Zynga Sues EA For 'Anti-competitive' Practices

An anonymous reader writes "In early August, Electronic Arts sued Zynga for allegedly copying EA's Sims Social game. Zynga has now launched a counterattack, suing EA for 'anticompetitive and unlawful business practices, including legal threats and demands for no-hire agreements.' The company also accuses EA of copying a Zynga game called YoVille. Zynga has also demanded a jury trial to settle EA's claims."

Zynga hahahahah

[TheRecklessWanderer]

We are using you for being mad at us for copying your product. Take that good company!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Zynga hahahahah

[phantomfive]

It's one of those situations where you wish BOTH could lose.

Re:

[AK Marc]

A case of "the enemy of my enemy is an even larger enemy."

Re:

[Ambvai]

Maxim 29: The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less.

Re:

[Internetuser1248]

And like last time there was a zynga vs EA story I will say it again: I hope they both bankrupt each other. I hate lawyers too but if they are going to be ripping someone off, please let it be both Zynga and EA at the same time. Burn baby burn.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Gameplay mechanics can not be copyrighted.

Re:

[viperidaenz]

Zynga didn't steal YoVille, they bought it off someone else.

Re:

[Bing Tsher E]

That anybody, or any entity, anywhere paid anything for YoVille is kind of scary.

Re:

[Bob9113]

If you can't see how this is seriously bad for indies then you are blind. if Zynga gets away with this why should I buy "Plants VS Zombies" when some corp will hire a bunch of Chinese coders and I can have "Shrubs VS The Undead" next week for free on FB? Why buy Minecraft when I can have MineBuilder for free? One of the great things that has come along is the way the Internet allows small artists to compete and sell their wares no different than the big guys, but if this kind of shit isn't stopped when it c

Re:Zynga hahahahah

[vux984]

How close were Zynga's copies

Pretty close to adding a mustache to the mona lisa and calling it an original work of art.

Re:

[EdIII]

Is it not an original work of art?

That's kind of a bad example because art is all about perception and some sort of statement from the artist. Would you say Andy Warhol was infringing upon Campbell's IP?

Just what exactly makes something original? I would actually claim that the work of art you propose is original because it is striking and thought provoking. It's the Mona Lisa, but why does she have a stache? Why are there 10 pictures in a row? Why does this one have a goatee?

In Zynga's case so much wa

Re:

[vux984]

Is it not an original work of art?

The mustache might me. Maybe. But no, its a derivative work.

Would you say Andy Warhol was infringing upon Campbell's IP?

Yes. Absolutely. Without question. It was clearly a transformative but derivative work.

But that's not really the important question. The important question is whether it was fair use. The mustachioed mona lisa was parody and defendable as fair use.

The Warhol on the other hand... not so much... I expect Campbell's could have asserted trademark and copyrigh

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[arose]

So the tetris company was right all along?

Re:

[Saint Fnordius]

I would say the proper term is "plagiarised". What Zynga did was not (as one poster said) adding a moustache to the Mona Lisa and calling it an original, but rather selling copies of a famous painting that is alike except for the signature and the colour of the flowers in the far background. Alike enough to dupe careless buyers, and just different enough to pretend that it is an original work of art.

Re:

[ganjadude]

I worked for a company who was bought out by zynga (we made dopewars) It was a very very bad experience. They are the definition of a troll company with too much money and no brains.

Re:

[Internetuser1248]

More than dare, I encourage more mainstream game companies to copy those that are innovating. I already paid for minecraft and dwarf fortress is free but there is still a LOT of room in this genre for new players. Voxel engine, destructable terrain, procedurally generated worlds - if there was anything I could say or do to get both zynga and EA to get in on that I would go for it. I don't think either of those companies have enough creativity to even attempt something like that though. They can't see the wo

Re:

[Kalriath]

Song covers DO require a license, but that license (called a mechanical license) is one that can be attained from a clearing-house without authorisation from the copyright owner (it's a mandatory license defined in law). Tribute bands are the same, as they're essentially covers. The only ones that do not require a license are parodies (and Weird Al Yankovic actually does get permission from the original artists as a professional courtesy anyway, incidentally) and satire.

Awesome, I'm buying popcorn already.

[SpzToid]

Patent wars are so passé. I am so ready for the anti-poach wars!

Re:

[AK Marc]

When discussing legal things, one should endeavor to use correct legal terminology. It isn't "illegal." That would imply that a company demanding one is breaking some law, and just asking for a non-compete is against the law. That's false. They are not "illegal". They are "not legally binding" That is, someone could demand you sign it as a condition of employment (and are free to not hire you if you don't agree to sign), but when you leave, the contract is void, and you are free to do what you want wi

EA vs Zynga

[Anonymous Coward]

Who's side are we supposed to be on?

Re:EA vs Zynga

[Makoska]

Who's side are we supposed to be on?

Battle for Wesnoth's LOL

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Good question. Certainly neither party to the lawsuit, and most definitely not with the lawyers. I'd have to say hope for all three to lose?

Re:

[i.am.delf]

Sometimes you need to root for both sides to fight and both to lose. I can't remember the original quote but it was about America selling weapons to both sides of a conflict because the US wanted both sides to lose.

Re:

[jamstar7]

That was 'Lord of War' IIRC. Great movie, one of Cage's best.

Re:

[Tastecicles]

I watched that yesterday. Agreed, fantastic movie.

Opening lines:

"There are over 550 million firearms in worldwide circulation. That's one firearm for every twelve people on the planet. The only question is: How do we arm the other 11?"

I'm sure he was quoting someone else there...

Re:EA vs Zynga

[Tastecicles]

Because nobody ever went broke selling weapons. Look at my cousin Gaila. He went into weapons, I bought a bar. Now he owns his own moon, and I'm staring into the abyss, and my only hope for salvation is the Federation.

Re:

[EdIII]

Now I am imagining all the executives of both companies being Ferengis. You know.... it just seems to fit perfectly.

In fact, if anybody ever does a documentary about this legal battle (like Microsoft vs Apple) they should use Ferengis as the actors.

   

Re:

[C0R1D4N]

I feel like Ferengi law would not have copyrights or patents. Companies would rely on DRM and proprietary stuff to try to keep customers locked in. Meanwhile the competition would use reverse engineering and industrial espionage.

Re:

[stoatwblr]

Actually, ammunition is the killer app. You sell weapons once. They need ammunition to function as such and they keep needing the stuff to continue functioning.

Re:

[gmuslera]

No matter which side loses, even if both does, lawyers win.

Re:

[beowulfcluster]

In this case, are not the lawyers for once the lesser of three evils?

Re:EA vs Zynga

[Tastecicles]

if you're selling weapons the LAST thing you want is for either side to lose - which is why whatever you sell to one side, you sell to the other. This has several side effects, not least of which you get obscenely rich and you remain neutral (see: Switzerland during WWII, the US arms industry during the Iran-Iraq war and pretty much every other conflict since WWII...). The thing you want to keep in short supply, however, is ammunition.

Re:EA vs Zynga

[Baloroth]

Who's side are we supposed to be on?

Well, EA did once produce some good games, so them I suppose. They still have some potential: Zynga never had any. Zynga are also pretty blatant about ripping off other games producers (indie game makers included), EA are usually not quite so bad in that area at least.

Quadrapassel

[tepples]

Zynga are also pretty blatant about ripping off other games producers

Any more so than the free software community, with it's "Quadrapassel" and its "M-x tetris"?

Re:

[AK Marc]

EA rips themselves off. Madden [$year] and such. Zynga should be applauded for copying games. And punished for copying copyrighted images creatively designed for it. The idea of a game of farmville should not be protected. Othewise, nobody else can make a 2D scrolling shooter, as Contra did it years ago (and wasn't th first) and if it isn't a shooter, Mario did it before you (and Pitfall before them).

I want Zynga to win because the idea that the concept of a game should be copyrightable is absurd.

Re:

[jamstar7]

Who cares? Pass the popcorn.

