Only rip off I see is the tyranids/zerg.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Blizzard Legally Opposes Valve Trademark Over DOTA Name [Up: Trial Schedule]
- Thread starter Drkirby
- Start date
Only rip off I see is the tyranids/zerg.
Togglesworlh
Banned
Having come from years of WoW, and not having played WC3 for a long, long time... he just looks like a big ol' demon guy with a fiery sword to me. Assuming you're talking about Doombringer, the only hero I can think of that remotely approaches... this:
Or I guess you might be talking about Axe? A reddish orc guy? He's pretty close to Warcraft red orcs, that I'll admit.
mysocksarepink
Banned
blizard qqin after it finally dawns on them that the gravy train left the blizzard terminals and comfortably inside valve's now? tsk tsk
shortly after valve announced DOTA2... didn't Blizzard acknowledge it, saying owell basically, or something along those lines?
does anyone have a link?
shortly after valve announced DOTA2... didn't Blizzard acknowledge it, saying owell basically, or something along those lines?
does anyone have a link?
Valve can do no wrong. They are gods to most gamers.
Also, they are in the right here.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
IrishNinja
Member
Ooo, I hope they win, just so that we can have some kind of inter-platform war between the top 2 developers. Then PC gamers can feel what it was like in the Nintendo, Sega years.
implying there was a competition is a typical mistake of nintentards like yourself who simply don't understand blast processing.
questionmark
Member
I think it's more of a case of not wanting to see what is right in front of his eyes.
Especially if Valve is able to start to bring in money from China with it.
Does DOTA cease to be because DOTA 2 is being made by Valve? I feel like the answer is no but feel free to correct me.
The Defense of the Ancients community seems pretty happy with their game. This is as much an alternative as LoL, etc just with a closer name. Nothing is being spoiled by DOTA 2 existing (except Blizzard plans to trademark when someone proved it to be marketable.)
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
I never understood how a game made using Blizz assets, Blizz lore, and Blizz Engine could be licensed by Valve. Has Blizz Sued Riot? Valve could have avoided this by not trademarking the game.
Activision.
Not sure what your getting at, Orcs, goblins, elves, dwarfs existed like 60 years at least before warhammer. Space marines from both universes are nothing alike unless you compare Dreadnaughts.
Actually this is another great point.
Icefrog is still actively developing the mod to boot, so they're suing the guy who is making the mod for their game.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
Wait wait wait, what the fuck. Steave Feak last worked on Dota in March 2005.
It seems Riot actually managed to get Blizzard to pay them somehow.
The word "DOTA" is more famous than Half-life or Starcraft or Diablo this gen.
I want to see how this plays out in court because its such a hilarious mess all around
Because Blizzard didn't make the gameplay, and they're not using any of Blizzard's assets?
bigtroyjon
Member
I don't know why you keep bringing this up but this court case is Blizzard opposing that trademark application. From what I can tell, Valve doesn't have a trademark, they've applied for one.
And since it doesn't seem like anyone has read the link
SerArthurDayne
Member
Yes, Blizzard can have a trademark without formally registering the trademark.
No, I don't think they have a trademark in this case.
Edit: Based on the above, they can argue that they have a common law trademark. The extent of that is uncertain, especially in an electronic context.
Why are they suing?
They have their own DOTA game in the works, right? They are probably suing so they can settle and Valve will let them use the name.
No, I don't think they have a trademark in this case.
Edit: Based on the above, they can argue that they have a common law trademark. The extent of that is uncertain, especially in an electronic context.
Why are they suing?
They have their own DOTA game in the works, right? They are probably suing so they can settle and Valve will let them use the name.
If the choice is between staying on the WC3 engine and "honoring the wishes of the community/Blizzard" and giving DOTA a standalone engine, more developers, more marketing, more tournaments, more recognition, I would choose the latter every time.
It is really as simple as that. One company isn't willing to do anything for the game/community, the other is willing to do everything. Valve is unquestionably "the good guy" here. Regardless of your personal feelings/speculation about the legality of Valve trademarking DOTA or Blizzard contesting it, you CANNOT possibly deny that Blizzard has done fuck all for the community beyond making WC3 itself.
