This is an interesting counter-example to the idea that IP rights should be abandoned.<p>The IP in question here would be copyright (as mentioned in the article) and these days likely trademark as well.<p>He did have a copyright,but this was deemed invalid. Copies flooded the market.<p>Now,of course,all (most) toys have a limited shelf life. But the clones are just in it for the money,the developer is discouraged and retreats. Further development is abandoned.<p>With software there are advantages to being open, or closed, but in both cases copyright and trademarks serve to protect the project. Obviously clones, copies,fakes and forks exist,but trademarks and licensing serve to protect the original authors intentions, and the author has choices in what protection they want.<p>Patents on software though such. I can't defend those.