Slashdot Mirror


Bethesda Tells Minecraft Creator: Cease and Desist

dotarray writes with news that Notch, creator of Minecraft, has received a letter from Zenimax, parent company of Bethesda, demanding that he rename his company's new game, which is called Scrolls. They claim it bears too strong a resemblance to The Elder Scrolls. Notch said: "First of all, I love Bethesda. I assume this nonsense is partly just their lawyers being lawyers, and a result of trademark law being the way it is. ... I agree that the word 'Scrolls' is part of that trademark, but as a gamer, I have never ever considered that series of (very good) role playing games to be about scrolls in any way, nor was that ever the focal point of neither their marketing nor the public image. The implication that you could own the right to all individual words within a trademark is also a bit scary. We looked things up and realized they didn’t have much of a case, but we still took it seriously. Nothing about Scrolls is meant to in any way derive from or allude to their games."

200 comments

  1. Can't you not by CSFFlame · · Score: 1

    normally copyright single common words?

    1. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Irrelevant, since this is in regard to a trademark, not a copyright.

    2. Re:Can't you not by nedlohs · · Score: 2

      They aren't claiming copyright, so that's irrelevant.

    3. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel certainly went after anyone using "inside" as a second word. And apple likes reminding people not to start a name with a lowecase i.

    4. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      normally copyright single common words?

      How many scrolls do you carry around?

    5. Re:Can't you not by Derekloffin · · Score: 2

      Indeed you can't. However, this is a trademark dispute, different rules (although I still think it is the height of stupid as they don't own the trademark on 'Scrolls').

    6. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Copyright the expression "First Post"
      2. Sue half of Slashdot
      3. ??? - There is no ???
      4. Profit!!!

    7. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Apple can suck my iPenis.

    8. Re:Can't you not by nschubach · · Score: 5, Funny

      Anywhere between 5 and 10... I usually get 5 that are marked with the number 20 on a regular basis. I trade these scrolls with other people for goods and services and they usually hand me back scrolls with the numbers 1, 5, 10 or different combinations thereof in change. ;)

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    9. Re:Can't you not by chill · · Score: 1

      Let me guess...

      There's an app for that.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    10. Re:Can't you not by kj_kabaje · · Score: 1

      I believe the underwear gnomes will sue you first.

    11. Re:Can't you not by someSnarkyBastard · · Score: 1

      Any guesses as to what its price point would be in the App Store?

    12. Re:Can't you not by devphaeton · · Score: 1

      Pull up some youporn on your iPhone and iPenis gratification becomes free-99 at the local Fapp Store.

      --


      do() || do_not(); // try();
    13. Re:Can't you not by Gripp · · Score: 1

      go ahead and trademark " '???' for use on internet based forums and SMS/IM messages" while you're at it. you should be able to cover a good percentage of the worlds population in law suits at that point.

    14. Re:Can't you not by Mastacheata87 · · Score: 2

      Isn't scrolls a quite common word making it untrademarkeable?
      Especially when it comes to role playing games, most of them use the word in the normal gameplay.
      That would make it pretty nonsensical to grant a trademark on that word for using it as the product's name.

      This is not even taking into account that they don't use their trademark enough for it being confused with the Mojang game.
      The official name of their Elder Scrolls series contains the word, but they are most commonly known and marketed by their subtitle.
      Even the link between a game with scrolls in it's name and the Elder Scrolls series is only in my mind for this stupid action, I wouldn't have made any connection otherwise.

    15. Re:Can't you not by loufoque · · Score: 1

      I'd say Apple is more common than Scrolls, yet you know you can't use it.

    16. Re:Can't you not by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      An yet several companies have the word apple in them...

    17. Re:Can't you not by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      more like Mojang actually registered it. But I would say use as a story element and game title were two very different things.

    18. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say Apple is more common than Scrolls, yet you know you can't use it.

      And the funny thing is that didn't stop Steve and Steve from using it for their computer company.

    19. Re:Can't you not by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      Only if you want to sale computers, software or digital media under that name. Say I want to create a company called Apple that sales toasters.

    20. Re:Can't you not by eqisow · · Score: 1

      But not computer companies. Trademark only applies for people in the same business, like making games.

    21. Re:Can't you not by milkmage · · Score: 1

      copyright? no.
      trademark? yes - for example - windows

    22. Re:Can't you not by Gorobei · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yep, and it's pretty settled: Microsoft lost in the USA when claiming "Microsoft Windows" somehow gave them the exclusive right to the common word "Windows." And don't even get me started about that "edge" crap.

      If you write a game about X (e.g. scrolls,) there is basically no way in the USA you can be prevented from using X in your product's name. It is descriptive, and can not be the exclusive property of someone else.

    23. Re:Can't you not by DMiax · · Score: 1

      up to 99 of each type, maximum one type per letter of the alphabet, obviously!

      But seriously, identify and recall are the must-have and 10-20 is really a minimum until you get something to replace them.

    24. Re:Can't you not by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Firstly, this isn't copyright; it's a trademark. They're two entirely different things.

      Secondly, you can't trademark common words in the industry in which they're common usage. For instance, "Apple" as the name of a greengrocer probably wouldn't fly, but "Apple" as the name of a computer company, or a music label obviously does. Also, trademarks only apply to things within the same domain - which is why Apple music and Apple computers could co-exist, until Apple started making inroads into the music industry.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    25. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The actual trademark is "Microsoft Windows" not "Windows"

    26. Re:Can't you not by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You can trademark them. This is not the same as copyright.

    27. Re:Can't you not by shentino · · Score: 1

      Not really.

      The moment you start pissing off the elite with such tricks, you'll find that any legal support you may have will mysteriously evaporate.

    28. Re:Can't you not by Opportunist · · Score: 1
      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    29. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The word is "sell".

    30. Re:Can't you not by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      No, but you can trademark them, when used in combination with a certain technology or application. Hence, I cannot name a CPU "Pentium", I cannot call my chocolate "Kinder Chocolate" (German for "Children Chocolate", a brand name, believe it or not, they trademarkt "children". It's not possible anymore in Germany to trademark common words, but Ferrero managed to slip through. They actually lost the case when trying to take over "kinder.de", owned by an online family portal, creating one of the most interesting cases where prior use of a domain "on topic" trumped a trademark), and I guess calling my webpage "Slashdot" would not only cause me to get a lot of hate mail but also one from CmdrTaco telling me in kind, or not so kind, words to C&D, despite this page owing its name to the usual way people describe URIs. Do I have to pay royalties whenever I tell a friend verbally how to reach a certain URI?

      Anyway.

      You can trademark words. Depending on the country you're in, you might first have to make one up, though.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    31. Re:Can't you not by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Exactly! this is like Apple suing for someone who used the word 'case" because they sell a case for the iPod. Nobody calls it "Elder scrolls" and even in their own marketing it has been Oblivion, Morrowind, etc.

      While I hope the guy tells them where to jump sadly in this country justice is for the rich and they could crush the poor bastard like a bug by tying his ass up in court for a decade so he'll probably have to cave.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    32. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and other countries."

      http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/IntellectualProperty/Trademarks/Usage/Windows.aspx

    33. Re:Can't you not by Jonner · · Score: 1

      normally copyright single common words?

      You can't even copyright phrases. You can, however, secure a trademark on unique phrases and words. If it were possible to get a trademark on a single, common word, Microsoft would stop anyone else from using "word" in their names.

    34. Re:Can't you not by rjch · · Score: 1

      An yet several companies have the word apple in them...

