A side note: trust, convention, and guild trademarks
It occurs to me that the controversy surrounding the trademarking of a guild name is an example of exactly the sort of permeable boundary between communitarian and authority-based enforcement that can cause trouble, that I was discussing in the posts on trust.
The standard convention for name reservations in these games is “first-come, first-served.” The community response to this has been to self-organize and work to prepare guilds in advance to log in on day one and reserve names. This race is seen as “fair” — any guild that really wants to get organized can do so, and can have a fair shot at being first on their server to reserve the name.
There is a measure of authority in this — it is the game service provider who is ultimately arbitrating this process. But they arbitrate in a hands-off manner. There is no direct intervention, and indeed if there were, it would likely result in outcries of favoritism from the playerbase.
By trademarking their guild name, the Syndicate has effectively instead removed themselves from this process which is widely accepted by the community, and has instead invoked a completely different authority. They have trumped the game of grabbing a name first by calling in a more highly-placed referee. The responses from the other player participants has been interesting:
- “It’s just game, (therefore this is stupid).” since the fact that this event happened at all is clear demonstration that virtual spaces are not just games, this isalmost a despairing cry, akin to the comments that Ted Castronova and others have made about real-money trades: effectively, that the intrusion of authorities outside the magic circle damages the integrity of the game itself. My personal take is that this is a lost cause in the case of virtual spaces, because they were never inside the magic circle in the first place. They weren’t games. 🙂
- “This guild is made up of arrogant elitists.” This is the response of those who suddenly feel disenfranchised. The appeal to a higher authority has left these people feeling like they are not part of the country club; they are suddenly second-class citizens. This is exactly the effect that I described in Part II of the essay on trust.
- “Let’s go make a zillion guilds that infringe.” And here we see an attempt at classic communitarian enforcement. The intent here is to ridicule and minimize the member of society who has offended; in this case, it may also be to overwhelm the service provider (e.g., the authority that the community wants to have control) with so many service calls that they are obliged to take police action against The Syndicate for profit reasons. It would be very similar logic to that behind restricting ads for guilds likely to attract controversy on the grounds that the controversy itself is expensive.
The last argument commonly made attacks the validity of the trademark itself, or whether the mark truly grants the sorts of rights that The Syndicate is claiming; all of which I’m not qualified to comment on.
Much of the debate surrounding the intrusion of the real world into these spaces has revolved around exactly this sort of dilemma: there’s a host of higher authorities out there, and many grounds on which to call them into any given debate. And yet, there are community conventions — a culture — that is at risk any time regulation enters the picture. Remember, you cannot regulate communitarian enforcement; the moment you do, it becomes an authority structure.
The interesting thing in this whole case is that trademarking a guild name is really a power grab by players against the authority of the service providers. Even if the service provider in the particular case of guild founding took a hands-off approach, there’s certainly other areas where they do not. Are the other players, by preferring the authority structure of the game, ignoring an opportunity to put themselves on more equal footing with the service providers? What other sorts of authority appeals can players make that put them in a better position? Other examples might be writing to Lambda Legal regarding treatment of a GLBT guild, or complaining that an interface change discriminates against the colorblind, and so on.
I suspect that if we really examined the boundaries of each of these cases, we’d find inherent biases in the community — cultural norms — regarding which of these appeals to higher authority are “fair” and which are not. But the bottom line is that the higher authority is there, and is not going away, and will always trump the service provider. In other words, The Syndicate has just fired another shot in the war between virtual world autonomy and cyberspace exceptionalism, and those who feel that cyberspace is merely a special case under real-world law.
They’ve also self-assigned a right commonly wished for in the community — “I’ve been using this name for years, so it’s mine” — and actually enforced it. In effect, the first article of a real-world “Rights of Avatars” has just been written, and it’s been written by appealing to a higher authority that may not buy into most of the others I proposed.
Addendum: I bet that many of the inherent biases the community has will be “gamist” biases, of the sort that I referred to in my talk at PARC. A gamist mindset considers a “land rush” style claiming system to be “fair,” but many other mindsets do not. We should not lose sight of the fact that the “gamer mindset” is by far a minority in the larger context of society, albeit likely a growing one. And that has interesting implications for the future.
39 Responses to “A side note: trust, convention, and guild trademarks”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Blogroll Joel on Software Raph Koster Sunny Walker Thoughts for Now Sex, Lies and Advertising
Plaguelands [HTML] [XML] [FULL] PlayNC [HTML] [XML] [FULL] PlayOn [HTML] [XML] [FULL] Psychochild’s Blog [HTML] [XML] [FULL] Random Battle [HTML] [XML] [FULL] Raph Koster [HTML][XML][FULL] Saavedra’s Blog [HTML] [XML] [FULL] Se7en Samurai [HTML] [XML] [FULL] Sifo’s Blog [HTML] [XML] [FULL] slashrandom [HTML] [XML] [FULL] Sporkfire.com [HTML] [XML] [FULL] Stargate Worlds News
Interestingly the act of trademarking the guild name may be their downfall. The content provider has restrictions on using other people’s trademarks within their game. No sane game will let you have a Spiderman guild or Coca-Cola guild. If I were a game company I would simply ban any guilds named ‘The Syndicate’ as it is someone else’s trademarked IP. The guild could argue they have granted permission, but as a game company I would say that is something I would be very uncomfortable policing. Easier just to ban them and any other trademarked names.
I agree with Brett. The easiest way out for a game company is to say no trademarked names period. That means that The Syndicate may have just lost the use of their name in any game hencefourth. Why should a publisher spend 1 second of their time determining which group of players can rightfully use the trademarked name on which server when they can simply prevent EVERYONE from using it, including The Syndicat themselves. Much cheaper in the long run.
I can totally understand the wish to protect a name that you have used for so long and to which you attach so much affection (even if it is a very common name like “Syndicate”). One of the worst feelings in a MMO is to sign up only to find that your favorite name is being used. I ran into that during the DAoC beta when I lost a nearly 20-year-old RP name after a character-wipe. And what made it worse was that, being beta, I couldn’t just hop on another server and create a new character. But even once the game went live and I had my pick of servers, it still chafed at me since the name was such a personal concoction (ie – the chances are miniscule that anyone else would have come up with the name on their own).God, am I still that bitter about it??
At any rate, I think The Syndicate has just doomed their existence in any MMO. I think most EULA’s specifically state “no trademarked” names. Right there you’ve cut yourself out of the game. But, maybe they have no intention to maintain their presence in any games under that name? Maybe The Syndicate is going to become a clearing-house website for affiliated guilds, offering resources to those guilds under the Syndicate banner to carry on guild activities outside of the game. I don’t know … if they wanted to secure their name for every game that ever comes out, well then I think they’ve done themselves in.
A thought just dawned on me while I was reading this post. Since said guild is now a “company” or “business” then would using the name ingame be considered Advertising. Thus using the game for profit. Now correct me if Im wrong but didnt a certain company (Valve) go after another advertising company for spraying ads in their counterstrike games? Im certain I read a story about that recently or something very similar.
I can see that a name is something to protect but to outright say that guilds named “The (xxxxx) Syndicate” or “Cyndicate” as in some examples are outlawed then you create alot of problems. Im pretty certain The Mafia Syndicate, The Crime Syndicate, and various other versions would be against their TM. If you want to protect your name then register it across all the new games that happen as well as make sure that your website has the server and games you are playing on it.
I still see this as a low blow to the mmo community as a whole. With the range of names that could have been made from the word Syndicate now removed greatly reduces what people can choose for their new guild names.
[…] Comments […]
This is why I always thought one should allow duplicate names in MMORPGs. This lets the service provider avoid being an authority. Unique names just give a false security that you transaction is with the same person – it is reliant on your fragile memory to not notice the spelling difference.
Client side labelling – which solves the avatar identity problem in a robust way – can also be used to disambiguate guilds. Fears of imposters ruining a guilds rep are partly due to the current system which guarantees guild identity by name. If I instead black list the guild by right clicking on their [Syndicate] tag and adding [Syndicate – Losers], the real syndicate need not worry as they will show up properly.
Unfortunately, EQ has hardwired people to expect unique names now. *sigh*
So, you create an environment where success hinges on motivated, organized groups working as a team and gasp when one of these groups asserts itself as an entity? It can be very easily argued that MMOs by their nature drive the creation of such guilds. Isn’t this the next logical step? Am I the only one who is not suprised by this? Try getting anywhere in the WoW high end through pickup groups.
I’m not surprised by this. Nor do I think that it is because these aren’t games. Any relatively public enterprise can have outside regulation like trademarking infringe on its set of rules. I do absolutely agree that it is essentially a powergrab to exert power from outside the game over the rules of the game itself and I personally think it is an unreasonable one.
I think this is just a case of trademark law going too far. Just as I think the Marvel vs. CoH case took trademark law too far and sided too heavily with the owners of the trademark. In my opinion, and this is an opinion that I think is somewhat “place”-oriented, trademark law simply shouldn’t govern the ways players express themselves in these places to such an extent.
I do think that The Syndicate should be able to protect their name commercially. And should perhaps be able to sue someone who sells T-Shirts that trade on their name. But they shouldn’t be able to prevent guilds from naming themselves “The Syndicate” in online worlds no more than they should be able to prevent us from typing the words “The Syndicate” on a blog or someone should be able to prevent a certain naming of a real child by its parents. I just think that taking IP law that far is counter-productive.
