C
chimaira
Guest
- Thread starter
- #31
GOGO mythic. I wub u more than Micropoo
T
Thorgald
Guest
- Thread starter
- #32
Originally posted by sh33py
Amazing how many people have such a poor understanding of the law.
The owner of a trademark has exclusive right to use it on the product it was intended to identify and often on related products.
Where trademarks are defined as:
Trademarks are generally distinctive symbols, pictures, or words that sellers affix to distinguish and identify the origin of their products.
It doesn't make any difference what the word is; what do you think the point of trademarking your company name is? For a laugh?
It's to stop anyone else from starting up with your name or similar and getting a free ride.
If a games developer started up, had absolutely nothing to do with Blizzard and called themselves Blizzard East you don't see anything wrong with that?
If someone is talking about mmorpgs and they say the word Mythic you think of DAoC, nothing else, not the dictionary meaning of the word you think of the company.
That's more than enough for Microsoft to get owned, even if the game wasn't a mmorpg but considering not only is it a mmorpg but one that deals with the same subject matter as DAoC they haven't got a leg to stand on.
that and just look at the fact that Microsoft just won their fight against Lindows...
and now they try to do almost the same thing themselves...
C
Chenuba
Guest
- Thread starter
- #33
Just because it's a law, doesn't make it less ridiculous, IMO.
S
sh33py
Guest
- Thread starter
- #34
So you think MS came up with Mythica for their viking mmorpg without any knowledge of Mythic's existance?
Come on
It's not ridiculous at all, trying to gain an advantage over your competition in this way is unfair and totally unnecessary.
C
Chenuba
Guest
- Thread starter
- #35
Actually I don't think MS was thinking about profiting from Mythic, making a game with scandinavian MYTHOLIGY hasn't ANYTHING to do with Mythic as a company.
My opinion isn't based on the law, but on the fact that it's wrong that some people think that they can OWN the right of using a word that existed even before those people had left their daddys balls.
I don't like MS nor Mythic particulary, I just think the law(s) about registered trademarks are BS in general.
My opinion isn't based on the law, but on the fact that it's wrong that some people think that they can OWN the right of using a word that existed even before those people had left their daddys balls.
I don't like MS nor Mythic particulary, I just think the law(s) about registered trademarks are BS in general.
S
sh33py
Guest
- Thread starter
- #36
Well you have a huge problem then because the whole point of a trademark is to prevent others taking advantage of your brand name/image/slogan whatever's popularity and successfulness it comes under trademark law and specifically unfair competition laws.
If it didn't exist then i could start up a company called Mythic with the same slogans and artwork, steal the lot, and pretend to be Mythic, no need to spend money on advertising because it's already been done by them.
That's not only illegal but it's morally wrong.
It's necessary to stop streams of companies called Microsoft or anything else, and as already explained it only becomes an issue when the item in question is used in the trademarked area of influence, in this case mmorpgs and even more specifically midgardian based mmorpgs.
It wouldn't be so bad if Mythica was a word, it's not, it's Mythic with an a on the end, Microsoft thought they could get away with it because they have expensive lawyers and they're a huge company but if there's any justice in the world they'll get a large fine and some nice big legal expenses.
C
Chenuba
Guest
- Thread starter
- #37
MS isn't making a company but a game called mythica, what's next, EA getting the word sport(s) registered as theirs alone to use ??????????
To me it has NOTHING to do with MS or Mythic but the principle behind this way of thinking that's wrong. I, personally, doesn't like that something that's NOT original (never seen before) can be claimed that way.
Hmmm, maybe I should make a gamecompany called GAME and then sue every other company using that PARTICULAR word on their boxes, damn it could confuse my customers buying other companies products thinking it's one of my companys excellent products.
IMO that case it utter crap and ALL similar cases should be turned down, as long as the trademark isn't original = invented by the company themself..
I'm convinced that the only reason so many people are happy about Mythic doing this is because they hate MS and just want to see them getting hurt in any possible way, even stupid ways..
To me it has NOTHING to do with MS or Mythic but the principle behind this way of thinking that's wrong. I, personally, doesn't like that something that's NOT original (never seen before) can be claimed that way.
Hmmm, maybe I should make a gamecompany called GAME and then sue every other company using that PARTICULAR word on their boxes, damn it could confuse my customers buying other companies products thinking it's one of my companys excellent products.
IMO that case it utter crap and ALL similar cases should be turned down, as long as the trademark isn't original = invented by the company themself..
I'm convinced that the only reason so many people are happy about Mythic doing this is because they hate MS and just want to see them getting hurt in any possible way, even stupid ways..
A
amazingsteve
Guest
- Thread starter
- #38
m8 ur missing the point.
If u make a MMORPG with the name Mythica, people might think it has something to do with Mythic Entertainment, which is a MMORPG company. So Microsoft has to spend less money on advertising cos Mythic already has a name.
Ofc. it's ok to use sports in ur title, there isn't a company called "sports" that is well known. If u call your soccer game EA FIVA, people think it has something to do with the Fifa series of EA, so the company creating the EA FIVA has to spend less money on advertising.
If u make a MMORPG with the name Mythica, people might think it has something to do with Mythic Entertainment, which is a MMORPG company. So Microsoft has to spend less money on advertising cos Mythic already has a name.
Ofc. it's ok to use sports in ur title, there isn't a company called "sports" that is well known. If u call your soccer game EA FIVA, people think it has something to do with the Fifa series of EA, so the company creating the EA FIVA has to spend less money on advertising.
S
sh33py
Guest
- Thread starter
- #39
As said Sports in itself doesn't mean anything, EA trademarks like "It's in the game" etc. are a part of EA hence protected by trademark laws.
If a games developer wanted to start up making sports games and call themselves SPORTS then sure they could trademark it and noone else could start up with the same name, where do you get the idea that it stops anyone using it anywhere else?
It only applies to the companies field / area specifically. Nothing else.
It's got nothing to do with being original, it's not a patent for an invention or such, it's just a way of making sure consumers aren't tricked by companies pretending to someone they're not. No words are original anyway, they're all in the dictionary
Brand image is one of the most important things to a business and to a consumer, there are enough words to go around, I'm sure Microsoft could of thought up a name that wasn't also coincedently the name of their biggest and direct competitor in the mmorpg market they're going for.
D
Driwen
Guest
- Thread starter
- #40
I agree
They could have named it after a great viking hero or one of their gods or valhalla. Microsoft most likely aimed at abusing mythics name by mythica as the name itself means very little to me and imo is ugly.
So imo they deliberaletly tried to use the name of mythic (and mythic also had asked them before going to court to stop using it).
S
Sichama
Guest
- Thread starter
- #41
You can't do it, you can't trademark words that characterize (sp) a product, like the word Games in your example, or the word Hamburger in the McDonald case etc. etc.
You obviously have absolutely no idea what it is like to work your butt off to create something that in time becomes succesfull and then have someone else try to trick people into buying his product taking advantage of your work and your name, not only does he take advantage of you but he will also probably harm you with a shity product that people may relate to you, years of work selling a good product can be easily destroyed by a lazy bum that can't make his own. If it ever happens to you think back on your words on this forum...
On the subject now, MS obviously knew about DAoC and they obviously knew Mythic has to react, it's not a matter of bad or good decision, they have no other option but to react because if they don't they forever lose the right to do so later.
Why did they do it? heh only they can answer this question, but be sure that whatever the result will be it will be exactly as MS knew it would be with no surprises whatsoever.
Mythic can't lose on this, but neither can MS, its interesting to see what will happen.
Y
-yoda-
Guest
- Thread starter
- #42
imo mythic should sue there asses get themselves either a nice big fat out of court settlement from MS . or win a nice big compensation from them in court. boosting there money hence hopefully have more money to spend on future mythic products making them better etc etc
im sure going by the law , if anybody can make a lotta money out of somebody whome is obviously breaking the law . they will do so..
taking people to court for stupid reason (like that fat twat who took mcdonalds to court cos he got fat) now that imo is EXTREMELY stupid... or the guy who sued tobacco companies cos he got cancer . both silly reasons cos they knew before they used the products what is POSSIBLE if used.
and MS has obviously broken the marketing laws , hence deserve to be taken to court, yes as some above say its stupid to do so ,, but the people above stating facts about tricking people to think game was made by mythic , imo mythic are well within there rights.
get themselves either a nice big fat out of court settlement from MS . or win a nice big compensation from them in court. boosting there money hence hopefully have more money to spend on future mythic products making them better etc etcim sure going by the law , if anybody can make a lotta money out of somebody whome is obviously breaking the law . they will do so..
taking people to court for stupid reason (like that fat twat who took mcdonalds to court cos he got fat) now that imo is EXTREMELY stupid... or the guy who sued tobacco companies cos he got cancer . both silly reasons cos they knew before they used the products what is POSSIBLE if used.
and MS has obviously broken the marketing laws , hence deserve to be taken to court, yes as some above say its stupid to do so ,, but the people above stating facts about tricking people to think game was made by mythic , imo mythic are well within there rights.
C
cjkaceBM
Guest
- Thread starter
- #43
So because Mythic Entertainment create online role playing games it now means that nobody is allowed to use the term Myth or its derivatives? Or any product that contains the words Dark, Age or Camelot and is also a MMORPG?
What about the movie Darkness Falls?
How far do you take this copyright/trademark argument?
I think this is the point Chenuba is trying to make. Yes there are lots of people who hate Microsoft (yet are perversly using their software on a day to day basis) but this doesn't mean that everything they do is designed to cloud issues.
Who coined the phrase MMORPG? Don't they own the copyright to that term? Will we see someone patent the method for playing large scale games across international networks?
On the one hand I want Mythic to win simply because I think that the marketting people either deliberately named the game to confuse the ignorant, or are so stupid they should be shot.
On the other this sets yet another copyright/trademark ball rolling that has the potential to never end.
Ultima Online, Ragnarok Online, Anarchy Online all share a common word and term but it could be argued that the ignorant might believe that they were aspects of the same game made by the same company?
What about the movie Darkness Falls?
How far do you take this copyright/trademark argument?
I think this is the point Chenuba is trying to make. Yes there are lots of people who hate Microsoft (yet are perversly using their software on a day to day basis) but this doesn't mean that everything they do is designed to cloud issues.
Who coined the phrase MMORPG? Don't they own the copyright to that term? Will we see someone patent the method for playing large scale games across international networks?
On the one hand I want Mythic to win simply because I think that the marketting people either deliberately named the game to confuse the ignorant, or are so stupid they should be shot.
On the other this sets yet another copyright/trademark ball rolling that has the potential to never end.
Ultima Online, Ragnarok Online, Anarchy Online all share a common word and term but it could be argued that the ignorant might believe that they were aspects of the same game made by the same company?
C
cjkaceBM
Guest
- Thread starter
- #44
Also the timing is rather forunate is it not?
Six to seven weeks after the release of Trials of Atlantis, Mythic Entertainment decide to sue Microsoft over the future game Mythica which itself was announced on 25th April 2003, 8 months previous.
Lots of nice publicity for DAoC, Trials of Atlantis and Mythic Entertainment just as sales would have dropped off, especially in the current anti-Microsoft climate.
Taken from Mythic's site
Copyright © 2001-2003 Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Mythic Entertainment, the Mythic Entertainment logo, "Dark Age of Camelot", "Shrouded Isles", "Trials of Atlantis," "Live the Legend," the Dark Age of Camelot, Shrouded Isles and Trials of Atlantis logos are trademarks and the stylized Celtic knot is a registered trademark of Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All other trademarks and copyrights property of their respective owners.
Seems to me that their trademark is Mythic Entertainment. It isn't Mythic or Entertainment but the two together that constitutes their trademark.
Wonder if EA would sue me if I designed and engineered a game called Electronica, all about some people who lived inside a computer generated world?
Six to seven weeks after the release of Trials of Atlantis, Mythic Entertainment decide to sue Microsoft over the future game Mythica which itself was announced on 25th April 2003, 8 months previous.
Lots of nice publicity for DAoC, Trials of Atlantis and Mythic Entertainment just as sales would have dropped off, especially in the current anti-Microsoft climate.
Taken from Mythic's site
Copyright © 2001-2003 Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Mythic Entertainment, the Mythic Entertainment logo, "Dark Age of Camelot", "Shrouded Isles", "Trials of Atlantis," "Live the Legend," the Dark Age of Camelot, Shrouded Isles and Trials of Atlantis logos are trademarks and the stylized Celtic knot is a registered trademark of Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All other trademarks and copyrights property of their respective owners.
Seems to me that their trademark is Mythic Entertainment. It isn't Mythic or Entertainment but the two together that constitutes their trademark.
Wonder if EA would sue me if I designed and engineered a game called Electronica, all about some people who lived inside a computer generated world?
C
cjkaceBM
Guest
- Thread starter
- #45
Also the timing is rather forunate is it not?
Six to seven weeks after the release of Trials of Atlantis, Mythic Entertainment decide to sue Microsoft over the future game Mythica which itself was announced on 25th April 2003, 8 months previous.
Lots of nice publicity for DAoC, Trials of Atlantis and Mythic Entertainment just as sales would have dropped off, especially in the current anti-Microsoft climate.
Taken from Mythic's site
Copyright © 2001-2003 Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Mythic Entertainment, the Mythic Entertainment logo, "Dark Age of Camelot", "Shrouded Isles", "Trials of Atlantis," "Live the Legend," the Dark Age of Camelot, Shrouded Isles and Trials of Atlantis logos are trademarks and the stylized Celtic knot is a registered trademark of Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All other trademarks and copyrights property of their respective owners.
Seems to me that their trademark is Mythic Entertainment. It isn't Mythic or Entertainment but the two together that constitutes their trademark.
Wonder if EA would sue me if I designed and engineered a game called Electronica, all about some people who lived inside a computer generated world?
Six to seven weeks after the release of Trials of Atlantis, Mythic Entertainment decide to sue Microsoft over the future game Mythica which itself was announced on 25th April 2003, 8 months previous.
Lots of nice publicity for DAoC, Trials of Atlantis and Mythic Entertainment just as sales would have dropped off, especially in the current anti-Microsoft climate.
Taken from Mythic's site
Copyright © 2001-2003 Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Mythic Entertainment, the Mythic Entertainment logo, "Dark Age of Camelot", "Shrouded Isles", "Trials of Atlantis," "Live the Legend," the Dark Age of Camelot, Shrouded Isles and Trials of Atlantis logos are trademarks and the stylized Celtic knot is a registered trademark of Mythic Entertainment, Inc. All other trademarks and copyrights property of their respective owners.
Seems to me that their trademark is Mythic Entertainment. It isn't Mythic or Entertainment but the two together that constitutes their trademark.
Wonder if EA would sue me if I designed and engineered a game called Electronica, all about some people who lived inside a computer generated world?
A
amazingsteve
Guest
- Thread starter
- #46
u just don't get it! It is ok to call a game Dark times, Siege of Camelot or anything like that. But u CAN NOT use a title which obviously refers to an already registered trademark, like Mythic. U can't call a game Tests of Atlantis, people will assume it's the same as ToA. U can call a game Atlantis.
who invented mmorpgs? mmorpg is a term to describe the online persistent universe games, so it can't be trademarked.
Online in the title? that's just to show that u play the game online, so it can't be trademarked.
who invented mmorpgs? mmorpg is a term to describe the online persistent universe games, so it can't be trademarked.
Online in the title? that's just to show that u play the game online, so it can't be trademarked.
S
sh33py
Guest
- Thread starter
- #47
As far as the law says, clearly you have no clue how far that is.
Trademarks only apply to their registered area, for Mythic that is mmorpgs/midgard mmorpgs, even if Darkness Falls was registered as a trademark it would only apply to mmorpgs, movies, offline games or whatever are fine.
Microsoft are in the wrong because Mythica is a midgardian mmorpg, the exact same area that DAoC is in, hence why the trademark/unfair competition laws apply.
No because Online is just a description of the game, trademarks are limited to words/logos or the like that are used to define the company in the same way that Mythic defines Mythic, Entertainment doesn't, and as already stated you can't trademark widly used descriptions.
As for the timing yes it's added publicity but it's not just cropped up, they've been negotiating with MS for months, it's just now the negotiations have failed so they're threatening court action.
C
cjkaceBM
Guest
- Thread starter
- #48
Go to
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=105on2.1.1
This is the US online trademark search.
What is a trademark or service mark?
A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it identifies and distinguishes the source of a service rather than a product. Throughout this booklet, the terms "trademark" and "mark" refer to both trademarks and service marks.
If you type in Mythic you will find the top two trademarks are by Mythic Entertainment.
