Current Insight Community Cases

Essential Datacenter Tips On Application Performance Monitoring

The Importance Of Skilled Immigrants To The American Economy

Help A New Kind of Music Label Revolutionize The Industry

Mandates To Buy American Should Be More Carefully Considered

Navigating The New Business World After This Recession

Shut Us Up

-- For Only $100 Million

Brought to you by Floor64 and the Techdirt crew.

stories filed under: "legal issues"
Failures

Failures

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
business issues, legal issues, scrabulous, wordscraper

Companies:
facebook, hasbro, mattel



How Hasbro And Mattel Killed Interest In Online Scrabble

from the nice-work,-guys dept

We've been chronicling just how badly both Hasbro and Mattel screwed up in responding to the massive success of Scrabulous on Facebook. The ridiculously popular application was attracting over 500,000 users every day and (amazingly) making Scrabble cool again, pumping up sales of the physical board game. But, of course, the intellectual property lawyers freaked out and said "this must stop." The resulting legal threats and lawsuits created quite a lot of backlash and anger (and a boycott of Hasbro games). Venturebeat is now looking at the aftermath, and shows that the fight effectively killed all momentum for Scrabble on Facebook. Part of the problem may be that the game is now fragmented, with a Hasbro version serving some countries, a Mattel version serving others and the Scrabulous makers' "modified" Wordscraper on the market as well. The end result is that each has significantly fewer users than Scrabulous had. In fact, the monthly number of users pales in comparison to the daily number of users that Scrabulous had. Great way to kill a wonderful (free) promotion that was attracting thousands of new fans to the game.

25 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
business issues, legal issues, scrabulous, wordscraper

Companies:
hasbro



Hasbro Finally Drops Scrabulous Suit

from the how'd-that-work-out? dept

It's difficult to see how Hasbro could have handled the Scrabulous situation any worse. Scrabulous, of course, was a Scrabble-like game made for Facebook, which quickly became one of the most popular apps on that social networking site. Hasbro, which owns the rights to Scrabble in the US, didn't have its own version, and rather than recognize an opportunity, it chose to shoot itself in the foot, suing the brothers who created it. The Scrabulous guys eventually came back with a slightly modified game, which became quite popular as well, while many angry Facebook fans organized boycotts of Hasbro products. Prior to that, of course, the attention brought about by Scrabulous had resulted in a renaissance for the game, leading many people to go out and buy physical Scrabble sets. Yes, Hasbro took a situation that was driving more sales of the board game, and turned it into one where thousands of people were boycotting its products.

Either way, it appears that Hasbro has now dropped the lawsuit over Scrabulous, saying that the changes made to the game makes the lawsuit no longer necessary. Still, it seems like Hasbro played this game backwards. Back when Scrabulous was popular, almost everyone I knew on Facebook had a few games going -- but since Hasbro got involved, it seems people have moved on. So, even if Hasbro "won" the legal victory, they pretty much killed their real opportunity to capitalize on renewed interest in the board game. The company says that the new versions put together by the Agarwalla brothers "provides people in the U.S. and Canada with a choice of different games." Sure, it does, but wouldn't Hasbro have been better off by capitalizing on the fact that all of their interests were aligned initially -- rather than competing -- and Scrabulous was driving more sales?

17 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Failures

Failures

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
business issues, legal issues, scrabulous, wordscraper

Companies:
facebook, hasbro



Hasbro's Nightmare: Scrabulous Returns With New Name And (A Few) New Rules

from the bad-business-decision. dept

Well, you kind of had to see this one coming. Days after taking Scrabulous down in response to the lawsuit from Hasbro, the brothers behind the game have put up a new game called "WordScraper" that is similar, but has a few different rules as well. The idea, obviously is to be different enough to get around the lawsuit from Hasbro.

When you look this over, you begin to realize just how badly Hasbro screwed up in handling this situation. In focusing on a legal solution, it may have created the worst case scenario for the business side of the company.

When we talk about various trademark and copyright disputes, one response we often get is that a company has to react that way to "protect" its "property." This is not quite accurate. While there are some issues concerning trademark and preventing a trademark from going generic, there are almost always better business responses than suing -- and on copyright issues, there's no requirement to protect. However, in an age where lawyers all too often make business decisions based on what can be done legally, rather than what makes the most business sense, those options are all too rarely considered. In the past, there was often little that could be done for those impacted by such decisions. These days, however, things are quite different. Pissing off a large group of people, even if you have the legal right to do so, can often be a disastrous business move.

