Idea Architecture

The Open Source revolution is here to stay, say most internet and computer experts. The open source revolution which has spiralled from writing operating system programms like Linux to application ‘widgets’ for various we based applications is currently in vougue with most programming savvy people indulging in. The advantage of the open source revolution is volunatry sharing of user generated ‘open’ source codes for the applications which can be sold at a price if the developer so intends, but essentially is a free to be upgraged, modified  and marketed by any user if he or she is also into coding. This is a tremendous opportuity for millions of computer programmers around the world who are able to use thier coding knowledge to build better models of a basic functional tool and market it for profits.

But there are many, for lack of a better word, discrepancies in the open source revolution. Take for instance a situation when an open source program creates an application which replicates a patented real world product, service or an experience in the virtual world. What are the rules which govern this? Is it in violation of the patent rules? This is exactly what is happening in the case of Hasbro vs Scrabulous. Scrabulous, developed by two Kolkata residents, Jayant and Rajat Agarwalla is the virtual version of the hit word game Scrabble which is a patented product owned by Hasbro.

Since the game was introduced as an application in the social networking site Facebook, the game has become a hot favorite of people around the world who use the social networking sites. And also as there is advertising involved in the whole scheme of things, there is vast revenue potential also. But now, Hasbro has woken up to the fact that Scrabulous is violating their patent for the original game of Scrabble and are miffed. Hasbro has insisted that Facebook needs to stop providing its users access to the game as it is in violation of their Intellectual Property.

This has caused serious reactions against Hasbro in the social networking world. Many ardent fans of the game have voiced their dissaproval of Hasbro’s insistence of removing the game from Facebook by publicly claiming that the company is being greedy by not allowing consumers have a better product (Scrabulous).

“I have burnt my Scrabble board in protest” 

commented on irate fan.

But are Hasbro wrong in doing what they are? I think it would be vastly incorrect if the intellectual property of the company be allowed to be exploited the way it has been. The power of social networking remains in the fact that most applications which are advertising magnets are based on the popularity of the product. Scrabble is one of the most popular games of all time and its virtual personification Scrabulous has no differences from the original real world version. Hence the product is still under domain of Hasbro’s intellectual property. If Facebook and the Agarwalla brothers are benefitting from the advertising reveneues of Scrabulous, then it is in breach of the intellectual property held by Hasbro.

Although the fans of the virtual game may be miffed, it is not correct to allow the game to continue in its present form, becuase of its popularity. The only suitable arrangement that can be found is if Hasbro were to benefit from the game of Scrabble being online and the company is willing to consider such a business model. Most people beleive that it is incorrect to steal another’s ideas, but find it hard to draw a line in such cases as there has been an effort by the Agarwalla brothers in developing the software, which people beleive allows them to market it. But, one should not forget that it is the primacy of ideas that an intellectual property defends and is of paramount importance if innovation is to continue.

But, there are problems at the other end of the spectrum also. For instance, this article in The American, titled “Courting Trouble on Patents” talks about the increase in the number of low quality patents being issued due to the sheer number of patent applications that need to be processed by the US Patents and Trademark Office (USPTO). With the costs and process of revoking these low quality patents being too high and cumbersome, the article argues patents might increasingly become a pain in the neck. While this is surely true, it is also a scary thought that intellectual property is not guarded and explotation like the Scrabulous case becomes prevalent. While, the Agarwalla brothers might not have intended to voilate serious patent laws while writing their open source code for Scrabulous, this incident is defenitely an important event in the often messy, but required process of safeguarding Intellectual Property.

Update: The story is getting murkier. The Agarwalla brothers have now relaunched the Scrabulous game under the name Wordscraper on Facebook. It already has a lot of fans and is getting more users hooked on regularly! Technically, as this version has some new rules and changes the squares of Scrabble to circles, it does not fall under the patent guidelines and it is free to be marketed. I was reading Mankiw’s textbook “The Principles of Economics” today morning on the topic of Externalites and how patents safegaurd against the negative externalities of not being able to generate a profit from one’s intellectual property. It makes me wonder how this above example shows that intellectual property is subject to ever more negative externalities and innovation is under threat in the new internet powered world. Yes, this may seem counter to most discussions today that the internet is the hotbed of innovation today. But, I beleive that it comes with a cost. The internet is turning propriety into a ‘fifteen mintues of fame’ kind of situation and I beleive that this is a foreseeable threat for the future of innovation. Aptly, the tagline for the newly launched game of Wordscraper is “Don’t follow rules, make them!”. I wonder what the consequences shall arise from this!