Word Mark MYTHIC ENTERTAINMENT
Goods and Services IC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: computer game software. FIRST USE: 19971101. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19971101
IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Operating real time, role playing games for others over global computer networks. FIRST USE: 19971101. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19971101
Mark Drawing Code (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS
Design Search Code 011503
Serial Number 78124814
Filing Date April 29, 2002
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition July 1, 2003
Registration Number 2766770
Registration Date September 23, 2003
Owner (REGISTRANT) Mythic Entertainment, Inc. CORPORATION VIRGINIA 3919 Old Lee Highway Suite 82A Fairfax VIRGINIA 22030
Attorney of Record James E. Dunstan
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "ENTERTAINMENT" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark TRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
Type in Mythica and you will find 5 applications by Microsoft.
Word Mark MYTHICA
Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: providing an on-line magazine and web site featuring information in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment; providing information on-line relating to computer games and computer enhancements for games; entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game; production and distribution of motion pictures and television programs; and entertainment in the nature of on-going television programs in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment; providing an on-line magazine and web site featuring information in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment; providing information on-line relating to computer games and computer enhancements for games; entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game; production and distribution of motion pictures and television programs; entertainment in the nature of on-going television programs in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 78277860
Filing Date July 23, 2003
Current Filing Basis 1B;44D
Original Filing Basis 1B;44D
Owner (APPLICANT) Microsoft Corporation CORPORATION WASHINGTON One Microsoft Way Redmond WASHINGTON 980526399
Attorney of Record William O. Ferron, Jr.
Priority Date February 3, 2003
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
So it seems that Microsoft has applied for Mythica to be the trademark not only of a game but of a company too, in which case Mythic Entertainment does indeed have a good case. Not because an online game uses a name similar to their company, but because Microsft is trying to register it as a brand that makes online games onlong with other things.
It would have been more of a gray area if they had just named their upcoming game Mythica. I don't believe Mythic Entertainment would have had a leg to stand on, but by attempting to create a brand Microsoft may have shot themselves in the foot.
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=105on2.1.1
This is the US online trademark search.
What is a trademark or service mark?
A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it identifies and distinguishes the source of a service rather than a product. Throughout this booklet, the terms "trademark" and "mark" refer to both trademarks and service marks.
If you type in Mythic you will find the top two trademarks are by Mythic Entertainment.
Word Mark MYTHIC ENTERTAINMENT
Goods and Services IC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: computer game software. FIRST USE: 19971101. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19971101
IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Operating real time, role playing games for others over global computer networks. FIRST USE: 19971101. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19971101
Mark Drawing Code (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS
Design Search Code 011503
Serial Number 78124814
Filing Date April 29, 2002
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition July 1, 2003
Registration Number 2766770
Registration Date September 23, 2003
Owner (REGISTRANT) Mythic Entertainment, Inc. CORPORATION VIRGINIA 3919 Old Lee Highway Suite 82A Fairfax VIRGINIA 22030
Attorney of Record James E. Dunstan
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "ENTERTAINMENT" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark TRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
Type in Mythica and you will find 5 applications by Microsoft.
Word Mark MYTHICA
Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: providing an on-line magazine and web site featuring information in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment; providing information on-line relating to computer games and computer enhancements for games; entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game; production and distribution of motion pictures and television programs; and entertainment in the nature of on-going television programs in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment; providing an on-line magazine and web site featuring information in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment; providing information on-line relating to computer games and computer enhancements for games; entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game; production and distribution of motion pictures and television programs; entertainment in the nature of on-going television programs in the field of computer games, science fiction, games and entertainment
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 78277860
Filing Date July 23, 2003
Current Filing Basis 1B;44D
Original Filing Basis 1B;44D
Owner (APPLICANT) Microsoft Corporation CORPORATION WASHINGTON One Microsoft Way Redmond WASHINGTON 980526399
Attorney of Record William O. Ferron, Jr.
Priority Date February 3, 2003
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
So it seems that Microsoft has applied for Mythica to be the trademark not only of a game but of a company too, in which case Mythic Entertainment does indeed have a good case. Not because an online game uses a name similar to their company, but because Microsft is trying to register it as a brand that makes online games onlong with other things.
