Blizzard and Valve at War Over DOTA Name

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Blizzard's Warcraft 3 Map editor clearly states in the EULA that anything made or used in the map editor is property of Blizzard and can be claimed as such. Therefore Valve (who are being nothing by opportunists by making Dota 2 in the first place) shouldn't have a case in the matter.
 
This makes me happy that I canceled my preorder on Diablo 3 last night and no longer have any intentions of trying or buying the game particularly after trying Skyrim. DOTA was never owned by Blizzard and the only association to it is through a fan created mod and sub genre just as Counter Strike is and was along with other famous mods turned franchises. and Blizzard didn't expend energy in DOTA the mod developers did.
 
I don't like that Valve is working on DOTA2. I've never been a fan of DOTA or any of those various copycat products. The game is too stressful and the people who play it are about as annoying as they come. Valve would do better to come up with their own new franchise or finish what they started with Half Life.

Having said that, I know Valve did this before with Team Fortress. I know that successful mod ideas have gotten teams of people hired, resulted in licenses and business start-ups, and contributed to many of our favorite games today. I'm ok with what Valve is doing. It doesn't look nefarious the way Blizzard paints it. They had plenty of opportunity over the years to take what was obviously a popular and successful enhancement to their games and do something with it. They had plenty of opportunity to hire modders, create games based on DOTA, or develop expansions for existing games that implement DOTA. Blizzard sat on its butt instead. Valve saw an opportunity being squandered by Blizzard, went after it, and just now Blizzard is realizing "hey, maybe we should have done more" and trying to take action finally. Too late.

Let this be a lesson to the other Blizzards of the world. Mods are great. Mod teams come up with more ideas and content in a shorter amount of time than your developers do. They move faster, they don't care about financial success, and they focus on gameplay quality. Some of them are more talented than others. Modders are a goldmine for future opportunities. Don't cut them out. Don't forbid modding of your games. Don't ignore teams that become celebrities in the communities of your games. Embrace modding and the community will constantly hand you new ideas and vet them to boot! Blizzard should have hired some DOTA people to help them build a DOTA game. They left the door wide open for a competitor like Valve.
 
[citation][nom]therabiddeer[/nom]Eul is working with Riot on League of Legends (maybe with guinsoo too, the other original developer). The only dev that valve has is icefrog.Also, Blizz only wants to stop the trademark... they dont care if valve calls their game DotA 2.[/citation] Blizzard is just trying to be greedy pricks they want to stop the trademark because simply put even though they have zero to do with actually creating the DOTA mod itself they want to benefit off of it's name recognition which they will have no rights to do so if Valve gets the patent they deserve first come first serve.
 
[citation][nom]knowom[/nom]Blizzard is just trying to be greedy pricks they want to stop the trademark because simply put even though they have zero to do with actually creating the DOTA mod itself they want to benefit off of it's name recognition which they will have no rights to do so if Valve gets the patent they deserve first come first serve.[/citation]
And Valve aren't? Put the fanboyism for Valve aside and realize that both are being greedy. If anyone deserves the trademark is the original creators, Eul and Guinsoo not Icefrog...at least according to everyone's logic in here (that who deserves the trademark is the modder) and of course, common sense.
 
[citation][nom]msgun98[/nom]While I agree in principle that Blizz is in the wrong, I fear that legally they will be able to win this if their EULA for WC3 explicitly states that all mods created for WC3 are the sole property of Blizzard. I'm afraid Valve and the original creators of DOTA might get pwn'd by a stupid, unethical EULA.[/citation] The mods might be, but not the names and ideas. Owning the rights to someone's ideas without their express knowledge and consent is unconstitutional.
 
[citation][nom]xerroz[/nom]And Valve aren't? Put the fanboyism for Valve aside and realize that both are being greedy. If anyone deserves the trademark is the original creators, Eul and Guinsoo not Icefrog...at least according to everyone's logic in here (that who deserves the trademark is the modder) and of course, common sense.[/citation] Except of course Icefrog was a DOTA modders as well and the project itself was even passed on to him. He was also the only one to decide to patent it the others had ample oppertunity. Eul and Guinsoo weren't concerned with it being that it's only a trademark anyway you can spin the concept plenty of ways without calling it DOTA Vavle simply seeks to own the rights to the name DOTA they aren't patenting the game idea itself.

Don't give me some valve fanboy crap Counter Strike a mod in the same fashion as DOTA is the only valve product I've even played. I'm no more a fan of Valve than I am other well respected developers like ID even though they haven't made a product I've enjoyed since Quake 3.
 
