I'm sure they would stop it, and they'd be right to do so if they legally own the name. Currently, they do. We shall see if the courts side with Valve or not, I imagine they will, and morally I have no doubt they should.
-
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
What you generally have to proof in the case of a dispute is that either the party is knowingly infringing on your product to compete against you, or they are riding on similarity/consumer confusion to gain an unfair advantage in the market. If your game is more or less completely unknown, has not benefit to the party with the similar name, and if you are unable to prove that there was any intention at all to copy you and the game just happens to have a similar name, yes you might not win a case.
In the case of DOTA though, I don't think there is any argument that Valve is definitely banking on the DOTA name as a known quantity, and they're not pretending otherwise. The only legal question is whether they should be denied this right, and who actually has ownership to such a trademark in the first place if they are to be denied that.
walking fiend
Member
First it is not up to Ice Frog after 'valve' trademarks the game;
Second, others may decide to maintain the game, and that will be up to 'Valve' to decide.
Who owns 'Football' or 'NBA'?
The_Endgamer
Member
I'll split it up concisely,
1) One word common in the English language (Fortress) is different than marketing a game with the same acronym as your product Blizzard held the rights to. The 'winning of hearts and minds' in the eye of a PC gaming culture through not suing the little guy is a good way of marketing yourself to gaming enthusiasts especially when your market already plays those smaller indie games primarily on a PC. This is in contrast to console gamers where it is more mainstream and indie games are less frequently bought rather than a multi-million dollar published game that their friends and colleagues own.
2) A crude oversimplification pervades your argument in your second point. A business is not foolish to go suing every small infringement of copyright like you infer on my argument, that's ignorant. It is a diminishing return and serves no real purpose. A cost/benefit analysis of each individual claim should be taken into account and if the costs to your existing business are there under threat from another business who is exploiting your product, then obviously you will undertake legal action much like Blizzard is doing now.
EDIT: See my point i made with StuBurns about costs outweighing benefits for more insight into my argument if you feel so inclined too.
You're assuming he made that comment without Valve's input; however, given it's still up on the official Dota 2 website, I'm going to assume that, yes, IceFrog is very much allowed to maintain the original DotA.
walking fiend
Member
eh? That's what I am saying all this time!
Did you expect valve to say: "hey, DotA community, we are going to trademark DOTA2, and as a gift will prevent any further development of DotA too; eat this."
What? Earlier you said this:
That is the very opposite of what IceFrog has expressed in the Q&A.
walking fiend
Member
Yes, I am pointing out why what IceFrog and Valve are saying is PR bullshit; and that legally there is no guarantee that Ice Frog can keep up his promise even if he wants himself; and if he doesn't, others will not be able to do what he promised to do.
Most probably, what will happen, is Ice Frog slowing DotA development to a point that the community is forced to let go of the old DotA, and after sometime he will issue a PR saying 'it has been a good time with you all, but its now time to move on".
People are banking on Valve and Gabe Newell's 'good will' and lack of business interest in DOTA trademarking;
DOTA is too big of a cash cow for anyone in their right mind to think so.
Their previous history means shit if not evaluted on its own merit:
Valve successfully "sued" Gravity Interactive, Inc over the use of "War Portal."
Valve is currently "suing" Disney over Portal as well.
Valve is currently "suing" DOTA-Allstars, LLC, trying to prevent them from trademarking "Defense of the Ancients."
Let me repeat that last one - Valve is trying to prevent someone else from using "Defense of the Ancients" while also trying to trademark "DOTA"
Valve "sued" over the use of the name "WholeSource" by a social networking company. They also "sued" over the use of "SuperSource" by a Australian video equipment company.
Man, Valve sure loves to "sue" people!
Valve is currently "suing" Disney over Portal as well.
Valve is currently "suing" DOTA-Allstars, LLC, trying to prevent them from trademarking "Defense of the Ancients."
Let me repeat that last one - Valve is trying to prevent someone else from using "Defense of the Ancients" while also trying to trademark "DOTA"
Valve "sued" over the use of the name "WholeSource" by a social networking company. They also "sued" over the use of "SuperSource" by a Australian video equipment company.
Man, Valve sure loves to "sue" people!
All you're doing is speculating in the opposite direction of presented fact. We have a firm statement from IceFrog that he'll continue to update DotA past the release of Dota 2, and he's employed by a developer not known for PR bullshittery, yet you're argument is, "Well, it's most definitely bullshit."
