Why the Skyrim boycott is a waste of time and missing enjoyment.

[Treblaine]

In response to me saying he should actually understand the law he's criticizing and the lawsuit before exploding like a novelty cigar on the internet. Despite stating at numerous times I like Mojang and enjoy Minecraft and don't have an iron in the fire when it come to whether Zenimax or Mojang is in the wrong, he's called me a liar, a conspiracy theorist, accused me of trying to "lure him into a trap" by educating himself, accused me of trying to defame Mojang and Notch, called me numerous names, screamed in all caps, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Dude it's basically the entire last 2-3 pages of this thread. I say "Hey you should look into this before sounding off on it" and he screams about conspiracy theories and traps for 5 paragraphs.

You're right, though. Nothing of the sort going on here! The anti-Zenimax brigade is being totally reasonable and sane and polite.

Come on, surely you have seen all the inflammatory comment and accusations I have had to deal with for the past 5 pages, before you even arrived I have had to deal with an undending stream of escalating nonsense. Over and over again I repeat the same points that show Zenimax's case is beyond flimsily but utterly frivolous but they again they are ignored as it is convenient to them.

Then you come in and tell me I need to "educate myself". Do you realise how inflammatory that is? Have you any idea how many times I have had challenging ideas cut down by attempts at being overly pedantic? That is the trap I'm talking about.

And how after all I have proven you then demand that I prove something DID NOT happen, TO PROVE that there was never a trademark dispute over "Dead Rising" and "Dead Island".

How about you calm down for a moment and consider that that really is the kind of demand that conspiracy theorists make: "prove something didn't happen. Can't? then I'm right!"

This is not a personal attack that you are a conspiracy theorist.

This is an observation that your argument (not you) just your argument is as flimsy as those used by conspiracy theorists.

I may be emphatic, but this is not personal.

I would also like to apologise for what I now realise is the suggestion that you are a zenimax-fanboy/notch-hater. I did not intend that, I got riled up out of control by a litany of inane and insulting nonsense for others and I'm afraid your was the last straw.

 

[mike1921]

Also, unless frivolous is a legal term what the law says is irrelevant to whether it's a frivolous retarded lawsuit. The only thing the status of the law changes is whether the rage should be directed at zenimax or the legal system, or in other words who's fault it is. Is it Zenimax for the lawsuit over something that will not harm them in any way? Or is it the legal system's fault for making it so Zenimax has to do that to keep rights to their trademark? I'm fairly open to hating any of them and I'm even more open to hating Notch since I have no real support for him.

That's all I've ever suggested. No one on this forum appears to have a full, scholarly understanding of trademark law. No one knows the specific details of the lawsuit. No one knows what damages were asked for. No one knows anything, other than what they've read in fluff articles and off Notch's twitter. Yet some people have EXTREMELY authoritarian opinions on the subject.

My stance is that having huge, aggressive opinions on subjects you're woefully under-informed on is silly.

Other people in this thread clearly disagree.

I disagree that a full understanding of trademark law is necessary . Like I imagine a minor college course or even some high school elective courses around the country would be enough to have a decision on the legality of this.

 

[Treblaine]

No. They offered a trademark that was So different that there was zero chance of Ambiguity.

It was adding more different words to the title. You are agreeing with Zenimax's ridiculous claim that Mojang is not allowed to use the word "Scrolls" AT ALL! That is blatantly unfair and abusive of the copyright system.

If you really believe Mojang offered one specific non-conflicting trademark, I think you should tell me what it is.

It would have been "Scrolls: [4-word-subtitle]" one that would have no word nor allusion to any Zenimax owned trademark. Like:

"Scrolls: The Power of Parchment"

Remember, Notch's game is literally ENTIRELY about scrolls. It is card-game mechanics except with scrolls.

Meanwhile, if you think this has anything to do with copyright law, I understand your confusion:

Copyright is about protecting creative works. Songs, books, and computer games all get copyright protection. We could talk about copyright a lot, but it would be meaningless, because this is not a copyright issue. Copyright is typically irrelevant for anything shorter than a sentence (and can often be irrelevant for things longer than a sentence).

Trademark is about protecting labels for products. They are not products themselves. They are words (or other symbols) that a manufacturer puts on their product to show that they stand behind the product and to show that their product is different from other people's products. The best trademarks are essentially adjectives (that you use in combination with some other words that also identify the product), because if the trademark was too generally useful then it ceases to be a product label and becomes a part of the language.

So, anyways, if this were a copyright issue, Bethesda and Mojang would both be laughed out of court.

Innocent mistake of a man who has been up for 30 solid hours without sleep. I have been calling it trademark from be beginning and I just made a mistake.

I clearly meant to type trademark. It's all I have been writing about for the past 5 pages.

 

[Mikkaddo]

please for the love of god use your brain.

I wouldn't presume to know more than you about anything, as I don't know you, but I would hope you've been around long enough to see the irony of that statement being said ON THE INTERNET. Just thought I'd point that out to you, and honestly I'd not realized there was all this butt hurt or flames going on . . . since I kind of saw both sides as being douches with this lawsuit from day one . . . but again, asking people to use their brain . . . on the internet? you sir . . . are a fool for that. You're absolutely right about the lawsuit, but a fool for expecting the internet to use it's brain.

 

[Saviordd1]

Something something your an idiot something something I'm better then you because I'm seeing through your idiocy, LOL.

Considering your overall idea was to call me an idiot from beginning to end while barely being able to spell some basic English words has left me a pretty poor picture of you as a person. I'm not saying your an idiot, you could be a college professor for all I know, but your idea of an argument is to call me an idiot repeatedly seems rather lazy and offensive.