Horse race journalism considered harmful

[tepples]

Neither. As in political reporting, the concept of "sides" [wikipedia.org] is one way that journalists turn stories into BS [cracked.com] because they have vested interests in the public not learning what's really going on [pineight.com].

Re:

[Greyfox]

No matter who loses this battle, humanity wins!

Re:

[Greyfox]

Sometimes... the only way to win... is not to play the game!

Re:

[seandiggity]

Who's side are we supposed to be on?

Anything that hurts Zynga, hurts facebook, as they reminded us over and over in the IPO filing [sec.gov]. So, depends what you think of the Zuckerborg.

Re:

[Blue Stone]

>Who's side are we supposed to be on?

The third side: mutually assured destruction ...

...a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy in which a full-scale use of high-yield weapons of mass destruction by two opposing sides would effectively result in the complete, utter and irrevocable annihilation of both the attacker and the defender.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction [wikipedia.org]

Re:

[Narnie]

Well, if you mean to choose the winning side, then its the lawyers obviously.

Re:

[Pinhedd]

The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy and nothing more I'm on the lawyer's side

Re:

[DiEx-15]

The one that isn't evil...

...Oh. Wait...

My choice

[meerling]

I'm cheering for EA on this one. Oh god, I feel sick and dirty, I need to take a shower now. :(

Re:

[Mashiki]

Shite vs Shit. Tough choice sometimes, but one stinks less.

Re:My choice

[Nemyst]

This is one of the few times where I'll be cheering for the lawyers to suck as much money out of both of them as possible.

Re:

[jamstar7]

Seems to me, it's more like the feeling you get when you see a carful of lawyers go over a cliff. In your brand new tricked out SUV that you're still waiting for the insurance paperwork to come back on...

Re:

[mwvdlee]

You mean the feeling that you could have had a few more passenger seats if you bought a more expensive SUV?

Re:My choice

[Penguinisto]

Sorta like watching Stalin go after Hitler. You want Stalin to win, but not win by too much.

Maybe, with little luck, Zynga can get stomped into oblivion (SCO-style would be nice), and EA loses so much money chasing it that they themselves are diminished to the point of leaving an opening for other companies.

But then there's Ubisoft. Is there anyway we can get Ubisoft involved in this too? Then maybe we can pray that they all obliterate each other.

Re:

[blade8086]

Because Stalin didn't try to take over all of europe either?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comintern
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cominform

Maybe EA can go down so we can get a NFL PC game

[Joe_Dragon]

Maybe EA can go down so we can get a NFL PC game.

Re:

[sg_oneill]

Only if Ubisoft first sells off Assasins creed to another company. Ubisoft suck, but I frigging love assasins creed.

Oh, you only have a Trace Buster Buster?

[gubon13]

EA is going to counter counter sue you, yo!

They're welcome to each other

[stepdown]

Can't think of two companies I'd rather see hemorrhaging money in the courtrooms.

Furiously scribbling notes

[ZackSchil]

Ripping off games: BAAAAAAD
Ripping off trade dress: GOOOOOOOOD... WELL NOOOOOTTT GOOOOOOOD BUUUUTT OOOOOKKKAAAAY WHHHAAATTTEEEVVVVVERR FUUUCKKK APPPPLEEE

Just taking down some notes here for the zombie slashdot poster bot I've been writing.

Re:

[Travelsonic]

I don't need to write anything down to see how retarded this post is.
THERE IS NO HIVE MIND! \ LOTS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE POSTING THEIR OPINIONS. ' To claim hypocrisy when you're taking different pinions, and making some hoopla about how /. is contradictory, when it is different people in these threads posting different individual opinions, well, there is no word to describe how dumb that is. Get off your high horse, read up on basic logic, basic lingual skills pertaining to debate.

One-word joke.

[RyanFenton]

When I was at PAX Dev a couple of weeks ago, one good way to get a laugh would be to mention virtually any player-manipulative or too openly copying large sections of games, then just insert the word 'Zynga'.

