Bethesda comments on Scrolls row

By Fred Dutton Published 6 October, 2011

"Nobody here enjoys being forced into this."

Bethesda has publicly discussed its legal row with Minecraft creator Marcus 'Notch' Persson over the Scrolls trademark for the first time.

Speaking with Kotaku today, Bethesda VP Pete Hines attempted to put distance between the creative side of Bethesda and the legal wranglings.

"This is a business matter based on how trademark law works and it will continue to be dealt with by lawyers who understand it, not by me or our developers," he said.

He added that it was not a personal vendetta, and that Bethesda is compelled to protect its trademarks.

"Nobody here enjoys being forced into this. Hopefully it will all be resolved soon."

While Bethesda had refrained from commenting on the dispute until now, Notch has been very vocal, frequently offering updates via his Twitter feed and blog.

He also chimed in for Kotaku's latest report, insisting that his Mojang studio had attempted to reach a resolution with Bethesda on a number of occasions, but without success.

"Our lawyers said [to Bethesda parent company ZeniMax] we didn't agree there was an infringement, but that we'd be willing to find a solution," he explained.

"We offered several different solutions, like us not getting the trademark, and us not using the word 'Scrolls' in its raw form, but as part of a longer title. [ZeniMax] repeatedly refused, demanding we stop using the word 'Scrolls'."

However, Hines added that there is more to the case than Mojang has chosen to discuss, though wouldn't go into specifics.

"Mojang's public comments have not given a complete picture as it relates to their filings, our trademarks, or events that have taken place," he claimed.

As widely reported, Bethesda believes Mojang's as-yet-unreleased Scrolls game infringes its trademark for The Elder Scrolls franchise.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (81) Latest comment 7 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Desheep #1 8 months ago

    Fuck lawyers.

  • riz23 #2 8 months ago

    Damage Limitation.

  • Koozer #3 8 months ago

    There are no winners from this. Mojang are probably more in the wrong, but I'm sure the internet will think otherwise. Poor Bethesda.

  • Deano_98 #4 8 months ago

    How are Mojang in the wrong? for using a word from the English dictionary as a game title? Why don't Bethesda's legal team go and sue everyone who use the word "the" aswel?

  • azix2 #5 8 months ago

    when you can claim rights to a word like "scrolls" you know something is wrong.

  • marmaduke #6 8 months ago

    Well, 'Scrolls' has a fantasy setting. and so does 'The Elder Scrolls'. Given how generic the Elder Scrolls stuff is and the sheer volume of it, there's a very good chance that there's going to be some overlap. Bethesda can then prove infringement. "Oh, so you've got dark elves and lizard people, have you? Well, so have we."

    That's probably enough for the lawsuit.
    Edited by marmaduke at 06/10/11 @ 23:40

  • Iain815 #7 8 months ago

    "Poor Bethesda"

    Are you fucking mad?

  • gjgjg #8 8 months ago

    what a waste of time, money, energy, oxygen, space, functioning organs, food, paper, memory space, office equipment... ill stop there.

    if this goes to court i hope moj present their case written on scrolls or something.

  • vibroguy #9 8 months ago

    @marmaduke

    by that rationale, seeing as Tolkein INVENTED modern mythology elves, his estate should be suing pretty much everyone.

  • smelly #10 8 months ago

    >what a waste of time, money, energy, oxygen, space, functioning

    You're quite right.. I should be allowed to publish my game "Sonic" featuring a cat which runs really fast around a 2d scrolling world. Afterall, "Sonic" is a common word in the english dictionary and in no way does my game infringe on "sonic the hedgehog" as that's a whole sentence.

    (My point is - there is quite a lot of complexity in this...)

  • HyperTails #11 8 months ago

    @vibroguy

    Everything fantasy is just a rip off of Lord of the Rings. Its not their fault that he created, literally, perfection, but you're right about his estate. They aren't suing Bethesda for putting Dragons in Skyrim, saying they've copied Smaug.

    Anyway, Bethesda are being tits, I hope they lose. Protecting your trademark is one thing, acting like Tim Langdell is another.

    @smelly

    Maybe Sega should sue Bethesda into next year for releasing Rage, because they blatently copied Streets of Rage there, if that's how they want to spin it.
    Edited by HyperTails at 07/10/11 @ 00:10

  • jrb #12 8 months ago

    copyright law states that you have to protect case where another product may infringe. Failure to do in cases where it's not clear cut, like this, could be harmful to Bethesda if someone decided to totally rip off the brand at a later date - there'd be document evidence of Bethesda not caring about it's brands.

    the case will go ahead, but could be dismissed easily, but at least it shows their intent to protect their brand.

  • septimus #13 8 months ago

    Fuck off Bethesda and your BS. No one is going to get fucking confused because they used the word scrolls.

    Shit I might now get sued as I used the word scrolls on teh internets.

    Tycho a la penny arcade is writing for this game, so especially backing them.

  • bengaming #14 8 months ago

    Nobody would mistake Scrolls for any Bethesda game. Still, it would make me happy to see this lawsuit drag on forever and cause Notch and Mojang to go out of business. It would make me feel less bad about buying Minecraft way back when it first came out, and then seeing it get worse and worse, barely ever get updated, and never ever adding any of the features it really needs. What a waste of money. What a horrible developer.

    Really, Bethesda is a terrible developer too, so no matter who loses, I win. Both parties likely lose a lot of money, and Bethesda gets a bit of bad publicity.
    Edited by bengaming at 07/10/11 @ 00:38

  • bengaming #15 8 months ago

    If someone made a "Boycott Skyrim to support Notch" Steam group, at least 75% of people who joined that group would be playing Skyrim on release day.

  • Slipstream #16 8 months ago

    Okay so I understand that there's more to this lawsuit than what has been revealed, fair enough, and I applaud Pete Hines for his atttitude toward the situation, he's just in for the production of the game and will leave the educated elements of the lawsuit to the educated people, again, wise.

    What is clear however is the trademark of the word 'Scrolls' no way should Bethesda have tabs on it, it's still utterly ridiculous.

    Anyway considering how outspoken Mojang is about the situation, he's definitely guilty of something that hasn't been exposed to the masses, that's for sure so it's difficult to feel sorry for him.

  • orren #17 8 months ago

    @jrb
    Copyright law states you have to protect your trademark, but trademarking a phrase consisting of three words does not automatically give a trademark on each separate word as well. "The elder scrolls", and "Scrolls" are two different trademarks. Unless bethesda has the word "Scrolls" trademarked separately, they don't have to defend anything.

    Example: "Coca Cola" is one of the most well-known trademarks, but there also exists a "Coca Colla"(with twin L). It's an energy drink, so i dare say the similarity is even bigger than between an open-world RPG and a card game. And cocacola company can't do a damn thing because they did not trademark the word "coca", only the whole phrase "coca cola".
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca_Colla

  • smelly #18 8 months ago

    >if that's how they want to spin it.

    My point is that it's a hell of a lot more complicated than you guys are making out.

  • Darkelfguy #19 8 months ago

    I highly suggest everyone actually read the article on Kotaku, it's highly informative and there's a whole lot more than this Eurogamer news piece would lead you to believe. For example, did you know that Notch's trademark for "Scrolls" was actually denied in the United States precisely because it infringes on existing trademarks? The Kotaku article is chock full of information like this, most of which they got from actual legal experts instead of just taking Notch's word for it.

    Here's the link to the article on Kotaku (in case, you know, you didn't click the one above in the news post): [link url=http://kotaku.com/5847295/mojang-v-bethesda-part-2-the-attorneys-and-notch--pete-weigh-in
    ]http://kotaku.com/5847295/mojang-v-bethe...[/link]

    Also, as always, do actually look up the trademarks involved first before choosing sides. This isn't some clear Black and White issue, and Mojang is hardly a victim in this trademark dispute, despite what Notch might lead you to believe (he has been, thus far, practically the only source of information on this case, and he's hardly unbiased).

