Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hmm, at the start of the article I was ready to point out how utterly onoriginal Fallout Shelter was and how the idea of them suing someone for copying them was absurd, but come on! This is Samsung levels of blatant!

It hasn’t been stated whether Bethesda owns the code. They hired someone who writes programs for a living. A programmer for hire will have a lot of code and style that gets used in everything they do.

If any of the code shows up in prior works that Beyond worked on, then Bethesda is sunk.

For example, I have a history designing hardware. And I have certain things that I do on everything I make. Because I find it increases the durability of my designs.

If you hired me to design something for you, that technique would be in the design.

If I design something for someone else later, and it incorporates my technique, you can’t sue them. Because it’s my technique.
 
It hasn’t been stated whether Bethesda owns the code. They hired someone who writes programs for a living. A programmer for hire will have a lot of code and style that gets used in everything they do.

If any of the code shows up in prior works that Beyond worked on, then Bethesda is sunk.

For example, I have a history designing hardware. And I have certain things that I do on everything I make. Because I find it increases the durability of my designs.

If you hired me to design something for you, that technique would be in the design.

If I design something for someone else later, and it incorporates my technique, you can’t sue them. Because it’s my technique.
Bethesda have said they own it. They may be lying of course.
 
There is actually a way out...

It appears from the article that Bethesda contracted Behavior to produce a game for them. It is very Likely that Behavior used code / a game engine that they’ve employed previously in other software.

If Behavior can prove that the code existed prior to Bethesda contracting them, then Besthesda’s claim will probably go down in flames.

The bug may very well exist in multiple other titles, or even beta versions of other titles worked on by Behavior.
100% agree... which is why I said "might be". ;):D
 
My bet is Bethesda will lose.

EDIT - Unless they actually copied code (I just read that part).

You can't defend "concepts"..... but if they can prove stolen code, that's different.

But I can't imagine it would be hard to re-create the same game with different code.

Looks like Interactive literally reused some portions of code from Fallout Shelter into Westworld's game

the random obscure bug that is identical across two completely separate games? now THAT is pretty telling.

I'm all with you about the copying of concepts. But to outright just take the same code, slap a slightly different paint job on it and call it a new game? Gotta get permission from the content owners for that one I'm pretty sure. Especially if you plan to profit from it.
 
They're both blatant ripoffs of Yoot Tower from 1999.

image.png
 
Wow. Lots and lots of games in the iOS App store are rip offs. The outcome of this lawsuit will have cascading consequences.
Bethesda alleges that this game is an actual ripoff though, that the company which Bethsoft hired for money to help make Fallout Shelter took sourcecode from that game (which is Bethsoft property) and used it to create this Westworld game.

Anyhow, if that is even remotely true, man did these people mess with the wrong company... Bethsoft is extremely aggressively litigious, they sued Mojang over the word "scrolls" for chrissakes (and won! Unfortunately for Mojang, nobody thought of having the court make Bethsoft to show them how many games prior to 2010 contain the word "Rage" in their title... lul)

Probably comes from that one of Bethsoft's main owners is a (very) rich lawyer IIRC... :p
 
The art looks nothing like at all. The premises have superficial resemblances but the plot is COMPLETELY different. (If your game has a gunfight, no others can? Not at all.) The story is copyright Westworld, so...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Someyoungguy
if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.

That's the crux, eh? Bethesda should have lawyers good enough to realize they need to own the underlying code and not just have the rights to resell it. Maybe they knew that but decided the extra cost to own the code outright rather than license it was too expensive and decided to forgo ownership. If they did, then they can expect the developer to reuse it if the opportunity arises.

I would guess Bethesda might have a case that the graphic displays were copyrightable and thus Westworld may have too close a resemblance; but I doubt anyone would confuse one game for the other.
 
Bethesda alleges that this game is an actual ripoff though, that the company which Bethsoft hired for money to help make Fallout Shelter took sourcecode from that game (which is Bethsoft property) and used it to create this Westworld game.

