I've been reading alot about copyrights lately but haven't really found the answer I was looking for. I developed a new game concept and was wondering if it is possible to copyright this. I'm not interested in copyrighting the game 'description' or the game code (graphics, etc), it is a new concept about a completely new kind of multiplayer game - nothing in the concept is borrowed from other games. As far as I've read about it, it seems that it is not possible to copyright this. Which means that if I bring out this game, someone else can steal the concept to make a similar kind of game (and makes tons of money with a better team, skills, marketing etc.). Is this so? (I recall the story of tetris, the inventor never got any money out of but lots of others did...)

Not copyright, no.

Given the state of the patent system, however, you could probably patent the game idea. Heck, you could probably patent tetris.

A game concept cannot be copyrighted. However the line between copying a concept and copying a product is such a grey area that it isn't an exact science to where one starts and the other ends. Let's say you make a racing game based in Boston and call it Boston Racer. You map the city, all the landmarks and create a track you race within the city limits. You put a few neat car models in the game and design your own engine to make a terrific racing game. So far so good. However as soon as it hits the market you get sued by another company who made Boston Rally, which is also a racing game in the city of Boston. Now any programmer knows that these are 2 entirely different games with entirely different engines but a court of law will most likely compare screenshots, conclude that they look the same and then rule in favour of the guys that sued you.

Sounds ridiculous? It happened to a developer we worked with. A judge doesn't know anything about games and you're particularly doomed if you get a female judge (no offense but women are more prone to look at pictures. A man will ask what's under the hood if he buys a car while a woman will more likely buy one because it looks nice). In the U.S. there are the famous Hasbro vs. the ret of the world lawsuits where they wanted to enforce copyrights on Pac man and Tetris. Hasbro lost that one but it could easily have gone the other way.

Quote:Original post by Xing Interactive
However as soon as it hits the market you get sued by another company who made Boston Rally, which is also a racing game in the city of Boston.

And they have no case. Any decent lawyer will get this thrown out. Heck, a paralegal probably could. Assuming you really didn't use any of the art/code/etc from that other game.

It seems its different in US and in Europe (where I live)...in Europe they seem to assume you have intellectual copyright over your game concept, and a patent is not possible or even necessary (see for example http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/consultations/responses/comsoft/atof/corbet.htm). In the US, there's examples of patents on game concepts. For example at actiongaming.com they say "First, we are going to give a priority to gaming concepts in which a patent has been applied for. "
http://www.actiongaming.com/newinvention/index.asp

seems like the patent/copyright for game concepts is reversed in US compared to Europe...I'm confused!

You can copy right the characters in the game, the name of the game (and of your company), you can patent the game code. I'm too tired (*just* woke up) to remember how this works, but much of the game design is considered your "intellectual property" - which is an advantage you have over Hasbro because Hasbro didn't *create* Pac-Man...they just owned it legally. Look into intellectual properpty laws, they're nothing to be scoffed at.

They work for books and comic book publications anyway =)

Ultimately if anyone ever tries to steal your game, you can just show up in court with the source code and show it off. Not much can be done to disprove that.