Instead of going against each other, why not partner up and make a killer FPS StarCraft game... or the other way around, a RTS Half-Life. =)
 
Pointless arguments.. It doesn't matter who modded it. When you open up the map creator for Blizzard WC or SC series, it states in the Terms of Agreement basically any map created modding the engine belongs to Blizzard and cannot be sold as a third-party software. In a court of law, DoTA technically belongs to Blizzard no matter what you guys think. I personally don't like this because I'm waiting for DoTA2 myself and wouldn't like the name to be changed.

Icefrog and Guinsoo are now making big money because they used WC3 DoTA to represent themselves as developers. They already know they won't and will never claim rights to DoTA on the WC3 which is why they developed LoL and DoTA2.
 
First off, Blizzard didn't create the content or name it Defense of the Ancients. Steve Feak did.

Second, Blizzard didn't trademark the acronym "DOTA" or copyright the name "Defense of the Ancients."

Third, the lead designer of Valve's DOTA "IceFrog", has been the developer of the DOTA mod for warcraft 3 since 2005.

Fourth, Just because DOTA was created using Warcraft's game editor doesn't make it property of Blizzard. Imagine Microsoft claiming trademark on all software that was written using windows.

Blizzard fail, lawyer win!
 
And to all the ranters on blizzards terms of service for the map creator, and the EULA's. Those are not legally binding in any way, to anyone. Ask the massive group of Sony customers if the EULA that sais "you can't sue us" has kept them from filing suit against Sony.
 
seriously I am sure the guy that made the mod didn't even get a lick of a nickel for that mod and now blizzard wants to make bank off of it somehow without paying for it.

Blizzard: NOOOO we didn't come up with that but that's OUR invention because they used OUR game to do it with.


This is why we, as humans are going to fail in the future. We sue ANY person that comes up with something, whether its an idea or a plan to improve something, there are sharks waiting.


Example: Someone doesn't want to invent light speed because they'll have George Lucas, Star Trek representatives and any other sci-fi flick that even mentioned or had light speed in it suing that clown.

We wont advance, especially with all these issues.
 
I think a lot of commenter need to brush up on their rights a bit.
1. Any product created by you is yours under ALL circumstances. No matter what, including any agreements signed. With the sole exception of "a work for hire" which is clearly not the case.
2. Eula agreements are NOT law, they require court approval to be valid. Any Eula Agreement cannot breach any rights, provided reasonable limits. Which the courts must decide.

I honestly see Valve having no trouble defending its right to use the term DOTA. Blizzard did not create it, the modding team did. and from I'm reading in the comments Valve has at least one major member of the team employed.
 
I think it is important to note that DOTA has required WC3 to play and another point was that its Genesis and later rise on popularity occurred on Battlenet which is exclusively owned by Blizzard. I do see the points raised by those siding with Valve but Valves success could come at a high price for us gamers. It could result in developers in the future refusing to support any mods that are not made by them to prevent such things occurring in the future. The original DOTA could not have been made without the original game and Battlenet infrastructure both of which were made and financed by Blizzard with all associated risks and costs. Is it really unreasonable for Blizzard attempting to stop another company making the DOTA franchise their own? What does this mean for Mods in the future? Blizzard provided the basis for the game and the means to enjoy it without pinging gamers a cent for the privilege. The developer who made DOTA has achieved personal success and many of us have enjoyed WC3 and DOTA for many years and Blizzard made it all possible. That has to be worth something.
 
As a Computing and IT UG with IP and business laws modules, while not a lawyer I know some things regarding copyrights:
DOTA as a software is copyrighter to the original creator, but as an opensource/freeware software EVERYONE has the right of editing the actual software, as long as it is released free and with credits to the original creator. Thus the context of the game is free and any code used in the game can be used by anyone, as long as the specific parts of code are released in public. Same principles with OS X and UNIX, Apple releases the UNIX parts of OS X with every update as free and the final user only pays for the add-ons/other included software/UI.

As for the name it is similar with the Linux dispute. Linus Torvalds did not register the "Linux" trademark and when an enterpriser tried to register it for personal benefits, Torvald took legal action and the trademark is consider to be "royalty free" under a sub licence from Toryald. A problem in DOTA case is that the original creator is actually lost and Valve in reality only hired the person behind DOTA for the last 4 months (All Stars version) and not the original one.

