If Notch could trademark Scrolls without opposition, then he has the exact same grounds to sue Bethesda for using the name. Trademarks are opposed all the time, the process is to essentially apply for a trademark and then defend against opposition based on other trademarks or laws, at which point you are approved if you can go unopposed. Bethesda's legal team is financially and occupationally obligated to oppose the trademark, as if it goes unopposed then Bethesda would be under threat of trademark infringement for any games they make using the word Scrolls in a copyrighted manner IE "The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim."
If I trademark the name Call to Duty, it may not be the same as Call of Duty, but I would be infringing on Activision's trademark just as much, and if I were to get that trademark I would have full legal rights to sue Activision for using my trademark for their game. No lawyer with a working brain would give away a copyright, so calling Bethesda's lawyer's greedy is just propaganda, and implying that they are cowardly for not accepting a Quake 3 deathmatch when they are absolutely legally in the right is just stupid. Notch can call his game whatever he wants, but he can't trademark words that are already covered by other trademarks, otherwise the whole concept of the trademark simply falls apart.
If I trademark the name Call to Duty, it may not be the same as Call of Duty, but I would be infringing on Activision's trademark just as much, and if I were to get that trademark I would have full legal rights to sue Activision for using my trademark for their game. No lawyer with a working brain would give away a copyright, so calling Bethesda's lawyer's greedy is just propaganda, and implying that they are cowardly for not accepting a Quake 3 deathmatch when they are absolutely legally in the right is just stupid. Notch can call his game whatever he wants, but he can't trademark words that are already covered by other trademarks, otherwise the whole concept of the trademark simply falls apart.