However, there are cosmetic differences, particularly the titular Yeti playing the same role as Triple Town's bear, and Yeti Town being presented in 3D rather than the 2D presentation of Triple Town. Both games also have a marketplace with identical prices for analogous items, and similar language in their dialog boxes. As the player tries to combine objects and increase their score, the game creates challenges by placing new objects that clutter the game grid. When three identical objects are placed next to each other on the grid, they transform into another object, such as combining shrubs into a tree. They are both match-three games on a six-by-six grid. Wolfson determined that this created a likelihood that consumers would confuse Mino with Tetris, and held that Mino's trade dress was infringing.īoth games have similar gameplay. Where Mino's marketing used the same color and style of the pieces from Tetris, these details were distinct expression and not merely functional ideas in the public domain. Wolfson also examined at Mino's marketing materials to determine if they infringed the trade dress of Tetris. However, Wolfson found that Mino co-opted all of these elements, which had no development purpose "other than to avoid the difficult task of developing its own take on a known idea". With the expressive elements of Tetris under copyright protection, copying one of these elements would not necessarily prove there has been copyright infringement, in isolation. Wolfson also granted protection to the blocks changing in color when they land, and the game board filling up when the game is over. This includes the twenty-by-ten square game board, the display of randomized junk blocks at the start of the game, the display of a block's "shadow" where it will land, and the display of the next piece to fall. However, Wolfson determined that several aspects of Tetris qualify as unique expression that is protected by copyright. This case has since been applied in other copyright disputes to offer broader protection to the look and feel of video games.Īccording to Wolfson, copyright cannot protect the idea of vertically falling blocks, or a player rotating those blocks to form lines and earn points, or a player losing the game if those blocks accumulate at the top of the screen. Xio Interactive, Inc.Īlthough standard gameplay ideas are not copyrightable, Mino was still substantially similar to Tetris in terms of its art style, and those elements are in fact protected by copyright.
0 kommentar(er)
