Bethesda Doesn't Enjoy Being "Forced" into Mojang Lawsuit

[Krantos]

Notch has made TONS of efforts to compromise and Bethesda hasn't done jack

Notch's "Compromises" have been a Quake match (would be awesome, but lets face it, not feasible), offering to not trademark the title, and adding a subtitle.

The latter two sound feasible, but they don't in any way address Bethesda's concerns. Bethesda is concerned about the game having the title "Scrolls." They don't really care if Notch doesn't trademark it; They don't want him to use it at all. As for adding a a subtitle, since every Elder Scrolls since Arena has had a subtitle, I think that would make it more similar, not less.

So, while I still think Bethesda is stretching the copyright laws past the breaking point, I understand why they don't accept Mojang's "compromises."

 

[JediMB]

Fun Fact: On the official Scrolls website, (scrolls.com), the words "Scrolls is a trademark of Mojang" appear at the bottom. Maybe they didn't drop the trademark application after all?

All I've ever read about it from Notch is that they offered to drop the trademark, and the offer was declined from Bethesda's end.

 

[Spencer Petersen]

I'm not a Notch fanboy, I really really hate minecraft. But Notch did offer to drop his trademark completely and Bethesda are continuing the court case regardless, to force him to drop a trademark he's already dropped...

He didn't offer to drop the trademark, he offered to change it to Scrolls:, which does nothing to alleviate the solution. Loaded headlines made him seem like the innocent party betting beat up on by big bad Bethesda until you read the content.

 

[SnakeCL]

Why yes, I did. doesn't change my thoughts on the matter. It's a waste of everyone's time and money. Simple logic would tell Bethsoft that there's no chance for confusing these two games, therefore, they need to stop being dickpistons over it.

You obviously did not read, since the US patent and trademark office actually said that there WAS enough confusion. So your issue is not with Bethsoft, its with the trademark office. But you seem to be willfully ignorant of that fact just so you can be mad at "The Big Bad Company".

This implies that one needs to be a copyright lawyer to form a valid opinion on something using basic logic any of us have. Way to go, bro!

Whoever said trademark law was logical?

I don't need to be a car designer to tell what is good or bad about a given car design choice. I don't have to be a game designer to tell if a given gameplay mechanic is good or balls. I don't have to be a lawyer to tell if a lawsuit is frivolous or not.

You need to have a decent understanding of form and function for each topic.

"I hate that this car is heavy, its 100lbs heavier than last year!" That 100lbs is safety equipment mandated by federal guidelines and crash tests, that didn't apply to last year.

"This car is too tough to drive in this racing game, clearly this game is not fun!" The game is actually handling like a real-world car, and is a simulation. The developers designed it as a simulation when you prefer an arcade-racing experience.

You don't need to be a car designer, a game designer, or a lawyer. But you need to be sufficiently educated on a topic to understand the more complex issues involved.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Why do you people still not get this. Did you hear what the copyright lawyer said, in the article, that you JUST read?

Why yes, I did. doesn't change my thoughts on the matter. It's a waste of everyone's time and money. Simple logic would tell Bethsoft that there's no chance for confusing these two games, therefore, they need to stop being dickpistons over it.


It's pedantics. That's all it is.

Basically, they have to file these motions just to make sure.

No, they don't. They don't need to file a lawsuit every time something vaguely similar pops up. You don't see Valve throwing a pissfit over pedantics like this.

And let's be honest, I doubt any of you are lawyers, and even if you were, it's not copyright law you study.

This implies that one needs to be a copyright lawyer to form a valid opinion on something using basic logic any of us have. Way to go, bro!


I don't need to be a car designer to tell what is good or bad about a given car design choice. I don't have to be a game designer to tell if a given gameplay mechanic is good or balls. I don't have to be a lawyer to tell if a lawsuit is frivolous or not.

