| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (122)

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:03AM eat it said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
They may have a legitimate claim. but suing valve is not a smart PR move.

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:22AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@eat it

Blizzard isn't suing Valve, they're trying to prevent them from registering Dota as a trademark.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:22AM Ectoplasm said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@eat it Especially with Diablo III due as soon as Q2, and a huge portion of PC gamers being Valve customers/zealots... I actually think Blizzard is in the right in suing Valve, but whether they're SMART to be handling it so publicly is another story.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:24AM Ectoplasm said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ectoplasm Eh but on second thought, is there really any other way to handle it? Blizzard's in quite a pickle but they need to do what they need to do.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:25AM Warlock said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@eat it Neither is trademarking a name associated with another company :P
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:59AM eat it said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@This Little Man Says His Name Is


I'm sorry, trying to prevent them from registering Dota as a trademark isn't a smart PC move.

Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:00AM eat it said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Warlock

This is also very true.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:13AM LexStewther said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Warlock

Ahh, but DOTA isn't associated with Activision or Blizzard. It is associated with the mod that was created using the WoW platform. Blizzard had nothing to do with the creation of the mod itself. And one of the original DOTA modders are working with Valve to create DOTA2, so how is that not fair. Activision/Blizzard dropped the ball in the first place by not sponsoring this product and now that they stand to lose out on it, they are crying like babies.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:15AM liquidsoap89 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Warlock

I don't think the titles association has anything to do with where it should end up. The guy who MADE DOTA is working at Valve on DOTA 2, and the way I see it... If anybody should get "ownership" of that title, it should be who made it. Not whoever owns the game you played it in.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:52AM Prince David said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@eat it Blizzard has no right, they don't own Defense of the Ancients. This was a completely fan made mod of the game.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 2:08PM bto said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@liquidsoap89

Icefrog did not make DOTA. He is the last known modder who took over for Guinsoo, who is working for Riot. If we go by your logic, then Riot is the one that should be able to hold on to this copyright. However, it's been said before, Riot and Blizzard don't want Valve to have the trademark, as it belongs to the community, not a corporate entity, they want to keep it community owned.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 2:48PM leksicon said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@liquidsoap89

You and I and any other reasonable person would think that.. But I bet there's plenty of language in Blizzard's Warcraft creator software EULA which basically says they own anything you create within it, your soul inclusive

Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 4:32PM Shadowless said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@eat it "Smart" or not, I fully support Blizzard in this move. Stupid of Valve to come in and claim ownership. Especially when they go around and demand other companies to remove characters. This is especially bad when they do it against some of the previous (or original?) developers of DOTA such as the makers of League of Legends.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 5:54PM Jennacide said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@This Little Man Says His Name Is
Valve already owns the Trademark, they also already won a case just like this. Blizzard is also trying to use a really murky legal trick, claiming the trademark is currently unused, because DOTA 2 is only in beta and not retail released yet, even though it IS in use on the beta.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 6:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@LexStewther
Yep exactly what i was going to say.

These articles i've read today regarding this are coming across really bias towards blizzard, all because blizzard think they own the rights ??

The fact that the mod creator was hired by valve means valve own the name, simple as. This mod has been ripped off by League of Legends Heroes of Newerth (i'd feel gutted if it was my mod being ripped off). But atleast they used different names, but blizzard is calling theirs blizzard dota, kind of like they are claiming they invented the name and game style (which is totally out of order).

On another note, there is a CS mod called GG (Gun Game) which was put into a Call of Duty game. Do you know what valve did ???
Nothing. Because they don't own it because it was in their game, just because there is a mod in a game doesn't mean that the game company can claim the rights to it.

Also i think that adding Facts to an article is VERY important, as getting something wrong can cause people to stir hate towards a curtain party no matter what the news is about.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 8:01PM vaylen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Jennacide

Valve hasn't won anything. They applied for the name and there were immediate challenges from Guinsoo and others. Blizzard is simply the largest entity to contest Valve's ability to use the name DOTA for their product. It could easily wind up that nobody gets to use DOTA and everyone has to make their own name for their product (Which Riot has already done)
Reply

Posted: Feb 11th 2012 3:38PM EngadgetSoFunny said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@LexStewther

The fact the DOTA one developer works at Valve and he coined the phrase makes it more his product/name more so than Blizzards. Working for Valve that ownership seems to transfer more to Valve than anywhere else.

Besides, Leage of Legends uses a DOTA-style gameplay and could easily be described as a standalone DOTA product seperate from a mod. So really, I'd argue that if anything the term is too general to be copyrighted in that its almost already 'common language'. It would be almost akin to trying to copyright 'Color Television' after 3 companies were already producing TVs 'modded' to have Color capabilities.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:06AM Guibs said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
So when will the original create of the mod sue both Blizzard and Valve for using his name?

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:14AM koehler83 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Guibs

He's making Dota 2 with Valve.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:22AM oO Wallace Oo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Guibs

As far as I am aware the original mod creator now works at Valve
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:23AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@koehler83

IceFrog isn't the original developer, he's the latest one.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:25AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@koehler83 @Guibs Isn't one of them making DOTA 2 and the other made League of Legends? I've always been a little confused with who was doing what.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:30AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

The 2nd Developer Guinsoo works for Riot Games on League of Legends.
The 3rd Developer IceFrog is working for Valve on "DOTA 2".
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:39AM Jenks said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@This Little Man Says His Name Is

1st Developer is Eul, who according to Valve, is working for them.

