Shark Movie Nerds × Monopoly= Sharknerd-opoly

Notes from theGame's CreatorWhat Inspired the Creation of “Sharknerd-opoly?”
For over four decades, following the 1975 release of Steven
Spielberg's film “Jaws” many different shark films have been produced.
The Asylum, an independent film company has brought to life films
depicting scenes featuring shark infested tornadoes in “Sharknado,” thevicious take down of a plane, and the Mecha Shark submarine of the “MegaShark” series. Many shark B-movies such as these have been made as aparody of monster movies.
Currently, during the time of Sharknerd-opoly's production, Germany
is working on a project entitled “Sky Sharks,” a film in which zombie Nazi
soldiers and their modified flying war sharks are revived in the present era.
Last year, in 2018, Jason Statham famous for his action movie roles
starred in the marine adventure shark film “The Meg,” which brought inover $530.2 Million at the box office.
In 2017, acknowledging the love of shark movie fans, our company
proposed the idea of a special event, the “Tokyo International Shark
Film Festival” to help further popularize shark films worldwide. Followingthat sentiment, we endeavored to produce a game where players could
experience the thrill and suspense of shark films.

▲ Tokyo International Shark Film
Festival 2017 Winter▲ Tokyo International Shark Film
Festival 2018 SpringWhy Use Monopoly as a Base?
Monopoly is known worldwide as a capital acquisition board gamewhere players buy and sell property placed around the board, while
drawing cards to turn luck in their favor and gain special opportunities. It isessentially a business game where players aim to accumulate the greatestwealth.
This structure was what initially caught my attention.
Shark films are also set in various cities around the world, specificallyin the United States where we often see the valor of the brave hero or theguile of the evil politician.
Additionally, in countries around the world starting with the UnitedStates, Monopoly has become public domain which has sparked theproduction of hundreds of adaptations of the game by many different gamedesigners.
In a similar fashion, with the goal of implicating the exciting story
structure of shark movies, Sharknerd-opoly was born!

◀ Initial Monopoly
game components
released in 1935.

◀ Early designof the game box.

The History of Monopoly (1)Patent and Expiration
Monopoly was patented in theUnited States by a salesman named
Charles B. Darrow in 1935, and sales
began following a license agreementwith the toy manufacturer ParkerBrothers.
Later, in 1952, the patent expired,but “Monopoly” had already become
very famous as a trademark as there
was almost nothing similar to it in theUS board game market.
The rights to the method of
gameplay have been granted in several
countries including the United States,and like all other patents, its term of▲Monopoly U.S. Patent
No. US2026082A
validity is 20 years after application or
17 years after receiving patent approval.
The basic patent for the popular trading card game “Magic: TheGathering” (US Patent #5662332) was granted in 1997 but has since expiredin 2014. Subsequently applied patents will also expire gradually.
In Japan, patent rights regarding the method of gameplay are notacknowledged, so the “Yu-Gi-Oh” trading card game produced by thecompany Konami was first conceived with references to the rules of “Magic:The Gathering.” In the subsequent expansion into the US, a partnershipwith the patent-owner Wizards of Coast and the parent company HasbroInc. was established, and Konami achieved great success in the UnitedStates.
During that time, I provided consulting for Konami's patent and theplaying rules for the “Yu-Gi-Oh” trading card game while working at aformer company.

The History of Monopoly (2)Releases in Japan
BankersIn 1953, Hanayama, a firmly established toy manufacturer in Japan,
released an adaptation of Monopoly entitled “Bankers” which featured thenames of real places in Japan.
A short time before this, the San Francisco Peace Treaty came into
effect in 1952 and Japan had just restored its sovereignty as the Korean
War continued (1950-1953). During this time, Japan continued its economic
revival while monitoring the political intentions of the United States.
Although patents weren't recognized in Japan at the time, presumably
the Hanayama company, quietly waited for the patent in America to expire
afterwhich they released the game Bankers as an adaptation of Monopoly.
Since the scope of copyrights (regarding art/creative works) in Japanfor board games and card games were also ambiguous at the time, theoriginal game Monopoly could've been released as it was, but in adapting
the game for Japan, a country that wasn't largely familiar with the American
cities in the game, it was changed to the more modern Japanese style.
Some time later, a Japanese translation of “Monopoly” was also
released by Hanayama in Japan, but it was released in 1965, 12 years after
the release of “Bankers.” Regarding the release of the Japanese version,
it is unknown what kind of negotiations occured with the original US
manufacturer Parker Brothers at that time.

