Trade shows and fearing other inventors with connections.

Publishers typically acquire a game design rather than a game idea. A game design typically involves a name (protected by trademark), a theme (only protected by trademark if it is tied to unique characters) and rules (protected by copyright) with a component list (not protected). With the rules and the component list, it is possible to construct a prototype and play the game. And, it is the prototype and how it plays that they are buying.

Although a publisher will often manufacture this game design with a slightly different set of rules, a different name and a different theme, it is far better for them to: (1) avoid any potential liability by licensing/buying it and (2) encourage repeat business by paying designers for their work.

Those of us who have the capacity to put together a design, show it to publishers and/or produce a game design quickly because of our connections also know who you want to work with and who you don't want to work with as a result of how publishers treat their inventors. And, I can tell you that personally, I am very reluctant to show a new design to a publisher who I know drags their feet and/or cheat people and I am very much inclined to give a first look to the publishers who are prompt and fair.

So... most of the hobby publishers are careful. Some are not and the rules are quite different for the mass-marketers. But, even then, they know that you don't kill the golden goose. In fact, the problem with Hasbro et al. is usually overcoming their risk aversion, not outright theft.

But, you make a good point about the ability for one inventor to steal from another inventor. If we're all in the same circle, communicating with each other and giving each other advice, it could be something that is done unintentionally as much as maliciously. Especially since game mechanics are not protected by copyright and patent protection is expensive and possibly invalid, it is very easy to see something someone else is working on and think about how you might be able to adapt it. But, I guess that's where we reach the point where law fails and ethics comes in.

How ethical are people in the game design business? I don't know. There are certainly a lot of reasons to cheat. But, what are the incentives to be ethical?

1. Workload. A lot of games need to be developed and there is no one who is more committed to developing it than its original author. I know that I can work on two or three times as many projects by working with other designers than by stealing it from them. Because if I were to steal it, I would have to do it on the sly and that would require that I do it myself. More often than not, working together is a win-win scenario insofar as I can provide something that they don't have: connections, reputation, insights on design/market/mechanics and they can provide me with the ability to test it, discuss it and ultimately make some money off of it.

2. Incompleteness. Most novice designers don't realize how incomplete their designs really are. If they realized what else needs to be developed to have a game design that a publisher will buy, they would realize that a nifty idea or mechanic is not enough. A game needs all the things I mentioned above and it is not very common that someone's 'brilliant idea' actually contains all that is required to sell a game to a publisher. As a result, it is very rare that a game design is stolen wholesale. Most of the time, a game designer with experience/connections will adapt some part of another designers game and add quite a bit of their own ideas to it. So... who's to say that in doing all of that work, it doesn't become theirs? In fact, that is precisely what copyright protects... the expression of an idea and the person who made the expression.

3. Friendship. Even with the internet, game design is not a completely anonymous community. I have come to know people and I am invested in their success as much as my own. There's no faster way to alienate yourself from a community than to treat a person unethically. And, even though, there is nothing preventing me from lurking on boards like this, a lot of the game design that I do takes place in PMs or emails that occur outside the board. And, really, the only way that you get better at anything is to practice... which requires exchange, discussion and constant feedback from a community.

4. Reputation. If Richard Garfield did nothing else in his life, Magic the Gathering would have been enough to make him rich. And the designers of Angry Birds are probably pretty set. But, examples of one or two people making millions on one design are rare. Most games are not hits, most designs require lots of people to actually publish and most professional designers are not one hit wonders... So, not only do we have to make many designs to live, we also have to worry about our reputation to have the opportunity to work with others. If you are making someone else rich, then perhaps they won't care who you have screwed over on your way up. But, there are many possible ways that behaving unethically can backfire in a world where we are all interdependent.

In the end, I hope that the people who share their ideas with me trust that I am not going to steal them. But, really there is nothing that prevents me from doing so. In some ways, I worry about this... because there's always a bigger fish. But, in some ways, I think this is good, because I would hate to be in a position where I have to track down every person who is responsible for any vague notion that I got from this board or others and incorporated into a game design so that I can get their written permission to pitch it.

That being said, for games that I have worked on which do have enough overlap so as to make me uncomfortable, I do ask for the permission of the designer from which I got the inspiration. And, more often than not, I simply offer to help them make their design publishable under the belief that in the end, two heads are better than one.