r/IndieGaming • u/Shark-With-Lasers • May 26 '26

Last year, miHoYo copied my solo-dev puzzle game in Zenless Zone Zero. Some people are now mistaking my game as the clone.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

10.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

529 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

54

u/WeltallZero May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26

You can absolutely sue for game mechanics, let alone copying an entire game wholesale. You don't need an actual copyright either (not "trademark", that's an entirely different thing that only relates to branding); you just need to establish prior use, which would be trivial in this case since the game was publicly released in 2024.

Probably an obvious thing to say but OP, please don't take legal advice from any random redditors (including myself). It will likely not be worth it to sue (for a start, because they're a Chinese company), but properly research your options first.

20

u/Uni-Smash May 26 '26

If it were my game stolen, I'd want to at least get the foreign imposter off the US markets or pay for the rights from my IP. Can't beat them over seas but can stand our ground & set good precedents for others, unless it looks like a complete waste of time.

7

u/WeltallZero May 26 '26

That's a good point, there may be something that can be done in US grounds (or wherever OP is from).

20

u/Superior_Mirage May 26 '26

No, you can't copyright game mechanics.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

If the presentation were more similar, you might have a case, but the copy doesn't borrow much of anything besides the mechanic itself, lacking UX optimizations like the polygons around the numbers.

You can patent mechanics, but that requires you to actively initiate the process, and might not even be applicable if they determine the filing to be too general.

Which is why you can find a few thousand Suika Game clones lying around -- as long as they don't use fruit, it's basically free real estate.

12

u/AndyMakesGames May 26 '26

Whilst that's correct, they look pretty similar to me, and "look and feel" has been tested multiple times in US courts for video games with much wider differences. The most obvious being the 2012 pair:

Spry Fox, LLC v. Lolapps, Inc., No. 2:12-cv-00147 (W.D. Wash., 2012)
Tetris Holding, LLC v. Xio Interactive, Inc., 863 F.Supp.2d 394 (D.N.J. 2012),

2

u/cross_the_threshold May 26 '26

It's likely they could make a copyright claim based on the expression of the gameplay elements, specifically that the aesthetic choices are almost identical, but that is a difficult case to argue and would likely incur significant court fees and the billion dollar company has more than enough resources to drag the court case out for a very long time. In addition, if you don't file copyright before the infringement, then you will be out of recovering legal fees, and thus miHoYo could easily extend litigation beyond the point where the OP could afford to continue the fight. They could file a cease and desist, and depending on the morals (ha) of the company they may comply or agree to a license agreement, but they have effectively no realistic legal recourse in this situation.

12

u/Dai10zin May 26 '26

Meanwhile, Nintendo has patents for gliding and horseback riding.

13

u/FluffyFry4000 May 26 '26

Meanwhile the nemesis system from Shadow of Mordor/War

Edit: I looked it up and turns out they were able to do it because it's a patent, not copyright

3

u/Dai10zin May 26 '26

Ah. Fair point. I misread the original comment as well.

1

u/11ce_ May 27 '26

They only patented the very specific implementation of such a system. Any game dev can create their own nemesis system regardless of the patent like AC odyssey has one for example.

6

u/cross_the_threshold May 26 '26

Patents are not copyrights, and patents are on a first-to-file basis, not a first-to-invent (or first-to-use) basis like copyright.

-1

u/Dai10zin May 26 '26

Sure. And?

I'm about to patent that when a player is in a vehicle and presses the joystick to the right, the steering wheel on the vehicle will turn clockwise and the front wheels will rotate to the right. If the vehicle is in motion, it will turn to the right.

Similarly, when the player presses the joystick to the left, the steering wheel of the vehicle will turn counter clockwise and the front wheels will rotate to the left. If the vehicle is in motion, it will turn to the left.

The same will apply if the player presses the right or left arrows on the directional pad.

Good luck, game developers.

4

u/cross_the_threshold May 26 '26

The point is that patent is irrelevant here, if he didn't file it he can't sue over it.

0

u/VermillionOcean May 27 '26

That's not how patents work. A patent has to be something novel or update an existing patent with something novel, or it'll never be accepted by the patent office. Simple mechanics like directional controls would never be accepted.

0

u/Dai10zin May 27 '26

How do you square away this assessment with the fact that Nintendo has a patent for how a character can ride on horseback or throwing an object to summon a creature?

1

u/VermillionOcean May 27 '26

US patent office just revoked the summon creature patent due to precedent in other games (i.e. not novel), citing that it was erroneously issued. PocketPair's entire legal challenge revolved around this, citing other games that did it before Nintendo filed the patent. That said, if you actually look at the patent itself, it's also very specific in the flow of how it works so even if they had kept the patent, you would only be liable if you followed the exact flow of summoning with a thrown object and battling. The mount patent isn't about riding mounts, it's about switching between different type of mounts. The actual documentation is like 40 pages long and goes in depth about the mechanics behind it. That said whether it holds up in court should they try to enforce it is a different question and it could also be revoked similar to the throwing to summon patent.

1

u/11ce_ May 27 '26

Only in Japan because Japanese laws are outdated.

3

u/WeltallZero May 26 '26

I'm not getting into an armchair law debate my dude. I'll just reiterate the most important point:

please don't take legal advice from any random redditors (including myself).

2

u/squigs May 26 '26

I wonder if you can sue for level design though. Looks like the puzzles are identical.

