Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Classic Games (Games) Government PC Games (Games) Social Networks The Courts The Internet Entertainment Games News

Hasbro Finally Drops Scrabulous Lawsuit 51

The Associated Press reports that Hasbro Inc. has now dropped the lawsuit it launched earlier this year against Rajat and Jayant Agarwalla, the creators of Scrabulous, a Scrabble clone that found a sizable following on Facebook. We previously discussed Scrabulous' return to Facebook under a different name, as well as the "official" Scrabble client, which was not exactly well received. Hasbro's IP rights to the game are limited to North America, and the AP story adds: "Mattel, which owns the rights to Scrabble outside of North America, filed a lawsuit against the brothers in India claiming violations of intellectual property. It was not immediately clear what the status of that lawsuit is."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hasbro Finally Drops Scrabulous Lawsuit

Comments Filter:
  • by LingNoi ( 1066278 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @07:46AM (#26143681)

    The damage is done, they've crushed Scrabulous into non-existence, what else is there to do?

  • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @08:40AM (#26143865)

    Many law suits have demonstrated that the idea of a game simply can't be copyrighted, only the name and IP. Arguably the only thing Scrabulous could've been caught on legally in this respect was the name, Scrabulous. A court case against someone for using a similar name wont find a sympathetic ear with a judge even then if the company hasn't at least given the defendant the option of changing the name out of court.

    Really, I think the best they could've done legally is taken them to court over the name had they been unwilling to change it after an initial request out of court.

    The lawsuit was probably there simply as a scare tactic to try and scare them into ceasing and desisting. This scare tactic worked to an extent, but now we're approaching the time they'd actually have to go to court and that they'd actually have to state their case they've backed off, because they know it was unwinnable based on similar past court cases.

    If you could copyright a first person shooter where you have to fight off an alien invasion for example, then that would kill off most the FPS market. If someone however created an FPS called Doomer and it had all the weapons and characters of the original then this would be a valid court case.

    The key is to ensure the only thing that's copied is the idea and concept and that the name and assets do not closely resemble the originals.

  • by jdgeorge ( 18767 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @01:10PM (#26147423)

    This is how my economist professor explained the reasoning for marrying an absolutely hot and smart woman.

    And yet, to me, the reasoning is similar to what I'd do with a winning lottery ticket: I wouldn't say, "no, I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with all that wealth; why don't you keep it?" Instead, I'd say, "yes, thank you, I'll take the 'cash now' option please."

  • by LandDolphin ( 1202876 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @04:52PM (#26150641)
    Yeah, what a loser. Stuck with a wife who is smart, good at what she most everything, and makes more money then him. Pfft, really would have to suck to be him.

Each new user of a new system uncovers a new class of bugs. -- Kernighan