Diablo character sparks a trademark fight between Blizzard and Fox

[Endus]

You dont evewn know the half of it. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ally-cancelled

Like, any such case should be settled by pointing to literally any dictionary entry for said word or phrase, or any pre-existing iteration of the same in any other work.

Case dismissed; not a unique creation.

Take the MyPillow whackadoodle. If he tried to trademark "My Pillow", get fucked. Remove the space, though? MyPillow? Sure, that's unique. But you don't get to sue anyone just for using the word "pillow".

[ONCHEhap]

Ah,intellectual property.

People become IP specialised corporate lawyers when they have neither the moral fiber nor the skill to become real lawyers

[Bigbamboozal]

That's not going to work out for blizzard since diablo literally means devil.

You can't trademark the devil.

And yet that's what fox is trying to do...hence why blizzard is trying to block it.

[Stardrift]

You can't just trademark regular words and own them. That's not how any of this works, Blizz.

Did any of you read? It's clearly Fox trying to trademark it, and Blizzard refuting it

[WintersLegion]

Did any of you read? It's clearly Fox trying to trademark it, and Blizzard refuting it

Well of course they didn't read it who takes the time to read when there is a chance of accusing Blizzard of not knowing what they are doing?

[Dhrizzle]

Any big company must protects its trademarks or right to use a name, no matter how stupid or petty it might seem.

A couple of petty examples from my country, Denmark:

1. Carlsberg, the big Danish beer producer, went after a camping-site named Carlsberg, but had to withdraw the case because the camping-site was named after the hill it was situated on, even though "Carlsberg" as a trademark was much older than the camping-site.
2. A guy here build a copy of Elvis' Graceland and named it "Graceland". He had to rename it to the "Memphis Mansion" after the Elvis estate went after him.

In this case we have one huge multi-billion company, Fox, in the entertainment business that wants to trademark a name that another multi-billion company in the same business has used for many years. So Blizzard is simply obliged to defend that it can use "Diablo".

The main issue here is whether "Diablo" is so common that you can't trademark it or stop other companies from using the same name.
It is also an issue whether a common word is used as a trademark in completly different or similar business areas.

For example "Apple" is a trademark of a producer of very specific electronic products and no other company can use the word "apple" within those areas.
But the company "Apple" can't stop companies using the word "apple" when we talk about the fruit/food etc. business as it is a common word describing something and not a name as such.

Once upon a time Apple Computers was sued by the Beatles, or more accurately their record company Apple Corps, and it was decided that Apple was allowed to use the name as there was little cross over between computers and music. They sued again when Apple added sound to their computers and most recently over iTunes when it's estimated Apple paid $50-100 million to gain the rights to the trademark.

- - - Updated - - -

It's pretty obvious people's hate binders for Blizzard is redirecting blood away from their brains preventing them from 1, reading the damned article, 2, comprehending what they read or have been explained, and 3, being objective.

Blizzard could find a cure for all illnesses and diseases, give it away for free and the narrative here would be that Blizzard is destroying Big medicine and ruining doctor's lives. Also it just a PR stunt.

But yes, this is Blizzard trying to protect their long running IP so that they can use it in the future without legal issues.

Same thing happened when Blizzard sued Valve to make sure fans of the original DotA game could keep their fansites etc.

[bluspacecow]

'Confusion' is a type of trademark dispute. That is what is being referred to. Like when two trademarks are in conflict in the same domain, such as Diablo branded T shirts or Diablo branded mugs. The trademarks don't need to be similar at all, the confusion part is about two conflicting products of the same name potentially causing product confusion to the consumers based on the name alone. And yes, it can be argued regardless of the actual characters, because sometimes the merch could be sold through the text alone.

^^ This

Trademarks are about protecting a mark (which can be a word of phrase) in a very particular product category.

Fox actually have 6 trademarks that intersect with Blizzard's existing trademarks in 10 of these product category. This should never of gone past the initial application stage.

- - - Updated - - -

This is basically what I've heard, as well. Blizzard is pretty much obligated to defend the name, due to how the trademarks work, or you might actually lose... some of the trademark protections? Or something along those lines? I can't quite remember. Maybe someone can shed some light on that?

Anyway, the point is, is that these lawsuits don't necessarily stem from some pettiness over the name. They do it, because they are obligated to do it.

Sort but I'm not sure of it's a legal duty that they are obligated to do and must do.

More of it would be legally dumb of them not to defend it. If they don't it dilutes their trademark as there's a possibility of other products in a product category sharing the same mark as their trademark. The protections they have are on their IP are weakened making it harder to defend in future trademark disputes as it can be argued that Blizzard don't care about their IP because of that other time they didn't defend their trademark.