      You don't need to even have the word "apple" in your business name to have Apple come after you. Woolworths in Australia changed their logo to one that resembles apple peel, and Apple went after them.

    35. Re:Can't you not by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      I have played alot of RPG games and the word scrolls is not common at all. And that word is not normal except for history class middle ages.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    36. Re:Can't you not by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      I love how that whole page is set up so that they don't lose their trademark as it falls into common usage.

    37. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the world is "sails," you presumptuous nincompoop.

    38. Re:Can't you not by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 1

      I haven't played a lot of RPGs, but all RPGs that had magic in them (specially roguelikes) had different magic scrolls you could read for one time effects. Like wands in NetHack, if I'm not mistaken.

      Magic Scrolls, therefore scrolls, are common in RPG games.

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    39. Re:Can't you not by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has trademarked Windows on its own. http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/IntellectualProperty/Trademarks/EN-US.aspx

      An their right to the term will only be in the areas they've trademarked it. So if they haven't trademarked it in everything then you could use Windows in the name of your toilet paper. In fact there are other trademarks for Windows as I recall and at the moments there are two trademarks for Scrolls and two for Scroll. This hasn't stopped the numerous other trademarks with those words within their trademark.

      If you have a trademark you're expected to defend it or risk losing it so Bethseda have to put up some sort of fight over this even if Notch ends up with it.

    40. Re:Can't you not by ZeRu · · Score: 1

      Still doesn't beat the case when Intel sued some guy who had the word "inside" in his website's address, despite the website having nothing to do with CPUs or even computers (I'm too lazy to Google more details).

      --
      If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
    41. Re:Can't you not by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      What makes Apple come after you is less interesting than what they _can_ get after you for, i.e what the law says. Apple Inc might be a so generic name that they would actually loose their trademark if they did go to court, note how all their trademark cases have been settled out of court. Microsoft was about to loose their trademark of Windows when they sued Lindows, another famous settlement. And here in Sweden Microsoft lost a trademark case against "Excel Data".

    42. Re:Can't you not by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Except that it isn't common usage.

      Do you install a Windows onto your computer when you install the Linux OS?

      Windows as it pertains to a software program is not common usage.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    43. Re:Can't you not by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      1 game doesnt make it a common event,ive never had a player who had to read from a scroll to play a spell. In any event its all a waste of money to make the rich richer "Lawyers" are the only one who win.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    44. Re:Can't you not by _KiTA_ · · Score: 1

      Exactly! this is like Apple suing for someone who used the word 'case" because they sell a case for the iPod. Nobody calls it "Elder scrolls" and even in their own marketing it has been Oblivion, Morrowind, etc.

      While I hope the guy tells them where to jump sadly in this country justice is for the rich and they could crush the poor bastard like a bug by tying his ass up in court for a decade so he'll probably have to cave.

      More like Apple suing someone for using the word Apple, or the word Pod. Say what you will, someone selling an "Apple PC" or a "ePod Music Player" would probably be looked at with a raised eyebrow in the US.

    45. Re:Can't you not by _KiTA_ · · Score: 1

      Except that it isn't common usage.

      Do you install a Windows onto your computer when you install the Linux OS?

      Windows as it pertains to a software program is not common usage.

      If I ask my parents, my coworkers, and even some of the people at my school? Yes, they are interested in hearing about this "Windows Linux" that I keep talking about.

      Just like how a lot of my friends are interested in trying out "Windows Chrome" cause it might be better than "Windows Explorer".

    46. Re:Can't you not by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Adobe does the same - they have a page on their website telling you the correct usage of the word Photoshop. Including gems similar to:

      Wrong: I am going to Photoshop this picture.
      Right: I am going to use the popular Photoshop® image editor to edit this picture

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    47. Re:Can't you not by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      loose their trademark

      Didn't Apple already loose their trademark upon the world when they opened their doors? They could quite possibly lose their trademark for failing to defend it, but loosing, it is entire too late for that.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    48. Re:Can't you not by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Name some games that don't include scrolls.

      Diablo used them for Identify and Town.
      Any D&D based one should have scrolls for one time use spells as certain character classes that don't use spellbooks can use onetime use scrolls to cast spells.

      Scrolls are rather common in RPG games, even if you don't know of any.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    49. Re:Can't you not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or Windows.

  2. Billable hours by Cruciform · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If this is how Zenimax's legal representation justifies their retainers they should be fired.

    1. Re:Billable hours by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      Why would you say that? ZeniMax has to defend their trademarks. Obviously, they would never take actual legal action against Notch for this, but they have to send a cease and desist in order to protect themselves during potential future litigation against companies that DO infringe upon their trademarks in a way that COULD harm ZeniMax. Why this is newsworthy beats me.

    2. Re:Billable hours by nickb64 · · Score: 1

      It's been a slow news week, really. That's why this is newsworthy. Plus, who doesn't love a little Minecraft, and therefore, Notch.

    3. Re:Billable hours by snowgirl · · Score: 2

      Why would you say that? ZeniMax has to defend their trademarks. Obviously, they would never take actual legal action against Notch for this, but they have to send a cease and desist in order to protect themselves during potential future litigation against companies that DO infringe upon their trademarks in a way that COULD harm ZeniMax. Why this is newsworthy beats me.

      There, fixed that for you.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    4. Re:Billable hours by Fritzed · · Score: 1

      "Obviously, they would never take actual legal action against Notch for this"

      From Notch's Blog:
      "Today, I got a 15 page letter from some Swedish lawyer firm, saying they demand us to stop using the name Scrolls, that they will sue us (and have already paid the fee to the Swedish court), and that they demand a pile of money up front before the legal process has even started."

      Directly threatening to sue and demanding a 'pile of money' sure sounds like actual legal action to me.

      --
      Spooooon!!!!!
    5. Re:Billable hours by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      Why would you say that? ZeniMax have to defend their trademarks. Obviously, they would never take actual legal action against Notch for this, but they have to send a cease and desist in order to protect themselves during potential future litigation against companies that DO infringe upon their trademarks in a way that COULD harm ZeniMax. Why this is newsworthy beats me.

      There, fixed that for you.

      If you're gonna be an egotistical jackass posting simply to correct my grammar, perhaps you should actually correct it. Way to fail.

    6. Re:Billable hours by Tacvek · · Score: 2

      But you don't need to do that. You do need to actively protect your trademarks. However you only need to take actual action if likely confusion would result.

      Since Notch's game is very unlikely to cause confusion, a cease and desist is not only not warranted, but might even open up Bethesda to potential liability for one of several torts. (I've never heard of anybody successfully suing for an overzealous C&D letter, but that does not make it impossible.)

      What may been prudent is to send a letter reminding Notch that they own a trademark on "The Elder Scrolls", and that care should be taken in ensuring that the logo, gameplay, etc are sufficiently distinct to avoid any possible consumer confusion. The letter properly written would make it clear that they have no objection to the name as long as the rest of the game is sufficiently distinct.

      That is all they need to do. Unfortunately most lawyers are not trained in writing such non-threatening letters, and they are very afraid of trying, since the wrong wording could be construed as a grant of rights to use the Trademark, which could result in being fired by their client, and possible a malpractice suit being filed against them.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    7. Re:Billable hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone that attempts to correct your grammar isn't necessarily an "egotistical jackass." They could have any number of reasons for doing so.

    8. Re:Billable hours by ewanm89 · · Score: 2

      shame one can't claim it as racketeering without physical violence being involved.

    9. Re:Billable hours by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      They don't have a trademark on a common dictionary word. They have trademark on the phrase, the appearance, and it's branding.
      If you own Rock and Roll Racing you're not defending your trademark if you C&D the NASCAR Racing dev team. You're just being dicks.

    10. Re:Billable hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In case anyone's paying attention, this is a grammatical difference between the UK and the US. In the US, companies are referred to (and indeed, treated under the law) as a singular entity. Therefore, "ZeniMax has..." is correct. In the UK and other countries that have their own interpretation of English, companies are referred to in the plural sense, so "ZeniMax have..." is correct for them.

      The more you know.

    11. Re:Billable hours by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Why would you say that? ZeniMax have to defend their trademarks. Obviously, they would never take actual legal action against Notch for this, but they have to send a cease and desist in order to protect themselves during potential future litigation against companies that DO infringe upon their trademarks in a way that COULD harm ZeniMax. Why this is newsworthy beats me.

      There, fixed that for you.

      If you're gonna be an egotistical jackass posting simply to correct my grammar, perhaps you should actually correct it. Way to fail.

      I wasn't correcting grammar at all, and never intended to do so... I was adding appropriate emphasis to make it absolutely positively crystal clear and without doubt that they really didn't have any good choice in the matter to let the issue slide.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    12. Re:Billable hours by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      Indeed, if the games are not causing confusion there is no place for a trademark infringement case.

      Example, let's said I make a racer game called Mario Ferrari. Like so Nintendo has a good case that I'm trying to make it seem like a version of Mario Kart. Even Ferrari, the car company, belonging to a completely different industry, has a case that I'm trying to make it seem as if they endorsed the car models in the game.

      BUT, if there was a very popular F-1 pilot named Mario Ferrari, and the game has licensed his image from his agents, then suddenly neither Nintendo nor Ferrari have a case since since few people would be confused about the trademark.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    13. Re:Billable hours by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely correct about the first part, but your analogy doesn't apply. There's a difference between suing for the use of "Scrolls" and suing for the use of "Racing". "Racing" would be a general term that simply describes the game and nearly every racing game has "Racing" in the title so it couldn't be recognized to be trademarked by anybody. "Scrolls" is an important part of the game's title and in order for ZeniMax to ensure that they'll be able to defend their trademarks in the future against those who actually are infringing upon them in some drastic way, they have to actively defend their trademarks at all times. Call it a flawed legal system, but that's just the way it is.

    14. Re:Billable hours by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      I understand this is a tech site, but there are plenty of events that occurred this week worthy of an article and discussion. Slashdot doesn't even post exclusively tech news anymore, so I see no reason not to post events like the 500 point drop in the DOW.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    15. Re:Billable hours by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      Scrolls are a common way for documents to be presented and tales to be told in fantasy games.
      They narrow their usage of the term with "Elder Scrolls".
      Using Scrolls in the generic doesn't dilute and I'll bet you a donut this won't stand up to judicial scrutiny. I understand that they have to consistently protect trademarks from infringement to keep the trademark, but this is just bullying.

    16. Re:Billable hours by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      Using Scrolls in the generic doesn't dilute and I'll bet you a donut this won't stand up to judicial scrutiny.

      Of course it wouldn't. ZeniMax wouldn't in their right mind sue over this. All they did was send a C&D to cover their ass. This will become newsworthy when this becomes a lawsuit. Until then, it's just stupid sensationalism and blaming the company and making them out to be heartless bullies when all they want is to not be fucked by the stupid judicial system.

    17. Re:Billable hours by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      You mean like that news post about a google automatic car that crashed when a human manually drove it? Yep, that was much more interesting...

    18. Re:Billable hours by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      Technically, that is tech news, since a car that drives itself must be driven by some artificial intelligence and it crashed whether or not a human drove it. I am just mentioning that /. tends to post news that is not tech news quite frequently and it undermines their agenda from time to time. Why not discuss the stock market if you discuss things like lawsuits.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    19. Re:Billable hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh, so the English get to have their "own interpretation" of the English language? How charitable of you!

    20. Re:Billable hours by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      I understand that legally speaking, companies need to defend their trademarks. However, I'm not certain where this notion that sending a C&D letter without following it up counts as defending a trademark comes from, and I have seen it at least two times in this thread alone.

      If somebody is in court challenging a trademark because it wasn't defended, do you think the judge is going to respond favorably to "But we sent a C&D, we just never had any intention of making him cease or desist!?" Or "you're violating our trademark, stop immediately!" "No we're not." "Oh okay, glad we cleared that up?" I don't see it.

      There is definitely a legal requirement to defend one's trademarks, but I strongly doubt that blindly firing C&Ds all over the place that you have no intention whatsoever of following up on counts. Can somebody point to some case law proving me wrong, or is this just some invention of Slashdot with no basis in reality?

    21. Re:Billable hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you say that? ZeniMax have to defend their trademarks. Obviously, they would never take actual legal action against Notch for this, but they have to send a cease and desist in order to protect themselves during potential future litigation against companies that DO infringe upon their trademarks in a way that COULD harm ZeniMax. Why this is newsworthy beats me.

      There, fixed that for you.

      If you're gonna be an egotistical jackass posting simply to correct my grammar, perhaps you should actually correct it. Way to fail.

      I wasn't correcting grammar at all, and never intended to do so... I was adding appropriate emphasis to make it absolutely positively crystal clear and without doubt that they really didn't have any good choice in the matter to let the issue slide.

      Wasn't much of a "fix" then, was it?

    22. Re:Billable hours by JockTroll · · Score: 1

      But you can send them a letter reading: "Sweden ain't so far from Norway. Beware."

      --
      Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
    23. Re:Billable hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me get this straight,

      You're criticizing an expression of someone's who's criticizing someone who's apparently falsely criticizing the symantics of someone who pettily corrected a comment completely to the point of the subject?

    24. Re:Billable hours by sepelester · · Score: 1

      That's not really to the point.

      "Scrolls" is a just as arbitrary a word as "Arena", which very relevantly was the first of the Elder Scrolls games.

    25. Re:Billable hours by LingNoi · · Score: 2

      If you don't like it then setup your tags properly. Complaining here to people that are interested in the news is wasting your own time.

    26. Re:Billable hours by Antisyzygy · · Score: 0

      Eat shit. You didn't even read my post or your English is so bad you can't comprehend it. Otherwise, you would have had something to say that made sense. I dont give a flying fuck what you think anyway so don't even bother to respond.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    27. Re:Billable hours by LingNoi · · Score: 0

      all i'm hearing is derp derp derp derp.

    28. Re:Billable hours by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Wasn't much of a "fix" then, was it?

      The phrasing came from the meme, not the actual applicability of the semantics to the situation.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    29. Re:Billable hours by Trilkin · · Score: 1

      I'll give you two credit - you're not insulting each other as ACs.

      --
      Nobody cares what the CAPTCHA for your post was.
    30. Re:Billable hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI "has" is US English, "have" is UK.

      (I have no idea what the GP was trying to do)

  3. hmmm by Troke · · Score: 1

    " The implication that you could own the right to all individual words within a trademark is also a bit scary." I believe Apple owns every individual word in the trademark of their name.

    1. Re:hmmm by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Apple", "Computer", and "Inc."?

      If we were to ask a magic eight-ball about this, it would probably suggest something along the lines of "My sources say no."

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " The implication that you could own the right to all individual words within a trademark is also a bit scary."

      I believe Apple owns every individual word in the trademark of their name.

      Then you're wrong , and probably didn't even stop to think about what you were saying. Apple have a trademark over the use of the word Apple in certain contexts but if you want to sell delicious apple pies then they'd better have something more than some retarded idea that they 'own' the word apple if they want to sue you. It took about a second of Googling to come up with a game called Bad Apple which I very much doubt is licensed by them. They don't 'own' the word and they don't claim to.

