As for copyright, it’s possible to copyright artistic presentation, like the text of rules for a game, but it’s not possible to copyright the rules themselves, i.e., the algorithm behind the same. That’s why enthusiasts of the first edition of Dungeons and Dragons are in the clear even though they’ve released a gamed called OSRIC that uses the exact same rules:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSRIC

So couldn’t one argue that Scrabulous is to Scrabble as OSRIC is to D&D? If not, why not?

There is a great tradition in personal computing of copying other’s interfaces and experiences.

I agree that there are real intellectual property issues in the experience of Scrabulous and Facebook’s lack of action, but terms like shoplifting, piracy, and the like don’t speak to the issue in the eyes of the the younger generations. Shop lifting is a concept of physical theft. I think you have have seen one too many movies that started with the ad, You won’t steal a car would you?

How cynical! But how true!

I would hope so!

Trademark, first and foremost. But come on! Scrabulous is such an obvious rip-off and really low rent. Also, it is the same game.

Why don’t you start the Mall Street Journal? Use our content while you are at it!

I do not think Hasbro/Mattel is trying to prevent the use, but have some control over a brand name they own.

You make excellent points, but the fact of the matter is is that it is Facebook’s town and it is responsible for the behavior of those who live there.

http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=5306887130

It would really help if you could dig a little deeper and identify exactly what “rights” are being disputed here. Are there claims of Trademark infringement? Copyright infringement? Patent infringement?

It’s important because it sounds like Hasbro/Mattel/EA are somehow trying to prevent the digital game from being played (regardless of whether the name of it sounds like “Scrabble”), when all they really own is the right to the name “Scrabble.” Are those companies claiming they own the right to the way the game is played? That would be kind of like the playing card manufacturer Bicycle trying to restrict online Poker, or preventing Microsoft from bundling Solitaire with Windows.

Please let us know what really is going on here because all “rights” are not equal.

And they may have ground to stand on, as the applications are after all hosted on the servers of the Scrabulous developers and Facebook merely provides the services of a directory of applications, an API for accessing the user information as well as a unified interface for applications.

The fact that Facebook convert from the FBML output of the application to the HTML rendered by the browser might be an issue, as arguably the perception is given that the application is being served from Facebook’s servers and appears to be a part of Facebook through the tight integration.

If it weren’t for the fact that Facebook applications are typically only available through facebook this integration step could be seen as analogous to say a site like stumbleupon.

Arguably OpenSocial provides an advantage here as the relationship between application and social network is much more loosely coupled.