    You can look up Mojang's trademark (and everyone else's) here: [link url=http://tess2.uspto.gov/
    ]http://tess2.uspto.gov/
    [/link]
    You can find even more information about trademarks in Kotaku's first article here: http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethe...

    Stay informed people! Don't make the mistake of thinking this is all Bethesda being the bad guys! Actually look at the facts before choosing sides!

  • orren #20 8 months ago

    ----------------------
    "For example, did you know that Notch's trademark for "Scrolls" was actually denied in the United States precisely because it infringes on existing trademarks?"
    ----------------------
    .
    While true, they also did provide a reason for the denial, which was that "The mere deletion of wording from a registered mark may not be sufficient to overcome a likelihood of confusion. "

    Notch however has since offered to adjust the name to "Scrolls: somesubtitle ", which would address the concern of USPTO quoted above(since the new name no longer is 'a mere deletion of wording from a registered trademark'). Thus, the USPTO ruling is obsolete now because it is only relevant for the trademark "Scrolls" (with no subtitle) that Mojang no longer insists on.
    Edited by orren at 07/10/11 @ 01:39

  • alcides #21 8 months ago

    cut the crap, stupid evil bastards....

  • darkmorgado #22 8 months ago

    He added that it was not a personal vendetta, and that Bethesda is compelled to protect its trademarks.

    Langdell claimed the same thing when trying to defend his attacks on anyone that used the word "EDGE" in a game. He was laughed at by the judge and now faces a potential prison sentence.

    YOUR TRADEMARK IS "THE ELDER SCROLLS" for an expansive, openworld RPG. Your trademark does not extend to suing people for making a virtual cardgame with the word "scrolls".

    If you continue this Bethesda, you will earn the scorn of thousands upon thousands of gamers. Just because you now think you are a bigtime publisher (youre not) with some triple-A games under your belt (all of which were hugely broken in a number of ways) does not mean you can suddenly turn into Bobby Kotick without massive fucking criticism.

  • ghostgate2001 #23 8 months ago

    Pretty sure the game-buying public will be able to tell the games apart... Besides, much as I loved Morrowind and Oblivion, and am counting the days until Skyrim, I can't in all honesty say that I even notice or care about the "Elder Scrolls" part of the names. People just refer to those games by their individual names and the series link is understood.

    I'm sure Bethesda's marketing suits feel like they ought to get all protective about the "brand" but there's really no need - the games themselves have such a powerful identity that they transcend any need to underline the fact that they're related by grouping them under a brand name, in the same way that you can simply say "Goldeneye" and everyone automatically understands that it's a James Bond film without you having to say it's "James Bond 17: Goldeneye."

    What I'm trying to say is that some brands have a powerful enough identity that they don't even need to mention the brand-name; it's implicit. Bethesda's marketing suits can relax: the precious "brand" is not under any threat, and they can channel the money they're wasting on lawyers and their pointless lawsuits into more wholesome pursuits like, I don't know, porting Fallout 1 + 2 to XBLA or the DS or something.

  • Bander #24 8 months ago

    A 10 second search for 'scrolls' on GameFAQs shows that there were games with that word in them long before Elder Scrolls or even Bethesda even existed. So what's the issue?

    Well, there is that small matter of Notch blatantly taking the piss by sticking 'craft' onto Minecraft, so I'm somewhat hoping the judge will find both sides guilty of not growing-up and punish them by suspending their pocket money.