    3. Re:hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's extra funny seeing as how they had a big scuffle with Apple records, hence it taking forever to get The Beatles on itunes.

    4. Re:hmmm by cwrinn · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure the Beatles own the trademark for "Apple", and that this has actually been a legal case in the past WITH Apple Computers. Ironically, the agreement was that Apple Computers could never use their "Apple" in association with music... iTunes = whoops?

      --
      Here's a cookie... *psst* it's MAGIC
    5. Re:hmmm by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Ironically, the agreement was that Apple Computers could never use their "Apple" in association with music... iTunes = whoops?
      Reply to This Parent

      Afaict it went something like

      Apple records sued apple computer in a dubious (the two companies at the time were in totally different markets) trademark lawsuit
      Apple computer settled with an agreement that they would keep out of the music buisness (which I guess made sense at the time)
      Apple computer launched itunes
      Apple records sued apple computer againclaiming that running itunes was a violation of their previous agreement
      Apple computer settled by buying all rights to the apple trademark from apple records and then licensing them back to apple records. In the process apple computer renamed themselves to Apple inc. Soon after this settlement the beatles music was finally posted on itunes.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:hmmm by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      They officially dropped the "Computer" from the name a few years ago. That said, I think they're suing an assortment of Android handset makers for their illicit use of the word "Inc.". Their case looks pretty strong, I have to say. I think they added the word "innovation" to the suit, so you know they're serious.

    7. Re:hmmm by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Which is why Minecraft creator is screwed.

      That was two completely different areas, one in computers and one in music, and there was still a trademark battle. Now we have video game Scrolls fighting video game The Elder Scrolls.

      I think Bethesda has a case here. If I came out with a game called "Grand Theft" I guarantee you Rockstar would be all over me and I would lose. If Microsoft can own the word "Windows" on anything computer related then Bethesda can own Scrolls for anything video game related

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    8. Re:hmmm by AnttiV · · Score: 1

      If that will become the reality, I will greatly regret the day I was born to this world... By your logic, no-one, ever, would be able to market any software that has the name "Windows" on it... Search any freeware/shareware website and you'll find hundreds, if not thousands, of titles that have "Windows" as part of their name (not counting the "for Windows" titles even). I HIGHLY doubt Bethesda has a case, I very much doubt they have trademarked "Scrolls", which would logically be required to even think of a case here. Logic has a infamous capability to be absent in legal battles, however. Think about game titles, if by trademarking the Title you automatically are granted a trademark on any individual words in the title, this world will collapse overnight. "Dragon Age" "Age of Conan" "Age of Mythology"; "Might & Magic Heroes" "Company of Heroes" "Heroes over Europe".. etc, etc. There's a point there, by the way. HOMM's real legal name is infact "Might & Magic® Heroes®", which means both parts of the title have been registered and STILL they don't have a case with any other game with "Heroes" on the title.

    9. Re:hmmm by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      You might regret being born into this world because of silly trademark law? talk about hyperbole......

      --
      Good-bye
    10. Re:hmmm by sepelester · · Score: 1

      "The Last Ninja" happens to be a classic series of games for the Commodore 64 that never stopped people from naming another game "Ninja". That System 3 would 'own' the word "Ninja" in the gaming world is patently absurd. Pun definitely intended.

  4. lawyer trying... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 0

    more likely their lawyer(s) trying to justify their employment.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  5. Shit will hit the fan by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 3, Interesting

    once they act on the word "Arena" in relation to Zenimax-owned products Elder Scrolls: Arena and Quake III Arena...

    1. Re:Shit will hit the fan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it won't, Zenimax owns iD now.

    2. Re:Shit will hit the fan by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Excellent. I'd love to see a company sue itself. I was waiting for SCO to do it, but it appears they never got around to it (despite SCO blatantly violating the SCO copyrights). I have seen a territorial authority do it though.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    3. Re:Shit will hit the fan by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 1

      Um yeah, nevermind the other "Arena" games that exist.

      Robot Arena, Penguins Arena, Rayman Arena, Swarm Arena, OpenArena, probably a few others

      Yeah, totally no danger. -_-

  6. As a non-gamer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... who has heard of 'The Elder Scrolls', seeing the game title 'Scrolls' did NOT make me think of the 'Elder Scrolls'.

    Is this one of those scenarios where you'll only connect the 2 if you are a hardcore gamer? Isn't that kind of a requirement if it infringes? Must be obviously universally recognizable?

    /$.02

    1. Re:As a non-gamer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally I did think of the elder scrolls, but I'm a major fan of morrowind, so that was expected.

    2. Re:As a non-gamer ... by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      There's little connection.

      Maybe if The Elder Scrolls series was colloquially known as "Scrolls" they might have a point. But it's always "Elder Scrolls" or "TES" and more often than not people name a specific game in the series (ie: Oblivion, Morrowind, Skyrim, etc)

      This is just a case of lawyers doing their damnedest to protect their trademark by attacking everything in a 50 foot radius... and they end up making the whole company look like asses instead.

    3. Re:As a non-gamer ... by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      TES to the community and specific names for which one it is everywhere else. Other than the original, The Elder Scrolls: Arena.

  7. Copyright != trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a trademark issue, not a copyright issue.

    Despite all falling under the banner "intellectual property", Trademarks, Copyright, Patents, Designs Rights etc are all completely different types of monopoly and shouldn't be conflated (which is why "intellectual property" is, quite frankly, a useless term).

  8. If this works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Coca Cola should send a letter to Pepsi Cola.

    1. Re:If this works... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and Wal Mart should eat K Mart and Stein Mart for lunch.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  9. Slippery slope by Uhyve · · Score: 1

    Interesting, I guess Valusoft should be suing Bethesda regarding Prey 2, since apparently in 2001, they released a game called "Primal Prey". ... I really had to search for that one.

    1. Re:Slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, certainly Elder Scrolls II and Prey 2 impedes on the trademark of either Super Mario Brothers 2 or Final Fantasy II. If Daggerfall is not ripping off Cloak and Dagger, then maybe Scrolls should just be renamed to Scrolls Scrollsw00t. Winterscrolls....

    2. Re:Slippery slope by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Speaking of Prey 2, im not sure why iuts called that. There are no Indians, no portals, no aliens from the first game.

      --
      Good-bye
  10. That's it by DemonGenius · · Score: 1

    I'm copyrighting the work 'the'. I suspect by the end of the year, I'll have successfully owned 95% of the planet.

    1. Re:That's it by DemonGenius · · Score: 1

      work --> word

      Yes, I know, I've got work on the brain

    2. Re:That's it by icannotthinkofaname · · Score: 1

      That's silly. You should follow Bethesda's example and trademark the word, instead.

      --
      Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
    3. Re:That's it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well... 95% of the english speaking parts, where trademark law is respected.

      Granted, that's a very large portion of the U.S., Canada, England and Australia, and indeed the world. But don't get your hopes up about the rest.

  11. This was important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bethesda just made my list of evil companies. Right up there with Oracle, Microsoft and Electronic Arts. I guess I'll just have to seed some scrolls to keep the karmic balance.

    1. Re:This was important by slaker · · Score: 1

      You have a list of evil software companies that doesn't include Adobe or Symantec?

      --
      -- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
    2. Re:This was important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think if you made a list of non-evil companies, the list would be more maintainable.

    3. Re:This was important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Apple? Come on, that company has more free cash than Dr. Evil. If they wanted to, they could buy Greenland.

