This one is something that I felt a bit uncomfortable talking or writing out loud - but it needs to be addressed and guided: IP Strategy in Mobile Games/Apps.

A few weeks ago, we all have heard about the copyright dispute between the 2 parties who I shall not name 😅 in the hybrid-puzzle genre.

And honestly… this isn’t the first, nor the last time we (Vietnamese developers) faced a legal battle.

I’m definitely not a legal expert, so last week, I grabbed my notebook (literally 😂) and sat down with host Trinh Thai to invite Jenny Pham - an IP strategy and corporate structure consultant who has worked with many game and app studios in Vietnam - for a proper deep dive.

Our conversation was in Vietnamese, but I thought I would share a few things that founders anywhere in the world can learn from:

No one truly wins in copyright disputes.

Legal fees alone can start from $50,000 and easily climb into the hundreds of thousands, or even millions, depending on complexity. In the US, lawyers often charge $1,000–$2,000 per hour. One preliminary motion? Around $25,000. Later stages get even more expensive.

But the real pain isn’t usually the lawyer bills.

It’s the opportunity cost.

Once a dispute starts, your game can get temporally paused, or worse taken down from the Play Store or Appstore if the other side provides solid copyright proof. That leads to:

• Lost optimization windows: Even if you eventually win or settle, you’ve missed the golden period for cheap CPI, strong UA, and machine learning running at its best.
• Cash flow headaches: Platforms may hold back recent revenue until the matter is resolved. Courts can freeze payout accounts entirely. Any founder knows how brutal that can be 🥶
• Reputation damage: This one hurts long-term - especially if you’re raising capital or going through M&A. Just like real estate, nobody wants to invest in something with messy ownership.

The thin line between “inspiration” and cloning

It's no secret that in hybrid-casual/ hybrid-puzzle that "borrowing" ideas or mechanics has been the norm (some would even go as far to call it good practice 😅). But where the legal line draws?

The two most important concepts in copyright are Idea and Expression.

Generally, ideas themselves aren’t protected (hence ideas are cheap...). What the law protects is the specific expression: UI layout, screen flow, color palette, button placement, paywall design, etc.

With precedents like last year’s Rollic Screw Jam lawsuit, proving “I was just inspired” has become much harder. Studios now need to show their design choices came from real research and testing (A/B tests, user data, etc.). So yes - document everything!

BUT, at the end of the day, the simplest test is this:

If players can’t easily tell the two games apart, you’ve probably crossed the line. Small UI tweaks often aren’t enough if the overall experience feels too similar.

IP protection as strategic advantage

If you don’t register trademark/copyright for your game(s), someone else might - and they could even use it against you.

This has happened more than once.

Trademark filing costs are surprisingly reasonable - just over $1,000 in most cases. While it can take time (especially in the US), once you file, similar applications get temporarily blocked. That alone creates a powerful layer of protection for your runway.

Jenny emphasizes:

IP should be seen as one of the studio’s biggest assets - and founders need to build it into your strategy from day one.

Built on solid foundations

When we asked Jenny: “If a studio could do just one thing right now to protect its IP, what should it be?”

Her answer surprised us:

Get your internal IP ownership structure right first.

Just like building a house, you need strong foundations. Jenny shared two real precedences that really made us think:

1. Penhallurick v MD5 (UK, 2021): In this case, Michael Penhallurick was a programmer at MD5. What made it special was that he mostly worked on his personal computer, at home, and outside regular working hours. After leaving the company, Michael sued MD5, claiming he was the rightful owner of the copyright for the software he created. Although the court eventually ruled in favor of the company, the case dragged on for three years, showing just how much time and legal cost these disputes can create.

Jenny emphasized the need for clear contracts covering overtime, side work, and retroactive effect - especially important in Vietnam because of the Personal non-property rights

2. That’s No Moon Domain Dispute (US, 2026) Co-founders sued their former CEO after he allegedly took control of the company domain post-termination, locked them out of their own website and email, and even listed the domain for sale at $6,666,666 (okay, what's the obsession with 6?). The studio claimed over $1 million in operational damages and serious reputational harm.

This is a stark reminder of what can happen when internal agreements on assets (domain, trademarks, IP…) aren’t clearly documented from the start.

Have to say I've learnt a lot from our conversation.