It would have been more of a gray area if they had just named their upcoming game Mythica. I don't believe Mythic Entertainment would have had a leg to stand on, but by attempting to create a brand Microsoft may have shot themselves in the foot.
S
Sichama
Guest
- Thread starter
- #49
I am with Mythic on this in the sense that i believe they are right.
The only thing i dont let my self forget is that....
....no matter what, Microsoft can't lose, even if the court decides in favor of Mythic and they order Microsoft to pay compensation to Mythic, in the end considering everything Microsoft will have benefited in some way.
I have no doubt about this.
The only thing i dont let my self forget is that....
....no matter what, Microsoft can't lose, even if the court decides in favor of Mythic and they order Microsoft to pay compensation to Mythic, in the end considering everything Microsoft will have benefited in some way.
I have no doubt about this.
O
old.Ramas
Guest
- Thread starter
- #50
The key test in all of this is whether the mythica product is likely to confuse consumers. Precise names aren't important, it simply requires you to convince a judge that new product A and pold product B is likely to be confused by reasonable consumers.
The fact that Mythica is using similar or identical class and realm titles isn't an issue of itself - and if it were, then it would get thrown straight out of court as all of DAoC is based upon prior art found in the public domain. Which means anyone else is entitled to use it. But to use those terms *and* put a similar name on the top could be argued to be unreasonably confusing.
Vague definitions of what should be considered 'reasonable' built up through hundreds of years of case law is the foundation of the Anglo-Saxon law system.
Mythic are doing this because they don't want people to think they are part of MS. They want MS to change the name - they know full well they have no case on the existence of the product itself.
Best they can hope for is that MS agree to change the name before anything goes to court, that way this will only cost Mythic a medium sized amount of money. If it does go to court both groups will lose money - and my bet would be on MS winning the case.
Best way for MS to climb down would be to prefix the word Mythica with some nonsence latin sounding word. imo.
Personally I think Mythic are worrying over nothing.
/shrug
The fact that Mythica is using similar or identical class and realm titles isn't an issue of itself - and if it were, then it would get thrown straight out of court as all of DAoC is based upon prior art found in the public domain. Which means anyone else is entitled to use it. But to use those terms *and* put a similar name on the top could be argued to be unreasonably confusing.
Vague definitions of what should be considered 'reasonable' built up through hundreds of years of case law is the foundation of the Anglo-Saxon law system.
Mythic are doing this because they don't want people to think they are part of MS. They want MS to change the name - they know full well they have no case on the existence of the product itself.
Best they can hope for is that MS agree to change the name before anything goes to court, that way this will only cost Mythic a medium sized amount of money. If it does go to court both groups will lose money - and my bet would be on MS winning the case.
Best way for MS to climb down would be to prefix the word Mythica with some nonsence latin sounding word. imo.
Personally I think Mythic are worrying over nothing.
/shrug
G
ghaladriel
Guest
- Thread starter
- #51
F
Falcon
Guest
- Thread starter
- #52
Mythic have no choice but to challenge Microsofts attempts at immitation with their new trademark applications else they're at risk of losing their very own Trademark.
F
Freppe^^
Guest
- Thread starter
- #53
Yep but imo its abit low, wasnt there a game called mythic or so before mythic company came up?
F
Falcon
Guest
- Thread starter
- #54
I can't see how protecting your product's name is low? It's either that or they let Microsoft get away with it, accept the financial damage it WILL cause and risk the possiblity of no longer owning various trademarks they previously registered.
Mythic aren't on the attack here, this is no act of agression towards Microsoft, on the contrary, it's an act of defence.
Mythic aren't on the attack here, this is no act of agression towards Microsoft, on the contrary, it's an act of defence.
O
old.Ramas
Guest
- Thread starter
- #55
I suspect you are thinking of 'Myth'.
There have been several games called Myth. The earliest I can remember was a C64 platform game, where for reasons never fully explained some strapping your fellow had to be guided across a series of Roman, Greek, and Norse based environments.
There were platforms, and I suspect much jumping around looking for the key needed to open the next door.
Then there was Bungie's Myth 1 & 2.
http://www.bungie.com/products/myth/myth.htm
...which were decidedly average RTSs made during a brief period in the late 1990s when fantasy RTSs other than Warcraft were considered socially acceptable.