    4. Re:This was important by Gripp · · Score: 1

      exactly. i can't get why companies don't realize what these types of actions do for their sales. i'll *probably* still buy the game... but considering that it was previously a "definitely" i think they should take heed and get the lawyers under a rope or two. 'cause i'm sure we're not the only ones who let things like this effect our purchasing decisions.

    5. Re:This was important by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      Bethesda softworks, the publisher, Bethesda games studios, the development studios, zenimax media the holding company, oh zenimax also own ID (game studio responsible for Quake and Doom series).

    6. Re:This was important by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And you'd probably only have to subtract, rarely to add.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:This was important by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I don't think anybody on that list ever had somebody that pissed them off arrested and imprisoned without cause to the extent that the Judges that threw the cases out ranted about how the case should never have happened. That prize goes to Adobe and Cisco.
      Of course even that is very low on the scale of true corporate evil.

    8. Re:This was important by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Bear in mind, it's probably not Bethesda but their scumbag parent company ZeniMax. The same ZeniMax that DMCA'd Mozilla because Mozilla had Javascript Doom on their webpage (and they just had the Shareware WAD files! It's not like they were distributing anything you couldn't get from pretty much anywhere).

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  12. Hmmm by boxxertrumps · · Score: 1

    My first thought when people mention scrolls is Prince of Persia. Don't know why.

  13. I can't imagine this will be upheld... by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

    Seriously, you can't even use PART of a trademark now? "The Elder Scrolls" is quite different from "Scrolls."

    That would be like saying you can't call a game "Blade" or "Mount" because of "Mount & Blade," or have a game called "Magic" because of "Might & Magic" ... or ...

    Maybe this is just because they have to be proactive about keeping their trademark or something. I don't know. Stupid. :)

    1. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Think I'm going to make a game and call it "The Nasty Wand Potions", and then wizards will be totally screwed since they won't be able to use scrolls, wands OR potions. Where is your god now?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by geekoid · · Score: 2

      Ask the Cleric.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by petermgreen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe this is just because they have to be proactive about keeping their trademark or something. I don't know. Stupid. :)

      The problem is that afaict there is no penalty for overreaching when enforcing your trademark but there is a VERY significant penalty (loss of enforcability of the trademark) for nor reaching far enough.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    4. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by xMrFishx · · Score: 1

      That would be like saying you can't call a game "Blade" or "Mount" because of "Mount & Blade,"

      I'm gonna have a game called Mountain Blade and Mytan Magic (or possibly He Rose of Mytan Magic).

    5. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      Who needs a God when I've got my staff. Bangs it into the ground "You shall not pass."

    6. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could probably ruin the whole internet industry with the other word though...

    7. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's worse than that... if you make a game called "this is the longest title of a game in the history of the universe but contains no actual information concerning what the game is actually about but that's no problem because after all, what's in a name: 2" then you can sue people for using the word "the" or the number "2"

    8. Re:I can't imagine this will be upheld... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Maybe this is just because they have to be proactive about keeping their trademark or something. I don't know. Stupid. :)"

      Being proactive. Sure. But you don't need to demand a settlement be paid before you even go to court while being "proactive" which according to notch is what they did here. Sounds more like they wanted a quick cash grab from the popular new kid in town, hoping they'd roll over out of fear.

  14. makes sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Elder Scrolls is just later in the series:

    Scrolls The Early Years.

    Scrolls.

    Elder Scrolls.

    1. Re:makes sense.. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I thought the new sequel naming convention went:

      The Elder Scrolls

      2 Elder 2 Scroll

      Elder Scrolls

      Scrolls

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:makes sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let us not forget our fifth sequel:

      5crolls

    3. Re:makes sense.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Scrolls:The Glint In The Milkman's Eye ?

  15. Should we start making a list? by Daetrin · · Score: 2

    Let's see, we can't use "Age" or "Edge", and now "Scrolls" is out as well.

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:Should we start making a list? by failedlogic · · Score: 1

      Or the Word 'Final'.

      There was the game Final Fight. Then there's the series Final Fantasy. Actually Final Fight had several versions so it could be a 'series' too. So now, you have a Final Fight game and you have Final Fantasy. Both involve fighting. Confused which is which fellow gamers? Think not.

    2. Re:Should we start making a list? by TarMil · · Score: 1

      "The Final Age of Scroll Edges"

    3. Re:Should we start making a list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bethesda alone will sue you into oblivion for that list.

    4. Re:Should we start making a list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a game called Edge out there already. :O

      My take on this whole thing is that it's being done for attention but what they don't realize, is that Notch has quite the following and this is a perfect way of destroying their company image. Even if their games are great, perception is everything and understanding that this isn't a fair claim, just big corporations pushing their weight around, the kids will pick up. The bottom-line is, they're fearful and really don't know what else to do when all the kids aren't purchasing their games because Notch has taken their cake. Lastly, Notch was extremely polite and good about this and as a business, they should be happy they had someone as calm and collected and they should play the Quake 3 match, win or lose, they will be seen in a more positive light than they are now. If they deny it, bad on them, their reputation will suffer.

  16. Hey I know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Destroy Bethesda one of the last decent game producers. I mean hell, do they got stocks I can short?
    WTF WTF all the way around. Pour a whiskey for me and a whiskey for you and bottoms up.

    Why nobody is seriously using those old scrolls +Fravia had in the phplab.
    http://fravia.2113.ch/phplab/scroll.htm Who needs f-ing google+

  17. Elder than the Elder Scrolls by BitterKraut · · Score: 3, Informative

    are Magnetic Scrolls: The Pawn, The Guild of Thieves, Jinxter, Corruption, Fish, Myth, Wonderland... loved these in the 80s/early 90s and still do. A 5,25" floppy disk, wrapped around a rolling pin, that's my earliest encounter with scrolls in video games.

    1. Re:Elder than the Elder Scrolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are Magnetic Scrolls [..] that's my earliest encounter with scrolls in video games

      Yeah, I remember them... but before *that* I remember the ZX81's "SCROLL" command in BASIC because the screen didn't automatically scroll when PRINTing reached the bottom (unlike most other computers) and ran out of space. Some games included that, so does it count? ;-)

    2. Re:Elder than the Elder Scrolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah...about that. You're making an argument for prior art, this is a trademark case, not a patent case. IANAL but even I can tell the difference between the two.

  18. Meanwhile... by devphaeton · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ....meanwhile, i have yet to see Notch get his panties in a bunch about Total Miner, the C- Minecraft knockoff coming to Xbocks Live in the near future. Yes I know the history of Minecraft, and I know that Notch borrowed a lot from Infiniminer. But this also goes to show that game 'concepts' aren't sacred.

    I can see if Notch named his new game "Alder Scrolls" or "Newer Scrolls" or "Minerfall: The Buggiest Scrolls Evar" or "Iron Scroll: Mining The Oblivion" or anything else that would directly allude to another game. I don't know about Scrolls, but it sounds as if it isn't anything like any of the Elder Scrolls games. Games which btw aren't really about scrolls in particular.

    Hmm...

    --


    do() || do_not(); // try();
    1. Re:Meanwhile... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see why notch would get his panties in a bunch. You acknowledge that Notch borrowed a lot from Infiniminer, but that really doesn't do it justice. The whole look and feel of Minecraft was taken from Infiniminer, and it annoys me when someone will start crap on a game that uses a similar style because "Minecraft did it first and everything else is clearly a ripoff, notch should sue!". Not that I'm not saying you're doing that.

