Ok, I''ve been checking out some of the games and I''ll post a complete review of each eventually. Here is what I''ve found: 1. Some games are very close to clones (Macman). I had to go to a friend''s house to see it, but it''s close. 2. Some look like they used the original game for the gameplay idea very closely, but art etc. is very much improved, so much that they can''t qualify as clones. Only clones in game rules. Should they be called ''semi'' clones? But definately not clones. 3. Some look like they only used the original as a loose inspiration. Gameplay and the whole game is very improved, and there are many new gameplay rules and new things. Sometimes a character is obviously based on the original character, but much improved and original art for them. Can the idea of a spaceship or ghost in a maze be copyrighted? The characters are obviously completely re-designed, but we still have spaceships and ghosts. I guess I don''t see the need for exact clones, unless of course they were made at a time when they were the FIRST one on the Mac. So if Macman was the only way Mac users could get pacman for the past 10 years, I say Mac users deserve to be able to play this great game. If however, there are 100 Pac Man clones for the Mac, that''s just a waste of programming effort. On the other hand, I guess if people learn to program by making these simple games, then it''s not a wasted effort, but a useful educational exercise. Now you would think Hasbro wouldn''t pick on ''freeware'' games, but in the case of Tetris, that''s not true. A student can make a JAVA tetris game for educational purposes, but god have mercy on his soul if he posts it as an applet on his student web page! :-( In this case Hasbro is definately going too far. And here lies the problem: I think someone touched on this earlier. The original Pac Man, Tetris, Asteroids, etc. games are SO DAMN SIMPLE that if you re-make it completely, you can capture every element of it in your remake. How can you improve eating dots in a maze? Well, it looks like one of the 3D Pac Man games did a good job of adding all kinds of new stuff like areas on the floor that you have to jump over or die, escalator like floors, jumping over stuff, all kinds of stuff. Still, they got sued probably because of the yellow ball. Actually, the new yellow ball looks nothing like the old yellow circle, one is 2D the new one is 3D and has eyes and different characteristics. Is a yellow round thing copyrightable? That''s a tough call, because it seems the rest of that game is so completely different I''m surprised to see it in the games list. Oh yes, some of the Tetris games are dangerously close to ''clones'', some are not. Why these games in the list and not the hundreds/thousands of others out there? How does Hasbro pick them? I''ve heard of JAVA Tetris games getting cease and desist letters from Hasbro, and there other commercial CLONES that are not in this lawsuit. How can that be? This whole matter is very unsettling because it almost seems as if any retro game is in some kind of ''random'' danger of being sued at any time.