<< Back to Warzone Classic Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 30 of 30   
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:09:56


Timinator • apex 
Level 66
Report
https://segmentnext.com/2021/04/10/activision-warzone-com-trademark/

How many badly researched wrong infos can one article have? Feel free to read yourself.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:11:52


[THD] RWP
Level 48
Report
I'll say one

WZ Idle is a branch of Warzone, and not the main game.
Warzone, is the main game, and was released before COD: Warzone.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:20:06


Farah♦ 
Level 61
Report
Well, let's count!

There are apparently two free-to-play Warzone games in the market right now and both of them were released around the same time.

Warlight/Warzone was released way earlier. Count: 1

The first is obviously the battle royale phenomenon by publisher Activision. The second though is web-based incremental strategy board game “themed around conquering the world.”

If they're talking about the order of release, then this is obviously wrong. Count: 1.5

The said web-based game is called Warzone Idle and was released by publisher Hasbro in 2020.

Not going to explain that one... Count: 2.5


Anyways, the article says the following:
"According to a complaint filed by Activision in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the web-based Warzone.com game has threatened the publisher to seek “massive damages” for trademark infringement in addition to restricting the publisher from using the Warzone name or using trademarks in relation to the name.

Activision has hence sued the maker of the incremental strategy board game and wants the Los Angeles federal court to declare Call of Duty: Warzone has an independent intellectual property and which does not infringe any trademarks."

Does this mean Fizzer has threatened Activision for using his game-name? That would be extremely interesting.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:21:47


Timinator • apex 
Level 66
Report
The said web-based game is called Warzone Idle and was released by publisher Hasbro in 2020.


Not going to explain that one... Count: 2.5


to me that counts for 2.



also you forgot

Warzone, the real one, was last confirmed in October 2020 to be catering more than 80 million players worldwide.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:22:16


[THD] RWP
Level 48
Report
That must have taken so long to write.

Anyways, I'd like to say, who the hell writes the website.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:22:36


JK_3 
Level 61
Report
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:23:41


[THD] RWP
Level 48
Report
I don't think this is a good time for memes.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:27:10


Blindigo
Level 60
Report
Let's find a new Name! Maybe something with "light"! ;)
Or Riskzone or something else...

Sry Fizzer, i don't know anything about the legal system in the USA, but that's surly a lot of work for u , for nothing...
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:29:16


[THD] RWP
Level 48
Report
By the way, they are literally saying COD is the real game.
To heck with them.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:30:51


JK_3 
Level 61
Report
Yeah, that article is not objective in any way.....

They clearly are either incredibly stupid or ignored some easy to find facts cause it would ruin their case.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:32:23


[THD] RWP
Level 48
Report
I think they are saying COD is the real one because they are a mainly COD online magazine.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:35:14


Farah♦ 
Level 61
Report
I've read through the whole court case Activision is filing. Looks like it's going to be a tough ride for Fizzer. Let's hope he wins!
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 22:43:04


Norman 
Level 58
Report
I've read through the whole court case Activision is filing. Looks like it's going to be a tough ride for Fizzer. Let's hope he wins!


Where can I find it?
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 23:03:13


TrapdoorSpiderTurret 
Level 57
Report
So this the real reason for creating idle. Baiting them into a frivolous lawsuit that will blow up in their faces... hah, genius!
Warzone vs Activision: 4/11/2021 23:58:36


Ocean0.1 
Level 59
Report
[Removed]

Edited 4/12/2021 00:03:28
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 00:11:12


krinid 
Level 60
Report
Yikes, scary fighting a big company, knowing that they can afford to create an expensive legal battle.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 01:05:45


{TLA} LND
Level 60
Report
It might be a very uninformed opinion, but imo this can only really mean good things for Warzone (the real one 😉).
Afaict, worst case scenario is that Activision wins and is allowed to use the Warzone name (which they're already doing anyway) and Fizzer has spent a fair bit of money on legal support. But Fizzer would get a fair bit of publicity for WZ.
Best case scenario - Fizzer gets a lot of money, publicity, and the name.
But I'd be interested to hear people's opinions on who has stronger legal ground to stand on!
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 01:54:24


Norman 
Level 58
Report
But I'd be interested to hear people's opinions on who has stronger legal ground to stand on!