      There have been sandbox building games before, and there have been blocky games before. Minecraft may have blown the genre wide open, but it wasn't really the first. Notch has no right getting his panties in a bunch when people make similar games. Now I have seen Total Miner and I think it just one of those carbon copy programs, but so what? That's how genres evolve. Someone creates a winning formula and people advance it. Sometimes you get subpar work, and sometime you get diamonds.

    2. Re:Meanwhile... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two wrongs do make a right, you guys!
      So what?

      People like you make me sick, seriously.

    3. Re:Meanwhile... by eharvill · · Score: 1

      I wonder if he could get away with a game simply called "TES?"

      --
      At night I drink myself to sleep and pretend I don't care that you're not here with me
  19. Shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zenimax is probably becoming a trademark/copyright bully. They had the JavaScript Doom port DMCA'd a few months ago, even though it was based on the original GPL source release and using the shareware IWAD (distributed by id Software themselves on their FTP site). I hope that Bethesda and id Software raise hell over this stuff and that it stops, because this is really damaging the reputation of some of the best game developers in the business. Imagine all the people who won't buy games from Zenimax subsidiaries if this keeps up....

  20. Wait - what happens if Notch succeeds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...in trademarking "Scrolls".

    Then could he (in theory) go to Bethesda and arm wrestle them for using HIS newly granted trademark?

    "Hey, I notice you have the title The Elder Scrolls... since I own Scrolls, I demand you cease and desist".

    Not saying Notch would do that - he's a normal/reasonable guy. But Bethesda's action might be the legally correct action in order to protect themselves from Notch's attempt to own a broad word.

  21. Evil Software Companies by Oxford_Comma_Lover · · Score: 1

    You have a list of evil software companies that doesn't include Adobe or Symantec?

    I like how the odd part is not making a list of evil software companies, but making the wrong one. =)

    --
    -- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
  22. hello lawyers, meet internet by wfmcwalter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Technology companies are pretty good about properly integrating their marketing and public relations efforts into the business proper. So if they need to do a safety recall the PR people are involved in the process; a decent PR guy can turn "the XYZ-5000 sprays customers with burning acid" recall into "XYZ really cares about its customers, and as a lovely fluffy precaution we're fixing all our XYZ-5000s, even though most of them are perfectly super and don't experience moderate thermal variances". Engineering, QA, customer relations, finance - every department doesn't get to communicate with the public (or do anything that's obviously going to end up being public) without someone in PR there to make sure the message is put out right.

    Legal departments, by dint of (often broken) corporate org-trees are a notable exception to this. When they see a problem, they fix it the lawyer way, and the rest of the company never knows until after the fact. In olden times of yore stuff like this was trivia between one legal office and another, and only the most nebbish of corporate historian ever know why a product changed its name or wasn't orange coloured any more. So the lawyers behaved as they always did, striking as quickly and as hard as they could, writing letters as outlandishly vitriolic and court pleadings as wildly exaggerated as they felt they could get away with, knowing that things would stay on the downlow and whatever happened only the outcome would matter to anyone.

    They didn't consider that, if you sent someone a demand letter, the first thing they'd do is tweet about it to their entire customer base (which turns out to be a big proportion of your customer base too), and post the letter (with all its wild and crazy claims) on the internet, for everyone to point and laugh at. If it's the all-too-common shot across the bows (rather than a serious attempt) you risk looking like a rather unhinged bully.

    Like it or not (and the lawyers don't like it, and decorate their broadsides with all kinds of "if you publish this letter we'll sue to for that too" stuff) everything anyone in the corporation does reflects on the whole outfit. The PR folks should be in on the ground floor with anything like this. They don't get to veto every lawsuit or every letter, but they can put a choke-hold on the stupid. Right now Zenimax's PR guy has his head in his hands; I'll bet the first thing he knew about the whole affair was when he read it online, and he'll spend next week fighting fires and soothing angry faces. Notch probably won't change the name, but if he does that's just another news cycle of bad PR for Zenimax.

    --
    ## W.Finlay McWalter ## http://www.mcwalter.org ##
  23. ironic by kirkb · · Score: 1

    The first place I'd heard about Skyrim and how cool it's going to be was from Notch himself, months ago.

    lawyers can go eat a poop sandwich.

    --
    Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
  24. Re:Hey I know - The Elder MFM Drives!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh-oh

    http://scrolls.blogspot.com/
    God has a plan for the fucking scrolls.

    By the way those old phplab scrolls felt like Copernic did, then the original copernic disappeared. Coincidence?

  25. Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by skine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The first rule of having a trademark is "don't lose your trademark." This is done by defending it against every potential threat, no matter how tenuous the connection.

    Essentially, if you don't defend yourself, then your trademark is automatically weakened.

    For example, if your trademark is for a video game called "Elder Scrolls," and you allow a game called "Scrolls," to be published unchecked, then you've effectively stated that the word "Scrolls," and titles including that word, are all acceptable, and cannot be challenged by trademark.

    In the end, Zenimax either maintains their current position by forcing Notch to back down, or their trademark is more clearly defined, including restrictions on what Notch can call this and its sequels (if any).

    Thus the only losing move is not to play.

    1. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      For example, if your trademark is for a video game called "Elder Scrolls," and you allow a game called "Scrolls," to be published unchecked, then you've effectively stated that the word "Scrolls," and titles including that word, are all acceptable, and cannot be challenged by trademark.

      Which is already the case - Bethseda has a trademark on "Elder Scrolls", not "all games with Scroll in the tite". They cannot legally veto other game titles simply because they have a word in common. All they can do is bluster and send threatening letters that would be blown away in court. "Scrolls" is not their trademark, they have no obligation to attack it, and it doesn't weaken "Elder Scrolls" in the slightest. Now, if they were threatening a game called "Eldest Scrolls", or "Ancient Scrolls" they might have a case - the similarity is such that there's a much greater chance of one being confused with the other.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    2. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      Not to mention most gamers also think of a name like Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion or Skyrim when they refer to an Elder Scrolls title. Its called "The Elder Scrolls X : _____" where X is its Roman numeral marking its place in the sequence, and _____ is its name. Its not just called "Elder Scrolls". I don't see any case here. In fact, if I was a lawyer at Zenimax, I would just laugh at my colleagues for being such morons for even trying to bully Mojang into doing something pointless. Something that has no chance in court and also doesn't affect your trademark in the first place.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    3. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much this. They have to take action to defend the trademark or risk losing it. That is how trademark law works. If anyone doesn't like it, they need to write their congressperson.

      That said, my prediction is that Notch will not back down because its a flimsy case, it will go to court, and if the court is any kind of sane, the ruling will be in Notch's favor. Everyone wins, because Zenimax did take the _required_ action to defend their trademark, and Notch gets to keep things the same. The only thing that sucks is that both sides will have to pay lawyers and the court to maintain the status quo.

      That sucks. That really sucks. But that's business :-/

    4. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Jonner · · Score: 1

      The first rule of having a trademark is "don't lose your trademark." This is done by defending it against every potential threat, no matter how tenuous the connection.

      Essentially, if you don't defend yourself, then your trademark is automatically weakened.

      For example, if your trademark is for a video game called "Elder Scrolls," and you allow a game called "Scrolls," to be published unchecked, then you've effectively stated that the word "Scrolls," and titles including that word, are all acceptable, and cannot be challenged by trademark.

      In the end, Zenimax either maintains their current position by forcing Notch to back down, or their trademark is more clearly defined, including restrictions on what Notch can call this and its sequels (if any).

      Thus the only losing move is not to play.

