Comments on: Scrabbling for Legal Rationalism: No Copyright for Games

By: Unit Structures – Wendy Seltzer on Scrabulous’ Legal Standing

Unit Structures – Wendy Seltzer on Scrabulous’ Legal Standing — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:18:28 +0000

[...] Today’s recommended post comes from Wendy Seltzer, law professor and fellow at the Berkman Center. In it, Wendy spends some time analyzing the intellectual property aspects of games. With the release of the official Scrabble Facebook application, and numerous C&D’s sent to Scrabulous’ creators, why does Scrabulous remain online? Seltzer states: “Scrabulous remains online, probably because the threats’ legal merits are murky: there are few rights to “a game” as such.” [...]

By: Wendy’s Blog: Legal Tags » Follow the Lead-Users, Not with Cease-and-Desists

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:34:04 +0000

[...] not it has the legal right, I think Hasbro’s lawyers gave the company bad business advice. As I’ve said before, I believe Hasbro has no copyright claim, but might have (easily avoidable) trademark claims based [...]

By: Our Scrabulous Affair « Andy on the Road

Our Scrabulous Affair « Andy on the Road — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:45:24 +0000

[...] guru Wendy Seltzer broke down the issue at stake in her blog post here, from way back in April. As she says, at the heart of this issue is the issue of how intellectual [...]

By: ZippyDSMlee

ZippyDSMlee — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 03:51:08 +0000

While alil off subject have you looked into game mechanic patents.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080309-patents-on-video-game-mechanics-may-strangle-innovation.html

As a gamer(incoherent game nazi to others) this scares the sht out of me its like locking up the themes of a story and saying you can not do that without paying us first, I know characters are protected I even know code is protected to a point but creating a “fake’a'like” setting thats vaguely familiar to something else and then trying to put a lock on that theme/style/mechanic is quite silly IMO, creative media needs its fodder for creation without it starts eating itself inside out *points to hollywod or EA…or MS….*.

By: Scrabble & copyright-Wendy Seltzer « FACT - Freedom Against Censorship Thailand

Tue, 15 Apr 2008 05:48:07 +0000

[...] Scrabbling for Legal Rationalism: No Copyright for Games Wendy Seltzer: April 8, [...]

By: Craig Torey

Craig Torey — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 01:36:45 +0000

It seems Mattel didn’t file a lawsuit but decided to join in the competition. Good analysis.

Knowing your legal and consumer rights is the best defense.

By: Links: 2008-04-12 « ideas Revolutionary

Links: 2008-04-12 « ideas Revolutionary — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 07:24:56 +0000

[...] Scrabulous - Scrabbling for Legal Rationalism: No Copyright for Games - a nice legal analysis [...]

By: FreieNetze.de » Links für den 9.04.2008

FreieNetze.de » Links für den 9.04.2008 — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:57:57 +0000

[...] Wendy Seltzer - Scrabbling for Legal Rationalism: No Copyright for Games [...]

By: Don Marti

Don Marti — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 18:28:46 +0000

Can Hasbro have a trademark in the distinctive look of the board, with its placement of double or triple scoring squares?

Leatherman claimed that “trade dress” applied to its tool design, but it looks like a tool’s function is not covered by trademark law. (Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. v. Cooper Industries, Inc.) But you could still play a clone game if the double and triple squares were in different places. You just wouldn’t be able to compare scores directly with players of the original trademarked game.

By: phik » set the wayback machine to 2005

phik » set the wayback machine to 2005 — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:02:30 +0000

[...] Wendy Seltzer’s “No Copyright for Games” today took me back to those days. Not exactly the same issues, but I feel for the Scrabulous [...]