Blizzard Says Valve's DOTA Trademark Doesn't Seem The Right Thing To Do

I'm with Blizzard on this one. As much as I loathe DoTA, it's a community creation that spawned from a Blizzard game, and Valve is basically stealing it and trying to make money off of it. It would be different if they had some of the original creators, but they don't.

But then again, this is what Valve does. They buy up talented people (usually from the community), take credit for their ideas, slap the Valve logo on it, and sell it back to the people that made it viable in the first place. The studio itself is basically creatively bankrupt. They did it with Turtle Rock and Left 4 Dead, they did it with Portal, they did it with Counter Strike, and they did it with Team Fortress. The only original idea to EVER come out of Valve is Half-Life. I don't see why people are surprised.

DarkLink77

I agree with your view towards this whole Dota fiasco, but come on now that's not necessarily true about Valve. Why do people put so much critique on them in regards to the people they acquire? I just find it a bit silly. If Valve has acquired those people to work for them they become a part of the team(valve) which means their projects were made by Valve. If you follow that logic with every single gaming company, much of them might as well have invented or innovated very little in the first place.

Even if you at least do have a point about how Valve has handled things, I respect their approach a hell of a lot more than Blizzard. If the situation was reversed and were the creators of Dota that worked on Valve's IP's, valve would have made the approach to acquire them in a heart beat.

Sure, in the end it doesn't sound that beautiful in forums such as this when you can then state something along the lines of what you did above DarkLink. But picture this: You're a company that created an IP, some members in the community use your IP foundations and create something extraordinary that garnishes a lot of popularity and later revenue for you, what do you do?

A. You make an approach to acquire their talent, since you realise that you're making a profit because of them and actually pay them for their services

B. You just leave them doing their work as it is and acquire lot's of revenue on their free work--who cares anyway? They're enjoying themselves in what they do.

That said I do believe that Blizzard shouldn't and doesn't own anything to anybody, but still, you know at what I'm getting at.

Yes I do know that not everybody that has had a hand in Dota is on board, but I do think that Valve would probably have tried to aqcuire the original team from the get go. Why is this seen as a negative by you is beyond me, just to make a statement that Valve has very little in regards to originality? What is so unatural about a company growing up and hiring talented people?

I don't really care about being called a Valve fanboy on this one, since I'm going out of my way to defend them(kind of hate it), but I really do wonder sometimes about that kind of logic and I can't really agree with it.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

I'm with Blizzard on this one. As much as I loathe DoTA, it's a community creation that spawned from a Blizzard game, and Valve is basically stealing it and trying to make money off of it. It would be different if they had some of the original creators, but they don't.

But then again, this is what Valve does. They buy up talented people (usually from the community), take credit for their ideas, slap the Valve logo on it, and sell it back to the people that made it viable in the first place. The studio itself is basically creatively bankrupt. They did it with Turtle Rock and Left 4 Dead, they did it with Portal, they did it with Counter Strike, and they did it with Team Fortress. The only original idea to EVER come out of Valve is Half-Life. I don't see why people are surprised.

StealthSting

I agree with your view towards this whole Dota fiasco, but come on now that's not necessarily true about Valve. Why do people put so much critique on them in regards to the people they acquire? I just find it a bit silly. If Valve has acquired those people to work for them they become a part of the team(valve) which means their projects were made by Valve. If you follow that logic with every single gaming company, much of them might as well have invented or innovated very little in the first place.

Even if you at least do have a point about how Valve has handled things, I respect their approach a hell of a lot more than Blizzard. If the situation was reversed and were the creators of Dota that worked on Valve's IP's, valve would have made the approach to acquire them in a heart beat.

Sure, in the end it doesn't sound that beautiful in forums such as this when you can then state something along the lines of what you did above DarkLink. But picture this: You're a company that created an IP, some members in the community use your IP foundations and create something extraordinary that garnishes a lot of popularity and later revenue for you, what do you do?

A. You make an approach to acquire their talent, since you realise that you're making a profit because of them and actually pay them for their services

B. You just leave them doing their work as it is and acquire lot's of revenue on their free work--who cares anyway? They're enjoying themselves in what they do.

That said I do believe that Blizzard shouldn't and doesn't own anything to anybody, but still, you know at what I'm getting at.

Yes I do know that not everybody that has had a hand in Dota is on board, but I do think that Valve would probably have tried to aqcuire the original team from the get go. Why is this seen as a negative by you is beyond me, just to make a statement that Valve has very little in regards to originality? What is so unatural about a company growing up and hiring talented people?

I don't really care about being called a Valve fanboy on this one, since I'm going out of my way to defend them(kind of hate it), but I really do wonder sometimes about that kind of logic and I can't really agree with it.