Anyway since your argument (The parts that were not simply "Your an idiot") is basically "Yep, your wrong, I'm right, your stupid for thinking the things I don't, something about morals, do your research even though I'm going to quote something that proves your point. The world sucks and bethesda is evil."

Honestly get over it, Bethesda has all the right to sue them. Yes, they said they'd give up the trademark but another main point of the argument is product confusion, giving up the Trademark won't make the courts happy, if notch wanted to really give up they would change the game to something like "Cards of doom" or whatever, whither or not that would please Bethesda would accept that is not seen, I'd change my opinion if they didn't take that settlement.

No, its not morally unjust. I think it was another article on this website who brought up a good point, this isn't just about Bethesda v. Mojang its making a point. If Mojang wins its proving that someone can name a game "The eldest books: Skyline" and get away with it because why the hell not? Those are common words man! You can't get me for it.

As for Notch not starting the boycott personally. No, of course not. But he knows his fans are zealous and that telling them everything would get them riled up, even if he didn't expect a boycott he was expecting SOMETHING, Notch is smart, he's using all his assets.

Also the person who sees ALL corporations as evil tyrants is obviously just a bit to cynical, cheer up buddy, its Bethesda, not sony xD.

 

[Saviordd1]

please for the love of god use your brain.

I wouldn't presume to know more than you about anything, as I don't know you, but I would hope you've been around long enough to see the irony of that statement being said ON THE INTERNET. Just thought I'd point that out to you, and honestly I'd not realized there was all this butt hurt or flames going on . . . since I kind of saw both sides as being douches with this lawsuit from day one . . . but again, asking people to use their brain . . . on the internet? you sir . . . are a fool for that. You're absolutely right about the lawsuit, but a fool for expecting the internet to use it's brain.

Yeah I'm starting to see that. Gotta stay positive though right?

What's really amazing is how this thread turned into a battleground.

I didn't ask for this

 

[Treblaine]

Star Trek is a sci-fi franchise. It Pre-dates Star Wars.

Are you saying the estate of Gene Roddenberry has grounds to sue LucasArts over trademark violation?

Well they don't. Because "Star Wars" and "Star Trek" are different names, just like "The Elder Scrolls" and "Scrolls" are different names.

I don't know.

And neither do you.

I do know. And it's a logical fallacy to simply state "well If I don't know then you don't know".

See I can figure this out. 25 years of unchallenged precedent is enough.

The law isn't some crazy thing detached from all reality, it's clear that the real circumstances of this case set the precedent that to claim trademarks are infringing based on a single word similarity and being broadly of the same themes is not grounds for infringement.

I don't remember anyone accusing anyone of being an anti-notch fanatic. You are imagining things there.

I think your idea is utter crap, and that it should be shown for the crap that it is before it spreads, ideas are powerful things when packaged in the right way. Your idea that Notch is lying, deceiving and misleading by withholding supposed "mythical exonerating points" about Zenimax is an insulting idea as it is tempting for the intellectually weak, and those who are of the opinion of not liking notch/mojang/minecraft and slavish unconditional love for Elder-Scrolls/Bethesda/Zenimax.

Nope, never happened!

I honestly didn't remember that till now. I admit I was mad, I over-reacted. I regret alleging that to you as it was a cruel insinuation on my part based on a false assumption.

But you still used the logic of conspiracy theorists, that is undeniable.

 

[Mikkaddo]

Yeah I'm starting to see that. Gotta stay positive though right?

What's really amazing is how this thread turned into a battleground.

I didn't ask for this

in that case let me apologize for Gamers in general and the lack of overlap in the diagram between Gamers and Intellectuals

 

[rdm]

It would have been "Scrolls: [4-word-subtitle]" one that would have no word nor allusion to any Zenimax owned trademark. Like:

"Scrolls: The Power of Parchment"

Remember, Notch's game is literally ENTIRELY about scrolls. It is card-game mechanics except with scrolls.

Except, of course, it was not "Scrolls: The Power of Parchment" that Mojang offered to use. Notch did not even say that it would be only one subtitle.

Meanwhile, we are not talking about Notch's game, we are talking about Mojang's trademark. (And, yes, I know that the trademark would be used for the game. But nothing in the trademark application suggests that that would be the only thing it was used for. Exactly the opposite. And I posted from the trademark application, so you saw what all it covered, so please stop trying to claim that this is only about that one game.)

So, anyways, if this were a copyright issue, Bethesda and Mojang would both be laughed out of court.

Innocent mistake of a man who has been up for 30 solid hours without sleep. I have been calling it trademark from be beginning and I just made a mistake.

I clearly meant to type trademark. It's all I have been writing about for the past 5 pages.

Ok, but if someone like you can confuse copyright and trademark is it really fair for you to say that no one else could confuse Elder Scrolls with Scrolls?

 

[Treblaine]

It would have been "Scrolls: [4-word-subtitle]" one that would have no word nor allusion to any Zenimax owned trademark. Like:

"Scrolls: The Power of Parchment"

Remember, Notch's game is literally ENTIRELY about scrolls. It is card-game mechanics except with scrolls.

Except, of course, it was not "Scrolls: The Power of Parchment" that Mojang offered to use. Notch did not even say that it would be only one subtitle.

Meanwhile, we are not talking about Notch's game, we are talking about Mojang's trademark. (And, yes, I know that the trademark would be used for the game. But nothing in the trademark application suggests that that would be the only thing it was used for. Exactly the opposite. And I posted from the trademark application, so you saw what all it covered, so please stop trying to claim that this is only about that one game.)