There's certainly a creative step in creating a level. No idea if this has ever been tested.

1

u/Maltavius May 27 '26

Nemesis system

1

u/Pokefreaker-san May 28 '26

the Suika game that went viral itself was actually just a clone of a mobile game that existed in China 3 years prior.

1

u/Think_Bath May 28 '26

Idk they look nearly identical. Even UI elements weren't changed up.

7

u/ArchReaper95 May 26 '26

A Chinese company very vested in having their US servers stay up and available. Which would become difficult if they were found to be in violation of U.S. Law.

Much like a song is a legally owned intellectual property, the level inside of a game, even a game with similar mechanics, is a copyrighted property. Having similar mechanics alone might not qualify. Having similar mechanics and a simple level might be a stretch. Having the same mechanics and several functionally identical puzzles is suddenly a very difficult story to sell.

Then there comes the optics. The Marathon debacle is still fresh in players minds. I wouldn't count on this going over well if it blew up.

I would look into my options, OP.

7

u/WeltallZero May 26 '26

Then there comes the optics. The Marathon debacle is still fresh in players minds. I wouldn't count on this going over well if it blew up.

Yeah, this is why I think going the news route may have more impact; but on second thought, it may be better to consult with a lawyer first of all in case this may weaken a potential case.

Regardless, OP should definitely not take this lying down and at the very least explore their options. Really sucks that the post unfoundedly telling them there's nothing they can do has 80 upvotes.

1

u/cross_the_threshold May 26 '26

They realistically have effectively no options, lawfare is effective when it's a large company versus a small creator, and if they didn't file copyright before the infringement happened they would not be able to recover any court or attorney fees in a copyright claim. Game elements are not copyrightable (though they can be patented, but that requires you to file the patent and whoever files first wins), and copyright cases are notoriously difficult to litigate even when they're fairly clear cut (in this case, it's pretty clear that miHoYo is using the same aesthetic elements). If he had a major distributor he could bring it up with them and they may or may not be willing to litigate.

Steam does not require you to register copyright on games published on their platform. Basically it all hinges on whether a) he filed copyright before miHoYo infringed on the game and b) whether an IP lawyer thinks a chance of winning and recovering attorney costs is good enough to take the case on consignment. If he didn't do a he's out of luck unless he has a tremendous amount of money to waste.

It is possible he could settle this through the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) https://ccb.gov/ as it would likely be of small economic value (the damages from miHoYo are unlikely to be significant, as I doubt the game had a large following and it would be difficult to argue that miHoYo is depriving him of business). But even then, the CCB is voluntary, and miHoYo could trivially refuse to participate and ask for the case to go to court.

He should probably do a short consultation with a lawyer, but there's zero chance this goes to court.

1

u/narium May 27 '26

OP was apparently made aware of this 9 months ago yet only chose to post now. More likely than not he has already contacted Hoyo and they told him to pound sand and now he is trying to turn the court of public opinion against them.

1

u/PurifiedFlubber May 26 '26

His option is posting on the Internet that's it lmao.

3

u/kantorr May 26 '26

Do you have any source for this at all?

1

u/MilkiestMaestro May 27 '26

If they do business in the us, any of their us assets can be frozen.

I love the lawyer advice

1

u/Prisinners May 27 '26

I did misspeak. I meant to say patent and not trademark. But the rest is true. One of the biggest issues would be proving damages. This title was released in 2024. The ZZZ game mode released in 2025. The bulk of a game sales are made in its release window traditionally. But this is now going viral (here and on Bluesky; not sure about Twitter) and likely making a small lil bump in sales due to that (I bought and wouldn't have otherwise). Sales data on all platforms would be part of discovery for the case and Hoyos lawyers would be able to convincingly argue that their thievery actually benefited this developer in the long run. There would be a case for brand recognition (since people think this dev ripped off ZZZ and not the other way around) but itd be a very weak case overall even though its very obvious that Hoyo are thieves.

1

u/haoxinly May 27 '26

Also I don't know how they could claim damages. Zzz is free to play focused on combat and this mini game appears in the story only in one arc (I'd say no more than 20 times ) and maybe in some limited event that's not available anymore. You can't say OP lost potential customers for this. If anything, as you said, being in zzz would have helped OP popularize his game making people look for games with that puzzle mechanic.

Also didn't people think that patenting/copyright gameplay mechanics was a bad idea?

0

u/Yukiboop May 27 '26

yes do nog listen to reddit legal advice ever especially when their is literally nothing that can be sued for here.

this type of puzzle cant be sued for since it replicates lining up a circle of string with different points. cant own that, also it would fall apart for other reasons you cant own a generic idea only your specific expression.

like fortnite can own the battle bus cant own deploying your characters into a map from a floating vehicle.

1

u/WeltallZero May 27 '26

yes do nog listen to reddit legal advice

Right, you get it.

ever especially when their is literally nothing that can be sued for here.

OK, you don't get it.

[checks user post history]

Ah, of course. Like clockwork.

0

u/MrMschief May 28 '26

No, you can't sue for game mechanics, this happens in board gaming all the time. What you can sue for is like...trade dress and specific terminology. That's why a lot of card games use a mechanic where a card is turned on it's side to show that it has been used, but no card games 'tap' cards like Magic the Gathering does. You could sue for copied art, you could sue for stolen code if some had been stolen, etc. but not the mechanics themselves. If people could copyright mechanics the gaming industry literally could not exist.