Treblaine said:
Ragsnstitches said:
Treblaine said:
It's not your comparison I hold to a fault... and my comparison was a lazy off the head way to catch your attention. My point was the line where I said:
"Also, don't claim that this isn't relevant, because you know... I said so."
Which is more clearly a jibe at your:
"Do. Not. Lie.
I can tell if you are lying when you say ridiculous and illogical things."
Because of all things... that is just lazy argumentation. It boils down to the playground logic of "because I said so". As I said to sewer rat, I read it as:
"You're objectively wrong based on my own subjective reasoning."
You could have flawless logic, but I ain't biting if your going to play that way. I doubt any opposition with 2 brain cells to rub together would either.
If you want to prove that Bethesda/Zenimax/The Law is in the wrong... show me something that I can read through, and formulate my own opinion. I might not agree with you, but I might respect your opinion because it was pulled out of somewhere, rather then nowhere.
I highly doubt you have the experience or knowledge to follow through with this argument without backing it up with sources. It's all knee jerk responses based on meagre updates of the whole event, usually weighted in notches favour, since he was for the longest while, the only one talking.
I should also point out, that despite all you say for Notch trying to play it nice and make peace with Bethesda... he's done a heck of a lot of PR damage from day 1... and I would put my money on it that it was deliberate.
If you have any comprehensive article that chronicles this whole ordeal*snort*, I will read it from begining to end.
I don't hate notch, but I'm not going to jump on the hate wagon towards bethesda, when from every angle I've looked at it, Notch has let his naivety of business and law bleed through every stage.
Well I have had to deal with people petty enough to simply lie by saying something like that two things completely different are actually the same. I wanted to pre-empt such ridiculous use of anti-logic to dance around the point. I know every round of reply and reply can obfuscate the central UNDENIABLE point that so many refuse to accept that from the outset and from all angles Zenimax's lawsuit is frivolous. I will NOT be lead off on a tangent.
Those two titles are SO DIFFERENT, I cannot see a logical or sensible circumstance in which they could be conflated. It was somewhat of a rhetorical question I suppose, I was trying to emphasise the (supposedly obvious) point that there are no major similarities that warrant a lawsuit. That the very basis of the lawsuit that there could be confusion is unfounded.
Do I really need any Sources on this one?
You have two sources right there, the respective titles of each game that Zenimax lawyers are taking to court as somehow so easy to confuse. What more could possibly be needed? Do you REALLY need a source to prove that the games "Dead Island" and "Dead Rising" actually exist? Really? We all know those games exist.
Notch has not done any PR damage BY TELLING THE BARE TRUTH. Zenimax did that to THEMSELVES. What do you want him to do, withhold information or actively LIE for zenimax so that their unreasonable actions are not exposed to scrutiny? You're shooting the messenger here, Zenimax has fucked up and you are scorning Notch for daring to reveal what they are trying to do!?!?
"If you have any comprehensive article that chronicles this whole ordeal*snort*, I will read it from begining to end. "
What the hell am I supposed to make of that.
I have written and article for you and I don't see what more you could possibly need. The CENTRAL ISSUE is confusion of games, those two titles side by side should say EVERYTHING! You may not have a "fault" with my comparison, but you have completely ignored with with so little consideration.
Is my explanation not good enough for you? Can the argument not stand on its own merits? Will you only accept it if you hear it come from the column of N'gai Croal?
I said I might not accept it even with support. The difference it makes is between me (and others) thinking you have an honest to goodness reason to argue... and are not just raging because your fav little indie dev can't cope in business, so you turn on the big bad corporation because they make you sad.
Right, I'm going to have to look at this piece by piece, just so we can at least a modicum of understanding between us:
Well I have had to deal with people petty enough to simply lie by saying something like that two things completely different are actually the same. I wanted to pre-empt such ridiculous use of anti-logic to dance around the point. I know every round of reply and reply can obfuscate the central UNDENIABLE point that so many refuse to accept that from the outset and from all angles Zenimax's lawsuit is frivolous. I will NOT be lead off on a tangent.
First of all, I deny that it's frivolous (therefore making it deniable, which shoots your argument dead)... why? Because business is serious. There is no petty in business, especially when we're talking millions to billions in respective currencies. Reasonable concern is enough to bring something to court, especially if your concern is your own valuable property being at stake. I'll get to how that relates to this case shortly.
Those two titles are SO DIFFERENT, I cannot see a logical or sensible circumstance in which they could be conflated. It was somewhat of a rhetorical question I suppose, I was trying to emphasise the (supposedly obvious) point that there are no major similarities that warrant a lawsuit. That the very basis of the lawsuit that there could be confusion is unfounded.