Yes, I know it covers a lot, because Mojang go screwed applying for only a narrow trademark of Minecraft only for terrible minecraft clones to appear on iOS that everyone thinks is a "shitty port" that damages the brand.

By the way, is Activision-Blizzard suing over Minecraft because they have the "Warcraft" trademark? Again, no. Yet another example of the precedent for why Scrolls is not only a reasonable trademark but a reasonable name for a game, full stop.

So, anyways, if this were a copyright issue, Bethesda and Mojang would both be laughed out of court.

Innocent mistake of a man who has been up for 30 solid hours without sleep. I have been calling it trademark from be beginning and I just made a mistake.

I clearly meant to type trademark. It's all I have been writing about for the past 5 pages.

Ok, but if someone like you can confuse copyright and trademark is it really fair for you to say that no one else could confuse Elder Scrolls with Scrolls?

Yes, it is fair. Because I did not confuse them, I clearly meant Trademark and merely typed Copyright. See those words don't even look or sound vaguely similar, only syntactically related under the topic of "intellectual property law" which it a mind numbing minefield at the best of times.

And that's the end of that. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

I said I might not accept it even with support. The difference it makes is between me (and others) thinking you have an honest to goodness reason to argue... and are not just raging because your fav little indie dev can't cope in business, so you turn on the big bad corporation because they make you sad.

Now this is an ad hominem attack and a misinformed assumption.

I'll be frank with you my beef here is the principal, I argued in the same way over the "Edge Trademark" lawsuits. I have sympathy for Mojang simply because I know it is legally outmatched. Not because he made quite a good game that I played all of 4 hours of and got bored of to only ever play again sporadically. My most played game right now is Doom... a Zenimax property.

First of all, I deny that it's frivolous (therefore making it deniable, which shoots your argument dead)... why? Because business is serious. There is no petty in business, especially when we're talking millions to billions in respective currencies. Reasonable concern is enough to bring something to court, especially if your concern is your own valuable property being at stake. I'll get to how that relates to this case shortly.

That logic does not follow, I am afraid.

Just because a company is serious business does not mean their argument is automatically serious, anyone can make a frivolous claim. Regardless of standing. It is to their benefit to make a frivolous claim against a small upstart that could one day be a competitor, or it could be dangerous paranoia.

Zenimax has no legitimate reason to either suspect their trademark would be void, or that there is any significant chance of brand confusion. Any gamer would know this immediately based on the precedents already so firmly established in this industry, from all the games of similar genre that use the identical words.

We sort of get to my point against yours here. "I cannot see", "It was somewhat... I suppose" "I was trying"... rounded off with something you then state like a fact: "That the very basis of this lawsuit that there could be confusion is unfounded". Right there you lost all form of persuasive weight with me. You seem to hold your own deductive analyses as immaculate and infallible therefore your point must be fact. It's not... Personal perspective (I cannot see) is not a fact, Personal reflection (I suppose) is not a fact and internal rationalisation (I was trying) is not fact. How on earth does that lead to a factual statement? Answer it doesn't... it's a baseless as your other points. It has no weight in this debate.

Well the entire substance of this issue is subjective, how the customer in their subjective analysis of games is likely to confuse "The Elder Scrolls V: SKYRIM" and "Scrolls: Something of Something".

You can't honestly say that any significant number of people would make such a subjective analysis and buy one when they really intended to buy the other.

It is certainly an objective fact that there are a whole FOUR words difference between the name of Zenimax's game and the name of Mojang's game.

In a debate, never presume something is common knowledge or obvious.

You mean I can't assume you know that games such as "Dead Island" or "Metal Gear Solid" exist?

Do you REALLY want me to link to their wikipedia page for each of those games? Or is wikipedia not a valid source, would I have to find a magazine clipping proving that each game actually exists?

The law is still law, ignorance/obliviousness not withstanding as an excuse.

The law is not the the last word on right and wrong.

You should NEVER refrain from speaking out against the law if it is unjust. I have shown how unjust it is as it is being used here to impede a developer when there is no chance of Mojang doing what people seem to think it could do.

And could you please stop calling me ignorant. I find that offensive and inflammatory. (yes, this is a sudden change of tone... people can do that, so can you)

Truth? Truth is based on what? Your opinion? Notch told us 2 bits of truth, 1: Bethesda sent him a cease and desist for trademark infringement, which he didn't take seriously... 2. bethesda challenged him to a court hearing, which he jested that they should be playing Quake 3 Arena instead. Not exactly rising to the challenge... but you know, playing to the crowd (in the show in which he directed and starred himself). All the while he kept preaching how this isn't going to fly, it's petty and it's ludicrous (I see where your coming from here) in a subversive tone that I imagined a violin been played in melancholic manner. Well it did fly, and is still in transit. A month or 2 later, he tells us, after the fact, that he tried to appease bethesda behind the scenes, but they refused... and that's it, only his side of things. What I read from that, was that he was genuinely afraid of shit going down, and tried to remedy it... but failed, so he played his sympathy card again to start another bout of PR damage. So far that's all I see defending him, his word and the words of others that echo his own.

I am afraid that it IS the logic of a conspiracy theorist to base your argument on presumptions that people of authority are tracelessly lying with no evidence of deceit and that exonerating truth is implausibly hidden by the very party who have every reason to reveal it. It is a fallacy as there is no way to argue against it yet you could apply it to anything.

"in a subversive tone that I imagined a violin been played in melancholic manner."

Are you taking this seriously? Do you REALLY think this furthers this conversation... or is this just an attempt to be inflammatory and offensive?

