Ubisoft Sues Apple and Google Over Distribution of Alleged 'Ripoff' Game - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Ubisoft Sues Apple and Google Over Distribution of Alleged 'Ripoff' Game

Ubisoft Entertainment this week levied a lawsuit against Apple and Google, accusing them of selling a "ripoff" of its popular video game Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Siege, reports Bloomberg.

unnamed
Ubisoft filed a complaint in federal court in Los Angeles, claiming that the game "Area F2," developed by Qookka Games, is a "near carbon copy" of Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Siege, aiming to "piggyback" off its popularity. Ubisoft said that it has notified Apple and Google that Area F2 is infringing its copyrights, but both companies have refused to remove the game from the Google Play and Apple App stores.

As one of Ubisoft's most valuable intellectual properties, Rainbow Six: Siege is played as a competitive e-sport, has 55 million registered players worldwide, and according to Ubisoft’s copyright infringement claim, is played by more than three million users every day. Ubisoft argues that the lawsuit can't be "seriously disputed" and that "virtually every aspect of AF2" is copied from Rainbow Six: Siege, "from the operator selection screen to the final scoring screen, and everything in between."

Ubisoft did not elaborate on why it is suing the app store operators for enabling distribution of the game rather than developer Qookka Games itself for the initial infringement. Qookka Games, owned by Alibaba’s Ejoy, is located in China, potentially making an international copyright claim more difficult. It remains unclear whether Ubisoft plans to file a separate lawsuit against the developer, in addition to app store operators.

Area F2 has over 75,000 reviews on the Google Play Store, and more than 2,000 on Apple's App Store, and many reviews on both platforms directly note the similarities to Ubisoft's title. Google and Apple have not yet responded to Bloomberg's requests for a comment.

Popular Stories

iPhone Duo Slack

Apple Announces iPhone Duo Apps Can Now Be Submitted to App Store

Monday October 5, 2026 7:15 pm PDT by
Apple today announced that apps optimized for the iPhone Duo can now be submitted for App Store approval, ahead of the foldable device launching on Friday, October 23. While existing App Store apps will automatically run on the iPhone Duo, only apps built with the iOS 27.1 SDK or later can dynamically resize to fill the entire space of the inner display, whereas unoptimized apps will have...
X twitter logo

X's Standalone Messaging App XChat Disappears From App Store

Monday September 14, 2026 3:25 pm PDT by
X's XChat app is no longer available from the App Store. The app does not come up when searching for it in the App Store, and clicking a link to it on the web returns an unavailable error. XChat allows X users to communicate with one another using end-to-end encryption and disappearing messages. The app's description says it is a "private, focused space built for conversation." XChat launched...
App Store Indie Games Week

Apple Announces 'Indie Games Week' on App Store

Monday October 12, 2026 7:48 am PDT by
Apple today announced it is Indie Games Week on the App Store, in celebration of the "incredible catalog of imaginative games made by independent teams with big dreams." Apple said seven acclaimed indie games are debuting on the App Store. No Man's Sky will be making its mobile debut on iPhone and iPad on October 28, and the six other games are Sifu, Vampire Crawlers, Little Kitty, Big City, 9 ...

Top Rated Comments

HiVolt Avatar
84 months ago
Copyright infringement from China? The hell you say....
Score: 41 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago

And to be clear, by taking a cut of sales on the App Store, if it was properly notified and did not act, a platform maker like Apple, who controls the distribution channel for its platform, is directly and deliberately profiting from the infringement. If Apple is aware of it and continues to sell it, they have a potential problem.
Not so fast. Apple is not the person to determine ownership of intellectual property if there is a dispute. Thats the job of the courts. If a lawsuit were to happen between the two parties over ownership a judge could grant an injunction to NOT PAY those Royalties because the results of the copyright lawsuit is pending..but they are not suing for ownership...they are suing Apple for distributing what someone else claims is theirs. Losing case, and they know it. Wouldnt be surprised if this got thrown out. They are hoping the negative press will make Apple and Google remove it so no money is made from it. Imagine if I said..Hey that Emimen song sounds like mine. Suing Apple because its on AppleMusic...and every other streaming service as well...and also any record store that sells Eminem...not how it works. I gotta sue Marshall Mathers and get the money owed to me FROM HIM. Apple has ZERO responsibility to investigate ownership since to get it into the App Store you are saying you legally own it, and if you dont YOU are liable for damages and possibly jail time.
Score: 33 Votes (Like | Disagree)
69Mustang Avatar
84 months ago
Ubisoft is suing the distributors (Apple and Google) to block the distribution and sale of the game. They're doing that because they know they don't stand a chance of a favorable outcome against Alibaba in a Chinese court.

It will be interesting to see the responses from Apple and Google. One of them desperately wants to get back into China (Google) and the other desperately wants to stay in China (Apple).
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Justanotherfanboy Avatar
84 months ago
While I am not a lawyer...
This seems like a weird move to try to put the impetus on Apple/Google to be the arbiters of what are “safe” similarities and what are not.... none of the app submissions guys working at Apple or Google passed the bar, worked their way up to being a judge, and have clear & definitive knowledge of copyright nuances in every area they operate in.

