trademark dispute
Latest
FlowVella: The presentation app formerly known as Flowboard
What's the difference between Flowboard and Flipboard? If you're the creators of Flowboard - a presentation creation app -apparently the app name isn't different enough from Flipboard, the story aggregation app. A trademark court found Flowboard to be just a wee bit too close to the name of Flipboard, so the former is now being rebranded as FlowVella. Let's hope they don't get into a trademark dispute with the makers of Nutella... There's more news from the FlowVella front as part of the rebranding. The company is launching an App Builder for packaging your Flows as iPad apps - that will cost you as little as US$99/month per app. The apps are also getting new pricing to go along with the new name. The iPad version of FlowVella is now available for free, while the Mac version - formerly available for $19.99 - is now only $4.99. Should FlowVella become your presentation go-to tool, there are optional premium subscriptions available.
Groupon says it's ended its trademark spat with open-source community (update)
Well, this could get messy. The GNOME project is a well-known free and open-source desktop environment for Linux distros. Gnome is also the name of Groupon's new proprietary point-of-sale operating system. The two couldn't be more opposed in ethos, and given the fact that the former has held a registered trademark on its software for the best part of a decade, the GNOME Foundation is understandably upset.
Indie dev Radiangames faces multiplatform delisting over trademark dispute
Indie developer Radiangames (Powerpuff Girls: Defenders of Townsville) has been forced to remove one of its games from multiple online storefronts in the wake of a recent trademark dispute from an online games publisher. The disputed title is Crossfire, a retro-styled shoot-'em-up originally released for the Xbox Live Indie Games (XBLIG) service in 2010. Following the release of an XBLIG sequel, the series later made its way to PC and iOS devices under the name Super Crossfire. Developer Luke Schneider researched the title before releasing his game, but didn't notice that online games publisher G4Box launched the similarly-titled free-to-play military FPS Cross Fire for PC platforms in 2009. After recently announcing Cross Fire 2, G4Box filed a trademark dispute against Schneider's game, resulting in its upcoming removal from all available platforms. "[Super Crossfire] barely makes any money these days, and I'm not spending thousands of dollars to try to fight the issue when I just want to make games," Schneider explains. "I can't say too many bad things about someone who's enforcing the trademark according to the law, though I do think it's completely obvious Super Crossfire is not an attempt in any way to infringe on their trademark, and I also don't think there's any confusion over the two games (arcade shooter vs. online F2P FPS)." Schneider's game has already been removed from iTunes, and will be delisted from Desura, GamersGate, and XBLIG this Friday. Schneider has considered renaming the game for a future PC re-release, and is currently polling fans for suggestions. [Image: Radiangames]
Kaiju Combat Kickstarter on hold over Wizards of the Coast trademark dispute
A Kickstarter project for an indie game called Kaiju Combat: Giant Monsters has been put on hold, due to a trademark disagreement with game publisher Wizards of the Coast. Soon after raising $112,513 for its $100k goal, developer Sunstone Games received an infringement notice from Wizards of the Coast. The notice claimed the name of Sunstone's game violated Wizard's "Kaijudo" trademark, which refers to a collectible card game based on a Hasbro TV show.Sunstone says its lawyer contacted Wizards last December to argue that "Kaiju" (a Japanese word that means "monster") had nothing at all to do with "Kaijudo," and they believed the matter had been settled. But this past week Wizards took the matter to Kickstarter directly, which took the project offline, claiming it was "the subject of an intellectual property dispute."Sunstone's owner Simon Strange says he's working as quickly as possible to get the project reinstated. Going through court costs, he says, would be prohibitive on the company's "limited development budget." Strange adds he's "hopeful" that Sunstone won't have to change the game's name.
Microsoft bans use of Metro name in Windows Store apps (Update: May not be banned after all)
If Microsoft can't use the Metro name, no one else can. Not in its company-owned Windows Store, at least. An update to the Windows 8 app criteria guide explicitly tells developers that any submitted Windows Store app with Metro in the title will "fail certification" -- effectively, it's banned. There's a certain irony to the aggressive stance on naming when Microsoft itself still mentions Metro prominently across many of its pages, but the restriction isn't a laughing matter for developers already trying to support an OS that doesn't ship for another two months. One of the most popular apps in the pre-release Windows Store, MetroTwit, likely faces imminent exile without a name change; there's also worries that mass transit apps might get the boot for entirely innocuous uses of the word. We've reached out to Microsoft for comment on its legal rights in the area. In the meantime, it's safe to say that "metro" is only to be spoken in hushed tones anywhere near Microsoft's official content portals. Update: Word from WPCentral is that the language restricting developers from using the Metro name wasn't a new addition to the Windows 8 app criteria guide. Turns out, it was an older error that has since been removed. Rejoice, developers! It appears that the word is not off limits. We've reached out to Microsoft for confirmation and will update when we hear back.
Microsoft downplays Metro design name, might face a lawsuit over all that street lingo
If you've seen most of Microsoft's design language for nearly three years, there's only one word that sums it up: Metro. In spite of that urban look being the underpinning of Windows Phone, Windows 8 and even the Zune HD, Microsoft now claims to ZDNet and others that it's no longer fond of the Metro badge. Instead, it's supposedly phasing out the name as part of a "transition from industry dialog to a broad consumer dialog" while it starts shipping related products -- a funny statement for a company that's been shipping some of those products for quite awhile. Digging a little deeper, there's murmurs that the shift might not be voluntary. Both Ars Technica and The Verge hear from unverified sources that German retailer Metro AG might waving its legal guns and forcing Microsoft to quiet down over a potential (if questionable) trademark dispute. Metro AG itself won't comment other than to say that these are "market rumors," which doesn't exactly calm any frayed nerves over in Redmond. Should there be any truth to the story, we hope Microsoft chooses an equally catchy name for those tiles later on; Windows Street Sign Interface Windows 8-style UI just wouldn't have the same ring to it.
