Blizzard Challenges Valve Over DOTA Trademark.

[Aeshi]

Sorry Blizz but if Valve can steamroll the actual creators of DoTA they can probably beat you too.

 

[Chased]

I thought everybody was cool with it. Anyway, I hope Blizzard wins so Valve has to cancel it and start pushing out another game, *cough* hl3 *cough*.

 

[ccggenius12]

Doesn't the WC3 EULA state that Blizzard owns all user generated content? I feel like this is pretty open and shut.

 

[Vivi22]

I know it was never blizzards to begin with however it was created using blizzard's materials and is directly connected to warcraft and its lore. The only one with any claim to the name DotA is blizzard. They have provided the tools needed for this mod to be created and have been supporting it since its creation. Valve on the other hand just want to cash in on the DotA name and the rush in the genre.

They have claim to the game engine and any Warcraft 3 related materials used to make the game (all of which I'm willing to bet Valve isn't using), not to the name nor the idea for the game since they are independent of anything Blizzard created.

By the logic you're using here, Valve would own the rights to every mod ever made for the original Half-Life, which they do not. Sure, Blizzard may have supported the DOTA community within Warcraft 3, but they still didn't make it, and have absolutely no right to it.

I don't see how they can possibly hope to win this to be honest.

 

[Freechoice]

As I say DOTA is now a game type not a game in itself, as such, you cant copywirte it. It would be like blizzard trying to copywrite MMO or RTS.

If thats a case, why did Valve call their game DOTA 2 when it would be like me releasing a game called RTS 3? The only reason Valve would call it DOTA 2 is to get repuation and brand recognition from the original Mod which most people is linked in their minds to Blizzard.

It's also a poor indication of Valve methodology for the past, what? 5 years? When was the last release of a Half-Life game, Valve's only truly original IP?

 

[NLS]

Heh, Blizzard didn't make DotA now, did they? All they did was profit off it without going all the way and aquiring the devs. Valve doesn't try to claim trademark rights on mods they haven't bought out already.

 

[Ryank1908]

IMO only people who have a claim to the DOTA name are those who made the damn thing. This was a number of people over the years. One of them (IceFrog) is working on DOTA2 at Valve. This pretty much settles this lawsuit. If anything, Valve should be able to sue Blizz for their "Blizzard DOTA" crap, since as far as I know none of the DOTA people are working on it at Blizz. But no, I don't think a company should automatically get full IP ownership over all user-made mods for their games.

Honestly, I can imagine Activision chiefs talking among themselves:
"Do they hate us?"
"Yes, they do, they really do!"
"Wait, they don't hate Blizzard, and they are a part of us!"
"Unacceptable!"
"Indeed. They are even fond of Blizzard. Blizz is giving them Pandas and Diablo 3."
"No, that can NOT stand! Blizz will need to do something about this! Options?"
"Well, it's drown kittens on Youtube or sue Valve, nothing else will piss people enough..."
"Kittens are cute, but people love Valve more. Sue Valve! Issue the edict!"
"As you command!!!"

Then technically you should be on the side of Blizzard, as they're not trying to claim copyright over 'dota', merely to prevent Valve from doing so.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Blizzard can't win since they don't hold the copyrights to the name DOTA. It's a community mod. No one holds copyright to it. Of course Valve sholdn't be making DOTA in the first place since it's a modification of Blizzard's best game in my humble opinion.

All of this.

I don't really see by they didn't just call it something else. I mean it's valve so people would have bought it whether or not it had Dota written on it.

 

[GoaThief]

Sounds like corporate sour grapes from Blizzard.

They dropped the ball and that boat sailed a long time ago, Blizzard have absolutely no right to the name DOTA as it isn't their creation. Things could have been different if they had previously given a damn and listened to fans, but that's how it goes... now they are attempting to cash in on Valve's rightful success.

 

[ResonanceGames]

Guys, COPYRIGHT =/= Trademark. They are two different things that work very differently from each other.

