Techdirt. Stories about "hasbro"

My Little Pony Fan Game Shut Down By Hasbro Over Trademark

Timothy Geigner — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:02:00 PST

If you have spent thirty minutes in the past year surfing the internet for anything revolving around memes, you know what bronies are. They're a rather passionate adult fanbase for My Little Pony and they love to create stuff to express their fandom. We previously covered (surprisingly) that Hasbro appeared to be a company that embraced this fanbase, realizing that all the additional attention and exposure would only serve them.

Well, reader PonyRock alerts us to news that Hasbro hasn't completely come over to the light side of the force, having recently shut down a fan-made MLP game. For their part, the makers of the game appear to bend over backwards in professing understanding of Hasbro's position, even after spending a year and a half developing their game.

Hasbro is not to be blamed here. As per U.S. Trademark law, as soon as an infringement comes to light, they are obligated to defend the trademark, or they will lose it. They had no choice in the matter, regardless of what they thought of the project or how it benefited them.

As I said, very gracious, if perhaps a bit incorrect. Hasbro likely did indeed have other options beyond a strict takedown of the game, which is now lost to everyone. If they had wished instead to continue to embrace their rabid fanbase, I would imagine they could have issued a zero dollar or low-cost license to the developers, allowing the game to go forward and potentially benefiting from even more exposure. Instead, the nuclear option was chosen, resulting in the game disappearing and exposure of the takedown instead of the game.

Despite the developers being more than fair to Hasbro regarding the takedown, the comments on the article are rather negative towards the company. I almost wonder if all the bending over backwards towards Hasbro might not be part of a strategy to get the company to reconsider and go the route described above. It'd surely be the better route. Going nuclear gains nobody anything.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Hasbro Offers Nerf Blogger Free Samples, Sends Lawyers And Investigators Instead

Leigh Beadon — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:03:00 PDT

We've praised Hasbro in the past for embracing and supporting the fan culture that surrounds the My Little Pony cartoon, but we've also pointed out that they aren't always so accommodating. This story, unfortunately, falls into the latter category. Callum points us to a rather disturbing tale from the operator of an Australian blog about Nerf, another Hasbro product, who got quite a shock out of what he thought was a friendly gesture by the company.

It started wonderfully: he was contacted by a Hasbro product manager who was asking for his mailing address so she could send him some free samples of a rare-in-Australia Nerf gun to offer as a promotional giveaway on the blog. He gave it to her, and soon after got something in the mail from Hasbro: a legal nastygram.

Not the nastiest of nastygrams, sure—in fact he makes a point of saying how polite it was. Which is why he decided to comply with its request that he take down some photos of an unreleased Nerf gun from the blog, which Hasbro claimed were copyrighted and confidential. The letter also asked him to tell them where he got the images, and he responded explaining that he's not sure where they came from because he gets photos sent to him constantly—and also reminded them that journalists and their sources have certain protections under Australian law. They emailed back and said they wanted to talk more on the phone; he responded saying the matter seemed to be resolved and he couldn't see any point in talking further. In the mean time, he got another email from another product manager confirming that they were sending him free samples! He was understandably confused, and then things got genuinely nasty:

Flash forward to today- I forgot all about this for a bit and didn't reply to the latest letter from the lawyers. Then I get stories from neighbours that some strange woman and some burly, repo-looking type is hanging around my apartment block. How creepy is that?

Sadly they weren't here to give me free stuff. Turns out they're from Hasbro's lawyers!!! I told them the same stuff all over again and tried to explain that I got a bunch of stuff from ebay and taobao – of course they haven't heard of taobao and seem to want me to do their job for them.

Yup. They sent people to his house to investigate and intimidate him. All while at the same time trying to court him with free stuff from another arm of the organization. At first, naturally, he wondered if the offer of free samples was a ruse to track him down, but Hasbro's lawyers roundly denied that and as the story began to gain traction, Hasbro released a statement on the Nerf Facebook page:

We appreciate the opportunity to provide the following statement concerning Hasbro’s investigation into “leaked” IP information regarding its NERF brand products. As with anything, there are two sides to every story. While we cannot comment on the details of any ongoing investigation, Hasbro takes all circumstances of its stolen and leaked IP very seriously and will continue to investigate sources of unauthorized information and products as it relates to its brands. We would like to clarify one of the inaccuracies that has been reported. While a local Hasbro Australia marketing team did reach out to the Urban Taggers website to engage in promotional activity for which it required its address, it was completely unrelated to the confidential global investigation being conducted on Hasbro’s behalf by independent investigators looking into sources of leaked IP information. Hasbro greatly values and appreciates its fan communities and is very proud of its strong relationships with many bloggers and sites that cover our brands and products.

