Blizzard Disputing Valve’s Trademarking of DOTA

@theanticitizen said:

Just rename it Iron Brigade and we're all set!

Funny thing is, if Valve has called this game "Attack of the Old Ones" nobody would have grounds to complain. Its the fact they choose to trademark it as a sequel of a game that isn't theirs that feels weird and out of character from them...

I am sure they can come to an agreement since they are both great publishers who work on PC mostly @Mikegosat they can't put Elders in the word because Bethesda will sue because people can get it confused with TES

@Tidel said:

Two megarich corporations fighting over the rights to something neither created.

Well it was build using an engine made by blizzard, with assets made by blizzard under blizzards EULA. If one of these companies has any rights to the name, it would be Blizzard. It would've been even better if noone had tried to trade mark DOTA, and that would've been the case if Valve hadn't done it. Valve fired the first shot here, they are the aggressor here (enough hyperbole?).

I find it weird that people use the argument "Well, Blizzard left the property to rot so it's fair play for anyone to pick it up". Is it a negative that until now they never tried to monetize on an incredibly succesful genre that was made succesful by their products? I thought people here hate companies going for the quick buck.

I realize Valve does a lot of things right and has a lot of goodwill and fans because of that, but in this case I see no scenario where Valve isn't the primairy "bad guy".

@Korne: Except that EULAs are in no way legally binding. The most power they give a company is the ability to shut people out of their services and have the EULA to point to.

Obviously money is a driving factor behind their decision. They are a company after all. That no way excludes it from being a pet project.

I can't wait for Source Engine the Game by Blizzard Entertainment

For I think the first time, I'm feeling like Blizzard is showing somewhat of an ugly side. Not to say that I'm surprised this Dota/Dota 2/Blizzard Dota thing finally became a point of contention. Hopefully things get worked out without any negative effects for the consumers.

I think it would be ridiculous if Valve owned the exclusive rights to DotA as a trademark. It just makes no sense. I don't know if Blizzard should have them either, though.

@cyraxible said:

@Korne: Except that EULAs are in no way legally binding. The most power they give a company is the ability to shut people out of their services and have the EULA to point to.

Obviously money is a driving factor behind their decision. They are a company after all. That no way excludes it from being a pet project.

Well of course money is the reason. Both companies are trying to own the Dota name in order to sell more copies as the sequel to the first MOBA game (even though it isnt). It would be awesome if a judge said no one can make "DOTA 2", but that will never happen.

And what is your definition of a pet project? I always think of it as a project you take even though it isn't likely to be successful.

mmmmmoba

Blizzard doesn't care about community, they never have! The mod community is something Blizzard has never had while Valve is far superior in public relations and creating superior games. Blizzard is a subsidiary of Activision and we all know how shitty they are. I am so glad Valve isn't publicly traded like those greedy whores. It was genius of valve to pick up the trademark. Imagine how long it will take for Blizzard to make a "DOTA" game, if they ever release it. The point is if Blizzard really cared about the community they would allow the modding community to make this "game" inside a game like how it was originally designed in WC3. But dont be foolish, its never about the community, they're just using this as a scapegoat.

They say they want the term DOTA to be for the community, and it still will be because copyrights don't affect mods.

@Hiddenpeanut said:

Blizzard doesn't care about community, they never have! The mod community is something Blizzard has never had while Valve has far superior in public relations and creating a superior products. Blizzard is a subsidiary of Activision and we all know how shitty they are. I am so glad Valve isn't publicly traded like those greedy whores.

I totally agree, but still see it as bad taste to copyright a name of a game that you had no part of making.

Trademark law is incredibly strict about the need to defend trademarks in order to keep them. How can Blizzard possibly claim to own the name Dota in a trademark sense when they made absolutely no moves to protect or stop unauthorized usage in the past 9 years prior to this? They never once attempted to trademark Dota, DotA, Defense of the Ancient, or any other combination/usage of that. They never once told anyone to stop using. I don't see how they can suddenly start now and have any real case. In fact there have been cash tournaments using DotA for years and Blizzard didn't do anything. Even when those tournaments were hosted on unofficial/illegal Battle.net replacements for WarIII, they never went after the DotA name then. So why now?

Remember when Team Fortress was a Quake mod, and how Valve now has the trademark for that? This isn't really the first time they've done this sort of thing.

It was dumb of Valve to try to use the DotA name in the first place. Yeah, I get it, it holds some value in marketing the game that they're making, but how could that possibly be worth the obvious legal trouble you'd have to step around to make it to that point?

@hermes said:

@theanticitizen said:

Just rename it Iron Brigade and we're all set!

