Blog Name: Andy's Global View
Blog URL: http://amglobal.blogspot.com/
RSS Feed:
Location: Washington, DC, United States
Blog Summary: Andrew Mack is the founder and Principal of AMGlobal Consulting. A seasoned, innovative professional with over 20 years experience in international business and international development. Andrew has worked in some 70 countries around the world with special emphasis on Emerging Markets in Africa, Latin America and Asia.
This blog has been active since: June,2006
Post: Scrabulous, Scrabble, and Economic Development in South Asia /Friday, 25 April
Scrabulous, Scrabble, and Economic Development in South Asia
In February I made my first visit to the Subcontinent, in Delhi, for the regional meeting of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN. In the main hall there were business and government leaders from around the region. At one of the side events an innovative new registry, dot asia, was launched.
Everything about the event spoke of economic dynamism and to me, of the benefit of an economic system – and longer term economic growth – built on a strong foundation of Intellectual Property (IP) rights. But most entrepreneurs in South Asia and other Emerging Markets (EMs) are still not fundamentally interested in the IP debate. They do see themselves as authors, or artists, or techies, but they don’t see themselves as IP entrepreneurs.
Personally I think this is a tremendous missed opportunity, with long-term implications for economic development.
The rolled eyes phenomenon
Of course if you get into a discussion of IP protection, many people will roll their eyes. Issues of IP are seen in the negative, largely defined by our nearly universal dislike – and this seems to be a global phenomenon – of lawyers. Add to this the general skepticism about the functioning of the courts in South Asia – and most people back away from IP.
However, to my eyes the IP protection debate is not about lawyers at all, but about the very entrepreneurs on whom so much hope is placed. I take as an almost frivolous example the case of the brothers from Calcutta that produced Scrabulous...
The Calcutta brothers who made Scrabulous
Now in the interest of full disclosure, I am a big Scrabble fan. I love playing. I have the computer game on my PC, and I play a lot. I know enough of the two letter words and obscure words beginning with Q that few of my friends will even play with me any more.
So you’d think that something like Scrabulous would have real appeal for me. But I think they should close down the program, and the sooner the better.
There are a number of reasons, of course, starting most obviously with the idea the brothers are hawking, which isn’t theirs to sell. The fact that Scrabulous is for fun and not for profit is irrelevant. It’s no different than piracy of any sort. If I write a book, it’s mine to sell, or license, or give away as I see fit.
Next, you have to consider the Scrabulous phenomenon and ask yourself – is Scrabulous really creating any real value for India? True, in the short term there might be some work for a few lawyers and a PR firm or two. But a few billable hours do not an economic powerhouse make…
Plain fun vs economic value
Compare Scrabulous with the original board game. Scrabble (the idea, using IP protection) has provided value for 50 years. The developers licensed the name to Hasbro, and again to Mattel. Money made, taxes paid, employment provided—the seeds of economic growth. From there the game spread around the world, long before the existence of the Internet. Again, people were hired in manufacturing and promotion in different countries. The game entered into the world’s consciousness. It was a good idea, made possible in part because of IP protection.
Scrabulous, on the other hand, will likely be gone within the year. Not much economic value there for India or the world.
There are many in Emerging Markets that get caught up in arguments around the high cost of IP. And its true, some IP – whether music, or film, or software, or whatever – can be costly. However, if we are really focused on building long-term opportunity in Emerging Markets, a short-term focus on the cost of IP misses the point.
I often hear that Bill Gates or Madonna (or in the case of Scrabulous, Hasbro) won't miss a few rupees if their IP is pirated. Maybe so. However, there is something much larger at stake. Emerging Markets entrepreneurs and government officials talk frequently about their desire to promote investment and growth and protect their own IP and CP (cultural property). They decry the lack of available finance for growth, and complain that they don’t get the best and latest goods and products.
From value to development
South Asia, as well as other Emerging Markets, can't seek to create an environment that will promote rapid, information-based, high-skill economic growth while tolerating loose IP standards. Experience shows that you simply can't have it both ways.
Why? They simply won’t attract as much investment in the long term. They won’t have the same ability to retain good talent. They won’t be able to build wealth. They won’t build competitiveness. And they won’t be able to and create alliances with companies that can give them access to global markets.
So, Emerging Markets need to recognize the role that IP protection can play in economic development, from creating employment, to strengthening the middle class, to ensuring economic independence and cultural preservation.
