Comments on: 'Scrabulous' debate may rewrite the rules of the game

Wildly popular Facebook application is in hot water for similarity to classic board game. But could it be a marketing treasure trove for Scrabble's trademark holders?

[faust]

Time to wake up

Come on Hasbro, when was the last time you sold any realy quantity of the board version?

Welcome to 2008, you should have built your own online versions 10 years ago.

Wake up the old men in mangement and show them what a computer looks like.

[newPoster]

"Welcome to 2008"

...where everyone thinks they should get whatever they want for free. Playing the game in real life sitting across from the other player(s) adds many aspects which online players can't comprehend. Scrabulous cheapens a great game. Shut it down Hasbro/Mattel.

[daftkey]

Overestimating online, overestimating real thing.

I'd recon that Hasbro sells plenty of Scrabble board games still - you still see them everywhere from Wal Mart to Toys R Us to Sears. I don't think those retailers use up valuable shelf space on stuff that "doesn't sell in quantity".

[voo.doo]

Hasbro doesnt need the Scrabulous guys

If there is marketing gold mine for Hasbro on Facebook, why would Hasbro buy out the Scrabulous guys, instead of just taking down Scrabulos and putting up their own game called...."Scrabble"?

Its their game and their trademark, they could run their own ads or take the ad revenue.

Its hard to see any value that the Scrabulous guys could add to this. Why should Hasbro reward them for infringing?

[mcclurec]

... 'cause its already there

Why would Hasbro bother creating a development team or hiring out the work to make an online version when it is already there? Re-inventing the wheel just out of spite is not a great business practice

[PostIT07]

Why wouldn't they?

"why would Hasbro buy out the Scrabulous guys, instead of just taking down Scrabulos and putting up their own game"

Because if a company the size of Hasbro, Mattel, or EA (for that matter) tried to build something like Scrabulous themselves, it would take them a over a year, cost them millions of dollars, and probably work half as well. They'd involve Marketing, outside focus group consultants, teams of business analysts, and dozens of programmers. By the time they finished, all of the Scrabulous fans would have moved on to the next "new" thing. It'd be much better for everyone involved if they'd just buy out the Scabulous guys and admit that they didn't think of it first.

[godlyfrog]

They don't need to buy them out...

They could easily demand the rights to the game as part of a settlement or part of a judgement, and would be perfectly within their rights to do so.

[godlessnovel]

I agree

I don't understand why people think these "creators" should be rewarded for being thieves. If I wrote a book called Chuck Finn and it had the exact same story has Huck Finn, posted it online and it build an audience, the estate of Mark Twain would sue me and tell me to take it down. Why would they have to buy an inferior version of the real thing and reward the developers who stole idea and sold advertising on a stolen idea?

I hate to tell you guys, but this is copyright infringement.

And lastly, Scrabble has to be one of the top 5 selling board games consecutively every year. Whether the people at Hasbro and Mattle are old men, fat cats, behind the times, etc. is irrelevant. They... umm... own it.

[jlagrande]

the elephant on the pot

Here the patent holder (the elephant) wanted to charge me $19.95 after only 60 minutes (!) of free playing time of Scrabble that came "free" with my new computers - and this for a version that was solitaire only.

Instead Scrabulous has opened up an interactive world with 2 million users - and still the elephant won't get off the pot. Seems to me, stupid economics on their part aside, that this is a repressive (holdback) form of patent enforcement - exactly what patent reforms were meant to eliminate. While acknowledging the primacy of the original idea - and perhaps forcing the new user (Scrabulous) to license it - let's not constrain those that develop an idea in useful, constructive directions. Otherwise the notions of "content protection" and "intellectual copyright" become narrowly punitive, as they no longer serve the inventor of the idea but the conglomerate sitting on the rights - to the exclusion of the public good.

[AkhamzRazor]

Factually Incorrect

Scrabble is not patented. Mattel and Hasbro are making a copyright and trademark claims against Facebook and Scrabulous.

[john31313]

Incorrect information

In the article, 'Scrabulous' Debate May Rewrite The Rules Of The Game, you make the comment to the effect that "There's also no direct competitor" That information is incorrect and I am surprised that no one has told you. Yahoo! Games has a full and web version of the game on it's website so there is a direct competitor. Next time you decide to post a story maybe you should take a little time and do a little background search to verify your stories. It's obvious that you may not have even done a simple search for Scrabble games in a search engine otherwise you would have found this. Do us all a favor and check your sources before you write these articles.