▲ Monopoly, Japaneseversion released in 1965.

▲ Bankers, Japan's first monetaryboard game, released in 1953.

The History of Monopoly (3)Appearance of Anti-MonopolyIn 1973, Ralph Anspach, a professor of economics at the San FranciscoState University, devised a new game entitled "Anti-Monopoly," in which
the victory condition was the redistribution of wealth, unlike "Monopoly," inwhich the victory condition was a monopoly of wealth.
Using the university's publishing department, Anspach made salesthroughout the states via mail order which in turn gained him huge
popularity. As a result, he was able to start his own company and began
making general sales.
In retaliation to Anti-Monopoly's success, Parker Brothers and thethen newly established company General Mills sued Anspach on grounds of"Trademark Infringement" and "Unfair Competition"
Despite the fact that the patent had expired, the two companies had
a vested interest in having an exclusive hold on Monopoly and games of asimilar type.
In the first trial, defendant Anspach lost his case, and more than10,000 "Anti-Monopoly" games in the warehouse were seized by court
order and disposed of. However, Anspach maintained his conviction.
Not only had the patent for the game on which the basis of “AntiMonopoly” was created already long expired, the victory condition wasindeed the complete opposite of “Monopoly.” Additionally, as a scholar,
Anspach felt that a game that highlights redistribution of wealth should
exist for the benefit of those studying economics.
Not willing to give up, in 1976 Anspach filed for an appeal of theinitial judgment.

▲ The second edition ofthe game highlighting
weatlh circulation.

◀ Professor Anspach's
invention of Anti-Monopoly.

▲︎ Latest version of thegame currently for sale.

The History of Monopoly (4)The Real Inventor!
In the case against Anspach, Parker Brothers Inc. and General Mills
brought “Anti-Monopoly" under scrutiny, claiming unfair competition. Theirargument was that “circling around the board” was a unique feature devisedand utilized only by "Monopoly" and was already widely recognized as such
regardless of the status of the patent.
However, with Anspach's intensive research, new information wasbrought to light.
Before the creation of Monopoly by Charles B. Darrow, there weregames with the exact same board-circling and land-purchasing format
entitled “The Landlord's Game” patented in 1904 and its later version
patented in 1924 already in existence.
These games did not enter into sales agreements with major
manufacturers, and they were hand-crafted and distributed only in someparts of the eastern United States. Therefore neither the members of thecourt of the first trial nor Mr. Anspach at the time knew of them.
The inventor of these games was Elizabeth Magie, making her the true
mother of board games featuring a circling format. In a testimony from herfamily, it was revealed that Darrow had bought the rights to Magie's gamefor $500.
Additionally, Anspach asked third parties to observe purchases of"Monopoly" and "Anti-Monopoly" at toy stores as a test to prove that there
was no confusion of the two games amongst consumers.

▲ Patent of“The Landlord's Game”▲ Inventor Elizabeth Magie

The History of Monopoly (5)Victory in Appeals Court
The case lasted for six years until 1982, when finally the members ofthe appeals court sided fully with Professor Anspach.
The losing party, Parker Brothers and General Mills were ordered by
the court to compensate Anpach for all of his products that were seized anddisposed of after the first trial. Compensation for the potential sales profitsthat were lost during the six-year period was also ordered.
The basis for the decision was that the Monopoly patent had already
expired and that games created of a similar type format could not be
tried as unfair competition. It was held that as long as a trademark could
be differenciated from another in existence it could not be consideredinfringement. Following that same sentiment, the court declared that theword "monopoly" itself was a generic word, therefore ruling that it was notillegal to use it in the promotion of products.
It was also revealed that Parker Brothers was aware of the fact that
Darrow created "Monopoly" based on Magie's "The Landlord's Game."
The fact that this information was kept concealed did not leave a good
impression on the court.
Monopoly Loses Its Trademark▲ “The New York Times”
February 23, 1983 article
announcing the victory infavor of “Anti-Monopoly.”▲ Professor Ralph Anspach after victory in the Supreme Court.

