It doesn't matter if the game is "successful." A large company could see potential and steal it anyway. Copyright law deters them from doing that, especially if you register your copyright which only costs $35 in the USA. It is there to protect IP, not revenue. Obviously the corpos abuse it in the opposite direction, by trying to squash anything remotely related, but that's the company misusing their legal team. It's not like copyright law dictates that companies have to go looking for knockoffs to target.
Viewing post in Copyright Infringement
Registering copyright is not needed to have the copyright. You have that automatically in the US since 1989 by being the creator and publishing your work somehow also does not hurt to prove it.
Registration only brings some questionable benefits that might even be in violation of the treaty the US signed. Complicated stuff, but in the context we talk about this, almost no indie or amateur dev is gonna register their assets or pieces of work. How does that even work for software versions? Every published version needs their own 35 $ registration or what? Or worse, assets, every separatly "tangible" asset needs registration? Also, this only is valid for the US, afaik. In another country that also signed the treaty, only the fact that you are the copyright holder counts, not the registration in a US registrary.
Copyright only protects the actual works, hence my question about the different software versions. Also, software usually is governed by licences, yet another can of worms.
That is what you get, if you want to apply concepts for physical items to the digital world ;-)
It is not needed, but it is pretty much your only chance in court. The whole "mail yourself a copy" thing is a myth and pointless since as you said, just creating the thing is when you technically receive the copyright, not when you publish or register.
For videogames you can register the source code as well as tangible assets such as the artwork, soundtrack, and writing. I think it is similar to music where you can roll it all into one registration (for music, you can register the actual written music as well as a physical recording of it at the same time).
You don't get a copyright for some parts of it such as the name, or the gameplay mechanics. And yes, this process is probably not done by amateur developers who have some free projects up on itch. But I would think that anyone who is selling their game and netting even a small amount of revenue would be wise to get the registration.
I am not talking about mail yourself a copy. This is not meant for digital stuff anyways and there seems to be no evidence that this is more than a myth.
The US law system is broken anyways in more than one way (like separation of powers), but needing that registration for anything is breaking it even more and that you do need it for anything might even be unlawful since 1989.
And I did not say, you receive copyright. This might be a translation issue. English is not my native language and not even the copyright concept is easily understandable.
You have the copyright by being the creator of a work. As a concept it basically says that you are the creator and this is the primary, the secondary is just some consequences of certain laws that assert that certain things can only be done by the creator or with permission of the creator. There are remnants of this still seen that the copyright ceases in relation to the death of the work's creator - and not in relation to the work's creation date.
It loses all meaning linguistically, if you spell it out: the right to copy. A what now? A right as in human rights? The right to vote? And for what, copying? What about copyrighting physical objects? We have no StarTrek replicators. Those terms were coined before digital copy was available. And like coining it was meant, as in minting. About after the book press was invented. There was no copy right with handwritten books, and those were copied a lot. I think it got an overhaul when music recordings became possible.
But enough philosophicals. Trivially, if you do not publish your stuff, how could anyone violate your copyright. So publishing the item will make it public and therefore documented with you being the creator of the work and the time.
Sorry for ranting and babbling. This whole topic is too complicated and the protection granted by laws should not be dependent on the money of either party. It violates my sense of morals.
In the US, registration is not required for copyright, but it changes the amount that you can win in court over a copyright violation. (This may be a violation of the Berne Convention but the only way to find out would be someone not in the US, pushing for a copyright case in the US, not getting the results they wanted, and then taking it to an international venue.) Without registration, you can only sue for provable damages; for registered works, you can push for more than that.
For what kind of rights: Copyright in the US is a limited-term economic monopoly. It covers copying, public performance, derivatives (like translations; what else counts as "derivative" is a game for lawyers) and a few ancillary rights. In the US, copyright does not cover "moral rights" that exist in Europe and some other places. Music recordings have their own special (nightmare) section of the law.
Unpublished works are copyrighted - this is relevant for things like "an author's rough draft of a novel"; someone can't grab it and publish without permission. Copyright exists/is granted the moment a thing is put in "fixed form." An unpublished game in your cloud storage is copyrighted; if someone hacks your account and steals it, they can't (legally) publish it without your consent.
There are rules about updates and new editions that would apply to registration of video games. I don't know the details, just that books have been doing expanded/updated editions for ages.
(But also: yeah, this is not a good venue for discussing the philosophy of copyright.)
Isn't the best to ask a lawyer from current country.
Each state in the US have different law's you can say they are 90% similar with few differences, other country's have different law's as well and each treat copyright different(In Russia and China there are no copyright Law's you can simply take a game and make an exact clone of it and no one will bother you, if you want to sue someone he will be under the Law's of the current country he's In)i can't give any advice else than go ask a lawyer.