I was asked my opinion on games that pass themselves off as something else in order to mislead consumers into purchasing that game rather than the one they are passing off. I put forward a hypothetical example where I believe this would be the case. I also stated that it would not just be immoral it would also be illegal. I don't believe clones are are trying to mislead the consumer. They are simply offering more of the same. And do the complaints of clones include suggestions that their code and assets have been copied? No. Therfore nobody has copied an implementation of an idea. Hence why I believe they are just the right side of the law. It matters in a huge, this is how innovation works kind of way. The intial idea and the implementation are two different things. I just don't understand what you're talking about. To have copyright it has to be an actual manifested idea - something that you can hold up and show to someone. If you can't show me a piece of paper with the implementation on (be it source code or art) then I'm sorry, it does mean it's not covered under copyright. This is all getting tiresome, not only for me, but for everybody who has the misfortune to read this thread. I keep giving illustrations on the difference between an idea and an implementation of that idea. I have given a very recent court case, copyright office quotes from two major countries, all saying that an idea behind a game is not copyrighted. You seem to accept an idea can't be copyrighted but what else other than ideas does a clone take from another game? Ola, until you accept the difference between an idea and the implementation of an idea you're going to struggle to come to terms with my point of view and indeed what copyright actually is. Perhaps it might be worth buying a book on the subject - I'm just going around in circles here. Maybe we can leave the legal discussion alone now? Can you accept that clones are just on the right side of the law and instead tell me why you believe you should be allowed to use Breakout's game design but nobody is allowed to use your Bricks Of.. design? And while you're at it - do you think Zuma is a clone of PuzzLoop and should Zuma be allowed? Rinku: Because if we establish that it's ok to use ideas from games - and we all do it that's for sure - it becomes a case of people in glass houses throwing bricks. I'm not sure what gives somebody the right to point to someone else and say "sorry - you have not innovated enough, we feel your game shouldn't be allowed".