Candy Crush Studio Denies Cloning Games, Pulls Cloned Game

Candy Crush Studio Denies Cloning Games, Pulls Cloned Game

Pac-Avoid

Candy Crush Saga publisher King says it doesn't clone games and has removed the game that's allegedly a clone of Scamperghost from its website.

Candy Crush Saga studio King was accused yesterday of cloning a game called Scamperghost a few years ago, after negotiations to publish it fell apart. Scamperghost creator Stolen Goose got a better offer elsewhere, so King hired another indie studio to make a quick copy of the game to get it to market first.

There's a particular ugliness (and irony) to the matter because King, as you've no doubt heard, recently trademarked the word "candy" and is attempting to do the same with "saga" in order to ensure that nobody else can try to piggyback on, and profit from, its work. The validity of its trademark claim doesn't seem entirely unfounded but it's losing the PR war rather badly, as it hasn't been able to effectively shake the image of a billion-dollar company using the system to screw the little guy, and the rather well-supported accusation that it has cloned games in the past - again, in an apparent attempt to put the gears to a smaller player - hasn't helped.

King said in a statement today that it doesn't clone games, and at the same time promised to remove Pac-Avoid, the Scamperghost clone, from its website. "King does not clone other peoples' games. King believes that [intellectual property] - both our own IP and that of others - is important and should be properly protected," a rep told VentureBeat. "Like any prudent company, we take all appropriate steps to protect our IP in a sensible and fair way. At the same time, we are respectful of the rights and IP of other developers."

The rep said that before King releases a game it does a "thorough search" of other games and trademark filings to make sure it's not stepping on someone's copyright. "However, for the avoidance of doubt, in this case, this game [Pac-Avoid] - which was coded by a third party developer five years ago - has been taken down," the rep added.

Ironically, it was that third-party developer who confirmed to Matthew Cox of Stolen Goose that Pac-Avoid was an intentional clone of Scamperghost and that King wanted it done quickly in order to beat Stolen Goose to the punch. Pac-Avoid no longer turns up in a search at King's Royal Games portal, but it's still accessible if you know where to look.

Source: VentureBeat

Permalink

Man has King gone full retard. Anyone want some popcorn? This gonna be good.

I just want King to go away =___= I am aware it is not that simple, but as of now they are hurting game industry.

I cannot recall the last time I have witnessed such incompetence.

EDIT: This article's title is amusingly well worded.

Aahh, if only the Namco had trademarked the word 'Pac', it would have been hilarious to watch them tear King apart.

That was about as useful as one of those settlements that companies pay in order to not be officially on record as having committed any wrongdoing, but with less bribery, and about as legally useless when they could still get burned on it if they were actually sued, using the Nintendo 3DS case as a precedent.

Luke Sawicki:
I just want King to go away =___= I am aware it is not that simple, but as of now they are hurting game industry.

I'd say they're hurting the casual gaming industry, like what Yahtzee said about PopCap in his Peggle review. This company, however, seems to be worse than PopCap due to blatant copying.

Although copying a well-established IP like Pac-man? Some people will do anything for money. Especially if they have to feed themselves.

I just want King's "saga" to be "crush"ed... and then after I shall eat some "candy"...

"We don't create clone games, that's why we are removing this game we cloned."

No King, that's not how reality works, just because you no longer are selling the bad thing you created, doesn't mean it magically disappears from the timeline. Who taught you about life? Marty McFly?

Lets see, develops and publishes games using the freemium model, uses lawmongering to crush competition, and makes shameless clones of smaller companies products.

Seems like King is becoming the new Zynga.

I wonder if they know what happened to Zynga.

RaikuFA:
Man has King gone full retard. Anyone want some popcorn? This gonna be good.

Its already been good, heres hoping it gets better.

Jesus Christ King, do you have no shame? Do you honestly think that everyone is simply going to take the tides of pure horseshit coming from your mouth at face value?

No, fuck you. You don't get to try to screw over indie developers and then say "Oh we're not trying to hurt anyone, we just filed a lawsuit saying otherwise". You don't get to make a blatant clone copy out of spite and then say "Oh we'd never try to copy anyone, that's why we're taking this copy of someone else's game down". You don't to pull those constant dick moves and still have anyone take you seriously.

Unfortunately, King, you probably don't care, because most of the people who play your games probably don't know or care about this entire debacle.

Captcha: American Cancer Society.

Do you lot deal with afflictions in the gaming community as well?

King is the new Zynga. I look forward to watching them manage to crash and burn. Oh King may look invincible now but as history shows companies like this have a habit of squandeirng BILLIONS of dollars and when they ate done breaking IP law they start brking the actual law. King is as greedy as it is soulless and stupid.

Mobile clone factories do not make games. As a community we revoke your right to use that term. How you say? Because fuck you that's how! Go have a single creative thought then we'll talk. Have some dignity.

