Visit BannerWitcoff.com
Showing posts with label Call of Duty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Call of Duty. Show all posts
On January 29, 2018, FaZe Clan, Inc. (“FaZe Clan”) , an online gaming team, was sued by FAZE Apparel, LLC (“FAZE Apparel”) for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition.  The case, originally filed in the Northern District of California, was transferred to the Central District of California on Mar. 13, 2018.  The case is now undergoing court-directed alternative dispute resolution.


When FaZe Clan is not sponsoring energy drinks (“FaZeberry”) or awkwardly self-promoting in Gamestop stores, FaZe Clan sells merchandise promoting their brand.  FAZE Apparel asserts that FaZe Clan is an “admitted past infringer” of its marks which simply attempted to “steamroll [FAZE Apparel] and improperly profit off its brand.”  According to FAZE Apparel, FaZe Clan has been well aware of FAZE Apparel for at least four years: in 2013, the USPTO refused to register various trademarks for FaZe Clan, finding that such marks would be confusingly similar to those owned by FAZE Apparel.  Since then, per FAZE Apparel, FaZe Clan has repeatedly attempted to market “FaZe” materials, only to (allegedly) back off when confronted by FAZE Apparel.

Cases like these underscore the importance of careful brand planning.  FaZe Clan is now in an awkward position: if FAZE Apparel’s assertions have any merit, FaZe Clan will be forced to either re-brand or seek some form of license from FAZE Apparel.  Even if FAZE Apparel’s assertions are not meritorious, FaZe Clan will likely have to spend significant sums to defend themselves from this lawsuit. 

Either or both of these issues could have been avoided had FaZe Clan taken a more informed and/or conservative approach when selecting its name.  This case evidences that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
NovaLogic, Inc. v. Activision Blizzard et. al.
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Case Number: 2:12-cv-04011

In March 2012, NovaLogic sued Call of Duty developer, Activision, for trademark infringement of its mark "Delta Force" (USPTO marks 2,704,298 and 2,304,869).  NovaLogic maintained that Activision's "Modern Warfare 3"  title (which grossed billions of dollars) infringed upon the mark they had held since the late 1990s when they released "Delta Force".  The game spawned a few sequels including 2003's "Delta Force: Black Hawk Down".  NovaLogic also sued Penguin Group USA, Inc. (who made the official guide for the game) as well as Microsoft on similar grounds. 

Judge John F. Walter ruled that Activision's use of the term "Delta Force" fell within free speech, and that the term would not confuse consumers into thinking NovaLogic endorsed the game.  The court went on to say, "Because the phrase 'Delta Force' and its insignia have an established and well-known prior meaning and connotation . . . that is unrelated to plaintiff and that meaning and connotation predate plaintiff's use of the registered trademarks, it is highly unlikely that consumers will be misled."  The claims against Penguin were dismissed on similar grounds.

NovaLogic argued that Activision had waived its free speech rights because it had initially paid NovaLogic royalties.  Judge Walter said this argument was, "unpersuasive and borders on the frivolous," because NovaLogic had licensed the mark to Vivendi Games in 2005, a company which was later acquired by Activision.  "Plaintiff fails to explain how an unrelated third party's contract could have resulted in the surrender of Activision's First Amendment rights with respect to a product, [Modern Warfare 3], that was not produced until 2011."  Activision had moved for summary judgment in March on the grounds that Delta Force was part of the "public lexicon" and is similar to terms like "West Wing" and "Scotland Yard."

With games having an ever-increasing focus on true-to-life realism, this victory is significant for publishers like Activision.  It allows them to pull inspiration from news headlines and make games directly referencing groups like the "Delta Force" without having to worry about potential litigation or licensing agreements with subsequent groups who use the term as a trademark.  Similarly, trademark owners should be careful when choosing a mark, and might think twice about trying to usurp rights to a name that has a previously understood public meaning.

While these particular claims were dismissed, the court did not address allegations regarding Activision's and Microsoft's  prominent use of the mark on the packaging of the special-edition Xbox 360 consoles that were bundled with the game.

We will update as more information becomes available.

Walker Digital, LLC, a self-professed “invention” company who claims to hold over 500 patents, has filed suit against Activision, Inc., Activision Blizzard, Inc. and Zynga, Inc. In the complaint, Walker Digital alleges that the defendants’ games infringe upon U.S. Patent No. 6,425,828, entitled “Database Driven Online Distributed Tournament System.” The patent claims priority to 1998, and its first claim reads as follows:

1. A method of conducting a distributed electronic tournament for a plurality of players, comprising:

exchanging information between a central controller and a player located remotely from the central controller, the information (i) being exchanged while the player plays a game in the tournament and (ii) influencing game play; and

storing in a database player information associated with the player, the stored player information being available for use in a subsequent tournament to influence game play of the subsequent tournament while the player is playing a subsequent game in the subsequent tournament.

The complaint alleges infringement by a litany of games, including (among others) Activision Blizzard’s Call of Duty: Black Ops, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (1 and 2), Call of Duty: World at War, Blur, DJ Hero 2, Cabela’s North American Adventures, and World of Warcraft (and its expansions packs), and Zynga’s Mafia Wars, Vampire Wars, Fashion Wars and Street Racing.

We’ll keep you posted on this one. The case caption is Walker Digital, LLC v. Activision et al., No. 1:11-cv-00004 (D. Del. filed Jan. 3, 2011).

    Home     Next >

Get the Patent Arcade App

Get the Patent Arcade App
Available now for iOS

Search This Blog


Recognition

Buy your copy today!

Buy your copy today!
ABA Legal Guide, 2d Ed.

Ross Dannenberg

Scott Kelly

Scott Kelly

Labels

Archives

Blogroll

Data Analytics

Copyright ©2005–present Ross Dannenberg. All rights reserved.
Visit BannerWitcoff.com