[shdon]

Honestly, Candy Crush and CandySwipe, while both using the candy theme, are rather different in terms of gameplay. Unlike the Scamperghost case, it is certainly not the case that Candy Crush is a copy of CandySwipe or even derivative. Candy Crush is the better game at least in terms of polish and long-term playability.

I won't deny King's douchiness in the trademark case, which will no doubt hurt Mr. Ransom and Runsome Games, but this is not like the Scamperghost case (and nowhere does Mr. Ransom imply that it is -- he's just calling out King on its evil scheme of attempting to quash a pre-existing trademark).

[JangoSteve]

True, but gameplay was never really the issue in terms of trademarking "Candy" (and "Saga" or whatever else). The interesting thing is that, in order to defend a trademark, you have to prove that there is potential for confusion. Here we have someone who supposedly had a confusingly-similar trademark before Candy Crush showing actual user confusion (i.e. no need to argue potential if you can show it's already happening).

[shdon]

The douchiness of King's move is not in question. I'm just pointing out that, apart from generally being similarly evil, it's not at all related to the Scamperghost thing. We should be angry at King for two different ways in which they are evil, not two counts of the same thing. If anything, this makes them worse.