  • Zaiz #25 8 months ago

    oh god you people and not understanding US trademark law. Here's the short version:

    You don't defend your trademark once, it becomes harder to defend later. This means it becomes much more attractive to attempt a confusing name. Bethesda doesn't defend "Scrolls" and suddenly someone puts out a game called "The Elemental Scrolls" with an open-world RPG lean. Bethesda will have to fight an uphill legal battle as the developers of "The Elemental Scrolls" point to "Scrolls". Their chances of winning the case at that point fall dramatically.

    You may wonder at this point, "Why is US trademark law so vicious?" and I really couldn't blame you. I'm not entirely sure, but I'm fairly certain it allows for faster 'recycling' of trademarks.

  • Number1Laing #26 8 months ago

    Example: "Coca Cola" is one of the most well-known trademarks, but there also exists a "Coca Colla"(with twin L). It's an energy drink, so i dare say the similarity is even bigger than between an open-world RPG and a card game. And cocacola company can't do a damn thing because they did not trademark the word "coca", only the whole phrase "coca cola".

    This is highly disingenuous. "Coca Colla" is, according to the Wiki you link to, is a drink limited to three cities in Bolivia. BOLIVIA. I guarantee you it will not last a day on American shores without feeling the full wrath of Coca-Cola's lawyers.

    Maybe Betheseda has a case. I can see why they might. Maybe they don't. I can see why they wouldn't. 't is up to the courts to decide - that's the whole point of a court system.

  • dagas #27 8 months ago

    Call of Duty - Call of Juarez, gears of War - God of War etc. So many games have much more simillar names than The Elder Scrolls and Scrolls yet that was no problem.

  • Nova1977 #28 8 months ago

    Myabe Bethesda have a game in the pipeline called "Scrolls". That siad, I just want to wipe this generation of gamedom from my mind, all we've had is endless talk about IP, lawsuits, copyright issues, sales, liquidation and some of the most memorable developers in the history of game developement being obliterated in the process. F... HD gaming.

  • Peter_LIAR_Molyneux #29 8 months ago

    Pete Hines is a poor man's spin doctor. Bethesda is totally responsible for this Langdell inspired mess. Maybe they should take the massive amounts of money being wasted chasing imaginary windmills and use it to actually hire some more programmers to eliminate the bugs that the QA testers DO FIND AND DOCUMENT but are then ignored to meet the 11/11/11 deadline that the marketing team fell in love with back in January.

  • Rack #30 8 months ago

    Sigh.

    For the people not able or prepared to spend 5 minutes reading into this Mojang are the copyright trolls here. They're trying to get exclusive right to the word Scrolls in all media. That's a dick move before you consider that it gives them the right to demand Bethesda stop using it for Skyrim. Can Bethesda claim prior art? Absolutely. Can they put up with Skyrim being delayed by a few weeks or months of legal hell? Absolutely not.

  • Notorious_LRO #31 8 months ago

    Total bullshit. "This is a business matter based on how trademark law works and it will continue to be dealt with by lawyers who understand it, not by me or our developers". At least grow some balls and stop blaming your lawyers.
    Edited by Notorious_LRO at 07/10/11 @ 07:09

  • jimr9999us #32 8 months ago

    Trademark law on a gaming site? Are you f-ing serious?

    Give me some more Skyrim vids and shut the f up. Seriously.

  • MaxiSleep #33 8 months ago

    I am confused cos I thought elder scrolls was same as magnetic scrolls.

  • penhalion #34 8 months ago

    In this instance I think Pete Hines is being a dick. It doesn't take any amount of legal knowledge to know that scrolls isn't in any way a trademark of Bethesda. It's a single word and countless other cases have already proved that you can't copyright those. You have to copyright the actual phrase.

    If he was really trying t be sincere he would have said to his lawyers (remember lawyers work for someone not as independent guns) that as long as his game is just called scrolls there's no need to waste money fighting a nonsense case about it.

    Instead he makes out that he's got nothing to do with the whole thing. Strange that as in a recent dispute (about a gambling game title we were working on) I simply told the lawyers to stop being dicks and work something out. Strangely as the comapny I work for was paying them, they listened. Go figure.

