Notch offered to not (tm) Scrolls etc, but Bethesda sue ahead anyway | Hacker News Reader

Notch offered to not (tm) Scrolls etc, but Bethesda sue ahead anyway

notch.tumblr.com

95 pointswillvarfar66 comments

It's important to note Notch not only offered dropping the trademarking of "Scrolls", he also offered adding a subtitle or new words to the game title to not make it just "Scrolls" (on top of the non-trademarking stuff).

Bethesda/Zenimax essentially sues to prevent Mojang from using the word "Scrolls" at all, in a game which is all about, well, scrolls.

Why would anyone want to make such a compromise, build a brand, make money, and then risk a lawsuit that will lead to a massive settlement. alternatives: "Scrollings", "Scrollables" etc...

> alternatives: "Scrollings", "Scrollables" etc...

That does not make much sense, it's not a game about scrolling it's a game about scrolls. As in rolls of parchments with words on them.

> rolls of parchments with words on them

I truly believe that Mojang could change the name to this and it would still be a smash hit.

I don't know the game, but "papyrus" sounds like a nice alternative to me.

http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2011/08/19

I think the point is that scrolls is a generic term describing an artefact commonly found in adventure games and so should not be seen as bearing the distinctiveness needed of a trademark to indicate the origin of goods/services in the field of computer games.

Notch and company showed weakness by immediately offering concessions, so Bethesda probably figures if they push harder they will drop Scrolls entirely. Which is probably true.

I'm just surprised there's no PR group talking with legal. This is a nightmare for Bethesda as Minecraft (and by extension Notch) has an extremely loyal and, dare I say, vocal following.

Win or lose Bethesda comes out looking like a evil group and probably will leave a sour taste in a few thousand gamer's mouths once it is all said and done.

Has anybody at Bethesda considered that nobody actually calls their games "Elder Scrolls"? I've seen pretty much all the footage on Skyrim, and I don't recall I've seen the series title once.

In their nonetheless strong position I'd try to create a culture where gamers point out, when talking about Notch's Scrolls, that this is not that scrolls; I see this as an opportunity for cheap marketing.

And what happened to the Quake 3 duel? It'd have been a win-win PR maneuver too. Unless they plan to play it in front of the judge.

> And what happened to the Quake 3 duel? It'd have been a win-win PR maneuver too.

The Bethesda/Zenimax lawyers "declined"

Thought so. It's a pity because that unusual move alone would worth a couple of bucks in terms of advertising. At least they didn't sit down to play AND sue Notch at the same time.

Thanks for the update.

>Has anybody at Bethesda considered that nobody actually calls their games "Elder Scrolls"? I've seen pretty much all the footage on Skyrim, and I don't recall I've seen the series title once.

That is "sort of" the point... when someone goes to Google and mashes in "Scrolls" Bethesda wants "Elder Scrolls" to fill the 10,000 pages of links, not Notch's "Scrolls". Unfortunately at this point going to Google and typing in "Scrolls +game" you get a mishmash of the two and a trickle of the lawsuit in the middle of it all.

Just because they want to dominate Google result pages on keywords of questionable relevance, it doesn't make a good lawsuit.

I'd like to represent these different search terms ("Elder Scrolls", Oblivion, Skyrim), but Oblivion is too broad to be of any use.

I heard Bethesda's next version of the game will be titled "The Elder Patent Trolls". I also heard they are sueing all patent trolls for being patent trolls, as they consider themselves have (TM) on that in the current game industry. Will be interesting to follow. :)

You can't sue someone for being a patent troll just because you have a trademark on a game called "Patent Trolls"! Just like Bethesda can't sue scrolls for being scrolls now.

You can sue for whatever you want. If you are a rich bully, you'll almost always win one way or another. The law is barely relevant.

Serious question: Have we heard from a human [1] in Bethesda's ranks about this issue? Or are they just playing the silent giant?

If I were the head of Bethesda's PR team and I saw this post, I would be having conniptions.

Footnotes [1]. "human", that is, an individual person speaking on-the-record, having identified themselves by their name and position within Bethesda. Not a legal team, committee or any other culpability-diffusing vehicle.

Bethesda suing over "Scrolls" when their trademark is for "The Elder Scrolls," even in the light of notch's offer to relinquish his trademark seems irrational.

But, they're still doing it.

So, what are some rational alternative reasons?

One conspiracy theory immediately comes to my mind: they want Mindcraft. They can't buy it; but, they sure as hell can "settle."

Bethesda makes awesome games, but their legal dept is clearly full of industrial grade a-holes. Notch has clearly show he is willing to back down. Get that in writing & call it a day. Instead they decide to take it to court.

Sounds like lawyers trying to justify their existence.

Well since Notch has TM'd Scrolls he in fact might be in a better position than if he TM'd XYZ Scrolls or Scrolls XYZ.

