Support NeoGAF

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

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.

Yes they did.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=443318

No one should be complaining about the name/game if the original creator (Eul) and the man who balanced the shit outta it (Icefrog) are part of the team.

 

[Card Boy]

Brb trademarking Neogaf 2.

 

[Schweinehund]

So, who do you think should have the rights to the name?

To the community, who would do such great things as not being able to prevent the game from falling into obscurity...

The amount of work to making sure that dota 2 is faithful to dota is astounding. I honestly don't understand people's hesitation with valve having trademarked dota. The game isn't going to strive by being on a RTS engine that is almost 10 years old.

 

[SerArthurDayne]

I have to think Blizzard loses here because of lack of use in commerce.

Basically, if unregistered you get a limited trademark for the areas you use in commerce.

Where is the commerce here?
Maybe they can argue since it is tied to Warcraft III, which was commercial. Did they ever monetize or distribute DOTA? Did Riot Games do so?

What area is the mark used in?
This question is problematic because of the internet aspect of the case, which laws generally aren't prepped to deal with. The "zones" are usually defined geographically.

Valve is first to register, has some actual use in commerce (or intent to use in commerce). Even if it is only to sell hats.

Blizzard can only win if they establish the use of the mark in commerce, and that creating a stand alone game was in the "zone of likely expansion" for the unregistered mark.

I would need to do more reading, know more of the facts, and do a closer review of my trademark law to speak with anything approaching a degree of certainty, however.

edit: Also, DOTA is all they registered, as opposed to "Defense of the Ancients"
In skimming, it basically looks like Blizzard is doing exactly what I said, going for a VERY broad definition of Commerce. Which might work if they were talking about the Commerce Clause, but I'm not sure the PTO will apply such a broad definition.

 

[Lothars]

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.

It's because Blizzard is automatically assumed to be evil and Valve automatically assumed to be good.

 

[Calvinpewpewpew]

With all due respect to Nirolak, how many of you commenting on this pending litigation (and especially those of you claiming that "Activision doesn't have a case", "bad move Blizzard", "this will get laughed out of court") have attended a copyright, trademark, patent, or intellectual property class? How many of you have law degrees? Are any of you licensed to practice law? Have you passed the patent bar?

If not, how in the world do you presume to know either a. the details of the case, b. the merits (or lack thereof) of Activision's argument, and c. the likely outcome?

Please do everyone a favor and don't just go "lol troll". It's a legitimate question that deserves to be asked, and answered, every time the public comments on litigation as if they are experts on it.

 

[bigtroyjon]

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.

Steve used the name for years on his site without anyone contesting that. He(or more specifically the website/company) should have the rights to be able to continue to use that name.

That doesn't mean he owns it or controls the trademark, it just means that Valve can't come in years later and claim to be the sole owner.

 

[Doc Holliday]

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.

This makes sense, to me. Valve launched the first salvo my applying for the trademark. Blizzard never bothered Riot afaik and league of legends is huuuuge.

 

[Drkirby]

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.

In fact, Steve stole huge amounts of content him self. The reason it was Dota All Stars is that it simply took the better heroes of different versions of Dota (There was once tons of Dota offshoots), and put them in one version.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

Brb trademarking Neogaf 2.

careful, blizzard might sue you because we talk and show blizzard games and assets on this site and therefore under their eula it belongs to them.

 

[faceless007]

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.

The bindingness of EULAs is not settled law.

I sure as fuck hope they're found to be bullshit though.

 

[Nirolak]

Brb trademarking Neogaf 2.

NeoGAF is a registered corporation: http://www.powerprofiles.com/profile/00005160063739/NEOGAF+LLC-NEW+FAIRFIELD-CT

 

[JaseC]

Hiring someone who worked on the project does not automatically give you the right to that product.

"Right" in what sense? Legally speaking, Dota was floating around the ether, able to be caught by anyone with a vested interest. Morally speaking? There's cases to be made for both the assenting and dissenting of Valve's action.

And did Valve employ Eul? I did not think so.

Yes.

 

[RadiantRule]

Yes they did.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=443318

No one should be complaining about the name/game if the original creator Eul and the man who balanced the shit outta it Icefrog are part of the team.

Smart move by Valve. Hiring Eul on the low-low just not to get sued. I guess the court will decide.

 

[Shining Sunshine]

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.

Then why keep the DotA name if they're willing to change everything?

 

[Instro]

I wonder if they are just trying to delay the release of Valve's game. I mean litigation could tie up Dota 2 for quite a while no?

 

[Nirolak]

Steve used the name for years on his site without anyone contesting that. He(or more specifically the website/company) should have the rights to be able to continue to use that name.

That doesn't mean he owns it or controls the trademark, it just means that Valve can't come in years later and claim to be the sole owner.

He used it as an acronym for Defense of the Ancients.

You'll notice that Valve very specifically did not trademark that.

 

[Doc Holliday]

So can I trademark Chess?

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

NeoGAF is a registered corporation: http://www.powerprofiles.com/profile/00005160063739/NEOGAF+LLC-NEW+FAIRFIELD-CT

Brb heading to Ball Pond Rd.