Hm... I don't want to jinx anything here but when there is a "Norman" lemonade on the market it's probably a bad idea to bring out a "Norman" whiskey while a "Norman" car brand is OK. What Activision seems to be going for is indeed a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory_judgment
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 02:24:37


Norman 
Level 58
Report
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 02:59:00

Pulsey
Level 56
Report
Warlight > Warzone anyway
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 03:37:30


Caleb Martin
Level 58
Report
Our WZ has existed before that crappy cash grab of a game existed, and it's taken every bit of attention we've gotten in forever. Fizzer is definitely in the right, but there's a very low chance he'll win against those twats. We're probably either going to have to live with being over shadowed or rename. again.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 04:22:37

Plausible Deniability
Level 10
Report
Some of you seem to be confused about this case. The content farm journalists don't help.

This is Case No. 2:21-cv-3073, filed April 8th, 2021, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Here are some excerpts from Activision Publishing, Inc.'s complaint:

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
... Activision respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment...:
1. Declaring that Defendant does not possess exclusive trademark rights in the term "Warzone."
2. Declaring that Activision's use of the WARZONE or CALL OF DUTY WARZONE Marks does not infringe... any existing and valid common law tradmark rights of [Warzone.com, LLC]...
3. Declaring that Activision's use of WARZONE or CALL OF DUTY WARZONE is not likely to cause, and has not caused, confusion... as to the affiliation... of [Warzone.com, LLC,] with Activision's goods and services...
4. Declaring that Activision's pending applications for registration of the marks WARZONE and CALL OF DUTY WARZONE may proceed to registration;
5. Declaring that [Warzone.com, LLC's] pending applications for registration of the mark WARZONE should not proceed to registration
...

Other than a request to be awarded "reasonable attorney's fees and costs," Activision is not going after Warzone for money or suing to shut down this game or force it to change its name. The above is the gist of what Activision wants from this lawsuit.

Why does Activision want this? You can learn that from the complaint as well:

The Parties' Dispute

On or about June 25, 2020, Activision filed applications for registration of the trademarks WARZONE... and CALL OF DUTY WARZONE...

On October 30, 2020, [Warzone.com, LLC,] filed applications for registration of the trademark WARZONE...

On November 3, 2020, the marks subject to the Activision Applications were published for opposition in the Trademark Official Gazette. The same day, [Warzone.com, LLC] filed a Notice of Opposition to registration of the Activision Marks

To avoid some confusion about how trademark law works:
A trademark can be any word, phrase, symbol, design, or a combination of these things that identifies your goods or services. It’s how customers recognize you in the marketplace and distinguish you from your competitors.
(https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/what-trademark)
Trademark infringement is the unauthorized use of a trademark or service mark on or in connection with goods and/or services in a manner that is likely to cause confusion, deception, or mistake about the source of the goods and/or services.
(https://www.uspto.gov/page/about-trademark-infringement)

In other words:

  • In June of last year, Activision, the maker of Call of Duty: Warzone, filed to trademark the terms "CALL OF DUTY WARZONE" and "WARZONE" (i.e., to legally register that they use those terms to distinctively market their products)
  • Later that year, Warzone.com, LLC, filed to trademark "WARZONE" itself and opposed Activision's trademark claims to "CALL OF DUTY WARZONE" and "WARZONE" by claiming trademark infringement- i.e., they argued that Activision's use of "Warzone" would confuse consumers into believing that Call of Duty: Warzone had something to do with this Warzone
  • Since then and now, Activision and Warzone's lawyers have been writing back and forth without progress
  • Activision is now suing Warzone to get Warzone out of their way as they use the term "Warzone" to market their products and trademark the term "WARZONE" to be used for Activision marketing

In my lay opinion, it is highly unlikely that Activision shuts down this game, bankrupts Warzone.com, LLC, or uses legal means to force Warzone.com, LLC, to change its name. Indeed, it's not what they are asking for nor what is at issue in the case.