2 things. That I don't consider this case a big deal and that I would like to see the source of your arguments, the thing that convinces you that Notch is right and Zenimax is wrong.

How about all the test cases of trademark disputes over single-word similarities that are thrown out of court, like Edge Games (that I have already given) and the many precedents of games sharing single-word similarities.

it is NOT enough to just state your point and say that is how it is.

Well, I must get it from you because that is exactly what you do.

You don't have merits.

Not MY merits. The merits of the argument, imagine if anyone said the same thing as me.

As has been mentioned above, I want to see what makes you defend notches corner

I don't see how that is relevant. Whether I like, don't care or hate Notch I

Your own opinion is not an argument all on it's lonesome.

Err, you did read all the posts I gave where I listed examples of precedents? Right?

You say Zeni is in the wrong, but offer nothing other then your own point of view, which is as far removed from fact as it can get. Same principles apply to anyone who tries to make a point in favour for, or against, a topic.

Well who else's point of view can I possibly give? And it IS more than that and it IS based on facts. The many facts I have given such as the precedents of trademarked game titles that share identical words.

Read this (all of it, 3 pages):
http://theelectricgeneration.com/2011/09/28/bethesda-v-notch-pt-1-the-basics-of-the-battle/

It's not the be all and end all of my opinion on the situation here, but it's a start. Also, read this:
http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fight

and this:

http://www.ramseylawgroup.com/viewarticle.php?id=21

The former is trying to be objective towards the case, and the kotaku one is weighted more in the "anti-notch" area, though a recent update might change that (haven't read it yet).

The last one is actually a Trademark How To, so to speak... you can skip to the last point (9) which emphasises Zenis seemingly aggressive action against something small.

Now, onto your comment.

First off that's an ad hominem I used deliberately to make a point, for all you have offered thus far, I can assume that your just regurgitating the same rage as a dozen posters that came before on this very thread, because I have little else to go on. Is that what you're doing? Personally I don't think so, but much can be derived from such unwillingness to provide supportive claims/evidence/logs/etc... very little of it is good.

Why do you consider me a conspiracy theorist? Because I have SUGGESTED an opinion on very weak information, usually third party reports and some info sleuthing? AS HAVE YOU. Short of notch running his mouth off every chance he gets (which is the most likely thing to go against him in this case, though I won't hold my breath on that either) I have not heard nor seen any reason for you to have a well structured and formulated opinion that not only supports notch, but demonises his opposition. Your points are still baseless. If I'm a conspiracy theorist for making stuff up (by your accusation), what does that make you? Ignorant? Delusional?

Don't play that game... that's a game for people who can't hold their own argument.

Err, you did read all the posts I gave where I listed examples of precedents? Right?

I thought someone already called you on that. If not, then allow me...
Any POTENTIAL trademark infringement that is not "aggressively" pursued under the eyes of the law, puts their mark is on the line. They essentially waver their rights to their own IP, just by letting even the most petty case off. It is illogical and irrational to do such a thing.

Just to clarify, they DO have a choice. The options are, bring Mojang to court and win/lose the case OR ignore it and leave a big gaping hole in their trademark.

For arguments sake, let's imagine they let mojang go. Is it likely someone could take the name or some knock off and misuse it? Not likely, but possible. If someone did, is it likely to end up with Bethesda/Zeni losing their Trademark? No, but it's possible. Even if they did go to court and win this theoretical case and all is dandy again, is it likely Zeni wanted to be in that position in the first place? No, hence the current perdicament. Zeni don't want this ***** in their armour as it could cost them more (even totally) if they don't.

Again, it's not likley, but it IS possible.

On merits

Are you a lawyer/Law student? Do you have privied info on the case? Are you involved in this case at a personal level? If not are you a journalist? Do you have 1st hand sources? Have you interviewed Zenimax/Mojang?

If you have answered no to all those questions, then your own argument, on its very lonesome, has no merit. But, it would have merit if you linked to someone or something that could affirm to the above questions or in any way relates to the case (1st hand or 2nd hand, 3rd hand is not accepted sourcing which would apply to most Escapist articles, though they link their sources at least).

----------------------- VERY IMPORTANT---------------------------

I believe notch will win this case. If zeni wins, then notch will have to really goof it up.

In one of the above links (the first one), it is claimed that these cases are ultimately decided by common sense... I suggest you read it. In his opinion, notch is going to win this case, based on items currently known to the public (he's even out of date at this stage since he doesn't mention the attempt at solving this outside of court). In that sense there is no need to worry.

Does that mean he'll win? I don't know.

Addendum: If you think you can change my opinion on anything I have said above... don't just rave at me, quoting yourself and telling me what you said earlier (which was worded, no links or sources). Show me something to solidify your argument, then give me a step by step because maybe I missed something in my own line of understanding.

 

[Saviordd1]

Yeah I'm starting to see that. Gotta stay positive though right?

What's really amazing is how this thread turned into a battleground.

I didn't ask for this

in that case let me apologize for Gamers in general and the lack of overlap in the diagram between Gamers and Intellectuals

Gamers can be nice people.

Sometimes

Depending

If they just won something they can be not bad.

 

[Treblaine]

Read this (all of it, 3 pages):
http://theelectricgeneration.com/2011/09/28/bethesda-v-notch-pt-1-the-basics-of-the-battle/

It's not the be all and end all of my opinion on the situation here, but it's a start. Also, read this:
http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fight

and this:

http://www.ramseylawgroup.com/viewarticle.php?id=21 The former is trying to be objective towards the case, and the kotaku one is weighted more in the "anti-notch" area, though a recent update might change that (haven't read it yet).

