61–70 of 100 posts
It would seem Bethesda fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go against a Swede when trademark is on the line"!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh FFS, did you even spend a second figuring out what a trademark on a color actually means?
I honestly don't know what you mean. I have almost no interest in copyright law as it is. All I know is that I believe that if I make a magenta cell phone and start selling it, T-Mobile might get upset. Please explain what you mean.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well they did hire the creator of Dota to work on it for them, not like they've stolen the name from him..
IceFrog isn't strictly the author of DotA. DotA is, if memory serves, based on an even older mod called Aeon of Strife. And DotA's development history is riddled with support from the WC3 mapping community so it's really unfair to name any one individual as a sole creator or rights holder. There really is no rights holder to the game and there have been at least 3 major releases by distinct developing groups: Demigod…
(Well, he's "the person of Dota", at least. Mr. Ismail is far too reclusive to ever show his face.)
Unfortunately, it pains me to say this, but this is the truth: If you tried to commercially release your own DOTA, and if you'd copied skills/heroes/items from the original game, Valve, or rather Ismail, would sic lawyers on you immediately. I know this because they tried to do it to S2, the creators of HoN (a very similar game).
So it's unfortunately not true "There really is no rights holder to the game". Valve/Icefrog hold all the cards at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh FFS, did you even spend a second figuring out what a trademark on a color actually means?
I honestly don't know what you mean. I have almost no interest in copyright law as it is. All I know is that I believe that if I make a magenta cell phone and start selling it, T-Mobile might get upset. Please explain what you mean.
Trademarks and copyrights are two totally different things. See here: http://www.lawmart.com/searches/difference.htm
tl;dr: Trademarks are more to do with logos and branding, their intent being to allow a company to distinguish themselves in a market with a certain identity. Violations of Trademarks are usually linked to consumers being mislead into believing a product is from one company when it is in fact from another.
T-Mobile does not own a copyright for Magenta. They don't own Magenta. If I want to make Magenta chairs they have no say. They would never receive a Trademark on black, however.
If you start making magenta phones, it's reasonable to assume that the average consumer would confuse them with the already popular magenta phones being promoted by T-Mobile, and this might damage their brand, given that your phones might not work to the same standard.
It's generally not good to form an opinion of topics before you actually obtain a relevant amount of education. It can lead you to making yourself look really stupid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm? Bethesda didn't make Quake, if that's what you're saying...
Bethesda bought id in '09, so yes they do.
But oh man: Carmack vs Notch. Imagine it.
Nevermind, I hope Bethesda can somehow persuade/pressure/bribe/extort Carmack into that. Because... C'mon. Carmack vs Notch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh FFS, did you even spend a second figuring out what a trademark on a color actually means?
I honestly don't know what you mean. I have almost no interest in copyright law as it is. All I know is that I believe that if I make a magenta cell phone and start selling it, T-Mobile might get upset. Please explain what you mean.
Here is wikipedia's entry on the first U.S. lawsuit that established that color could be trademarked: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitex_Co._v._Jacobson_Produc....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm? Bethesda didn't make Quake, if that's what you're saying...
Bethesda bought id in '09, so yes they do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IceFrog isn't strictly the author of DotA. DotA is, if memory serves, based on an even older mod called Aeon of Strife. And DotA's development history is riddled with support from the WC3 mapping community so it's really unfair to name any one individual as a sole creator or rights holder. There really is no rights holder to the game and there have been at least 3 major releases by distinct developing groups: Demigod…
He's not the author, but he's "the face of Dota" at this point. (Well, he's "the person of Dota", at least. Mr. Ismail is far too reclusive to ever show his face.) Unfortunately, it pains me to say this, but this is the truth: If you tried to commercially release your own DOTA, and if you'd copied skills/heroes/items from the original game, Valve, or rather Ismail, would sic lawyers on you immediately. I know this be…