I'm with blizz on this. Seriously, people here will support Valve on absolutely anything. Valve is trying to trademark a free product and sell it for real cash. They are taking a mod (u guys keep going on about how Valve loves the mod community) and commercializing it...sort of like counter strike.... Maybe if u guys stopped agreeing with everything Valve does, you would see that this is sorta messed up. Sure...the OLD version of DOTA will be free, but they will probably start sending cease and desist orders to anyone trying to update Dota and/or make new versions.II_Seraphim_II

I'm with Blizzard on this one. As much as I loathe DoTA, it's a community creation that spawned from a Blizzard game, and Valve is basically stealing it and trying to make money off of it. It would be different if they had some of the original creators, but they don't.

But then again, this is what Valve does. They buy up talented people (usually from the community), take credit for their ideas, slap the Valve logo on it, and sell it back to the people that made it viable in the first place. The studio itself is basically creatively bankrupt. They did it with Turtle Rock and Left 4 Dead, they did it with Portal, they did it with Counter Strike, and they did it with Team Fortress. The only original idea to EVER come out of Valve is Half-Life. I don't see why people are surprised.

DarkLink77

I hate when people say Valve is stealing when they haven't really done that, and Icefrog went to them wanting to make this sequel.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

I'm with Blizzard on this one. As much as I loathe DoTA, it's a community creation that spawned from a Blizzard game, and Valve is basically stealing it and trying to make money off of it. It would be different if they had some of the original creators, but they don't.

But then again, this is what Valve does. They buy up talented people (usually from the community), take credit for their ideas, slap the Valve logo on it, and sell it back to the people that made it viable in the first place. The studio itself is basically creatively bankrupt. They did it with Turtle Rock and Left 4 Dead, they did it with Portal, they did it with Counter Strike, and they did it with Team Fortress. The only original idea to EVER come out of Valve is Half-Life. I don't see why people are surprised.

Wanderer5

I hate when people say Valve is stealing when they haven't really done that, and Icefrog went to them wanting to make this sequel.

Blizzard is right in saying Vavle's actions aren't the right thing to do, anything that might distract Valve from Episode 3/Half-Life 3 generally doesn't sound like the right thing to do. :P

[QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

I'm with Blizzard on this one. As much as I loathe DoTA, it's a community creation that spawned from a Blizzard game, and Valve is basically stealing it and trying to make money off of it. It would be different if they had some of the original creators, but they don't.

But then again, this is what Valve does. They buy up talented people (usually from the community), take credit for their ideas, slap the Valve logo on it, and sell it back to the people that made it viable in the first place. The studio itself is basically creatively bankrupt. They did it with Turtle Rock and Left 4 Dead, they did it with Portal, they did it with Counter Strike, and they did it with Team Fortress. The only original idea to EVER come out of Valve is Half-Life. I don't see why people are surprised.

DarkLink77

I hate when people say Valve is stealing when they haven't really done that, and Icefrog went to them wanting to make this sequel.

But he is the current owner. The original creators gave the mod to him and left to be Riot games.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

I hate when people say Valve is stealing when they haven't really done that, and Icefrog went to them wanting to make this sequel.

Wanderer5

But he is the current owner. The original creators gave the mod to him and left to be Riot games.

[QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] IceFrog didn't make DOTA.DarkLink77

But he is the current owner. The original creators gave the mod to him and left to be Riot games.

Maybe they did and it's now Icefrog's decision. Have they even say anything about this? And this still doesn't mean that Valve is stealing this.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

But he is the current owner. The original creators gave the mod to him and left to be Riot games.

Wanderer5

Maybe they did and it's now Icefrog's decision. Have they even say anything about this? And this still doesn't mean that Valve is stealing this.

[QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Giving someone a mod to maintain and giving him the rights to sell that idea to another company is a very different thing, and I'm fairly sure they didn't do the latter.DarkLink77

Maybe they did and it's now Icefrog's decision. Have they even say anything about this? And this still doesn't mean that Valve is stealing this.

Interesting, but maybe they should had trademark it eariler. Makes me wonder if Icefrog had told them this sequel was being made lol.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

Maybe they did and it's now Icefrog's decision. Have they even say anything about this? And this still doesn't mean that Valve is stealing this.

Wanderer5

Interesting, but maybe they should had trademark it eariler. Makes me wonder if Icefrog had told them this sequel was being made lol.

Valve is changing. Give them a few more years and theyll be the next EA/Activision. Theyre already looking to make small time DLC money with the TF2 hats. And theyre stealing other peoples ****.....

Valve is changing. Give them a few more years and theyll be the next EA/Activision. Theyre already looking to make small time DLC money with the TF2 hats. And theyre stealing other peoples ****.....

erglesmergle

Lol.People still complaining about the new pay for item system? God you can still get them for free.