Yes they do, no matter if you think they don't they have to fight this, because if they don't they lose their trademark under US law. There is no pedantics about it. It is a must, and Value does do this we just don't hear about because the other party isn't immature and doesn't feel the need to drag the public into the debate

 

[Sjakie]

The silliest thing about this is that noone actually refers to these games as "The Elder Scrolls."

I sympathise with Bethesda, a little bit, but it's not the title of Mojang's game that needs changed. It's these idiotic laws.

My thoughts exactly.
I dont call Morrowind, 'The Elder Scroll's III'.
This is just lawyer's providing their own job security and making money (and help making games more expensive in their own way)

 

[Nami nom noms]

Bethesda are talking out of their arse, tbh.

I'm insulted by their impression that everyone who buys their game is too stupid to be able to read.

They will lose; IP law will not cover the name scrolls, just because their game is named 'the elder scrolls'. It is the formation and use of the words that is important. The law is not stupid. If Mojang called it 'The something scrolls: something', then they'd have a case.

other examples in the games industry?

Rome: Total War, and Shadow of Rome. Did creative assembly need to sue capcom because their game had rome in the title? and people would confuse the two? no. Did another game with Rome in the title hurt the sales and success of the Total war series? no.

The point about defending their copyright is true. But they have gone for the something that is not a threat here... Bethesda's lawyers really haven't done their job properlly on this one.

 

[RJ Dalton]

So, why hasn't this stopped that one company from producing shitty and obvious knock-offs with titles like "transmorphers" and "mega piranha" which are clearly designed to make customers confuse their products with more popular ones in hopes of getting sales?
I don't buy that anyone is being forced into a lawsuit here.

 

[AdmiralCheez]

Fun Fact: On the official Scrolls website, (scrolls.com), the words "Scrolls is a trademark of Mojang" appear at the bottom. Maybe they didn't drop the trademark application after all?

All I've ever read about it from Notch is that they offered to drop the trademark, and the offer was declined from Bethesda's end.

From what I've been reading, everyone's been using the phrase "trademark application." Does that mean it was approved and Mojang actually has it?

If not, then I find it odd they would claim to have something they don't.

In either case, there's a lot of confusion surrounding this business, so I think I'll stop commenting until I get more information.

 

[SnakeCL]

Bethesda are talking out of their arse, tbh.

I'm insulted by their impression that everyone who buys their game is too stupid to be able to read.

They will lose; IP law will not cover the name scrolls, just because their game is named 'the elder scrolls'. It is the formation and use of the words that is important. The law is not stupid. If Mojang called it 'The something scrolls: something', then they'd have a case.

Uh, the US trademark office even said that the two were close enough to be an issue. Whether you think they aren't or not is not an issue, according to the actual trademark office, they are.

Rome: Total War, and Shadow of Rome. Did creative assembly need to sue capcom because their game had rome in the title? and people would confuse the two? no. Did another game with Rome in the title hurt the sales and success of the Total war series? no.

Do we know that there wasn't any litigation between the two? No, because we don't have someone like Notch trying to sick uninformed fans of his games on the other company. I'd even wager that "Rome" is not a word you can trademark, since, well, its a place.

The point about defending their copyright is true. But they have gone for the something that is not a threat here... Bethesda's lawyers really haven't done their job properlly on this one.

It IS a threat, that's just the issue. The US Trademark office basically said "hey uh, take this to court or you're losing your trademark."

 

[chadachada123]

All of you are thinking about this as hardcore gamers. Oh course, *you* know the difference. Try to view this from the point of an outsider. The point Bethesda makes is correct.

Casual gamers don't even know the "The Elder Scrolls" prefix, everyone says Skryim or Oblivion and not "TES IV Oblivion"

Even the casual people that know that the series is called the Elder Scrolls series know the difference between that and "Scrolls." Elder Scrolls simply are not, in any sense, understood with only the second word.

On top of this, EVERY SINGLE Elder Scrolls game has had a suffix, and every one but the first has had a number describing its entry in the series. It occupies the same space as "Dead" in George A Romero movies, and suing is just as stupid for Bethesda('s lawyers) as it was for Romero to sue the creators of Dead Rising, and would be as stupid as suing the creators of The Walking Dead.