I'm inclined to believe them—but that doesn't make their behavior all that much less shameful. This is a problem a lot of big companies have: their legal departments and their marketing departments are completely disconnected, so one is out there encouraging activity that the other is trying to squash. It's why you get nonsense like Viacom suing YouTube over videos they uploaded themselves. This may have just been a coincidence with really horrible timing, but at the end of the day it's no way to treat a customer—much less a super-customer who promotes your products to others.

Oh, and he never got his free Nerf guns.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Brands Slowly Learning Not To Freak Out When Someone Creates A Parody?

Mike Masnick — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:57:32 PDT

A whole bunch of you have been submitting the recent story from Variety, that picks up on the silly takedown of Peanutweeter, and notes that at least some brands have realized that it's good to embrace such parody accounts even if they're technically infringing. The "surprise" company that has really embraced this kind of thing is Hasbro, with its support of the "bronies" -- adult men who (ironically?) use My Little Pony footage to remix it with other content, such as Wu Tang Clan songs. And it's a surprise (though not mentioned in the article), because Hasbro has a pretty well-documented history of going after parodies.

That said, much of the rest of the article isn't particularly encouraging. Yes, Hasbro appears to allow and support some of the brony remixes, but still feels that it can and should step in when it sees what it doesn't like. Other brands still feel the need to stop any of this kind of activity.

Amusingly, the article's discussion on fair use suggests (incorrectly) that YouTube's new "Copyright School" helps explain the nuances of fair use:

YouTube in particular has tried to enlighten its users to the nuances of fair use. The Google-owned site introduced a tutorial on the subject in April, as well as a "copyright school" -- a video series that educates users who have been flagged for copyright violations, followed by a quiz they're required to pass in order to be reinstated.

Except, that's not the case at all. YouTube's copyright school was criticized widely for brushing aside fair use and leaving out the nuance entirely. In fact, that's why there was an entire contest by Public Knowledge to create a second video that explains fair use to go with YouTube's original misleading video.

Either way, while it's nice to see Hasbro realize that not all parodies are evil, and that it's even good to support some cases of parody, it's a bit unfortunate that the overall prevailing view still seems to be that these kinds of things should either be shut down or possibly tolerated, rather than embraced as an important element of culture.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Hasbro Sends Sharron Angle Cease & Desist For Monopoly-Like Game Board On Website

Mike Masnick — Tue, 2 Nov 2010 13:47:24 PDT

It does seem odd that Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle (who apparently has a half-decent chance of winning) keeps running into intellectual property issues. Angle, of course, was the candidate who promised to sue Harry Reid, whose job she's trying to take, for copyright infringement, because his campaign reposted an older version of her website to suggest she was changing her positions. As far as I can tell, no such lawsuit was ever actually filed. However, Angle got into some infringement hot water herself when Righthaven sued her for copying a LVRJ article on her website. Now we can add Hasbro to the list. Hasbro, the notoriously overprotective game maker, is threatening Angle because she put up a fake gameboard for a game which attacks Reid. Apparently, the boardgame looks too much like Monopoly for Hasbro's tastes. Apparently, Hasbro wants to make sure it keeps its monopoly on Monopoly... If Angle actually wins, it would be nice if she then used her new job to help fix problematic intellectual property laws that get in the way of free speech, but seeing as she seemed willing (at least in talking) to use the laws herself in the same manner, I doubt we'll see anything productive from her on this topic.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Hasbro Lawyers Threatening Parody 'Get Out Of... Free' Cards, Which They Previously Allowed...