Requisite for the next IP entrepreneur
South Asians need to demand the kind of business environment that will help them thrive, and the improvements to the courts that will help them protect and leverage their country’s good ideas. In the words of Sourabh Gupta, a Washington, DC-based Indian trade and development analyst, they need to build “a body of case law that is pro-innovation and pro-IP protection to help underpin their aspirations of upward mobility.”
It’s not about today’s Bill Gates. It’s about tomorrow’s Bill Gates, the one who might come from India or Bangladesh or any other Emerging Market.
And as Gupta says, the opportunity “will only be as strong as the energies invested by those most materially affected – the vast multitude of small entrepreneurs.”
In the end, if we are truly serious about what we claim to want so badly – investment, jobs, to be taken seriously on the world economic stage, to become economic drivers, not just followers – then we need IP protection.
Because unlike Scrabble, economic development is no game.
Blog Name: Angry African
Blog URL: http://angryafrican.wordpress.com
RSS Feed: http://angryafrican.wordpress.com/feed
Location: South Africa
Blog Summary: Angry African on the Loose
This blog has been active since: December 2007
Post: Make It Better: Scrabulous - Can someone shoot the lawyers please / March 2, 2008
Make It Better: Scrabulous - Can someone shoot the lawyers please
I have to confess that I went through a phase of addiction. To Scrabulous on Facebook. I played it with my friends in Australia, and with my wife sitting across me in the lounge. I now have it under control. I only have about 2 games going at the same time and only play at night. Now it seems as if this will be taken away.
By Mattel and Hasbro - the owners of Scrabble. And, surprise, surprise, the fight is being led by the corporate lawyers.
I am not surprised that the lawyers are heading this up. They’ll take any case if they can smell that they might win. I guess it comes from losing so often. And corporate lawyers are especially pathetic. Couldn’t make it in the courtroom or on their own. So decided to be the ‘fact-checker’ that cross the t’s and dot the i’s. Boy, do I have a special dislike for them.
They have been at the heart of almost every failure that I have worked on. Mind you, not failure because of our work or advice. But failure because they didn’t agree with our way or our advice. Let me give you a classic example.
I worked with a large company that was the target of a major trademark campaign by activists and an African government. Our advice? Just agree to sign the agreement they want you to sign. Yes, you might have a legal case, but most of these cases have nothing to do with whether you are legally right or wrong.
Being legally right does not equal morally right. Legal justice does not mean doing what is just. The campaigners will just argue that the system is in favor of ‘Big Business’ and that the little guys always get the short end of the stick. It’s a ‘no win’ for the company.
And, most importantly, you can’t win a popularity contest with a respectable campaigning non-profit or an African country. Everyone got this, except the lawyers. They argued that it could set a precedent. That it might (yes might) hurt the company - they were wrong. So the company continued to fight the legal case.
And we continued to argue that they need to just sign the bloody agreement - their well earned reputation was getting hammered. We eventually told them that they WILL sign an agreement. Not because we say so, but that was just the way it works out in the end in these campaigns - hey, I headed up a few campaigns while at Oxfam.
It dragged out for more than a year. The company got hammered. Their reputation was shot. The end result? They agreed to sign the agreement…
I continue to fight the corporate lawyers at every turn. We argue - just be transparent and tell people everything. The lawyers? No, can’t do that - too risky. (I bet you that the tobacco industry got the same advice from their lawyers from day one). We argue - sign an agreement with the local community that you will respect their rights.
The lawyers? No, can’t do that - too risky. We argue - be open at the board level about pay. The lawyers? No, can’t do that - too risky. At every turn we bump into them. This roadblock stopping all progress. And the end result? The lawyers are wrong, the company’s reputation is damaged, and we look like asses for being right.
Why could the lawyers not be told to shut the hell up and let the ‘money makers’ in the company run things. I have had two CEO’s tell the lawyers to stop telling him what he can’t do and rather help him make things possible. Instead of stopping things from happening, make sure that every legal angle is covered to make things happen. Be part of progress, don’t stop it. And in both cases the company benefited from the result. Better relations, more respected brands, and innovative changes.
What should Hasbro and Mattel have done? Tell the lawyers to shut the hell up. And ask the marketing people to speak to the developers about getting their name attached to Scrabulous. Imagine - 500,000 free hits every single day.