  • dnd #35 8 months ago

    an awful lot of uninformed rage in this thread. here's one tip: copyright != trademark, for those of you who think the words are interchangeable.

  • orren #36 8 months ago

    ----------------------------------------
    "Sigh.

    For the people not able or prepared to spend 5 minutes reading into this Mojang are the copyright trolls here. They're trying to get exclusive right to the word Scrolls in all media. That's a dick move before you consider that it gives them the right to demand Bethesda stop using it for Skyrim."
    ---------------------------------

    If YOU spent 5 minutes reading into this you'd know that the above is not the case, as mojang have offered to GIVE UP the trademark: http://notch.tumblr.com/post/10990169550...

  • zegerman1942 #37 8 months ago

    Of course Notch does not tell the whole side of the story. He only spins what he needs to in order to get maximum PR for minimum cost. Good on Bethesda for not jumping on that bandwagon.

  • orren #38 8 months ago

    ---------------
    "Of course Notch does not tell the whole side of the story"
    ---------------

    If making the complete legal documents of the case available to the public doesn't constitute 'telling the whole story' then i don't know what is.
    http://notch.tumblr.com/post/10814623188...

  • Lymmusic #39 8 months ago

    There probably is more to it than marcus is letting. Although bethesda are huge and rich, they aren't huge and rich because they sue eveyone, otherwise they would be skint... No corporation sends in the expensive lawyers just to fuck the little guy, not unless there ar genuine legal reasons. As sick as i am of corporations greedy behaviour i am more sick hearing these arrogant little independant developers banging on about how much they hate the big corporations yet their popularity and success force them ever closer to behaving in the same way. Mud slinging is mud slinging, whether its lawyers or twitter posts.

  • Xboxfanuk #40 8 months ago

    Two rich bastards fighting over a name which is part of a title of a game franchise. And this is news?

  • JayG #41 8 months ago

    From that article

    [link url=http://kotaku.com/5847295/mojang-v-bethesda-part-2-the-attorneys-and-notch--pete-weigh-in
    ]http://kotaku.com/5847295/mojang-v-bethe...[/link]

    "They're being very unreasonable," Notch said. "If someone made a game called 'Minesomething' or 'Somethingcraft,' we'd be fine with it. In fact, there are games that are VERY similar to Minecraft with these names already, and we are not going to go after them. We'd even be fine with both 'Mine' and 'Craft' separately

    Blizzard must be happy to hear that.

  • SylarsStubble #42 8 months ago

    ...and this is the reason why law is a well paid profession...

  • Subdominator #43 8 months ago

    If anybody is acting like Langdell it's Notch. Cause news flash, Bethesda did never trademark "Scrolls". Notch was the one that did so and without talking to Bethesda first. So unless Langdell had the trademark "The Elder Edge" all those accusations are outright stupid.

    Bethesda could've trademarked "Scrolls" a long time ago but they chose not to do so because they felt it wasn't right to register a trademark for a single word. Because of that whole "Edge" thing.

    The Notch Defense Force has to learn one thing: It's not always the one who is most vocal who is right. The facts are pretty clear, there can be no other Scrolls games. No matter if you're in the US or in Europe. McDonalds for example has only its name as a registered trademark. But that doesn't mean that you can make a store, call it McPizza or McBurger and get through with it. Trademarks protect you from misuse of the name itself and from people trying to profit from a similarity in name. Notch already went on the edge (I see what I did there) when he called his first game MineCRAFT. Blizzard could've easily sued him for that and they'd have won.

    Notch often responds with "but Bethesda uses Rage and Streets of Rage is a Sega trademark, they're doing the same thing". Do you know if Bethesda maybe settled with Sega to use the name? Maybe they paid Sega half a million to do so. It happens all the time with trademarks. So just pointing the finger doesn't cut it. If Notch had balls he would've just called the game differently, yet similar. It's not like the name decides the game's fate. I mean how cool would a name like "The game formerly known as Scro..." or "Rolled paper with magic stuff on it" be? Or "Scroll: The Plural"? Or he could have just trolled Bethesda and trademarked "Scroll Trolls".