Valve know, perhaps better than any other developer, the importance of nurturing a community. Forcing people from DotA to Dota 2 flies in the face of that.
walking fiend
Member
All I am doing is being realistic and see Gabe Newell as a business man and not a white knight:
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Turns out Blizzard is actually fighting Valve over the Dota name:
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91202572&pty=OPP&eno=1
Trial Schedule:
I was wondering when this would happen.
Honestly, it wouldn't really matter.
nephilimdj
Member
After reading the legal document, cant see valve winning this one.
Surprised to see riot games working with blizzard with the dota name thu
Surprised to see riot games working with blizzard with the dota name thu
Wait who is Sue and why is she so popular -_-
on-topic, this is all in such bad taste. The road to MOBA heaven is paved with bad intentions
Hahaha... damn the comments around here do see-saw from one side to the other
(goes back to playing LoL once a day for the first-win-of-the-day IP bonus)
No, you're ignoring Valve's history with community interaction, and, again, a direct Valve-sanctioned statement from IceFrog regarding his future commitment to DotA.
Your first quote mentions Blizzard, not Valve.
Your second quote is a joke post.
Again, there is no evidence to suggest that Valve would use its Dota trademark to sabotage DotA mods that are not Dota 2.
Edit: Just so we're clear, I'm saying Valve acting nefariously with the trademark is unlikely, not an impossibility.
Who was saying he is a white knight?
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Seriously? Everyone in this topic seems to believe Valve will win this without too much trouble...?
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
They were most likely lying in wait for the perfect moment.
Valve's game is called DOTA 2.
Blizzard's is called Blizzard DOTA or something.
Huge conflict of interest.
Not even mentioning the sketchy matter of Valve taking the DOTA name in the first place.
The day I come to GAF for legal counseling is the day I've lost all hope.
Unless phisheep is online.
Togglesworlh
Banned
Dinosaur Tamer
Member
Sometimes I hate how hard it is to tell if someone is serious around here. I remember Chinner being into Zelda Williams, but I can't remember if he cares about joke posts.
Care to elaborate on that? I am not a lawyer, but I personally don't see how Blizzard is supposed to have a case here after publicly stating they do not own any rights to DotA.
Clearly Valve is banking all their previous goodwill towards to community to crack down with Dota2, leading to the next console generation where they will pump out console-exclusive Half-Life sequels 7 months at a time.
walking fiend
Member
those, such as the poster above you, who believe Valve is 'unlikely' to legally act against any form of DotA usage if it cuts into their DOTA business.
---
Anyhow, if anyone has bothered to read Blizzard file, they have a very strong case (beside the fact that it is possible to play DotA using LAN, which then still may be considered using B.Net in their usage); and it is most likely that they will prevent Valve from trade marking DOTA.
Luckily, court will not be easily effected by PR and 'good will' talk such as Valve has hired Eul and Ice-Frog, so they have the right to the DotA.
Togglesworlh
Banned
Are you fucking serious?
Do you know what the term "white knight" actually means? Here's a hint: it doesn't mean "not an asshole".
Those are two very different things. You are accusing people based on your own bias.
walking fiend
Member
eh? it exactly means that, in this context at least: "a company that is a friendly acquirer in a takeover"; or from Webster: "one that comes to the rescue of another especially : a corporation invited to buy out a second corporation in order to prevent an undesired takeover by a third "
I am saying, it is not realistic to think Valve is taking over DOTA as a sign of their good will toward the DotA community; if it was the case, they would name it something else and leave the DotA alone.
It's a conclusion derived from being familiar with Valve's history of community interaction, not because I believe Gabe Newell is a "white knight". It would benefit Valve greatly to leave the DotA moniker as it exists within the mod space well alone and instead focus on supporting and improving Dota 2 to make it more attractive to disinterested or hesitant players of other MOBA titles, the original DotA included. Similarly, it would benefit Valve to allow IceFrog to continue supporting the original DotA given the man is employed by Valve, for if they took him away from DotA, it would present the impression Valve are forcing people to Dota 2, and that - you guessed it - would annoy the community.
nephilimdj
Member
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91202572&pty=OPP&eno=1
document is there
Basicly thought process behind playing dota, you need wc3 and are aware its a mod. Dev knew of the EULA and so is the installer. long time association will make some think dota2 has something to do with the warcraft or blizzard company.