 

[Pureauthor]

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.

Putting things in the EULA doesn't mean it holds up in court.

 

[Evlar]

With all due respect to Nirolak, how many of you commenting on this pending litigation (and especially those of you claiming that "Activision doesn't have a case", "bad move Blizzard", "this will get laughed out of court") have attended a copyright, trademark, patent, or intellectual property class? How many of you have law degrees? Are any of you licensed to practice law? Have you passed the patent bar?

If not, how in the world do you presume to know either a. the details of the case, b. the merits (or lack thereof) of Activision's argument, and c. the likely outcome?

Please do everyone a favor and don't just go "lol troll". It's a legitimate question that deserves to be asked, and answered, every time the public comments on litigation as if they are experts on it.

We are commenting on NeoGAF, a fan community. No qualifications are required to state our opinions on these kinds of matters, that I'm aware of. That would be an efficient way to shut down discussion on this discussion board.

 

[Card Boy]

So can I trademark Chess?

As long as you worked on it last apparently.

 

[Deadstar]

If Blizzard wins maybe Valve can rename Dota to Iron Brigade. That's not taken, right?

 

[Pureauthor]

I wonder if they are just trying to delay the release of Valve's game. I mean litigation could tie up Dota 2 for quite a while no?

Pft. Like they need to bother. Valve Time will ensure this game takes its sweet time getting out.

 

[Nirolak]

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?

Well yes, because that's generally what legal matters revolve around.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Then why keep the DotA name if they're willing to change everything?

Cause the original creators are working on it. Jaffe won't call spiritual successor of Twisted Metal "Combat shooter" would he? You rather call it TM or TMBlack2 to avoid lawsuit.

(I hate typing on iPhone at 2am).

 

[JaseC]

Smart move by Valve. Hiring Eul on the low-low just not to get sued. I guess the court will decide.

Sued? Sued by whom? Valve is the only entity with anything resembling a valid legal claim to DoTA.

 

[Mama Robotnik]

Oh dear, Blizzard.

 

[Pureauthor]

So can I trademark Chess?

Well, if you got the OK from a) the guy who actually came up with the basic idea and/or b) the last dude to have modified the rules as accepted by the international chess playing community, then go for it.

 

[Conrad Link]

Blizzard gonna release their own one called The Real DOTA 2!

 

[Cydonian__Knight]

I thought this would happen eventually, especially with Blizzard making their own version of Dota for Starcraft. It does seem kind of silly to trademark the word Dota at this point though...

 

[lupinko]

Gabe: *laughs*

 

[Riposte]

It is very possible Blizzard is ran by assholes with or without Kotick's involvement.

 

[Apath]

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.

Sorry, I haven't modded WC3 in a long time ;p Yes I meant the Doombringer hero. (Or not? Red demon with a flaming sword and hooves for feet.) I guess I do not remember the model name he's based on as well as I thought.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Sued? Sued by whom? Valve is the only entity with anything resembling a valid legal claim to DoTA.

The only fucked up part is that DOTA is a genre that looks the same everywhere with same names. I hope Blizzard doesn't find a way to somehow convince the judge that it's a copyright infringement by showing pictures of the map.

 

[Aselith]

With all due respect to Nirolak, how many of you commenting on this pending litigation (and especially those of you claiming that "Activision doesn't have a case", "bad move Blizzard", "this will get laughed out of court") have attended a copyright, trademark, patent, or intellectual property class? How many of you have law degrees? Are any of you licensed to practice law? Have you passed the patent bar?

If not, how in the world do you presume to know either a. the details of the case, b. the merits (or lack thereof) of Activision's argument, and c. the likely outcome?

Please do everyone a favor and don't just go "lol troll". It's a legitimate question that deserves to be asked, and answered, every time the public comments on litigation as if they are experts on it.

Do you have a degree in politics? Don't comment on politics.

Did you ever play pro sports? Don't comment on pro sports.

Did you ever build a car? Don't comment on cars.

Did you ever write a song professionally? Don't comment on songs or singing.

Did you ever write a Hollywood movie? Don't comment on movies.

etc.

 

[Aaron]

Pft. Like they need to bother. Valve Time will ensure this game takes its sweet time getting out.

If this court case is on Blizzard time, they would be up to DOTA 6 before it actually comes up in court.

 

[Nirolak]

The only fucked up part is that DOTA is a genre that looks the same. I hope Blizzard doesn't find a way to somehow convince the judge that it's a copyright infringement by showing pictures of the map.

Given that Zynga and Gameloft continue to exist, it would be pretty hard to do that.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

With all due respect to Nirolak, how many of you commenting on this pending litigation (and especially those of you claiming that "Activision doesn't have a case", "bad move Blizzard", "this will get laughed out of court") have attended a copyright, trademark, patent, or intellectual property class? How many of you have law degrees? Are any of you licensed to practice law? Have you passed the patent bar?

If not, how in the world do you presume to know either a. the details of the case, b. the merits (or lack thereof) of Activision's argument, and c. the likely outcome?

