nor denying it. They need to be sued out of existence and their lawyers disbarred.
Re:Sort of, I suppose (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh really? You might want to reconsider that comment.
Zynga recent earnings and prospects [marketwatch.com]
EA recent earnings and prospects [cnbc.com]
The numbers between these two aren't even close, neither in revenue or earnings.
Re:Contest (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it's simply called 'doing business'. The prize is money.
Nothing has changed, companies have always acted like that if it gets them the most money. It's not like in the last few months we've changed the rules to favor those who act like greedy bastards -- that's always been how it's worked.
And, sadly, Zynga is far from the first company to be involved in two separate lawsuits, and arguing totally opposite (and incompatible) things in each.
Corporations and lawyers don't have cognitive dissonance by doing contradictory things.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)