EA... a Corporate troll?

[johnnnny guitar]

Well it?s nice that their pissing other companies off instead of customers

 

[drifter92]

EA didn't do it. It's some random pissed off former CoD player. Originally, the site had a video entitled "Modern Warfare 3 sucks" (search on YouTube, made by user RoboJules) and the following statement:

Modern Warfare is c***. On November 8, 2011, the most over-hyped first-person action series of all-time returns with the copy and paste sequel to the lackluster Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Check out the E3 2011 gameplay demo featuring the Black Tuesday level for a look at the epic fail of the campaign. Pre-Order Call of Duty MW3 Today for Xbox 360, PS3, and PC to secure exclusive bonuses only available online for Modern Warfare 3 fanboys who don't know that Battlefield 3 is the better game.

It was last updated on the 10th of July (since then it redirects to BF3's site).

 

[Yopaz]

I doubt this is EA. Almost anyone can do this, but doing so will cause a potential lawsuit, so I doubt this is EA. A good joke however, but I've seen better. A few years ago a porn site was redirecting everyone to a feminist site.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Funny, but whoever did it better not be traceable because Activision will sue them to hell and back.

 

[Suicida1 Midget]

This is a major move for EA. They just pissed off a bunch of cod fans, and quite possibly turned a few. TROLOL.

 

[DracoSuave]

The problem with that is that Domains By Proxy is committing that criminal act. Activision has to go after them now. They're going to get sued. And no, signing a waiver saying they're not legally responsible doesn't actually make them not legally responsible, as they're the registered owner of the domain.

In other words... if EA did it through them, Activision could find that out REALLY quickly.

There is no criminal act being committed here. Anybody can register a domain under any name they want as long as its not taken.

That would be correct except for the fact it's explicitly against the law according to the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act]

But... you go believe what you like.

 

[Merkavar]

Well played EA, well played.

my sentiments exactly

 

[DracoSuave]

That would be correct except for the fact it's explicitly against the law according to the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act of 1999.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act]

But... you go believe what you like.

I read the law and it doesnt really mean anything.

Specifically, it means that if you register a domain for the purposes of violating a trademark, then you're culpable.

Not to mention, trademark law is pretty clear that if you use the trademark in a means that is intended to infringe, then you're culpable under that. It does not matter if you own the object that is infringing the trademark.

So... yes... registering a domain with the trademark of your competition, in order to have people using said domain go to your website... yes you ARE using the trademark, and yes it is culpable under trademark law, regardless of your rights to own a domain name.

You also have the right to own a billboard. You don't have the right to use the billboard to break the law.

There's absolutely no way EA's lawyers would allow EA to do that... it would be too easy a lawsuit.

 

[Bags159]

I don't get the joke. I click a link for MW3 and it takes me to MW3's site.

oh.. i see what you did there. generic FPS. even though battlefield kind of isn't. it'd be like saying new flashpoint and ARMA are the same, when they clearly arn't

anyway your joke, and others to by now falls flat on it's face when the first thing you see is battlefield 3 written everywhere. just saying

I watched a twelve minute gameplay video of BF3 on youtube last night. If I didn't know it was BF3 going in I wouldn't have been able to tell you what it is.

 

[Gorilla Gunk]

Call me petty but shit like this makes me not want to buy EA games.

The whole CoD/BF "rivalry" just seems really childish to me, especially since it's really one-sided. I really can't think of any instance where Activision has done something like this, at least on the scale that EA does it. They're exhibiting the same type of trollish behavior they lampoon CoD players for having. This is coming from somebody who is a big fan of Bad Company 2 (and Bulletstorm which had the whole 'Duty Calls' thing).

This juvenile "Nyah-na-na-na-na" thing EA has going on towards CoD is a problem and I feel that if I buy BF3 I'm just contributing to the problem and encouraging more stuff like this.

 

[FalloutJack]

You know, they may be just plain old idiots.

"What's the difference, Jack?"

Well, if you've seen the Point-Haired Boss from Dilbert, magnifify it a few times and that could be EA.

 

[Jester00]

you guys know that modernwarfare3.com is not the official page right?

 

[puffy786]

Quite hilarious. Never thought that the gaming industry would come to use dirty tricks than modern day US Republicans. D:

 

[Altorin]

Wow, EA actually does some good marketing for once. I guess they made some adjustments to their marketing department after the whole Dead Space incident.

no, this is pretty much the same old immature BS they've pulled time and again

and I love it!