  • Spungles #44 8 months ago

    The joke is I might not have heard of Scrolls if it wasn't for this. Now I'm considering not buying Skyrim until its cheap 2nd hand. Have at you, Bethesda!

  • uknortherner2000 #45 8 months ago

    @Rack: "For the people not able or prepared to spend 5 minutes reading into this Mojang are the copyright trolls here."

    Perhaps you ought to follow your own advice? This is about trademarking, not copyrighting.

  • coolbritannia #46 8 months ago

    Unless you believe a burning bush can really talk and a beardy bloke can part the dead sea, I'm pretty sure Bethesda are infringing the fantasy dead sea scrolls here.

  • Madder-Max #47 8 months ago

    scrolls arent just fantasy out reality in our distant past. just makes bethesda look like a bunch of cocks

  • simonpm #48 8 months ago

    Bullshit trademark law or not, this whole case is pedantry at it's most extreme and all parties involved should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for allowing it to get out of hand.

    Having said that, Mojang simply cannot lose out of this - if they win they'll be known as giant killers of the gaming industry. If they lose, people will feel sorry for the underdog, Bethesda will recieve more hate and it's all good press for Mojang. Bethesda on the other hand cannot win out of this. It's all bad press for them, and even if they win what have they gained? People can't use the word "Scrolls", big fkin deal.

    Bethesda are pretty stupid to have even let it get this far.

  • TexMurphy01 #49 8 months ago

    Sounds like what I want to be reading is Kotaku...

  • uknortherner2000 #50 8 months ago

    There's a town in Wales called Bethesda. It's been there for hundreds of years. Do they know they're infringing on Bethesda Softworks' trademark?
    Edited by uknortherner2000 at 07/10/11 @ 09:11

  • BigJonno #51 8 months ago

    I've got to wonder what some of the people throwing around their ill-informed opinions in this thread would do in Zenimax's position. Your highly-paid legal team get in touch and tell you that someone is doing something that, while it seems like a non-issue now, will open you up to all kinds of threats on your valuable IP down the road. Do you take their advice, knowing that they're doing exactly what you pay them to do and that it's part of your job and your obligation to the company owners to do so, or do you ignore them because a bunch of armchair lawyers on the internet are going to think you're a dick?

    Bonus question: how much say do you think a creative team of a subsidiary of the company making these decisions has in the process?

  • monty2k #52 8 months ago

    @Orren:
    If making the complete legal documents of the case available to the public doesn't constitute 'telling the whole story' then i don't know what is.
    http://notch.tumblr.com/post/10814623188...

    Nice but it's not really complete transparency is it?

    a) all the legal documents are in Swedish
    b) they're unedited
    c) they would use legal jargon that's probably unintelligible unless you're an expert in Swedish trademark law.

    I've read some court summaries (specifically the case of Heather Mills McCartney vs Paul McCartney) and it's hard reading even if it's in English and edited down to the essentials.

  • byakuya83 #53 8 months ago

    Post deleted at 10:03:41 30-03-2012

  • TruSmiles #54 8 months ago

    To be honest, this whole thing makes both Bethesda and Mojang look like a pair of cocks.

    But I still love both companies and this won't affect my purchasing decisions for either Skyrim or Scrolls.

  • arcam #55 8 months ago

    Anyone wonder what the CEO of Zenimax used to do? Yes he was a lawyer. At least he was until he was indicted on eight felony charges for lying to US regulators (he was acquitted), and banned from ever working in banking as part of a civil suit brought the Federal Reserve.

    Doesn't really mean anything of course, but might explain why Zenimax are more aggressive with their trademarks than other companies in similar positions.

