They're not. Everyone keeps saying that, but it's wrong. Their claim is that Scrolls will be unfairly taking advantage of the Elder Scrolls trademark that they have built up over the last decade or so. While I agree that that's a fairly tenuous claim, it is simply wrong to say that they are trying to own the word.NEDM said:I think it is absurd that they are trying to take sole ownership of a word.
Cute, trite, but seems to be missing the point. Unless, of course, you're just trying to take the piss out of things.Shamanic Rhythm said:In other news, I got sued last night by Bethesda because I used the word 'Rage' in a story title. That's right, apparently they trademarked the term for their ID-developed shooter 'Rage' and because of how broad that application was, they can sue anyone they like.
The only logical thing I've heard about the case so far. I chalk it up as repercussions of Tim Langdell.GameChanger said:I lately read an article which stated that this whole ordeal is not about the fact that the two games may be confused, but that if Mojang gets trough with the copyright of 'Scrolls' they have the legal right to sue Bethesda instead for the fact that 'The Elder Scrolls' contain the word 'Scrolls'.
Don't know about that, they are fighting this out on Mojang's turf Sweden which is ( very ) lenient when it comes to copyright ( Like 'justifying' the pirate bay ) So I actually doubt wether Bethesda should even dare to make a copyright claim in Sweden court 'cause it doesn't end well for them.TrilbyWill said:Apple Corps v Apple Computer.
Apple Corps was using the name first. They won an $80,000 settlement AND Apple Computer weren't allowed into the music distribution business.
If this goes to court, Bethesda's lawyers can pull out this precedent, win the case and possibly put Mojang out of business. Even if Mojang change the name, there's still the possibility of a massive settlement.
^this. Majong is the one being a dick in all this. Rename your game, how hard is that? it's not even like your game has any goddamn thing to do with scrolls in the first place anyway. Name it "Majong Pyramid" that would make sense.GreatTeacherCAW said:Poll this and I will quickly choose Bethesda, despite hating all of their games. Lawfully, and logically, it seems to be the right choice.
I call the games "TES [Number]: subtitle" as well, I think it's more common among gamers who were alive when the earlier ones came out, but I can't be sure.TheKasp said:Just a little fun fact: It is not Bethesda who tried to take the ownership of this word. Mojang tried it and Bethesda fought back because this word is in the title of their franchise. Just so you start thinking:NEDM said:I think it is absurd that they are trying to take sole ownership of a word. If they win, anyone who has written a book, produced a movie or TV show with any of the words the/elder/scrolls, should launch a lawsuit against bethesda and site this lawsuit as reason they should win. Claiming sole ownership over a word is insane, and name one elder scrolls game where you call it elder scrolls 4 or 5. Most people call them Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind, etc. If mojang named their game Skyrim, sure bethesda would have a case.
Besides, are bethesda's lawyers busy trying to stop Fallout online? Do they really have time for another frivolous lawsuit?
Imagine if Dungeons and Dragons could take over total control of those those words, or final fantasy, or any of these series. It's a recipe for madness.
Scrolls trademark is over 300 words long, applies in TV, radio and every form of virtual media.
The Elder Scrolls trademark is limited to some things like T Shirts (The Elder Scrolls in full use) and "fantasy games printed on CD and DVD". I can tattoo this trademark on my little finger.
So yes, it is clearly Bethesda who wanted to take control over 1 word. Please people, start to inform yourself before you blabber bullshit.
Also: I call games from The Elder Scrolls series always with "TES [Number]: subtitle". When I speak about it I always start with the full name.
this seems fairly accurate, but I personally like some of their games, but the Scrolls series isn't one of them (oddly enough though, all my other friends are crazy for it).GreatTeacherCAW said:Poll this and I will quickly choose Bethesda, despite hating all of their games. Lawfully, and logically, it seems to be the right choice.
To clarify, I said people who were born when the early ones come out. In retrospect, it would have been faster to just say what I fricking meant and say people who played any of the TES games before TES IV: Oblivion.TheKasp said:http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fightspartan231490 said:I call the games "TES [Number]: subtitle" as well, I think it's more common among gamers who were alive when the earlier ones came out, but I can't be sure.
And Majong really tried that, fuck they were/are being even bigger dicks than I thought.
There you can find it. Interesting article, together with the recent article on escapist I simply fail to see a clear victim in one of those two. To be honest, it is more likely that they are both victims of the trademark laws.
Also: I am not really old enough to have played the older TES games, I started with the third installment. But I tend to call games the way they are called on the box. And my The Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind box clearly says that the title of this game is not "Morrowind".
