Activision Wins ModernWarfare3.com Dispute

[Cormyre]

Ah, justice. Blind to all but the mighty dollar.

You'd think they'd have to purchase the website from the guy at the very least though.

Exactly, they should have to pay him like people have to pay domain squatters at the very least instead of outright "legal" theft like this.

 

[John Funk]

If this was an internet forum we would have banned him for trolling and flame baiting.

Agreed.

I don't think you'd have taken his account off him and given it to someone else though. If I buy modernwarfare5.com now, or gearsofwar4.com or halflife3willnevercome do you think said corporations will let me keep them - no matter what I say about them?

Even if I have a radio show discussing babynoises, do you think Freddy Mercury's estate will let me have radiogaga.com? Because if they do, Lady Gaga won't.

If you have the website and are using it in a legitimate manner, they have no choice. Remember the three criteria:

-confusingly similar to an existing copyright

-no legitimate interest in the domain name

-used in bad faith

The only one they could possibly argue is the first one. They would have no legal leg to stand on, as opposed to here where they had *every* legal leg to stand on. I know you have a raging hate-on for Activision and ol' Bobby K, but ATVI was in the right here.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Remember the three criteria:

Dealt with them earlier.

The only one they could possibly argue is the first one. They would have no legal leg to stand on, as opposed to here where they had *every* legal leg to stand on.

They still should have had to rebuy the domain, given they were at fault for not securing it in the first place.

 

[John Funk]

Remember the three criteria:

Dealt with them earlier.

The only one they could possibly argue is the first one. They would have no legal leg to stand on, as opposed to here where they had *every* legal leg to stand on.

They still should have had to rebuy the domain, given they were at fault for not securing it in the first place.

You handwaved it earlier, ignoring that it was the actual crux of the matter.

It's an unreasonable expectation. Yes, after the success of MW2 one might have suspected that MW3 was coming, but IIRC this domain was purchased before then. So, how far in the future should Activision be required to purchase domains? Should they buy up to MW10? What about MW20? When does it become ridiculous to expect a company to have to secure every possible domain for every possible sequel it could produce?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

You handwaved it earlier, ignoring that it was the actual crux of the matter.

No it isn't. There are three points to that rule. The Atari case had one, the Activision case had all three. Both were decided towards, and on, the first point. Trademark ownership. That's decided by the American laws that state that trademarks that aren't aggressively challenged have a chance of losing their copyright.

That's why Activision aren't in the wrong on this. Yeah, you heard it here first.

It's an unreasonable expectation.

But it is a legal expectation.

Yes, after the success of MW2 one might have suspected that MW3 was coming, but IIRC this domain was purchased before then.

So, at that point, Activision should have either
a) Begun legal proceedings or
b) Begun financial proceedings.

They didn't do either. What they have done is used the trademark law to override the possession law. And the trademark law REQUIRES them to do that. Therefore setting up the framework, legal case and winner purely by who has the most dollars.

Which is what I said. Names have too much power. Regardless of who owns them.