Blizzard Sued By Game Guide Creator

Gamespot reports on a suit brought by a game guide creator against Warcraft-maker Blizzard Entertainment. The two parties will be going to court because of an attempt by Blizzard to quash a guide the plaintiff created for the World of Warcraft MMORPG. Offered electronically through eBay, the company claims that the guide creator is infringing on their IP. From the article: "Kopp's complaint argues that his book does not infringe on any of the companies' copyrights for several reasons: The book presents a disclaimer on its first page about its 'unauthorized' nature, contains no copyrighted text or storylines from the game, and makes "fair use" of selected screenshots under copyright law, the complaint said."

Comments

Just play Oblivion

[ShawnMcCool42]

I like WoW fine enough... but it was just a game to keep me interested while I waited for a single player RPG. You know... something with real content and playability.. Something designed around giving the player abilities rather than handicapping them.

I bought Oblivion and it was well worth it. Throw away those MMOs and play something with atmosphere.

Re:More reasons for repudiating copyright and IP

[Anonymous Coward]

There's already an official game guide out there. It was written and published by Bradygames but Blizzard endorses it and sells it on their online store. It's outdated and not very useful at all.

Authors have done this before -- successfully

[Hannah E. Davis]

I've heard of this kind of thing happening before, actually -- a while back, Anne McCaffrey was squelching fan artists left and right, angry that people should even try to make money off illustrating scenes from her novels. The vast majority of authors (and other IP owners) habitually turn a blind eye to this type of copyright infringement, mainly because it benefits them, but the point is that they can put a stop to it if they want, and some of them have in the past.

Re:Protecting the Trademark

[rossifer]

this guy using the World of Warcraft trademark for personal profit (which he clearly did)

But trademark law doesn't prevent you from using another company's trademarks for your profit. It primarily protects against uses that dilute the value of the trademark. So "MS Excel for Dummies" can be published without a license from Microsoft, even though it (1) clearly uses a trademarked phrase and (2) is published for profit. You can even sell your own spreadsheet program and market it as "Better than Excel!(tm)" as long as you don't call it something that could be confused with "Excel" or "MS Excel" or... Basically, all you have to do is acknowledge the trademark and not confuse potential customers with your use of the other company's trademark in your materials.

Which this guy apparently did. Blizzard is way out on a crazy limb here and in my non-expert estimation, will probably not prevail.

Regards,
Ross

Re:The BS of the DMCA

[TommyBlack]

Basically, if you are low on funds, wave the DMCA in front of someone's face and take them to court.

Actually, it's usually the opposite. If your opponent is low on funds, wave the DMCA in front of them and force them to settle out of court. A lot of these cases are adjudicated fairly if they ever actually get to court, but that's not where the main problem is.

MOD PARENT DOWN -- thanks

[Red Flayer]

Blech, I was totally incorrect and wish I'd had the seventh cup of coffee before posting that.

Thanks to everyone who pointed it out!
J

Blizzard is right

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference between all these other publishers and this one guy is that all these publishers do one thing first: that is ask Blizzard's permission. He is publicly using Blizzard's works for profit, and he's in the right to do so as long as he's asked. The disclaimer that he published doesn't mean anything without at the very least asking for permission.

I wonder what would have happened if the guy just followed accepted procedure and simply asked to publish his works? Most of the time, as stated, this stuff benefits the brand that's being advertised, so the company will just say yes. But without asking, getting the profits too benefits blizzard even more. It's people with money looking for more money, which, in our capitalist fair to the consumer economy, is what we all do. This guy just made it easy.

Not to defend blizzard here, but look at every other brand, you can't take them and start selling them as your own under any copyright law without the "used with permission" clause.

Re:WTF is wrong with Blizzard?

[cpt kangarooski]

What appears to have been happening is this:

He puts an item up for auction.

Blizzard issues a notice to Ebay to remove it. (This is similar to, but distinct from, a section 512 takedown notice -- something the plaintiff's attorneys may be confused about, from reading the complaint)

Ebay removes it automatically.

He contests it, which results in Ebay putting it back up after a period of time.

Blizzard issues another notice.

Ebay removes it automatically again.

Cycles of putting it up and having it taken down continue until his ebay account eventually gets suspended.

Even if he was mostly upset about Ebay having this policy that is highly favorable toward rightsholders, ultimately the central issue is whether or not the takedown notices are supported by a right held by Blizzard.

Ebay doesn't make a decision, you see. They don't want to be in that position. They just do what they're told with regard to takedowns, with the proviso that takedowns that are challenged and not responded to will be canceled, and the offending item put back up. (Which is similar to the 512 system)

Blizzard and this guy, Kopp, are the ones in the best position to resolve things. Ebay is stuck in the middle.

The screenshots may be the problem

[Jugalator]

I think it can be generally agreed on that writing about WoW on its own isn't an infrigement; books do this all day, and then also makes it clear who owns the trademark, like this one did, and everyone is happy. But... These guides also had screenshots, which he said would fall under fair use, however, these books are also sold for profit, which means he's profiting in part from Blizzard's material.

For fair use to be most clearly applicable, the content need to not impact the copyright owner, the material isn't sold, and isn't used to profit from it. But these things aren't fulfilled here, which puts him in a grey area, and I can understand why greddy Blizzard lawyers make a fuss of this when they can.