This is clearly demonstrated by Hasbro. The saga began earlier this year when Hasbro realized that Scrabulous was ridiculously popular on Facebook. Scrabulous was developed by two brothers who liked the game Scrabble and noticed that it couldn't be played online. Hasbro had done little to help put the game online, and the brothers were merely doing a much better job responding to the market need than the company that supposedly "owned" the rights.

Hasbro finally put together its own version (which got terrible reviews) and then sued Scrabulous, getting the brothers to take the game down. And, historically, that's where all this would end. Hasbro was legally in the right and had every right to push to block Scrabulous. But, as a business decision (as counterintuitive as it may seem), this reaction may be quite bad for business.

First, witness the rather loud and nearly immediate response from many Scrabulous fans, slamming Hasbro for its actions and pushing a boycott on all Hasbro products. Some will surely claim that many of these folks would probably never buy a Hasbro product in the first place and so this is a lot of noise about nothing. However, don't underestimate the reputational hit that Hasbro will take for this -- especially among younger folks who may be Hasbro's most important target audience. As Metallica is still in the process of learning, your reputation is extremely important, and damaging it by treating your fans incorrectly can do an awful lot more damage to your brand than you might expect.

Now, add in the fact that the Scrabulous guys have come back with Wordscraper, and chances are people are going to flock to it, just as vehemently as they now want to avoid Hasbro's Scrabble. That's about the worst case scenario for Hasbro, and it was entirely avoidable if they had simply realized how people would react to their decisions (which wasn't hard to guess from earlier responses prior to the lawsuit).

Update: Some folks in the comments (and via email) are pointing out the rumor that Hasbro offered to buy out Scrabulous from its creators. That's a valid point, but it doesn't really change the rest of the calculus here at all. Even given the fact that Hasbro made an effort at buying them out, that still doesn't mean that (having failed that) suing them was the proper second response -- as evidence by exactly what's happened since then.

77 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
copyright, embedding, fair use, legal issues, linking

Companies:
fomd, movierumor, mpaa



Is Embedding Infringement? MPAA Sues Two Sites

from the we-may-find-out dept

While we still need to wait for the end result of the YouTube/Viacom case to learn whether hosting infringing videos is infringement itself, there's another open question about whether or not linking to or embedding infringing videos is also infringing. It seems difficult to understand how it could be infringing, as it's no different than pointing someone to freely available content (and, technically, linking and embedding are no different at all -- it's just some HTML). The person (or computer) doing the linking or embedding has no idea whether the content being linked or embedded is infringing -- and it seems reasonable to believe that if it's available online, there's nothing wrong with linking to it.

Yet, here we have the MPAA suing two sites that both link to and embed various movies. The two sites in question, FOMD (Found Online Movie Database) and MovieRumor, don't host the movies themselves. They merely point people to various movies that are publicly available online. It would seem like a rather drastic stretch of copyright law to claim that is also infringement, but don't be too surprised at how this will be argued. The MPAA will play on emotional, rather than rational, arguments -- and it may actually work, given some similar cases in the past.

34 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
(Mis)Uses of Technology

(Mis)Uses of Technology

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
copyright, embedding, fair use, legal issues

Companies:
associated press



We Can't Quote The AP... But Can Embed Its Videos?

from the left-hand,-meet-the-right-hand dept

The Associated Press is still insisting that bloggers shouldn't be excerpting its articles online without a license -- but apparently no one told the folks pushing AP videos. Jon Ashley wonders about this difference, noting that the AP has its own YouTube Channel, where it appears that the videos all have embedding enabled. This, of course, takes us right back to the question we asked last week concerning whether or not embedding videos can be seen as infringement. In the meantime, since the AP insists it really wants to be a part of the "conversation," can it explain why embedding videos is great, while quoting is not?

7 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
copyright, des moines register, embedding, legal issues



Blog Receives Takedown Notice For Embedding A Video With Authorized Embed Code

from the keep-the-lawyers-busy dept

A year and a half ago, I wondered outloud if embedding an infringing video would be considered infringement as well. Technically, it's no different than just linking to infringing content. However, imagine an even more ridiculous scenario: what if a website puts up its own videos with an embed code, but then sends out takedown notices to anyone who embeds it? Russ writes in to let us know that's exactly what happened with an Iowa sports blog that was trying to raise awareness of the floods in Iowa (a good thing) and embedded a video from the website of the Des Moines Register using the very embed code offered by the Des Moines Register. So what happens? The Des Moines Register sends a takedown notice claiming copyright infringement. After complaining about this on the blog, and getting some attention over it, someone from the Register apologized and said that it was an overeager staffer who was unfamiliar with the fact that videos on the site included embed codes.