If you are curious about this case, the Case Number listed above should be sufficient to gain access to public documents about it. You do not have to rely on third-rate journalists for your information here. Meanwhile, do not panic.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 05:55:46


{TLA} LND
Level 60
Report
Thanks for that, PD!

And Fizzer, if you're reading this and it would help your case to have examples of people being confused about the two Warzones, I know of one or two people who joined TLA's discord server thinking it was for CoD, and who promptly left when they realised their mistake.
I'm sure others have similar examples as well!
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 06:30:00

Plausible Deniability
Level 10
Report
TLA, that is at best the opposite of helpful evidence for Fizzer's trademark infringement claim. It shows that people were misled by the "Warzone" name into believing that the Discord servers for a Warzone Classic clan had something to do with Activision's Call of Duty: Warzone game, not that people were misled by "Warzone" into believing that Call of Duty: Warzone has something to do with Warzone.com, LLC. If you had a small pizza place named "Starbucks" and people started showing up to it believing it was affiliated with the Seattle-based coffee chain Starbucks, that would be quite the opposite of them hurting you by tricking customers into thinking they were related to you. Now add to that a long history of people naming their restaurants "Starbucks" before your small pizza place came up with the name:
Other games with the same name include, for example, Warzone by KEA Games, Warzone by Arcade Studios, Warzone by Zaid Ghababsheh, Warzone by Y8.com, Warzones by Y8.com, Warzone Mercenaries by Y8.com, WWII: Warzone by Y8.com, Warzone Online MP by Y8.com, Crossfire: Warzone by JOYCITY, No Rule Warzone by Ren Xila, Battle Royale Warzone by RedZone Studios LLC, Idle Warzone 3d by Virede, Warzone: Clash of Generals by Stratosphere Games, Warzone Getaway 2020 by Ace Viral, Anomaly Warzone Earth by 11 bit Studios S.A., and Warzone! Emergency Landing by Reludo.

Discord and Twitch business does not matter, however. The question is not about whether anyone specific believed one game was affiliated with the other brand but whether the hypothetical average consumer would.

Both parties appear to have competent lawyers. https://www.msk.com/ for the plaintiff, https://www.newmanlaw.com/ for the defendant. This lawsuit is likely just the plaintiff's lawyers calling the defendant's bluff after months of unproductive written exchanges, not some earth-shaking event that will change this game forever. I doubt either needs our help. Both probably planned extensively for this. We should just wait and watch instead of getting over-excited.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 06:34:26


{Canidae} Kretoma 
Level 59
Report
I think it is just annoying that since the name warlight was dropped, you can no longer find the game via google, only that COD pleb shit... Well, but we knew that for a long time.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 09:49:32

Pulsey
Level 56
Report
Bring back Warlight!
Warzone vs Activision: 4/12/2021 09:56:51


JK_3 
Level 61
Report
And Fizzer, if you're reading this and it would help your case to have examples of people being confused about the two Warzones, I know of one or two people who joined TLA's discord server thinking it was for CoD, and who promptly left when they realised their mistake.
I'm sure others have similar examples as well!


The amount of CoD player that join the WZ Public Chat (https://discord.gg/6JMEZzXV5e) is incredibly high. Since Knyte has been sending all the new Prime/Optimum members to that server as well the percentage has gone down, but we had days where 5 times as much CoD players as WZ players joined a day. (Long time ago, so i can't be bothered to look through the history)
Warzone vs Activision: 4/13/2021 04:46:10


OvertForeigner
Level 56
Report
This article makes me want to punch the wall
Warzone vs Activision: 4/13/2021 15:24:44

Dragonseance
Level 59
Report
Welcome to the failure that is modern journalism.
Warzone vs Activision: 4/14/2021 04:35:44


火Legle火 
Level 59
Report
Posts 1 - 30 of 30