The words 'E.A.' will also get some laughs connected to generic corporate thuggery, but after the whole 'Worst Company in America" stuff, it's a bit overplayed.

Ryan Fenton

Re:

[History's Coming To]

OK, I'll give it a go:

I heard in the latest beat-em-up Jim Parsons (Big Bang Theory) is going to fight the A-Team's BA. Zynga.

Of they they want a jury trial

[Guru80]

It comes down to personal perception more than the law. EA is the big bad guy on the block, Zynga is the family friendly buddy on facebook. There are no good guys here though, both are greedy thieves who would rob you blind in a moment if they could do so legally. Welcome to the business of studio game development/publishing. Thank god for indies.

Re:

[mwvdlee]

The problem is... on occasion EA has accidentally done the right thing.
Zynga hasn't.

Re:

[AK Marc]

Zynga is at least predictable and hasn't killed any games I've liked. EA buys successful games/studios, then puts them out of business. Zynga is easy for me to ignore. I can't recall ever seeing a Zynga game in a store to even try to ignore.

when two pieces of shit fight

[Osgeld]

does anyone give a crap? let them both sue each other into oblivion and the world will be a better place

Re:

[krisamico]

Sounds great, but they'll finance this B.S. by cutting their respective workforces!

Re:

[Osgeld]

and?
if those people have any skills they will easily find another job, and if not, they will have time to make some decisions about their lives.

I dont buy this feeling that no company can fail for the poor workers will starve to death in a gutter crap ... I was recently unemployed for a year and yet I am still alive, newley employed and doing better than I was at my last job. So let them cut jobs, again its better for everyone.

A comparison

[TRRosen]

Well let's see.
Nether company creates there own games. EA buys them and Zynga steals them.
Both companies steal from their users it's just that EA does it $50 at a time while Zynga does it $.50 at a time.
Both companies treat gamers like crap.
EA abuses the hell out of professional developers while Zynga abuses the hell out of people that think they are developers.
(sorry Zynga workers but my dog writes better code)
EA uses huge expensive marketing campaigns of BS while Zynga just spams you until you give in.
EA often ruins good games after taking them over. Zynga often ruins good games after copying them and flooding the market with their version.
EA actions makes you hate them. Zynga's actions make you hate yourself.
All in all the world would be better off if neither existed. But the tie breaker goes to EA as we would actually miss their games.

Soon in the news...

[Anonymous Coward]

With both Zynga and EA lying financially in shambles because of the lawsuit, their lawyers team up and buy both Zynga and EA to form ZEANGA.

Redacted Counterclaims

[flimflammer]

It amazes me how often lawyers try to redact information from the public by changing the foreground and background to black when we can just select the text to reveal it.

Their counterclaim is full of not-so-redacted text.

Zynga has a point

[laffer1]

I hate to say this, but Zynga has a point. Consider how many crappy b movies are made in Hollywood related to hits. It's particularly bad with children's movies, but it also happened to Jaws and Jurassic Park. I heard on NPR recently that they're making a big comeback since digital distribution has taken over. It's easier to get on Netflix or Amazon's service than in stores. How is it different to copy a game versus a movie?

My big problem with Zynga isn't that they copy games shamelessly from EA and ot

Bottom Feeding Scum

[kiriath]

Companies like Zynga that churn out these games to feed off the souls(and wallets) of those who have the time to devote to them make me sick. These companies create games that lead people to absolutely nowhere, working tirelessly at something seemingly insurmountable, only to have something new and even more insurmountable to take its place. Repetitive nonsense spewed forth with slightly different packaging to make it a little different the next go round.

I'm looking at you Blizzard *evileyes*

It's the sort of headline

[Ukab the Great]

I'd expect to read on the Onion. Not CNET.

Another great time for that AvP meme

[neminem]

You know, the tagline, "whoever wins... we lose"?

Also reminded of that joke that was so popular in elementary schools, "what would you rather be eaten by, a [any random carnivore], or a [random other carnivore]?" "I'd rather the [two carnivores from the previous sentence] eat each other."