IBJNews

Phase 10 inventor folds in dispute over top-selling card game

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The inventor of the world's second-best-selling card game has settled a lawsuit with the Plainfield company that markets and distributes the game.

The battle over the rummy variation called Phase 10 began in December 2008, when Michigan inventor Kenneth Johnson accused Fundex Games Ltd. of copyright infringement, trademark dilution, fraud, conversion and theft in a case filed in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis.

The parties agreed to dismiss the case Oct. 22. Court records do not offer any information on a settlement, and attorneys for the inventor and the company did not immediately reply to phone messages.

Fundex still lists Phase 10 as among its stable of products on its website. The game is a whale for the company, selling more than 3 million copies per year, second only to Uno.

In the lawsuit, Johnson claimed the privately held Fundex withheld royalties, granted sub-licenses without his consent, failed to include Johnson's copyright notice on card games, and registered the Phase 10 mark for itself in the United Kingdom and France.

The principals of Fundex struck a deal for the game in 1986, paying Johnson a flat $60,000 and assigning him royalties on all future sales. The parties amended the agreement in 1996 and 2003, but the gist remained the same: Fundex had the right to market and sell Phase 10 and the first right to market new products related to the game, in exchange for making royalty payments.

The lawsuit says Johnson discovered in the summer of 2008 that Fundex wasn't living up to its end of the deal. He spelled out his concerns in two letters to the company. And he notified Fundex of plans to review its records on Phase 10, as allowed in the contract, but when his auditors arrived a month later the company refused to provide the requested information.

So Johnson, who received a trademark for the game in 1994, told the company he was canceling the deal. When Fundex continued to market and sell the game, he filed suit.

The dispute appears to have arisen at least in part over the company's push to repurpose and repackage the card game in multiple forms, including a mobile version.

In a separate case still pending in the same court, a local lawyer who invented the game “Chronology” also claims Fundex is illegally selling her game without paying royalties.

That suit, filed in March, says Fundex hasn’t paid public defender Jane Ruemmele royalties since October 2008. "Chronology" players try to place historical events and inventions in their proper place in time.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Kent's done a good job of putting together some good guests, intelligence and irreverence without the inane chatter of the other two shows. JMV is unlistenable, mostly because he doesn't do his homework and depends on non-sports stuff to keep HIM interested. Query and Shultz is a bit better, but lack of prep in their show certainly is evident. Sterling obviously workes harder than the other shows. We shall see if there is any way for a third signal with very little successful recent history to make it. I always say you have to give a show two years to grow into what it will become...

  2. Lafayette Square, Washington Square should be turned into office parks with office buildings, conversion, no access to the public at all. They should not be shopping malls and should be under tight security and used for professional offices instead of havens for crime. Their only useage is to do this or tear them down and replace them with high rise office parks with secured parking lots so that the crime in the areas is not allowed in. These are prime properties, but must be reused for other uses, professional office conversions with no loitering and no shopping makes sense, otherwise they have become hangouts long ago for gangs, groups of people who have no intent of spending money, and are only there for trouble and possibly crime, shoplifting, etc. I worked summers at SuperX Drugs in Lafayette Square in the 1970s and even then the shrinkage from shoplifting was 10-15 percent. No sense having shopping malls in these areas, they earn no revenue, attract crime, and are a blight on the city. All malls that are not of use should be repurposed or torn down by the city, condemned. One possibility would be to repourpose them as inside college campuses or as community centers, but then again, if the community is high crime, why bother.

  3. Straight No Chaser

  4. Seems the biggest use of TIF is for pet projects that improve Quality Of Life, allegedly, but they ignore other QOL issues that are of a more important and urgent nature. Keep it transparent and try not to get in ready, fire, Aim! mode. You do realize that business the Mayor said might be interested is probably going to want TIF too?

  5. Gary, I'm in complete agreement. The private entity should be required to pay IPL, and, if City parking meters are involved, the parking meter company. I was just pointing out how the poorly-structured parking meter deal affected the car share deal.

ADVERTISEMENT