Think of it like this:
Wrangler starts using Levi rivets in their jeans, so Levis sues............ Walmart?


Not so fast. Apple is not the person to determine ownership of intellectual property if there is a dispute. Thats the job of the courts. If a lawsuit were to happen between the two parties over ownership a judge could grant an injunction to NOT PAY those Royalties because the results of the copyright lawsuit is pending..but they are not suing for ownership...they are suing Apple for distributing what someone else claims is theirs. Losing case, and they know it. Wouldnt be surprised if this got thrown out. They are hoping the negative press will make Apple and Google remove it so no money is made from it. Imagine if I said..Hey that Emimen song sounds like mine. Suing Apple because its on AppleMusic...and every other streaming service as well...and also any record store that sells Eminem...not how it works. I gotta sue Marshall Mathers and get the money owed to me FROM HIM. Apple has ZERO responsibility to investigate ownership since to get it into the App Store you are saying you legally own it, and if you dont YOU are liable for damages and possibly jail time.
THIS! 1000x
This would set a bizarre precedent & open the floodgates forcing Apple to hear every perceived grievance.
I wonder how long app submissions would take if Apple employees in that department were spending 99% of their time responding to thousands of claims from devs that competitors are too much like them, & busy trying to cross reference every single other app that has come out in the past decade to scour for similarities, so they don’t get sued.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago

This is 100% not true. Apple and Google can make a decision regarding any app in their app stores without a judgment by the court. They do it all the time. There have been numerous articles on MR and other tech sites about Apple removing apps, removing and reinstating apps, requiring apps to modify function. Both companies can make a decision to remove the offending app at anytime with no input from the courts.

Unfortunately, everything you wrote is wrong. IANAL but I know it's 100% the responsibility of Apple and Google (A/G) to ensure the apps in their respective stores aren't violating IP laws. Not ZERO. Just like it's the responsibility of a brick & mortar store owner to ensure they aren't selling counterfeits. Ubisoft says they notified both companies and neither removed the game. Neither did. Which apparently lead Ubisoft to sue to block distribution. Most likely what they thought to be the most effective way to ensure EJoy doesn't unfairly benefit from Ubi's IP.

Your music analogy was a poor choice. If you said a song from Slim Shady sounded like yours, you'd have recourse in the DMCA. In this hypothetical, you could request to have the song taken down from iTunes, Youtube, Spotify, etc.

"Suing Apple because its on AppleMusic...and every other streaming service as well...and also any record store that sells Eminem...not how it works." - you

↑↑↑ - "That's exactly how it works." - me

Ubisoft in real life, and you in your hypothetical, could potentially sue anyone in the distribution chain including end users.
Nope you are 10000% incorrect.

You say Apple takes things down and makes people change apps all the time. Yes they do because they have not adhered to APPLES rules on Apps. NEVER for copyright infringement WITHOUT a court judgement. I know this PERSONALLY.

Please show me instances of Apple removing an App because it was too similar to another app? If so why are there hundreds of Solitaire games? They are all similar....

Apple is NOT required by law to go through every app and DECIDE whether its too close to another app. Its not their job and thats what a court is for.

Again you are wrong when it comes to a music copyright. If my song sounded like a Slim Shady song, I can REQUEST it to be removed from everywhere (anyone can request anything ...free country) but guess what...NO ONE WOULD have to do anything because a dispute in ownership has to be decided in a court of law.

Remember the Robin Thicke "Blurred Lines" case. Well Marvin Gaye's estate said the song sounded too much like a Marvin Gaye song. Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams who wrote it said no it was different. iTunes didnt stop selling it. No one pulled it. No one stopped streaming it. No brick and mortar store stopped selling it. Not one of those entities were sued. Marvin Gaye's estate sued the WRITERS of that song for copyright infringement. It went to court and Marvin Gaye's estate was awarded millions from Robin Thicke and Pharrell NOT iTunes or any store for selling it. No store got sued and no one pulled it. Not Apple's job.

Countefeit goods has ZERO to do with Copyrights. Its illegal to sell counterfeit and if a store is doing so, they can be sued as well as arrested. That has nothing to do with this.

The game in question isn't a counterfeit. It's not calling itself Rainbow 6 by Ubisoft. Its a game that is similar. Is it too similar? Thats what a court decides.

Here is a good one...what if...the developer of game #1 leaves the company they worked for and takes his code with him as part of his agreement with that company. That code is then sold to another company and they release game #2 with that code. Its similar because its the same code...but it was purchased legally...is that copyright infringement?

That's what the legal system is for. It may be far more complex than it is on the surface. Apple didnt remove it because unless a court has said its copyright infringement then it isn't.

When Microsoft released Windows...did Apple sue every computer store for selling it? No they sued Microsoft for copyright infringement.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago

Ubisoft is suing the distributors (Apple and Google) to block the distribution and sale of the game. They're doing that because they know they don't stand a chance of a favorable outcome against Alibaba in a Chinese court.