Either way this will be thrown out and Notch will win, but only after spending 6-7 figures on defending it. :-(

I wonder if they are looking to extract some money out of notch.

They kind of have to, protecting your trademark is part of your obligations. They seem to have a good case for it too, it s not like their claim is unsubstantiated.

Next up: "Apple sues makers of 'Pod People' video game for trademark infringement. Apple legal says, 'We sorta have to or people will get confused.'"

Trademarks tend to be tied to a specific type of business. A better analogy would be if Apple sues an mp3 product named "Pod: The Music Player".

Or Infogear's iPhone trademark, which Apple aggressively violated.

More like "we sorta have to or the next guy with a name that actually will cause confusion will point to this case we avoided and say 'look! They lost the protection on their mark because they didn't go after these other people!' and he might win"

Much like Apple Records suing Apple, Inc. Sure they lost, but they pretty much had to make the attempt or risk losing in a later case because of not suing earlier.

After that Square Enix sues someone for making game called "Fantasy"

Actually I'll make a short list of some words which are latter part of two word name, do not use these or you may get sued!

Tournament, Agenda, Commander, Conquer, Creed, Company, Bowl, Protocol, Edge, Carnage, Zone, Fortress, Hazard, Effect, War, Wars, Blade, Nights, Sight, Agent, Ruler, Boy, Cell, Asylum, Reloaded, World.

In essence Bethseda is doing exactly the same what any owner of names/words I mentioned would do if they would sue anyone for using the words. Bonus points for recognizing the games where they came from.

P.S Remember that Scrolls in "The Elder Scrolls" is not like Warcraft in "World of Warcraft" but it's more like Tournament in Unreal Tournament, word which by itself does not invoke the brand at all.

The Beatles (well, their label Apple Records) was in a long running trademark dispute with Apple [Computer] which went back and forth for decades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

If you ever wondered why it took so long for The Beatles to be sold in the iTunes store it's mostly because of the litigation and bad blood between the two parties. I imagine that cold, hard cash healed all wounds.

> They kind of have to, protecting your trademark is part of your obligations.

Their trademark is "The Elder Scrolls". Not "Scrolls". Yet they're refusing that Mojang use the word "scrolls" at all, whether as the game's sole name or as any subset of the game's name.

The court will decide if they are confusable. I bet I couldn't name my game "Angry windows" either

There is no shortage on other "Angry X" games in the Android market, for instance.

https://market.android.com/search?q=angry&so=1&c=app...

i bet if they were as successful as angry birds, rovio would (rightly) have asked them to change their name

The Scrolls game hasn't been release. You can't argue that it's been "successful" and that's why they're being sued.

>I bet I couldn't name my game "Angry windows" either //

If your game is a clone of Angry Birds then no. If your game is not marketed in a way that confuses people to thinking that it comes from the originators of Angry Birds then yes.

What would happen if the first company which has used "war" in a video game title sue the other ones...

i think it is time to create a different court system for silly law sues like this

This has nothing to do with the laws, and everything to do with the lawyers.

You fucking Bethesda bastards, leave notch alone. * chris crocker

Even if Notch doesn't register Scrolls, he is still violating their trademark. That's what trademarks are for, ensuring that nobody else uses your name.

Scrolls is just an English word. You shouldn't be able to trademark it in the first place.

Apple.

It is trademarked within context, it is violated in its own context (video games).

That's exactly how trademarks don't work. Windows. Apple. McDonalds (a proper name!). Name combinations: Pizza Hut, Quaker State, Bank of America.

Yes I know how it works. I was commenting that I find the current system of being able to trademark English words like "orange" a pretty silly system.

You really don't see a problem with someone other than Microsoft selling an operating system and calling it Windows?
What about a company that does mail delivery calling itself the "United States Postal Service" ?
An airline called "Virgin"?

It should be called 'microsoft windows'. That way we can have 'Apple windows', 'digital research windows' and so on. Window managers are a class and you should not be able to monopolize a class name without some sort of addition.

"Hello, I have a problem with Nokia Photoshop not loading on my Fujitsu-Siemens Macbook Pro after installing the latest upgrade of 'Google Snow Leopard Windows'".

"Google" is an English word, so you'll have to be a bit more specific.

"Well i tried Adobegoogling it, Microsoftgoogling, Googlegoogling and Quorastackoverflowing it, but no clear solution was found. I am gonna consider buying the Virgin Atlantic Photoshop CS4 instead from the Walmart App Store"

Technically, "Google" isn't an English word - it's a misspelling of the English word "googol."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_(verb)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escalator#Loss_of_trademark_rig...

