Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Notch: Mojang Offered "To Give Up the Trademark" for Scrolls

The Word of Notch offers a "short response" to some criticism in an editorial on Kotaku based on the recent release of legal documents related to the court battle over the Scrolls trademark. He explains that Mojang actually offered to give up the trademark, but Bethesda seems determined to go to court nonetheless:

I just saw this:

http://kotaku.com/5846111/mojang-v-bethesda-or-i-hate-it-when-mommy-and-daddy-fight

I feel the need to clarify a couple of things:

We realized we should apply for the trademark “Minecraft” to protect our brand. When doing so, we also sent in an application for “Scrolls”. When Bethesda contacted us, we offered both to change the name to “Scrolls: <some subtitle>” and to give up the trademark.

They refused on both counts.

Whatever reason they have for suing us, it’s not a fear of us having a trademark on the word “Scrolls”, as we’ve offered to give that up.

View
39 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

39. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 22:23 ^Drag0n^
 
Jensen wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 21:08:
WaltC wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 10:25:
I expect that he has no intention of being dragged into court but will remove the word "scrolls" from his game title before it ships.

I'm sure that's why he paid who-knows-how-much for the scrolls.com domain.

I'll take "What you get for $11.99 at GoDaddy.com" for 100, Alex.
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 21:08 Jensen
 
WaltC wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 10:25:
I expect that he has no intention of being dragged into court but will remove the word "scrolls" from his game title before it ships.

I'm sure that's why he paid who-knows-how-much for the scrolls.com domain.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered "To Give Up the Trademark" for Scrolls Oct 4, 2011, 19:29 Hump
 
Sounds like Bethsofts legal dept. wants to exercise the usual behaviors of corporate/entertainment industry attorneys....being worthless scumbags.  
Avatar 10137
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."

- Jim Goad
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 13:21 Bodolza
 
Beamer wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 12:54:
Yeah, but they were made people in the 1860s or 1870s. Whenever that railroad case was.

No, they weren't. A court reporter said they were, but that's not what the judges actually ruled. It wasn't made official until Citizen United.

And for the sake of law they need to be treated as people.
This doesn't mean we can't limit that.

Why should they be treated as people? Why can't we treat them as corporations? They are government constructs, after all. Why should they have the same natural rights as people?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 12:54 Beamer
 
This is not true. The idea has been around for a long time, but they were not consistently treated as such by the court system, and the Supreme Court had never decided if corporations had constitutional rights until Citizen United.

Yeah, but they were made people in the 1860s or 1870s. Whenever that railroad case was. And it was in 1809 or so that they notion first entered our law.

The extent of their definition entirely depends on what the government says they are.

And for the sake of law they need to be treated as people.
This doesn't mean we can't limit that.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 12:42 Bodolza
 
Beamer wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 09:37:
Corporations have been legally people for centuries.

This is not true. The idea has been around for a long time, but they were not consistently treated as such by the court system, and the Supreme Court had never decided if corporations had constitutional rights until Citizen United.

Let's focus here. Being against Citizen United: good. Being against corporations as people: stupid.

Why? They aren't people, you know. They're legal constructs created by the government. The extent of their definition entirely depends on what the government says they are.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 11:53 yuastnav
 
WaltC wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 10:25:
[...]
document, manuscript, paper, parchment, scripture, papyrus, file...just for starters. [...]

You are right. He should release a game called "Paper".

m(
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 10:25 WaltC
 
When Bethesda contacted us, we offered both to change the name to “Scrolls: <some subtitle>” and to give up the trademark.

This thread is amazing...;) It's like few people even read the sentence above that Blue actually quoted from "notch" on the front page! You know, the sentence in which "notch" actually states he made no effort whatsoever to settle and actually responded to Bethesda by insulting them with an offer to change the name of "Scrolls" to "Scrolls: <some subtitle>" I don't know why Notch simply didn't offer to change the game name to "Scrolls: Elder"...:D

Obviously, "notch" is doing this simply for attention and publicity for his upcoming software release. At this point, though, "notch" hasn't actually done anything Bethesda can sue over, and Bethesda won't have any reason to sue unless "notch" decides to use the word scroll in the title of the game--game isn't out yet and so has no title, of course. I expect that he has no intention of being dragged into court but will remove the word "scrolls" from his game title before it ships. If "notch" had any sense at all he'd know that by far the best publicity for his upcoming game is Minecraft--not some juvenile, public crybaby fest over the use of the word "scrolls" as a the name for a computer game. Everybody knows Bethesda got there first, a long, long time ago.

synonyms for the noun "scroll":

document, manuscript, paper, parchment, scripture, papyrus, file...just for starters. The thing is if notch has any imagination whatever he can easily choose a a name for his game that is original. I can't see the problem there at all. I actually would be embarrassed to have to admit that the most original title for my game that I could conceive was "Scrolls: Something." Minecraft as a game title was only partially original (a take off on War-craft, Star-craft, etc.) He might call this one "Filecraft" or simply "Papyrus" and leave off the "craft." There are a million things he could do aside from moving in on Bethesda's computer-game trademark turf.