I have a good analogy. It's like suing the creators of "The Club" because it could be confused (not even confused by a moron in a hurry, mind you, so I'm using a REALLY liberal use of the word "could") with "Midnight Club: Los Angeles." No one with any knowledge of video games whatsoever could possibly confuse the two.

 

[artanis_neravar]

All of you are thinking about this as hardcore gamers. Oh course, *you* know the difference. Try to view this from the point of an outsider. The point Bethesda makes is correct.

Casual gamers don't even know the "The Elder Scrolls" prefix, everyone says Skryim or Oblivion and not "TES IV Oblivion"

But before they release the name Skyrim it was called "The next Elder Scrolls game" or "Elder Scrolls V", Just because people call GTA: San Andreas "San Andreas" Doesn't mean that the full title doesn't apply. "Ocarina of Time" is still a Legend of Zelda game, "Modern Warfare 2", "Modern Warfare 3", "World at War", "Black Ops" are all still Call of Duty games.

 

[Kuala BangoDango]

I understand that he wanted to protect his creations, but his trademark application for Scrolls really concerned me, going after everything from radio broadcasts to clothing lines. In the long run, he could have had legal right to sue anyone that tried to use "scrolls" in anything, including the Elder Scrolls.

So if I understand correctly, Mojang is the "bad guy" because, by trademarking the word Scrolls, one day in the future he MIGHT do what the "good guy", Bethesda, is already doing TODAY...IE: trademark a word and sue anyone who uses it?

Also, if Mojang COULD trademark Scrolls, isn't there some sort of law that would prevent Mojang's from ever suing Bethesda's use of Elder Scrolls due to the Elder Scroll's brand pre-existing Mojang's trademark?

My opinion is that Bethesda's lawyers are just being sue-happy. If they really WERE just protecting their trademark then what about:

Warcraft vs. Minecraft?
Grand Theft Auto vs. Auto Assault?
God of War vs. Gears of War?
Lords of the Realms vs. Lord of the Rings?
etc., etc., etc.?

Obviously the above examples show that lawyers have SOME leeway to think for themselves instead of resorting to lawsuits at any use of one word of their game.

 

[Mustang678]

I'm on Bethesda's side.

 

[harvz]

Am I the only one who never hears it referred to as elder scrolls, much less scrolls?
the first time I heard the name Skyrim, I asked what Skyrim was, I was told "The sequel to Oblivion".

 

[JediMB]

Fun Fact: On the official Scrolls website, (scrolls.com), the words "Scrolls is a trademark of Mojang" appear at the bottom. Maybe they didn't drop the trademark application after all?

All I've ever read about it from Notch is that they offered to drop the trademark, and the offer was declined from Bethesda's end.

From what I've been reading, everyone's been using the phrase "trademark application." Does that mean it was approved and Mojang actually has it?

If not, then I find it odd they would claim to have something they don't.

In either case, there's a lot of confusion surrounding this business, so I think I'll stop commenting until I get more information.

Yeah, at this point I'm just going to wait and see how the case works out.

Either way, the part of me that wants to shift blame onto someone or something now has the US Patent and Trademark Office, so I can go back to being excited about both parties' upcoming games.

 

[Aerius]

The copyright office decides whether there will be confusion between two names - not Bethesda's lawyers. And if the office holds that there could be confusion, then Bethesda has to defend their copyright or forfeit it.

If Gears of War and God of War coexist, or Rome: Total War and Shadow of Rome, it's because either a) the copyright office held that there would be no likely confusion between the titles, or b) one party or the other paid some sum of money for the use of the copyright of the other party.

It's also worth noting that it's not just because the word "Scrolls" is in "The Elder Scrolls". While it might not be central to how gamers refer to the titles, it's central to the phrase; in contrast, the word "war" is common enough in games that Gears of War is more commonly identified with the word "Gears" as opposed to the word "War", thus the lack of a trademark conflict.