• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF

Drkirby
Corporate Apologist
(02-10-2012, 05:36 AM)
Drkirby's Avatar
Turns out Blizzard is actually fighting Valve over the Dota name:
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?p...&pty=OPP&eno=1

Trial Schedule:

Last edited by Nirolak; 02-10-2012 at 08:32 AM.
Togglesworlh
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:37 AM)
Togglesworlh's Avatar

Originally Posted by Drkirby

Turns out Blizzard is actually suing Valve over the Dota name, lawl:
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?p...&pty=OPP&eno=1

By this Opposition, Blizzard seeks to prevent registration by its competitor
Valve Corporation ("Valve") of a trademark, DOTA, that for more than seven years has
been used exclusively by Blizzard and its fan community, under license from Blizzard.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Drkirby
Corporate Apologist
(02-10-2012, 05:40 AM)
Drkirby's Avatar
There is also the factual error where they state the only way to play Dota is to use Battle.net
Swag
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:40 AM)
Swag's Avatar

Originally Posted by Suit

Distributed, marketed, and promoted by
Blizzard and its fans (under license from Blizzard);

Yeah okay Blizz
Togglesworlh
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:42 AM)
Togglesworlh's Avatar
I expected better from Blizzard.

By that I mean I fully expected them to be stupid-protective over something they've never owned nor made an effort to own previous to Valve's announcement of Dota 2, but I also fully expected their lawyers to not straight up lie when drawing up this document. And by that I mean I'm not surprised Blizzard is trying to pull some shady shit, but do they really expect to get away with it when the very core of their position is untrue?
Uriah
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:45 AM)
Uriah's Avatar
Should make a new thread. That's pretty big news.
Nirolak
Mrgrgr
(02-10-2012, 05:45 AM)
Nirolak's Avatar
Split bump.
Drkirby
Corporate Apologist
(02-10-2012, 05:45 AM)
Drkirby's Avatar
that utilizes and is built upon the
Warcraft III game engine, interface, and gameplay mechanics; that is comprised of
Warcraft III characters, items, spells, artwork, textures, and color palates;

Don't think of infringing on Blizzards Trademarked Color Palates!
outunderthestars
He's not our sharpest knife.
(02-10-2012, 05:46 AM)
outunderthestars's Avatar
as one who could not possibly care less about DOTA, can someone summarize this mess for me? :)
Drkirby
Corporate Apologist
(02-10-2012, 05:47 AM)
Drkirby's Avatar

Originally Posted by Uriah

Should make a new thread. That's pretty big news.

And it does have one now. Just to cover the bases

Turns out Blizzard is actually suing Valve over the Dota name, lawl:
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?p...&pty=OPP&eno=1

Topic: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=462639

Edit: This moved too?
Last edited by Drkirby; 02-10-2012 at 05:55 AM.
Uriah
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:47 AM)
Uriah's Avatar
id suing Valve over Team Fortress.
Nirolak
Mrgrgr
(02-10-2012, 05:47 AM)
Nirolak's Avatar

Originally Posted by outunderthestars

as one who could not possibly care less about DOTA, can someone summarize this mess for me? :)

Someone made a Warcraft 3 custom map called Defense of the Ancients.

Valve later hired that person and also a person who curated the mod for years afterwards.

They trademarked the word "DOTA" and called their game DOTA 2.

Blizzard sues Valve over this.
Tenck
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:47 AM)
Tenck's Avatar

Originally Posted by Drkirby

Turns out Blizzard is actually suing Valve over the Dota name, lawl:
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?p...&pty=OPP&eno=1

Haha, that's hilarious. I hope this is settled quickly and Valve continues on with Dota 2 as it is.
JaseC
gave away the keys to the kingdom.
(02-10-2012, 05:47 AM)
JaseC's Avatar
Massa
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
Massa's Avatar
Valve should never have taken the name Dota 2 for themselves.
EatinOlives
Harass A Bull?
Report to HR.
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
EatinOlives's Avatar

Originally Posted by outunderthestars

as one who could not possibly care less about DOTA, can someone summarize this mess for me? :)

DOTA's a popular mod, obviously not owned by Blizzard. They have no actual right to the name because it's not their name and they didn't trademark it.

It's like Bethesda suing over the name "Midas Magic".
alphaNoid
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
alphaNoid's Avatar
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.
BY2K
Membero Americo
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
BY2K's Avatar
Blizzard never licensed the name! They said it themselves!