Please do everyone a favor and don't just go "lol troll". It's a legitimate question that deserves to be asked, and answered, every time the public comments on litigation as if they are experts on it.

CEN 800 - Law and Ethics. Study of the legal and ethical aspects of engineering practice, including Canadian legal system and business organizations, tort liability, business contract law, intellectual and industrial property, principles of arbitration and alternative dispute resolutions, the practice of engineering, occupational health and safety, ethical aspects of engineering practice, ethical dilemmas in project management, sustainable development and ethical behavior, and globalization and international standards for ethical and social responsibility.

Your contribution to society/this_thread is...

?

 

[Apath]

Do you have a degree in politics? Don't comment on politics.

Did you ever play pro sports? Don't comment on pro sports.

Did you ever build a car? Don't comment on cars.

Did you ever write a song professionally? Don't comment on songs or singing.

Did you ever write a Hollywood movie? Don't comment on movies.

etc.

To be fair, law is pretty different from (most of) these things.

 

[Infinite Justice]

CEN 800 - Law and Ethics.

Your contribution to society/this_thread is...

?

This thread just got better...

 

[lupinko]

Cause the original creators are working on it. Jaffe won't call spiritual successor of Twisted Metal "Combat shooter" would he? You rather call it TM or TMBlack2 to avoid lawsuit.

(I hate typing on iPhone at 2am).

Scott Campbell already did that in 1998 with Rogue Trip.

Which was known as the real Twisted Metal 3, and not the joke 989 Studios "Twisted Metal 3" that came out that same fall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rogue_trip.jpg

lol Million Seller Developer of Car Combat.

 

[SteveWinwood]

It is very possible Blizzard is ran by assholes with or without Kotick's involvement.

I'm convinced that the lawyer types are so intertwined with everything now that no one is innocent anymore.

 

[questionmark]

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?

In your opinion, does every single person who works at Blizzard have the rights to everything related to Blizzard games? No, of course you do not. Blizzards IPs belong to the company Blizzard, and the people running it.

The very notion that some low level QA guy has a claim on a property he has worked on is ridiculous, and that is basically what your agument amounts too.

 

[Aselith]

To be fair, law is pretty different from (most of) these things.

No, it isn't. They all require a great deal of training and expertise to truly understand and predict but they're fun to take a run at for laymen. No special degrees required to comment from the peanut gallery.

CEN 800 - Law and Ethics. Study of the legal and ethical aspects of engineering practice, including Canadian legal system and business organizations, tort liability, business contract law, intellectual and industrial property, principles of arbitration and alternative dispute resolutions, the practice of engineering, occupational health and safety, ethical aspects of engineering practice, ethical dilemmas in project management, sustainable development and ethical behavior, and globalization and international standards for ethical and social responsibility.

Your contribution to society/this_thread is...

?

You can only comment on Canadian litigation. Go file a restraining order on some bagged milk or whatever you all do up there.

 

[Apath]

No, it isn't. They all require a great deal of training and expertise to truly understand and predict but they're fun to take a run at for laymen. No special degrees required to comment from the peanut gallery.

Well to know laws you have to first study them. There are a lot of laws, many complicated. I'd compare it to math or history. I didn't disagree with your point.

I mostly meant your comparisons. You do not need to be a professional athlete to comment on a sport, but it's expected you've watched a lot of it. I'd assume you would have to know a fair bit about the laws being discussed to comment on them (in serious discussion).

 

[TheUnsane1]

Some part of me hopes Blizzard makes some progress on this. Ideally enough that Dota 2 has to get rid of the lazy naming and lack of creativity for the champions.

I know they are just carried over but that doesn't make them good.

 

[Aselith]

Well to know laws you have to first study them. There are a lot of laws, many complicated. I'd compare it to math or history. I didn't disagree with your point.

I mostly meant your comparisons. You do not need to be a professional athlete to comment on a sport, but it's expected you've watched a lot of it.

No shit. And you don't need to be a lawyer to comment on a court case. See how that works?

 

[Apath]

I don't even know where this is going now.

I agree. I'm drunk and letting myself get out of hand. I see his point.

 

[Sober]

With all due respect to Nirolak, how many of you commenting on this pending litigation (and especially those of you claiming that "Activision doesn't have a case", "bad move Blizzard", "this will get laughed out of court") have attended a copyright, trademark, patent, or intellectual property class? How many of you have law degrees? Are any of you licensed to practice law? Have you passed the patent bar?

If not, how in the world do you presume to know either a. the details of the case, b. the merits (or lack thereof) of Activision's argument, and c. the likely outcome?

Please do everyone a favor and don't just go "lol troll". It's a legitimate question that deserves to be asked, and answered, every time the public comments on litigation as if they are experts on it.

If you look two posts up from your reply, SerArthurDayne seems to give a semi-informed look on the matter.

Also, if you want to flash your supposed qualifications around and then enlighten us "filthy rabble", rather than writing a condescending reply, tell us about the law surrounding the matter. By all means go ahead.