Bethesda Softworks is suing Warner Bros. and Fallout Shelter co-developer Behaviour Interactive over the recently released Westworld, alleging that the mobile game based on HBO’s TV series is a “blatant rip-off” of Fallout Shelter.
In a suit filed in a Maryland U.S. District Court, Bethesda alleges that Westworld — developed by Behaviour and released this week for Android and iOS — “has the same or highly similar game design, art style, animations, features and other gameplay elements” as Fallout Shelter.
Fallout Shelter was originally released in 2015 for mobile devices. The game was later ported to Nintendo Switch, PlayStation 4, Windows PC and Xbox One.
Bethesda said in its suit that Behaviour uses “the same copyrighted computer code created for Fallout Shelter in Westworld,” alleging that a bug evident in an early version of Fallout Shelter (which was later fixed) also appears in Westworld. Bethesda alleges the companies “copied Fallout Shelter’s features and then made cosmetic modifications for Westworld’s ‘western’ theme.”
The suit also alleges that “Behaviour breached its contract with Bethesda and utilized its restricted access to Bethesda’s intellectual property, including Bethesda’s copyrighted code, trade secrets, and other rights, to compress its development timeline, reduce costs, and quickly bring the Westworld mobile game to market, and offer players the widely popular gameplay experience found in Fallout Shelter.”
The suit points out similar gameplay features, including “cartoonish 2D characters in a 3D environment” and the underground multi-room facilities that players explore and build, in both Fallout Shelter and Westworld.
Bethesda is suing for copyright infringement, breach of contract and misappropriating trade secrets. The publisher is seeking a jury trial and damages.
Polygon has reached out to Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment and Behaviour Interactive for comment on Bethesda Softworks’ lawsuit, which you can read in full below.
Update: Warner Bros. provided the following statement to Polygon:
As one of the world’s leading creators of intellectual property, including the ground-breaking television series Westworld, Warner Bros. has a deep respect for intellectual property rights. As such, the assertions by Bethesda Softworks that Warner’s Westworld mobile game improperly used source code from Bethesda’s Fallout Shelter are as surprising as they are unsubstantiated. Warner Bros. has been assured by the game developer, Behaviour Interactive, that Bethesda’s allegations are untrue and that none of Bethesda’s code was used in the Westworld game. Moreover, contrary to Bethesda’s baseless accusation, Warner Bros. at no time “induced” Behavior to use the Fallout Shelter code in Westworld.
Bethesda Softworks LLC v. Behaviour Interactive, Inc. and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. by Polygondotcom on Scribd
Comments
What a bunch of BS. So i guess Bethesda owns an entire genre? Of course games occupying the same genre are going to have similar game design. I suppose the people that made Tiny Tower & Tiny Death Star, and other developers for similar games should all sue Bethesda for ripping them off.
By voodooman_71 on 06.22.18 11:27am
However, claiming that the dev uses "the same copyrighted computer code created for Fallout Shelter in Westworld," including "bug evident in an early version of Fallout Shelter [that] also appears in Westworld" is more than simply suing over genre similarities.
By greyjk on 06.22.18 11:31am
Yeah, there is a difference in ripping off a general game idea and actually ripping out code from a game. That’s what the headline should be. Huge difference.
By NinJustin on 06.22.18 11:33am
Did you even read the article?
If, as Bethesda says, Behaviour had access to their code under contract, and then mysteriously created the exact game for someone else – With the exact same bug as Fallout Shelter had, then that’s pretty shifty, no?
Don’t muddle this up with the PUBG suit.
By LittleRitzo on 06.22.18 11:32am
That’s actually a very relevant thing to bring up because I don’t know that it’s as cut and dry as people seem to think (even without getting into the context of Korean law). In this case, Bethesda is going after Behaviour because they made the game, it’s not about specific assets necessarily (which is also true of Epic/Bluehole). Bethesda are saying not just that Behaviour had insider knowledge but also re-used code outside the scope of the contract. This is similar to when Epic counter-sued Silicon Knights saying that they re-used elements/code from Unreal in games other than Too Human, outside of their contract, and got some cash / prohibited Silicon Knights from selling those other games.
The reasoning behind Bluehole’s case, though, isn’t just about making the exact same game / play-style. The issue is going to be that they licensed the game engine from Epic, so, like in this case, Epic probably had access to no small part of their code, designs, planning, etc. In the support world, you don’t just say "what specific value do you want this equation to come out to," you work with a client to develop an understanding of the project’s scopes, purposes, etc., to make sure your product/service is being leveraged in a way that’s to their best benefit.
On top of that, they’re unhappy about Epic’s using them in marketing material to promote the engine without their permission (which, if anything, is good evidence of Epic trying to profit from their licensee beyond the scope of the contract / inappropriately).
If Epic developed a near clone of Bluehole’s game at a time when they were contractually supporting them, that’s pretty shifty. In the Bethesda/Behavior case, they’re saying the presence of a given bug confirms that the code was copied. Working in the opposite direction, who’s to say that a given bug isn’t present in Fortnite because Epic, in their support relationship with Bluehole, was part of resolving it and/or had a better understanding of the code because that relationship let them see how to avoid the bug? Those are the kinds of questions that Epic is inviting.