I don't believe it's missing the point, no. I fail to see how the breadth of Mojang's 'Scrolls' trademark application is anywhere near out of the ordinary in terms of what people nail down the rights to. People are blowing it out of proportion because it's just a single word and they're inventing ridiculous stories about how they would be able to do what Tim Langdell did with 'Edge' - ignoring the fact that he got his ass handed to him for trying that, and that there have been other single words trademarked for longer without them being removed from our vocabulary or indeed from trademarks (hence there is Apple, and Apple Corps, and only one makes iPhones).Zachary Amaranth said:Cute, trite, but seems to be missing the point. Unless, of course, you're just trying to take the piss out of things.Shamanic Rhythm said:In other news, I got sued last night by Bethesda because I used the word 'Rage' in a story title. That's right, apparently they trademarked the term for their ID-developed shooter 'Rage' and because of how broad that application was, they can sue anyone they like.
Which is nice, except Langdell did cost people money in the process and do damage. Similarly, Spike Lee did the same, suing people who used "Spike." Oddly enough, the fact that he had his "ass handed to him" has little comfort.Shamanic Rhythm said:I don't believe it's missing the point, no. I fail to see how the breadth of Mojang's 'Scrolls' trademark application is anywhere near out of the ordinary in terms of what people nail down the rights to. People are blowing it out of proportion because it's just a single word and they're inventing ridiculous stories about how they would be able to do what Tim Langdell did with 'Edge' - ignoring the fact that he got his ass handed to him for trying that, and that there have been other single words trademarked for longer without them being removed from our vocabulary or indeed from trademarks (hence there is Apple, and Apple Corps, and only one makes iPhones).
You mean stuff which the lawyers have refuted? Yeah, good chance Notch is lying, like he was when he tried the "picking on the little guy" card.Not to mention that Notch offered to change the trademark so that it was "Scrolls: Something Something", which would invalidate any of these ridiculous arguments that he's trying to remove the word Scrolls from the language.
And now you're the one making up stories.But that wasn't good enough for Bethesda, who believe that trademarking the term 'The Elder Scrolls' gives them the right and the legal obligation to go after anyone who uses one of those words in isolation, and they are pursuing the lawsuit, so if he does end up owning the word 'Scrolls', it will be because Bethesda pursued the matter to court.
Seems like most anyone who has actually paid attention thinks both companies are being asshats. Doesn't make Notch any less a liar, though.And people can seriously argue that Notch is the bad guy in all this?
This article is so obviously biased and written by someone who isn't even trying to be objective.Michael Omer said:Russ Pitts wrote an interesting article that really changed my view about the entire thing: http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fight
The US patent office believes they are close enough to merit action due to possible consumer confusion there still isn't any word on what bethesda or zenimax believes on that particular issue beyond "We should do what the government office holding us by the balls says."Nevermore43 said:This article is so obviously biased and written by someone who isn't even trying to be objective.Michael Omer said:Russ Pitts wrote an interesting article that really changed my view about the entire thing: http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fight
And as for the Apple Computer vs Apple Corps thing - the legal precedent is all about the idea that reasonable people could be confused and think that they were the same thing. No one is going to think that a game called "Scrolls" and a series of games called "The Elder Scrolls" are related.
Hell, by the EXACT logic Bethesda is using, no one would ever be able to make a game called "Dragon" because Squeenix owns the rights to "Dragon Quest."
It's little comfort that they upheld the law to the point of revoking his trademark over the word 'Edge'? So the system has shown that if people try and abuse it by trademarking individual words and suing people for their use as components of trademarks, they will be punished, and that's not good enough for you?Zachary Amaranth said:Which is nice, except Langdell did cost people money in the process and do damage. Similarly, Spike Lee did the same, suing people who used "Spike." Oddly enough, the fact that he had his "ass handed to him" has little comfort.
Apple inc. and Apple Corp. Have limited purviews and agreements between them. Which were overstepped, led to lawsuits, and further agreements. Funny, though that that case DID mandate legal action, which is exactly what people are worried about here.
See, it's not so much inventing ridiculous stories. Your own examples included real ones.
Link me.You mean stuff which the lawyers have refuted? Yeah, good chance Notch is lying, like he was when he tried the "picking on the little guy" card.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113531-Bethesda-Doesnt-Enjoy-Being-Forced-into-Mojang-LawsuitAnd now you're the one making up stories.
Again, I'd be interested to see where your proof that he is a liar actually is.Seems like most anyone who has actually paid attention thinks both companies are being asshats. Doesn't make Notch any less a liar, though.
It didn't do it for me. Russ is pretty paranoid about Notch's intentions, when absolutely fucking EVERYTHING I've EVER read from/about Notch points towards him causing this entirely by accident. He should have approached the trademark office with a lawyer.Michael Omer said:Russ Pitts wrote an interesting article that really changed my view about the entire thing: http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fight