[BarCraft] Has been removed from StarCraft II - Page 3

On June 16 2013 10:11 Daumen wrote:
Was actually the best map available on the Arcade.

On June 16 2013 00:50 R1CH wrote:

The map was pretty much 100% Bang! mechanics with name changes.

On June 16 2013 10:21 iyasq8 wrote:
arent game ideas ok to copy? u know, like tetris?

On June 16 2013 07:52 Nerski wrote:
Maybe in the future if you don't want to have your work go to waste, you do this new hip thing all the kids are doing. You sit down with your team and you come up with your own idea from scratch, and build that into a product. If that's to much investment in time for you then quit bothering to make things.

On June 16 2013 12:59 Xapti wrote:

Game ideas are OK to copy ex. Starcraft, Dune, Street Fighter, Virtua Fighter, Modern warfare, Battlefield, etc.
That said, Tetris is specifically not a copyrighted (or at least originally wasn't copyrighted) game that was in public domain (something about the Soviet government owning it or or something, I can't remember and don't really care), so it's not a good example. The name Tetris can indeed be used for a brick laying arcade puzzle game (unless someone does own a claim on it now or something), but for instance using Starcraft characters by name in an RTS would be IP infringement.

No. That's ridiculous. No one in the game industry is suing anyone over making FPS (or racing, or fighting) games, and there's hundreds out there (many very similar ones). The fact that a game is similar to another has virtually no claim that I know of for a copyright case.
Unique and innovative/original games are nice, but they shouldn't be the only games made.

On June 15 2013 17:35 MonkSEA wrote:


Let me just copy Magic the Gathering while just modifying the names and artwork. See the copyright there? I'm presuming Barcraft was very similar to Bang! in the same way as the aforementioned scenario. Card copyright is pretty fiddly but not all Tower Defense games are the same and not every dictionary based game is the same.

On June 16 2013 13:50 DonKey_ wrote:


Ya.... Hex the MMO TCG game actually went and did that.. They haven't been sued. In fact they funded their MTG clone with Kickstarter as well.

On June 16 2013 15:28 felisconcolori wrote:
Of course, IANAL, etc, etc, but you only have to google a little bit to find out how much the DMCA can get abused, and how much it sucks.

On June 16 2013 14:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:

Except it's not an exact copy. There are several similar mechanics, yes (some which are almost blatantly copied), but there are still some differing rules, the cards are not 1:1 copies, etc.

On June 16 2013 13:15 Nerski wrote:
The idea of a card game isn't what's in question...what was brought into questions was did the game in fact 100% copy an existing card game. According to what was posted it did, which is a lot different then suing over making an FPS game.

You wouldn't see Valve sue Activision over COD, because while they are both an FPS they are not the same past that fact.

In this case it's not just that he made a card game mod, he 100% copied an existing card game and just re skinned it.

What he did would be the equivalent to me re skinning CS:GO with SC2 skins and names and calling it my own game and trying to give it away. Which is worlds different then the example you gave.

On June 16 2013 04:36 Xapti wrote:
How does it seem that way?
Their demands are absurd and baseless.

I don't think you can claim copyright infringement just because a game is similar to another. It's pretty damn clear-cut AFAIK. Blizzard is an experienced and rich (full of legal staff) organization that should know this.
I don't know what exactly they're worried about. As far as I understand, if litigation was to occur, at least in Italy (and possibly in USA) the winning side will have all their legal fees paid for by the loosing side. Since Blizzard should know that they couldn't lose a case, there's no reason why they should back down, since the Creators of Bang! will only be shooting themselves in the foot since they'll be losing not only their own legal fees worth of funds, but also their opponent's.

Maybe my view is incorrect/skewed, but from what I've seen and heard, I don't see how there's any legitimacy to their demand or a case, and I would certainly like to hear an explanation of otherwise.

On June 16 2013 18:45 Xapti wrote:
I think over the years there have been some pretty serious copies of games: breakout, pacman, space invaders, Doom/Wolfenstien, Diablo, Bejewled, DotA (i.e. DotA2/LoL/HoN/BAS/others),Guitar hero/DDR, Puzzle Bobble/Bust-A-move, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pac-Man_clones
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_clone

I'm glad Bejeweled came to my head. Bejewled is a prime example here. Blizzard themselves made Starjeweled and ripped off bejeweled entirely. All they did was add-in SC2 units fighting each other to it, but kept the Bejeweled part identical.

While I personally don't know how similar Bang! is to Barcraft, I can only assume there are minor, or even significant changes/additions such as new cards or balance changes. I'd say that's all that's necessary to completely throw out any copyright — if any changes are even necessary at all aside from the fact it's a different form of media, not for commercial gain, and not using any artwork/names.

I'm pretty sure people have essentially done this in gaming history and have gotten away with it (at least for non-commercial games such as this case). In your example SC2 skins and names couldn't be used though, because that'd be infringing on Blizzard IP, but if the skins were unique then no issue.

On June 16 2013 18:48 bluQ wrote:
Bejeweled is completly different to Starjeweled.

Most of the games you list are games which are mant to be a clone but have either the approval from the copyright owner or their whole goal was to rip-off a game but NOT interfere with any copyrighted stuff...