It looks to me like Blizzard has a decent case. You have to remember that these things don't happen in a vacuum. Trademark law offers a lot of flexibility for companies to make their case, and the fact that the term Dota has a long history with a Blizzard game and none at all with any Valve game is a pretty strong argument against the trademark.


Do some learnin': http://www.lawmart.com/forms/difference.htm

 

[CounterReproductive]

DOTA Defense of the Ancients (gaming)
*** DOTA Download over the Air (Wavecom Wireless)
*** DOTA Declaration of the Americas on Diabetes
*** DOTA Département d'Optique Théorique et Appliquée (French: Theoretical and Applied Optics Department)
** DOTA Delaware Occupational Therapy Association
** DOTA Department of Transportation, Airports Division (Hawaii)

Why don't the guys below also sue for the right to use the acronym, which is all it is really.

 

[duedmen]

For Time after the Oblivion of Duke Nukem Released when the sons of PC gaming would spill their own blood...no one wanted to believe they existed and when the truth finally dawned IT DAWNED WITH FIRE

 

[ResonanceGames]

Why don't the guys below also sue for the right to use the acronym, which is all it is really.

Context ABSOLUTELY matters when it comes to trademarks. Like I said, these things don't exist in a vacuum. Judges aren't (usually) drooling idiots who can't distinguish between a department of transportation division and a game company trademarking something that was already identified with an established IP.

I'm not sure Blizzard will win this, but it definitely wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Zer_]

Doesn't the WC3 EULA state that Blizzard owns all user generated content? I feel like this is pretty open and shut.

Yes it does, that's something that most people here seem to ignore... Blizzard could very well win this one. If they don't then it could potentially set damaging precedents to modding communities.

 

[ResonanceGames]

The EULA can state whatever it wants, that doesn't magically mean that they actually own content that was created by the community (though they might). The fact is, no one has ever really challenged the copyright ownership of mods in court (that I know of) so we don't really know. Are mods a derivative work, since they use the game engine? A judge might look at the game engine as just a tool, like Photoshop, and rule that anything created with it belongs to the creator.

This is potentially the case that will clarify it once and for all.

 

[Beryl77]

This has been going on for a few months now, for some reason all the news sites started to report about this now. Here is the response [http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91202572-OPP-4.pdf] from Valve's lawyer, if anyone is interested.


Anyway, I doubt that Blizzard will win but we'll see.

 

[Asukachan]

Doesn't the WC3 EULA state that Blizzard owns all user generated content? I feel like this is pretty open and shut.

Yes it does, that's something that most people here seem to ignore... Blizzard could very well win this one. If they don't then it could potentially set damaging precedents to modding communities.

I actually opened up my EULA for Warcraft III on my computer and here's what I've read.

"This software program including any and all subsequent patches, any printed materials, any on-line or electronic documentation, and any and all copies and derivative works of such software program and materials (the "Program") are the copyrighted work of Blizzard Entertainment Inc."

and

"All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Program and any and all copies thereof (including but not limited to [A LOT OF WORDS REMOVED TO AVOID WALL] incorporated into the Program) are owned by the Licensor or its licensors."

The Licensor in this case being Blizzard who supplied the License to War3.

Spending quite some time on the League of Legends forums myself and having seen this type of thread a lot before (after Riot Games challenged Valve's claim to the DOTA title a while back), I often see the argument that Blizz have no claim to DOTA since it's not their game, but a "derivative work". I'll just quote someone from the first League of Legends thread I can find via googling the matter.

"Just because DotA was created using WC3 assets does not make DotA Blizzard's property. It's a derivative work, whereby the unique aspects put into it by the original authors are unique and owned by the original authors."

Looking at the top of the EULA, it clearly states that any derivative work falls under "the Program" and the IP rights in "the Program" seems to go to Blizzard as in the second piece of the EULA.

I'm not going to take sides here and even try to flail my flag for either Valve or Blizz and who's a greedy corporation and whatnot, but purely on paper (EULA) it looks like Blizz has the right of way on this one.


EDIT: As people have already stated, it really boils down to if the map is indeed considered a derivative work or not. I will be interested to see how the magistrates rule on this one as it will most likely be a praxis case law in the future when it comes to these matters.