Anyhow, if that is even remotely true, man did these people mess with the wrong company... Bethsoft is extremely aggressively litigious, they sued Mojang over the word "scrolls" for chrissakes (and won! Unfortunately for Mojang, nobody thought of having the court make Bethsoft to show them how many games prior to 2010 contain the word "Rage" in their title... lul)

Probably comes from that one of Bethsoft's main owners is a (very) rich lawyer IIRC... :p

A hired programmer would have certain code and techniques that they use by habit. That code doesn’t automatically become property of any one entity if it’s his standard technique.

So if he can prove he used that code prior to Bethesda, then he’s free.

He was hired to perform a task. If his contract is to perform a task, then Bethesda doesn’t own anything.

If he was hired to create specific code, and the contract is written to transfer intellectual property, then Bethesda may have a case (assuming he never used that code prior to Bethesda).

If you hire me to design a custom off road vehicle that you plan to sell, my techniques don’t become your property. Unless our contract is for me to transfer ownership of that design to you. Otherwise, all you own is the right to use and sell the vehicle I built for you.

Likewise, when I used to design electronic devices, I had certain proprietary techniques that appeared in everything I made.

I had a standard product line that I sold. But...I also had companies hire me to design and produce a product that had never been made before. They’d describe the intended function in absolute detail. And I’d design and produce the first one.

Nowhere in that transaction did I transfer to them any rights of ownership to any aspect of that design.

Sometimes, I’d even give them the details to replicate it. And produce as many as they wanted on their own. But... all design rights stayed with me.

Many of those custom designs that I was hired to produce eventually became part of my standard product line.

I’d either offer the exact product to other people, or I’d incorporate aspects of that product into my my other future product offerings.

I also have worked with designing custom virtual environments for other people / companies. And sometimes I will design something for someone and really like a certain design component of that project. And sometimes I will incorporate those favorites aspects into other virtual environments that I design for other people.

In fact, after a number of virtual environments had been made for different entities, I had a lot of favorite aspects from a number of different environments I had design.

I had a personal desire to produce for myself one environment that incorporated all my favorite aspects from the hundreds of other virtual environments I had made.

After it was done, the finished design was amazing. All my favorites came together like a highly refined virtual environment that was the software equivalent of a greatest hits album (except it was a visual interactive product).

I showed it to someone, they liked it. So I sold it to them.

But.... in all my above examples, I retained full ownership of everything I ever made. Even the works I did under contract. Because my contract was to perform a task.

My contract was not to develop and transfer ownership of proprietary intellectual property. In other words, all they purchased was my labor. They didn’t own my ideas, techniques, etc.

The article does not provide enough information to declare with any certainty whether Bethesda is correct in their assertions.
 
Last edited:
I'm all with you about the copying of concepts. But to outright just take the same code, slap a slightly different paint job on it and call it a new game? Gotta get permission from the content owners for that one I'm pretty sure. Especially if you plan to profit from it.

That really depends on the contract. Years ago I was paid for some computer graphics work I did for a program. After an exclusive period I was free to resell the work to anyone who wanted it. Since then, I have developed other materials that I cannot reuse; and was paid much more for relinquishing the rights to it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LordVic
Interesting Bethesda pointed out that the two games have the same bug, instead of... fixing the bug? Aside from this situation of infringement, why would you declare your game has a bug that you've known about that hasn't been fixed?
 
They're alleging that they stole intellectual property (code) from fallout shelter, and used it in Westworld iOS.

Oh - the MR article didn't mention that at all, but digging into the Polygon article I do see that now.

It's interesting. The same developer "co-developed" both games, Fallout Shelter with Bethesda and Westworld iOS with Warner Bros. Normally when I see that it's "co-developed" I assume it means one company provided some art assets and licensing, while the other actually developed it. So normally with that arrangement, it'd be 100% OK for this to occur.

In this case though, Bethesda is claiming that they also provided some code. It leaves me wondering how much code was actually provided by them... if it was a substantial amount, why involve a co-developer at all?
[doublepost=1529714886][/doublepost]
Interesting Bethesda pointed out that the two games have the same bug, instead of... fixing the bug? Aside from this situation of infringement, why would you declare your game has a bug that you've known about that hasn't been fixed?

It says the bug was fixed shortly after release in Fallout Shelter. So the allegedly stolen code would have been an earlier copy from when that bug was present.
 
