Conquer Club

Hasbro is in the process of suing Scrabulous for their Scrabble knockoff. Obviously, all of the other maps aren't a trademark infringement, but it seems like it could be argued that the ability to play the classic map on this site could be argued as infringement. I'd never play any sort of computer version of RISK because this site is a great substitute. Has this sort of argument been addressed before, or discussed with a lawyer to ensure the right precautions are made? Seems like the little "we're not associated with" isn't enough, and the same thing that Scrabulous did.

retrocrush wrote:Hasbro is in the process of suing Scrabulous for their Scrabble knockoff. Obviously, all of the other maps aren't a trademark infringement, but it seems like it could be argued that the ability to play the classic map on this site could be argued as infringement. I'd never play any sort of computer version of RISK because this site is a great substitute. Has this sort of argument been addressed before, or discussed with a lawyer to ensure the right precautions are made? Seems like the little "we're not associated with" isn't enough, and the same thing that Scrabulous did.

Yes, I'm fairly sure they trademarked the gameplay of their game, besides. That's what makes Risk Risk, isn't it? So merely changing the appearance and name hardly seems legal. Perhaps someone should bring this to Hasbro's attention?

Ditocoaf wrote:

retrocrush wrote:Hasbro is in the process of suing Scrabulous for their Scrabble knockoff. Obviously, all of the other maps aren't a trademark infringement, but it seems like it could be argued that the ability to play the classic map on this site could be argued as infringement. I'd never play any sort of computer version of RISK because this site is a great substitute. Has this sort of argument been addressed before, or discussed with a lawyer to ensure the right precautions are made? Seems like the little "we're not associated with" isn't enough, and the same thing that Scrabulous did.

Yes, I'm fairly sure they trademarked the gameplay of their game, besides. That's what makes Risk Risk, isn't it? So merely changing the appearance and name hardly seems legal. Perhaps someone should bring this to Hasbro's attention?

It would never hold up in a court of law. Hasbro owns nothing of a sort. Nowhere does this say Risk anywhere on the site. Cased close.

Actually, a former mod was a lawyer (Scarus), and he said Hasbro would indeed have a case against CC.

Scrabulous was IDENTICAL to scrabble.
Conquer club isnt, even the classic map gameplay.

Can someone sue me if I create a new game with a deck of 52 cards? (bad example but still)

I call Blah and Whatever....I didn't know they were synonyms for meaningless ...

Bruceswar wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:

retrocrush wrote:Hasbro is in the process of suing Scrabulous for their Scrabble knockoff. Obviously, all of the other maps aren't a trademark infringement, but it seems like it could be argued that the ability to play the classic map on this site could be argued as infringement. I'd never play any sort of computer version of RISK because this site is a great substitute. Has this sort of argument been addressed before, or discussed with a lawyer to ensure the right precautions are made? Seems like the little "we're not associated with" isn't enough, and the same thing that Scrabulous did.

Yes, I'm fairly sure they trademarked the gameplay of their game, besides. That's what makes Risk Risk, isn't it? So merely changing the appearance and name hardly seems legal. Perhaps someone should bring this to Hasbro's attention?

It would never hold up in a court of law. Hasbro owns nothing of a sort. Nowhere does this say Risk anywhere on the site. Cased close.

Actually, it says RISK at the bottom of the homepage, but that's out of context and I see your point

Bruceswar wrote:
It would never hold up in a court of law. Hasbro owns nothing of a sort. Nowhere does this say Risk anywhere on the site. Cased close.

It doesn't have to. The name is the Trademark, the gameplay is the copyright.

Scrabulous doesn't say Scrabble anywhere on the site either.

Hasbro could argue that they sold the game rights to another company, so CC's online play infringes on the authorized rights. They resell that RISK brand like crazy to many other board game variants. Seems like it's a very real possibility that they come knocking with a cease/desist here someday.

Actually, from some other things I read, they could threaten, but really don't have too much of a case. You can't really protect a game, per se, apparently. Just the logo, image, board, and actual instructions. Since a Risk Map isn't really such a unique innovation, and maps of the world have existed long before, it'd be tough.

Not to say that they wouldn't be pricks. I read elsewhere that they went after college kids who were selling alternative Risk rules, but it was just a threat they couldn't back up.

retrocrush wrote:

Bruceswar wrote:
It would never hold up in a court of law. Hasbro owns nothing of a sort. Nowhere does this say Risk anywhere on the site. Cased close.

It doesn't have to. The name is the Trademark, the gameplay is the copyright.

Scrabulous doesn't say Scrabble anywhere on the site either.

Hasbro could argue that they sold the game rights to another company, so CC's online play infringes on the authorized rights. They resell that RISK brand like crazy to many other board game variants. Seems like it's a very real possibility that they come knocking with a cease/desist here someday.

Bah, remove or even slightly modify the classic map and problem solved.

Btw, electronic arts will do the license version of scrabble on facebook now.

retrocrush wrote:Actually, from some other things I read, they could threaten, but really don't have too much of a case. You can't really protect a game, per se, apparently. Just the logo, image, board, and actual instructions. Since a Risk Map isn't really such a unique innovation, and maps of the world have existed long before, it'd be tough.

Not to say that they wouldn't be pricks. I read elsewhere that they went after college kids who were selling alternative Risk rules, but it was just a threat they couldn't back up.

It's not the map that's the problem... it's the gameplay... rolling dice in this particular manner to move armies in this particular manner to take over the board. There's no denying that this game is basically Risk, with different graphics. And they have a copyright on the Risk game--as in the gameplay.

SlayerQC wrote:Btw, electronic arts will do the license version of scrabble on facebook now.

It's not the Classic Map that's the problem... it's the gameplay itself.

SlayerQC wrote:Scrabulous was IDENTICAL to scrabble.
Conquer club isnt, even the classic map gameplay.

Can someone sue me if I create a new game with a deck of 52 cards? (bad example but still)

You might want to look into the number of Monopoly type lawsuits before deciding.

However, offhand, I would say that this site likely interest people more in Risk than anything else. Also, since they have allowed other "Risk" copies on-line, they should have cracked down on them all.

But the bottom line ... if it starts to roll in dough, they will probably come knocking for their "share"

First off, Risk is a physical board game that you play on a table top or on the floor. You open the game box, flip open the board, and take out all those little men/horse/cannon plastic game pieces, whereas, CC is a virtual gaming environment with only numbers, not little plastic pieces. In addition, each CC map is of a different design, of which Risk/Hasbro do not in anyway own a copyright of. We can all make maps and play games on them and Hasbro can't say diddley squat.

Also, CC randomly places armies on the board for you, while in Risk, each player chooses where they place each of their starting pieces. Risk doesn't offer all the different features of which CC can provide, so therefore, CC is a different gaming environment all together. Try to play FOW on a Risk board...you just can't do it!

DaGip wrote:First off, Risk is a physical board game that you play on a table top or on the floor. You open the game box, flip open the board, and take out all those little men/horse/cannon plastic game pieces, whereas, CC is a virtual gaming environment with only numbers, not little plastic pieces. In addition, each CC map is of a different design, of which Risk/Hasbro do not in anyway own a copyright of. We can all make maps and play games on them and Hasbro can't say diddley squat.

Also, CC randomly places armies on the board for you, while in Risk, each player chooses where they place each of their starting pieces. Risk doesn't offer all the different features of which CC can provide, so therefore, CC is a different gaming environment all together. Try to play FOW on a Risk board...you just can't do it!

I get you for the non classic maps. To be fair, though, there is a currently available computer version of RISK that has random territory assignments as an option.

retrocrush wrote:

DaGip wrote:First off, Risk is a physical board game that you play on a table top or on the floor. You open the game box, flip open the board, and take out all those little men/horse/cannon plastic game pieces, whereas, CC is a virtual gaming environment with only numbers, not little plastic pieces. In addition, each CC map is of a different design, of which Risk/Hasbro do not in anyway own a copyright of. We can all make maps and play games on them and Hasbro can't say diddley squat.

Also, CC randomly places armies on the board for you, while in Risk, each player chooses where they place each of their starting pieces. Risk doesn't offer all the different features of which CC can provide, so therefore, CC is a different gaming environment all together. Try to play FOW on a Risk board...you just can't do it!

I get you for the non classic maps. To be fair, though, there is a currently available computer version of RISK that has random territory assignments as an option.

Well, there ya go! Lack should be suing the living daylights out of Hasbro for this infringement of ConquerClub copyrights! How DARE THEY!

Ah, as the posts thus far illustrates, there is plenty of factual matters to weigh on this issue. Enough to survive motions for summary judgment - if this site even had the dollars to stand up to that point. To put it simply, being sued in this context by someone like Hasbro would be really really bad for this site. And in fact, if it ever came to Hasbro's attention, it is most likely they would have to sue in order to protect their trademark.

There is a reason Coke sends around people to randomly order a "coke" at bars that don't distribute Coke, only Pepsi. It's because once the mark becomes ubiquitous, and beyond the control of the mark holder, the mark is lost. Even if Hasbro didn't care about this site, they would have an obligation to sue in order to protect their trademark. (That's assuming they claim the classic Risk game is their trademarked property). In the event the mark holder doesn't care, you get a friendly handshake license so everyone is happy. In this case, because of the market potential, etc. it is unlikely you could hope for that.

But the bottom line is that, having been around and built up a decent amount of content, Classic is actually this site's weakest link. I for one "never" play it. And frankly it should be taken down before it becomes a legal albatross.

There is also a "version of risk" on facebook and other sites such as landgrab have risk style games.

If Hasbro was overly concerned they would have done something long ago.

gdeangel wrote:But the bottom line is that, having been around and built up a decent amount of content, Classic is actually this site's weakest link. I for one "never" play it. And frankly it should be taken down before it becomes a legal albatross.