  • scoop #56 8 months ago

    I wonder how many trademarked franchises have words "Rings", "Sword", "Gate", "Hell", "[insert any common word]" in them.

    So much for thousands of years of language development - it's all been a waste of time, if you can "own" a word by mere association.

  • lordofthedunce #57 8 months ago

    this is quite the comments thread.

    /Facepalm doesn't really cover it

  • alegl5141 #58 8 months ago

    Ok, so the Coca Colla thing might not be viewed as a threat to Coke Cola, but what about products which exist in somewhat more 'influential' countries like the UK for example, where pretty much every supermarket has their own brand of 'Coke' or 'Cola' which is called such.

    How are they permitted to sell without the presumably mega conglomerate shutting them down?

  • Spekingur #59 8 months ago

    Laws are not the same between countries. This case is being held in Swedish courts.

    Zenimax owns the trademark 'Elder Scrolls' - that's it. They do not own 'Scrolls' and thus the trademark itself does not infringe on their 'Elder Scrolls' trademark. The 'Elder Scrolls' trademark is not trademarking words A and B, it's trademarking the combination of these two words under A.

  • Kanjin #60 8 months ago

    It's a freaking card game!!!

  • Golgo #61 8 months ago

    To all the Tolkien lovers here who are saying his 'estate' should sue. Get a grip FFS, he didn't 'invent' elves and dragons and fantasy in general, as you are claiming! He merely drew on the global heritage of folklore and mythologies.

  • orren #62 8 months ago

    ----------------------------
    "@ Orren:
    Nice but it's not really complete transparency is it?

    a) all the legal documents are in Swedish
    b) they're unedited
    c) they would use legal jargon that's probably unintelligible unless you're an expert in Swedish trademark law. "
    -----------------------

    Notch published the documents the way they went to the swedish court.

    The fact that you personally cannot read swedish or that you are not a swedish law expert is not his fault in any way.
    "He did not tell the whole story" is quite a different accusation from "He did not translate it for me and explain it to me", don't you think?
    Edited by orren at 07/10/11 @ 11:33

  • Mr_Fujisawa #63 8 months ago

    @alegl5141

    There aren't any other 'Coke' branded Cola drinks. Coca-Cola and Coke are trademarks of Coca-Cola. I believe that Cola itself is a flavour of drink, it'd be like tradmarking 'Blackcurrant' and being sued by Ribena. So you couldn't trademark the flavour as such, so you can buy Tesco Cola, but not Tesco Coke, same as that you can buy Pepsi Cola.

  • Smoped #64 8 months ago

    Now admittedly my perception might be coloured by the fact that I think "Scrolls" is a piss poor name for a game, but...
    I'm 80-90% certain this is all just a publicity stunt by Notch. He has to know he can't win. Even if he'd eventually win the lawsuit, Zenimax/Bethesda would have dragged it on for so long it would have cost him everything he's made from Minecraft and then some. I expect him to reveal the new, real name for "Scrolls" in the near future.

  • CatWeazle #65 8 months ago

    I don't Mojang/Notch have a full grasp of this, and are likely to end up losing the battle - and a lot of money (good thing their last game was quite popular huh?)

    Incidentally Minecraft could equally have been seen to infringe Warcraft and Starcraft, so they've already been on the thin ice.

  • yoomazir #66 8 months ago

    I'm sure all the smartasses here, blaming Bethesda, have deep knowledge about trademarks and other legal issues, and also know what's happening in the Court's case...
    Yeah, thought so, fucking retards.
    Edited by yoomazir at 07/10/11 @ 13:36

  • Phishfood #67 8 months ago

    Bethesda being owned by Zenimax means they have to tow the company line. So if Zenimax wants to send lawyers after Mojang then they'll just have to bite their lip and go along with it.

  • WinterSnowblind #68 8 months ago

    @Rack
    "We offered several different solutions, like us not getting the trademark, and us not using the word 'Scrolls' in its raw form, but as part of a longer title."

