bigtroyjon
Member
If they trademark it, yes?
Trademarks are like patents, you can get one without much effort, the real test comes when someone challenges it in court.
If they trademark it, yes?
Yep. Not sure why people are arguging otherwise. Call the game something else like what S2 and Riot did, don't trademark a name that isn't yours. Heres a bad analogy, It's like if I wanted to trademark the name The Holy Bible 2.
It's theirs now, legally. They trademarked it. Morally, if it belonged to anyone, it belonged to Eul. Eul works for Valve. Checkmate.Yep. Not sure why people are arguging otherwise. Call the game something else like what S2 and Riot did, don't trademark a name that isn't yours.
The dickery is on Valve's part for the name. Valve's game isn't exactly rocking the originality either when it comes to the art/character design. Seems like that would be one of the things they'd want to be wary of.
It's like blaming Bethesda games bugs on the programmers.
again, I am not saying that why they are making a sequel, but why they are naming it DotA 2?
As if they have any right over DotA 1.
I'm on Team Valve.
The name wasn't Blizzards, they hired the main guy behind the map (right? Or one of the main guys at least?) and then they trademarked the name Dota. Technically, if Blizzard wanted to go all legal, wouldn't the only be associated with Defence of the Ancients or the acronym DOTA and not Dota the word? I'm not sure on legal stuff anyway but that seems like the type of legal loophole type thing there would be.
Yep. Not sure why people are arguging otherwise. Call the game something else like what S2 and Riot did, don't trademark a name that isn't yours. Heres a bad analogy, It's like if I wanted to trademark the name The Holy Bible 2.
I'm on Team Valve.
The name wasn't Blizzards, they hired the main guy behind the map (right? Or one of the main guys at least?) and then they trademarked the name Dota. Technically, if Blizzard wanted to go all legal, wouldn't the only be associated with Defence of the Ancients or the acronym DOTA and not Dota the word? I'm not sure on legal stuff anyway but that seems like the type of legal loophole type thing there would be.
And, again, people have already pointed out that both the original creator of the custom map and the man currently responsible for the upkeep of the custom map, four years running, both work for Valve. If either one had an issue with Valve owning the trademark, then maybe you'd have a case. Unfortunately, neither one has expressed anything like that.
Next?
So, EA has the right to publish MW4, cause they now have hired the dev?Valve hired both Eul and IceFrog. The only designer of DoTA not at the studio is Guinsoo, who works at Riot (LoL). As Meat Loaf once said, "2 out of 3 ain't bad".
You are definitely right on that, but I'd argue Blizzard's designs are more "inspired" by Warhammers, while Valve's Dota is pretty much a copy of each of Blizzard's characters. You can basically at first glance tell who every hero is in Valve's Dota for a reason.
When Activision bought Blizzard everyone said nothing will change, Blizzard is still doing their own thing. I have not been impressed by anything Blizzard has done since the acquisition. Warcraft II, III and Starcraft are my most played games of all time and Starcraft II left me disappointed. With Diablo III they have a chance to win back some good will with me but now they are fucking suing Valve for capitalizing on the most popular thing about Warcraft III which they completely dropped the ball on? Save us Gabe.
You are definitely right on that, but I'd argue Blizzard's designs are more "inspired" by Warhammers, while Valve's Dota is pretty much a copy of each of Blizzard's characters. You can pretty much at first glance tell who every hero is in Valve's Dota for a reason.
I'm on Team Valve.
The name wasn't Blizzards, they hired the main guy behind the map (right? Or one of the main guys at least?) and then they trademarked the name Dota. Technically, if Blizzard wanted to go all legal, wouldn't the only be associated with Defence of the Ancients or the acronym DOTA and not Dota the word? I'm not sure on legal stuff anyway but that seems like the type of legal loophole type thing there would be.
And, again, people have already pointed out that both the original creator of the custom map and the man currently responsible for the upkeep of the custom map, four years running, both work for Valve. If either one had an issue with Valve owning the trademark, then maybe you'd have a case. Unfortunately, neither one has expressed anything like that.
