It would be interesting if Apple would step in here. They could, given their obscenely vague appstore "rules", simply delete the CandyCrush Saga game out of the store as it is a copy of an existing game. That would force King to be a bit more creative in their copying in the future.
That said, "protecting" games has been a problem, almost literally forever. On the one hand you want folks to benefit from there work, on the other hand sometimes a 'derivative' is a much much better game. So do you cut off that like we've done with software patents? Or not?
> "protecting" games has been a problem, almost literally forever. On the one hand you want folks to benefit from there work, on the other hand sometimes a 'derivative' is a much much better game
Despite this argument's merit in general, it's a complete digression in this particular case. They didn't just heavily copy his game, but then turned around and named it similarly, registered a trademark, then turned that trademark against him. At what point do we stop pretending these people are anything but thieves?
I'm the author of a popular app that has been copied by many many other developers. Despite many complaints to try and limit the copy-cats, Apple does nothing and leaves the issue up to the developers to sort out between themselves for the most part and it's absolutely frustrating.
Watching an app be successful and then watching the copy-cats swoop in to feed on your success as Apple (or Google) do nothing is very difficult to deal with.
Welcome to capitalism. If you were a web app, or a brick and mortar store, there would be no Apple or Google for you to appeal to. Only the courts, which you have anyway, but which have no sway over developers in China, etc.
Honestly I can't believe you (and other) developers are surprised when this happens.
My company's web site was copy and pasted wholesale by a competitor, and we had to threaten legal action against them in order to get them to replace it. (Probably with someone else's.)
The claim for the Apple marketplace was that it would be a better place, a well-tended garden. Better for consumers, better for vendors, and worth Apple taking a large slice of profits. So I think it's reasonable that developers are surprised.
Less choice when all the independents die out, inferior products because unoriginality isn't punished, confusion over product differentiation leading to undesired purchases ... the consumer is getting screwed right, left, and center.
The issue with courts is that not only do you need to convince them that the copier is in the wrong, but also that apple/Google should be the ones to do something about it.
That said, "protecting" games has been a problem, almost literally forever. On the one hand you want folks to benefit from there work, on the other hand sometimes a 'derivative' is a much much better game. So do you cut off that like we've done with software patents? Or not?