Activision Mad About Modern Warfare 3 Site, Trying to Get it Taken Down

[Kakashi on crack]

As the Internet would say: someone is trolling Activision like a boss.

mmmmhmmm

Ok, I read over some of their little complaint paperwork crap, and very rarely do they bring up MW3. All they say is "We are going to keep talking about how successful our franchise has been so it gives us the rights to take over this domain." I think I saw maybe one legit excuse that didn't revolve around sales figures and marketing money spent on previous games.

To put it simply, Activision really doesn't have a case and is pulling this out of their ass. They've been trolled, they've been trolled Big-Time (legally I might add) and now they're just throwing a fit over it.

 

[Vibhor]

Uhh, I believe they cannot copyright the term "Modern Warfare". It is way too generic.
In fact the first google search of the term gives me a page describing the whole thing as opposed to giving me a page of COD 4.

 

[Omegatronacles]

See, the thing is, whoever owns the domain name aside, Activision owns the 'modernwarfare3' part of it, and unless the buyer of the domain can prove fair use (which linking to a competitor is NOT, by the way), then they can get screwed under trademark law.

One the other hand, was Modern Warfare 3 a trademark when the domain was purchased?

When did Activision announce/trademark MW3? Cause if it happened after this site was bought and set up I think that would actually weaken their case.

I could be wrong though.

 

[deathtopenguins]

Very funny, but really, Activision definitely has the right to at least request that the domain be transferred to them. Especially since it was being used as a prank against them and the domain name would be exceptionally confusing.

I'd prefer it if they had to buy the domain off the guy who originally bought it, for a ridiculous price, just like in the good old days of 'domaining'. However since "ModernWarfare3" is a trademarked and at the time of the complaint the site was an obvious example of cybersquatting/trolling4lolz I think that Activision will (and should) win this one.

Doesn't stop me having a good chuckle while it lasts though

 

[BloodSquirrel]

Uhh, I believe they cannot copyright the term "Modern Warfare". It is way too generic.
In fact the first google search of the term gives me a page describing the whole thing as opposed to giving me a page of COD 4.

Copyright? No, they couldn't.

Trademark, on the other hand, operates off of very different rules. The entire point of Trademark is to prevent somebody aside from Activision from making shovelware and slapping "Modern Warfare 3" on it to rip off unaware consumers and cash in on their brand.

 

[Vivi22]

To put it simply, Activision really doesn't have a case and is pulling this out of their ass.

On the contrary. They hold a trademark on the name Modern Warfare with regard to video game titles, and they have a responsibility to protect that trademark. If they don't, they can lose it and then the name would be worthless to them because anyone could use it as a video game title. If a site is using a domain name which is identical to the name of an upcoming installment of the franchise to advertise a competitors game, then they could have a very strong and legitimate argument that it could confuse customers who don't know any better into buying a competing game, or even lead to the name being associated with a competitors game. Hell, simply by having the rights to the name they can probably argue that this person doesn't have the right to use it as a domain name. Regardless of what the fallout of all of this is, they not only have the right to attempt to obtain the domain, but a responsibility to do it on behalf of the stakeholders of the company.

Uhh, I believe they cannot copyright the term "Modern Warfare". It is way too generic.

The title Modern Warfare, as it pertains to video games would be protected under trademark law, not copyright law. Just as titles like Final Fantasy, Super Mario Bros., The Legend of Zelda, etc. are all trademarks. If you wanted to make a game and call it Modern Warfare, you wouldn't be able to because Activision already has an established franchise using that name and they would be well within their rights to take you to court if you tried using it.

 

[Nobby]

Is Battlefield 3 not a game set in modern times with warfare involved? is it not the third installment (sort of) in its series?

Anyway Activision can do whatever the hell they want, I'm still not buying anymore of those steaming piles they try shovel out for the subhuman morons and those poor souls misled into thinking this one might just be a return to the old days of CoD.

 

[opiwankenobi]

what if someone were to patent Mw4s name? what would happen then?

OFFT:I have a litle experiment that I need to work out I probabely will be banned for this but Hopefully I won't

come on press it for science I want to see if it works it probabley won't though

YOU, dear Sir, are the devil o0

 

[opiwankenobi]

double post, sorry.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

One the other hand, was Modern Warfare 3 a trademark when the domain was purchased?

The "Modern Warfare" part is trademarked. Any slight variation of that phrase is an infringement. Activision would still have a case if it was "Modern Warfare: Battlefield" or "Modarn Warfair".

The key is whether or not the phrase is being used as an attempt to confuse the consumer into purchasing a product they falsely believe is produced by Activision.

 

[Vibhor]

Uhh, I believe they cannot copyright the term "Modern Warfare". It is way too generic.

The title Modern Warfare, as it pertains to video games would be protected under trademark law, not copyright law. Just as titles like Final Fantasy, Super Mario Bros., The Legend of Zelda, etc. are all trademarks. If you wanted to make a game and call it Modern Warfare, you wouldn't be able to because Activision already has an established franchise using that name and they would be well within their rights to take you to court if you tried using it.

But a site isn't a video game. For example, the term "Black" is trademarked by EA for its shooter but I am very well within my rights to make a site with the term 'black' in the url. I am pretty sure EA wouldn't have splashed shit if they made a site named "Black ops" to promote CODBLOPS

 

[SyphonX]

I've almost never seen a franchise with an exact domain name. They are nearly -always- and -guaranteed- to be taken by someone else. So you're likely to see "Shooter-game" instead of "Shooter.com", etc. It's pretty common, and most companies just move on with their business and lives, realizing it's a petty squabble.

Instead, as big corporations always do, they dramatize everything because they have a shamelessly huge market and propaganda budget, which affords them the ability to dramatize everything publicly.

 

[Fursnake]

Yes! Yesss! Oh, let me taste your tears, Activision! Mmm, your tears are so yummy and sweet!

 

[Femaref]

Uhh, I believe they cannot copyright the term "Modern Warfare". It is way too generic.

The title Modern Warfare, as it pertains to video games would be protected under trademark law, not copyright law. Just as titles like Final Fantasy, Super Mario Bros., The Legend of Zelda, etc. are all trademarks. If you wanted to make a game and call it Modern Warfare, you wouldn't be able to because Activision already has an established franchise using that name and they would be well within their rights to take you to court if you tried using it.

But a site isn't a video game. For example, the term "Black" is trademarked by EA for its shooter but I am very well within my rights to make a site with the term 'black' in the url. I am pretty sure EA wouldn't have splashed shit if they made a site named "Black ops" to promote CODBLOPS

Legally, Activision has a case on this. You can deny it all you want, the law will give them that domain.

 

[Fusioncode9]

Ahhh! So many Justin Biebers! My eyes are bleeding!

 

[Braedan]

doesn't activision have enough money to just pay the guy for the rights to the site? If someone said they would give me 250k for a website I owned and was trolling with... it would be theirs pretty fast...

 

[BloodSquirrel]

doesn't activision have enough money to just pay the guy for the rights to the site? If someone said they would give me 250k for a website I owned and was trolling with... it would be theirs pretty fast...

That encourages domain squatting. They'll just have to shell out another quater of a mill for modernwarfare3.net, moderwarfare3.org, modernwarfare3.xxx, modernwarfarethree.net.modern-warfare-3.com, etc.

 

[BrotherRool]

They do have the right here. But it's been done before (i9.com=firefox or something similar) and in many ways, the joke has already been played