Agreed. Removal of the Classic map would solve the most egregious problem with copyright. I also agree with an earlier post (can't remember who) about the significant changes in gameplay:

* Fog of War
* Random placement
* No choice on how many armies to attack with
* MANY different boards
* Bombardment
* MANY different bonus types
* Team games
* Team deployment and fortification
* Medals
* Scoreboard

Sure there are similarities, but I like to think that this site has evolved and become something vastly different to Risk. I certainly did not get anything like the gaming experience with Risk as I do here. Risk is a social tabletop game, CC is a broad community-based game. And in summation, to quote from Deadwood... "Those who doubt me, suck cock by choice"

e_i_pi wrote:

gdeangel wrote:But the bottom line is that, having been around and built up a decent amount of content, Classic is actually this site's weakest link. I for one "never" play it. And frankly it should be taken down before it becomes a legal albatross.

Agreed. Removal of the Classic map would solve the most egregious problem with copyright. I also agree with an earlier post (can't remember who) about the significant changes in gameplay:

* Fog of War
* Random placement
* No choice on how many armies to attack with
* MANY different boards
* Bombardment
* MANY different bonus types
* Team games
* Team deployment and fortification
* Medals
* Scoreboard

Sure there are similarities, but I like to think that this site has evolved and become something vastly different to Risk. I certainly did not get anything like the gaming experience with Risk as I do here. Risk is a social tabletop game, CC is a broad community-based game. And in summation, to quote from Deadwood... "Those who doubt me, suck cock by choice"

I disagree - it extends far beyond Classic map, despite the fact the Classic map is *by far* the most played map on the site, totaling probably like 50% of the games played. Despite that...

-Fog of War is a gametype - if CC wanted to be unique, it would have to ONLY use FoW.
-Random placement existed in the board game RISK and was even mentioned in the instructions. It was said if you wanted to use random placement you should shuffle up all the cards and each player pick one, and they get that territory.
-Third point is insignificant to differentiate.
-The different boards don't detract from the point Classic is the main one used. For example you can plagiarize half a paper and it's still plagiarism.
-Bombardments is merely an offshoot on specific maps. That does not constitute being different.
-Different bonus also does not take away from the fact that many aren't different bonus types.
-You could have team games in normal risk.
-The ability to team deploy/fortify, although a very SHAKY excuse, I will let it pass.
-Medals are not part of ConquerClub and are for the profile, not the game itself.
-The scoreboard also is merely a ranking system used to show the leaderboards, completely irrelevant.

By the way, making things slightly different does NOT make it different in terms of legality. For example, the two following paragraphs, the first I found on the internet, the second I reworded. If it went to court, it WOULD be considered plagiarism.

The next time you visit your healthcare professional, you may want to ask about your levels of the sunshine vitamin: vitamin D. Over the past few years, a tremendous amount of information has been gathered in medical literature regarding the benefits of adequate vitamin D levels. Although this information is important for everyone, monitoring vitamin D levels is especially important for those with kidney or heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, loss of bone density, obesity or who are over the age of 65.

Next time you decide to visit your healthcare professional, you will want to ask about your levels of vitamin D: the sunshine vitamin. Over the last few years, a large amount of information has been accumulated in medical literature concerning the benefits of sufficient vitamin D levels. Although this information is important to each individual, monitoring vitamin D levels is most notably important for those with heart or kidney disease, diabetes, loss of bone density, high blood pressure, obesity or who are over the age of 65.

I'm pretty sure that's why they called it "Oceana" and not Australia.

The thing is, it doesn't matter if there are options that have different play style than Risk. In fact, the key elements of the game are intact in every map, with every option:

You own spaces, you have armies on those spaces, you attack spaces owned by other players, you roll (your armies-1 up to 3) dice while attacking, you roll (your armies up to 2) while defending, if you have the higher roll the other space loses armies, if you eliminate all armies from a space you capture it and move armies from your space onto it, etc, etc.

All of this added together makes a very specific game, which is trademarked by Harsbo. And they could sue, if this was brought to their attention.

Ditocoaf wrote:

SlayerQC wrote:Btw, electronic arts will do the license version of scrabble on facebook now.

It's not the Classic Map that's the problem... it's the gameplay itself.

Then any dice based game would have the same problem.... Eh.. I think not. I Know many dice based games where you use some sorta cards and are bonuses, but are nothing like risk. Are those bad as well?

Bruceswar wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:

SlayerQC wrote:Btw, electronic arts will do the license version of scrabble on facebook now.

It's not the Classic Map that's the problem... it's the gameplay itself.

Then any dice based game would have the same problem.... Eh.. I think not. I Know many dice based games where you use some sorta cards and are bonuses, but are nothing like risk. Are those bad as well?

It's the specific way that dice are used to conquer spaces from other players with #s of armies. That's basically what makes Risk Risk, and that's what they also hold a copyright on. See my above post (that you conveniently skipped).

Ditocoaf wrote:You own spaces, you have armies on those spaces, you attack spaces owned by other players, you roll (your armies-1 up to 3) dice while attacking, you roll (your armies up to 2) while defending, if you have the higher roll the other space loses armies, if you eliminate all armies from a space you capture it and move armies from your space onto it, etc, etc.

This is just part of the core gameplay that CC shares with Risk. While they may not have a copyright on "dice" or on "cards", all these things added together in this specific way is what they do own.

Before there were little plastic pieces there were little wooden cubes and 3 sided wooden pieces. I agree that if this place makes money someone is gonna want to have some of that territory.