
Agar.io Clone DMCA - _jomo
https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/d028f601f93e201186b4a75b85ad48281e5349b4/2015-07-30-Agario.md
======
Matheus28
It's not a clone, it's deobfuscated code from the game client that's being
used in several sites to host an exact copy of the agar.io client, with their
own ads. If you actually read the DMCA, it's pretty detailed in how it
violates Miniclip's copyrights.

An example of clone that doesn't infringe their copyrights (written from
scratch, not derived from the original game):
[https://github.com/huytd/agar.io-clone](https://github.com/huytd/agar.io-
clone)

Disclaimer: I'm the agar.io developer

~~~
britknight
IANAL, but my understanding is that the fact that the clone was written from
scratch doesn't have any bearing on whether or not it infringes on copyright.
The clone uses the name "Agar.io Clone" and copies the look and mechanics of
the original game, thus making it _substantially similar_ in appearance and
use to the copyrighted work. Unless they have found some way to invoke fair
use (educational purposes, etc.), the clone you mention is also infringing.

An analogy: if someone were to write a book called "Harry Potter - Clone" in
their own words about the adventures of young wizard, you could expect them to
receive a notice of infringement pretty darn fast, regardless of the fact that
they didn't copy the original word-for-word.

~~~
x0054
In the above mentioned link to Agar.io clone the copyright infringing part is
the "agar.io," not the actual reproduction of the game. The game play it self
can not be copyrighted, and it can not be patented because there have been
several prior art games with exact same gameplay (or very similar). There is a
very similar planet like game for the iOS that I used to play back in 2010,
and that's just off the top of my head.

In the main link Agar.io has a very fair DMCA claim if their JS has been
literally copied, even if it has than been subsequently altered. However, if
one was to make a game like "Bob's Better Floating Balls that Eat Each Other"
from scratch, I don't think Agar.io would have a fair claim. I am guessing
that they also have a trademark out on Agar.io.

~~~
plonh
"Agar.io" is not copyrighted. It is trademarked if anything.

~~~
x0054
You are right, Trademarked, you can't copyright names. It would be an easy
trademark case to make though.

------
benatkin
It seems the author of the repo wrote a new implementation of the backend but
copied the code from the frontend. I dislike the DMCA process and I find some
other stuff in the complaint I disagree with but it seems like the repository
was infringing.

~~~
Matheus28
Not even that. There was just client-side in that repository.

It used this for the server side:
[https://github.com/OgarProject/Ogar](https://github.com/OgarProject/Ogar)

------
mrkmcknz
I've reached out to Rob Small(Miniclip founder) on numerous occasions over the
last 5years. He's always very helpful, supportive and willing to make
introductions. He also bootstrapped Miniclip to where it is today.

I doubt Miniclip is going around throwing DMCA notices to companies cloning
Agar.io without good reason.

------
weakme
IANAL, but my understanding is that the fact that the clone was written from
scratch doesn't have any bearing on whether or not it infringes on copyright.
The clone uses the name "Agar.io Clone" and copies the look and mechanics of
the original game, thus making it substantially similar in appearance and use
to the copyrighted work. Unless they have found some way to invoke fair use
(educational purposes, etc.), the clone you mention is also infringing. An
analogy: if someone were to write a book called "Harry Potter - Clone" in
their own words about the adventures of young wizard, you could expect them to
receive a notice of infringement pretty darn fast, regardless of the fact that
they didn't copy the original word-for-word.

------
regularjack
"All copyright, trademark and associated intellectual property rights in
www.agar.io and the Agario game are owned by Miniclip SA."

Miniclip SA is a Portuguese company. Can non-US entities submit DMCA takedown
requests?

~~~
duskwuff
Of course. Why wouldn't they? The DMCA takedown process specifies how US-based
ISPs, hosting providers, and other web sites should respond to copyright
complaints, and guarantees them a variety of legal protections so long as they
follow the process. Making that process unavailable to copyright holders
outside the US would make those protections unavailable, increasing the
workload for these businesses.

------
Fatiumat
Can anybody describe what will happen if the clone author file a DMCA counter
notice and how after that the non USA company can proceed and prove that the
code is really stolen? As i understand the code is not copied exactly, as it's
obfuscated in the original, so no way to prove exact copy.

Have a similar situation, my code was obfuscated and somebody just decide to
do a reverse engineering and add some features on top, then they put all of
this on github under a nice GNU license...

------
nacs
As others mention, this seems to have directly copied the client code.
However, I found this amusing:

> The Agario game’s distinctive style and graphics are known to tens of
> millions of players

Colored circles moving around on a checkered grid [1] is apparently
"distinctive style and graphics".

[1]: [http://i.imgur.com/h3rr9xc.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/h3rr9xc.jpg)

------
Sleaker
This is not a DMCA request, this is a IP property rights notice that the
repository is violating copyright & trademark. Nowhere is it stating that it
is a DMCA.

~~~
knd775
"I have read and understand GitHub’s Guide to Filing a DMCA Notice."

Not only that, it uses language and structure common to all DMCA takedown
requests.

------
Frozenlock
"If you are the repository owner, and you believe that your repository was
disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification, you have the right to
file a counter notice and have the repository reinstated."

Guilty until proven innocent.

~~~
sabalaba
To be fair, at least the DMCA gives the benefit of the doubt to content hosts
via the safe harbor provisions.