More importantly if they didn't fight it raises the possibility of Fox obtaining the Diablo trademarks instead. Fox could then bring the fight back to Blizzard attempting to get their trademarks dismissed. And that's incredibly dangerous for Blizzard not to act.

- - - Updated - - -

And yet that's what fox is trying to do...hence why blizzard is trying to block it.

Blizzard aren't trying to trademark Diablo.

They are seeking to defend their trademarks they have some of which have been registered , renewed and disputed a time or to since 1996

[SirBeef]

Once upon a time Apple Computers was sued by the Beatles, or more accurately their record company Apple Corps, and it was decided that Apple was allowed to use the name as there was little cross over between computers and music. They sued again when Apple added sound to their computers and most recently over iTunes when it's estimated Apple paid $50-100 million to gain the rights to the trademark.

- - - Updated - - -



Same thing happened when Blizzard sued Valve to make sure fans of the original DotA game could keep their fansites etc.

Well that was more of a secondary benefit, it was because they felt they had the right since the map/mode was made using their IP and was associated with WC3. But yeah.

[Raven]

You can't just trademark regular words and own them. That's not how any of this works, Blizz.

Tell that to Fox that applied for a trademark for OK boomer.

[Clozer]

Could you call your car "car" and trademark "car" and whenever someone calls their car "car" in a movie you could fight that? The US has some pretty cool trademark laws.

[WintersLegion]

Could you call your car "car" and trademark "car" and whenever someone calls their car "car" in a movie you could fight that? The US has some pretty cool trademark laws.

Funny thing is if a Trademarked name becomes the standard term for something a company can lose their trademark it's happened to a few companies and Google is at risk of it happening to them.

[Bigbamboozal]

^^ This

Trademarks are about protecting a mark (which can be a word of phrase) in a very particular product category.

Fox actually have 6 trademarks that intersect with Blizzard's existing trademarks in 10 of these product category. This should never of gone past the initial application stage.

- - - Updated - - -



Sort but I'm not sure of it's a legal duty that they are obligated to do and must do.

More of it would be legally dumb of them not to defend it. If they don't it dilutes their trademark as there's a possibility of other products in a product category sharing the same mark as their trademark. The protections they have are on their IP are weakened making it harder to defend in future trademark disputes as it can be argued that Blizzard don't care about their IP because of that other time they didn't defend their trademark.

More importantly if they didn't fight it raises the possibility of Fox obtaining the Diablo trademarks instead. Fox could then bring the fight back to Blizzard attempting to get their trademarks dismissed. And that's incredibly dangerous for Blizzard not to act.

- - - Updated - - -



Blizzard aren't trying to trademark Diablo.

They are seeking to defend their trademarks they have some of which have been registered , renewed and disputed a time or to since 1996

That's literally what I just said

[Daedius]

Sounds similar to Sky trying to claim ownership to the word "Sky", doubt it'll get anywhere... People shouldn't be allowed to claim ownership of singular words unless it's a made up one.

[sensei]

It's funny when people say you cannot trademark common English words while typing their comments on an iPhone

It's funnier when you take into consideration the two companies involved are named "Blizzard" and "Fox".

[Lord Pebbleton]

This thread taught me that trademarking regulations were determined by throwing darts at a board while blindfolded

[Veggie50]

You can't just trademark regular words and own them. That's not how any of this works, Blizz.

...which is exactly what Blizzard is claiming, it’s Fox that’s trying to trademark.

- - - Updated - - -

People so confused about the difference between trademarks and copyrights...

[deenman]

It would be very amusing if fox manages to get the trademark and force blizzard to change the name haha,if im not mistaken blizzard doesnt actualy own the trademark for the name diablo itself

[Kumorii]

It would be very amusing if fox manages to get the trademark and force blizzard to change the name haha,if im not mistaken blizzard doesnt actualy own the trademark for the name diablo itself

I propose the name should be changed to "Djävul"

[George]

It's funnier when you take into consideration the two companies involved are named "Blizzard" and "Fox".

Haha, indeed, even better

[bluspacecow]

It would be very amusing if fox manages to get the trademark and force blizzard to change the name haha,if im not mistaken blizzard doesnt actualy own the trademark for the name diablo itself

Blizzard have multiple granted trademarks for "Diablo" , some they've had since 1996. That's 25 years worth of having to re-register it when it expires as well as defend it when it's been disputed. They still have them despite all this time.