Thanks,

John

[JettaTurbo]

Really?

John -

The next line of the original article clarifies the statement which
you find incorrect. "Neither Hasbro nor Mattel operates a Web-
based, ad-supported version of Scrabble..."

The Yahoo! version is a try and buy for $19.99, not a free (ad-
supported) web version. I'm assuming you didn't mean Literati...
Scrabble's ugly cousin.

I find your last sentence to be a little harsh as well. There's no
need to be condescending.

Happy Scrabbling!
--Joe

[JettaTurbo]

Look back a year or so... (ATARI)

Actually there was a WONDERFUL online free version of actual
licensed Scrabble just a short time ago. It was offered on
games.atari.com, along with a number of other classic games,
including Monopoly, Boggle, Battleship, and Yahtzee.

While it did not have some of the more helpful
networking/game-saving features of Scrabulous, it was a very
attractive and complete representation of the game of Scrabble,
playable by parties online simultaneously.

Unfortunately, now that Hasbro acquired the rights to Scrabble,
the "Atari" version disappeared. There is a statement to that
effect here: http://corporate.infogrames.com/infogramesgb/2007/07/new_
agreement_with_hasbro.php

I'd been hoping that this version would resurface, but I'll admit
to using Scrabulous in the meantime.

I'm just surprised that the very recent Atari version hasn't made
any article that I've seen.

[partytildawn-20159620461052270]

I will be the CEO of Hasbro can't even send a text message...

Hasbro and Mattel are too busy importing lead based children's toys into the USA to keep up with technology and the needs of today's tech savvy customers... or maybe Hasbro and Mattel execs have been eating the lead chips falling of these imported Chinese toys...

[j-dfrost]

Negotiate

It is lear that there is a desire for the availblility of this game to continue so why do the originators of Scrable not negotiate with the "Scrabulous" designers for either participation or partnership and both can win instead of all loosing.

[Walter L. Johnson]

I think it is time to revoke Scrabble rights

No matter whether you view Scrabble or Scrabulous as better, I think the Copyright and any Patent Claims on Scrabble should be revoked. By modern standards the game is neither original nor innovative and today would not be eligible for a patent. Copyright also requires greater simularity. The purpose of copyrights and patents is to protect the inventors of original ideas which add to our collective knowledge, not to protect users of pre-existing common knowledge. Scrabble does not own the rights to any language and no one else can because the language is common knowledge.

The boat has long since left the dock on stopping infringing uses if they ever really existed past 1970. Indeed a strict interpretation of Scabble as a patent, rather than a registered trademark, would ask why they didn't claim crossword puzzles, which probably came first as infringing.

[Ms Cyprah]

Hasbro is in the dark ages

I am surprised Hasbro is seeking to shut it down when they have
no online alternative in place. As usual, it seems that customers
matter little, only the money and reputation! They should be
quick to form a partnership with these guys to get the most out
of the new fans of the game.

We are in an electronic age, Hasbro, like it or lump it. Good
marketing on your part would be seeking to capitalise on such
innovations, not to crush them. That's ancient thinking. Just
demand a share of the profits and let them be. Think of the
possibilities across the Web! I hope this ends amicably and in a
beneficial way for everyone.

[roastbeefforbreakfast]

There are Two Alternatives

No online alternative in place for Scrabble?! Uh, no. There are TWO official and FREE Scrabble games online: www.thepixiepit.co.uk and www.isc.ro

Hasbro and Mattel have every right to shut down the unofficial Scrabulous.

[limefan913]

Horrible example..

All of Mark Twain's works are in the public domain. It'd be plagiarism, but its not copyright infringement. I can republish his works as many times as I want, and make money off it too, and it doesn't matter.

[Duke of Alberta]

Important Question

I would like to know if there has been an increase in sales of the Hasbro, Mattel and EA versions of Scrabble (am I allowed to use the word Scrabble?) since the introduction of Scrabulous on Facebook?

[madmanmtg]

What's the latest on this?

What's the situation? Is Hasbro winning or does Scrabuluos stay up?

[moinulhaqqk]

I do not know that wht is this?

[scrabulous1969]

Hasbro has taken all our funaway! WHY? It's not like scrabulous is making money out of this. Scrabulous is much more fun than sramble version! Ahhhh, maybe that's why, feeling a little green? You guys are too much! I will NEVER buy an other Hasbro game again and will pass that around!