• Fortress Fallout Strong-armed by ZeniMax/Bethesda into Changing Name
    50 replies, posted
[quote=TechRaptor] [B]Howard Marks, the founder of the indie studio Xreal, recently received a cease and desist letter from ZeniMax over the use of the word “Fallout” in the title of his upcoming game Fortress Fallout. ZeniMax is the parent company of Bethesda, which publishes the Fallout games, and owns a trademark on the title Fallout. [/B] The purpose of trademarks is to protect consumers from buying substandard products from imitators using the name of popular product, and to protect the reputations of companies from being associated with such imitators. If someone were to make a post-apocalyptic RPG and called it Fallout, there would be a very good reason why people might confuse it with the already existing Fallout series, and possibly buy it on that basis. However, Marks does not believe that their game violates the trademark, because Fortress Fallout is a significantly different game from the Fallout series, and their should be no confusion by consumers causing them to believe that they are related. However he admitted that they do not currently have the money to put up a drawn out fight in court over this, so they will be changing the name of the game.[/quote] [url=http://techraptor.net/content/fortress-fallout-strong-armed-changing-name]Source[/url]. Here is a video explaining the situation: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcwaoUGpaaE[/media] It is a shame that Zenimax is doing this again, especially after doing it to Mojang.
Fucking retarded that you can copyright such a broad word, what next Suing a Power plant because they say they've discovered Nuclear Fallout? Unless you invented the actual word, YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PATENT A WORD.
My take on this type of thing is if you are doing something in an unrelated business, then I'd be on your side in using a term associated with someone else's product. But in this case, a person is making a game using the name of a famous series of games, and the word "Fallout" is the actual name of a game. The example in the article, 'scrolls' is not the same, since Daggerfall/Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim is how those games are referred to in terms of fame, no one calls them "Elder Scrolls III" or similar. "Half life" is a term commonly associated with various topics related to radiation too, you sure as hell aren't going to be allowed to make your own Half Life game.
[QUOTE=Source;47161003]Fucking retarded that you can copyright such a broad word, what next Suing a Power plant because they say they've discovered Nuclear Fallout? Unless you invented the actual word, YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PATENT A WORD.[/QUOTE] They patented the [U]use[/U] of fallout in the [I]title.[/I] Guess what this guy was using it for? Use in his title. It's dumb, but that's how it do. And I can actually see how this would cause a little confusion unlike scrolls.
[QUOTE=Xubs;47161129]Gamebryo Engine is not the cause of Bethesda's faults and people need to stop blaming the wrong thing. Bethesda is entirely the fault for why Oblivion and Skyrim have some gross engines, not Gamebryo. All of the gross bits of the Beth RPG games are entirely their own code, Gamebryo was just a vehicle for it, and you wouldn't blame Ford for someone driving a Ford GT when they scrubbed a pedestrian, would you? Gamebryo's been used from things as different as Civ 5 to Epic Mickey.[/QUOTE] gamebryo was also used for the scholarship edition of bully.
You shouldn't be able to trademark or patent a single word. It's in the dictionary, defined, as one word. If you make a game that uses that word, You do so full well knowing that it can be used elsewhere. Why doesn't Merriam Webster fuck your ass up? Because it's ridiculous, that's why
I usually like Bethesda, but their ridiculous use of their trademarks makes me pretty mad. What if you made a game called Nuclear Fallout? It literally describes a potential real world event, but I bet Bethesda would sue the shit out of you. :(
Be sure to help greenlight my new action golf game, Fall Out Fore.
zenimax aren't bethesda. this is just lawyers being lawyers
So Rage and Doom are also words you can't use for your game I suppose?
imagine if valve made them change the name because it says "fortress"
[QUOTE=.Lain;47161277]zenimax aren't bethesda. this is just lawyers being lawyers[/QUOTE] zenimax was literally founded by Bethesda employees with the money they got from Bethesda
I remember they did this with Notch's Scrolls game because of the Elder Scrolls
rip fallout boy, too infringing
I don't see this as being too egregious - it's a video game that has the word[I] fallout[/I] in the title. When I think of videogames with the word [I]fallout[/I] in the title, I think of the Bethesda RPGs. This guy might not have been malicious in his intent, but letting him slide could be seen as an implicit pass for hacks that do want to associate their subpar efforts with a loved franchise. When you have an IP, it's your job to defend it, or you may loose the authority to do so at all in the future. The court system doesn't always take the 'spirit' of the law into consideration quite like rational humans.
Never heard of the game. If anything, the attention will serve them more than it could harm.
