I think Mike just mixed up "secondary meaning" and didn't realize that was the legal term, not just some generic idea of "yeah they're famous."

see for more context: https://www.bitlaw.com/source/tmep/1212.html

Also, as we reach these edge case questions, we're rapidly approaching (if we haven't passed it already) the limit of my legal knowledge. And we also run into questions that are best left to erudite judges, well-trained lawyers with well-researched cases, and the reasonability of a well-informed jury that might ultimately decide this case if it really goes all the way. (Judges generally try to focus on questions of law, while questions of fact get left to the jury.)

I'm already at the point where I bug acquaintances who have law degrees with questions about this case before saying anything to y'all, and I'd like to stop pestering them soon. So if you've got more questions, there's a high chance that my response will just be "🤷 I'm no lawyer, I'm just a normal guy who knows enough to catch the red flags here [albeit, a little bit too late]"

Edited 8/6/2021 20:44:31

Activision is big mean guy. He like use word, but we like use word too, and he won't stop using word. We try to be calm, and we simply demand he pay us lots of money to stop using word, but he refuse! He take us to court!

Him using word is bad because we don't know how else to compete. And we used word first!

So because he don't give us money, we have to take money from children. They agree we own word. They agree we are cooler than big mean guy. They google some stuff, so they are very informed.

Judge may think we are stupid. Whole world might think we are stupid. But we show them! We take money from children to pay lawyers! We are living the dream. Who care if judge laugh at us?

can anyone calculate how much fizzer would make of 0.35% of activison warzoens profits (I think he is asking for that much)

is it really only 1/3 a percent? jesus. he is entitled to more imo lol, they are playing it very safe


but anyway, i dont think there are any real concrete reports (Activision claimed to raise 500 million in a 3 month period. but overall i read it is around 3 billion.

1/3 percent is still 10 million dollars.

In case you couldn't tell from my very satirical post, Fizzer is entitled to nothing. My post is essentially about as strong Fizzer's legal claim is.

I would be very surprised if Fizzer's claim survives Activision's pending motion to dismiss and the motion for summary judgement it will surely eventually file. And even if it does, there is no chance he will get anything from a trial.

The only way Fizzer gets ANYTHING at this point, is if he survives the motion to dismiss, and Activision wants to settle so they don't have to go through discovery. This is really the only "winning" move for Fizzer at this point. If he had ethical lawyers that told him the truth, and didn't try to just drain his (and by extension, this community's) pockets, that's exactly what they would tell him.

There are various legal reasons why Fizzer will lose, but I'm sure as hell you guys won't read any of them. I wasn't going to make any legal conclusions on this, but this has dragged on far too long, and I don't want any more of you madlads wasting your money.

Edited 8/7/2021 16:34:04

1/3 percent is still 10 million dollars.

How could Activision's use of the word "warzone" have caused 10 million in damages to a business that has no chance of making anywhere near 10 million dollars in revenue in the first place? And if they were somehow making that much revenue, why is there a GoFundMe?

(btw it's 0.25%, not 0.35%, and that's just the initial demand that Warzone.com, LLC, opened with. Who knows what they're trying to go for now?)

Edited 8/7/2021 17:24:32

1/3 a percent is still 10 million dollars

u are forgetting that it's that percent of profits. activison may have made 3 billion but only got 500 million profit after paying staff and other technical stuff.

(thx for clarifying the percent l4v.)

Edit: I think the amount fizzer would of asked for would be around 1 million. 10 mil sounds too ambitious.

Edited 8/7/2021 17:39:42

Activision said millions, so maybe higher than 1mil

i don’t know exact profit lines but i’d think it’s more than 500 million easily

Yeah, it's somewhere south of $2B/yr since that's about the combined revenue of COD:MW and COD:WZ. Beyond that, we can only speculate. But going off of 0.25% * $2B/yr, Warzone.com, LLC's opening ask was less than $5 million/year. This was just their opening ask, though, and not an amount they can hope to win in court (because in court they're asking for 3 x the damages that they've suffered from Activision's alleged trademark infringement).

Once you get into the territory of "who's asking for how much?" it's just pure speculation. We only know that Warzone asked for 0.25% of CoD:WZ profits sometime in late 2020, that Activision offered $10,000 (unclear on what terms), that Activision claims Warzone at some point was asking for millions, and everything else is only known to the parties in the case and their legal teams. Past a certain point, we'd just be making up numbers.

The thing about cases like this one is that you very quickly run into the limit of publicly available information, as you wait for the next court document filing, and it's tempting but counterproductive (if your goal is to get informed + help others get informed) to try to push past that point. We honestly have no idea what's going on in the settlement negotiations at this point or if they're even still going on at this point.

yh ik what u mean. I was thinking of the bare minimum of what fizzer would want.

All that because Seph did a joke

Except it wasn't a joke. When changing name from WarLight to WarZone, Fizzer and Mercer explained that the goal was to get more traffic because the word 'WarZone' was way more searched than 'WarLight'.

When you try to grab too much, you end up dropping everything

Mercer. is this another developer?

EDIT: head cannon is that mercer was a developer that turned to the bad side and was turned into rafflebot like a weird parody to five nights at freddy's

Edited 8/8/2021 16:34:35

Mercer is/was a major investor in Warzone who was involved in at least an advisory position at the time of the Idle launch.

The renaming to Warzone was claimed to be Mercer's idea.

There is much more information about Mercer out there, on the public record, but to seek it is forbidden. Be warned!

Except it wasn't a joke. When changing name from WarLight to WarZone, Fizzer and Mercer explained that the goal was to get more traffic because the word 'WarZone' was way more searched than 'WarLight'.

When was this? On one of the Twitch AMAs? Or on the site somewhere?

Edited 8/8/2021 18:36:47

@Sanmu I didn't know you were an appointed judge in the united states, maybe you can give us some more inside tips on how this case is going to pan out or how American law works

You realize he's an actual lawyer, right?

psssst Sanmu think of all the rep u could gain if u helped fizzer for nothing

Minor update for those following at home- here's the next 3 dates to mark on your calendar:
- 2021/08/20: Warzone.com, LLC, deadline for responding to Activision's Motion to Dismiss
- 2021/09/03: Activision's deadline for filing a reply supporting their Motion to Dismiss, once Warzone responds
- 2021/10/01: Hearing date (at 1:30 PM Pacific Time) if the Motion to Dismiss gets that far

This deadline change (Activision originally asked for 2021/08/27) was agreed upon by both parties.

I like Fizzer as a person a lot actually. He's fun to play with in Small Earth quickmatches and he's pretty nice.

I just don't think the case is very strong at all. There are situations where the dispute is far more ambiguous and arguments can be made on both sides. I just don't think this is one of those situations.

lol you played Fizzer in rt SE?