Everyone has a hardon for them as they are perceived as the underdog, the small development studio against the big evil corporate empire. Everyone is a bunch of tools.Daystar Clarion said:
Another good reason why Bethesda doesn't have any right to the word Scrolls
- Thread starter GonzoGamer
- Start date
You're confusing copyright and trademark, and in this case it wouldn't apply, because of the generic nature of the word "scrolls."chstens said:
It looks to me like the Romero-Dead Rising debacle. It was just as stupid then as it is now.
It'd be like suing the show The Walking Dead because it has the word "Dead" in it.
Bethasda is stupid, not because of who would have been legally or morally in the right, but because Mojang offered many concessions (like just abandoning using the name Scrolls) that they didn't need to offer but Bethesda is STILL suing over it.
Why not just make an agreement that Mojang won't use "Elder Scrolls" in any context (except for parodies, of course) and Bethesda won't use Scrolls as a singular without Elder or some other prefix/suffix?
You know, like how normal copyright stuff works? Just nice and formalized?
Edit: Checked out one of the main posted articles saying why Bethesda isn't retarded. He put (correctly) that words that are exceptions to the copyright include descriptors, parody, etc. Well, uh, The Elder Scrolls are a single collective (or set of many, this isn't the time for an English debate). Scrolls is a descriptor describing the item(s).
It'd be like banning a war movie named October just because of Red October. It'd never fly.
It'd be like suing the show The Walking Dead because it has the word "Dead" in it.
Bethasda is stupid, not because of who would have been legally or morally in the right, but because Mojang offered many concessions (like just abandoning using the name Scrolls) that they didn't need to offer but Bethesda is STILL suing over it.
Why not just make an agreement that Mojang won't use "Elder Scrolls" in any context (except for parodies, of course) and Bethesda won't use Scrolls as a singular without Elder or some other prefix/suffix?
You know, like how normal copyright stuff works? Just nice and formalized?
Edit: Checked out one of the main posted articles saying why Bethesda isn't retarded. He put (correctly) that words that are exceptions to the copyright include descriptors, parody, etc. Well, uh, The Elder Scrolls are a single collective (or set of many, this isn't the time for an English debate). Scrolls is a descriptor describing the item(s).
It'd be like banning a war movie named October just because of Red October. It'd never fly.
You can trademark single words, just look at Rage, DOOM, etc. "Rage" and "Doom" are used in normal speech probably just as much if not more than "Scrolls" is, so your point isn't good.
However they are still wrong. Why, when Mojang offered to drop the trademark, did they not accept it? They just want money and it is a stupid case. Hopefully the court wherever they are doing it is intelligent enough to understand that.
However they are still wrong. Why, when Mojang offered to drop the trademark, did they not accept it? They just want money and it is a stupid case. Hopefully the court wherever they are doing it is intelligent enough to understand that.
I was corrected, and made my statement on that corrections few posts after that, I am not uppity about being corrected, i am being uppity because people dont read a few more posts to see the rebuttal.unoleian said:
And you are wrong about your "correction". They do not own (C) on "The Elder Scrolls" They own it on the FULL title name. Look at your Oblivion Case, it says "The Edler Scrolls IV: Oblivion (C).
NOW, the TM's apply to the "Style" In which the words are formed. Lets take a look shall we:
http://tess2.uspto.gov
(Hit Basic Search, Type in The Elder Scrolls, and hit the second TM.) For some reason they dont allow you to link directly to the TM.
This is one of their Trade marks(For Oblivion). Notice how it is under the catagory of "Mark Drawing Code" Stating that the own TM's on The Elder Scrolls (or any mention there of) Under the Font or Style in which you see it under. The way in which the words in the logo for Bethesda and Zenimax are also TM'd, this applies to the style of the words and logos. This is why Zenimax and Bethesda also have (C) on their respective names as well.
The Do not own a TM under JUST The Elder Scroll. But on how the words are presented, not under the Standard Characters. (which would be just the words themselves)
Now i could go out, and make a Book Store called The Elder Scrolls, as long as it looks nothing like the Style they use. And I wouldnt be able to have it as a fantasy themed store. But if i just bought a Barnes and Nobles and renamed it, there would be no problems.