Funny thing is, if Valve has called this game "Attack of the Old Ones" nobody would have grounds to complain. Its the fact they choose to trademark it as a sequel of a game that isn't theirs that feels weird and out of character from them...

The mod was originally called Defense of the Ancients, where as DOTA 2 is officially DOTA 2, so I don't know how Blizzard can lay any claims to it. Valve employed the DOTA developer anyway so the ball is in their court. Not many people even know that DOTA is an abbreviation for Defense of the Ancients.

Valve could just argue back that it doesn't stand for that, then refuse to go into further detail. I really don't think Blizzard can win this if they do take it further than pretending they want it for the community. If Blizzard thought they could take charge of it, they would have. This is Activision we're talking about.

@Korne said:

@Hiddenpeanut said:

Blizzard doesn't care about community, they never have! The mod community is something Blizzard has never had while Valve has far superior in public relations and creating a superior products. Blizzard is a subsidiary of Activision and we all know how shitty they are. I am so glad Valve isn't publicly traded like those greedy whores.

I totally agree, but still see it as bad taste to copyright a name of a game that you had no part of making.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IceFrog

IceFrog is a game designer, known for being the longest-serving and current developer of the Warcraft III mod Defense of the Ancients. He is currently employed by Valve Corporation as the lead designer for Dota 2, the stand-alone sequel to the original scenario. IceFrog's involvement with DotA began in 2005, when he inherited the reins of the dominant variant entitled DotA Allstars from Steve "Guinsoo" Feak. Since the beginning of his involvement, IceFrog has added a myriad of features, including heroes and gameplay fixes. Every release is accompanied by a change log released on the official website. IceFrog is renowned for his continued anonymity, having never publicly disclosed his actual name.

@Korne: In any of the interviews with Gabe Newell about this project he's always struck me as a fan of Dota first and a business man second.

A pet project is exactly that; Passion before business.

Money doesn't taint that.

@Sooty said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IceFrog

IceFrog is a game designer, known for being the longest-serving and current developer of the Warcraft III mod Defense of the Ancients. He is currently employed by Valve Corporation as the lead designer for Dota 2, the stand-alone sequel to the original scenario. IceFrog's involvement with DotA began in 2005, when he inherited the reins of the dominant variant entitled DotA Allstars from Steve "Guinsoo" Feak. Since the beginning of his involvement, IceFrog has added a myriad of features, including heroes and gameplay fixes. Every release is accompanied by a change log released on the official website. IceFrog is renowned for his continued anonymity, having never publicly disclosed his actual name.

But then Guinsoo and Pendragon, two of the lead designers of DotA Allstars, didn't like the idea of Valve creating DOTA 2 either. It just seems dirty to claim something like that for yourself.

Also, would it be ok for EA to copyright the name COD5, saying it has no relationship to Call of Duty 5? No. You can't do that.

Blizzards grasping for straws now, cause their own Blizzard DOTA might end up needing a name change now.

@Hiddenpeanut said:

Blizzard doesn't care about community, they never have! The mod community is something Blizzard has never had while Valve is far superior in public relations and creating superior games. Blizzard is a subsidiary of Activision and we all know how shitty they are. I am so glad Valve isn't publicly traded like those greedy whores. It was genius of valve to pick up the trademark. Imagine how long it will take for Blizzard to make a "DOTA" game, if they ever release it. The point is if Blizzard really cared about the community they would allow the modding community to make this "game" inside a game like how it was originally designed in WC3. But dont be foolish, its never about the community, they're just using this as a scapegoat.

You're really mad.

And really wrong.

I still think DOTA 2 is a really stupid name, so I wish that neither side would be able to use that name.

The fact that valve is trying to get a trade mark for Dota blows my mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dota

In October 2009, IceFrog was hired by Valve Corporation, leading a team in a project that he described as "great news for DotA fans". Valve filed the trademark for "Dota" in August 2010, leading to Steve "Pendragon" Mescon to file a counter application of trademark for the phrase "Defense of the Ancients", on behalf of DotA-Allstars, LLC., in order to "protect the work that dozens of authors have done to create the game". Dota 2 was officially announced by Valve in October 2010.

Blizzard isn't the only one that has beef with the name. If Guinsoo stepped in a bit more, I'm pretty sure this argument could be over for Valve.

@patrickklepek: It should also be noted that the original creator of DotA, Eul, works for Valve. After his tenure with the mod, he was hired and has worked on every Valve project since, including Half-Life 2.

Also, Guinsoo (the second steward after Eul and behind Icefrog) now runs a company (Riot) in direct competition with Valve. He has a very vested interest in their failure, so I doubt Valve will be able to bring him into the case for much of anything.

It's funny how they only care about this now that Valve is going to be making money off it. Blizzard didn't give a shit about DOTA for years. I blame Activision.