It will be interesting to see the responses from Apple and Google. One of them desperately wants to get back into China (Google) and the other desperately wants to stay in China (Apple).
And to be clear, by taking a cut of sales on the App Store, if it was properly notified and did not act, a platform maker like Apple, who controls the distribution channel for its platform, is directly and deliberately profiting from the infringement. If Apple is aware of it and continues to sell it, they have a potential problem.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Latest Stories
Apple's HomeView Repair Fees Revealed
Apple's HomeView Repair Fees Revealed
9 hours ago
Everything Apple Still Has Coming in October
Everything Apple Still Has Coming in October
10 hours ago
Welcome Home: Everything Apple Announced on October 13
Welcome Home: Everything Apple Announced on October 13
12 hours ago
Will the Full-Sized HomePod Get Siri AI? Apple's Website Offers a Clue
Will the Full-Sized HomePod Get Siri AI? Apple's Website Offers a Clue
12 hours ago
Apple Releases Third Public Betas of iOS 27.2 and macOS Golden Gate 27.2
Apple Releases Third Public Betas of iOS 27.2 and macOS Golden Gate 27.2
12 hours ago
iOS 27.2 Adds New Apple Music Icon
iOS 27.2 Adds New Apple Music Icon
12 hours ago
HomePod Mini 2 Works as Default Speaker With Select Macs
HomePod Mini 2 Works as Default Speaker With Select Macs
13 hours ago
Elevation Lab Pulls AirTag Silencer After Stalking Concerns
Elevation Lab Pulls AirTag Silencer After Stalking Concerns
13 hours ago
iOS 27.2 Beta 4 Removes New Health App
iOS 27.2 Beta 4 Removes New Health App
14 hours ago
iPhone Duo Will Have Day-One iOS 27.1 Update
iPhone Duo Will Have Day-One iOS 27.1 Update
14 hours ago
Where to Pre-Order Apple's New HomeView, HomePod Mini 2, and Apple TV 4K
Where to Pre-Order Apple's New HomeView, HomePod Mini 2, and Apple TV 4K
15 hours ago
Apple Releases New AirPods Beta Firmware
Apple Releases New AirPods Beta Firmware
16 hours ago
Apple Seeds Fourth macOS Golden Gate 27.2 Beta to Developers
Apple Seeds Fourth macOS Golden Gate 27.2 Beta to Developers
16 hours ago
Apple Releases Fourth iOS 27.2 Beta
Apple Releases Fourth iOS 27.2 Beta
16 hours ago
Apple Releases Fourth watchOS 27.2 and visionOS 27.2 Betas
Apple Releases Fourth watchOS 27.2 and visionOS 27.2 Betas
16 hours ago
Anker and Jackery Offer Prime Day Encore Discounts on Power Stations
Anker and Jackery Offer Prime Day Encore Discounts on Power Stations
17 hours ago
New Apple TV 4K and Siri Remote Have These 14 New Features
New Apple TV 4K and Siri Remote Have These 14 New Features
17 hours ago
HomeView Runs Third-Party Apps From Your iPhone or iPad
HomeView Runs Third-Party Apps From Your iPhone or iPad
17 hours ago
RIP, homeOS
RIP, homeOS
17 hours ago
New Apple TV 4K Supports Surround Sound via Four HomePods
New Apple TV 4K Supports Surround Sound via Four HomePods
18 hours ago
Apple Says HomePod Mini 2 Won't Support Siri AI Right Away
Apple Says HomePod Mini 2 Won't Support Siri AI Right Away
18 hours ago
HomeView Can Dim to Apple's Lowest-Ever Display Brightness
HomeView Can Dim to Apple's Lowest-Ever Display Brightness
18 hours ago
New Apple TV 4K Adds Far-Field Microphones for Hands-Free Siri
New Apple TV 4K Adds Far-Field Microphones for Hands-Free Siri
18 hours ago
Apple Details HomeView's Audio Hardware
Apple Details HomeView's Audio Hardware
18 hours ago
Apple Shares Videos for HomeView, Apple TV 4K, and HomePod Mini 2
Apple Shares Videos for HomeView, Apple TV 4K, and HomePod Mini 2
18 hours ago
HomeView Comes in Four Colors, but Wall-Mounted Model Gets Just Two
HomeView Comes in Four Colors, but Wall-Mounted Model Gets Just Two
19 hours ago
Older Apple TV 4K Models to Gain Apple Intelligence and Siri AI Support
Older Apple TV 4K Models to Gain Apple Intelligence and Siri AI Support
19 hours ago
HomeView Brings Guided Recipes and Hands-Free Timers to the Kitchen
HomeView Brings Guided Recipes and Hands-Free Timers to the Kitchen
19 hours ago
New Siri Remote is $59 and Compatible With These Apple TV Models
New Siri Remote is $59 and Compatible With These Apple TV Models
19 hours ago
HomeView's Wall Model: Pay More, Get Less Speaker
HomeView's Wall Model: Pay More, Get Less Speaker
19 hours ago