Valve already won.
Deadbeat
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
Deadbeat's Avatar
Sounds like someone is scared.
Swag
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
Swag's Avatar
Wonder if they'd still consider the lawsuit if Icefrog stopped support for the Old Dota map and just focused on Dota 2 development.
Data West
coaches in the WNBA
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
Data West's Avatar
wait but.. i thought the reason was because it belonged to the fans but now.. i don't. huh
Finaika
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
Finaika's Avatar
What`s up with Blizzard nowadays?
Moaradin
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
Moaradin's Avatar
Haha good luck Blizzard.
Dreams-Visions
I'm mad as hell but this sandwich is delicious
(02-10-2012, 05:48 AM)
Dreams-Visions's Avatar

Originally Posted by Massa

Valve should never have taken the name Dota 2 for themselves.

why not? Blizzard certainly doesn't own the name.
Wario64
works for Gamestop (lol)
(02-10-2012, 05:49 AM)
I thought this was old news? I swore I read something like this months ago
LunaticHigh
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:49 AM)
LunaticHigh's Avatar
Do any law types in here actually think they have a case?
Togglesworlh
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:49 AM)
Togglesworlh's Avatar

Originally Posted by Massa

Valve should never have taken the name Dota 2 for themselves.

lol
Subitai
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:49 AM)
Subitai's Avatar
say it isn't so blizzard
Data West
coaches in the WNBA
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
Data West's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dreams-Visions

why not? Blizzard certainly doesn't own the name.

Because no one should own it? Because multiple people helped make the map into what it is, and it shouldn't be up to one guy to decide what it is?
SparkTR
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
SparkTR's Avatar

Originally Posted by Finaika

What`s up with Blizzard nowadays?

Activision.
Bill Murray
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
Blizzard should of put a ring on it.

Valve did kind of swoop in and swipe it, but I know everyone is pro-Steam and Valve around here.
Rygar 8 Bit
Jaguar 64-bit
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
Rygar 8 Bit's Avatar
wonder what caused them to get butt hurt they have been aware of this game for the longest time
Tenck
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
Tenck's Avatar

Originally Posted by Nirolak

Someone made a Warcraft 3 custom map called Defense of the Ancients.

Valve later hired that person and also a person who curated the mod for years afterwards.

They trademarked the word "DOTA" and called their game DOTA 2.

Blizzard sues Valve over this.

Wouldn't that mean Valve can sue Blizzard for their Blizzard Dota game?
Nelo Ice
Nelotard
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
Nelo Ice's Avatar
Lol, Blizzard completely missed the boat on DOTA and they're now they're just trying to cash in on it. This case is going to be a trainwreck :lol.
JaseC
gave away the keys to the kingdom.
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
JaseC's Avatar

Originally Posted by blindfoldswithin

Do any law types in here actually think they have a case?

Paging phisheep.

Originally Posted by Tenck

Wouldn't that mean Valve can sue Blizzard for their Blizzard Dota game?

No. DoTA as it exists within WarCraft III (and presumably StarCraft II) is Defense of the Ancients. Valve trademarked the word "Dota" rather than the actual acronym and what it represents. Dota and Defense of the Ancients are, despite meaning the same thing, legally different.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
Ignis Fatuus's Avatar
Fuck you Blizzard. This case will just further illustrate how far you've sunk under the Kotick regime.
Nirolak
Mrgrgr
(02-10-2012, 05:50 AM)
Nirolak's Avatar

Originally Posted by zoner

Because no one should own it? Because multiple people helped make the map into what it is, and it shouldn't be up to one guy to decide what it is?

They hired Eul, the guy who came up with the name and original map, and Ice Frog, the guy who made the most contributions.

What next, Gaming Age suing us over having GAF in our name?
suzu
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:51 AM)
suzu's Avatar
Is this for real? lol
alphaNoid
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:51 AM)
alphaNoid's Avatar

Originally Posted by EatinOlives

DOTA's a popular mod, obviously not owned by Blizzard. They have no actual right to the name because it's not their name and they didn't trademark it.

It's like Bethesda suing over the name "Midas Magic".

Don't pretend to know the legalities of this case. For one, the original DOTA was a WCIII mode, on Battle.net. IceFrog likely agreed to a EULA when he uploaded his DOTA mod to bnet that indicated that Blizzard wholely owned the rights to the names of products on its system.

Sound crazy?

Clauses like that are in just about all EULAs out there. If something like this existed when the first DOTA was uploaded to Battlenet long ago, Valve is out of luck and is going to either pay up or rename the game.
hylje
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:52 AM)
hylje's Avatar
Oh wow. BAD move Blizzard. Bad move.
LunaticHigh
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:52 AM)
LunaticHigh's Avatar
Is it important to note that valve trademarked specifically "DOTA" and not "Defense of the Ancients"? I believe Valve registered dota 2 as "DOTA 2" and not "defense of the ancients 2" there's no mention of it at all.
Last edited by LunaticHigh; 02-10-2012 at 05:52 AM. Reason: edit: valve trademarked
Hellsing321
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:52 AM)
Hellsing321's Avatar

Originally Posted by Togglesworlh

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Hahaha how does Blizzard think they can get away with a crock of shit like that?
Nirolak
Mrgrgr
(02-10-2012, 05:52 AM)
Nirolak's Avatar

Originally Posted by alphaNoid

Don't pretend to know the legalities of this case. For one, the original DOTA was a WCIII mode, on Battle.net. IceFrog likely agreed to a EULA when he uploaded his DOTA mod to bnet that indicated that Blizzard wholely owned the rights to the names of products on its system.