Free advertising on one of the most popular social networks available. Instead? 500,000 potential campaigners against Hasbro and Mattel. Instead of free advertising and potential clients? Free dislike and loss of clients. I for one won’t be replacing my Scrabble game soon. And won’t buy the game for my friends as I was planning on doing. And I blame the corporate lawyers for that.
Can someone just shoot the corporate lawyers so we can start making some money and enjoy a better life.
Scrabble, Controlling Authority
Blog Name: Controlling Authority
Blog URL: http://controllingauthority.wordpress.com/
RSS Feed:
Location:
Blog Summary: A legal Studies blog
This blog has been active since: Jan, 2008
Post: Scrabble / March 2, 2008
Scrabble
Hasbro and Mattel claim that on-line Scrabble is piracy. I guess a lot of people are playing it on Facebook where it is called Scrabulous but the rules and points are exactly the same. As many of you know, I play at www.isc.ro, I just checked my stats and I have played 1,641 games over about 4 years.
Both the sites are hosted on servers outside the U.S. Scrabulous in India and ISC in Romania. This makes it more difficult/impossible for Hasbro and Mattel to shut them down.
NoObamaKoolAid is going to love my suggestion to the companies: get the domain scrabble.com and start making money. Make the site really fun and easy to use. Let people play free if they are willing to look at ads but allow them to buy a membership that would allow them to play without being bothered by ads.
Give one player name free and let them buy more if they want. In short, build a better website where people can play scrabble and people will come. Why don’t they even try?
I am confident about my site in Romania staying up, but they could force the hand of facebook pretty easily. Or, license it to facebook for a fee. Facebook is making plenty of dough. I’m just saying people want to play scrabble, isn’t that good for the company? They just have to figure out how to get them to play on their website versus others.
Blog Name: ...on pampers, programming & pitching manure
Blog URL: http://www.kimpallister.com/
RSS Feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/kpallist
Blog Summary: "A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." - Robert A. Heinlein
Location: Bellevue : Washington : United States
This blog has been active since: 2005, January
Post: The Scrabulous Solution: An Open Letter to Mark Zuckerberg / 20.01.2008
The Scrabulous Solution: An Open Letter to Mark Zuckerberg
Dear Mark,
Following last week’s announcement by Hasbro (and later Mattel, who have the Euro rights) that they were pursuing legal action against two developers in India that made Scrabulous, the Internet has been abuzz with the collective worry that 600k people may lose their beloved Facebook pastime.
It would be a shame for all those involved if Scrabulous were to go away. With over six hundred thousand people registered, Scrabulous is one of Facebook’s most popular applications. The outcome of the situation will affect the satisfaction of Facebook’s customers. It will have impact on perception of Facebook as a viable development platform, and on Facebook’s relationship with its developers (indifferent beneficiary, or protective and nurturing parent?). Facebook’s actions here will also send a message to owners of consumer brands and IP owners about Facebook’s respect for their concerns, and many of these companies could well be future advertisers or partners.
Facebook’s actions here will also be highly visible. The Hasbro threat to the makers of scrabulous was widely written about and even covered on national television.
In my eyes there seem to be three courses of action for Facebook, only two of which are viable, and only one of which is a good idea.
The possible courses of actions are as follows:
1. Step in and help the developers in their legal fight against Hasbro. I believe this to be the non-viable path, or at best sub-optimal. They are quite clearly violating Hasbro’s IP at multiple levels, from look and feel to game rule set, to even the questionable porte-manteau naming. Even if you helped Scrabulous win, this course of action would be bad publicity and costly.
2. Do Nothing. This is a perfectly viable course of action. After all, Hasbro’s not suing Facebook, but rather the devs. However, what’s at stake is bad publicity, the possible loss of one of your most popular third party applications, and with it, the loss of a significant amount of customer engagement.
3. Broker a winning solution for all parties. I believe this is feasible, and is the best course of action. Everyone wins, it’s not significantly expensive, and the possible upside is significant.
So what does this winning solution look like? I’ll first lay out the steps involved, and then the benefits for each party.
First, Facebook acquires Scrabulous. That could mean acquiring the developers in which case you get a couple smart engineers to help implement the steps below, but at minimum, you buy the Scrabulous codebase, the servers running the service today, and the player database.