The last one is actually a Trademark How To, so to speak... you can skip to the last point (9) which emphasises Zenis seemingly aggressive action against something small.

Thanks for the links, i'll get round to reading all 9000 words of those various essays as soon as I have the time.

Now, onto your comment.

First off that's an ad hominem I used deliberately to make a point, for all you have offered thus far, I can assume that your just regurgitating the same rage as a dozen posters that came before on this very thread, because I have little else to go on. Is that what you're doing? Personally I don't think so, but much can be derived from such unwillingness to provide supportive claims/evidence/logs/etc... very little of it is good.

Is there some kind of problem with your browser?

What about ALL the precedents (dead Rising-Dead Island) of similarly named games and films which have not jeopardised any trademarks?

What about how Notch offered to drop the trademark claim?

What about How notch offered to drastically change the name of his game?

Why do you consider me a conspiracy theorist?

I don't. I merely said you use the logic typical of a conspiracy theorist, that is not the same as being a conspiracy theorist. Conspiracy theorist defend their allegations with logical fallacies such as insinuating grand lies and deceptions, to accuse grand lies is a fallacy in and of itself.

I am attacking your argument, NOT you personally.

Err, you did read all the posts I gave where I listed examples of precedents? Right?

I thought someone already called you on that. If not, then allow me...
Any POTENTIAL trademark infringement that is not "aggressively" pursued under the eyes of the law, puts their mark is on the line. They essentially waver their rights to their own IP, just by letting even the most petty case off. It is illogical and irrational to do such a thing.

That is clealry not true, otherwise the trademark to "Star Trek" would have been lost shortly after "Star Wars" came out, when the owners of the "Star Trek" trademark fail to "aggressively" pursue LucasArts to completely change the name of his Sci-fi franchise.

For arguments sake, let's imagine they let mojang go. Is it likely someone could take the name or some knock off and misuse it? Not likely, but possible. If someone did, is it likely to end up with Bethesda/Zeni losing their Trademark? No, but it's possible. Even if they did go to court and win this theoretical case and all is dandy again, is it likely Zeni wanted to be in that position in the first place? No, hence the current perdicament. Zeni don't want this ***** in their armour as it could cost them more (even totally) if they don't.

Ummm, Zenimax suing Mojang over "Scrolls" is not going to strengthen Zenimax's trademark claim from real threats. Threats like if an unauthorised game called something like "The Elder Scrolls VI: Norseman" were to be released copying the box art and theme of Skyrim almost identically.

Are you a lawyer/Law student? Do you have privied info on the case? Are you involved in this case at a personal level? If not are you a journalist? Do you have 1st hand sources? Have you interviewed Zenimax/Mojang?

If you have answered no to all those questions, then your own argument, on its very lonesome, has no merit. But, it would have merit if you linked to someone or something that could affirm to the above questions or in any way relates to the case (1st hand or 2nd hand, 3rd hand is not accepted sourcing which would apply to most Escapist articles, though they link their sources at least).

I ask you to consider the argument on it's own merits. I literally spelled it your to you that you should imagine that ANYONE is making this argument.

Yet you then go on to say you will regret THE ARGUMENT on IT'S OWN Merits, because I MYSELF am neither a lawyer, Law student, journalist or have special link with the case.

You don't seem to understand the concept of "considering an argument on it's own merits".

----------------------- VERY IMPORTANT---------------------------

I believe notch will win this case. If zeni wins, then notch will have to really goof it up.

In one of the above links (the first one), it is claimed that these cases are ultimately decided by common sense... I suggest you read it. In his opinion, notch is going to win this case, based on items currently known to the public (he's even out of date at this stage since he doesn't mention the attempt at solving this outside of court). In that sense there is no need to worry.

Does that mean he'll win? I don't know.

Addendum: If you think you can change my opinion on anything I have said above... don't just rave at me, quoting yourself and telling me what you said earlier (which was worded, no links or sources). Show me something to solidify your argument, then give me a step by step because maybe I missed something in my own line of understanding.

Why would I need a link or source when you have already provided to me the perfect link that your yourself admit that this is an open and shut case in favour of Mojang... yet Zenimax is instigating a case they will most likely lose. Why would they do that?

I have already suggested a reason for them to do this: to hurt their indie competition with and expensive and slow legal battle. That would make them a bully.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

Read this (all of it, 3 pages):
http://theelectricgeneration.com/2011/09/28/bethesda-v-notch-pt-1-the-basics-of-the-battle/

It's not the be all and end all of my opinion on the situation here, but it's a start. Also, read this:
http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fight

and this:

http://www.ramseylawgroup.com/viewarticle.php?id=21 The former is trying to be objective towards the case, and the kotaku one is weighted more in the "anti-notch" area, though a recent update might change that (haven't read it yet).

The last one is actually a Trademark How To, so to speak... you can skip to the last point (9) which emphasises Zenis seemingly aggressive action against something small.

Thanks for the links, i'll get round to reading all 9000 words of those various essays as soon as I have the time.

Now, onto your comment.

First off that's an ad hominem I used deliberately to make a point, for all you have offered thus far, I can assume that your just regurgitating the same rage as a dozen posters that came before on this very thread, because I have little else to go on. Is that what you're doing? Personally I don't think so, but much can be derived from such unwillingness to provide supportive claims/evidence/logs/etc... very little of it is good.

Is there some kind of problem with your browser?

What about ALL the precedents (dead Rising-Dead Island) of similarly named games and films which have not jeopardised any trademarks?