Nearly everything in dota is taken from wc3 editor and game, including the "Ancients" association.
Pedadragon and guinsoo gave up rights to the main mod site before icefrog took over to blizzard including its "dota, ll" fansite company name (2004 created).
walking fiend
Member
You are ignoring that none of other Valve games have potential to be profitable nearly as much as DOTA.
If they are so so good and favor the community, why don't they remove DRM from Steam, like GoG?
again:
Togglesworlh
Banned
Yeah, no. You're either completely misinterpreting people's stated opinions, or you're a troll, because no one here said or even implied that Valve is trademarking "Dota" for the purpose of allowing everyone to freely use it.
In fact, all that's ever been said, is that given Valve's long, long history of not being dicks about this kind of shit, that it's unlikely to happen this time around, either. And you're sitting here, not only (probably intentionally, since you've been corrected more than once already) misinterpreting the statements of various posters, but also claiming that Valve is suddenly going to turn heel and become this evil overlord, intent on forcing the entire world to bend to its will.
And your assumption that this will change Valve's stance to trademark infringement is in direct opposition to how the studio has conducted itself in the past.
I see we're going in circles here.
That's completely irrelevant.
Again, that has nothing to do with Valve's history.
walking fiend
Member
Yeah, in Valve's long long history, the only thing as big as DOTA they have had is steam, and it has DRM in it.
what?
didn't some one post various of their lawsuits, including the one against Defence of the Ancients?!!
They can always branch and change the name. It happens to open-source projects all the time.
Gabe Newell is trying to crush the Blizzard rebels in order to usher in the new age of gaming, but those Blizzardites are a hardly lot, always fighting like a bunch of cowards, wanting to stay in the past.
The sooner Blizzard is crushed under the iron heel of Valve, the better.
Dinosaur Tamer
Member
Truly we are lucky that Blizzard is ready to save the day and fend off Valve, who are trying to suppress the modding community after lulling them into a false sense of security for such a long time.
Now, let's say Blizzard actually stops Valve from trademarking DOTA. What now? Surely, they only care about protecting the DotA community from Valve, right? Well, by your very own logic, that can't be right. That's just PR and 'good will'.
By your logic, there is no reason for Blizzard to do this, beside of making profit out of it. And how do they do that? By trademarking it themselves and stopping everyone else from using the name in order to protect their very own Blizzard DOTA.
I'll let you ascertain the existence of those lawsuits.
Togglesworlh
Banned
Hahaha holy shit man. Okay, let's assume those are real for a moment.
Ahem-hem. I'm getting into character, here. AHEM-HEM. HEM.
...
Help! I can't find any information on these lawsuits! Could you please find some for me? Thanks, buddy!
I think this calls for a quote about the evils of capitalism.
walking fiend
Member
I am deserving of he is a total idiot tag;
I shamefully decease of any further discussion and will now go cry in shame
(sorry. (I honestly thought they had done so, cause Blizzard is really holding a trademark for Defence of the Ancients, apparently)
crimsonheadGCN
Banned
Those were oppositions to trademarks, not lawsuits by Valve. Margalis was using quotation marks around the word sue/suing to poke fun of the original thread title, "Blizzard suing Valve..."
The trademark is still pending for Defense of the Ancients, so Blizzard does not hold it yet. Valve has filed an opposition to the trademark after the original owners of DOTA-ALLSTARS, LLC (Riot Games) filed an opposition to Valve's trademark of Dota.
I am deserving of he is a total idiot tag;
I shamefully decease of any further discussion and will now go cry in shame
sorry. (I honestly thought they had done so, cause Blizzard is really holding a trademark for Defence of the Ancients, apparently)
The trademark is still pending for Defense of the Ancients, so Blizzard does not hold it yet. Valve has filed an opposition to the trademark after the original owners of DOTA-ALLSTARS, LLC (Riot Games) filed an opposition to Valve's trademark of Dota.
I am deserving of he is a total idiot tag;
I shamefully decease of any further discussion and will now go cry in shame
sorry.
Haha, don't worry about it.
walking fiend
Member
Does it mean I may feel less of an idiot? I guess not...
thanksHaha, don't worry about it.
The_Endgamer
Member
Just putting it out there but...
I personally hope Valve gets sued for a large amount. Hopefully that'll make them release HL3 a little sooner. heh
I personally hope Valve gets sued for a large amount. Hopefully that'll make them release HL3 a little sooner. heh