Next?
I am saying that no one owns a right to this game.
Steve 'Guinsoo' Freak also worked on it, and he isn't on Valves side.
What`s up with Blizzard nowadays?
The problem, is that DotA is not a game of Ice Frog or Eul; it has been a 'free' community game, and now is being monetized by Ice Frog and Eul; it was also heavily supported by Blizzard platforms.
I am saying that no one owns a right to this game. Why do you think there's no game named Football?
I understand that the crew that helped make it are hired at Valve now, but that still doesn't give them the right to the name.
If anything, they should allow Eul and Icefrog to co-own the name and license it.
But bottom line is, Valve just deciding to trademark it was bad form. And basically copying all their characters was also bad form.
Guinsoo made the smallest contribution of them all, and is already off being happy making the big bucks at Riot. Who gives a shit.Steve 'Guinsoo' Freak also worked on it, and he isn't on Valves side.
Also why are we using people as arguments who may or may not exist?
But bottom line is, Valve just deciding to trademark it was bad form. And basically copying all their characters was also bad form.
When Activision bought Blizzard everyone said nothing will change, Blizzard is still doing their own thing. I have not been impressed by anything Blizzard has done since the acquisition. Warcraft II, III and Starcraft are my most played games of all time and Starcraft II left me disappointed. With Diablo III they have a chance to win back some good will with me but now they are fucking suing Valve for capitalizing on the most popular thing about Warcraft III which they completely dropped the ball on? Save us Gabe.
Character copying is definitely bad.
Yeah there are exceptions, even a good amount, but there are a ton of heroes and a good portion are based on their WC3 counter parts. The hero based on the Fel Guard model, for example, is not too generic but is very similar to the Dota 2 version. When I first saw him, I didn't even have to wonder who he was. I do not agree that the ones that are similar are only the generic ones.This is just heading even further down the path begun long before Activision ever came into the picture.
For some of the more generic ones (like Drow Ranger, for example), sure. But they've changed quite a few of them significantly enough to be Different while still being Recognizable (an intentional choice, to be sure). Storm Spirit, Earthshaker, Tidehunter, just to name a few.
I think there both assholes in this situation.
Valve probably should have called it something else. Trying to copyright the DOTA name after its been around for nearly 10 years is just silly.
The problem, is that DotA is not a game entirely of Ice Frog or Eul; it has been a 'free' community game, and now is being monetized by Ice Frog and Eul; it was also heavily supported by Blizzard platforms and WC3 assets and even its lore.
I am saying that no one owns a right to this game; not blizzard, not valve and not Ice Frog. Why do you think there's no game named Football?
So, EA has the right to publish MW4, cause they now have hired the dev?
you mean when viacom(blizzard) bought activision? They just put Bobby in charge of the gaming division at viacom.
So, Valve's methodology of addressing a community mod of one of their games:
Day of Defeat. Mod of Half Life. Valve hires the creators, trademarks the name, supports further development, and sells the mod through retail. Continued support to the present day, after updating to new assets and the Source engine.
And Blizzard's methodology of addressing a community mod of one of their games:
Defense of the Ancients. Mod of Warcraft 3. Ignore the most popular community mod in the world for most of a decade. After the first three curators of the game get hired by other developers, declare in a legal brief that the IP belonged to you the entire time, with no apparent interest in hiring the community talent or the niceties of applying for a trademark.
A rational opinion admid a sea of petty fanboys.
So, Valve's methodology of addressing a community mod of one of their games:
Day of Defeat. Mod of Half Life. Valve hires the creators, trademarks the name, supports further development, and sells the mod through retail. Continued support to the present day, after updating to new assets and the Source engine.
Steve 'Guinsoo' Freak also worked on it, and he isn't on Valves side. Also why are we using people as arguments who may or may not exist?
So, EA has the right to publish MW4, cause they now have hired the dev?