I talked about code, this lawsuit is not about code, but as Blizzard pointed out the basic code where DOTA lies on, it is copyrighted to Blizzard, making this a complex legal dispute. If Warcraft 3 ToA has a loophole, a small window or something regarding mods TMs and copyrights then Blizzard legally is the owner of the name as well. If no such thing exist within W3 ToA, then my best guess it will be similar to Linux case with Valve failing to register the TM and Blizzard maybe forced to licence it with free or fair royalties.
 
[citation][nom]arcu86[/nom]Blizzard should of hired the creater of DOTA, not vavle.[/citation]
Actually mate Valve did not hire the original creator, but only the person behind maintenance of the "all stars" version of DotA.
 
[citation][nom]Wamphryi[/nom]I think it is important to note that DOTA has required WC3 to play and another point was that its Genesis and later rise on popularity occurred on Battlenet which is exclusively owned by Blizzard. I do see the points raised by those siding with Valve but Valves success could come at a high price for us gamers. It could result in developers in the future refusing to support any mods that are not made by them to prevent such things occurring in the future. The original DOTA could not have been made without the original game and Battlenet infrastructure both of which were made and financed by Blizzard with all associated risks and costs. Is it really unreasonable for Blizzard attempting to stop another company making the DOTA franchise their own? What does this mean for Mods in the future? Blizzard provided the basis for the game and the means to enjoy it without pinging gamers a cent for the privilege. The developer who made DOTA has achieved personal success and many of us have enjoyed WC3 and DOTA for many years and Blizzard made it all possible. That has to be worth something.[/citation]
Finally someone with logic! :)

Up to now most companies did not include any such policies regarding mods trademarks and copyrights, other than royalties, not to sell mods, etc etc. Many companies rely on mods to provide a longer lifespan and value for money in their games, without having them actually pay anything than provide some tailored tools they used during the game development. I do not think they will stop helping modders, but they may now start to pay more attention to legal documents, agreements and restrictions, even distribution related restrictions -only through their controlled channels.
 
[citation][nom]dalethepcman[/nom] Fourth, Just because DOTA was created using Warcraft's game editor doesn't make it property of Blizzard. Imagine Microsoft claiming trademark on all software that was written using window. [/citation]

Actually to release a commercial software under Windows, such as a game, you need ROYALTIES from Microsoft.

If you actually use an open source component of Windows and do not mess up with the rest, you do not even need royalties. In example games using OpenGL are royalties free, as OpenGL is a shareware and everyone can use it, as long as they credit the original creators and release the code they used in public. Developing a software with a language such as Java, it is again royalty free, as Java is licensed under Sun and you agree with Sun rules. The fact that Windows have a Java Virtual Mahcine to run your code is irrelevant to you in terms of legal and copyrights. If you however use the software in a Windows computer you have to cite Windows brand and trademarks to MS.

If you are using a Windows component, then yes you need royalties or if you are accessing Windows code in any way. You agree to all these when you sign up as a developer to any platform, whenever you have a paid or free subscription.

Icefrog contribution is enormous and will be taken into consideration for sure, but it is not such a turning point if I can recall open source software laws properly.

In any case I hope none will get the TM and both Blizz. and Valve shut up and continue developing their versions of DOTA 😛
 
I think valve has no business using the name DOTA, they need to call it something else, like league of legends did.
The only person i feel should rightfully be able to name something Defense of the ancients, should be the designer of the warcraft3 map.
by another company making and selling a product called the same thing, they will be taking the credit for the warcraft3 version of DOTA. so valve would just be profiting off of all the popularity and attention that DOTA earned with Warcraft3.
 
SO STUPID, that equal saying the first person in the world called exemple Steve well would sue all the other Steve for copyright name ............. Soon or later all the world will be copyright so we gonna see like non sense name product coming. Like the new twelve corse phone the ' vthioplekurj ' Yeah baby the fastest phone in the world.
 
What a shame that article fails to mention that Valve employed ICE frog, the one and only developer of DOTA mod. By the way official approach of Blizzard to the game of DOTA was: 'we dont want to know' until Valve spot the chance to make it big, NOW they are outraged someone is stealing THEIR game? I was a fan of Blizzard and their products. Was. This is beyond trolling
 
IIRC all mod names are the IP of their prospective owners. So the people who should be really pissed off here are the makers of DOTA not Blizzard. If Blizzard wants to step in on behalf of the mod team that made DOTA then that's fine. Blizzard might even be able to claim that since DOTA is a mod for warcraft it falls under their IP and that they should be the ones who get to choose whether or not to trademark the name. If the creators and blizzard declined to TM it and neither of them put it up for public license then valve should be allowed to TM it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom