[QUOTE=Benlecyborg;31195473]How about SCAR porn?[/QUOTE]
Is that where guys push SCARs up a woman's vagina and pull the trigger? :V
[QUOTE=MasterG;31194084]
1:) They exploit their customers in such a way that they don't care about them in any way beyond sales.
To compare them to valve, valve value their customers over everything and do extreme amounts of things to please fans. Activision do not.
[/QUOTE]
Newsflash! Businesses never care about customers beyond sales. All this talk 'pleasing fans' and shit? They don't do that to make them feel good about themselves, it's so you're more likely to buy their stuff!
Any so called fanservice is mostly to insure that you stick with them and buy their games rather than their competitor's.
[QUOTE=V12US;31190960]I hate Call of Duty, but to be honest, Activision has a point.
All this stupid bullshit fanboys are pulling is damaging both franchises. First the asshat who put up this website, and now the dickhead who's leaking pictures of the Battlefield 3 alpha on the lowest settings available, claiming the game looks like shit.
These kids need a slap on the wrist, to say the least. Sooner or later they're going to learn that when you're fucking with a large corporation, you're just going to get a large corporate dick rammed up your ass.[/QUOTE]
I don't know if it's just me, but the whole demographic that plays those games, and is vocal about it, aren't really worth listening to. Besides, as many people as there are dogging them games, there are just as many or more willing to hassle the other side in support of their own. It's all the fans' doing and I don't see why anyone else should really shake a fist
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;31196063]Newsflash! Businesses never care about customers beyond sales. All this talk 'pleasing fans' and shit? They don't do that to make them feel good about themselves, it's so you're more likely to buy their stuff!
Any so called fanservice is mostly to insure that you stick with them and buy their games rather than their competitor's.[/QUOTE]
yeah, obviously those money-hungry fucks like Valve who double the size of their games with free content like in TF2 and give away games for free like HL2 Deathmatch (and TF2) are just in it for the money, giving shit away is a surefire way to make a profit :downs:
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;31196063]Newsflash! Businesses [b]never[/b] care about customers beyond sales. All this talk 'pleasing fans' and shit? They don't do that to make them feel good about themselves, it's so you're more likely to buy their stuff!
Any so called fanservice is [b]mostly[/b] to insure that you stick with them and buy their games rather than their competitor's.[/QUOTE]
From never (as in no chance) to mostly (as in unlikely) in a single post.
[QUOTE=SourBree;31198666]From never (as in no chance) to mostly (as in unlikely) in a single post.[/QUOTE]
hyperbole
And here I was thinking when companies wanted a domain they PAID for it (Valve), but making the owner of the domain pay you for it does seem like a better idea!
Activations needs to understand that any of their actions towards the COD series at this point is doing nothing but hurting their reputation more.
guess who's never buying another activision game
<<<<<<<this guy
[QUOTE=V12US;31192665]Would you offer money to a guy who's trying to fuck you up the ass?[/QUOTE]
Activision will spend more hiring lawyers for the case than it would cost to just buy the domain off it's rightful owner. This is about proving a point and being complete assholes.
Did.. did you guys even read the fucking thing?
I mean, come on. The first fucking line of the source (The TITLE) says "Activision [B]Files Complaint[/B] over modernwarfare3.com" and the only line that has $2600 referenced is the one that says:
[quote]The complaint cost Activision $2,600 USD to file for a three-member panel.[/quote]
Maybe read a little closer before you post it
[QUOTE=Baldr 2.0;31192091]Not really, but they can sue you for it.
If you have a domain name that matches a political party name or governmental service they can demand the domain by court (and even give you some cash, refusing would mean you would get nothing and they get the domain).[/QUOTE]
I don't believe that. Someone on this forum owns USAirForce on Youtube, they asked for it and he said 10 grand or no deal and that's why they're like AFBlueTube now or something.
I don't see why he can't ask for money if it's his domain, especially because he made it before MW3 was trademarked.
[QUOTE=FunkyDisko77;31201167]Did.. did you guys even read the fucking thing?
I mean, come on. The first fucking line of the source (The TITLE) says "Activision [B]Files Complaint[/B] over modernwarfare3.com" and the only line that has $2600 referenced is the one that says:
Maybe read a little closer before you post it[/QUOTE]You can't forget that anyone here won't bother questioning something that puts Activision in a negative light.
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;31195214]What the fuck are you talking about? Activision has owned the "Modern Warfare" franchise trademark since 2006.[/QUOTE]
They can't trademark Modern Warfare, since it is such a universal term. Modern Warfare could be talking about the piece of shit Activision publishes, or it's counterpart that may turn to shit because of Origin Battlefield 3; as they both base their games around modern times of war. Or it could just be relating to, oh hey, THE MODERN WARFARE OF OUR TIMES!!?! The term can be applied to both video games and real life situations.