If Blizzard really thought they owned the tern "DotA" they should have filed the trademark first. Done.

In reality the trademark should go to Dota Allstars LLC. (Pendragon and co.) Although Blizzard has a much more legitimate claim to it than Valve.

Especially seeing as IceFrog was not a principal creator of Dota or Dota Allstars, he was just the main guy left with it's caretaking when the main creators went off to work on different projects. Such as LoL.

Blizzard does not "own" the name DOTA, imo. If blizzard were smart they wouldve picked up the DOTA people themselves and register the name. The fact they didnt is simply their own fault.

Don't see why Blizzard would care so much though, it wont be as big as say... League of Legends. DOTA 2 will sell decent and will have a hardcore fanbase, but nothing as big as LoL. Of that, im confident.

All this noise over DOTA. It's like a dung beetle fight. The winner walks away with a lump of poo.

Valve will win though. Team Fortress was a Quake mod. According to Blizzard, it would belong to the Quake community, but I think we all know that it didn't stop there.

@avidwriter said:

It's funny how they only care about this now that Valve is going to be making money off it. Blizzard didn't give a shit about DOTA for years. I blame Activision.

That doesn't even make sense, since the merger of Activision and Blizzard has led to them creating a DOTA game in the upcoming Starcraft game. Blizzard didn't think it would be profitable. Now that games like LOL and HON have showed how incredibly popular and lucrative these games can be, everyone wants a piece.

@Korne said:

@Hiddenpeanut said:

Blizzard doesn't care about community, they never have! The mod community is something Blizzard has never had while Valve has far superior in public relations and creating a superior products. Blizzard is a subsidiary of Activision and we all know how shitty they are. I am so glad Valve isn't publicly traded like those greedy whores.

I totally agree, but still see it as bad taste to copyright a name of a game that you had no part of making.

That's what valve does, and I think they're a smart company for doing so, they are... The Blob, sucking up other game companies in their wake (in a good way) and refining and marketing their new IPs to perfection. I applaud valve for jumping on the DOTA ball when Blizzard just sat there with their thumb up their asses for so many years.

From the multiple sites I've read this story on, I'm still trying to figure out where people are getting the idea that this is a lawsuit. It isn't. It's a formal opposition to Valve trademarking Dota. That's different than a lawsuit against Valve. This is just Blizzard trying to step in and stop Valve from trademarking a name. They're not even necessarily trying to get Valve to not use the name Dota 2 (though that could certainly be a by-product), they're just trying to stop Valve from trademarking a name that has been associated with a Blizzard product for several years. The people that are siding with Valve sound like they just want a reason to be angry at Blizzard and/or Activision and don't really care what any of this is about, they just want to be able to point a finger and say "this here is the bad guy!"

@Bloodthorne said:

Blizzard does not "own" the name DOTA, imo. If blizzard were smart they wouldve picked up the DOTA people themselves and register the name. The fact they didnt is simply their own fault.

Don't see why Blizzard would care so much though, it wont be as big as say... League of Legends. DOTA 2 will sell decent and will have a hardcore fanbase, but nothing as big as LoL. Of that, im confident.

Had to reply, almost 99.9% of all PC gamers own steam, if even a tenth of them try DOTA when its released and they will because it'll be free to play, it'll dwarf LoL like a mother fucker.

@Dberg said:

All this noise over DOTA. It's like a dung beetle fight. The winner walks away with a lump of poo.

And the most popular new genre. It might be the new "plastic instrument music genre".

@G0rd0nFr33m4n said:

@Bloodthorne said:

Blizzard does not "own" the name DOTA, imo. If blizzard were smart they wouldve picked up the DOTA people themselves and register the name. The fact they didnt is simply their own fault.

Don't see why Blizzard would care so much though, it wont be as big as say... League of Legends. DOTA 2 will sell decent and will have a hardcore fanbase, but nothing as big as LoL. Of that, im confident.

Had to reply, almost 99.9% of all PC gamers own steam, if even a tenth of them try DOTA when its released and they will because it'll be free to play, it'll dwarf LoL like a mother fucker.

But getting that many people to play and continue to play a game like DOTA is hard. As hardcore as League of Legends is, DOTA is more hardcore and less accessible.

@Korne said:

@G0rd0nFr33m4n said:

@Bloodthorne said:

Blizzard does not "own" the name DOTA, imo. If blizzard were smart they wouldve picked up the DOTA people themselves and register the name. The fact they didnt is simply their own fault.

Don't see why Blizzard would care so much though, it wont be as big as say... League of Legends. DOTA 2 will sell decent and will have a hardcore fanbase, but nothing as big as LoL. Of that, im confident.