[QUOTE="erglesmergle"]

Valve is changing. Give them a few more years and theyll be the next EA/Activision. Theyre already looking to make small time DLC money with the TF2 hats. And theyre stealing other peoples ****.....

Wanderer5

Lol.People still complaining about the new pay for item system? God you can still get them for free.

Theyve got their foot in the door. Its only a matter of time.

Why call it DotA? Valve is trying to cash in on the established name. League of Legends & Heroes of Newerth use the same concept under original names. This seems like a really dog act - Very Activision like. Yet even though Blizzard are partnered with Activision, they still didn't trademark DotA.. I really didn't expect this from Valve.

Twin-Blade

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

I hate when people say Valve is stealing when they haven't really done that, and Icefrog went to them wanting to make this sequel.

Wanderer5

But he is the current owner. The original creators gave the mod to him and left to be Riot games.

such unnecessary e-drama..

but valve brought the dota team onboard with the purpose of having them develop the new game on source... how is this bad if the people who made dota in the first place are making dota 2?

Arguing over dota seems pointless considering dota is far from an original game.

I agree and they better not make too much trouble about this. I guess it won't be long untill we find out just what kind of company Valve really is when handling this.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

However, I would just like to see them create something on their own, instead of buying up people and their ideas. While those ideas do become a Valve game, they started somewhere else

DarkLink77

Why should that be important though? The ideas might have existed yes, but they might have never seen daylight without Valve. Are we going to go to a point where having a new IP made by the original dev team as finally something that was created by Valve? Because that seems to be the case.

I have an idea for a project, Valve loves it and decides to grab it and give me the tools and funds I need for its development under the name of Valve, why would that degrade them in any way? This situation is just more talked about and criticized in Valve's case, because the company, unlike others, hires a lot of talented people inside the gaming community--gamers are simply more familiar with it.

, and in the case of DOTA, it just seems wrong that they are trying to trademark something that they had nothing to do with in the first place.

DarkLink77

I have to agree.

Very well thought out post, though, I must say. Kudos on that. :DDarkLink77

Thanks :P

Valve is changing. Give them a few more years and theyll be the next EA/Activision. Theyre already looking to make small time DLC money with the TF2 hats. And theyre stealing other peoples ****.....

erglesmergle

[QUOTE="erglesmergle"]

Valve is changing. Give them a few more years and theyll be the next EA/Activision. Theyre already looking to make small time DLC money with the TF2 hats. And theyre stealing other peoples ****.....

jasonharris48

[QUOTE="jasonharris48"]

[QUOTE="erglesmergle"]

Valve is changing. Give them a few more years and theyll be the next EA/Activision. Theyre already looking to make small time DLC money with the TF2 hats. And theyre stealing other peoples ****.....

Brownesque

And there some that you have to get the old way so it is fair and there only a few anyway. I haven't seen all of the weapons but alot of them have their own use of strategy and are not really overpower much. And unlocking stuff is just a thing to do so if you don't want to do it that fine. This is not that big of a problem.

I'm just hoping valve hires teh guys who made insurgancey. Its great.

really, can NO ONE see whats going on here?

a mod that was free, now wanting to copyright / sell it...........

uh....so no one has heard of counter-strike

really, can NO ONE see whats going on here?

a mod that was free, now wanting to copyright / sell it...........

uh....so no one has heard of counter-strike

dxmcat

It would be funny if DOTA2 ended up being free like Alien Swarm. :P

Just a reminder of the general opinion of DOTA's community...

Here's a hint: not once is it mentioned on the "best" side of the argument.

Just a reminder of the general opinion of DOTA's community...

Here's a hint: not once is it mentioned on the "best" side of the argument.

svetzenlether

I heard the community can be pretty nasty to newcomers. That why Valve said that they are going to create ways of rewarding experienced players for helping newcomers.

And you didn't need to bump that thread.

Blizzard vs Valve. Hmm, interesting.

waltefmoney

Legally DOTA falls under public domain since it had become a generic term for an RTS tower defense game like demigod, LOL, and HON.

Also you might find this old letter from pendragon interesting. http://www.dota-allstars.com/index.html

I don't understand why Blizzard didn't TM the game years ago and incorporate it into SC2 as an official gametype

[QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] IceFrog didn't make DOTA.Brownesque

But he is the current owner. The original creators gave the mod to him and left to be Riot games.

Noone has attempted to copyright DotA until now, honestly so what if frog didnt create it? He and whoever helps him are the ONLY ones maintaining dota.

I love these people who say "ive known dota for years, i know guinsoo, i know eul i know blah" so what? You know what guinsoo is doing? Oh YEA making money off the dota concept with LoL and riot games. Icefrog didnt ditch Dota while working on dota 2.

DotA the WC3 MAP will always be FREE. A direct sequel financed by valve with input from the guy who MAKES DOTA RIGHT NOW has every right to be called Dota 2. Will people buy dota 2 when u can just play dota? who knows.