What about how Notch offered to drop the trademark claim?

What about How notch offered to drastically change the name of his game?

Why do you consider me a conspiracy theorist?

I don't. I merely said you use the logic typical of a conspiracy theorist, that is not the same as being a conspiracy theorist. Conspiracy theorist defend their allegations with logical fallacies such as insinuating grand lies and deceptions, to accuse grand lies is a fallacy in and of itself.

I am attacking your argument, NOT you personally.

Err, you did read all the posts I gave where I listed examples of precedents? Right?

I thought someone already called you on that. If not, then allow me...
Any POTENTIAL trademark infringement that is not "aggressively" pursued under the eyes of the law, puts their mark is on the line. They essentially waver their rights to their own IP, just by letting even the most petty case off. It is illogical and irrational to do such a thing.

That is clealry not true, otherwise the trademark to "Star Trek" would have been lost shortly after "Star Wars" came out, when the owners of the "Star Trek" trademark fail to "aggressively" pursue LucasArts to completely change the name of his Sci-fi franchise.

For arguments sake, let's imagine they let mojang go. Is it likely someone could take the name or some knock off and misuse it? Not likely, but possible. If someone did, is it likely to end up with Bethesda/Zeni losing their Trademark? No, but it's possible. Even if they did go to court and win this theoretical case and all is dandy again, is it likely Zeni wanted to be in that position in the first place? No, hence the current perdicament. Zeni don't want this ***** in their armour as it could cost them more (even totally) if they don't.

Ummm, Zenimax suing Mojang over "Scrolls" is not going to strengthen Zenimax's trademark claim from real threats. Threats like if an unauthorised game called something like "The Elder Scrolls VI: Norseman" were to be released copying the box art and theme of Skyrim almost identically.

Are you a lawyer/Law student? Do you have privied info on the case? Are you involved in this case at a personal level? If not are you a journalist? Do you have 1st hand sources? Have you interviewed Zenimax/Mojang?

If you have answered no to all those questions, then your own argument, on its very lonesome, has no merit. But, it would have merit if you linked to someone or something that could affirm to the above questions or in any way relates to the case (1st hand or 2nd hand, 3rd hand is not accepted sourcing which would apply to most Escapist articles, though they link their sources at least).

I ask you to consider the argument on it's own merits. I literally spelled it your to you that you should imagine that ANYONE is making this argument.

Yet you then go on to say you will regret THE ARGUMENT on IT'S OWN Merits, because I MYSELF am neither a lawyer, Law student, journalist or have special link with the case.

You don't seem to understand the concept of "considering an argument on it's own merits".

----------------------- VERY IMPORTANT---------------------------

I believe notch will win this case. If zeni wins, then notch will have to really goof it up.

In one of the above links (the first one), it is claimed that these cases are ultimately decided by common sense... I suggest you read it. In his opinion, notch is going to win this case, based on items currently known to the public (he's even out of date at this stage since he doesn't mention the attempt at solving this outside of court). In that sense there is no need to worry.

Does that mean he'll win? I don't know.

Addendum: If you think you can change my opinion on anything I have said above... don't just rave at me, quoting yourself and telling me what you said earlier (which was worded, no links or sources). Show me something to solidify your argument, then give me a step by step because maybe I missed something in my own line of understanding.

Why would I need a link or source when you have already provided to me the perfect link that your yourself admit that this is an open and shut case in favour of Mojang... yet Zenimax is instigating a case they will most likely lose. Why would they do that?

I have already suggested a reason for them to do this: to hurt their indie competition with and expensive and slow legal battle. That would make them a bully.

1. So you won't read them? Fine by me, I was just supporting my points.

2. As clear as possible: Zenimax has to either A) Face mojang in court or meet them on their terms outside of court, not Notches terms since he's the culprit (weighted term I know, but I didn't say I wasn't biased) or B) Ignore them, but risk having it come back to them in the future, as evidence against them in another trademark case.

3. I didn't say you called me a Conspiracy theorist? I said you consider me one. By the definition of consider, that's exactly what you did. Don't jump to conclusions thank you.

4. Dead Rising and Dead Island did not come into a trademark dispute, because their respective legal teams saw no violation or risk I presume. Do you have a written account of what Dead Rising or Dead Island Trademarked? No? Neither do I. These "precedents" have no bases for your assumption. Just because their names or content seem similar does not mean that the trademarks conflict. How is that? I don't fucking know as I have only surface knowledge on trademarking at best. Same reasoning can be applied to Star Wars and Star Trek.

Though that begs the question... how do you know their wasn't a confrontation? Because there wasn't a big guffaw over it? Can you put even a rough figure or statistic of how many cases actually become public knowledge or settle out of/before court. Honestly I can't, so I'm not going name out random things and say there was no precedence and that it's as valid as an actual source.

5. No it won't strengthen it... I didn't say it would. I said it would damage it, which is quite different.

6. I'm sorry, do you think your argument needs to be recognised as a valid and well reasoned objective opinion in this case? Because I don't. I will say it again it has no merit. It does not matter whether tom, dick and/or harry made this argument, I would dismiss it as ramblings and rants.

Unless said other has an actual place in this case and is not a simple observer scraping for facts, there is no reason to think of it as anything more then guess work. You nor I have the qualifications or all the details needed to actually contribute to the overall case, therefore we have no merit on our own word... none of us. A Lawyer may have merit based on his education, an executive of a company may have merit based on their personal stake in the case (though biased), a Journalist may have merit as a 2nd hand source, since it is their job to ascertain the full picture of a situation (does not always happen though).

