Blizzard is SUING Valve over DOTA

[Zelkova]

It looks like they are suing Valve over the usage of the Dota name, because it was used by their playerbase for their game. I have not read too much of this.


http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?p...&pty=OPP&eno=1

[JoeTang]

It's not over the use of the DotA name, it's over the trademarking of the DotA name.

[Fiel]

In Valve's response:

"Opposer cannot claim exclusive rights to the DOTA mark."

Sounds like Valve is agreeing that DotA started with Warcraft II and III, but that does not signify that just because the idea was created using their world editor that the idea of DotA belongs to Blizzard - only the map and assets. The idea is responsible to its creator.

This will be a good case to see how far copyrights/trademarks extend from world creators to the worlds they create.

I'm definitely on Blizzard's side here. But it's maddeningly stupid that they haven't filed a trademark on it thus far.

[Malthe]

Blizzard has had absolutely nothing to do with DotA it was made by fans for fans.
If anybody, it belongs to Eul.
I just personally do not believe having something made on their world editor gives them any control of the name at all.
They even say "DOTA, that for more than seven years has been used exclusively by Blizzard and its fan community,"
Which is bullpomegranate because it's been the fan community, not blizzard, blizzard didnt have their hands in DotA and didnt work on it in any way. The person that has worked the most with DotA has been IceFrog while Eul created it.

Oh it gets better.
Blizzard wrote: "and whose name (DOTA, an acronym for "Defense of the Ancients") is a reference to Warcraft III characters known as the "Ancients.""

Hahahaha, ancients is a reference to the two ancients that you defend, not the heroes/characters. GJ Blizzard.

"Valve seeks to appropriate the more than seven years of goodwill that Blizzard has developed in the mark DOTA"
Again, blizzard didnt do anything about DotA.

And:
"The title "Defense of the Ancients," or "DotA," is a reference to the Warcraft III characters known as the "Ancients," since the primary objective of the game is to either defend or destroy (depending upon which team the player is on) the Ancient known as the Tree of Life."

That just proved that they really have no idea what DotA is about.

[JoeTang]

In Valve's response:

"Opposer cannot claim exclusive rights to the DOTA mark."

Sounds like Valve is agreeing that DotA started with Warcraft II and III, but that does not signify that just because the idea was created using their world editor that the idea of DotA belongs to Blizzard - only the map and assets. The idea is responsible to its creator.

This will be a good case to see how far copyrights/trademarks extend from world creators to the worlds they create.

I'm definitely on Blizzard's side here. But it's maddeningly stupid that they haven't filed a trademark on it thus far.

I believe the stance Blizzard had was they were not going to file a trademark because the game belongs to the community, and they felt the community could govern themselves over it without Blizzard needing to step in and be big brother, or whatever idealistic logic they had. Now they feel Valve is threatening that position by attempting to possibly monetize the name and in the process screw over Blizzard for having anything to do with DotA.

[Luxeraph]

Maybe, just maybe Blizzard just don't want the name trademarked by anyone since it was made by the community.








But we all know thats bull.

[Malthe]

I believe the stance Blizzard had was they were not going to file a trademark because the game belongs to the community, and they felt the community could govern themselves over it without Blizzard needing to step in and be big brother, or whatever idealistic logic they had. Now they feel Valve is threatening that position by attempting to possibly monetize the name and in the process screw over Blizzard for having anything to do with DotA.

And blizzard is working on "Blizzard DotA" themselves ATM for the SC2 engine. Hah.

Also DotA is a game GENRE by now. Just like rogue-likes are called rogue-likes. Some DotA-ish games are called DotA games.

[LadyJenJen]

I dream of a world where all the big name companies stop suing each other

[Hanabira.Kage]

I dream of a world where all the big name companies stop suing each other

Keep on dreaming.

It'll keep happening due to human greed.

[Flonne]

>community creates a subgenre of RTS
>company has nothing to do with it other than it starting off using a free source editor provided by said company
>company now owns subgenre?
lol what.

