Blizzard and Valve Sort Out Their Legal Dispute Over DOTA Trademark

I'd also like to point out that on the point out on the 5-15 bombcast Patrick and Vinny agreed the name is indeed dumb.

So, y'know, winner winner chicken dinner. ;P

@Addfwyn said:

Worth pointing out that the guy who Valve hired (Icefrog) did not make dota, he maintained and did some of the updates for dota. The original dota was made by Eul, though that bears little to no resemble to dota allstars which was created by Guinsoo (who works for Riot Games which makes League of Legends). So it's not really as cut and dry as 'maker of dota made dota 2'.

Icefrog's been overseeing DotA All-Stars for the last seven years. Given how much the game has changed (and grown in popularity) under his direction, he is essentially the person responsible for the iteration of Dota which most people are familiar with.

@TPoppaPuff said:

Valve gave up practically nothing (except the right not to sue user mods with the name dota? lol good luck with that anyways) and Blizzard gave up everything.

I strongly suspect that when the terms of the actual agreement are released that we will see Valve gave up some decent $$$ to make Activision/Blizzard go away.

I agree with you that Valve has got the better end of the deal longterm, but it's not like Blizzard didn't get what they were really after (a quick payday and the freedom to still release their SCII mod). Whether Blizzard should have gone for more is a fair question.

@Duckbutter said:

you people

you people in the Giantbomb community talk too much.

about 96% of the way through reading this article's title sentence, i thought they were gonna settle this dispute with an actual in-game Dota battle. that would have been cooler.

@soyombo2001: O RLY?

If it's not an IP then I could package the title and sell it to anyone I feel like and use all the characters and assets for my own commercial use, correct? I could jut steal the graphics and use them in my own game and sell it without any repercussions right? If it's not an intellectual property than there is literally nothing they could do.

Now fanboys are arguing it isn't an IP!

lol

@TPoppaPuff: I don't really know what you saying but you need get your facts straight. Blizzard All-stars is not a title, its not an IP, its not even a stand-alone game. It is a mod made for free for Starcraft 2 owners. They can name it whatever they want. They don't care how it sounds. It's just something fun for the fans that they are providing for free just like the mods that came before it. I might be off a little but they were called "Aiur Chef", "Star Jeweled", and "Left 2 Die". Get over it.

Wow. I didn't think Blizzard would be the ones to back down on the name.

Valve is more powerful than I thought.

I don't think the name Blizzard all-stars is THAT bad, I mean Blizzard isnt very serious about their mods, They got one called Aiur Chef and another called Starjeweled for crying out loud!

I get a feeling the game game will definitely be really bad compared to all the other DOTA games out there though.

Blizzard MOBA would be hillarious, its like calling a game ww2 shooter.

Who cares? Diablo 3 comes out tomorrow!!

I find it funny that Blizzard decided to simply use the subtitle from the current DOTA.

Well I'm glad they settled this like adults. Mostly. I don't care too much either way I'm not a big rts or dota gamer.

@Phished0ne: And this title is the king of those chunks. Congrats to it, I guess.

@Gilsham said:

@TPoppaPuff: lol what, just because Blizzard is making it doesn't make it AAA, that is what the press applies to games which have mega bucks spent on them.

Blizzard MOBA is a 100% worse than Blizzard All Stars (I don't get peoples problem with it other than trying to be 'cool')

also people are really going of the ledge saying that Blizzard has "lost" this, this a compromise it is what sane people do when there is a disagreement between them, it is some that you will need to learn to be able to function in this world, if Blizzard had lost then they would have been to court and the judge would have ruled in favour of valve.

I feel that Blizzard All Stars will be a better game because it is changing something (also the DOTA community is toxic to new people), but more that Blizzard All Stars it think that the next big thing in the MOBA genre will be Sins of a Dark Age because it is evolving the genre somewhere (I also think SMNC should be bigger than it is)

Oh my God... Read what I wrote again. I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS AN AAA TITLE, I said it was coming from a big, AAA studio who is far too big and far too good to have an IP, no matter how much they invest in it, with a name that dumb. Again, if they're not putting that much into the game why shouldn't they call it "Turd Sandwich?" By naming it Blizzard All-Stars that line between unacceptable and merely bad is indistinguishable. Blizzard Moba is a better, less silly name than Blizzard All-Stars. Moba isn't a great name but conveys not only exactly what it is but conveys that it has all the Blizzard's "all-stars," cuz having a bunch of heroes is half of what makes a moba a moba. The all-stars is implied.