Secondly, broker a deal with Hasbro (& Mattel) where:
* Scrabulous will be updated in two phases: (1) rebranding it as “Scrabble” or “Scrabble For Facebook” immediately, and (2) at a later date a “Scrabble Pro” will be added as a premium subscription service (more on this later in this post).
* Hasbro, with Facebook’s help, develops “Scrabble Pro” as part of the exercise of getting familiar with the Scrabulous codebase, server administration, etc.
* Hasbro takes possession of the codebase and manages the servers, following the launch of the Pro version of the game. At this point, Facebook is hands-off.
* The subscription business (say a 5% uptake out of what by then may be a 1M userbase, at say $25/yr, would make this a $1.25M/yr business at minimum) goes to Hasbro. Optionally, Facebook could have some recoupable amount out of this to recoup engineering costs in helping with the transfer of code and the interim running of the service, but this seems like a nit.
What is the ‘pro’ version of Scrabble and why would users choose to pay the subscription fee? Hasbro would have a better idea what would resonate with their players, but here are some ideas:
* Richer stats tracking (how many bingos and with whom? Pie charts of wins/losses. Avg score per game, etc.
* Scrabble variants (alternative dictionaries, Clabbers, speed-scrabble, etc)
* Better chat functionality
* Tournament private tables/lobbies
* Leaderboards
* Etc
OK, so why is this final scenario on which I’ve elaborated the “win-win-win-win” solution? Let’s recap:
* The developers of Scrabulous get to cash out and/or get employed by Facebook, and are no longer threatened with Hasbro legal action.
* Hasbro acquires one of Facebook’s most successful apps, has a head start on creating a successful subscription games service within Facebook, and acquires a community of 600,000 users.
* Facebook gets Hasbro as a partner, keeps its customers happy, doesn’t lose one of its top apps, and gets a proof point for a business model that other developers and IP holders may choose to follow. The corporate image avoids egg on the face and is seen as helping out the little guy.
* Scrabulous players don’t lose their beloved game, and have a chance to add new features and variants by upgrading.
What’s to lose?
Regards,
Kim “Scrabulous Fan” Pallister
Blog Name: 5 Blogs Before Lunch:
Blog URL: http://daveibsen.typepad.com/5_blogs_before_lunch/
RSS Feed:
Blog Summary:
Location:
This blog has been active since:
Post: The Owners of Scrabble Are None Too Happy With The Success of Facebook's Scrabulous / 16.01.2008
The Owners of Scrabble Are None Too Happy With The Success of Facebook's Scrabulous
With 260,000 players on weekdays and about double that number on weekends, the Facebook version of Scrabble--called Scrabulous, is a huge success. Unfortunately, Scrabble's owners, Hasbro and Mattel aren't seeing a dime of it.
In legal circles that's called copyright infringement.
The application was developed in Calcutta, India, by software developers Jayant and Rajat Agarwalla and launched at the end of June. They have a website version, as well as a Facebook portal. The Facebook portal allows users of the social networking site to play with their friends and others in the network.
The software developers say they placed their version of Scrabble on Facebook after approaching Hasbro (which owns the rights to the game in the US and Canada) and received no response.
Isn't that kind of like knocking on the door of a house, and, if the owners don't answer you walk in and make yourself at home?
According to Brand Republic, initially the pair said that they were targeting just a few thousand users, but within weeks the Scrabulous application had 20,000 users and was growing fast and making the pair around $20,000 a month.
The folks at Mashable explain the game this way:
For anyone that loves to play Scrabble, this application lets you do it your way. There are options to play with other users that aren’t even online. This way, you can let your Scrabble game go on forever. Well, maybe not forever, but at least you can play when you want to play.
Once you’ve added Scrabulous, you can choose to host a game, start a game with a friend, see who’s online now, find a friend that’s currently playing, or join a table.
Now Hasbro has responded jointly with Mattel, which owns the rights to the board game internationally, and asked the applications be pulled.
The addictive quality of the game is explained by the folks at LifeClever:
"I have a confession. The reason why you’ve heard barely a peep from me isn't because I’ve been Tasered by zealous cops or abducted by aliens. Truth is, I've been fiendishly playing Scrabble Scrabulous on Facebook. I swear, it's like a Krispy Kreme donut with sprinkles of crack on top.
"After its integration with Facebook, Scrabulous is now delightful, convenient, and sticky. It's a great example of how to take a classic standalone product and turn it into an online service that connects emotionally and deeply with people.