I personally would pay an amount thats reasonable for a graphics upgrade and to get past the wc3 engine restrictions (eg the recipe system)

A sequel has to happen sometime thats true to the original map and has better interface and accessibility, Id rather valve get the license than trying to navigate bnet 2.0 for a dota game in starcraft 2 the engine is even less suited for DotA.

Valve is changing. Give them a few more years and theyll be the next EA/Activision. Theyre already looking to make small time DLC money with the TF2 hats. And theyre stealing other peoples ****.....

erglesmergle

Legally DOTA falls under public domain since it had become a generic term for an RTS tower defense game like demigod, LOL, and HON.

Also you might find this old letter from pendragon interesting. http://www.dota-allstars.com/index.html

jrhawk42

I really don't care about this particular story. I do however enjoy Valve's work when they are away from Half Life(I find Half Life 2 incredibly unsatisfying, episodes included). So I'm looking forward to see how the Dota 2 game being done under the Valve banner turns out. jg4xchamp

wow glad to see im not the only one that doesnt think half life 2 is the second coming. I thought the game was incredibly boring.

I actually much prefer the stuff valve does outside of half life myself.

but valve brought the dota team onboard with the purpose of having them develop the new game on source... how is this bad if the people who made dota in the first place are making dota 2?

Brendissimo35

[QUOTE="Brendissimo35"]

but valve brought the dota team onboard with the purpose of having them develop the new game on source... how is this bad if the people who made dota in the first place are making dota 2?

AdrianWerner

Perhaps the first post should have been updated?

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="Twin-Blade"]

Why call it DotA? Valve is trying to cash in on the established name. League of Legends & Heroes of Newerth use the same concept under original names. This seems like a really dog act - Very Activision like. Yet even though Blizzard are partnered with Activision, they still didn't trademark DotA.. I really didn't expect this from Valve.

SamiRDuran

The game rules and rights belong to the creator ICEFROG who has gone to ValveBirdy09

First of all Icefrog isn't the creator of DOTA.

Second...you can't trademark games mechanics, many games are using DOTA gameplay and there's nothing Icefrog can do about it.

Third, DOTA uses a lot of Blizzard's owned elements, like graphics, names, sounds etc. Icefrog obviously doesn't owne them and will have to create new ones at Valve

And fourth, the little he owns he also sold to S2 games, who have rights to use everything Icefrog made up untill specific patch point

[QUOTE="Birdy09"] The game rules and rights belong to the creator ICEFROG who has gone to ValveAdrianWerner

First of all Icefrog isn't the creator of DOTA.

Second...you can't trademark games mechanics, many games are using DOTA gameplay and there's nothing Icefrog can do about it.

Third, DOTA uses a lot of Blizzard's owned elements, like graphics, names, sounds etc. Icefrog obviously doesn't owne them and will have to create new ones at Valve

And fourth, the little he owns he also sold to S2 games, who have rights to use everything Icefrog made up untill specific patch point

Activision talking through Blizzard as usual. The game rules and rights belong to the creator ICEFROG who has gone to Valve, tough luck Blizzard, maybe you should go out of your safety zone for once in your life and create new games, not milk series that use to be more than casual appeal.Birdy09

Strange, I didn't think milking could mean 12+ years between the release dates of two installments.

I didn't know IceFrog was the creator of DotA either. As far as I know DotA was just the WC3 port of Starcraft's AoS, and if anything the creators would be Eul (the first one to do the port) and Guinsoo (the one who made the TFT version).

And Blizzard isnt?theyre churning the samegame out, making all 3 of thier franchises have that "WoW" charm and doing nothing but praising themselves out of thier arse.Birdy09

Churning the same *what* out? What you said makes no sense at all.

What the hell is Diablo 3 doing so great in 2010? What did Starcraft II actually do other raise the grahical quality, add achievments and butch BNET? What is Catacalysm doing for the MMO genre othre than teaching its ok to re-use dungeons just shove effortlss fight into them ( Lol at Shadowfang keep).Birdy09

What is a game that's not yet released supposed to do *at any time*, not just in 2010? You tell us.

What did SC2 do? Hmmm, where should I begin...The only RTS with three races that play in a completely different way from eachother released in the last 12 years, check. The only RTS that has got balance straight in the last decade, check. The only RTS that is pushing the notion of eSports all over the world, check. Most detailed and deepest editor ever seen in an RTS, check. The only RTS with 29 SP missions, of which no single one plays like all the others, check.

Cataclysm, I could agree that it's not really doing much, just a major overhaul of old WoW mechanics, however what you said about it is silly. Old dungeons deserve their old glory back.

^Average Blizzard hater, peeps...nothing entertaining to see here.