This is an issue of the same genre, under the same catagory of games and media, this is where Majong and Notch are in the wrong. They want a STANDARD Tm (i am assuming) of the name Scrolls, this would screw Zenimax, and they HAVE to fight it.
Can someone make this clear for everyone in the most simplistic sense?
Is the title "Elder Scrolls" copyrighted or just the words "Elder" and "Scrolls" in said title?
Is the title "Elder Scrolls" copyrighted or just the words "Elder" and "Scrolls" in said title?
Yes, I know how different Star Wars and Trek are, that's what I meant when I said exactly that in the parenthesis highlighted above. But both have to do with space. Just like The Elder Scrolls and Scrolls have to do with fantasy. The two games sound as different from each other as the two "Star" franchises, that is why I used that example (even though I know Star Trek predates Star Wars, but I couldn't find a better example - that's why I used the second example of the hypotethical "Star" movie).Bluntman1138 said:
The problem is just that. The settings are similar, but they are not the same. So what, now I can't make a fantay game with the word "scroll" in the title? Even if it is a common English word that has a lot to do with any generic fantasy setting? I understand that is about how the law works, I'm not questioning that. I just think that is a stupid law that lends itself to abuse of the type Bethesda is trying to pull right now (and the type Mojang tried to pull first, I know, but they backed up, didn't they?).
By the same logic being applied in this whole affair, I'm prohibited to write a novel in a classic fantasy setting called "The Mystical Lord of Death and Sorrow", because that is fantasy with "lord" in the title, even though no rings appear in the story... If that doesn't sound ridiculous to you, I can't say anything else.
No, you could write the Novel. The TM for LotR is for the exact wording, and how it is presented (the style of hoe Lord of the Rings is spelled, basically the font)Truehare said:
Now, you can have Elves (but not the Tolkien created elven language) dwarves, humans, half elfs, mithral, halflings, gnomes, wraiths, wryms, giant spiders.. etc, these things are all public domain. The Only TM's and C's are specific locations, and names, and setting.
Now you might have a problem writing a Fantasy based novel just entitled "Rings", but you would be walking a fine line depending on the content of your story. But a book with the title you gave, no one could say anything about. (until the content was examined)
When talking about fantasy, most of the generics in the genre are public domain, and can be used by anyone for anything. Only specifics are C and TM.
But the Tolkien Family doesnt have right to the individual words, unless the content of the book or movie has parallels to what they have the rights to. You could write a novel called The Ring or Power, as long as none of the content drew any parallels to existing rights.
I am assuming Majong wants a blanket TM on the word Scrolls. Since NO ACTUAL FACTS have been released to the public, just the whiney bitching of D-Bag on his twitter account. We need to be able to see the TM application, and see the arguement that Zenimax is having.
I could be completely wrong. But without any REAL facts from both sides yet, who knows. It could very well be Zenimax lawyers getting bored or trying for a quick cash grab. Or it could be something more sinister on the side of Notch, or something idiotic, or an honest mistake or whatever. But until we get some real facts,everyone is speculating..Even Me! And there really is no need for it.
You can make a game, write a book, make a movie or name your next bicycle line RAGE. The trademark for Rage is the design of the spelling, and for being a software designer.Abengoshis said:
Doom on the other hand has several tm's and copyrights which extent to a movie and video game . But you could write write a novel named doom (as long as there was no parallels, and no other books that have the title doom) Name your small business Doom, But since there has been a movie called Doom already, no matter the context you wouldnt be able to use it as a title)
Having a TM or C just doesnt make you the owner of that word, it gives you certain protections on how it can be used, but it is still limited.
People seem to be confusing Copyright with Trademark. Copyright deals with protecting the work as a whole while Trademark deals with protecting the 'image' of it.
If someone created a game exactly like Oblivion and just changed the names around but titled it something completely different would be violating copyright but not trademark.
The Elder Scrolls is trademarked specifically for pre-recorded CD's and DVD's featuring fantasy games. That means the 'image' of The Elder Scrolls is a fantasy game. Using the name Scrolls for a fantasy game is a violation of that.