Mike Masnick — Wed, 4 Mar 2009 12:22:00 PST

Mike C. writes "Hasbro is at it again. I've been a reader of Randy Cassignham's This is True for several years now. Among other things, he offers a "Get Out of Hell Free" card - a parody of the Monopoly Get Out of Jail Free card. Back in 2000, he received a cease & desist (postage due!) and after some discussion, altered the card to include a "not endorsed by Hasbro" line. At that time, they decided not to pursue the matter any further. Fast forward to 2009 and they "recently became aware that you are offering for sale "Last Chance - Get Out of Hell Free" cards and stickers on your website." Wait, recently?? I guess times are tough for the Hasbro lawyers and they're looking to drum up some more business. Randy has been kind enough to post the full story to his website starting with the original action in 2000 and ending with the 2009 cease and desist."

It seems pretty clear that Hasbro's lawyers have a bit too much free time on their hands (perhaps now that they're done killing off interest in online Scrabble). You would think, at some point, management at Hasbro would recognize that sending their lawyers off on such wild goose chases not only increases the legal bill, but also does tremendous damage to the Hasbro brand.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

How Hasbro And Mattel Killed Interest In Online Scrabble

Mike Masnick — Wed, 7 Jan 2009 12:20:17 PST

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.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Hasbro Finally Drops Scrabulous Suit

Mike Masnick — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:39:58 PST

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?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Looks Like Someone Learned From The Scrabulous/Hasbro Mess

Mike Masnick — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:14:00 PDT

We've talked about how both Hasbro and Mattel seriously screwed up in dealing with Scrabulous, the online version of Scrabble written by two brothers in India and placed in Facebook where it became a huge hit. While the companies did make overtures to working with the brothers, eventually they sued to shut down the game, pissing off plenty of legitimate fans, leading to widespread boycotts of Hasbro and Mattel games, and allowing the brothers to create their own new game that has also won fantastic reviews.

It appears that not every game company is so short-sighted. Reader Doug Schneider writes in to let us know about a guy who created a virtual copy of the popular casual game Bejewled inside the virtual world World of Warcraft. Yet, rather than shut the guy down or threaten to sue him, the makers of Bejewled, Popcap Games, hired the guy to create an official version for World of Warcraft, saying that the original version lacked polish, so they figured it made sense to just hire him to clean it up and make an official version. What a concept.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

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

Mike Masnick — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 03:05:01 PDT

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.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Hasbro Sues Scrabulous For Making Scrabble Popular Again

Mike Masnick — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 13:49:00 PDT

For months, Hasbro and Mattel had been threatening the makers of Scrabulous with a lawsuit for daring to do what the gaming companies had been unwilling to do: make a fun version of Scrabble available on Facebook in a way that got many people playing the game on a regular basis. It took nearly 9 months, but Hasbro finally put a version of Scrabble on Facebook itself, and now that it's up has finally officially filed the lawsuit.

It's rather telling that Hasbro waited until its own version was online to file the lawsuit. What the company is basically admitting is that Scrabulous was a great promotional vehicle for Scrabble (otherwise why leave it up?), but now that Hasbro is competing with Scrabulous online, it wants to cut out that competition. Hasbro's General Counsel is being quite misleading in saying: "Hasbro has an obligation to act appropriately against infringement of our intellectual properties." That's not quite true. There is no "obligation" to sue someone who made your game popular again just because you were late to the game.

Scrabulous showed Hasbro that there was a huge market for their game. There was no indication that Hasbro had any interest in Scrabble for Facebook prior to Scrabulous' success.

Then there's this bizarre quote from Hasbro's GM of digital initiatives: "Hasbro has always had the same two priorities. One is to offer a great playing authentic game for fans and the second is to protect our intellectual property. This was theft of I.P., plain and simple." Really? Your second biggest priority is to protect your IP? Then why did you wait all this time to sue? Clearly there was a benefit in leaving Scrabulous up while your own version was being developed. Clearly the comparison to "theft" is incorrect. No one would let "theft" go on for months on end before suing, just so they could create their own competitive offering.