People are pretty quick to say anyone is free to clone any game, but it’s the relationship between the two companies that makes it shifty of Epic to actually do so. They’re entirely free to make a game with the exact same mechanics, but, again, it’s pretty shifty to do so when you likely have access to someone else’s code due to your support relationship. It’s not that different from when Sony worked with Nintendo to design and create a CD-drive for the SNES and then went behind their back to make and bring to market the Playstation. That’s shifty.
By nearly on 06.22.18 7:15pm
Bluehole has a case that needs to get sorted out, but in this case I’m pretty sure it’s egregious wholesale theft.
By Tommy21toes on 06.23.18 1:38am
You’ve got that backwards..Nintendo went behind Sony’s back and announced that they had partnered with Phillips instead.. from Wikipedia: "Development of the format started in 1988, when Nintendo signed a contract with Sony to produce a CD-ROM add-on for the SNES. The system was to be compatible with existing SNES titles as well as titles released for the Super Disc format.78 Under their agreement, Sony would develop and retain control over the Super Disc format, with Nintendo thus effectively ceding a large amount of control of software licensing to Sony. To counter this, Nintendo president Hiroshi Yamauchi sent Nintendo of America president Minoru Arakawa and executive Howard Lincoln to Europe to negotiate a more favorable contract with Philips, Sony’s industry rival. At the June 1991 Consumer Electronics Show, Sony announced its SNES-compatible cartridge/CD console, the "Play Station".7 The next day, Nintendo revealed its partnership with Philips at the show—a surprise to the entire audience, including Sony. While Nintendo and Sony attempted to sort out their differences, between two and three hundred prototypes of the PlayStation were created,910 and software for the system was being developed. In 1992, a deal was reached allowing Sony to produce SNES-compatible hardware, with Nintendo retaining control and profit over the games, but the two organizations never repaired the rift between them and by the next year, Sony had refocused its efforts on developing its own console for the next generation of consoles." …that’s shitty.
By Seth Rogaine on 06.23.18 12:01pm
Hey c’mon…reading comprehension is hard, okay? Who has time to read and retain when they have knee jerk comments to make?
By Oldnaud on 06.23.18 5:49pm
Going to go ahead and say you didn’t read the article. If what they allege is true then it makes perfect sense to bring a lawsuit into play.
By KilroyWasHere1 on 06.22.18 11:33am
I suggest reading the article in full before commenting. Clearly stealing code is different matter than being inspired by tone and direction.
By GAME THEORY on 06.22.18 11:55am
I suggest reading the article in full next time so you don’t get a bunch of people replying to say that you should have read the article first.
By Quint126 on 06.22.18 12:27pm
I’m not going to read the comments. I’m just going to say that that guy should have read the article first.
By mondeca on 06.22.18 2:55pm
Since you didn’t bother reading it, Behavior made Fallout Shelter for Bethesda. Behavior made Westworld for WB with the same code and some tweaks. Bethesda owns the code that Behavior used, even though they wrote it. Bethesda has a rock solid case.
By Tommy21toes on 06.22.18 12:31pm
Wait, you did read that they allege their CODE was used, right?
This isn’t a PUBG style sour grapes lawsuit. Sounds like they have a very good case to me, of course IANAL.
By Mygaffer on 06.22.18 6:03pm
Good job the X-com devs didn’t go after Bethesda for blatantly ripping off the base building mechanics from their games, right?
Bethesda really need to chill the fudge out.
By Luciferous on 06.22.18 11:30am
Again, did you even read the article?
If the developer had access to their trade secrets, and then mysteriously created a game that’s so identical to Fallout Shelter, it even has the same bug in the same place – Then maybe they’re right?
By LittleRitzo on 06.22.18 11:33am
If I’m being 100% honest I skimmed it, my bad really.
By Luciferous on 06.22.18 12:42pm
This is a rare mea culpa on the internet and bless you for it sir
By PointyThings on 06.22.18 1:04pm
It’s fine, we all skim things from time to time. So long as you can go back later and know what truly happened, little harm’s done.
By LittleRitzo on 06.22.18 1:24pm
Skimming and then commenting is another animal.
By Tommy21toes on 06.23.18 1:47am
The main issue seems to be the reusing of copyrighted code, not game mechanics
By Daphadil on 06.22.18 11:33am
The X-Com devs would go after Bethesda if Bethesda wrote X-Com, sold it to them, and then used the same game code to create a competitor (Z-Com or whatever). Bethesda owns that game now and Behavior can’t turn around and sell it to WB with some asset changes.
By Tommy21toes on 06.22.18 12:35pm
As a couple other commenters here I was about to be a little upset at Bethesda for this one, but the article paints a completely different picture than the headline suggests. The headline makes it seem like a "your game looks like mine" lawsuit, but the fact that they stole code directly from Fallout Shelter is a totally different thing.
By nos.is.lame on 06.22.18 11:41am
I think the title is misleading. Bethesda is suing them for using code and assets developed with Fallout Shelter in the Westworld game. That is more like accusing them of theft.
By bardler on 06.22.18 11:45am
If Behaviors contract with Bethesda says that Bethesda owned the code (as they assert), and it did not give them a license to use for other things (and I’d be pretty shocked if it did), then they’re screwed, and they’re going to get it coming from both sides, since I’m sure they had to warrant to WB that they owned or had the right to use everything in the WW game they developed.
And what is worse is that every future potential partner that considers using Behaviors services, is now going to be concerned that their intellectual property will be in jeopardy.
By Unlikely on 06.22.18 11:58am