Given that trademark law is not how I would like it to be, and in this case seems to have far more than is reasonable scope, I think that the natural reaction of the MMO’s should be as I originally said: simply remove “The Syndicate” entirely from circulation as a possible guild name just as they would remove any other trademarked name. Deny this as a viable way to try to change the game.
I don’t think that gaming companies are willing to jump into that particular pot of water. You cannot prevent a trademark owner from using their trademark. Furthermore trademarked gaming guilds are an indication of stable player populations. I think that gaming companies will be more than willing to allow guilds with trademarked names to be the sole users of their guilds name if it means that they get subscriptions to their games in blocks of 500 players.
MMOs create a need for these types of organizations for success within games, like I already said. People who run these organizations invest a lot of themselves and work hard to create an image and a reputation for themselves. 20-30 people who play together on a server is one thing. That group is not even likely to trademark. But when you have been around for a while and built up a reputation at which point impostors start setting up and represent themselves as your organization you have a different situation entirely.
I honestly don’t see a “power grab”. Have you read any of their trademark correspondance? Its rather cordial. They have a legal duty now to attempt to enforce their trademark, so they do. I think that they are trying to eliminate peoples ability to capitalize on their success or damage their name. What you see as ruining the fun and freedom of being able to pick any guild name you want on your server they see as a constant stream of cheap attacks and mistaken identities.
I think gaming companies will welcome this. I think they want big stable guilds. Gaming companies change character and guild names on a daily basis, so often they dont even hear the whining. I think removing the confusion and creating clarity about who is who is worth more to gaming in the long run. MMO gaming is growing up.
All a gaming company has to do is honor your request to be the sole user of your trademarked name and it is instantly more “guild friendly” than a company who refuses to assist you. As more guilds gow to the size where trademarking their assets is a viable option, the services and assistance that a gaming company chooses to offer to organized guilds will be critical in a guilds decision to play or not to play.
I personally don’t fault them for wanting to protect their name/reputation, although in another comment I did say that I thought it was a bit of a “take my toys and go home” move. That was a first impression and, now that I know more about the situation, I admit it was not an entirely fair thing to say. I do, however, still think this will work to their detriment, especially in the short term. Whatever their intentions, they ARE putting up walls (whether they mean to or not) and I just have a feeling that they aren’t going to enjoy the reception (as evidenced in many comments on many posts covering the topic). I’m sure that with the “business-fication” of gaming (and MMOs in particular) they will probably all wind up millionaires in a couple of years somehow because of this (and I still won’t be 🙂 ), and I will undoubtedly be praising them for their genius in having the foresight to make this move. However, I suspect they will experience quite negative backlash (unfounded though it may be) from a significant portion of the gaming community. Then again, it wouldn’t be the 100th time I was wrong about something!
Well, dwellers on the frontier always hate it when city folk move in. Longing for the freedom of the open ranges. But the argument “It eliminates chaos and anarchy.” will always trump the argument “It stifles creativity.” with people in authority. I understand the frustration about people bringing in their rules, laws, fences and walls. But its been thus with the civilization of every frontier that has ever bounded humanity.
There are interesting dynamics around the extension of a game from “official” channels like the game itself and the forums it provides, into the “real world”.
In the pre-release stages of a MMORPG we don’t specifically discuss here, I was a member of a guild-to-be. I was the director of the guild’s intelligence operations. As such, I was responsible for the gathering and dissemination of information to members and prospective members. Our guild’s intent was to operate in a “grey area” which was not strictly speaking illegal, but distinctly shady and unquestionably effective.
Our main competition was another guild which was colloquially called by a shorter version of the more formal name they had registered for their web site. Perceiving an opportunity, I registered several domains under their colloquial name, pointing these domains at a page which informed the unsuspecting visitor why our guild was better and they should join us instead. (These pages did include a link to the guild’s real page.)
The community outcry was surprising. In response to the complaints, I was kicked out of my guild (before the game even launched!), and based on the general animosity toward me in the forum I decided not to participate in the game at all. The guild completely abandoned the web site I had built and was hosting, probably to avoid being associated with the event.
It was truly fascinating to watch the community response to the situation. There was a strange sort of dichotomy about the expectation of fair business practices: within the systems provided by the game, you were expected to do anything in your power to succeed. However, once outside those game systems, only a small subset of activities were considered “fair” – IMO, because there was no authority to prevent unfair advantage.
