[wormius]

Assets are copyrighted, are these not the same assets? Did one not take the assets of another or are these open source graphics and anyone is free to use them? If they can shut down a youtube video because some rando asshole DMCAs it for a few seconds of audio in the background I'm not sure why wholesale art ripping off wouldn't be justifiable?

Especially considering the point of DMCA is "TAKE DOWN ASK QUESTIONS LATER" (I hate DMCA, so I'm not saying I'm in favor of it, but it's odd that big players get to abuse this, and scammers get to abuse this (and maybe this is a scammer?) but people who apparently have their own art assets (assuming this isn't open) isn't allowed to use the same tools the big players use? I'm not talking about "a copy of a game".

Or is this a case where the ad uses graphics of one thing but the actual game doesn't use the same graphics?

[RandomThoughts3]

> Assets are copyrighted, are these not the same assets?

Only for the advertising part apparently. I didn’t see the trailer but the poster was relatively samy but different enough to not be a copy. The game seems widely different (and a lot less good).

As I said it’s clearly riffing on the marketing campaign of the complaining indie game in a disingenuous way but it doesn’t seem to be a DMCA infringement as far as I can tell.

Don’t get me wrong, I have no sympathy for the studio trying to make money with a boring idle game by plagiarising the marketing of a good game. It’s just that the title is both aggressive and inaccurate enough to really tick me off.