For future reference:
(Name) The Elder Scrolls - Trademarked
(Name) Skyrim - Trademarked
(Name) Oblivion - Trademarked
The games as a whole - Copyrighted
If someone created a game exactly like Oblivion and just changed the names around but titled it something completely different would be violating copyright but not trademark.
The Elder Scrolls is trademarked specifically for pre-recorded CD's and DVD's featuring fantasy games. That means the 'image' of The Elder Scrolls is a fantasy game. Using the name Scrolls for a fantasy game is a violation of that.
For future reference:
(Name) The Elder Scrolls - Trademarked
(Name) Skyrim - Trademarked
(Name) Oblivion - Trademarked
The games as a whole - Copyrighted
Right, now repeat that search, and this time, click the last link.Bluntman1138 said:
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4007:3n44um.6.8
That's Zenimax's trademark for "The Elder Scrolls" as a typed drawing (or, you know, just the words, regardless of font etc.), from 1995, for use in "computer game programs".
They do, very much, have a trademark on The Elder Scrolls.
They ALSO have one for "Oblivion" ( http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4007:3n44um.7.3 ).
(oh, and by the way, mojang's copyright is also there, search for "scrolls", it's number 9. Which is the second instance of "scrolls" in that list, after a t-shit company.
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4007:3n44um.3.9 )
Don't just half-ass your research and talk with authority about the subject.
Yeah, and if people on Bethesda's side knew that Notch not only tried to reason with them, saying he would change Scrolls to add a subtitle to it OR to drop the trademark on Scrolls entirely, and if they knew that Bethesda STILL chose to sue despite the suggestions, they would realize there's a lot more grey area to this argument than EITHER side is willing to admit to.Daystar Clarion said:
Notch initiated the trademark thing with Minecraft first, then decided it would be good to cover his other game while he's at it. He wants to protect his games, and legally, protect his ass. Entirely reasonable, but he went overboard with the coverage. Bethesda wants to protect their series' name as well, but they've proven that they're not afraid Notch is going to sue them for using Scrolls in their game titles, but rather that they think Scrolls will get confused with TES, or that Scrolls will somehow harm their crazy multi-million sales on Skyrim or something.
No, it's all about protecting the trademark the already have. Notch says he's willing to drop the trademark but he still wants to use the name Scrolls. With or without a subtitle, that still violates Bethesda's trademark.Eventidal said:
I'm not good at reading legal documents, but it seems to me Notch is trying to copyright the word "Scrolls" in all digital media, which would mean Bethesda would owe Mojang money.tstek said:
So pull a dick move and act like the victim = Internet support. Gah.
There is no way Mojang's trademarking of the word "scrolls" could cause Bethesda to owe them money. Bethesda already owns a trademark on "The Elder Scrolls" so that is fairly used.Double A said:
And anyway, you can't really sue someone over using something before you trademarked it AND before you came came up with the name. The person who used it first has rights to it (unless it was previously trademarked, but of course in this case that is irrelevant; Bethesda used it and trademarked it before Mojang existed).
An issue I think is overlooked here is that they both currently hold these trademarks, which are said to infringe upon one another, meaning either the US patent and trademark office screwed up (wouldn't be the first time) or that the case will be quickly thrown out as frivolous (you can't sue someone because they used their own trademarked name, as they said they would, AND the patent and trademark office OK'd the use(as a note this result would probably end up with Bethesda paying Mojang's legal fees, as well as some compensation(for an example of this happening, see Universal v. Nintendo, a trademark infringement case where universal sued over donkey kong because they own the rights to king kong (SO MANY PARENTHESES)))).
Actually, I don't Scroll's trademark has gone through completely yet. Right by Owner, it says (APPLICANT). On the Elder Scrolls' one, it says (REGISTRANT). It can take forever to get a trademark, but as long as it's pending, no one else can use it.tstek said:
What all of this is, is Bethesda trying to keep what it owns and Notch either having absolutely no idea about US Trademark laws, a horrible lawyer, or just wanting to get a lot of publicity. Notch's blanket trademark won't even go through because it's just too broad.