Thingaboudet...;)


 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 10:12 Dev
 
ZeroCougar wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 07:12:
Just keep making Minecraft, Notch, stick to finishing what you started there...
He's kinda busy making scrolls and whatever else he's announced. I think the company grew too big too fast and he's losing focus on minecraft.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 10:11 Rhino
 
Beamer wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 09:27:
Not sure why people are suddenly aware of corporations legally being people, and not sure why they're taking such offense to it.

If I had to hazard a guess: I have noticed that it has come up a few times recently on The Daily Show and Colbert Report. Since so many haven't paid much attention to these sorts of things, but also watch those shows, then they are seeing for the first time that corporations are treated as people and trying to shoehorn it into their dislike of corporations without, as you noted, a firm understanding of several of the details.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 09:37 Beamer
 
Oh, wait, people are against Citizen United.


Corporations have been legally people for centuries.
Citizen United is less than 2 years old.


Let's focus here. Being against Citizen United: good. Being against corporations as people: stupid.

And this is why no one is paying attention to Occupy Wall St. - the lack of focus and basic understanding. Very good intentions, pisspoor execution. They're hurting our cause.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 09:27 Beamer
 
Kajetan wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 08:08:
Beamer wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 07:26:
Well yeah. How else could they sign a contract?
A company has no need for such rights to make legally binding contracts.

Yes it does.

It also needs these rights to be sued. Let's say a UPS driver hits your car. Do you want to be able to sue UPS? Then it needs to be a person, otherwise you're suing the driver and no one else.

Not sure why people are suddenly aware of corporations legally being people, and not sure why they're taking such offense to it. Any that I've asked have failed to articulate a reason, either, instead they just call me right wing and tell me to watch more Faux News. Yes, the guy that wants tax brackets that go up over 90% is right wing...
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 08:08 Kajetan
 
Beamer wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 07:26:
Well yeah. How else could they sign a contract?
A company has no need for such rights to make legally binding contracts.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 07:26 Beamer
 
EddieTheHack wrote on Oct 3, 2011, 23:12:
fela wrote on Oct 3, 2011, 23:11:
Yup this is when you have a nation run by lawyers and fictional entities (corporations)that own language.

The only way to win is not to play.
Corp's are legally people in the us. its disgusting.

Well yeah. How else could they sign a contract?
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 07:12 ZeroCougar
 
I wish this whole thing would just go away. It was out of left field, so to speak, to begin with. Notch doesn't come across as doing this intentionally by any stretch of the imagination, in my view.

Just keep making Minecraft, Notch, stick to finishing what you started there...
 
Avatar 57005
 
- That's a very nice everything you have there... ssssssssSSSSSSSSSSS -
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 06:35 Fibrocyte
 
InBlack wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 04:23:
This makes no sense at all. Why would Bethesda sue if he offered to drop the name???



Either Notch is lying, or there is something else going on here...

He didn't offer to 'drop the name' - he offered to modify the name and as others are pointing out his modification just brings it closer to what you might expect from a Bethesda title.

All this aside, its amazing how people swoon over Notch's words. I somewhat believe what Cutter is saying - Notch is the bad guy here. We already know he's a shyster from how he delivered Minecraft to the world.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Valve Single Player Clarification Oct 4, 2011, 05:11 Optimaximal
 
To me, the Kotaku article is misleading (and seems to have an agenda to boot).

Notice how they transparently change the claim against Mojang from 'Scrolls' - which, with the capitalisation, is distinct and can relate to a product - to 'scrolls', which defines the word itself - something that would never be granted, as you cannot trademark a genericized word.
 
Avatar 23755
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 04:23 InBlack
 
This makes no sense at all. Why would Bethesda sue if he offered to drop the name???



Either Notch is lying, or there is something else going on here...
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 04:15 Flatline
 
Amusingly enough, renaming the game Scrolls: (subtitle) is probably closer to Bethesda's trademark than just naming your game Scrolls.

What's probably happened is that Mojang got the cease & desist, blew it off and was a smartass about it, and is now getting sued. Probably for not complying with the C&D more at this point.

Mojang strikes me as particularly not very legal savvy. They're paying the price now I suspect. Or they will.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Notch: Mojang Offered Oct 4, 2011, 01:07 mag
 
EddieTheHack wrote on Oct 3, 2011, 21:35:
Krovven wrote on Oct 3, 2011, 21:23:
It's just more legal bullying from Bethesda. Hopefully they will lose this, just like they have lost every time in the Interplay case(s).


Except for that part where Mojang is attempting to trademark literally every single instance where the word 'scrolls' might ever be used. If Mojang gets the copyright on the word 'scrolls' Bethesda is in a deep pile of crap because Mojang could go after them for just having the word in their games title. When it comes to a companies bread and butter they are not going to take the good intentions and word of someone if they potentially have the power to royally fuck things up. Even the very idea of copyrighting a single word is stupid. Notch is Tim Langdel. You can't own a commonly used word. Period. If mojang would have called this something else with multiple distinct words and then tried to copyright it this case would not be happening. I hope Bethesda cleans Mojangs clock for even trying this crap.

<Morbo>

TRADEMARKS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY

COPYRIGHTS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY

</Morbo>

Also, Trademarks are not Copyrights.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo