Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!uunet!mcsun!ukc!axion!tharr!steveh
From: steveh@tharr.UUCP (Steve Hebditch)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Legal action against STrabble game.
Keywords: Scrabble, STrabble
Message-ID: <2182@tharr.UUCP>
Date: 30 May 91 13:45:49 GMT
References: <1991May24.125450.17582@lsuc.on.ca> <4cVH31w164w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> <1991May27.210009.16927@lsuc.on.ca> <1991May28.140645.2069@bigsur.uucp>
Reply-To: steveh@tharr.UUCP (Steve Hebditch)
Organization: TQM Communications
Lines: 13

In article <1991May28.140645.2069@bigsur.uucp> brad@bcars362.UUCP (Brad Shapcott) writes:
>I mean if it is obvious to the court that Scrabble is just a variant on
>crosswords, and while entitled to its particular format and graphics the
>company owning this game cannot extend its copyright to EVERY crossword variant
>(regardless of medium), then close duplicates would have legal grounds to
>refute the owning company's claims.

No doubt a major part of the problem was that the name "STrabble" would
almost certainly be considered an infringement of Spear's trademark. Had the
game been called something else then the company would probably not have
taken an interest. In court they'd simply have to show the product was
"passing off" rather than get into the intricacies of copyright that
Brad mentioned.