But you know what? It's OK, because if they change the name to Blizzard Moba now all of a sudden you guys will realize All-Stars is a stupid name and if they name it Turd Sandwich well you'll just rationalize that too. Fanboys will defend anything.

PS. A compromise means that both sides came to a mutual agreement where both sides gave up something to come to an agreement. Valve gave up practically nothing (except the right not to sue user mods with the name dota? lol good luck with that anyways) and Blizzard gave up everything. That is hardly a compromise. Saying this is a compromise is akin to being in a battle to the death, committing seppuku then claiming a tie. End result is your dead and they lived; they won. And now Blizzard's guts are strewn about the floor. But I'm sure people will keep claiming a compromise because, again, fanboys will defend anything.

@PHARAOH said:

@NaDannMaGoGo:

Yeah but blizzard was wrong just to claim it anyway They didnt make that mod and the guy who made Dota has the rights to the name and to make the sequel and hes working for VALVE.

It would be like Epic filling a lawsuit against the Moders that created the best unreal maps. If they wanted to make a shooter using the maps they created for unreal 2004 epic just couldnt just sue them because those maps were known so well on unreal 2004. I created some maps for UT 2004 i would hate to think epic can just take them and sell them and i get nothing.

Blizzard should have done the smart thing like Valve and just Hire the guy that made DOTA.

Good lord you have no idea what you're talking about....

@Detrian said:

Great! Fuck Blizzard. Maybe next time they'll get off their asses faster instead of trying to dick people over by cockblocking a project.

Riiiiiiiight...

@TPoppaPuff said:

@SnakeEyes327:

@psoplayer said:

I think you have completely misunderstood what Blizzard All-Stars is supposed to be if you're calling it "a big budget title".

I apologize, let me rephrase that: Blizzard All-Stars is legitimately a candidate for the worst name of a AAA, big budget-developer created IP of the last five years. Blizzard is far too good and far too big to have a IP with a name that dumb.

Better? Or are you both now going to argue Blizzard is an indie developer? Go ahead, kids. If you're gonna argue every little semantic and every fine detail let's hear what else you can possibly complain about.

It's just a mod right? Well, hell then let's just name it Uncle Chuck's Secret Pajama Party! It's just a mod, right?

Blizzard All Stars is actually a decent name. Especially because the people that are super interested in it already know what it is. This is one of the few times where name doesnt matter. You could call the new EA FIFA game "YO WE CALL IT SOCCER 13"(for the US market) and no one would care because there isnt really an outside market for soccer games. Once people understand that it is what those crazy kids call a "MOBA" game, blizzard all-stars is great, it conveys that the game has a vast collection of blizzard characters. Thats all people really need to know. People that arent interested in MOBA games wont even give it a second glance. Just like people that dont know what "DOTA" is dont give a flip about DOTA 2. If you are going to call out this game for having a terrible name, look at game titles. A lot of them blow chunks.

@TPoppaPuff: lol what, just because Blizzard is making it doesn't make it AAA, that is what the press applies to games which have mega bucks spent on them.

Blizzard MOBA is a 100% worse than Blizzard All Stars (I don't get peoples problem with it other than trying to be 'cool')

also people are really going of the ledge saying that Blizzard has "lost" this, this a compromise it is what sane people do when there is a disagreement between them, it is some that you will need to learn to be able to function in this world, if Blizzard had lost then they would have been to court and the judge would have ruled in favour of valve.