[DrRusty]

this will be fun to watch

/popcorn

[Hanabira.Kage]

this will be fun to watch

/popcorn

[Fiel]

Also DotA is a game GENRE by now. Just like rogue-likes are called rogue-likes. Some DotA-ish games are called DotA games.

Don't know if I agree with that. The term "MOBA" seems to have caught on much more than DotA-clone.

[Corn]

I'm definitely on Blizzard's side here. But it's maddeningly stupid that they haven't filed a trademark on it thus far.

Just because of this I'm on Valve's side here. Just because they're filing a trademark on it NOW signifies they just want to eff Valve over in the butt. I'm sure that if they told Valve to "switch your name" back when Valve declared its development, Valve would've probably done it. It's too late now, though.

[Malthe]

Don't know if I agree with that. The term "MOBA" seems to have caught on much more than DotA-clone.

Riot coined that term and Riot use it. Sure, you can put LoL under that term but many many many DotA players and HoN players hate that term because it describes absolutely nothing.(Multiplayer Online Battle Arena)
It is very weak and can be used to describe too many games(Counter strike can be put into that category and so can some RTS games), it is far from accurate and even ARTS(What Valve calls it) is still not accurate but more precise.
It has caught on for LoL but not for the rest of the scene.


There's even a neat post on TL describing it better than i can: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/view...ic_id=255359#2

MOBA -- Multiplayer Online Battle Arena
What competitive game isn't multiplayer, online, and takes on some sort of battle? The first three words apply to nearly every single online game that pits players against each other (obviously). The fourth word, arena, doesn't even describe the DotA-genre. Using that word implies an all-hostile area that dismisses DotA's territorial control and lane-pushing among its many facets of gameplay. Even RTSRPG would be a better (yet still lacking) acronym. If anything, use DotA as a genre of its own, or use its original form, AoS (Aeon of Strife). Please help stop the widespread use of the vague term MOBA!

On a different note, just checked an old article: http://www.1up.com/previews/dota-2-v...oys-developers

"IceFrog was the catalyst; he's the main reason why we're making DOTA 2" -- says Johnson. "A lot of us are DOTA fans also from a game-design perspective, and at Valve we already have the original creator of DOTA, Eul."

Eul is the original creator of DotA and the original dev. He named the mod DotA and he was behind it until he let guinsoo have his hands on it, the game was far from balanced whilst being in guinsoo's hands and didn't become balanced till IceFrog picked it up and made the game extremely popular and competitive. I'd say Eul and IceFrog have quite some say regarding the name, but that's just my opinion ofcourse, i'm no expert regarding copyright laws and trademarks.

[Dark Link]

As Joe already said, this entire thing is over Valve attempting to acquire the 'DOTA' trademark, and Blizzard is pointing out that the acronym is already strongly associated with an existing non-Valve product, aka the WC3 custom map.

People are trying to make this way worse than it actually is.

[LadyJenJen]

Keep on dreaming.

It'll keep happening due to human greed.

Most likely. Still recovering from the stupidity of Notch's Scrolls and Elder Scrolls case lol

[Seanny]

As Joe already said, this entire thing is over Valve attempting to acquire the 'DOTA' trademark, and Blizzard is pointing out that the acronym is already strongly associated with an existing non-Valve product, aka the WC3 custom map.

People are trying to make this way worse than it actually is.

Oh wow, that went over my head at first. So its Valve technically trying to 'monetize' the name. That flipped my opinion rather quickly.

[Malthe]

Oh wow, that went over my head at first. So its Valve technically trying to 'monetize' the name. That flipped my opinion rather quickly.

Yea, i don't think anybody should have the name as some trademark.

But my problem is that if blizzard wins this case they'll probably try to get the name themselves..

[JoeTang]

Yea, i don't think anybody should have the name as some trademark.

But my problem is that if blizzard wins this case they'll probably try to get the name themselves..

I believe if Valve gets the trademark for this, they could pursue legal action against Blizzard for their new Blizzard DotA as well as any existing DotA maps in WC3 or SC2, and whatever else they have affiliated with it.