this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2024
193 points (99.5% liked)

Games

16745 readers
648 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
193
NYTimes Files Copyright Takedown Against Hundreds of Wordle Clones (www.404media.co)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But they don't have control over the clones, copyright don't extend that far

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Assuming that Wordle is copyrightable at all, why wouldn't copyright extend to clones? How far do you think copyright extend?

What would be the purpose of selling or buying the copyright if you can't stop the ones that are "stealing" it for free?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Copyright covers creative expression, not functionality. The code and unique design elements would be protected, but not the idea of a grid or guessing letters, etc (which all predate them anyway). Even the word list is difficult to claim protection to if it was generated by algorithmic filters on dictionary words (it probably was) because then the selection also isn't expressive.

So I can't copy their code or exact look, but I can definitely make my own version legally.

What's the point? Yeah I don't know why they spent money on such a simple concept either. The copyright protection is far more useful when the thing has enough expression that clones won't be indistinguishable anymore.