Legal Regulation of “Skinning” Games
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/w2njgc77Keywords:
“Skinning” Games, Copyright Law, Intellectual Property Protection, Anti-unfair CompetitionAbstract
The development of video games has formed a complex and diversified huge system. It is precisely because of the variety of modern video games and abundant layers, "skinning" games and other infringement problems are endless. What kind of electronic games are worth protecting, and which part of them need to be protected, is the problem of today's legislation and justice. Judicial practice is basically through the copyright law or anti-unfair competition law to regulate the infringement of electronic games, but both have different degrees of inadequacy. If the development of "skinning" games is allowed to continue, the excellent but small-scale and medium-sized game developers will be driven out of the game market, and the future of electronic games will not go too far. Therefore, it is essential to strengthen intellectual property protection and improve the level of innovation by setting up a special category of protection through the Copyright Law and leading the development of the video game industry by judicial means.
Downloads
References
Qian Wang, ‘The Negation of Video Game Rules’ [2024] Law 23 <https://kns.cnki.net/ KCMS/detail/ detail.aspx? dbcode= CJFD &dbname=CJFDLAST2024&filename=fxzz202403010> accessed 25 May 2024.
Zhang, ‘Skin Game’ in Does Video Game Playing Need Copyright Protection? (Rampage, Zhihu 2021) <1> accessed 22 January 2023.
Sonali D Maitra, ‘It’s How You Play the Game: Why Videogame Rules Are Not Expression Protected by Copyright Law’ (2015) 7(4) Landslide 34.
US Copyright Office, Copyright Registration of Games (US Government Publishing Office 2020) https://www. copyright. gov/ circs/circ108.pdf accessed 22 October 2023
Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., et al. v Shanghai Youyi Network Technology Co., Ltd. (2014) Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court HZMCZ No 23.
Jiangsu Province Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court, (2019) Su 05 Zhi Chu No 1169 Civil Judgment (Jiangsu Province Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court 2019) <1> accessed 22 October 2023.
Niu H, ‘Research on the Identification of Video Game “Skin Swapping” Infringement’ (2022) 41(16) Henan Science and Technology 121.
Nexon Holdings v Tencent et al. [2006] Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court YZMCZ No 8564.
Data East USA v Epyx Inc, 862 F.2d 204, 209 (9th Cir 1988).
Nexon Holdings v Tencent et al. [2006] Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court YZMCZ No 8564.
He C and Li Y, ‘Analysis of the Dilemma and Countermeasures of the Division System’ (2020) Electronic Intellectual Property 17.
Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law to the Trial of Civil Cases of Unfair Competition (2008) Bull Sup People’s Ct (China) 1
Taichi Panda vs Flower and Bone. [2018]Jiangsu High People's Court SGMZZ No1054.
Tencent v 360Guard, Supreme People’s Court (2013) MZ No 5.
Tianxiang He, ‘From Single-Player Games to Metaverse: A Futuristic Analysis of Challenging Legal Issues in the Video Game Industry in China’ (2022) 71 GRUR International 952 <https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikac039> accessed 25 May 2024.
Zhao Z, ‘Dilemma and Countermeasures: A Study on the Judicial System of Online Game “Skin Changing” Behavior’ (2021) 33(4) Journal of Chongqing Radio and Television University 53.
Anti-Unfair Competition Law (People's Republic of China, 1993).
Guangdong Civil Final No 763 Civil Judgment (2020) High People’s Court of Guangdong Province.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
