Potential Copyright Theft - Not From Disney, but from MOUSE

[QuillianInkheart]

So, I got an add for a game on my phone called "Retro Shooter: Last Mouse" and yes, it's exactly what you think. A cheap cash-grab knockoff of MOUSE with a trailer that makes it look like this game, but it really the usual low-quality micro-transaction slop. However - and this is what I hope to bring attention to by mentioning this - I think they directly copied designs/animations/enemy types from MOUSE, put them in Blender to make a 3d version of them, and called it theirs. Idk the legality of this, but if the animations are identical - just in 3d - I assume that's grounds for a lawsuit. I didn't actually play it - I downloaded it to post a 1 star review, calling it out on it's BS, then uninstalled - but I wanted to bring this to the dev's attention in case there is grounds for any legal action to defend your game. It's ironic; people are talking about Disney being the ones attacking MOUSE for copyright, but now MOUSE might have a situation where THEY have the big guns.

[Cris]

If they did their own models based on something we can all watch on the released material, then it becomes very difficult. As far as I know you have to take the very same assets somebody else owns and then it becomes illegal.

Also, the game haven't even been released, I'd assume makes it difficult too since you can't call it a copy if the original idea isn't even materialized yet.

But I don't really know, pretty sure about the first thing though.

[QuillianInkheart]

Originally posted by Cris:

If they did their own models based on something we can all watch on the released material, then it becomes very difficult. As far as I know you have to take the very same assets somebody else owns and then it becomes illegal.

Also, the game haven't even been released, I'd assume makes it difficult too since you can't call it a copy if the original idea isn't even materialized yet.

But I don't really know, pretty sure about the first thing though.

Copyright law is based more on the moment of the creations inception, not when it's released. For example, imagine a AAA studio sees an indie game they like, but it's not released yet. They can't copy that game based off the trailers.

It's actually hilarious; when I first posted this, the game had mice enemies ripped straight from this game's design framework as the enemies. But when I called them on their BS in their reviews, now they have super low detail human enemies instead, and they VERY CLEARLY have Mickey Mouse as the player.

[Cris]

Originally posted by QuillianInkheart:

Originally posted by Cris:

If they did their own models based on something we can all watch on the released material, then it becomes very difficult. As far as I know you have to take the very same assets somebody else owns and then it becomes illegal.

Also, the game haven't even been released, I'd assume makes it difficult too since you can't call it a copy if the original idea isn't even materialized yet.

But I don't really know, pretty sure about the first thing though.

Copyright law is based more on the moment of the creations inception, not when it's released. For example, imagine a AAA studio sees an indie game they like, but it's not released yet. They can't copy that game based off the trailers.

It's actually hilarious; when I first posted this, the game had mice enemies ripped straight from this game's design framework as the enemies. But when I called them on their BS in their reviews, now they have super low detail human enemies instead, and they VERY CLEARLY have Mickey Mouse as the player.

I remember Palworld and its alleged copy of Pokemon but then lawyers or other kind of experts in those matters made videos talking about how hard it would be for Nintendo to win a lawsuit since they have the copyright for their creatures but they don't own the concept of a "fire lizard" or "water turtle" so most likely they would waste their time. Also I remember of all the cases of people that directly copied things like Mario Bros. and in a blink they got their strike notice/cease and desist and although it's mostly a meme, there are real cases where companies sued people for using their creations like that man who built a Spiderman-themed gravestone for his deceased child and Marvel/Disney sent him a judicial warning.

But as I said I don't really know, but I estimate Disney would've already taken this game and the copy you talk about down if there was a good opportunity to do so but, again, they have copyright over Mickey but not over the design concept Steamboat Willie brought for the first time, even though they brought it for the first time and everybody knows.

As for the indie studio behind this game; probably they don't have or can't spare the funding for a lawsuit, but I think being a game not released yet they are going to bet on themselves; Mouse is a project known for a long time already and if they are working hard on it we'll get an at least decent game that will crush those bootlegs from India or wherever in Asia they come from, even maybe taking over whoever is interested in said bootleg, and THEN maybe they will sue. I mean, all the best wishes for Mouse but the gaming industry is in decline and it wouldn't be new if the game flops so; why would they spent any time in charging themselves with legal fees in a case that they MIGHT win for what? Keep the way clear for something they haven't even finished, that could fail or even be cancelled. It's too soon.