Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
H. G. Muller wrote on Mon, Aug 15, 2022 06:55 AM UTC in reply to Viswesh Srinivasan from 05:51 AM:

Chances that people want to play a variant are very small. Chances they would want to pay for it next to zero.

There are two variants I know of that were patented. In the U.S.. (Patents do not automatically apply world wide.) In the U.S. you can pretty much patent anything; whether the patent is valid is to be determined in the court cases that challenge it. That makes them cheap; there only is a (yearly?) registration fee. In Europe it can take tens of thousands euros to do the due diligence get a patent approved. (And the result of this in case of a chess variant would most likely be that it gets rejected, for lack of novelty.) As far as I know both U.S. patents expired before anyone challenged them, because the inventors got tired of paying the fees.

To make sure there would be no legal issues for this website, there was a ban on using words that reminded of the variant in any posting here.

I am not sure how you could make money out of a chess variant. Unless it requires special equipment, which you sell. Patents are more suitable for protecting equipment than ideas. Chess variants typically only require a board and pieces, though. Boards can be made from cardboard and paper, and pretty much anything could be used as pieces. (A wide selection of high-quality unorthodox pieces is already commercially available, both in wood and plastic.) There is no way you could prevent people using these at home.

Of course you could set up an internet server where the variant could be played on-line. And ask a fee for regestering there. It seems a good way to make absolutely sure no one would ever want to play it, even in the extremely unlikely case that the variant would have the potential to become popular on its own merits.


Edit Form

Comment on the page How to Design and Post Your Own Game

Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.