Had to reply, almost 99.9% of all PC gamers own steam, if even a tenth of them try DOTA when its released and they will because it'll be free to play, it'll dwarf LoL like a mother fucker.

But getting that many people to play and continue to play a game like DOTA is hard. As hardcore as League of Legends is, DOTA is more hardcore and less accessible.

The old DOTA was, it may sound like fanboy bullshit, but Valve is smart, they will get people to play their game and like it somehow I guarantee it.

@G0rd0nFr33m4n said:

@Korne said:

@G0rd0nFr33m4n said:

@Bloodthorne said:

Blizzard does not "own" the name DOTA, imo. If blizzard were smart they wouldve picked up the DOTA people themselves and register the name. The fact they didnt is simply their own fault.

Don't see why Blizzard would care so much though, it wont be as big as say... League of Legends. DOTA 2 will sell decent and will have a hardcore fanbase, but nothing as big as LoL. Of that, im confident.

Had to reply, almost 99.9% of all PC gamers own steam, if even a tenth of them try DOTA when its released and they will because it'll be free to play, it'll dwarf LoL like a mother fucker.

But getting that many people to play and continue to play a game like DOTA is hard. As hardcore as League of Legends is, DOTA is more hardcore and less accessible.

The old DOTA was, it may sound like fanboy bullshit, but Valve is smart, they will get people to play their game and like it somehow I guarantee it.

Maybe, but from the tournaments I have watched, it still has that hardcore and punishing feel to it. Last hitting and denying is a lot harder than HON, and I personally hate the zoomed in camera (all personal preferance though. New players may feel different).

Blizzard's leagel team, being a dick again.

@Pr1mus: Check your math please.

The MOBA games have a really strange past imo. But I kinda hope that blizzard wins because then valve can have another name to dota2. either way it will probably be bigger then LoL and that other game, as long as its free2play.

Blizzard can fuck right off. It's such a slippery slope they're going down.

I've found the two original filings for the DOTA trademark if anyone's interested.

Valve: http://www.trademarkia.com/dota-85102245.html filed August 6, 2010

DOTA-ALLSTARS (Blizzard): http://www.trademarkia.com/dota-85103667.html filed August 9, 2010

Oh, so Blizzard owns all the copyrighted material uploaded into Warcraft Mods? I'm sure someone made a Counterstrike map or a half-life map. Also, what of all the maps I played based off of movies?

Worldedit wasn't the program that most mapmakers used anyway. There was user modded versions that gave a lot more leeway and customization.

@FateOfNever said:

From the multiple sites I've read this story on, I'm still trying to figure out where people are getting the idea that this is a lawsuit. It isn't. It's a formal opposition to Valve trademarking Dota. That's different than a lawsuit against Valve. This is just Blizzard trying to step in and stop Valve from trademarking a name. They're not even necessarily trying to get Valve to not use the name Dota 2 (though that could certainly be a by-product), they're just trying to stop Valve from trademarking a name that has been associated with a Blizzard product for several years. The people that are siding with Valve sound like they just want a reason to be angry at Blizzard and/or Activision and don't really care what any of this is about, they just want to be able to point a finger and say "this here is the bad guy!"

Yeah, it's been said a couple of times already in this thread, but either this tidbit is not true (love to hear it), or people just love loving Valve and love hating on Blizzard/Activision.

Shut up and make good video games.

@Binarynova said:

When you install Warcraft III, you agree to Blizzard’s EULA (End User License Agreement), which states all material created with the game’s tools, including the editor that helped birth DOTA, is Blizzard's property.

Wait wait wait wait! Modders willingly signed a license agreement that explicitly says that all material created with the game's tools are Blizzard's property? All material? Every single map. Every mod? That was in the EULA? I thought EULAs were just now getting ridiculous.

I was all ready to jump in here and tell Blizzard to take the DotA name, a name that they didn't come up with, that the community coined, and shove it. But ha! If that's what the EULA said, then sounds like the creators of Defense of the Ancients and by extension Valve are out of luck (and anyone else who made a Warcraft III mod).

This is assuming that EULAs are anything but a farce. Has their legal mettle ever been tested in court on this level?

@Pr1mus said:

They should settle this with a tournament of Dota and Dota 2. Team Newell vs Team Morhaime. If Team Newell wins, they get the trademark. If Team Morhaime wins, Valve has to rename the game to something like Defense of the Hat and give a free tf2 hat to every Blizz employee.

Riot should jump into that as well, since they have beef with this whole naming fiasco as well.

I'm with Valve.

they should decide it with a tournament and the fans pick which game is more fun to play and the loser has to be deleted from the developer's database. lol that would be a competition.