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

Apr 4, 2007
15,588
1
0
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.
The name wasn't Blizzard's either.
 
Feb 17, 2009
12,544
0
0
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.
It's theirs now, legally. They trademarked it. Morally, if it belonged to anyone, it belonged to Eul. Eul works for Valve. Checkmate.

Having now lost the legal and moral arguments, do you Kotick apologists have any other absurdities to spew?
 
Dec 22, 2006
14,387
1
0
Of everyone involved here I really don't know why we should suppose the name belongs to Blizzard. And if it doesn't belong to Blizzard then where is the case?
 
Sep 27, 2009
19,653
7
705
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.
 
Apr 11, 2009
7,255
0
0
Florida
Porn companies are able to get away with copyright infringing titles by slapping "A XXX Parody" in the titles of their works, like Seinfeld A XXX Parody or Star Trek: The Next Generation A XXX Parody.

If Valve wanted to be really dickish in response to this, couldn't they just add "A Spinoff Parody" to DOTA 2?
 
Jun 23, 2011
2,972
0
0
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.
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?
 
Mar 25, 2009
24,339
0
780
Well Blizzard will lose for sure, because the name of Dota 2 is Dota 2, not DOTA 2. Blizzard are just being dicks here. I doubt they have any kind of real chance against Valve.
 
Jun 7, 2004
56,398
0
0
Blizzard ignored the community forever, and they're support for the community is horrible. They now see the big cash cow it is, and want a piece of the pie. I'm glad Valve took it, they support and care for the community a lot more than Blizzard ever will.
 
Feb 17, 2009
12,544
0
0
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.
There were three people who worked on DOTA. The original creator was Eul. Guinsoo took over for a period. Then IceFrog took over, made the most contributions, and maintains the game to this day.

Valve has hired both Eul and IceFrog. Guinsoo works at Riot. None of them work for Blizzard.
 
Nov 16, 2006
19,378
0
1,025
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.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
Jul 30, 2009
73,803
6
890
Western Australia
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.
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".
 
Apr 13, 2011
8,247
0
0
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?
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?


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".
So, EA has the right to publish MW4, cause they now have hired the dev?
 
Aug 4, 2009
12,377
0
690
19
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.

Not to mention most of the spells are based off of Blizzard's templates, though I feel that's pretty minor.
 
Jun 23, 2011
2,972
0
0
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.
This is just heading even further down the path begun long before Activision ever came into the picture.

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.
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.
 

Drkirby

Corporate Apologist
Jan 29, 2008
42,344
0
0
28
Florida
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.
They hired the man who has managed the map for years, several other members of his team, and I believe they ether fully hired Eul, or tracked him down and 'bought' the name off of him.
 
Aug 11, 2010
17,104
1
0
VIC, Australia
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?
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?
 
Feb 17, 2009
12,544
0
0
I am saying that no one owns a right to this game.
And you're saying wrong things that are wrong because Valve has trademarked the name.

And under no weirdo fantasy scenario does Blizzard, of all parties, have any claim to it.

Steve 'Guinsoo' Freak also worked on it, and he isn't on Valves side.
He's not on Blizzard's side either because he wants the money he's making at Riot. Again, Eul came up with the name and has the strongest moral claim. If you think Guinsoo has any claim, then IceFrog's claim should be stronger still.
 
Nov 28, 2005
40,972
0
0
39
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.
 
Apr 4, 2007
15,588
1
0
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?
So you're saying every member of the community created and worked on it?

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.
Who has the right to the name?
 
Aug 29, 2009
4,438
0
0
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 mean when viacom(blizzard) bought activision? They just put Bobby in charge of the gaming division at viacom.
 
Dec 22, 2006
14,387
1
0
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.​
 
Aug 4, 2009
12,377
0
690
19
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.
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.
 
Apr 3, 2010
29,270
0
0
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.

And Blizzard for clearly missing the boat on DOTA and trying to get it back after Valve swooped in.
 

Drkirby

Corporate Apologist
Jan 29, 2008
42,344
0
0
28
Florida
Not too sure how much merit it has, but someone on Reddit mentioned that Ice Frog had gone to Blizzard at one time about making a Stand Alone Dota and was shot down. Anyone know if it is true or not?
 
Feb 27, 2010
2,761
1
650
1 billion bajillion dollars profit isn't enough for Activision Blizzard ... they have to have MOAR !!!

Little do they realise that no one can have moar than Mr. Gabe.

Screw you Blizzard ... first you drop LAN support and now this shit.

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.
Valve are assholes for seeing potential and funding development for this game? I have no problem with Valve taking the DOTA name under their wing. They gave jobs to the DOTA guys and funding to produce the next DOTA. It's just Blizzard being jerks.
 

Zen

Banned
Jun 24, 2005
13,050
0
0
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?
A rational opinion admid a sea of petty fanboys.
 
Nov 16, 2006
19,378
0
1,025
you mean when viacom(blizzard) bought activision? They just put Bobby in charge of the gaming division at viacom.

Ya my bad. Everything since then I have not been impressed with.

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.​
This. Blizzard dropped the ball BIG TIME and just looks like sour grapes.
 
Nov 4, 2011
66
0
0
Valve filed the trademark for "Dota" in August 2010, leading to Steve Mescon to file a counter application of trademark for the phrase "Defense of the Ancients", on behalf of DotA-Allstars, LLC., in order to "protect the work that dozens of authors have done to create the game".

Why are people supporting Valve on this one?
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
Jul 30, 2009
73,803
6
890
Western Australia
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.​
A better example would be Counter-Strike. Hell, Jess Cliffe still works at Valve.

Edit: Not that I'm aware of the DoD team flying the coop.
 
May 5, 2011
10,299
0
0
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?
Why hasn't Eul, the guy who came up with the name (you know that one thing that gives it an identity), complained about this?

It's the name they are fighting for, and the guy who came up with it is currently on team Valve. Why is this hard to understand?