I feel that Blizzard All Stars will be a better game because it is changing something (also the DOTA community is toxic to new people), but more that Blizzard All Stars it think that the next big thing in the MOBA genre will be Sins of a Dark Age because it is evolving the genre somewhere (I also think SMNC should be bigger than it is)

@PHARAOH: Worth pointing out that the guy who Valve hired (Icefrog) did not make dota, he maintained and did some of the updates for dota. The original dota was made by Eul, though that bears little to no resemble to dota allstars which was created by Guinsoo (who works for Riot Games which makes League of Legends). So it's not really as cut and dry as 'maker of dota made dota 2'.

peple need to stop calling action rts games moba games i mean seriously,multiplayer online battle arena? that can be any multiplayer game out there,by this disciption call of duty is a multiplayer online battle arena.

@SnakeEyes327:

@psoplayer said:

I think you have completely misunderstood what Blizzard All-Stars is supposed to be if you're calling it "a big budget title".

I apologize, let me rephrase that: Blizzard All-Stars is legitimately a candidate for the worst name of a AAA, big budget-developer created IP of the last five years. Blizzard is far too good and far too big to have a IP with a name that dumb.

Better? Or are you both now going to argue Blizzard is an indie developer? Go ahead, kids. If you're gonna argue every little semantic and every fine detail let's hear what else you can possibly complain about.

It's just a mod right? Well, hell then let's just name it Uncle Chuck's Secret Pajama Party! It's just a mod, right?

@NaDannMaGoGo:

Yeah but blizzard was wrong just to claim it anyway They didnt make that mod and the guy who made Dota has the rights to the name and to make the sequel and hes working for VALVE.

It would be like Epic filling a lawsuit against the Moders that created the best unreal maps. If they wanted to make a shooter using the maps they created for unreal 2004 epic just couldnt just sue them because those maps were known so well on unreal 2004. I created some maps for UT 2004 i would hate to think epic can just take them and sell them and i get nothing.

Blizzard should have done the smart thing like Valve and just Hire the guy that made DOTA.

@TPoppaPuff said:

@NaDannMaGoGo said:

a) Moba is a shitty term

b) Blizzard Moba would be about as shitty as it gets

c) The famous Wc3 DotA is DotA Allstars

d) Blizzard All-Stars actually sounds okay

e) All-Stars in regards to their version of the game makes even sense, considering that there are all cool kinds of Blizzard's famous characters involved in their game.

A) So is "Dota"

B) Still not as shitty as "Blizzard All-Stars"

C) Terrible names are terrible names, regardless of tradition.

D) False

E) Cool is subjective, but it is objectively in the Moba genre.

Blizzard All-Stars is legitimately a candidate for the worst name of a big budget title of the last five years.

I wasn't aware that a free mod for StarCraft 2 is now considered a "big budget title". Go put your head in an oven please.

Huh, sorta surprised it was resolved so fast. Blizzard could have probably (legitimately) kept this going for way longer. It seems like they actually were just interested in securing the name for their customers to use. Which honestly I didn't believe, even though they said it before. Figured it was just corporate doublespeak. Pretty happy to be wrong in this case, and good on them.

I expected years of litigation. I am pleasantly surprised.

Does anyone have a link to the actual press release?

Cool, seems like neither of these companies turned into huge babies or tried to salvage as much money as possible from the other side, which is what usually happens with this stuff.

@Questionable said:

Its still à Dick move from valve. Regardless of how consumer friendly their intentions are.

Yeah, it kind of is actually!

Its still à Dick move from valve. Regardless of how consumer friendly their intentions are.

Great! Fuck Blizzard. Maybe next time they'll get off their asses faster instead of trying to dick people over by cockblocking a project.

Well, this is the best result possible, short of acknowledgement that it's counterproductive to fight over ownership of the name of what has essentially become a sporting activity. It's hard to blame them, really, even in 2012 so many games sell based primarily on the name.

Next week: Sony sues Blizzard for the rights of the word “All-Stars”.

Yay Valve!

@ERoBB said:

Still have no idea what DOTA is.

Defence of the ancients

Still have no idea what DOTA is.

@TPoppaPuff said:

Blizzard All-Stars is legitimately a candidate for the worst name of a big budget title of the last five years.