Idk, I only saw the game title and thought it was news about a fallout MOBA or something "Fallout" is basically the name of the series and half of this game's title is "Fallout", I don't see how any could object to this on grounds other than "trademarks are bad"
[QUOTE=Tmaxx;47161103]They patented the [U]use[/U] of fallout in the [I]title.[/I] Guess what this guy was using it for? Use in his title. It's dumb, but that's how it do. And I can actually see how this would cause a little confusion unlike scrolls.[/QUOTE] I don't think anyone could possibly confuse Fortress Fallout with the Fallout series unless they had brain damage. [t]http://i.imgur.com/QAe3QVB.png[/t] Fortress Fallout. [t]http://i.imgur.com/tbYpqWe.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/ERVorFU.gif[/t] Fallout. The two have absolutely nothing in common besides part of the name and both being video games. [editline]18th February 2015[/editline] Honestly if Fortress Fallout might confuse people because it's similar to Fallout, then shouldn't Beyond: Two Souls have been forced to change their name because people might think it was the sequel to Dark Souls? They've both got Souls in the title, right?
Remember when King trademarked the word Saga, Candy and Crush?
To be fair, I first heard of Fortress Fallout from the title of this thread and my first thought was that it was some fan made Fallout thing where you build fortresses, or even just a fortress building game in a post-apocalyptic setting. Fallout isn't exactly a super generic or commonly used word.
its just a c&d, he could likely continue without any risk
[QUOTE=TheTalon;47161221]You shouldn't be able to trademark or patent a single word. It's in the dictionary, defined, as one word. If you make a game that uses that word, You do so full well knowing that it can be used elsewhere. Why doesn't Merriam Webster fuck your ass up? Because it's ridiculous, that's why[/QUOTE] it's in the dictionary defined as a word but it's being used to refer to a product, not the meaning of the word according to dictionary "brah did you play the new fortress fallout?" any reasonable assumption would be of bethesda fallout, not this new video game. if i were to make a "fallout cleaning products" then that's fine!
[QUOTE=Source;47161003]Fucking retarded that you can copyright such a broad word, what next Suing a Power plant because they say they've discovered Nuclear Fallout? Unless you invented the actual word, YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PATENT A WORD.[/QUOTE] Oh boy, is it 'Facepunch doesn't understand trademarks' time again [i]already[/i]? -It's not a patent. A patent is a protection on a novel technology. You cannot patent a word. -It's not a copyright. A copyright is a protection on a creative work. You cannot copyright a word. -It's a trademark. A trademark is an identifying mark as part of a brand that sets it apart from its competitors. It's to prevent a company from being able to rip off the names of their competitors. It can be a symbol, a word, a slogan, or any combination thereof. -A trademark doesn't cover all applications of a name or word, it covers specific ones likely to cause confusion. The standard test is whether there could be reasonable confusion on the part of an ordinary person as to whether the product is part of the trademarked brand or not. In this case it's because it's a game with the name Fallout, which despite being a word is heavily associated with an existing videogame brand. A movie or book named Fallout wouldn't have this problem, unless it was very close to the brand of the game (eg, post-apocalyptic 50s-kitsch). Since a trademark only applies to commercial products your hyperbolic example of a power plant is irrelevant. -And lastly, a trademark must be actively protected to avoid becoming generic. Whether Zenimax wants to or not, their lawyers have determined that having another game on the market with Fallout in the name could genericize their trademark and then they wouldn't be able to use it. For any company with an established brand, this is a very, very bad thing. You can freely use the word 'apple' in conservation. You can go to the store and buy 'apples'. You can make a cleaning product or a car or a tennis shoe and call it 'apple'. But try making a computer product called an 'apple' and you can expect a C&D from Apple faster than you can say 'maybe I should call my lawyer'. It's not about securing ownership of the dictionary and it's not as ridiculous as people always make it sound.
[QUOTE=catbarf;47161822]Oh boy, is it 'Facepunch doesn't understand trademarks' time again [i]already[/i]? -It's not a patent. A patent is a protection on a novel technology. You cannot patent a word. -It's not a copyright. A copyright is a protection on a creative work. You cannot copyright a word. -It's a trademark. A trademark is an identifying mark as part of a brand that sets it apart from its competitors. It's to prevent a company from being able to rip off the names of their competitors. It can be a symbol, a word, a slogan, or any combination thereof. -A trademark doesn't cover all applications of a name or word, it covers specific ones likely to cause confusion. The standard test is whether there could be reasonable confusion on the part of an ordinary person as to whether the product is part of the trademarked brand or not. In this case it's because it's a game with the name Fallout, which despite being a word is heavily associated with an existing videogame brand. A movie or book named Fallout wouldn't have this problem, unless it was very close to the brand of the game (eg, post-apocalyptic 50s-kitsch). Since a trademark only applies to commercial products your hyperbolic example of a power plant is irrelevant. -And lastly, a trademark must be actively protected to avoid becoming generic. Whether Zenimax wants to or not, their lawyers have determined that having another game on the market with Fallout in the name could genericize their trademark and then they wouldn't be able to use it. For any company with an established brand, this is a very, very bad thing. You can freely use the word 'apple' in conservation. You can go to the store and buy 'apples'. You can make a cleaning product or a car or a tennis shoe and call it 'apple'. But try making a computer product called an 'apple' and you can expect a C&D from Apple faster than you can say 'maybe I should call my lawyer'. It's not about securing ownership of the dictionary and it's not as ridiculous as people always make it sound.[/QUOTE] So my plan for Apple shaped computer products is a no go unless I call them bananas?
