The Anti-Capitalist Origins of the Monopoly Man

Stephen Ives

I met Ralph in 2005. That’s after I shot the interview with him that’s within the movie. I got here throughout his self-published guide referred to as The Nice Billion Greenback Monopoly Swindle and I assumed, that’s attention-grabbing. I sought him out. The movie didn’t work out then, however eighteen years later American Expertise stated, “We love this concept! Let’s do it.”

Ralph was nearly the cliché of the rumpled, distractable tutorial. He had the corduroy blazer and the hair far and wide. However he was a really sharp man, a Jewish émigré from Germany who fled the Nazis along with his household. They’d been given assist after they first obtained to America by the Quakers. He was pissed off by monopolies within the Nineteen Seventies, by the gasoline costs going up, by OPEC. And he got here up with this recreation Anti-Monopoly. That was his concept of a greater option to arrange society. He was additionally unwittingly doing the identical factor Lizzie Magie had tried to do: to make use of a board recreation to speak a robust social message.

He obtained sued by Basic Mills, the cereal conglomerate that had swallowed up Parker Brothers. If it occurred to you or me, and you bought a scary cease-and-desist letter from a multinational company, you’d most likely say, “I’m sorry! I’m sorry!” and stroll away. However Ralph stated: “No manner.” He sued them first to get jurisdiction in California and launched into a ten-year authorized campaign to show that his recreation was utterly separate from their recreation, and that there was no manner that their logos ought to be confused: One is Monopoly; the opposite is the precise reverse, Anti-Monopoly.

Ultimately his case went all the best way to the Supreme Court docket of the USA. It was a protracted battle for Ralph. The Court docket of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco dominated in his favor. Most of blue-chip America filed amicus briefs in help of Basic Mills, they usually took it to the Supreme Court docket. And the Supreme Court docket denied to listen to the case. The Ninth Circuit ruling held.