Innovention Toys Wins Lawsuit Against MGA Entertainment
Innovention Toys, publisher of Khet, filed a patent infringement lawsuit against MGA Entertainment and Wal-Mart Stores in October 2007 over the Laser Battle board game, as noted on BGN at the time. Khet, which debuted in 2005, and Laser Battle, which appeared a year later, are both two-player games in which players have mirrored pieces that they move across the gameboard and lasers that they use to attack and remove pieces. To describe the game (or rather games) more precisely, let’s turn to section 39 of Innovention’s patent for a “light-reflecting board game”:
39. A method of playing a game by opposed players; said game comprising two sets of distinguishable playing pieces, each set having movable pieces with no mirrored surfaces, of which one is a key piece, and pieces with at least one mirrored surface, a game board consisting of a first end, a second end, and a plurality of rows and columns, intersecting to form a plurality of spaces, the method comprising the steps of:
- placing each player’s set of playing pieces on the game in a pre-determined starting configuration; and
- alternating turns, each turn comprising moving, either a translation or a rotation, a piece followed by activation of a laser, said alternating moves continuing until one player illuminates the opposing player’s key piece;
- wherein moving a piece consists of a movement one space in a horizontal, vertical, or diagonal direction to an unoccupied adjacent space.
As noted on Patent Arcade, MGA asked for the lawsuit to be dismissed, claiming that it was invalid since not all of the pieces in Laser Battle are intended to be moved during the game. The judge countered that the pieces can be moved, even if the rules direct players not to do so. The judge also rejected MGA’s request that the patent be dismissed as being obvious. (Toys R Us had been added to the lawsuit as a defendant at some point during the past two years.)
After the judge subsequently ruled that MGA had infringed on Innovention’s patent, Innovention requested an injunction against MGA, barring the company from any further production or sales of Laser Battle. Says Innovention’s Luke Hooper, “Now we’re waiting for a one day trial to be scheduled to determine the financial damages.” An attorney for the defendants has said that they will ask for the judge’s ruling to be reconsidered, according to Patent Arcade.
Posted by W. Eric Martin on Oct 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM in Game News, Boardgame News / 1044
Comments:
You must register with BGN in order to comment. Registration is free, but if you appreciate the news, previews, reviews and other material posted on Boardgame News, please consider becoming a member to keep the info flowing to your screen!|
Hallelujah. This is a positive note at the end of an otherwise crappy day. I hope it sticks, and I hope they reap millions from their lawsuit. Posted by Mark Crane on Oct 31, 2009 at 12:45 AM | #
|
|
Sounds like the judge let common sense rule the day, but it’s lucky for Innovention that they didn’t get a judge who is a gamer. I mean, if the rules say you don’t move the pieces, then they can’t move, even though they’re obviously physically movable. So it’s a good thing the judge isn’t a rules lawyer. :-) Posted by Larry Levy on Oct 31, 2009 at 01:19 AM | #
|
|
Even with the odd reasoning of the judge, after looking at the two games, there are much too many similarities to be coincidence. With a little more creativity (and hiring a game designer), MGA could have built on the great idea of mirrors/lasers to avoid a lawsuit and make something original and fun in its own right (for an example, see the recent “Burg der 1000 Spiegel” from Markus and Inka Brand). Glad to see the nice guys finish first this time. Posted by Jeff Allers on Oct 31, 2009 at 04:39 AM | #
|
|
Stick it to them. When I saw that on the shelves at walmart, I knew something was amiss. Glad to see action was taken and was followed through. Good luck getting your due. The local walmart sold around 50 of them the first year over xmas months. Think of that multiplied by stores, years and months, they made bunches of cash on the product. Bleed them dry!!! Posted by Scott Nelson on Oct 31, 2009 at 07:22 AM | #
|
|
I may be wrong, but Innovention may have actually shopped the game to these guys a year before they stole it. Anyway, I’m off to patent “small, humanoid wooden pieces that can be moved from one space to another” See you in court! :) Posted by Mark Crane on Oct 31, 2009 at 08:51 AM | #
|
|
In an October 2006 post on BGG, Luke Hooper wrote about the debut of Khet – then called Deflexion – at New York Toy fair in 2005 “where it gathered a good amount of interest from small retailers and of course plenty of inventors who are always there sketching out notes.” Eric Posted by W. Eric Martin on Oct 31, 2009 at 09:01 AM | #
|
|
Here is a similar note from the author: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1024542#1024542 “we were fortunate enough to talk to buyers from Target and ToysRus who said they liked our game but already purchased a nearly identical game from MGA that was not being shown publically in the private meetings that the big boys set up. While friendly competition is expected in any industry, it is extremely tough when a big company comes out in a suspicious manner with a very similar product to try and push out a smaller group trying to break in.” Posted by Mark Crane on Oct 31, 2009 at 09:18 AM | #
|
|
I have both and Deflexion/Khet is by far the better game. I hope they get the money they deserve, but I also hope Khet sticks around for the long haul. Posted by S. Deniz Bucak on Nov 1, 2009 at 01:44 AM | #
|
|
I still think patents on games should be outlawed. Just like they should do for software! Posted by Surya Van Lierde on Nov 5, 2009 at 08:21 AM | #
|
Next entry: W. Eric Martin: Have You Stopped Beating Your Wife?
Previous entry: Sneak Peak at Phalanx' Version of God's Playground
