Copy rights

I wonder why the company which own the main game idea are not suing anyone who creates clone of the same game

For instance
Atari Company first released Break out game in 1976 so they own the original idea for the game but there are tons of games are similar to Break out
also, Individuals or companies making clones of break out and doesn’t really give a credit to Atari as they are considered the original owner of the idea
Anyone got an explanation ?

I would suggest that the concept of “breaking bricks with a ball” is not, by itself, unique enough. If no one could ever make another game where a ball breaks bricks you’d see a lot less games.

Most games are offspring as it were from a previous game, there is in fact a very good diagram explaining this in the book Level Up by Scott Rogers.

I’m sure if someone else blatantly used the name without permission, or tried to suggest that it was the Atari version there may be more of an issue. Often I suspect that the addition of one slightly different game play feature and a different name is sufficient to argue that it’s “original”…

Updated Wed Jun 28 2017 18:20

oops, I quoted the wrong book - it is a good book though…

It was actually a diagram called “The Evolution of the 2-D Shooter” in a book by Raph Koster called A Theory of Fun for Game Design.

Found the diagram with a Google search :slight_smile:

1 Like

@Rob Thank you for your thoughtful reply , Really helped me to get how copyrights works

in addition to what you have referred to ,After i did a research to know all the possible ways to protect the game idea
Here is a Link of a comprehensive overview about [Intellectual Property] (
if anyone want to know about the other ways to protect their games.

1 Like

You’re more than welcome and thanks for the link :slight_smile:

Privacy & Terms