"IceFrog was the catalyst; he's the main reason why we're making DOTA 2" -- says Johnson. "A lot of us are DOTA fans also from a game-design perspective, and at Valve we already have the original creator of DOTA, Eul."

http://www.1up.com/previews/dota-2-valve-fanboys-developers
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 6:15PM Zamzoph said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Jenks

It's rather peculiar that all claims of Eul working for Valve comes back to this one comment in one 1Up interview. It makes me rather suspicious of whether or not it's even true. If it really was, I imagine Valve would've flaunted his name side-by-side with Icefrog this whole time.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:08AM koehler83 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Go Valve!

I feel it's necessary for the community to arbitrarily take a side.

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:09AM Korbie said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
My money's on Valve winning this one.

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:31AM dakoe3 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Korbie I hope Valve wins this one. Blizzard has no rights over the name since they didn't even create it. They should have handled the situation how Valve handled the Counter-Strike situation. As soon as the game became popular they backed it up and the creators became part of the studio. Blizzard dropped the ball with this one. They just look butthurt right now.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:42AM Major Pyr0 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@dakoe3 Please read the article. Blizzard doesn't want to own the name, they want it to stay with the community. Valve are the one that want to own the name.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 2:52PM Guibs said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Major Pyr0

Since the original create works for Valve it seems, it makes sens for them to want to use the name again. It's just another way for Blizzard to try to piss people off. You get to see the Activision hold right there.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 3:15PM Lotobarnes said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Major Pyr0
The issue is that the name means a lot in this case, as it shows both nostalgia and that it means to be the "true" successor to DotA. If they have Eul and Icefrog on board then they have every right to continue using that name and since this game will be stand-alone and not a mod it only makes sense that they take ownership of its name if they choose to branch out with it. Guinsoo went to make a new game in many different ways just using the DotA concept as a stepping stone, so it would make sense that they don't make use of its name. Blizzard wanting to "keep it in the community" however is both a meaningless phrase and an empty one because they just don't want Dota 2 to interfere with the future of their Blizzard DOTA and they'd likely move to make money off the title in the future, if Blizzard has shown one thing in their company's history up to this point its that they are willing to try to squeeze money out of just about anything they can despite their words in the past.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:09AM eat it said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think they should just change the name. Personally, I don't know what Dota means. Do the letters stand for anything? Is it a made up word? Is it someone's name?

It makes me feel like I'm not in the loop, which makes me feel like maybe I should just skip this game since I don't know anything about it.

If they change it. everyone interested will still know about it and a better name help market it to people that don't know anything about it.

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:16AM HighFiveJesus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@eat it

thank you its exactly how i feel. Its really going to hurt the marketability.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:22AM Laivindil said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@eat it

Defense of the Ancients
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:23AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@eat it In case you actually wanted an answer DOTA is an acronym for Defence of the Ancients; the name of the original mod that was created.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:25AM Jing2487 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@eat it
Yes actually it stands for "Defense of the Ancients" Its just that everyone called it DotA (notice the spelling) Valves is Dota 2. Valve even went as far as to hire the guy that made the mod. The concept, design and gameplay are also pretty much the same as well. But valve is not calling it "Defense of the Ancients 2"
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:27AM HighFiveJesus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Laivindil

ah well see, that wasn't hard at all was it? How hard would it be to put that on the box? Seriously, they were going to use DOTA?
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:32AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@HighFiveJesus

The map is universally known as DotA, its rarely ever refereed to as Defence of the Ancients so it makes a lot more sense to call it DOTA 2 then Defence of the Ancients 2.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:34AM DekuTree said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@eat it

You could also just google it..
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:56AM Softserve said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@DekuTree I think his original point of that name being meaningless to the masses when at retail is still solid.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:18AM liquidsoap89 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Softserve

Though I haven't heard anything about this game being sold at retail stores.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 10:40AM Redeemer said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@eat it
But at the same time, any name is meaningless until you learn more about the game. I mean, what is "Mass Effect" if you didn't know anything about the game before hand?

There is a big fan base for DotA who recognize the game's name. Why wouldn't they want to tap into that by keeping the name? Brand recognition is huge.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 2:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@eat it Defense of the Ancients.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 3:34PM HighFiveJesus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@eat it

Its definitely me then. I just hate brands that abbreviate because they perceive its so mainstream there's no way you wouldn't know what it stood for. I do seem to let it pass when it makes up a real word, like for the stalker games, so I think i'm just a bit of a hypocrite, but overall it irks me.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:10AM Clerono said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Oh boy I cant wait for evil companies (EA( claim ownership of my user generated content!

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:26AM eat it said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Clerono

Ownership is probably in the user agreements.

If you WORKED for them and designed a game they would make you sign a contract that states that everything you do for them is their property. That is assuming you are not some hot shot designer that they are head-hunting.

Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 7:33PM MarkKB said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@eat it

Stuff developed in the employment of a company is owned by a company. However, the same is not true for fan-made mods or maps - they are considered 'transformative works' and therefore are protected by copyright.
Reply

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:10AM Jing2487 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Valve should challenge Blizzard to a DOTA match for the rights of the name. It would certainly be more amusing.

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:11AM MooseMuffin said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
This seemed inevitable once Blizzard announced their game as "Blizzard DOTA".

Posted: Feb 10th 2012 9:16AM PCEliTiST said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@MooseMuffin Also, it seems that's the reason Blizzard "recently" started patching again the game, after years of inactivity by them... They wanted probably to say: "here, we still care and we're active on this game".
Reply

Featured Stories

Image

Stiq Figures, May 14 - 20: He's heating up edition

Posted on May 27th 2012 11:30PM

Image

The Joystiq Indie Pitch: Ballin

Posted on May 27th 2012 10:30PM

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW