Why don't you guys believe The Dark Below was a real trademark anymore?

[Myzou]

I'm a bit confused as well.

The Dark Below was the first one filed.

Then the next day, the D3 one pops up?

But because someone proved it was easy to fake, the first one is no longer valid? -.--

[chrisisvacant]

I'm only gonna say this once.

Back in 2011, Blizzard registered a trademark with the USPTO for "Mists of Pandaria." When the news came out -- on about August 2, 2011 -- you could at that very moment go to the USPTO website and do a trademark search for "MISTS OF PANDARIA" and it would come up as a LIVE TRADEMARK. Not an application -- an actual, existing, REAL, live trademark, in TESS, the USPTO's database of actual trademarks.

If you search TESS for "The Dark Below", there are NO RESULTS. If you search by company name ("Blizzard Entertainment") it comes up with over 100, and none of them are "The Dark Below."

There is a difference between the APPLICATION and the ACTUAL TRADEMARK. All these "teas.uspto.gov" links are to the APPLICATIONS, which anyone can create for free and don't mean ANYTHING. TEAS stands for "Trademark Electronic APPLICATION System". TESS stands for "Trademark Electronic SEARCH System." TEAS is for looking at applications; TESS is for looking at actual trademarks.

To check:

1. Go to uspto.gov
2. Mouseover "TRADEMARKS" in the top nav
3. Click on "Trademark Search"
4. Click on "Basic Word Mark Search (New User)"
5. Type "DARK BELOW" (no quotes) into the "Search Term" field. (Or "THE DARK BELOW" if you prefer.)
6. Hit enter.
7. See that the only result that comes up is a mark that happens to contain both "dark" and "below" in the (lengthy) description. If you select "exact search phrase" from the search form, it finds NO RESULTS for either "DARK BELOW" or "THE DARK BELOW".

Now, all this proves is that there are currently no trademarks for the term "DARK BELOW". It does not prove that "DARK BELOW" isn't the name of the next expansion. However, as of right now there is NO reliable evidence that I know of that "THE DARK BELOW" is the name of the next expansion.

Reaper of Souls doesn't show up either. Ho ho ho ho ho ho hoh oh ohoh ohohohohohohohohohohoho.

Holes in your argument like whut. Furthermore, TESS wouldn't have showed the Swaziland registration either. Please.

- - - Updated - - -

No, because Blizzard wouldn't have the new expansion begin while in the previous expansion's storyline.

Which btw further proves that this is a hoax. It just smacks of a legion fanboy wanting MoP to be over with as quickly as possible. He wants the Legion storyline to start so badly, that he has the legion expansion starting before MoP is even finished.

You have yet to address Ruby Sanctum setting up Cataclysm in a non-*.0 patch.

[Wildberry]

No, because Blizzard wouldn't have the new expansion begin while in the previous expansion's storyline.

Which btw further proves that this is a hoax. It just smacks of a legion fanboy wanting MoP to be over with as quickly as possible. He wants the Legion storyline to start so badly, that he has the legion expansion starting before MoP is even finished.

Sorry I want to get out of Asian Hell ASAP?

Also Teriz, I have a word for you, "foreshadow".

[Unionoob]

The Dark Below just doesn't sound right if you compere it to "Burning Crusade", "Wrath of the Lich King", "Cataclysm", "Mist of Pandaria"... all those names are more or less catchy and easy to remember and associated while "The Dark Below" sounds like 3 random words put together and nothing else.

[Seezer]

They tried to throw us off of MoP as well. I think TDB is going to be real. It's in lore, it sounds like it has potential. I'm going with it. Besides. This is the time 2 years ago, almost to the day is when MoP was trademarked.

[dirtside]

Reaper of Souls doesn't show up either. Ho ho ho ho ho ho hoh oh ohoh ohohohohohohohohohohoho.

Holes in your argument like whut. Furthermore, TESS wouldn't have showed the Swaziland registration either. Please.

I guess it makes you feel better to be snide, rather than just being polite? Anyhow.

I was only talking about WoW expansions, which, since Wrath, have followed the same pattern: Trademark shows up in TESS; someone notices, and articles appear wondering what it is; a few weeks or months later, at Blizzcon, Blizz announces a WoW expansion with that name. Maybe the D3 team felt comfortable announcing the name before the mark was approved.

The only conclusion I made (which isn't even a conclusion, it's a simple fact) is that there's no live U.S. trademarks for "The Dark Below." Half the posts in the thread weren't even aware that there was a difference between TEAS and TESS.

[Heywoods]

The Dark Below just doesn't sound right if you compere it to "Burning Crusade", "Wrath of the Lich King", "Cataclysm", "Mist of Pandaria"... all those names are more or less catchy and easy to remember and associated while "The Dark Below" sounds like 3 random words put together and nothing else.

There are 18 pages of various posters providing solid precedence about how Blizzard normally trademarks their expansions as well as thorough explanations of the US trademark approval process but your reasoning why "The Dark Below" is not the next possible expansion is because it doesn't "sound right?

You are telling me "Mists of Pandaria" doesn't sound random? There is no pattern whatsoever to the titles of each expansion.

[Xsy]

What the hell is this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns-KMXe_iiU

[Mormolyce]

There was a timeskip between Wrath and Cata and probably the others too.

The expansions have all been 1 year apart actually (except I think TBC -> Wrath was 2 years). And the events of each expansion must've taken at least a year to actually play out (suspension of disbelief required I think).

I actually wouldn't take the dates Blizzard give too seriously to be honest. They just put roughly a year between each expansion and leave it at that.

[dirtside]

The expansions have all been 1 year apart actually (except I think TBC -> Wrath was 2 years). And the events of each expansion must've taken at least a year to actually play out (suspension of disbelief required I think).

I actually wouldn't take the dates Blizzard give too seriously to be honest. They just put roughly a year between each expansion and leave it at that.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "a year", because here's the dates of each WoW expansion launch (in the U.S.):

2004-11-07: WoW vanilla
2007-01-16: TBC
2008-11-13: Wrath
2010-11-23: Cataclysm
2012-09-25: Mists

That's gaps of about 26 months, 22 months, 24 months, and 22 months, respectively. On average it's about 2 years between expansion releases.

[chrisisvacant]

I guess it makes you feel better to be snide, rather than just being polite? Anyhow.

I was only talking about WoW expansions, which, since Wrath, have followed the same pattern: Trademark shows up in TESS; someone notices, and articles appear wondering what it is; a few weeks or months later, at Blizzcon, Blizz announces a WoW expansion with that name. Maybe the D3 team felt comfortable announcing the name before the mark was approved.

The only conclusion I made (which isn't even a conclusion, it's a simple fact) is that there's no live U.S. trademarks for "The Dark Below." Half the posts in the thread weren't even aware that there was a difference between TEAS and TESS.

Oh stop. I was being pretty tame for these forums. You don't have to be so serious. This is a bowl of fun soup.

I'm just saying that at some point, Blizzard will switch their game up. It stands to reason, after all they've said about trying to do MoP and further expansions differently than the prior expansions, that this is as good a time as any.

That means:
An epilogue-ish patch called Skysunder COULD HAPPEN
An employee taking a screenshot of the application COULD HAPPEN
The application in question COULD BE used or it COULD BE foreshadowing of something to come

It seems like a lot of folks understand parts of this situation, but not typically -all- of it except for those who feel they know better. The people who purport to know better (the "Asterisks, duh!" guy, Teriz, others) don't actually know better, but they put up a good fight. All I'm saying is that there is absolutely reasonable doubt. Not saying that all the wild shit people come up with as to what this or that means is true! But that's the fun of speculation.

My "career" in WoW isn't decided upon the context of expansions. I've grown out of the bipolar "ZOMG IT HAS TO BE THIS OR IM GOING TO EXPLODE I HATE CHINESE PEOPLE AND KIDDIES AND GHOSTCRAWLER" attitude (assuming I ever came close to it, which I didn't - thankfully). So none of this really matters in the end. I can patiently await Blizz saying something.

[Mormolyce]

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "a year", because here's the dates of each WoW expansion launch (in the U.S.):

2004-11-07: WoW vanilla
2007-01-16: TBC
2008-11-13: Wrath
2010-11-23: Cataclysm
2012-09-25: Mists

That's gaps of about 26 months, 22 months, 24 months, and 22 months, respectively. On average it's about 2 years between expansion releases.

Nah we were talking about time skips in the lore. Like when each expansion is set in Warcraft's timeline.

- - - Updated - - -

That means:
An epilogue-ish patch called Skysunder COULD HAPPEN
An employee taking a screenshot of the application COULD HAPPEN
The application in question COULD BE used or it COULD BE foreshadowing of something to come

Well sure it COULD happen. Anything COULD happen.

Wanna put $50 on there being a 5.5 patch called Skysunder? I'll take such a bet!

[chrisisvacant]

Well sure it COULD happen. Anything COULD happen.

Wanna put $50 on there being a 5.5 patch called Skysunder? I'll take such a bet!

I work in the video game industry here in SF. One thing I won't lose money on, ever, is the ability of a dev team to surprise (good or bad) their consumers. So, no, I won't take that bet. I'm just saying. :P

[Recyclops]

I mean, It's a neat name. I love speculation as much as the next guy, but it's just that, speculation. If the next Xpac is The Dark below that's cool, if not I'm sure whatever else it'll be will be coolio too.

[Linkedblade]

Obviously Corgis Unleashed is Titan.

[Deleted]

Blizzard blatantly said Mists of Pandaria wasn't a WoW expansion and there would not be Pandas in WoW.

I don't think they ever said this.

Also, I'm going to assume it's a hoax till Blizzard confirms it, too much ingame hinting at legion for them to completely switch direction.

Also The Dark Below sounds like the "continent" name, not the name of an expansion. It would be like having expansions called Outland, Northrend, random-places-here-there-and-everywhere and Pandaria.

[Crysis]

I don't think they ever said this.

Also, I'm going to assume it's a hoax till Blizzard confirms it, too much ingame hinting at legion for them to completely switch direction.

Also The Dark Below sounds like the "continent" name, not the name of an expansion. It would be like having expansions called Outland, Northrend, random-places-here-there-and-everywhere and Pandaria.

You mean like Mists of Pandaria? Oh yeah right. The name is nice, it sounds badass but! only if it's a metaphor and not a real place under the ocean, in that case I want it to be hoax. I don't want another boring old god stuff, I want to kick some demon-ass so I'll rather believe that the possibly leaked patch logo for 5.5 Skysunder is real and we'll get that instead of this.

[Berri]

You mean like Mists of Pandaria? Oh yeah right. The name is nice, it sounds badass but! only if it's a metaphor and not a real place under the ocean, in that case I want it to be hoax. I don't want another boring old god stuff, I want to kick some demon-ass so I'll rather believe that the possibly leaked patch logo for 5.5 Skysunder is real and we'll get that instead of this.

Whether you want the Old God stuff, it's inevitable that it's going to come in the future.

[Hitei]

I don't think they ever said this.

Also, I'm going to assume it's a hoax till Blizzard confirms it, too much ingame hinting at legion for them to completely switch direction.

Also The Dark Below sounds like the "continent" name, not the name of an expansion. It would be like having expansions called Outland, Northrend, random-places-here-there-and-everywhere and Pandaria.

It still sounds good.

[Wildberry]

It still sounds good.

That sounds like an opinion.