Blizzard opposes Valve's DOTA trademark application
Blizzard has filed an opposition in Valve's ongoing trademark application to trademark the word DOTA, an acronym for the Defense of the Ancients map made popular through Warcraft III's custom map scene. DOTA was responsible for a good portion of Warcraft III's success and widespread competitive play, and the community has been calling the genre DOTA for many years before Valve began development of DOTA 2. Valve hired on DOTA developer Icefrog to develop a new DOTA product from the ground up in house. Other DOTA developers went off to form Riot Games, which makes the incredibly popular League of Legends. And even as Riot tries to shift the nomenclature from DOTA to MOBA, the community that started it all is still winning out. Even Valve head honcho Gabe Newell said he didn't like the DOTA or MOBA acronym, instead substituting ARTS, or Action Real Time Strategy, in its place. Filing an opposition does not necessarily mean that Blizzard wants to trademark DOTA -- it doesn't. Rather, an opposition makes light of information otherwise not seen and shows that there is more at stake and more people and parties have a stake in the word DOTA as being a community-owned term. Valve and Gabe Newell responded to Blizzard's opposition by stating that the game being developed was a true sequel to DOTA and rightfully should have the moniker trademarked. However, the DOTA genre is still very much a term used to describe the three-lane tower setup of the classic DOTA map. Blizzard will be releasing its own Blizzard DOTA game in the future through its brand new Battle.net Arcade system.
Bethesda tells Mojang to lay down its virtual guns, lawyer up for a trademark battle
Time was, men could settle their disputes with glinting swords at the ready and their honor on the line. Nowadays, only the cosplaying and Comic Con attending folk alike are likely to burnish (elvish) blades, although they're rather inapt to sully them with enemy blood. Well, unsurprisingly, Mojang head Markus "Notch" Persson's modern day offer of a Quake 3 Arena simulated duel -- his proposed method of extralegal recourse -- was shot down by Bethesda, the company suing the Minecraft creator for use of the word "Scrolls" in its unreleased card game. As these are apparently sue-happy times, both parties are headed to court to battle it out, with Mojang facing the terrible repercussion of a forced product name change. From the looks of the defendant's Twitter feed, however, it doesn't appear the impending litigation's breaking this Swede's stride.
Minecraft creator challenges Bethesda to deathmatch for the word 'scrolls'
While Samsung, Apple, HTC and others battle it out in court with lawyers and expansive patent portfolios, one man seems to know how real geeks settle disputes -- with a deathmatch. Markus "Notch" Persson, the man behind Minecraft and head of Mojang, has decided the best way to put the trademark squabble with Bethesda to rest is two rounds of three-on-three Quake 3 Arena action. The Elder Scrolls developer is sticking with the same tactics that have made smartphone companies our new least-favorite corporate citizens, but Notch thinks ownership of the word "scrolls" can best be determined with BFGs and railguns. With any luck this will catch on and, when Steve Jobs and Larry Page lead their forces into battle in Team Fortress, we're gonna have to put on our money on the Mountain View crew.
Judge strips Langdell of trademarks, doesn't award EA damages
Tim Langdell and EA have been bumping heads for a while now. As suggested last week, Judge William Alsup has approved a move to cancel Langdell's collection of "Edge" trademarks after he lost a legal battle with EA, concerning "Mirror's Edge." All parties must furnish their own court costs and EA will receive no damages, GamesIndustry.biz reports. There's also a special stipulation: Langdell must inform "all persons and entities with whom a licensing agreement has been obtained involving the trademarks asserted herein that the marks have been cancelled and provide these persons and entities with a copy of the order denying plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction and the final judgment." In layman's terms, it means that Langdell must contact these firms and individuals and inform them he no longer holds any of these "Edge" trademarks. By Friday, Langdell or his representatives must provide a sworn statement to this effect. As for EA, it looks like the company is ready to move on from the affair. In a statement, an EA representative stated, "We're pleased that we've reached a settlement and can put this behind us."
Law of the Game on Joystiq: Trademark infringement? Not like-wii
Each week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq, a column on legal issues as they relate to video games: GamePolitics recently posted a piece on Forbis, the makers of the weemote, and an issue that is all too familiar in Trademark law: trademark infringement. To summarize the GamePolitics piece, Forbis Technologies trademarked "weemote" in the year 2000 for a children's television remote. According to a Time piece on the weemote, sales have fallen considerably since the Nintendo Wii was released. The blog-o-sphere coined the term "Wiimote" soon after the Wii hardware was announced, and the term has stuck ever since. Nintendo, however, does not have a trademark on the term "wiimote," only on "wii."Forbis is hoping to enter into a business arrangement by which it can re-brand its product and Nintendo can take control of "wiimote" and "weemote" (pronounced the same) because, as they put it, "the damage has been done here (whether intentional or not)." In fact, in cases of possible infringement between a significantly larger player and a smaller one such as this, a settlement of this nature would not be unusual. Even if Nintendo believes it would be successful in an infringement suit with Forbis, this may be the far cheaper option to resolve the issue. After all, the weemote brand had minimal value before the introduction of the Wiimote based on the company's self-described weak sales. Nintendo has thus far declined to purchase "weemote." But stopping at an out-of-court settlement wouldn't do much to illuminate the legal points that exist here, so let's take a look at this as if it were going to go to trial.