      When I was a kid, I didn't understand why documentation with my Legos said "Please call them Lego bricks, not Legos." Now I know that's part of their trademark defense policy.

    5. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Antisyzygy · · Score: 2

      Good job being an apologist. Defending your trademark only extends to defending it when its possible that someone is in your industry using a trademark sufficiently close to your own such that it may confuse consumers. Scrolls != Elder Scrolls. Trademark violation is not happening with "Elder Scrolls V : Skyrim" vs. "Scrolls", so it is literally a moot point. In regard to Bethseda games, most people see "The Elder Scrolls XXX : YYYYYY", where XXX is the Roman numeral for where a particular game is placed in the series, and YYYYY where a particular game has its specific name. Clearly, there is no confusion between "Elder Scrolls XXX : YYYYY" and "Scrolls". Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    6. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Flambergius · · Score: 2

      That is possibly what the Zenimax's lawyers are thinking, but even if that would be true it would still be missing the big picture. Let me quote from little further down this conversation.

      "Bethesda is in my shit list now.

      I am putting any company that is letting itself run by lawyers instead of customer-oriented executives into that list. and bethesda just made that list. i am bored lately, and i was toying with the idea of playing an old school rpg franchise i havent played yet. and actually i stood over elder scrolls for some time in gamersgate. now i know which i wont be buying - elder scrolls." (Unity100)

      Trademark is about exclusive right/ability to identify with a brand. You don't want to diminish the brand - without a valuable brand your exclusive right becomes meaningless.

      Going far people like Notch and public favorites like Mindcraft is a potential PR disaster. You should not do that as a part of a standard, mail-a-letter-to-everybody procedure. Regardless of the merits of their claim, somebody at Zenimax was sleeping on the job.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers - Pablo Picasso
    7. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the real reason that LEGO should not be called Legos is that calling it Legos makes you sound stupid.

    8. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He wanted to play an old-school RPG? I sure as hell hope he wasn't thinking of firing up Daggerfall, which is without any doubt one of the buggiest, most heavily patched and utterly craptastic "RPGs" ever made. Daggerfall is the reason Bethsoft was on MY shitlist, in 1997. Thank god for Interplay or the CRPG genre would never have been properly resurrected. It's still a crying shame that this company owns the rights to Fallout.

    9. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by drobety · · Score: 1

      Essentially, if you don't defend yourself, then your trademark is automatically weakened

      "defend"? They were attacked? Sounds more like the opposite to me... In any case, they prevented "weakening" of their trademark by weakening their brand (seriously, who likes bully corp. lawyers?)

    10. Re:Nothing to See Here. Move Along. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      such that it may confuse consumers. Scrolls != Elder Scrolls. Trademark violation is not happening

      In your opinion.

      A judge or jury hearing a case might not agree with you. If I were responsible for maintaining Bethesda's patent portfolio, I'm not going to risk losing a trademark because some blowhards on slashdot don't think there's an issue.

  26. This will be retracted by Tridus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Every now and then we see lawyers for a company do silly things like this. Lawyers live in their own world, nearly wholly disconnected from ours. In their world, they send lots of letters on anything that even remotely might kind of sorta maybe be in the same ballpark as their trademark.

    In the real world, marketing sees the reaction to that. When it makes news (like this case), marketing goes to the CEO and says "hey legal is causing us grief." The CEO then tells legal to play nice in this case. Particularly since if they actually tried to challenge this in court they'd get laughed at.

    So, publicity will solve this one.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    1. Re:This will be retracted by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      This is exactly why they need to have Marketing, Legal and other branches meet before making decisions like this. A simple hour meeting with upper management and heads of the departments would have solved this before it became an embarrassment.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    2. Re:This will be retracted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, publicity will not solve this one, because you HAVE to defend your trademark, no matter how tenuous the connection. If you are are doing business in the same market (in this case, software), you absolutely must litigate to defend your trademark. No you don't get a choice in the matter unless you are okay with losing the trademark.

      The aren't being dicks, its not lawyers doing silly things, it is the letter of the law. That is the real-world fact of the matter. Marketing doesn't have shit to say about it.

    3. Re:This will be retracted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt marketing has any problem with legal in this case. Up until yesterday, I had only faintly heard of a game franchise called the Elder Scrolls. Thanks to Notch twitter is full of posts about this stuff. I have now seen two trailers of the games. I 'm also aware that a new game is coming out on 11.11.11 and it's called Skyrim or something. Also Steam is quite conveniently having a 50% sale on two of the Elder Scrolls games. Coincidence? I think not.
      Seems to me that Notch has http://games.slashdot.org/story/11/08/05/2123244/Bethesda-Tells-Minecraft-Creator-Cease-and-Desist#made some free worldwide marketing for Bethesda and in the process weakened his own trademark for "Scrolls".

    4. Re:This will be retracted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or more fundamentally, you are saying that reason(on the part of the public, who you think will be made aware of this) will trump the arbitrary fictional house of cards called trademark law. I'm doubtful. Too many people abstract away what is happening(threat of force against someone for creating an identifier that contains a non-unique english noun that is also part of other product identifiers) and apologize for a system that 'requires trademarks to be defended'.

      Too few are able to forget all the silly rules for a moment and just think about what the different parties are doing. If we aren't at the point where people laugh and roll their eyes in disgust, if we are still at the point where we have to explain how absurd this is, if we are still at the point where people take this legal hassling and the rules seriously, I am not optimistic that this will be solved without at least some headache for Notch.

  27. More like no case by ewanm89 · · Score: 2

    It should also be pointed out that the several trademark registries allowed Mojang to register Scrolls months ago. Including US and Sweden (registering it as an EU trademark).

    1. Re:More like no case by Jonner · · Score: 2

      It should also be pointed out that the several trademark registries allowed Mojang to register Scrolls months ago. Including US and Sweden (registering it as an EU trademark).

      If true, it's disturbing that it's possible to register a trademark for a single, common English word.

    2. Re:More like no case by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      yep..
      I think next up: "Songs" "Tunes" "Motors" "Engines" "Legends" "Elders" etc..

      even if he would refer to it as scrolls himself.. it would be better to prefix it with something, even if it's just a word taken at random from some book(flip open a latin book, flip pages, point finger).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:More like no case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is in a narrowly defined field though. "Scroll" as it relates to an action video game. It wouldn't be infringed by a Scroll soft drink, a Scroll printing company, or even a Scroll wheel mouse.

    4. Re:More like no case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such as apple?

    5. Re:More like no case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If true, it's disturbing that it's possible to register a trademark for a single, common English word.

      Actually, it's not disturbing. Apple owns a trademark on the word Apple, for example. But that trademark only guards against things in the same industry (e.g. software and consumer electronics). You could start up a toaster company and as long as you didn't make your product too white and shiny (to the point that consumers would think that your toasters are made by Apple) you could use the word Apple as your brand.

      This isn't necessarily how things actually work, admittedly. Apple could expand their trademark to cover kitchen appliances if they thought that they wanted to make them in the future, or even argue that toasters are similar enough to computers that consumers would get confused, and they may be right.

      There are also companies like Monster cable also abuse the process by sending threatening letters to things that have nothing to do with their business (Monster recently threatened a mini-golf course!). Leo Stoller owns a trademark on the word 'stealth' and they have used it to threaten other companies that have nothing to do with his industry. But the ability to trademark single, common English words is not as bad as you think.

    6. Re:More like no case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like an apple.

  28. Thier just upset that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the same lawyers recommended their name be Bethesda.

