Zenimax files trademark for "Dragonborn"

Loonook · May 21, 2012

Dannyalcatraz said:
In law, there are no extraneous factors deciding cases.

The point is, all cases are fact dependent, and a seeming slam-dunk can turn on the tiniest details.

There is a possibility for precedent, or the idea that the trademark itself covers such a wide variety of ground that it is in and of itself unacceptable (I doubt this will occur). The other possibility is that the two locations cover very different concepts under a generic name... Personally I think that Bethesda would have a much better shot at keeping their specific 'in setting' name than having to deal with the pretty substantial amount of WotC usage of the term.

Of course IANAL, just interested in copyright, trademarks, etc.

Slainte,

-Loonook.

S'mon · May 21, 2012

It wouldn't seem to be registrable under UK/EU TM law (my field) as it does not seem inherently distinctive as a badge of origin of goods/services, neither has it been used as a badge of origin & acquired distinctiveness through use. My impression is that US law is much the same, but that the US registry may be more lenient if registration is not disputed.

Dannyalcatraz · May 21, 2012

I don't think they are...and it's pretty much a given WotC/Hasbro would throw at least one lawyer at this one.

Janx · May 21, 2012

This sounds like it should be a game.

Company A just TM'd a word that we all know Company B has been using since 2006.

How long before one company notices the other specifically?

How long before the two end up in court?

Yora · May 21, 2012

Loonook said:
I really find it strange that they didn't trademark the name along with Illithid, Beholder, etc.

I am pretty sure they don't have a trademark on the name beholder. The creature known by that name certainly is original IP, but I don't think you can get a trademark for something like this.

And I assume they never thought of trademarking Dragonborn because that's just a very generic word.

Kaodi · May 21, 2012

If Zenimax wins, that would be messed up. So they used the term in passing a couple of time before Skyrim? Wizards has used it in far more products where it was of far greater prominence than anything Zenimax had done until last year.

Janx · May 21, 2012

Yora said:
And I assume they never thought of trademarking Dragonborn because that's just a very generic word.

I hardly think "Dragonborn" is a generic word. How often does the word Dragon even show up in everyday speech? Let alone putting the two together.

The lawyers on this thread would know best, but I'm pretty sure it ain't generic, even if genericness did apply. Apple is a far more generic word, and we all know how well that trademark is doing.

Dannyalcatraz · May 21, 2012

Apple is a far more generic word, and we all know how well that trademark is doing.

Ah, but they're a tech company- let them try to move into fresh produce and see what happens!

Besides, you do know they had a long dispute with a certain Beatles-owned company...

amerigoV · May 21, 2012

I wonder the implications on Kobolds. Will they have to go back to being dog-critters again?

Janx · May 21, 2012

Dannyalcatraz said:
Ah, but they're a tech company- let them try to move into fresh produce and see what happens!

Besides, you do know they had a long dispute with a certain Beatles-owned company...

the fact that Apple Computer is still making products says that worked out fine for them, despite the dispute.

Mostly my point to the other guy is that the word "apple" is a generic word and still holds value as a trademark. While DragonBorn may be made of 2 simple english words. Dragon doesn't get a lot of play outside of games and stories, and the pairing of them is fairly uncommon.