I think you have completely misunderstood what Blizzard All-Stars is supposed to be if you're calling it "a big budget title".

@killergrapefruit said:

Are you shitting us? That's the exact opposite of what's going on. Indies have fled XBL in droves because of Microsoft's refusal to support developers properly. Want to patch your game any day you want? Set your own price? Add free expansions? Decide when your game will be released? Only Valve let's you actually do those things. XBLA is useless for most Indies since you actually need a publisher. How much sense does that make? And XBLIG, don't even bring that up. It's a one in a hundred ratio for actual good games.

Publishers are doing very well outside of Steam. You can get your fix on GamersGate, GOG, D2D, hell even Origin actually has non-EA games on it. And then you have the complete hold-outs that still refuse to buy digitally and exclusively shop retail (most of western Europe essentially). Before I quit out of here I'll just have you know that from a $60 purchase, a bigger percentage lands in the publisher's pockets through Steam than through conventional retail channels. You sound like a fool, honestly.

Are you shitting me? I just said that if Steam didn't exist, the Community Games/Indie Games and iOS marketplace would be the only places for them to go, therefore dramatically increasing the quality of titles in each marketplace, meaning MS not being morons would actually support the service publically because they would understand the potential sales offered. The only reason they've "fled in droves" (there are more weekly releases of Arcade titles and Indie titles right now than there have ever been on the service, btw) is because Steam exists. And no, you don't need a publisher for Indie games. Arcade games, sure, but certainly NOT indie games. I really don't understand how you can be so dense. If the indie games on Steam were on Indie Games, Indie Games service would be a lot better. Durr.

No they really aren't. Of course they're profitable, but would you care to even guess what the ratio of digital sales on Steam is compared to all other services combined? It's gonna be around 9-to-1. And yes, genius, as I already stated before digital distribution is much more profitable for publishers and developers than retail chains, but each publisher running their own retail stores with as much accessibility as Walmart is literally impossible. However, direct publisher marketplaces is something that's feasible, but currently Steam is dominating any real potential of that being a viable option. All of the profits from a sale is worth more than a portion of the profits gained through an outlet like Steam or retail, correct? Or are you going to argue that too?

@NaDannMaGoGo said:

a) Moba is a shitty term

b) Blizzard Moba would be about as shitty as it gets

c) The famous Wc3 DotA is DotA Allstars

d) Blizzard All-Stars actually sounds okay

e) All-Stars in regards to their version of the game makes even sense, considering that there are all cool kinds of Blizzard's famous characters involved in their game.

A) So is "Dota"

B) Still not as shitty as "Blizzard All-Stars"

C) Terrible names are terrible names, regardless of tradition.

D) False

E) Cool is subjective, but it is objectively in the Moba genre.

Blizzard All-Stars is legitimately a candidate for the worst name of a AAA, big budget-developer created IP of the last five years.

@TPoppaPuff said:

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

Without steam core pc gaming would mostly be dead. Also many indie developers would be out of work and mod makers would not be able to make the leap to selling fully featured titles. Tripwire for example.

Oh ye of little faith, do you honestly believe PC gaming would be dead? PC gaming satiates a niche audience for which there are no alternatives. On the whole it would be smaller than it currently is, but it would be in a healthier state for the developers. The top level PC games would still have just as high sales. The mid-level devs would be much better off. And the indie devs would shrink or flock further to iOS or Xbox Indie, which means the quality of both services and their offerings would likely increase dramatically. And give MS a reason to support and promote that library/service and by extension those games would reach just as many if not more people than they currently do. Think about it; 360 online population is huge and an indie game that doesn't have to fight the distractions available on a PC could have a better chance of reaching its potential than the numbers on Steam where the vast majority of these games are getting bought by the same individuals who buy these games en masse. Same for iOS devices. Instead of both services being a wasteland for shovelware they would instantly become the de facto services for bite-sized games of a high quality. Instead these games have to struggle to find their own room against a full-fledged big budget title like an SR3 for the same price thanks to a Steam sale.