    Bethesda are trying to stop him using the word period. If Notch does get the trademark, it just means no one else can make a game called Scrolls, it wouldn't completely stop others from being able to use the word in their titles.

    Sorry, but there's far too many people commenting on this who clearly have no idea what they're talking about. Don't try and claim one side is in the wrong when you don't understand the situation.

  • Spekingur #69 8 months ago

    @CatWeazle: Minecraft infringing on Warcraft and Starcraft? How so? Just because of the name? Because, you know, it is apparently not just about the name - it seems that Zenimax takes offense at something that Mojang is trying to trademark within their trademark application, but they do not want to tell us exactly what it is.

    @yoomazir: And you know everything?

  • CatWeazle #70 8 months ago

    @Spekingur: Just cuz they sound kinda similar ;-P You're right tho.. I think this is about the *scope* of Mojang's patent application - basically patenting the word 'Scrolls' in and across every medium known to man.

  • HyperTails #71 8 months ago

    @Golgo

    Yes, thanks for that Captain Obvious. Nobody said that he created Elves or Dragons, just that he created a world so perfect EVERY fantasy game/film/book has been a complete copy of his work.

  • arcam #72 8 months ago

    I think this is about the *scope* of Mojang's patent application - basically patenting the word 'Scrolls' in and across every medium known to man.

    But Mojang have already already offered to drop the trademark...

  • yoomazir #73 8 months ago

    @Spekingur no, and that's why I have the decency to not trash a dev/publisher when I don't know the whole story.

  • dnd #74 8 months ago

    tbh i wouldn't be surprised if blizzard/acti had a long hard look at 'minecraft' and considered some kind of action, but on balance decided not to. you don't have to have a trademark in order to stop somebody using a name, but it makes it easier.

  • GaryHoward #75 8 months ago

    This has nothing to do with Bethesda really. This is ZeniMax's doing, the bastard corporation owned by the bigger and evil bastard that is Rupert Murdoch, whom own Bethesda. This is getting silly now, feeling sorry for Mojang for the obvious stupidity over a bloody name and also Bethesda acting as an arse-raped puppet.

  • Smoped #76 8 months ago

    Also, Mojang got a reply to their trademark application that said that it was in violation of another trademark, they hadn't invested in advertising or other significant uses of the name, so they didn't stand to lose anything, and they still decided "Hey, let's use the name anyway!" Who does that? Why? To stick it to The Man?

  • Neil__ #77 8 months ago

    "Why don't Bethesda's legal team go and sue everyone who use the word "the" aswel?“ [sic]

    So the retards start spouting their gibberish almost immediately.
    If you dimwits don't understand trademarks then why don't you find out about them before making idiots of yourselves with comments like that.

    Then again, looking at the up-votes the ignorant outnumber the educated by a substantial margin.

  • Trigg3rHippie #78 8 months ago

    This stuff looks like it's taken right from s South Park episode.

  • Smoped #79 8 months ago

    @redbarony: Well ,there was that one time when both Palace Software and Psygnosis put out a game called "Barbarian" at roughly the same time. I bet some people were confused by that.

  • OliverH #80 8 months ago

    @Zaiz
    "oh god you people and not understanding US trademark law. Here's the short version: "

    I'm afraid it is you who doesn't understand. US trademark law has precisely zero relevance in a Swedish court.

    "You don't defend your trademark once, it becomes harder to defend later."

    There's a difference between "defending" and "swamping courts with frivolous lawsuits". If it was simply about defending the trademark, they could have long come to an agreement.

  • Captain_Jono #81 7 months ago

    @Koozer. I'd vote you up for not jumping on the David Versus Goliath bandwagon, but frankly what's the point after -40! I think I'll give you -1 instead, seeing as negative votes only seem to follow people who resist the line of populist tripe.

    Consider yourself +41 on common sense!