[editline]18th July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Stupideye;31194417]Too late.
[url]http://modernwarfare4.com/[/url][/QUOTE]
[img]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/images/display/58845.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;31194507][img]http://nextgenerationgaming.net/gameimages/call-of-duty-4.jpg[/img]
"Modern Warfare" is a trademark. That kid is fucked.[/QUOTE]
Thats Activisions only loophole in the whole thing though. They still have no rights to that webssite.
[QUOTE=FunkyDisko77;31201167]Did.. did you guys even read the fucking thing?
I mean, come on. The first fucking line of the source (The TITLE) says "Activision [B]Files Complaint[/B] over modernwarfare3.com" and the only line that has $2600 referenced is the one that says:
Maybe read a little closer before you post it[/QUOTE]
So they didn't sue the guy for 2600$ and just want the to take the domain that has their trademark in it?
those [B]GREEDY BASTARDS[/B]
I wonder how people would react if it was EA trying to take down a battlefield3.com, or Valve trying to take halflife3 down?
It's a company filing a complaint about a site that is registered under their trademark, something that can affect sales. I don't see this as something Activision would do. Any company would take this prudent action.
I might be late, but last I check they have no right to the domain name. Anybody can register any domain name. The only really illegal thing to do is to register, say, BF3.com and then go to EA telling them you'll trade it for $4000.
Just registering and using a domain is perfectly legal last I checked.
[editline]19th July 2011[/editline]
Nevermind. OP is an idiot and Activision isn't asking for any money, just for the domain.
Site's down anyway. Doesn't matter much now.
I should trademark Mod3rnwarfare.com and Modernw4rfare.com
Then get sued twice!
[QUOTE=HSF;31190709]Tired as fuck, you get the point.[/QUOTE]
If would have been funnier if you replied.
Sue me.
[QUOTE=Darkebrz;31203118]I might be late, but last I check they have no right to the domain name. Anybody can register any domain name. The only really illegal thing to do is to register, say, BF3.com and then go to EA telling them you'll trade it for $4000.
Just registering and using a domain is perfectly legal last I checked.
[editline]19th July 2011[/editline]
Nevermind. OP is an idiot and Activision isn't asking for any money, just for the domain.[/QUOTE]
Domain trading isn't illegal.
How can someone seriously buy a product from such an idiotic company?
[QUOTE=Obi Wan;31207205]How can someone seriously buy a product from such an idiotic company?[/QUOTE]
Because typical COD fans cares about it
Or Activision couldve just done [url]www.mw3.com[/url]
oh wait i guess thats taken too
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;31192163]No, the Modern Warfare franchise was trademarked way before this site, any variation of The "Modern Warfare" IP is illegal. In this case, the modernwarfare3.com site is IP and cyber squatting.[/QUOTE]
Activision has no legitimate right to the domain, but just watch them win and the guy lose a ton of money.
[B]edit:[/B]
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;31194507][img]http://nextgenerationgaming.net/gameimages/call-of-duty-4.jpg[/img]
"Modern Warfare" is a trademark. That kid is fucked.[/QUOTE]
Yes it is a trademark, but it is a descriptive trademark which are really fuzzy to deal with when both products are using the name to describe their product. It gets even more fuzzy when the product in question in no way is competing in the same field as your product. Modern Warfare is a game, modernwarfare3 is a website... these are completely seperate fields.
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;31195214]What the fuck are you talking about? Activision has owned the "Modern Warfare" franchise trademark since 2006.[/QUOTE]
Modern Warfare has been a term used by historians long before Activision claimed it. It would be like Sega suing because someone used the term Total War in their book without asking permission.
[QUOTE=Hobo4President;31208306]Activision has no legitimate right to the domain, but just watch them win and the guy lose a ton of money.[/QUOTE]
lets hope the judge isn't a lonely 12 year old boy
Why didn't they think of all these domains right at the start when MW3 wasn't even planned?
It's not exactly going to cost them much
[QUOTE=Android phone;31198803]hyperbole[/QUOTE]
Except the fact that he meant his post to be taken literally. That and he made no evident remarks to show he was intentionally exaggerating.
[QUOTE=Hobo4President;31208306]
Modern Warfare is a game, modernwarfare3 is a website... these are completely seperate fields.[/QUOTE]
The suit is specifically about the website, which Activision does have the right to. Technically, they could sue on any minor variation of "Modern Warfare". Whether they would win or not is up in the air, as you said, copyright law is quite "fuzzy" indeed.
However, at this point I won't make bets on the owners defense in court when the website is currently plastered with MW3 stuff, most of it detrimental.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