And while yes the indie developers have benefitted greatly from Steam, they're the only ones. The mid-level big budget titles like SR3 are nowhere near as profitable as they should be. Sales and DLC gets sifted through Valve's grubby hands. They're a publisher on top of a publisher; just another layer to suck money off the top and prevent investment in similar titles because essentially publishers are now unable to viably sell their own games without Steam. It's popularity has killed the ability of publishers to sell their games independantly, which is just part of the reason companies like THQ are dying. And unlike physical retailers where it is literally impossible for every dev to reach the entire consumer base, there is not a major publisher out there that couldn't sell it's own games digitally without Steam. The only difference is now the online consumer base has narrowed its scope to only Steam. If Steam didn't exist as we know it, PC gamers would be far more willing to buy directly from the publishers site.

Are you shitting us? That's the exact opposite of what's going on. Indies have fled XBL in droves because of Microsoft's refusal to support developers properly. Want to patch your game any day you want? Set your own price? Add free expansions? Decide when your game will be released? Only Valve let's you actually do those things. XBLA is useless for most Indies since you actually need a publisher. How much sense does that make? And XBLIG, don't even bring that up. It's a one in a hundred ratio for actual good games.

Publishers are doing very well outside of Steam. You can get your fix on GamersGate, GOG, D2D, hell even Origin actually has non-EA games on it. And then you have the complete hold-outs that still refuse to buy digitally and exclusively shop retail (most of western Europe essentially). Before I quit out of here I'll just have you know that from a $60 purchase, a bigger percentage lands in the publisher's pockets through Steam than through conventional retail channels. You sound like a fool, honestly.

@ADAMWD: MMM SPAAAGETTE

@Heylook: Cigarette Juice?

This is great news! There's usually way too much sand-throwing in big industries, making everyone seem cheap and childish.

I don't think the name "DOTA" is as near and dear to Blizzard's plans for this game as some people think.

Anyone in the MOBA community already understands these are two different games, and will choose the one that is more engaging to them, whatever the name.

To the massive install base Blizzard already has (WoW, Starcraft, Diablo players) that never got into DOTA as a WC3 mod, they probably associate "DOTA" with a nasty community if they even have any impression on the name whatsoever. Blizzard's going to be popping prominent advertisements for their new free game to millions of already engaged customers and possibly keep developing their cross-game hooks (ie. Get cute hero in All-Stars to max level in a match, you unlock a pet on your WoW character that can battle in the new Mists of Pandaria expansion).

I think the lack of reprisal for using DOTA in any non-commercial work is a good thing to have cleared up - If this was built by a community, it's nice that name wasn't locked away.

I saw Blizzard and Valve having ice cream together the other day. Turns out this ordeal has only strengthened their friendship, as these things so often do.

Valve has three (Half-Life, Counter Strike, Portal)

@BiG_Weasel: Don't forget Left 4 Dead, Team Fortress, Day of Defeat, Alien Swarm, Ricochet (lol)...

... and now DOTA, of course.

Sounds like good news!

Anyone else find the similarities between these two companies interesting? They're two of the biggest names, but they only have a handful of franchises to their name. Blizzard has 3, right (Diablo, Starcraft, Warcraft), and Valve has three (Half-Life, Counter Strike, Portal). Not sure it means anything, but I just noticed the coincidence.

@phrosnite: I feel stupid for expecting better.

Good to hear that a agreement was reached

@GunslingerPanda said:

@phrosnite said:

Hahah. Great job, Valve. Blizzard can suck it.

What the-

>EA-owned franchise avatar

Oh, nevermind. Carry on pffffffffft.

What the-

>My little pony avatar

Oh, nevermind. Carry on pffffffffft.

As for the upcoming official DOTA update from Blizzard, that has been renamed Blizzard All-Stars. Because apparently that was the best name they could come up with on short notice.

It's not a random name though. At some point, the name of the original Dota wc3 mod was Dota Allstars.

@phrosnite said:

Hahah. Great job, Valve. Blizzard can suck it.

What the-

>EA-owned franchise avatar

Oh, nevermind. Carry on pffffffffft.