Not to support King, but:
It's been awhile since I took Business Law, but if I recall correctly, removing/resolving/fixing the object of contention explicitly cannot treated as an admission of guilt in a court of law. For example, if one of your porch stairs has a small dent and your neighbor tripped over those stairs and sued you for it, this doesn't mean that you're not allowed to fix those stairs now. It's more of a "why leave that problem out and invite more trouble" sort of thing, and courts recognize it.

After all, whether or not they pull the game won't help them in court anyway.

So... can we declare worst company of 2014 yet? Let's give poor EA a break for a year and give the crown to a new "King".

dyre:
Not to support King, but:
It's been awhile since I took Business Law, but if I recall correctly, removing/resolving/fixing the object of contention explicitly cannot treated as an admission of guilt in a court of law. For example, if one of your porch stairs has a small dent and your neighbor tripped over those stairs and sued you for it, this doesn't mean that you're not allowed to fix those stairs now. It's more of a "why leave that problem out and invite more trouble" sort of thing, and courts recognize it.

After all, whether or not they pull the game won't help them in court anyway.

To be totally fair, this isn't the same thing as the whole point of the claim is to make them admit to copying games.

This is more like, the neighbor tripped over your dented porch stair, then you fixed it and said "I don't have a dent in my porch stair, what are you talking about. Also, only I can own den-- I mean, porch stairs. Get wrecked."

Exactly like that.

Word for word.

In court.

... I'm going to bed.

Ferisar:

dyre:
Not to support King, but:
It's been awhile since I took Business Law, but if I recall correctly, removing/resolving/fixing the object of contention explicitly cannot treated as an admission of guilt in a court of law. For example, if one of your porch stairs has a small dent and your neighbor tripped over those stairs and sued you for it, this doesn't mean that you're not allowed to fix those stairs now. It's more of a "why leave that problem out and invite more trouble" sort of thing, and courts recognize it.

After all, whether or not they pull the game won't help them in court anyway.

To be totally fair, this isn't the same thing as the whole point of the claim is to make them admit to copying games.

This is more like, the neighbor tripped over your dented porch stair, then you fixed it and said "I don't have a dent in my porch stair, what are you talking about. Also, only I can own den-- I mean, porch stairs. Get wrecked."

Exactly like that.

Word for word.

In court.

... I'm going to bed.

I guess King could argue that "we didn't know that game was an obvious copy of your game, but now that you've enlightened us, of course we'll take it down! And of course we naturally expect people to do the same for our cease-and-desist letters!"

But yeah it's not looking good for them. But I think it's more bad PR than an actual civil "crime,"

dyre:

Ferisar:

dyre:
[spoiler]Not to support King, but:
It's been awhile since I took Business Law, but if I recall correctly, removing/resolving/fixing the object of contention explicitly cannot treated as an admission of guilt in a court of law. For example, if one of your porch stairs has a small dent and your neighbor tripped over those stairs and sued you for it, this doesn't mean that you're not allowed to fix those stairs now. It's more of a "why leave that problem out and invite more trouble" sort of thing, and courts recognize it.

After all, whether or not they pull the game won't help them in court anyway.

To be totally fair, this isn't the same thing as the whole point of the claim is to make them admit to copying games.

This is more like, the neighbor tripped over your dented porch stair, then you fixed it and said "I don't have a dent in my porch stair, what are you talking about. Also, only I can own den-- I mean, porch stairs. Get wrecked."

Exactly like that.

Word for word.

In court.

... I'm going to bed.[/spoiler]

I guess King could argue that "we didn't know that game was an obvious copy of your game, but now that you've enlightened us, of course we'll take it down! And of course we naturally expect people to do the same for our cease-and-desist letters!"

But yeah it's not looking good for them. But I think it's more bad PR than an actual civil "crime,"

Whilst it's rare for anything to come if these instances they still violated IP law and seemed to have used actual assets. The can't really plead ignorant either as the third party they hired to do the work as essentially ratted them out. Nothing more will probably come of this than them having to take the stolen content down and maybe apologise but it is still an example of how IP law and copywrites can be hijacked and bent to suit a large bully companies will. Kings dubious trademarks coupled with their aggressive plagiarism marks them out as a company the industry needs to ostrticize and combat. They will certainly struggle more to find people willing to do business with them as a publisher.

PR is more powerful than a small civil settlement.

Well, I hope King enjoys having all it's dirty laundry dug up and aired in public, they have called the thunder down upon their own heads, and in their hubris they continue to taunt the storm clouds.

Most likely nothing really incriminating will be discovered, but it will still be amusing to watch.

dyre:

But yeah it's not looking good for them. But I think it's more bad PR than an actual civil "crime,"

Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice.

Oh, this keeps getting better and better. Way to make asses out of yourself.

It's like the Zynga style of business and the Don Mattrick school of PR have merged and evolved into a terrible new form called King.

pac-avoid, pac-avoid..... see the art and name smack of something I could swear I've heard of before, pac-something? I don't know i'm sure it will come to me but i'm fairly certain this was an original idea they have every right to be offended by the accusation of making game clones. I mean there most popular billion dollar game candy crush is unlike anything we've ever seen before.

You can't hide your shame King, the Internet knows, and it will never forget.

You're only making yourself look worse, but hey, keep it up, give us more reasons to hate you.

EDIT:

dragongit:
So... can we declare worst company of 2014 yet? Let's give poor EA a break for a year and give the crown to a new "King".

EA does not deserve a break, only hellfire and damnation, scorn and ridicule.

To quote the great Tom Lehrer:

"Plagiarize!
Let no one else's work evade your eyes!
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes...
So, don't shade your eyes... just
Plagiarize! Plagiarize! Plagiarize...
Only be sure to always call it, please, 'research'..."

I hope Banner Saga's creators kick King's ass in court. I hope King ends up liable for court costs and a trademark nullification for their shenanigans.

Anybody who plays a lot of mobile games will tell you that there are a pile of "me too" titles out there. Original ideas are very, very rare, and being first with one of them is no guarantee that you'll be the one to find success with it. What makes King look bad in this instance isn't the cloning itself, it's that it rushed the job specifically to beat the original creator to the market. That's just sleazy. If King was to own that sleaze - say it was a young company, desperate to get a leg up, bad decisions were made, etc. - then I'd be inclined to forgive and move on. But as is usually the case (and you'd think companies would have picked up on this by now), the more it tries to sweep it under the rug, the worse it makes things for itself.

dragongit:
So... can we declare worst company of 2014 yet? Let's give poor EA a break for a year and give the crown to a new "King".

You never know, EA might buy King out in order to get a hold of those incredibly vague trademarks and secure the coveted Triple Poo.

Hang on... So the "bejeweled with a different name" company has a "no-cloned-games" policy? SERIOUSLY? This company with their BS policies and trademarks are starting to sound more and more like Zynga.

So since i deleted anyhing to do with king from my phone once this started i started to look at other people. While i do my daily ride to and form work on the bus that takes 1 hour every day, a lot of people do things while waiting. reading books, playing mobile games ect (i personally like audiobooks the most during that time). so i decided to look at who is playing king games. I dont think their audience is going to care about any of this. and im not saying it in a good way.

Andy Chalk:
Anybody who plays a lot of mobile games will tell you that there are a pile of "me too" titles out there. Original ideas are very, very rare, and being first with one of them is no guarantee that you'll be the one to find success with it.

very true. For example there was a hill climg racing game, which was a great game and i still play it. after couple months there were 10 hill climb racing games and even other games having hill climb racing minigames inside them (Pou is one of the more popular names to do that). mobile market copies eachother ideas all the time.

Surely there are plenty of games that use the word "saga" ready to wreck King in court? I hope that is how the legal system works.

Anyway...King is yet another parasitic, unoriginal, plagiarising, money-grubbing bastard company in the mobile and small game space. And if there is justice in the universe it will go the way of Zynga.

And by the way, there is a very, very small difference between cloning and the majority of what King does, and I see them as despicable for the latter as much as for the former.

I find the mobile gaming scene extremely ugly and unappealing. We constantly see companies like King re-skin other popular games, claim to have invented a genre and then aggressively start squatting on a bunch of ideas like a giant ape flinging it's own poo at passers by.

It's undignified and keeps some in the indie scene (although they have started to develop some of the same problems) away from the mobile space as their games are prone to being cloned, not just figuratively but literally. Companies regularly steal whole chunks of assets from certain games. It's almost standard practice.

I think part of the issue is these companies are not gaming companies. They are purely money houses. Their smash and grab approach to the mobile market is very harmful, to others and to their own long term prospects.

Wait, wasn't Candy Crush Saga itself just a clone of Bejeweled? I could be mistaken, but if not that's a pretty big elephant in the room.

Um isn't Candy Crush a clone of Bejeweled?

But don't color me surprise if king and his company go to number 1 worst company of the year.

But gamers being a fickle bunch who knows...
"grabs some Doritos"

MeChaNiZ3D:
Surely there are plenty of games that use the word "saga" ready to wreck King in court? I hope that is how the legal system works.

Oh... there's one in particular I can think of who could fit the bill of a studio with games that use the word Saga that could absolutely ruin King in court, and I'm sure they could appreciate the good PR right about now.


Nuff said

Orks da best:
Um isn't Candy Crush a clone of Bejeweled?

But don't color me surprise if king and his company go to number 1 worst company of the year.

But gamers being a fickle bunch who knows...
"grabs some Doritos"

In which Bejeweled is a clone of Columns, which was made by Sega.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here