The Scrabulous/Hasbro situation is a perfect example of Matt Mason's thesis that "piracy" is almost never about "theft." It's almost always a market indicator that the market is unhappy with what's being offered. It's the market showing companies what they want.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

The Way To Beat Scrabulous Is Not With Lawsuits Or Crappy Versions Of Scrabble

Mike Masnick — Mon, 7 Apr 2008 16:21:00 PDT

In the ongoing saga of Scrabulous, the unauthorized online version of Scrabble that has found many fans on Facebook but has upset Mattel and Hasbro (who own the rights to Scrabble), it appears that RealNetworks and Mattel have finally put out an official version of Scrabble for Facebook -- but the problem is that it's terrible. As the NY Times reports, "Facebook Scrabble takes a long time to load, does not always quickly update to show recent moves, and the words the game will accept do not reflect standard Scrabble dictionaries, or even the English language." While it's nice to see that Scrabulous still hasn't been forced offline, it seems odd that the authorized version is so terrible. It still probably would have made the most sense to just do a deal with the brothers who created Scrabulous (and there are still rumors that a deal has been discussed, but without a decent resolution), but if that doesn't work, the way to compete is with a better product. Putting out a product that's not very good isn't likely to win over many fans.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

How Could A Game That Has Made Scrabble Popular Again Be A 'Bad Precedent' For Mattel?

Mike Masnick — Mon, 3 Mar 2008 06:34:00 PST

Back in January, we explored the news that both Hasbro and Mattel (who own the rights to the board game Scrabble in different regions) were upset and threatening to sue about the incredibly popular knockoff version Scrabulous on Facebook. As we pointed out at the time, shutting down the game would quickly piss off 2.3 million Scrabble fans -- many of whom were interested in the game for the first time, most likely leading to real sales of the board game. While the situation still has not been resolved (and Scrabulous remains online), the New York Times has the latest details that suggest that Real Networks is negotiating with Scrabulous' creators. Since Real has a deal to produce an online version of Scrabble (the article first says the deal is with Hasbro, and later says it's with Mattel, so it's not clear who the deal is with), perhaps this will all be worked out for the best. However, the article does mention that executives from Mattel are against the idea of settling with the creators of Scrabulous, fearing that it "would set a bad precedent."

That's lawyers speaking, not marketers. How could a fun online game that has rejuvenated interest in what was seen as a rather dull board game among many folks today, be considered a "bad precedent?" How could having millions of new fans of your game and treating them right, rather than depriving them of what they want be considered a "bad precedent?" Some may answer that the "bad precedent" would be that it would encourage others to create similar knockoffs of other Mattel games, but, again, if they drove as much interest in the originals as Scrabulous did, isn't that a good thing? Some may claim that it would deprive Mattel the opportunity to license the games for lots of money, but again looking at Scrabble as an example, the bigger fear for Mattel should have been the fact that many people didn't care about the game at all. By letting random people create the games for it, it can quickly determine which games work well online and then work with the creators of those games to put an official stamp on it. The Agarwalla brothers created this game at no cost to Mattel, who otherwise would have spent a ton of money to create it after which it might not have caught on in the same way Scrabulous did. This way the game has been created, tested and even built up an audience at no cost to Mattel. Shouldn't they consider that to be a good thing?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Hasbro Sues Scrabulous For Being Too Scrabble-ish

Dennis Yang — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:13:24 PST

It was only a matter of time before super-popular office productivity killer, Scrabulous, was sued by Hasbro for infringing upon the Scrabble trademark. A shutdown notice was sent two weeks ago, although, as of right now, Scrabulous is still operational (hurry up and finish up your games). Founded in 2006 as a standalone website by two Indian brothers, Rajat and Jayant Agarwalla, Scrabulous' growth accelerated significantly when it launched as an application for Facebook. As the 9th most popular application on Facebook, Scrabulous boasts over 2.3 million active users with over 500,000 of them active daily. While Hasbro does indeed have a strong legal case against the Agarwalla brothers, they are missing out on a key opportunity by pursuing this litigious route. Although Hasbro recently licensed the digital rights of its games to EA, no online version of Scrabble exists right now. So, by shutting down Scrabulous, Hasbro would be angering 2.3 million of Scrabble's biggest fans. Instead, why not hammer out a compromise and turn this into a win-win-win situation? Unfortunately, most likely, history will repeat itself, as this is not the first time Hasbro has chosen this route -- in 2005, they shut down popular online Scrabble site, e-scrabble.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story