Look at it this way, me and you, we're not even on the side lines, or in the stadium, we're listening to a news article after the fact, being recited over a radio. We are too far removed from events to claim anything we say on it's own as having weight in this discussion, beyond conjecture and reciting 2nd and 3rd hand knowledge.

7. Because you haven't even stopped to ask what my take on the situation actually is, instead presuming I'm labelling notch as a big baby and dry humping bethesda because I love em so. This is not it.

My point is that there is no good or bad side to this. Essentially, its a matter of "Dems da breaks"... it's how this world, as it is, works. Zenimax are not EVIL because of it, or greedy, and notch is not in the wrong either for standing up to it. They BOTH HAVE TRADEMARKS and it is their obligations to fight for them. Win or lose, other then the financial pain of a court hearing (which it still not get to), things will remain as they are now. The case will not absorb or destroy anything, what it will do is create a distinction between the 2 trademarks. A name change may be required if Mojang loses or zenimax will have some serious PR work as well surgical removal of their foot from their mouth if they lose.

I will say this against notch though. He should have kept his mouth shut. If he loses (or even wins) Zenimax COULD sue him for damages to their company (the PR damage mentioned earlier). That would be a low blow on Zenis part and I would lose respect in them, but at that stage, notch would have already bought his plot and casket with the amount he has been babbling since this started. Again, as I said earlier, Ignorance of the Law is not an excuse. He could suffer badly for his childish behavious and that would be tragic... I like notch.

Geez, that interview between Todd Howard and Notch seems so... tragic now.

 

[emeraldrafael]

Boycotting a game is pointless

At some point you will give in and buy the game.
...

thats not true. I said I would Boycott Black Ops and I still havent bought it.

Anyway this thread mostly sounds like an "I like this game, people who dont are wrong and I'm going to tell you why you're wrong with personal opinion." Besides, maybe people just dont want to buy it. I have no personal drive to buuy it and have yet to play an elder scrolls game just because i dont want to. If they want to boycott let them. its their time and money and patience and its not affecting you so I fail to see the problem.

Cause really, if the only issue is "oh, they're not gonna play a game a find awesome and want people to verify my opinion by agreeing" or "wah, its going to hurt game sales and they may never be another Elder Scrolls game, and I just cant have that" you're being as petty as the boycotter.

...

Then again I could be missing hte point entirely.

 

[cthulhumythos]

uhg. this has devolved into one of those threads that each post is pretty much an essay picking apart someone else's essay post.

you guys are making it difficult for me to lurk! what ever happened to the short sweet inane posts that were a quick read?

i feel like i should post something relevant to the topic- i really don't care. i don't care if notch is secretly in the wrong and is simply appealing to his legions of fans to feel bad for him and make bethesda look bad. i don't care if bethesda really does have some sort of draconian legal department who's favorite activities are on picking the little man and kicking puppies. why should i? i play the games. this legal battle will in no way jeopardize that. all they have caused is people to complain and pick sides in a he said she said battle.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Come on, surely you have seen all the inflammatory comment and accusations I have had to deal with for the past 5 pages, before you even arrived I have had to deal with an undending stream of escalating nonsense.

There were some inflammatory remarks being said in this thread, yes, going back to the OP. If you don't take offense at me saying it, you've been one of the most polarizing and inflammatory figures in the debate, though. You argue your points extremely emotionally, you switch gears rapidly and randomly, and you seem to project ideas onto the people you're talking to, and then attack those ideas. When I link you logical fallacies I'm not saying "Ha ha you're dumb!" or trying to undermine your argument. I'm trying to draw your attention to the fact that a lot of what you're saying isn't supported by anything more than your personal need to believe it. That doesn't mean it can't be true. It just means that we don't really know. And yes, I know you don't know, because it was one of the first things we discussed, in which you admitted to having absolutely no legal background whatsoever, and no interest doing the leg work required to. And that's alright, that's a lot of fucking work. I have no intention of doing it myself. But without doing that work, we cannot actually claim to know what's going on.

1. You don't know what laws specifically are being referenced in the lawsuit. Which sections of which laws, specifically.
2. You don't know the legal process Notch went through to apply for his trademark, or any of the legal ramifications of what could arise from his proposed compromises.
3. You don't know the valuation Bethesda places on their Elder Scrolls trademark, or what their projected threat to that trademark was.
4. You don't know what damages they sought, based on what contingencies.
5. You don't know what the potential outcomes are, what a settlement is likely to look like, what it means for both parties if they lose.

All we have for this is guesswork. Or your gut feeling, because you like Notch and think corporations are evil. Or maybe you love Skyrim and think Notch is a turd. It doesn't matter. Without knowing, it's all just guesswork. It's all just "I have a strong feeling about something I read and sort of understood, and now I'm ANGRY and will do X!" Not a lot of patience, prudence, or critical thinking is going into this boycott or this furious indignation.

You've got three possibilities.

1. Notch is a dolt.
2. Zenimax are sinister necromancers.
3. Trademark Law is annoying and stupid.

Based on the knowledge we laypeople on a video game forum have, any of those three can be true. It's not about the one we WANT to believe because of our personal confirmation biases. It's about us not knowing. And I think collectively...as a GENERATION...we like to shoot our mouths off about stuff we only tangentially understand.

This was never about you, or your affection for Notch, or your irritation at Zenimax. You're welcome to your feelings. I like Notch. I love Minecraft. I want him to succeed. I love Bethesda. I want them to succeed. I am not the OP. I don't think it's anyone's fault, because without facts to support my opinion what would be the use of it?