We sort of get to my point against yours here. "I cannot see", "It was somewhat... I suppose" "I was trying"... rounded off with something you then state like a fact: "That the very basis of this lawsuit that there could be confusion is unfounded". Right there you lost all form of persuasive weight with me. You seem to hold your own deductive analyses as immaculate and infallible therefore your point must be fact. It's not... Personal perspective (I cannot see) is not a fact, Personal reflection (I suppose) is not a fact and internal rationalisation (I was trying) is not fact. How on earth does that lead to a factual statement? Answer it doesn't... it's a baseless as your other points. It has no weight in this debate.
Do I really need any sources?
Yes. Otherwise your just ranting and counting your own potentially narrow analyses as a fact, which is insulting to anyone else with an opinion. In a debate, never presume something is common knowledge or obvious. You can't be taken seriously from an opposition that way, all you gain is nods and alleluias from like minds... which yields nothing short of boosting your own ego if you get a positive response, but bumming you if someone retorts.
You have two sources right there, the respective titles of each game that Zenimax lawyers are taking to court as somehow so easy to confuse. What more could possibly be needed? Do you REALLY need a source to prove that the games "Dead Island" and "Dead Rising" actually exist? Really? We all know those games exist.
Notch has not done any PR damage BY TELLING THE BARE TRUTH. Zenimax did that to THEMSELVES. What do you want him to do, withhold information or actively LIE for zenimax so that their unreasonable actions are not exposed to scrutiny? You're shooting the messenger here, Zenimax has fucked up and you are scorning Notch for daring to reveal what they are trying to do!?!?
Your sources, which I grant you it is a source, only shows a lack of understanding of the laws that govern trademarks... it doesn't disprove anything, though it does prove how ludicrous the laws can be if this was the only reason the case is going forward (which can happen in the knee jerk system currently in place). The law is still law, ignorance/obliviousness not withstanding as an excuse.
Truth? Truth is based on what? Your opinion? Notch told us 2 bits of truth, 1: Bethesda sent him a cease and desist for trademark infringement, which he didn't take seriously... 2. bethesda challenged him to a court hearing, which he jested that they should be playing Quake 3 Arena instead. Not exactly rising to the challenge... but you know, playing to the crowd (in the show in which he directed and starred himself). All the while he kept preaching how this isn't going to fly, it's petty and it's ludicrous (I see where your coming from here) in a subversive tone that I imagined a violin been played in melancholic manner. Well it did fly, and is still in transit. A month or 2 later, he tells us, after the fact, that he tried to appease bethesda behind the scenes, but they refused... and that's it, only his side of things. What I read from that, was that he was genuinely afraid of shit going down, and tried to remedy it... but failed, so he played his sympathy card again to start another bout of PR damage. So far that's all I see defending him, his word and the words of others that echo his own.
"If you have any comprehensive article that chronicles this whole ordeal*snort*, I will read it from begining to end. "
What the hell am I supposed to make of that.
2 things. That I don't consider this case a big deal and that I would like to see the source of your arguments, the thing that convinces you that Notch is right and Zenimax is wrong.
I have written and article for you and I don't see what more you could possibly need. The CENTRAL ISSUE is confusion of games, those two titles side by side should say EVERYTHING! You may not have a "fault" with my comparison, but you have completely ignored with with so little consideration.
Is my explanation not good enough for you? Can the argument not stand on its own merits? Will you only accept it if you hear it come from the column of N'gai Croal?
Your explanation is fine, but it's entirely subjective, following your own reasoning and echoing all that I have heard already from other people who are only echoing opinions. Show me where this line of though stems... it is NOT enough to just state your point and say that is how it is.
You don't have merits. An unsupported argument is actually just a rant, based on conjecture and self-conviction.
As has been mentioned above, I want to see what makes you defend notches corner... I'm not trying to tell you your wrong, but I'm definitely in the persuasion that thinks Zenimax is right to go ahead with this, regardless of the outcome, and expecting me to take your opinion as gold is foolish. Your own opinion is not an argument all on it's lonesome. Tell me what it is that is influencing your take on events, show me the opinion that resonates with your own. That's all I ask for, that's all I need to see that your not just raging.
From what I gather at this point in time, is that you take Notches word as gospel, simply because he spoke first. You say Zeni is in the wrong, but offer nothing other then your own point of view, which is as far removed from fact as it can get. Same principles apply to anyone who tries to make a point in favour for, or against, a topic.
R? Legit reason to start lawsuit (Notch's Original Trademark APP) -> Withdrawn reason to initiate lawsuit -> Lawsuit continues for legitimate legal precedent reasons
