Midway Sues Ericsson Over Defender 'Tribute' 24
An anonymous reader writes "Redkeyreddoor is relaying a story, via the Wall Street Journal, that Midway has sued Ericsson for distributing a completely unlicensed version of Defender on its T68 cellphone. The mobile game in question seems to be 'Game', which does bear a remarkable similarity to Defender (there's a screenshot at this Japanese cellphone review page). Ericsson has apparently removed 'Game' (and a version of Tetris, ingeniously called 'Tetris') from later versions of the T68."
Wow. (Score:4, Interesting)
Defender was hard enough with a joystick and five buttons spread out over a wide two-hand console. I can't imagine playing it on my cell phone with a keyboard the size of a mini-post-it note (and my big fat tree-trunk thumbs) would be even remotely entertaining.
If they were gonna steal a game, they shoulda done some research first. Something like Galaxian or Galaga would have been a better fit.
Re:Wow. (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Wow. (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the original poster forgot that Defender's joystick was only two-way. This reduced the number of switches needed to implement the game's interface. A more standard joystick could simply be mapped to the two-way joystick, with the off-axis substituting for the Reverse and Thrust buttons. (I personally think the 2600 joystick was more natural than the arcade's requirement of a reversal toggle.)
Re:Wow. (Score:3, Interesting)
I love the hyperbolic damages. (Score:5, Funny)
"You have a shitty Defender clone on your phones. OMFGWTFLOL GIVE ME ALL YOUR PHONES!!!111!onehundredandeleven!"
Why sue for an apology or some licensing ducats, when you can sue for the whole frigging world and settle for and apology and some licensing ducats.
Haven't they heard of Epyx Vs. Data East? (Score:5, Informative)
Although since the game was removed I guess it might have been the smart thing to do from Midway's perspective.
But using the actual "Tetris" trademark was just plain stupid.
Re:Haven't they heard of Epyx Vs. Data East? (Score:3, Interesting)
On what grounds? (Score:3, Interesting)
Defender was released 24 years ago. Is this a copyright case? I doubt they actually took any actual code from Defender.
Even if they did, copyright's whole purpose is to promote growth of the public domain - is anybody arguing that Williams Electronics, the creator of Defender, would not have created it if they weren't guaranteed an artificial monopoly for over two decades? Why are copyrights on computer software so ridiculously long anyway?
Re:On what grounds? (Score:1)
Re:On what grounds? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's how politicians get stuff like this through without being voted out of office - progressively strengthen local laws by synchronizing "upwards" with foreign laws, through FTAs and treaties like the Bern Convention. Then the US introduces the DMCA, and the EU "synchronizes" with the US... rinse, repeat.
steve
Re:On what grounds? (Score:1)
What you are describing is closer to how patants work.
allthough copyright was 25 years(or was it 50) years untill a certan mouse nearly went into the
public domain.
Now its life +99 years, or is it just the 99 years.
I cant ofllow all the changes these days,
they lobbly in some new scam ever few yeras.
Been around a while.. (Score:3, Informative)
Anyone else roll Defender back in the day? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Anyone else roll Defender back in the day? (Score:1)
I must have a new one... (Score:2)
That's rather surprising to me because I bought the phone off of eBay and it's pretty beat up outside; paint coming off, scratches, etc.
Still works quite well tho... Just looks fugly. Hopefully ugly enough that nobody will steal it.
As Ericsson would say...(oblig Tenacious D quote) (Score:3, Funny)
You gotta believe me!
And I wish you were there!
Just a matter of opinion.
Re:Old Ericsson phones had Tetris, too (Score:1)