Oh - the MR article didn't mention that at all, but digging into the Polygon article I do see that now.

It's interesting. The same developer "co-developed" both games, Fallout Shelter with Bethesda and Westworld iOS with Warner Bros. Normally when I see that it's "co-developed" I assume it means one company provided some art assets and licensing, while the other actually developed it. So normally with that arrangement, it'd be 100% OK for this to occur.

In this case though, Bethesda is claiming that they also provided some code. It leaves me wondering how much code was actually provided by them... if it was a substantial amount, why involve a co-developer at all?
[doublepost=1529714886][/doublepost]

It says the bug was fixed shortly after release in Fallout Shelter. So the allegedly stolen code would have been an earlier copy from when that bug was present.
Got it, sorry was confused.
 
Just based off of the looks of it, they both remind me of Sim Tower:


View attachment 767360
Just more modern.

They're both blatant ripoffs of Yoot Tower from 1999.

View attachment 767370

uh? SimTower 1994?

Simtower.gif

The art looks nothing like at all. The premises have superficial resemblances but the plot is COMPLETELY different. (If your game has a gunfight, no others can? Not at all.) The story is copyright Westworld, so...

All of these posts missing the point that literal code theft supposedly happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WylyQuimby
Boy you can really tell who read the article before commenting, and who didn't.
And a bunch of other people who just stops commenting because they are smart and know they are not smart enough to comment so that they can contribute to this discussion.
 
That's the crux, eh? Bethesda should have lawyers good enough to realize they need to own the underlying code and not just have the rights to resell it. Maybe they knew that but decided the extra cost to own the code outright rather than license it was too expensive and decided to forgo ownership. If they did, then they can expect the developer to reuse it if the opportunity arises.

I would guess Bethesda might have a case that the graphic displays were copyrightable and thus Westworld may have too close a resemblance; but I doubt anyone would confuse one game for the other.
... the list I posted above that are the enumerated categories to call something a work for hire. Otherwise, you cannot get to the clause you cited.
 
Yeah the key is if they can actually prove they copied code.

Gameplay wise this one seems to also have character creation and an overworld.

From a visual observation, they two point camera and rendering look the same (though could be manually reproduced), but the character rigging looks absolutely identical. That alone is too unique for it to be a coincidence.
 
... the list I posted above that are the enumerated categories to call something a work for hire. Otherwise, you cannot get to the clause you cited.

I would think he met the :as a contribution to a collective work, clause since his code would be part of the overall code and thus part of a "collective work."

More to the point, absent the mentioned clauses could they not contractually agree that Bethesda owns the work and thus cannot be reused by the developer, even if it does not qualify as a "work for hire?" As I understand it, a work for hire is a specific type of agreement between parties but does not exclude other agreements to transfer ownership.
 
And if you can find code from SimTower in Fallout Shelter,you may have a point.
no point.. this happen in software industry all the time.. If the x win, which mean y contractor cannot build software other then x vendor. X will loose , if win it industry collapse;

E.g Normal Scenario

Company SAP build this x future to y company, then SAP found out another company require same functionality as requested by x and asking double price. Are x legal to sue another company ?

Apple sell to me this song x by famous artist, then somebody come to me saying i also get it free. Same tempo same voice same everthing ? Should i sue Apple ?

In the end just a service not a trademark copyright by the purchaser.
 
no point.. this happen in software industry all the time.. If the x win, which mean y contractor cannot build software other then x vendor. X will loose , if win it industry collapse;

E.g Normal Scenario

Company SAP build this x future to y company, then SAP found out another company require same functionality as requested by x and asking double price. Are x legal to sue another company ?

Apple sell to me this song x by famous artist, then somebody come to me saying i also get it free. Same tempo same voice same everthing ? Should i sue Apple ?

In the end just a service not a trademark copyright by the purchaser.

No, this doesn't happen in the industry all the time. And your example isn't even remotely relevant. Please actually look into what is happening before posting.
 
No, this doesn't happen in the industry all the time. And your example isn't even remotely relevant. Please actually look into what is happening before posting.
If you think this is not relevant is okay. But in my life as developer, this thing happen. CODE ,DB STRUCTURE, CONCEPT . If cannot be re-usable, no point doing software.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.