Talk to a trademark attorney. I assume you already thought of that, but seriously, it's your safest route. Trademark laws are very confusing. I used one to trademark Daredevil Dave (big plans for him in the near future). I can recommend one who is familiar with the game industry via pm. Anyone can search the trademark website too. Again, I assume you know this, but just stating it for anyone else. A quick search reveals many "With Friends" marks, and they do not all belong to Zynga. However Zynga DID file for the phrase "With Friends", as you will see on the list. See for yourself (I had to type "with friends" in quotes because the search function didn't seem to like the word "with"). Trademark Search (US) http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=tess&state=4010dakbh.1.1 HANGING WITH FRIENDS LIFE IS BETTER WITH FRIENDS GAMES WITH FRIENDS WITH FRIENDS DEAL WITH FRIENDS LIFE IS BETTER WITH FRIENDS An article about Zynga trying to TM "With Friends". Not sure if it went through yet, if not, hurry up and use it! http://fusible.com/2011/07/zynga-files-trademark-for-with-friends-with-the-us-patent-and-trademark-office/ You'd better find out for sure, I don't think it will.
The issue with trademark law is there is ambiguity with respect to what constitutes infringement. You should consult a trademark lawyer, but some high level comments to get you started - you can be considered to be infringing on a trademark when there is "the potential for the consumer to be confused" with respect to the product or service. This creates a lot of ambiguity around when you may or may not be infringing, and you could easily be infringing without knowing. - you can search for registered trademarks in the US here http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp - registered trademarks are mostly only valid within the categories for which they are registered, though well known marks could still claim infringement across categories - you can still be considered to be infringing a trademark even if it is not registered when it has been asserted and used as a trademark by the "owner", but it is harder for the claimant to action/prove/defend. - erring on the side of caution is usually the best way to go with respect to naming your games. Avoid names similar to or including names/references to toys, board games, celebrities, TV shows, movies, old games, and current games. Do trademarks and Google searches when exploring names for your game. - parody names can be okay in clear circumstances, but you need to be careful around these too. - protect yourself by registering your trademarks in key territories and defending those marks. - you typically can't trademark something which is merely descriptive. The closer your name is to a pure description of what it is, the harder it is to trademark. Hope that helps.
Giants crowding out the small guys So now EA launched Monopoly Hotels and Zynga with Dream Heights, Glu with their spin on Tiny Tower, and more importantly, Dream Heights now has a 4.8 rating with 6181 5 star ratings. Wow. It kind of goes to show that the user doesn't really care does it? http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115847-Zynga-Bumps-Dream-Heights-Review-Score-People-Get-Mad?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitterfeed&utm_campaign=auto Ripping off game designs and repackaging them as your own is greasy as hell, but I'm not convinced that this "controversy" is anything more than a spot of manufactured publicity. Both sides are trying to turn the minefield of user reviews to their advantage, after all, and as long as the Zynga people are up-front about their affiliation, is it really a problem?
IF it is the case that those ratings are mostly from real users that like the product. I am not so sure anymore for apps from some of these big brand names. It seems like there is a rating inflation over the last year or so as apps have to get ever increasing ratings to get to the top ranking. The battle seems to be getting played in the ratings registered without reviews. If Botnets can be used to download, they can be used to register ratings also, no? I am also curious about your link that shows Zynga employee reviews and their affiliation. It doesn't seem to be from a single place but a composite from the AppStore and LinkedIn (notice the connection degree number) which someone else put together to expose them. Or is there a place where people can place reviews with their Linked In profile that I don't know of?
It looks like a composite, I myself am not aware of that other than some cut and paste job from the person who wrote the article. Looks like he just did a little bit of investigating and put the obvious two and two together. Still amazed, if the reviews are indeed all "fake" why is Zynga still allowed to be there or is this being selective?
of course apple is selective.. but why should there be no a couple thousand positive reviews for the game? i mean if you forget that its a copy and only take the game for what it offers.. its as fun as tiny towers.. the art style even more casual compatible my even attract more users to it than pixel art.. so since tiny towers was a great game.. why should a casual gamer who does not know where the idea originated from make a bad review about the game if its all he played? the core gameplay is still excellent.. one of the reasons they stole it in the first place?!.. so i highly doubt thoose are fake reviews.. no matter what skin it carries the core gameplay is fun.
Ok, granted, independent people may view the game as fun because the system is indeed fun, like an FPS at its core is a fun system (and with nicer graphics that is even better). I guess the whole "indie platform" of Apple is a myth? How do we get a chance at this when the big guys can do what they want and get away with it when the little guys are always going to be bullied?
Small teams can move faster than large corporate. Stay ahead of them through innovation and nimbleness.
I think the criticism is that Zynga shows that a corporation with a large developer team can clone the output of a small nimble company faster than they can create their own.
My point is Nimblebit is in a position to move faster with respect to bringing more improvements to the table.
I think you are missing the point. As any developer knows, it takes 10 times as much time to bring an original idea (new app or new features in an app) in a usable form to market (after all the false starts, refinements, usability testing, etc) than to copy a successful idea from someone else taking far less risk since it has been proven by someone else and you have a working design to copy. You are talking about a small company X bringing an original idea to market faster than a large company can bring their own original idea and you may have some justification for that. But this case isn't that. It is a large company being accused of ripping off the final output so they don't have to do their own thinking, false starts, refinements, usability testing etc (at least not as much as the one who did it originally) and so can create a clone very quickly not take longer because they are large. The latter only applies if both of them had to come up with their own original ideas and there you have a point. This particular case is different. As a small company you cannot hope to keep on introducing new innovative features to stay ahead if a larger company with bigger marketing clout is waiting to copy any good idea that comes out. Small has no advantage in this scenario.
I guarantee Zynga spent a ton more money and resource bringing Dream Heights to market than Nimblebit did with Tiny Tower. The question I was responding to was how can a small team compete with large corporates. My answer is "be nimble, because they can't be". Small devs can make decisions much faster than corporates can and they will always have that edge, even if they don't have the same resources.
I agree that greater money does not mean a great game, we have seen this example in games across all platforms. But the case of Zynga would appear to be that their mantra is to copy others and make it better in the process. Isn't that what Pincus basically said about not being first but being best? To the point of being nimble I agree that being nimble is our advantage but if you compete with an organization who is nimble, with more resources, and blatantly takes your idea and invests in it heavier? Nimblebit is not the winner here, just look at the Top Grossing charts, they are nr. 23 and Dream Heights is nr. 15. In only a few short weeks they are already making more revenue than Tiny Tower is. Monopoly Hotel is in position 21. Tiny Tower may have its fans but the new audience is picking Dream Heights and Monopoly to the detriment of the Indy.
How is Nimblebit not a (the) winner? They have been a top grossing app for a long time, have a large fan base to leverage, were the Apple Game of the Year, and continue to bring in daily revenues which far exceed their costs. Is Zynga eating some of their lunch? Sure. But Nimblebit has benefited both historically and currently by bringing an original title to market, and they will be able to continue to be successful based on that performance. If people want to throw up their hands and suggest the "small guy" can't compete against large corporates then fine. But the reality is there are plenty of small guys doing just fine by being fast, creative, and innovative. A quick scan of the App Store will prove that.
I agree with you that creativity is important but if you are saying it's too simple to run a business I think that would not be true. I may not agree with Zynga's method but to get to where they are (they too were small once) in as fast a period as they did running thousands of employees? That cannot be easier or simpler than making a game.
The Future will tell but my guess is that Nimblebit is on the path downwards (with Tiny Tower I mean) because of the competition in the same field. My point was that not only is Zynga eating some of their lunch, the intend to eat all of it. It's Walmart vs the grocery store next door. They may have been the first to sell fresh vegetables and can hold out but in due time cannot unless they become a certain size. I am not saying that indies throw their hand up but now that the market is big enough for large companies to take note the battle has just changed on us remarkably. Especially now that companies like Atari can take down indy apps and Zynga and EA can copy indy apps with impunity without fear of any kind of repercussion. Nimblebit will continue to make another great app and Apple seems to like them so they will get some feature space. But for the 99.99% less fortunate indies, our task just got a whole lot harder with the entry of the giants game companies and their blank cheque.
