King.com tries to explain they are not really looking to crush the competition but rather make sure they are protected. Over the last couple days stories have come out about the maker of the famous Candy Crush Saga game trademarking the word “Candy” for video games and clothing, and they are also looking to trademark the word “Saga”.
King made a statement about the Saga situation,
King has not and is not trying to stop Banner Saga from using its name. We do not have any concerns that Banner Saga is trying build on our brand or our content. However, like any prudent company, we need to take all appropriate steps to protect our IP, both now and in the future.
In this case, that means preserving our ability to enforce our rights in cases where other developers may try to use the Saga mark in a way which infringes our IP rights and causes player confusion. If we had not opposed Banner Saga’s trade mark application, it would be much easier for real copy cats to argue that their use of “Saga” was legitimate. This is an important issue for King because we already have a series of games where “Saga” is key to the brand which our players associate with a King game; Candy Crush Saga, Bubble Witch Saga, Pet Rescue Saga, Farm Heroes Saga and so on. All of these titles have already faced substantive trademark and copyright issues with clones.
Read Write covered the story and explained that King.com might be in a “Use it or lose it” type situation.
From the article:
King’s explanation might sound silly at first when you consider how Banner Saga and Candy Crush Saga are simply using a word that already exists in the dictionary (“saga”). But there’s some legitimacy to King’s legal parrying: With trademarks, if you don’t use them, you stand to lose them.
Trademark law says companies’ rights to marks must be maintained through actual lawful use of the trademark, and if it’s not used or enforced in cases of infringement, the owner could be removed from the register on the grounds of “non-use.” Owners like King aren’t required to always take action against all infringement cases if it’s proven to be “minor” or “inconsequential,” but generally trademark owners are compelled to defend their marks, especially when others in the same industry are attempting to capitalize on their popularity.
It is worth noting that King.com makes roughly $700,000 a day and is worth billions according to Read Write, they are also highly dependent on Candy Crush Saga so they are pulling out all the stops to keep their company at the top of the market.
The other thing that keeps getting overlooked in all these articles written is that they mark is open for opposition in the U.S. and possibly enough app developers could object and prevent it from becoming a registered trademark.
Has anyone called Hasbro, the makers of Candy Land ? They don’t have an app but they do have several video game titles based on their famous board game.
Candy Land and Candy are mutually exclusive of each other in my book – no matter how used
That’s not the point Brian, the same could be made for Candy Crush Saga, they are trying to get the Trademark for Candy in video games and clothing, my point is Candy Land would have as much right to try to go after the TM for Candy in video games.
King said:
> “If we had not opposed Banner Saga’s trade
> mark application, it would be much easier for
> real copy cats…”
How ironic. King creates an app that duplicates the old ‘Match 3’ formula of gameplay and then sees no problem in calling other people “copy cats”.
I guess they don’t just copy formulas, keep your unreleased games under the radar also. =/ http://junkyardsam.com/kingcopied/#
“Candy Land would have as much right to try to go after the TM for Candy in video games.”
Candy Land is distinct not only by its name but by the type and style of its game – but in having those indisputable rights something with just CANDY or LAND that is not like Candy Land is perfectly fine.
You and I could come up with a game that looks and feels like Monopoly and Life and call it “Mr Spanking” and still be infringing on those types and style of games.
These TM’s are complete bullshit.
It would be one thing if they actually were only trying to “protect” their mark for the actual video games they have. its quite another thing when they try to claim exclusivity for the word “Candy” in areas they have absolutely no standing in whatsoever. I posted the entire list on the original post… but examples such as underwear, eyeglasses, cell phone cases, & computer connectors are all not something King even traffics in, let alone have any precedence in. That is what makes this so egregiously over broad. What is most troubling is that the USPTO seems to be actually going along with it, now THAT is scary.
@ richard
What a coincidence… (I guess it’s just so obvious)… In the article they used the same “It’s ironic” phrasing to describe King’s actions that I used in my post above.
As to comparing the two games, I find the original Scamperghost art direction much more attractive than what King.com ended up with in Pac-Avoid.
King even went as far as using the word ‘Pac’ in their title… and yet they want to protect their own names. That’s just really arrogant and disgusting on their part.
All of these actions will eventually come back to bite King.com. Right now they’re making huge gains and got lucky and won the ‘app lottery’ with Candy Crush. But long term they’re already doing a good job of garnering bad press and alienating developers in the process.
App buyers can be very fickle since there are so many apps and app developers out there. Just because King is doing well now doesn’t mean that will always be the case, as plenty of (formerly) big game companies in the past have proven.
I don’t understand the uproar. Isn’t “Apple” a trademark covering a series of classes that include computer hardware, software etc.?
It’s all about use. Check out Apple.gr – in business since 1998.
The problem with generics is that they are more susceptible to broader use. They also don’t rank that well as opposed to brands.
People are pissed off at tech companies coming along, and taking generic words that have been used since forever, and saying well nobody can make a game and call it CANDY… wtf is that, something is wrong with the system, Joe Public is not completely stupid, you are going to close off all innovation like this.
This will be challenged, and I think they will be given a very limited use, or waived off, I checked NON DOMAIN threads, and people are really annoyed by this, and patent trolling, those days are coming to a forefront.