While it's great that the Des Moines Register quickly recognized its mistake, apologized and promised to make sure it wouldn't happen again, it still does raise some questions that are almost certain to show up in the future. It's still not clear if a site is responsible for embedding infringing videos. But what if the video's copyright holder doesn't like how a video is being used? What if, for example (and this is not what happened in this case) a site had used that same video of the Iowa floods to mock the victims? I would imagine that it would be tempting in that case to send out the takedown notice, even though the embed code had been offered up. We're almost certainly going to see this happen in the near future. Someone who puts up a video with an embed code is going to be unhappy with how that content is being used, and will claim infringement, even though the content was freely offered up.

The copyright implications of embedding are not at all clear -- and that means you can be sure that lawsuits are on their way.

21 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Search Techdirt
And now, a word from our Sponsors..



Popular Posts
Poll

Which Internet Concern Worries You The Most?

 

 

 

 

 

 


Add Techdirt RSS To Your Reader
rss Add Techdirt to your Bloglines
Add Techdirt to your Google Add Techdirt to your My Yahoo
Add Techdirt to your Netvibes Add Techdirt to your Newsgator
Subscribe to Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Older Stuff

Friday

5:46am: Canadian Ebook Store Offers 'Free' Public Domain Ebooks -- Claims Copyright Says You Can Only Make 1 Copy (25)
4:01am: There Are Lots Of Ways To Fund Journalism (14)
1:49am: Winner Takes All, Long Tails And The Fractilization Of Culture (10)

Thursday

10:37pm: The Lobbyists' Ability To Control The Message (29)
8:11pm: In Going Free, London Evening Standard Doubles Circulation While Slashing Costs (26)
6:10pm: Senate Exploring Med School Profs Putting Names On Ghostwritten Journal Articles In Favor Of Drugs (22)
4:52pm: What Does It Say When A Comedy Show Does More Fact Checking Than News Programs? (56)
3:33pm: Nordic Music Week: Optimism Galore And Found Songs (11)
2:10pm: Would Top Sites Really Opt-Out Of Google Based On A Microsoft Bribe? (37)
12:57pm: Intel Lawyers Again Go Too Far In Trademark Bullying (23)
11:43am: Mandelson Wants Gov't To Have Sweeping Powers To Protect Copyright Holders (40)
10:47am: Once Again, Walmart Stops People From Printing Family Photos Due To Copyright Law Claims (42)
9:39am: Essayist Writes Popular Essay... Then Sends 'Non-Negotiable' Invoice To Church Who Posts It Online (59)
8:23am: ASCAP, BMI And SESAC Continue To Screw Over Most Songwriters: 'Write A Hit Song If You Want Money' (78)
7:07am: Kicking People Off The Internet Not Enough In South Korea, Copyright Lobbyists Demand More (26)
5:33am: Are The Record Labels Using Bluebeat's Bogus Copyright Defense To Avoid Having To Give Copyrights Back To Artists? (42)
3:53am: Larry Magid Calls For News Tax To Fund Failing Newspapers (29)
1:35am: Judge Says 'There's An Ad For That...' And It's Ok For Now (14)

Wednesday

11:01pm: Oh Look, Some Police Do Know How To Use Craigslist As A Tool (8)
8:43pm: Netherlands The Latest To Propose Mileage Tax That Requires GPS For Tracking Driving (30)
6:40pm: Spain Says Broadband Is A Basic Right (12)
4:22pm: Entertainment Industry Wants More People To Know About OpenBitTorrent Tracker (25)
3:00pm: It's The TSA, Not CSI: Actions Limited To Security, Not Crime Investigation (25)
1:49pm: The More Innovative You Are, The More You Get Sued; Yet Another Patent Lawsuit Over Shazam (7)
12:36pm: Oh No! Nobody Reads! Oh No! It's Too Cheap For Everyone To Read! (18)
11:15am: We See Your 'Copyright Contributes $1.5 Trillion' And Raise You 'Fair Use Contributes $2.2 Trillion' (17)
9:55am: Cable Industry Joins MPAA In Asking FCC To Allow Them To Stop Your DVR From Recording Movies (45)
8:44am: Sony Pictures Having Its Best Box Office Year Ever... Still Blaming Piracy For Killing The Business (38)
7:30am: Jenzabar Finds 'Expert Witness' Who Will Claim Google Relies On Metatags, Despite Google Saying It Does Not (38)
5:52am: China Says Microsoft Violates IP With Windows, Bars Sales (26)
More arrow
Quick Links
Close
E-mail It