The History of Monopoly (6)Supreme Court Sides with AnspachDissatisfied with the appeal court's decision, Parker Brothers, Inc. andGeneral Mills tried to take the case to the Supreme Court, however theirpetition was denied, allowing the appeal court's ruling to stand.
As a result, Anspach's claims were fully acknowledged.
This occured in 1983.
Following this, the companies reached a settlement granting Anspachcompensation for court costs and damages.
In the end, after continued negotiations, with “Monopoly” remaining
a trademark of Parker Brothers, Anspach assigned the “Anti-Monopoly”
trademark to the company while continuing to hold the rights to produce
the game under license.
It could be assumed that some of the company's fear was that
Anspach's company could produce other more radical games or that it
might fall under the control of one of their competitors.
Interestingly, as of spring 2019, the sons of the late Professor Anspachare producing and selling the “Anti-Monopoly” game under their companyof the same name Anti-Monopoly Inc.
The news about Monopoly losing the monopoly on its own namebecame a major topic in the United States, with reports published in “TheWall Street Journal” and “The New York Times”, as well as “The Guardian,”a highly reputable publication in the U.K. The story quickly became known
to board game fans around the world.

▲ US Supreme Court

The History of Monopoly (7)Rise of the “Opoly” BrandThe news of “Monopoly” being ruled as a generic term quickly spreadamong numerous American game designers, sparking the boom of thecreation of games using the Monopoly format.
Despite the expiration of the patent being a known fact, no one hadthought to capitalize on the brand by creating similar or different versionsof games of that type. It wasn't until this time that makers began producing
their own arrangements of Monopoly.
To avoid trademark infringement, makers added the suffix “-opoly” totheir newly created game titles.
Among these companies was Late for the Sky Productions, a company
founded by a university student in Ohio in 1984. Since the company wasestablished, it has released over 100 “-Opoly” games.
Special materials including blank game boards and blank cards havealso been released for young aspiring game designers to create their own
board games.
Additionally, the board game production company USA-Opoly
Inc. (founded in 1994) has worked with famous titles and brands such as“Harry Potter” and “The Beatles” and released many special collaboration
products on a large scale.
Though the company has “Opoly” in its name, they received a license
to use the suffix in their company title from Parker Brothers (now known as
Hasbro Incorporated).

◀︎▲ Numerous “Opoly” games.

The History of Monopoly (8)Usage of Images and Icons in Products
Images and icons used in “Monopoly” have also become publicdomain.
According to the copyrights laws in America, as well as Japan, after
having exceeded a certain number of years since publication, images become
free to use by anyone once the copyright protection period has ended.
As a result, many designs derived from Monopoly have been released
as non-official products on Amazon in the US.
In Japan, protection for images used in board and card games include
design rights (20 years) and a corporate copyright for applied arts (50 years
according to old law). To illustrate, if sales of a product featuring an image
began in 1965, the image is protected until the end of 2015 and only
becomes public domain starting in 2016.
Therefore, in "Sharknerd-opoly," the iconic character Mr. Monopoly
was the inspiration for the image of our game's mayor candidate of "Shark
Attack City," who is also a gentleman with a top hat, yet appears slightly
younger than his counterpart.

▲ Cushions featuring public domain Monopoly images.

▲ Derivative works featuring Mr. Monopoly (Amazon US)

Differences with Monopoly
Though Sharknerd-opoly and Monopoly appear similar in design,
there is a major conceptual difference that separates the two.
That being the elimination of the bank and the system of buying andselling lands with money.
Therefore, Monopoly enthusiasts, may at first feel the absence of thereal estate and monetary system is unusual.
As mentioned in the beginning, Sharknerd-opoly is a game with themain purpose of having players relive the thrill & suspense elements thatcharacterize shark movies.
It is an exhilarating, yet sadistic game where players trample over theirrivals as they scramble to avoid being caught by the man-eating shark.
In that sense, it may not be viewed as a typical “-Opoly”game.
However, the game pays homage to the original creator of the“board-circling” element and its timeless charm.
It is my sincere wish to one day visit the graves of Charles B. Darrowand Elizabeth Magie and pay my respects to these noteworthy figures.
Cyberdyne Inc, Solid Game TeamPresident Nobuyuki Takahashi