  29. Brand Name by Databass · · Score: 1

    I'm with Notch on the idea that Elder Scrolls really doesn't have a lot of scroll-based IP in it nor the right to own single words, but more importantly:

    Of all the company names Notch could pick to epitomize what he and Minecraft are about, why "Scrolls"? That doesn't add any brand value. Honestly, he himself has ten times the brand recognition of any company name he could make. He could make his company "NotchCo" or "Notch's Minecraft Company" and get 100x the name recognition.

    "Scrolls Studios, LLC? The hell is that?"
    "It's the company Notch founded, that made Minecraft."
    "Oh! Why didn't you just SAY so?"

    1. Re:Brand Name by Thalagyrt · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh? The company's called Mojang. Scrolls is another game they're working on. 3 seconds with Google would have told you that and spared you however long you wasted writing that up. :|

      --
      Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
    2. Re:Brand Name by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      or just look up the Scroll trademark application and it would say it's registered to Mojang AB.

    3. Re:Brand Name by Thalagyrt · · Score: 1

      Well, yeah, but that still can fall under 3 seconds with Google. :P

      --
      Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
  30. Talk about disrepectful to the gamers. by lexsird · · Score: 1

    First, someone inform these tools that gamers aren't so retarded to not know the difference. We are computer gamers, not console gamers, we aren't playing Pogs, we aren't completely retarded. Secondly, the Minecraft guy is small potatoes, he's the little guy, the underdog, and busting his balls is a great publicity stunt to paint yourself as being a complete dick. I don't like buying games from people who act like dicks. Why? Because being a dick is a habit, and how long does it take for them to be dicks with me if I do business with them.

    Besides, how come some game company with a half ounce of brains hasn't snapped this guy up and put him on their dev team?

    Now for something completely different; Minecraft PvP to me is awesome. It's as polished as that last turd I dropped off, but the concept/game play of it has potential to be incredibly brutal and nerve wracking. The brutality of it reminds me of Darktide, but only crueler somehow if that is possible. It's not for pussies. It needs the polish of a slick FPS and the rich character development of a RPG, make it MMO, and PVP and you would make orgasmic money. Multiple orgasmic money. You know I am right.

    --
    Take the Red Pill.
  31. What's the big deal? by Can't+find+a+usrname · · Score: 0

    Just change the name.

    It's not like Notch is losing anything, the "Scrolls" name has next to no brand recognition for him and is a little close to "Elder Scrolls".

    Why blow this up into a full blown confrontation?

    1. Re:What's the big deal? by Can't+find+a+usrname · · Score: 0

      Oh really, mod me down on this?

      LOL.

      Slashdot really has gone down hill.

    2. Re:What's the big deal? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Given your UID, I doubt you've been here long enough to know what 'going downhill' really entails.....

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    3. Re:What's the big deal? by eharvill · · Score: 1

      Not sure why you were modded down, but I definitely disagree with you. It's a principle thing. He did nothing wrong and now a multi-million (billion?) dollar company is trying to bully him. It's pure BS. I sure hope he doesn't back down.

      --
      At night I drink myself to sleep and pretend I don't care that you're not here with me
  32. Bethesda? by dasherjan · · Score: 1

    Bethesda is the name of a hospital that's been around at least 20 years. Maybe they should have their lawyers take a look at Bethesda Softworks. hehe

  33. Bethesda is in my shit list now. by unity100 · · Score: 1

    I am putting any company that is letting itself run by lawyers instead of customer-oriented executives into that list. and bethesda just made that list. i am bored lately, and i was toying with the idea of playing an old school rpg franchise i havent played yet. and actually i stood over elder scrolls for some time in gamersgate. now i know which i wont be buying - elder scrolls.

    i have no tolerance for lawyery gimmicks and cutthroat capitalism in gaming. anyone who curbs my future potential fun - which unfortunately is quite lacking in our times - is my mortal enemy. and threatening/scaring other companies into anyhing, even if its about names, does that.

    bye bye bethesda. you had quite a few good games.

    1. Re:Bethesda is in my shit list now. by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      You'll also have to write off iD Software too, as they are owned by the same parent company, ZeniMax Media. It's ZeniMax pursuing all these ridiculous cases (including sending a DMCA notification to Mozilla for hosting Javascript Doom, despite that JS Doom is based on GPL source code and used the Shareware WAD files available for free from iD).

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    2. Re:Bethesda is in my shit list now. by unity100 · · Score: 1

      ok. ill update my mind to ignore anything that is involved with the word 'zenimax' and tell people to do the same.

  34. Prior Titles with Scroll by canowhoopass.com · · Score: 1

    I did a quick Google search and found several game titles with 'Scroll'. Several pre-dating the 1994 release of the first Elder Scrolls.

    I suspect Bethesda will have troubles winning this one, but courts can be funny sometimes.

  35. Fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bethesda is bad and you are bad for liking them. You should probably just uninstall life.

  36. wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at the minecraft fanboys come out of the woodwork on this article.
    Come on fanboys. be honest. yeah its a shitty lawyer type thing to do. but elder scrolls and scrolls IS a little too close when they are both in the games industry.

    If you want to argue over what's stupid or evil.. Target the worlds trademark system on this one. Not the lawyers who are doing what they're supposed to be doing when the trademarks are a little too close and overlap in the same industry. You can't blame ppl for doing their job within a shitty system the rest of us defined. ie. hate the game. not the players.

    As much as i HATE to defend lawyers... They are in the right on this one and will most likely win.

    (still think we should try killing all the lawyers, it's a novel solution that we have not tried yet. Heck. it might just fix the planet. Won't know until we try once tho... )

  37. Just rename the game by sixsixtysix · · Score: 1

    to The Younger Scrolls

    --
    ...
  38. Interesting paragraph... by _KiTA_ · · Score: 1

    "Today, I got a 15 page letter from some Swedish lawyer firm, saying they demand us to stop using the name Scrolls, that they will sue us (and have already paid the fee to the Swedish court), and that they demand a pile of money up front before the legal process has even started."

    Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't it a standard not-technically-a scam in the EU / UK for legal departments to file on behalf of customers they don't actually represent, requesting legal fees and the like? Something to do with how the courts (particularly the trademark system) works over there? I seem to remember many, many, MANY moons ago a discussion on Slashdot about some legal firm in Germany doing something similar.

  39. Actually, I'm surprised this came first by Alzheimers · · Score: 1

    I would have guessed that it would have been Blizzard going after him for using a word + "Craft"

  40. Argument against Notch by drb226 · · Score: 1

    Notch says "The implication that you could own the right to all individual words within a trademark is also a bit scary." Well Notch could be a little more creative than using a single dictionary word to name his game. I hope he isn't planning to assert any trademark on the word "Scrolls".

    1. Re:Argument against Notch by jackbird · · Score: 1

      You mean the way "Doom," "Quake," "Half-Life," "Blood," "Sin," "Fable," "Descent," "Tempest," "Wizardry," "Unreal," ""Joust," "Defender," "Driver," "Lemmings," "Torchlight," and "Fallout" are simply common words and not recognizable enough to be trademarked as a video game title?

  41. Sail This! by Lord+Balto · · Score: 1

    So, I can found a company called Apple Sails that manufactures sailboats, but if I also build digital depth finding equipment, I can't call it Apple Trolls (q.v.)? I'm beginning to think you shouldn't be able to trademark any single word that appears in a standard dictionary. Generally, the trademark system would appear to be iLLOGICAL and iDIOTIC. Not to mention iNSANE.

  42. Oh man... by Moosader · · Score: 1

    I'm going to have to rename my geriatric-oriented action adventure JRPG "Elder". I don't want to get sued!