The point is it was not a verb before Google the company

>Window managers are a class and you should not be able to monopolize a class name without some sort of addition.
The Windows trademark is for the entire operating system product. It's not just for the window manager.
Keep in mind that trademarks are incredibly specific. Infringement only occurs if it's a similar product. For example, there is a recreational vehicle company named Starcraft that has been in business since the early 1900's. Blizzard made the real time strategy game called Starcraft. Both usages of the word "Starcraft" are registered trademarks, and do not infringe on each other.

You can't. Trademarks have domains in which they are functional. Microsoft owns "Windows", an English word, but only in the computer domain (whichever one that is). They do not own the word Windows. The system already does not let you simply trademark English words.

Not to mention Bethesda

Trademark law is not patent law, it tends to be stricter, more restricted and much harder to abuse (although it can be abused, see Tim Langdell).

> he is still violating their trademark
This is what people are debating here. The name of the game os "Elder Scrolls." Should they be able to block anyone from having a game with either of those two words in the title? It would be like someone making a franchise "The Dark Knight" video game getting sued by the makers of "Alone in the Dark" because the titles share the word "Dark." This is not to mention the fact that no one refers to any of the Elder Scrolls games by the name 'Elder Scrolls.' People call them by the release/episode names (e.g. Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind is just referred to as "Morrowind" far more frequently than "Elder Scrolls III").
[edit] Better example: Sid Meier suing Disney over a Pirates of the Caribbean video game infringing on his Pirates![1] game.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier%27s_Pirates!

I'd have thought the opposite would be a more accurate comparison: Disney claiming "Pirates!" as similar to/confusable with "Pirates of the Caribbean" (discounting any issues of who actually owns what trademarks in reality just now).
No mention of the issue is complete without a reference to Tim Langdell, and his hilarious suits against anyone using the word 'Edge' in their games[1].
[1] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Edge_Games

> The name of the game os "Elder Scrolls."
Actually that's the name of the game series and the sub-title of the games (and technically it's "The Elder Scrolls), the games are called Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim. Or "The Elder Scrolls [game sequence number]: [actual game title]" if you want it in full. With [actual game title] replaced by expansion names for each installment's expansions.

I think it's more like: "[...] that nobody else uses a term you have trademarked in a way that could allow consumers to be confused or misled into thinking that they (the non-registered mark users) are affiliated or speaking on your behalf"
In short, will normal people think "Wow, Bethesda is making something called The Elder Scrolls: Scrolls" or "Mojang presents: The Not-As-Young-As-They-Used-To-Be Scrolls: Get off my damn lawn! (in affiliation with Bethesda/Zenimax)"
It's entirely possible for different companies to hold a mark on the same (set of) words, as long as no opportunity for confusion arises. Thus, Apple (Computers) are distinct from Apple (Record Label), although there was some drama when Apple the former fired up the iTunes store and started to compete with the latter. I think they just threw money at it til it went away though.
I guess the trial question would be if the use of the word 'scrolls' in relation to computer gaming is sufficiently confusing, or whether people should be able to distinguish between "The Elder Scrolls(tm)" fantasy first-person RPGs, and "Scrolls" the trading/playing-card game.
As silly as the confusion seems to most gamers, a brief glance at http://scrolls.com could maybe almost be confusing to a newcomer.

In Spain we have UNIX fire extinguishers. It's funny the first time you see one in the wall of a mall.

Read the article linked: http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-whe...
Notch is trying to own the word "scrolls" in all media. This has implications not just for that single company, but every gaming company that ever wants to use the word "scrolls".
To me, that's scummy behaviour. People should not be able to trademark single words across all forms of media. It does not matter if they made minecraft or not, they do not deserve to own the word 'scrolls'. It's an english word, it belongs to all of us.

Have you read TFA? Notch offered to drop the trademarking entirely.
And while their attitude could (of course) change in the future, so far Mojang has only used trademark law in a single case: against a fellow selling a minecraft ripoff as "Minecraft" in the AppStore (which is about as clear-cut as you can be for trademark infringement). Not even FortressCraft[0], a blatant ripoff of the game using a very similar name structure and reusing half the trademark, has triggered any giving of fuck from Mojang (as far as I know, I might be wrong) although it has drawn the ire of the community.
[0] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHdWswvezds&feature=mfu_i...

Notch even congratulated them: https://twitter.com/#!/notch/status/115752966702628864 . And people didn't believe him so he posted: https://twitter.com/#!/notch/status/115753196785381376

Yes, because clearly the world ended when Microsoft trademarked the common English word "Windows".
You clearly don't understand the concept of "trademark". It isn't going to prevent you from having a rock-and-roll band named "Scrolls." Or writing a book called "Scrolls." Or doing a movie called "Scrolls" (provided it isn't based on Notch's game.)
Getting a trademark for "Scrolls" isn't even going to prevent you from making a computer game with the word "Scrolls" in it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com