Hell they've only just acknowledged the DOTA genre AFTER a year of incredible League of Legends growth.
It is really as simple as that. One company isn't willing to do anything for the game/community, the other is willing to do everything. Valve is unquestionably "the good guy" here. Regardless of your personal feelings/speculation about the legality of Valve trademarking DOTA or Blizzard contesting it, you CANNOT possibly deny that Blizzard has done fuck all for the community beyond making WC3 itself.
Hell they've only just acknowledged the DOTA genre AFTER a year of incredible League of Legends growth.
Pureauthor
Member
The name has been licensed. As for Dota 2, the game itself is made using Valve's assets, it's own engine, and new lore for all the heroes.
So...
blizard qqin after it finally dawns on them that the gravy train left the blizzard terminals and comfortably inside valve's now? tsk tsk
shortly after valve announced DOTA2... didn't Blizzard acknowledge it, saying owell basically, or something along those lines?
does anyone have a link?
Blizzard said DOTA should belongs to the community. Rob Pardo of Blizzard later mentioned, "I don't think it's critical [to have the name DOTA] to delivering that experience to the fans," which is hilarious in the face of this lawsuit.
I wonder if Valve even care about Blizzard's use of "DOTA". Blizzard firing first, a month after announcing Blizzard DOTA, would suggest "no."
Valve didn't license DotA, they licensed Dota 2. DotA is still a community mod updated by Icefrog and always will be. No one but Icefrog will own it unless he decides to pass on the torch, which I don't see happening. Dota 2 does not use anything from Warcraft. It runs on the Source engine, and they came up with their own lore for the heroes.
Absolutely, Valve shouldn't have been allowed to copyright the name.
I agree both are not in the right, I don't think Blizzard has any right to sue but I also don't think Valve has any right to trademark the name.
RadiantRule
Banned
Except Valve's lack of morale won't be judged.
Pureauthor
Member
... Why not?
walking fiend
Member
So, Blizzard, who 'freely' provided the platform and assets and lore to help DotA become arguably the most popular PC game from an 'unknown' quantity; and also the community that helped the game on many fronts, neither have any right to the game.
However, Valve has every right to a game that they didn't have ANY kind of involvement with, just because now, after the game is at its apex, they are hiring the upkeepr of the games that even themselves are only partially responsible for the success of DotA?
If only Eul or Ice Frog could have made DotA to this point without the help of community, and also the free of charge use of WC3 assets, tools, lore and B.Net platform, and even GG Client; I would say there's a shred of justice in letting THEM own the name, and still not Valve.
---
I wonder, those who are making a devil out of Blizzard and white knight out of Valve, are aware that GG Client has been menetizing the whole DotA game for years and they weren't shut-down by Blizzard?
Sure, it's all business, but what Blizzard is worrying about, is that Valve is not only running away with the game, but also it most probably will halt future advancements of DotA out of Valve.
I do worry about that too.
bigtroyjon
Member
That doesn't matter, if he had a hand in creating the thing and giving meaning to the name(which his website seemed to have a big hand in), he would hold rights to it.
And you should change the thread title. They aren't suing Valve, they are opposing the trademark application.
Schweinehund
Member
In dota 2 the names have been changed a bit (For instance it doesn't show Lina's last name and Furion's name is just Nature's Prophet) and the lore is altered or completely different (it's actually pretty cool)..
Having come from years of WoW, and not having played WC3 for a long, long time... he just looks like a big ol' demon guy with a fiery sword to me. Assuming you're talking about Doombringer, the only hero I can think of that remotely approaches... this:
Or I guess you might be talking about Axe? A reddish orc guy? He's pretty close to Warcraft red orcs, that I'll admit.
I think he's talking about Sven and his original model, which is a blue felguard.
Doombringer is based off a Doomguard.
les papillons sexuels
Banned
blizzard suing does nothing good for them.
