> Are we not really allowed to make Icehouse games, but Andy just looks the other way?
You know, it's never been made clear. I think it could be an
uncomfortable issue (i.e. it might take more money than the Looney's can
spare to stave off anyone making an game book that is labeled as "for
the Icehouse Game System"). But the name Icehouse is copyrighted, so one
might have to use double-speak or get permission to specify the most
common source of "transparent and opaque stackable pyramids in three
different sizes."
However, I have asked more than once (admittedly, buried somewhere in a
related post) about publishing Icehouse System rules, and I've never
seen a reply. For instance, I think the game Stacktors! (if ever refined
and completed) would make for a great and colorful single-sheet,
two-sided, laminated POD product. I have also asked about re-packaging
sets: could someone print rules to ONLY their games, then buy TH sets in
bulk to package with the printed game as a "complete set" (ex:
Stacktors! sold with a full spectrum of TH Rainbow and Xeno sets
resorted into mono stashes)?
Anyway, I too have been curious about the true legal status of rules
involving the pyramids for a little while now (part of why I release
into Creative Commons most of my "light games"). One can patent a
design; one can copyright a name; one can even patent a rules mechanic
("tapping" a card in Magic is patented!). But can one who holds all
three of those actually DO anything to someone who doesn't violate any
of them AND who, in fact, will generate additional sales? (FYI, any
legal action against infringement has to prove a loss to be compensated;
hard to do if you actually are selling more product due to the
"violation.")
But I ain't a lawyer... I'm just asking the Looneys again;
David