Sound crazy?

Clauses like that are in just about all EULAs out there.

EULA's are not legally verified entities.

I could put "alphaNoid must give me all his money if he clicks accept" into an EULA and it wouldn't mean anything.
kenta
Has no PEINS
(02-10-2012, 05:53 AM)
kenta's Avatar

Originally Posted by Wario64

I thought this was old news? I swore I read something like this months ago

The filing date is 11/16/11, so yes. Unless this document just got made public, but I don't think that's the case
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
(02-10-2012, 05:53 AM)
Ignis Fatuus's Avatar

Originally Posted by alphaNoid

Don't pretend to know the legalities of this case. For one, the original DOTA was a WCIII mode, on Battle.net. IceFrog likely agreed to a EULA when he uploaded his DOTA mod to bnet that indicated that Blizzard wholely owned the rights to the names of products on its system.

Sound crazy?

I always knew Blizzard owned the rights to Pokemon Maul!
Grayman
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:53 AM)
so is a judge going to hold up that Blizzard owns everything created or played in their games based on a click through EULA?
Tenck
Member
(02-10-2012, 05:53 AM)
Tenck's Avatar

Originally Posted by alphaNoid

Don't pretend to know the legalities of this case. For one, the original DOTA was a WCIII mode, on Battle.net. IceFrog likely agreed to a EULA when he uploaded his DOTA mod to bnet that indicated that Blizzard wholely owned the rights to the names of products on its system.

Sound crazy?

Clauses like that are in just about all EULAs out there.

Blizzard never said they owned it up to this point. If it was part of the EULA, they never once mentioned it.
EatinOlives
Harass A Bull?
Report to HR.
(02-10-2012, 05:53 AM)
EatinOlives's Avatar

Originally Posted by alphaNoid

Don't pretend to know the legalities of this case. For one, the original DOTA was a WCIII mode, on Battle.net. IceFrog likely agreed to a EULA when he uploaded his DOTA mod to bnet that indicated that Blizzard wholely owned the rights to the names of products on its system.

Sound crazy?

Clauses like that are in just about all EULAs out there. If something like this existed when the first DOTA was uploaded to Battlenet long ago, Valve is out of luck and is going to either pay up or rename the game.

Don't pretend like you know them either, considering how little power EULAs actually have.
Drkirby
Corporate Apologist
(02-10-2012, 05:54 AM)
Drkirby's Avatar

Originally Posted by outunderthestars

as one who could not possibly care less about DOTA, can someone summarize this mess for me? :)

Dota is a mod of Warcraft 3. Has had dozens of people work on it over the past 7 years, has had several major project heads over seeing the mod throughout the years (The three biggest are Eul, ported a custom map from Starcraft and made a Warcraft III mod of it, Guinsoo, who now works at Riot games who make League of Legends, and Ice Frog, who still manages the game to date and has worked on it for about 4+ years)


Valve decided to do what Valve does, and pick up the mod's development team and remake/make a sequel of it (See Team Fortress 2, Counter Strike, Day of Defeat).

So, one legal battle that Valve may have to fight is if Dota can even be copyrighted or if it is public domain. Personally, Blizzard may be better off trying to prove the Dota name is public Domain rather, since then they can call Blizzard Dota Blizzard Dota.

Also, some staff at Riot Games, makers of League of Legends, and who formally worked on Dota in the past, have put up some fight over the trademark.
JaseC
gave away the keys to the kingdom.
(02-10-2012, 05:54 AM)
JaseC's Avatar

Originally Posted by alphaNoid

Don't pretend to know the legalities of this case. For one, the original DOTA was a WCIII mode, on Battle.net. IceFrog likely agreed to a EULA when he uploaded his DOTA mod to bnet that indicated that Blizzard wholely owned the rights to the names of products on its system.

Sound crazy?

Clauses like that are in just about all EULAs out there. If something like this existed when the first DOTA was uploaded to Battlenet long ago, Valve is out of luck and is going to either pay up or rename the game.

Yes. Blizzard explicitly stated, after the announcement of Dota 2, that it does not own the rights to Defense of the Ancients and the name should rest in the public hands of the community.

Originally Posted by Nirolak

EULA's are not legally verified entities.

Also, this. The only reason EULAs scare people into submission is because they haven't the money to fight back.

Thread Tools