1. it draws more attention to the game valve is making
2. it paints them as copyright/trademark/patent trolls in the eyes of the community
3. it wont change anything when valve releases their version of the game
1. it draws more attention to the game valve is making
2. it paints them as copyright/trademark/patent trolls in the eyes of the community
3. it wont change anything when valve releases their version of the game
Eul made the name and acronym though, so would the rights not fall to him?
Unless it falls to the last user, at which point it would be Icefrog's.
Steve exists solely in the middle here, neither creator of name nor upkeeper.
Pureauthor
Member
So, who do you think should have the rights to the name?
Activision.
Certainly not Eul, the guy who came up with the name. Should belong to Blizzard, since they had a say in this.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Cause not only did Valve hire the current driving force behind the final edition of dota (Icefrog) but also the original creator of dota (Eul). What did Blizzard do? Jerk off and make money.
This is what I don't get, it's not like owning the dota name will magically make the entire dota community like their game - the dota community was built entirely on internet word of mouth, the same internet word of mouth that's going to smear bliz for trying to pull this.
What's especially hilarious is they had every opportunity (and then some) to adopt dota in the same way that valve absorbed so many games and developers, and they willfully ignored the chance, letting dota become popular in spite of, not because of anything they ever did for it.
bigtroyjon
Member
I don't know, there are probably a lot of people that could lay some claim, including Blizzard. I don't think this is much about Blizzard wanting the trademark, it's more about them not wanting Valve to be the sole owner.
BannedEpisode
Member
Valve's Dota 2 is pretty much all their work isnt it?
Art?
Engine?
Lore?
I'm admittedly not a huge MOBA guy but I have played DOTA 2 and it seems pretty cut and away separate from Blizzard's intellectual property.
The way I see it, Blizzard is upset that they never took the initiative to take ownership of a game that was never created by them in the first place. All that can come of this is poor press.
Art?
Engine?
Lore?
I'm admittedly not a huge MOBA guy but I have played DOTA 2 and it seems pretty cut and away separate from Blizzard's intellectual property.
The way I see it, Blizzard is upset that they never took the initiative to take ownership of a game that was never created by them in the first place. All that can come of this is poor press.
But that doesn't make any sense as Valve is attempting to only trademark "Dota", not the name the acronym represents. If Blizzard decided to call its upcoming MOBA "Blizzard's Defense of the Ancients", there would be absolutely zero potential legal issues.
walking fiend
Member
I like how you are merely reducing the whole thing into a very simple 'law' issue.
So, how about those who made the game popular? How about those who hosted the game, like B.Net and GG Client? All those who helped to test the game and work on assets and balance and items and everything? Or about those who constantly keep WC3 up to date?
Can someone in their right mind think DotA has been a 1, or 3, man project? And not the work of several different entities and the support of its huge community?
RadiantRule
Banned
Hiring someone who worked on the project does not automatically give you the right to that product. And did Valve employ Eul? I did not think so.
Anything that goes into a Warcraft III map, including any intellectual property of the map maker, is legally Blizzard's property. It's in the EULA.
Back when Dota 2 was announced, Blizzard stated that "Dota" belongs to the community, and they wouldn't try to trademark it. They didn't. However, Valve did, despite having no involvement with the game prior to the development of Dota 2. All Blizzard is trying to do here is block Valve's trademark so that Blizzard could release Blizzard Dota without getting sued by Valve. This will not force Valve to rename Dota 2 or anything of that nature.
I honestly cannot understand how so many people in this thread are taking Valve's side.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Question...Lets say had managed to get DOTA 2 trademarked, could they turn around and sue Blizzard for using Blizzard Dota?
Mr Touchdown
Member
So, this is basically a big waste of money by Blizzard, right?
To which I say... WHY THE HELL DID YOU NOT DO THIS SOONER BLIZZARD?
Game is already made, is going to be released, Blizzard can't do shit. Waste of time -_-
To which I say... WHY THE HELL DID YOU NOT DO THIS SOONER BLIZZARD?
Game is already made, is going to be released, Blizzard can't do shit. Waste of time -_-