Page 33 of 130 FirstFirst ... 2331323334354383 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 1296

Thread: Hex sued by MTG

  1. #321
    Quote Originally Posted by Ashenai View Post
    I'm not trolling, I'm just giving my opinion. I've been a Magic player for around 10 years now, and I'm a fan of a lot of other CCGs as well (Hearthstone, SolForge, Netrunner.) I'd have tried Hex as well, if it wasn't in closed beta.

    I think Hex is similar to Magic in a very obvious and profound way. I don't know of any two other card games that are as similar to each other. The similarities are huge, and they are everywhere. You could theoretically put any Magic card into your Hex deck (doing the obvious translations: the fact that I don't even have to mention how to translate a Magic card into a Hex card kind of illustrates my point) and it would work without a hitch. You couldn't do that with SolForge or Hearthstone. Try putting a Netrunner card into your Magic deck, see where that gets you.

    I'm sorry if this seems like trolling to you, but it's my honest opinion. I haven't posted on here before, because I saw little point in signing up to the forum of a game I can't play. But this lawsuit grabbed my interest.
    Is it me or did this person just made a new account just now so he could support the crappy mtg that noone would spend money on anyway

  2. #322
    I would completely ignore any post made here by newly created accounts. They are most likely Wizards employees trying to affect the community's opinion on the matter.

  3. #323
    Quote Originally Posted by Kami View Post
    Oh, did you also see how they made a comment about the physical size of the cards?

    Also it's interesting to note that one of our podcasters was outright mentioned in the lawsuit.

    But seriously speaking, knowing how bad the copyright/patent system is in the US, this could be problematic imo.
    Would the solution then lie in GameForge? move the "company" over to Germany? i'm thinking it is harder for a US company to sue a European company over US laws? if Hex was created based in "germany" (the CZE people can just stay in the US ofcourse, i mean its the age of side branches and home workers :P)

    GameForge might be able to make a bigger stand against Hasbro than CZE, perhaps this was also a reason to seek partnership with a large publisher.

    in any case, its a lame thing to do, i mean focus on your paper cards and let the Digital TCG over to companies that actually know how to build digital games :P...

  4. #324
    Quote Originally Posted by katkillad View Post
    Does it really look similar? They both have "cards", but even those are pretty different.

    Attachment 1824

    Attachment 1825
    In all honesty I see a load of buttons on the left of the mtg that are confusing also the board of mtg looks crappy made out of squares and their art seems way old like its from the eighties or nineties

    Hex has a nice board that is overseeable and has a nice look to it as well as the great art for their cards

  5. #325
    Am I the only person here that thinks Hasbro and WotC are well within their rights of defending their patent(s) in a case where they feel they are being infringed? That's the entire point of having patents and patent rights in the first place. I feel the issue lies elsewhere. The patent in question is so broad that I don't understand how it could have been granted in the first place. At first glance it seems that any card game that divides the card face into separate zones and involves physical manipulation of the cards to mark different states would be infringing large parts of it, which seems rather ridiculous to me. I'm also not sure that having a 20 year old patent about very generic card game designs and mechanism is a sensible thing to do, but that's how the law seems to work currently.

    There's a sensible thought behind the patent system, namely to make sure that people that spend money, time and effort in development of new ideas and products are granted a time frame in which they have exclusivity on that product to regain the costs of development before competitors can join the same market with significantly lower research costs. I'm not particularly opposed to this idea, but the past 3-4 decades have clearly shown that our old ideals of patents and copyright are often in conflict with the fast paced modern automated and digital world. Not enough effort has been put in keeping these laws in line with the values we put on things and ideas today, as illustrated with some of these patent cases, the concept of software patents as a whole and the entire entertainment industry vs piracy fight in all its ridiculously overblown glory at times.

    In its current state, Hex very much resembles a custom MtG set that makes some more use of the digital nature and with some mechanics renamed. It might and will set itself apart further as time goes on, but I'm not sure either of these things even matter in this particular case anyway.

  6. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by chromus View Post
    I would completely ignore any post made here by newly created accounts. They are most likely Wizards employees trying to affect the community's opinion on the matter.
    Don't be ridiculous. I'm just a guy who plays a lot of Magic (google ashenai magic if you want), and I heard about Hex being sued on a Magic message board. I made an account here because I remembered hearing about the Hex kickstarter, and I was curious what you guys thought of the issue. I can't imagine a Wizards employee would possibly care what you guys think of this. Obviously you guys are going to be on cryptozoic's side; you're invested in the game, both emotionally and financially. It only makes sense that you'd want what's best for Hex, and you wouldn't care what's best for Magic.

    I dunno anything about copyright/trademark law either, and I was hoping some of you might have some useful information. And some of you did! I feel like I learned a lot.
    Last edited by Ashenai; 05-15-2014 at 03:55 AM.

  7. #327
    Any copyright lawyers on here? AFAIK game mechanics cannot be copyrighted. Otherwise people could copyright things like "roll 6 sided dice". They can (and have) copyright terms like "tapping" but Hex isn't using that term. I'm still a bit worried but we will see.
    Contributor of the Hex TCG Wiki
    Pledges: Pro + 2x Collector + King

  8. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by KingxOfxThexVoid View Post
    In all honesty I see a load of buttons on the left of the mtg that are confusing also the board of mtg looks crappy made out of squares and their art seems way old like its from the eighties or nineties

    Hex has a nice board that is overseeable and has a nice look to it as well as the great art for their cards
    The lawsuit used the Duels of the Planswalkers interface as a comparison, which is alot more similar to Hex
    Cornerstone - For geriatric gamers

    HexMine.com - Premier card database site

  9. #329
    Rock League Champion
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    868
    cze should have been aware of this situation, i hope this was expected to happen
    - they hopefully have evaluated this case before, so... maybe they are prepared.

    an official statement from cze would be very welcome, just to calm the comunity down.
    Austrian Kickstarter & Slacker Backer | IGN: Cernz
    __________________________________________________

    -=] Dont mess with the bull, you gonna get the horn [=-

  10. #330
    Quote Originally Posted by Rapkannibale View Post
    Any copyright lawyers on here? AFAIK game mechanics cannot be copyrighted. Otherwise people could copyright things like "roll 6 sided dice". They can (and have) copyright terms like "tapping" but Hex isn't using that term. I'm still a bit worried but we will see.
    Not a lawyer but an uncle of mine is an IP lawyer and gave me a rundown on stuff when I was looking into publishing some games in High school.

    As I recall it goes like this:

    Game mechanics are a method for playing a game, and can be patented. A patent has to be applied for and granted, can be contested if someone else was using the method before you, and will expire. Others can also patent improvements to your patent and you'll need to license those improvements to use them (tends to result in cross licensing since they need to license your patent to use their improvement). Most companies don't patent their game mechanics because patents are expensive and few games have mechanics that are worth the cost.

    Copyright covers "creative works" things like the text of your rulebook, artwork, and any game fiction. You don't have to apply for copyright you juts get it by virtue of publishing (applying helps you establish a date which can be important). Copyright technically expires but not until 70 years after the death of the crater so in practical terms it doesn't expire. This is probably the easiest thing to get sued over if your game is similar to another because if you lift any text from the other game's rulebook you've infringed.

    Trademark covers things like names, and logos. You have to register the trademark, and it only applies in a limited context. You also have to actively defend it, and periodically renew it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •