24 votes

The new Flappy Bird game has a hidden secret; crypto

10 comments

  1. [10]
    arqalite
    Link
    This wasn't a sale, they just scooped up the trademark because Nguyen didn't renew it. I guess it's legal but it feels scummy IMO. Either way, the original APK is still floating around the...

    Honestly I'm sad that Nguyen sold the assets to... whatever the fuck this is, but on the other hand I hope he made a lot of money and is in a better place mentally now (for context, he shut down Flappy Bird because its success was taking a toll on him). This wasn't a sale, they just scooped up the trademark because Nguyen didn't renew it. I guess it's legal but it feels scummy IMO.

    Either way, the original APK is still floating around the internet so if anyone craves the original experience they can just download it. It would have been nice to have it back on the Play Store, but there are already so many clones and knockoffs that people might struggle to find it in the first place.

    I'd stay away from this "new" version though. Flappy Bird didn't need multiplayer back then, and certainly didn't need crypto - that hasn't changed yet.

    14 votes
    1. [6]
      stu2b50
      Link Parent
      He didn’t make a penny from it. He just didn’t renew the trademark lol. You can’t really blame anyone but him for that, though.

      Honestly I'm sad that Nguyen sold the assets to... whatever the fuck this is, but on the other hand I hope he made a lot of money and is in a better place mentally now

      He didn’t make a penny from it. He just didn’t renew the trademark lol.

      You can’t really blame anyone but him for that, though.

      18 votes
      1. [5]
        arqalite
        Link Parent
        Yeah, I just noticed that, this is somehow even worse 😭

        Yeah, I just noticed that, this is somehow even worse 😭

        3 votes
        1. [4]
          stu2b50
          Link Parent
          Is what it is. By its nature trademark is something that has been to actively defended (and demonstrated that you use it). Unlike copyright, trademark is inherently vague - you're protecting the...

          Is what it is. By its nature trademark is something that has been to actively defended (and demonstrated that you use it). Unlike copyright, trademark is inherently vague - you're protecting the IDEA, the image of something. Because it's so broad and vague, it necessities more active defense that you still "own" it.

          If the original author can't be bothered to do so, it's only fair someone else nabs it.

          9 votes
          1. [3]
            Raistlin
            Link Parent
            In that case, it feels like the fair thing would be that it enters into the public domain, not that someone unrelated owns it.

            In that case, it feels like the fair thing would be that it enters into the public domain, not that someone unrelated owns it.

            3 votes
            1. [2]
              stu2b50
              Link Parent
              That's a bit of misunderstanding of what trademarks are. It's not like copyright, where it's something that is granted automatically, then expires. A trademark means you're claiming that a set of...

              That's a bit of misunderstanding of what trademarks are. It's not like copyright, where it's something that is granted automatically, then expires. A trademark means you're claiming that a set of media is tightly associated with your image as a company or individual, and that you want to claim it for a specific business context.

              A trademark isn't the kind of thing that "enters the public domain". You can always try to claim anything as your trademark, but unlike copyright the boundaries, and whether you are sufficiently uniquely represented, must be argued.

              6 votes
              1. Raistlin
                Link Parent
                Sorry, no, I believe that you're right in that's how it works. I'm not a lawyer. I just don't think that it's "fair" that someone can nab it. It's certainly a thing the law allows seems like, but...

                Sorry, no, I believe that you're right in that's how it works. I'm not a lawyer. I just don't think that it's "fair" that someone can nab it. It's certainly a thing the law allows seems like, but I think what would be more fair is that anyone can now use it, since the original creator no longer wants it.

                1 vote
    2. [3]
      pseudolobster
      Link Parent
      Technically it's still there. If you're logged into an account that ever installed it in the past, here's the link: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.dotgears.flappybird I...

      It would have been nice to have it back on the Play Store

      Technically it's still there. If you're logged into an account that ever installed it in the past, here's the link: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.dotgears.flappybird

      I installed it as recently as a year or two ago, but for my current device it says it's incompatible. Dunno if it's my android version or what, but I'm a little bummed to discover I can't install it anymore.

      1 vote
      1. phoenixrises
        Link Parent
        The Google Play store requires developers to upgrade to a different target of SDK basically every year regardless if anything has changed, which is why. I think Slay the Spire had that issue last...

        The Google Play store requires developers to upgrade to a different target of SDK basically every year regardless if anything has changed, which is why. I think Slay the Spire had that issue last year or so too.

        Source: I'm an android developer lol

        3 votes
      2. PleasantlyAverage
        Link Parent
        That's likely just the Play Store throwing a fit. The game still works when sideloaded on my Android 14 device.

        That's likely just the Play Store throwing a fit. The game still works when sideloaded on my Android 14 device.

        2 votes