Over and over again I repeat the same points that show Zenimax's case is beyond flimsily but utterly frivolous but they again they are ignored as it is convenient to them.

I'm not ignoring your points. I'm trying to make you understand that your opinion of the frivolity and flimsiness of the case is irrelevant. You have a layman's understanding of the law. Without understanding it in depth...its ramifications...it's potential setbacks and perils for each company...the ins and outs and loopholes that can be exploited without prudence, we're just apes throwing bones at an obelisk.

Then you come in and tell me I need to "educate myself". Do you realise how inflammatory that is? Have you any idea how many times I have had challenging ideas cut down by attempts at being overly pedantic? That is the trap I'm talking about.

You're interpreting it as a snide attack. I'm seriously saying...you feel this strongly about it, educate yourself. You come in here screaming in all caps about Notch and his twitter, and I'm going to chalk you up as another loud opinion without a clue to underwrite it. If you did a little studying and calmly came in here to explain trademark law, how it was being applied in this circumstance, what the particular charges were, what the damages discussed were, etc, etc, you'd be a hero. Sway people with facts, and logic. Not emotional outbursts and personal attacks.

How about you calm down for a moment and consider that that really is the kind of demand that conspiracy theorists make: "prove something didn't happen. Can't? then I'm right!"

You need to understand that I am, and have been, calm. I've been irritated at points, because I feel you just talk right past me to throw drunk punches at phantom opponents you assume I represent. But I'm not emotionally invested in this on any level.

I'm not asking you to "prove something didn't happen". I'm asking you to stop using supposition as the ground work for your points. Supposition is fine when you're just hashing stuff through with friends. You don't need to send a friendly chat up for peer review. But you've been hectoring people to within an inch of their lives. All caps. Bellowing. Repeated phrases. Personal attacks. The whole nine yards. And you can roll that way, but you need to have facts. Nice, hard facts. Not "things that are common sense!" and "things that I know are sane!" because I've seen you use "ad hominem" a few times now, so you're familiarizing yourself with logical fallacies and you know why that's not okay.

TLDR Version: There's nothing wrong with your opinions. I neither agree, nor disagree with you. There is something wrong with the aggressive, fundamentalist way you present your opinions, because you are not sufficiently informed to speak with that level of authority.

NOW.

If you want to continue discussing this we can, but discussion only. I'm not getting sucked into another tirade of bellows. I'm aware of the things Notch said. I'm aware of from whence your ire towards Zenimax springs. It's all good. Just calm it down...accept that there's another way of looking at this situation, and respect that there's another way of looking at this situation. And while we're all still using blogs and twitters as our "facts", we need to not jump to militant conclusions, or we will look like fools for fairly obvious reasons.

 

[rdm]

Yes, I know it covers a lot, because Mojang go screwed applying for only a narrow trademark of Minecraft only for terrible minecraft clones to appear on iOS that everyone thinks is a "shitty port" that damages the brand.

By the way, is Activision-Blizzard suing over Minecraft because they have the "Warcraft" trademark? Again, no. Yet another example of the precedent for why Scrolls is not only a reasonable trademark but a reasonable name for a game, full stop.

Actually, apparently Bethesda is not suing because they think that people would confuse the two games. They are apparently suing about a different confusion.

Meanwhile, I think Notch is screwing himself, by trying to trademark Scrolls. You know that Xerox was a trademark, and they lost almost their trademark because "Xerox" became a commonly used word, right? (Actually, it was "Zipper" that became a common word and used to be a trademark.)

Yes, it is fair. Because I did not confuse them, I clearly meant Trademark and merely typed Copyright. See those words don't even look or sound vaguely similar, only syntactically related under the topic of "intellectual property law" which it a mind numbing minefield at the best of times.

And that's the end of that. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill.

Except both you and I have also been confused about other topics.

Personally, I thought that they were suing about potential confusion involving future products that could be sold under that trademark. And you have thought that they were suing about confusion between the specific games currently being released.

Apparently, both of us were wrong, according to http://theelectricgeneration.com/2011/09/28/bethesda-v-notch-pt-1-the-basics-of-the-battle/

Anyways, the real winner here is probably Dark Souls (I mean, ok: personally, I think replaying after death by going back to a previous save or checkpoint is about the cheapest and least interesting game play possible -- I much prefer for the gameplay to include the needed information ahead of time, and enough content to make replaying from the start a fun thing -- but I know there are lots of people that are forgiving about that kind of issue).

 

[Kelthurin]

Yes. I realized which part of the post you were answering to now, nice lack of editing. Anyway, I answered above.

As did I, either way stop being so rude, I know you think it makes you look awesome or smart or a bad ass or whatever your aiming for but honestly It just makes you look juvenile.

I am not being rude, I am telling you that you sound desperate. Are you afraid the boycott is going to kill Skyrim's sales? You say it's a waste of time so you clearly think the boycott won't kill Skyrim's sales in which case, why make a thread about it?

It's juvenile to try and convince others that their buying decisions should be the same as yours. You want to buy Skyrim, then do so but don't tell others that their decision not to buy Skyrim is a waste.

Just so you know, I am not boycotting Skyrim but I still respect those that are because I respect people who take a stand against an increasingly greedy and abusive industry. I don't respect people who try to guilt trip others into buying something.

Guys, come on. Bethesda would have to start endorsing child rape or something equally disturbing before the Skyrim sales would get hurt even a little. There is nothing to worry about.

Also this Notch fellow should just rename his game and be done with it. To me it seems like he was emboldened by the Fallout MMO debacle, thinking "Hey, Bethesda always get trounced in court. Maybe this is my chance to get even more publicity".