Game / IP protection

Quote: mcallister3200

95% of galaxy’s table games offerings are shufflemaster games with a sidebet or two added, or a minor paytable tweak. It’s an obviously shameless, pathetic way of doing things but it’s also obviously working for them looking at pits across the US. Yeah, shufflemaster did the same thing with a few from galaxy think it’s just the way that business operates, lucky ladies, tri-lux, (hcf?) but it’s not literally 90%+ of their offerings like galaxy.

i just looked it up and they offer a "one price for all" kind of deal when it comes to renting their games

https://www.galaxygaming.com/prime-membership

I remember that patent dispute between Derek Webb and Mikohn (or Shufflemaster) regarding 3 Card Poker took forever to resolve.

Quote: UCivan

High Card Flush: AGS vs Galaxy in court; AGS budgeted $1 M for the legal case and Galaxy won.

Flush Rush by SHFL/SG. Similar concept? No one brought up the case anywhere? If you have over $1M, do it.

It is my understanding that the AGS issue was that the inventor of HCF sold exclusive rights twice. Is wasn’t an IP issue but a contract / rights issue.

Flush Rush is a similar game, but different. Yes, it could be an IP infringement issue.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

It is my understanding that the AGS issue was that the inventor of HCF sold exclusive rights twice. Is wasn’t an IP issue but a contract / rights issue.

Flush Rush is a similar game, but different. Yes, it could be an IP infringement issue.

The case was not about selling twice. It was a war between the 80%-owner vs 20%-owner. IP was part of the package on the negotiation block. HCF's IP also includes High Card Straight, High Card Same-Color, etc.

Hi All,
Im a newby to all of this

I have read this thread in detail and you have all provided some great, yet concerning details with IP protection issues for new games. As with many of you, I have developed a new game and have got it to the point where it will be going to a 60 day trial at a particular venue early in the new year. In my discussions with patent lawyers they have all been very clear that trademark and copyright is about all you can achieve and there is limited other options to protect your game.

We are about to engage with a contact in the US (Im in Sydney) to assist with driving the same approach with Vegas and Indian reserve casinos, and am very nervous about game theft.

My takeaway from all of this is either 1. Run with the trademark and copyright and run the risk or 2. submit patent pending and also run the risk but potentially have a long an costly battle to potect the IP.

Quote: UCivan

The case was not about selling twice. It was a war between the 80%-owner vs 20%-owner. IP was part of the package on the negotiation block. HCF's IP also includes High Card Straight, High Card Same-Color, etc.

Yes, it was about selling it twice. The contract between Galaxy and the inventor was for exclusive rights to be distributed Nstionwide.

Galaxy was not licensed in the State of California and a few other States they wanted to be in. The inventor decided that not being in those States violated the contract and then sold the rights to the game to AGS. Both companies now believed they had the rights to the game and both companies were selling it.

AGS lost, as they should have and HCF is back to Galaxy exclusively.


ZCore13