A recent rise in legal cases over allegations of copyright and IP infringement will have put the industry on high alert.
We gained the insight of Co-Founder and MD at Comparasino, Martyn Hannah, who suggested that it could be a watershed moment for changing the ways that games studios operate.
CasinoBeat: How would you describe the reaction you have seen from the online casino industry in response to these rising copyright cases?
Martyn Hannah: I can’t speak for others, but for me, it has led to a feeling of disappointment. This industry is supposed to be at the cutting edge and where the brightest minds and creative talents are given the freedom to come up with new ideas, concepts, technologies and experiences.
Companies copying the IP of others or stealing their trade secrets goes against this. On the flip side, you can have instances where companies leverage their size and power to bring cases against smaller rivals encroaching on their market share under the premise of IP infringement, a tactic that’s just as dirty and underhand in my opinion.
CB: Do you believe the recent spate of copyright cases in the industry could be a watershed moment for how each game studio operates?
MH: It’s looking that way. There have been some really high-profile cases over the past 12 months and I’m sure more will come to light. These cases involve some of the biggest and most established companies in the sector, which shows just how deep the issue runs.
If I were operating a game studio, it would certainly make me take a very close look at how we were approaching the development of themes, designs, sound, mechanics and technology, and I’d do everything I could to ensure there was no risk of infringing someone else’s IP, nor of having my IP infringed.
CB: As employees moving from one company to another have been involved in several cases, could we see a change in strategy when it comes to the recruitment process?
MH: I can only assume that employees are already being subject to non-disclosure agreements and certain non-compete clauses as part of their contracts. I guess what we are seeing here is the potential breach of those NDAs and clauses, which will likely make up part of the cases being brought against those accused of IP infringement.
I don’t see how companies could do more to protect trade secrets as people are free to move between companies so long as they abide by NDAs and contract clauses, assuming those clauses are reasonable and lawful. That said, the high-profile nature of these cases, many of which include issues arising from employees leaving one company to join another, might prevent similar situations from arising in the future should the consequences be serious enough.
CB: Is there a concern that these cases will continue as the igaming market becomes increasingly competitive?
MH: I hope that it will lead to a slowdown in cases moving forward. The cases currently being heard should stand as a clear message that copying the ideas, designs, products, solutions and experiences offered by a competitor is not the right way to do business. It’s easy to look at something that works and is successful and copy it, but that’s just wrong on many levels.
Dig deeper and push harder to come up with your concepts and then invest the time and resources that those with innovative products have into your own game-changers and catalysts for success. That’s the most effective way of rising to the top even in the most competitive markets.
CB: Is there potential for the industry to slow down the quantity of games that it releases and evolve the production process in order to ensure that games are completely unique?
I don’t think the issue is the volume of games being created but rather the need for studios to innovate, get ahead of their rivals and ultimately generate revenue and profit. There has been such a strong drive for studios to come up with their own trademarked mechanics that I think we were always going to arrive at the point where there were strong similarities between some of them.
I guess more careful consideration needs to be given to game design and how studios look to replicate the success of their rival’s titles – the fishing theme/cash collect genre has a lot of games that look and play very much the same but from different providers. These providers are all looking to cash in on the popularity of a combination (fishing and cash collect) that was initially pioneered by a particular studio. There’s a pretty fine line with this stuff and it’s up to each studio how close to the bone they want to go.
CB: What steps can suppliers also take to protect their own original innovations, IP and ideas?
This is an incredibly complex area. Even as an online casino comparison brand, we have trademarked the Comparasino name and logo – having had prior experience with a previous site of our brand and design being copied – and to be frank, it was a bit of a minefield.
I can only imagine how challenging it must be for studios with multiple brands, designs, names and mechanics to trademark, with each market often requiring its own trademark and a different way of securing it. For me, IP will become the new compliance with studios having to appoint an IP specialist to ensure their assets are properly protected.
CB: Are there any lessons that can be learned from other industries when it comes to IP infringements or generally ensuring the avoidance of copyright breaches?
MH: To me, it’s pretty simple. Just don’t wilfully copy someone else’s idea, design, name, product or experience – especially if that person or company has trademarks in place. Instead, push yourself to come up with something new and different. You never know, it could be the next big thing.