[QUOTE=TacticalBacon;47161519]I don't think anyone could possibly confuse Fortress Fallout with the Fallout series unless they had brain damage. [t]http://i.imgur.com/QAe3QVB.png[/t] Fortress Fallout. [t]http://i.imgur.com/tbYpqWe.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/ERVorFU.gif[/t] Fallout. The two have absolutely nothing in common besides part of the name and both being video games. [editline]18th February 2015[/editline] Honestly if Fortress Fallout might confuse people because it's similar to Fallout, then shouldn't Beyond: Two Souls have been forced to change their name because people might think it was the sequel to Dark Souls? They've both got Souls in the title, right?[/QUOTE] For a while, every time I saw "Beyond: Two Souls," my brain assumed it was related to Dark Souls, feeling surprised every time I remembered that it wasn't.
[QUOTE=Source;47161003]Fucking retarded that you can copyright such a broad word, what next Suing a Power plant because they say they've discovered Nuclear Fallout? Unless you invented the actual word, YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PATENT A WORD.[/QUOTE] also the reason a lot of companies go after this kind of thing is because you eventually lose the power of the trademark if your product name becomes ambiguous to the public. thats why for example coca-cola/coke are so intent on pushing their brand name and trademark red colour, because they will not be able to enforce their trademark if 'coke' is used by the general public to mean any cola based drink. this makes more sense than their scrolls thing, because 'fallout' could be used to refer to both games. it might look like a case of 'big guy tries to shit all over little guy just because', but its likely they are just trying to protect the trademark/brand name they have spend so long building.
man, when i first read this headline, i was under the impression that the developer was making some sort of fallout clone, but this has absolutely nothing to do with Bethesda. this is just an all around salty move by Zenimax. [QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;47161088]My take on this type of thing is if you are doing something in an unrelated business, then I'd be on your side in using a term associated with someone else's product. But in this case, a person is making a game using the name of a famous series of games, and the word "Fallout" is the actual name of a game. The example in the article, 'scrolls' is not the same, since Daggerfall/Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim is how those games are referred to in terms of fame, no one calls them "Elder Scrolls III" or similar. "Half life" is a term commonly associated with various topics related to radiation too, you sure as hell aren't going to be allowed to make your own Half Life game.[/QUOTE] what if the a game titled "The" becomes a breakout hit? now we're looking at a large potential for cease & desist abuse. i believe that all of these cases should be thrown out the window unless there's apparent appropriation of game assets or programming.
My main issue with this is the all fallout games have been fallout [something]. Fallout 1, 2, New Vegas, Brotherhood of Steel, Tactics. Etc. This does not follow that pattern. I understand that a trademark is a trademark, but this is where it gets too overreaching.
[QUOTE=Klammyxxl;47166109]what if the a game titled "The" becomes a breakout hit? [/QUOTE] Then a court will review the trademark claim case, and any judge on planet earth will decide that using the name 'the' is too generic and would not cause confusion on the part of a reasonable consumer, and thus will reject the trademark claim. Seriously, it's not that difficult. Trademark law isn't about airtight rules etched into stone tablets, it's about companies reasonably not wanting other companies to take advantage of their brand or cause needless confusion.
[QUOTE=Cushie;47166012]also the reason a lot of companies go after this kind of thing is because you eventually lose the power of the trademark if your product name becomes ambiguous to the public. thats why for example coca-cola/coke are so intent on pushing their brand name and trademark red colour, because they will not be able to enforce their trademark if 'coke' is used by the general public to mean any cola based drink. this makes more sense than their scrolls thing, because 'fallout' could be used to refer to both games. it might look like a case of 'big guy tries to shit all over little guy just because', but its likely they are just trying to protect the trademark/brand name they have spend so long building.[/QUOTE] Isn't this what happened to escalators?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.