Suppose I wanted to practise using some of my newfound skills, and I decided to make a variant of the all-time classic beginner''s game Tetris. Would I be allowed to distribute it amongst people, via the internet? After all, Alexey Pajitnov has the copyrights to it. I don''t expect him knocking on my door, but how legal is it to make a clone of his (or anyone else''s) game, and then distribute it, even if you don''t charge anything or make any money off it?

Copyright isn''t about having the right to make money from copies of things; it''s about having the right to make copies, full stop. Usually, the copyright holder will then make money by selling copies of the original item, but making money has nothing to do with it. It''s all about who has the right to make copies. If you make an illegal copy of something, you can be sued wether or not you made any money.

As for making a variant of Tetris, what you''ll be copyig there is somebody else''s game design, which itself is also copyrighted.

Stick with checkers or card games that are in the public domain.

Roo, Pantheon Software]

I''m definitely not an expert on the subject... But I read somewhere that the name ''tetris'' is copyrighted, but the game idea is not. There have been many shareware and distributed Tetris-like games. I think you can make a tetris clone, but you can''t call it tetris, or something similar.

So if you make a "Bab Paap''s falling stones" game that looks like Tetris, you should be okay.

Now, I do want to say that I could be completely wrong, so if I am, don''t hold me too accountable =)



~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Vogel
~~~~~~~~~~~

I heard somewhere they copyrighted using the syllable "tris" in a game''s name (so people don''t leech off their popularity). Then again, I''m probably wrong as usual.

Be careful with Tetris (and Asteroids, and Pong, etc.) The rights to a lot of old classics were bought a few years ago by Hasbro. You definetly don''t want to be targeted by those guys - they are very sue-happy. Just ask Xtreme Games LLC - as far as I know, they are still involved in a legal battle with Hasbro.

-Mike

As for Tetris, just don''t call it Tetris or refer to it in any way and you will be fine.
As for Hasbro, I still think they are jerks for trying to extend copyright to try and protect the ideas of "their" games. I should be able to make a game based on the same type of gameplay as Asteroids but instead call it something else, and I shoul be able to improve upon their ideas without worrying about legal issues and repurcussions. That is what copyright was made for. It isn''t to protect the copyright holder.
As found on http://open-spaces.com/article-v2n1-loren.php

The primary purpose of copyright is not, as many people believe, to protect authors against those who would steal the fruits of their labor.


The core purpose of copyright law is not difficult to find; it is stated expressly in the Constitution. Article I, section 8, clause 8 of the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall have the power: "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."



The entire page is a good read to understand, and a quick search on Google wouldn''t hurt either.

So as for Hasbro limiting my abilities to improve on something or create my own somewhat derivative work, I think they need to be curtailed.

quote: by securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries

Call me strange, but isn't game design, including the way the code is written, part of "Writings and Discoveries" when well, the code is written. Its like redoing the X-Men comic with all the same stories and characters but changing the names and calling it your own. You just can't do that.

Hasbro suing people for making profits off of games that they rightfully own the copyright of is perfectly legal and suitable. If someone wants to make money, you've gotta come up with some original ideas of your own and market it right.

[edited by - zer0wolf on August 5, 2002 1:04:09 PM]

As long as you create the game from scratch, do not call your game "Tetris" or any variant, and give it a different look/feel, you should be okay.

I''m basically making assumptions here, but what should be copyrighted/trademarked are:
1) the specific machine code, i.e. program, for the game;
2) any game-specific character images (in this case, there are none because the game uses common geometric shapes and a basic interface design);
3) any game-specific character names (again, a non-issue in this case);
4) the game name itself ("Tetris") as a company mark/brand
5) any storyline/background/history that is an original creation related to the game (also irrelevant).

With any game, avoid cloning/copying the above and you should be well in the clear. There are exceptions, of course, but it''s a simple formula that should do you well.

Hey, folks! I might as well share what I know about this.

First of all, copyright protects a work, not an idea. Ideas cannot be copyrighted. Nobody may own an idea, just as nobody may own the letter P or the number 13.

Copyright protects the finished product as a single package. In essence, it protects only the presentation. Any hack may legally take the general plot of A Tale of Two Cities, create new characters, set the action in Tanzania, and publish the resulting mess.

Pac-Man is copyrighted. It is illegal to use the artwork from that game, or to create another game called Pac-Man. But the idea of Pac-Man cannot be copyrighted. Anyone can create and sell a critter-scurries-through-maze-while-pursued-by-four-enemies-but-may-eat-enemies-under-special-circumstances game.

But you may not create a game that looks exactly like Pac-Man. Your game may not be called Pac-Man. Your mazes may not be identical to those in Pac-Man.

There is, however a special rule about creating derivative works. This is hopelessly complicated (which only means I didn''t finish reading about it.) :D Basically, it means you can''t use artwork from the game to create your own. And you can''t reverse-engineer copyrighted software, tweak the code a bit, and call it your own.

Concerning Tetris, anyone may create (and even sell -- big money there) a Tetris clone. But if your game is called Tetris, or anything else with a "-tris" in it, you may be successfully sued for copyright infringement.

And I don''t think Alexey Pajitnov owns the copyright for Tetris. From what I understand, his work became government property, and he received virtually no compensation for it.

To summarize: Yes, it is perfectly acceptable to create your own clone games. And no, ideas cannot be copyrighted.

Midway may own characters like Subzero and Jax. But can you image what would happen if a company could own the very concept of the Tournament Fighter? There would be no Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Tekken, Dead or Alive, King of Fighters, Virtua Fighter, or Soul Calibur. In a way, each of these games is decended from Karateka.

If ideas could be copyrighted, the game industry would suffer. Hey, Karateka was a great game for its time. But it''s just not Soul Calibur. :O

Jonathon

quote: "Mathematics are one of the fundamentaries of educationalizing our youths." -George W. Bush

"When a nation is filled with strife, then do patriots flourish." - Lao Tzu

quote: Original post by Jonathon
Hey, folks! I might as well share what I know about this.

First of all, copyright protects a work, not an idea. Ideas cannot be copyrighted. Nobody may own an idea, just as nobody may own the letter P or the number 13.

snip

To summarize: Yes, it is perfectly acceptable to create your own clone games. And no, ideas cannot be copyrighted.

No, but some ideas can be patented which is not far from ownership. Not that any company is likely to patent their game.

"A method for simulating the destruction of coloured squares via geometric relationships"