Blizzard Legally Opposes Valve Trademark Over DOTA Name [Up: Trial Schedule]

#2
#5
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?
 

Drkirby

Corporate Apologist
#8
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!
 
#12
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.
 
#17
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.
 
#33
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?
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
#35
Do any law types in here actually think they have a case?
Paging phisheep.

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.
 
#37
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?
 
#39
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.
 
#41
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.
 
#43
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.
 
#45
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!
 
#47
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.
 
#48
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
#49
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.
#50
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.

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.