I believe the community in an MMO perceives that the game’s staff have a vested interest in making the game fair, and that this differs greatly from the real world (where most people are experiencing some degree of unfairness). When the game extends into the real world, the game is no longer fair – nobody in the game can prevent you from getting an unfair advantage in the real world, because you’re outside the authority. It’s like rolling the dice in a game of Monopoly and moving your piece off the board to avoid paying rent; there are those who read the rules and say “it doesn’t say you can do that”, and there are those who say “it doesn’t say you can’t”.
The line usually seems to be drawn based on who will win and who will lose when the action is permitted (per the laws I have previously established), but when you bring the real world into the equation there arises an added question of whether the action is permitted to everyone. It is interesting to me that an action which requires much *time* is rarely questioned, but an action which requires much *money* is almost inevitably despised.
We could probably talk about this for days. 😉
The idea that I have been thinking on is that as time goes on with more and more guilds adopting this. Imagine what will happen when every guild of 20 players, who might be in other guilds as well mind you, create trademarked guild names. Sooner or later game companies themselves will most likely just eliminate guild titles entirely due to all the work and expense it would cost. Just do some numbers on it. Lets assume there is 1 million mmo players in the world. (Yah I know thats low but bear with me). Lets say that everyone of them is in a guild of 40 people which is the usual average. Thats at least 25,000 guild names. Seems like a low number but then lets assume that those 25,000 guilds trademarked their unique names. You now those locked but add on the variations of said guild name. Thats where the trouble comes in. You suddenly have a insane number of combinations eliminated for any new players who want to form their own guild. Most guilds have very broad or basic names. Just look at the forums for Lineage2 to get a idea. “Thor”, “Uprising”, “Dawn”, “Nexus(z?)”, for a few examples. Basic brief guild names which have now been removed entirely.
The point Im getting across is that it may not be a problem now but give it a few years when the MMO business increases in numbers. The amount of trademarked names may have increased to such a amount that game companies will have to hire more employees just to monitor it. Which would equal to either greater cost on subscriptions or more loss for the company. Most likely new players will not want to pay more just to be limited due to trademarks as well as some old players. Then the only viable option is to remove guild names entirely unless there was no special rights to naming.
I realize there is a huge amount of guild name possibilities when writing this. Im just pointing out that it will limit what people can choose. If your playing a Fantasy game your not exactly going to be called “Nanotech Prophecy”. Rather you could but if your a strict roleplaying guild you would not.
To say that a company should allow a guild name that is trademarked because it brings 500 people is quite silly. Just because a guild says it has 500-1000 people does not mean that every single person will be playing.
Are you saying that a company can’t choose to disallow usage of a certain trademarked name in their service? I don’t think so. MySpace can certainly delete all links or references to any competitor’s name that is mentioned on their users pages (and has done basically that) even though these might be trademarked.
I don’t think we’ll see 25,000 guild trademarks though. It costs money to file for a trademark and either a fair amount of legal research of paying a lawyer even more money. Which is part of the issue. If trademarks are enforced by a few larger guilds this will be seen as another instance where outside money gives other players an unfair advantage in the game. An MMORPG which supports this may easily get more bad press than good and it may be exactly the opposite: that an MMORPG which says that it won’t allow guilds to “buy” their name will get more positive press.
Instead of massive trademarking we might see an MMORPG that allows a one-time registration of a guild name across all servers. I see this as more headache than it’s worth but this would probably be seen as a positive thing by larger guilds without ticking off smaller ones.
In general I don’t see any “good” being created from this. Especially from a “place” perspective. One place, the real world and it’s copyright law, is trumping another. This is where I say that trademark law goes too far. If a name is used in an MMORPG with a different usage than used in other instances of that MMORPG or other MMORPG’s then it should be a separate entity with an identity relative to THAT place. If anything, the trademark itself should be restricted to the specific server — which is in effect what the current system is: trademarking on a per-world basis. Trademarking on a per-MMORPG basis is about as far as think this should go before it just becomes too restrictive for too little gain.
I don’t disagree with people who think GM’s have a duty, in fact, to keep the game fair. There seems to be a huge gulf between opinions on the topic of fairness, with many players demanding an even playing field and many other players saying “hey, life ain’t fair”. The difference is, in the “real world” we (go with me here) essentially live for free.
Yes, yes, there is so much that we have to pay for, and “nothing is free”, but technically the act of living costs us (strictly speaking of monetary costs here) nothing in the real world. In online games we are, in most cases, paying up front for the client and paying a monthly fee to participate. That right there demands a level playing field.
I know this goes OT to an extent, but I think (hehe) my point is that if you had a game that was completely free to acquire and play then all bets are off. You can have no expectation of fairness because you aren’t paying for it. EXCEPT for rules which evolve with the community. If you’re paying for a game, then you should be entitled to a reasonable expectation of fair-play. And to many people that will include no influence from forces outside of the gamesphere over their activities within it. In otherwords, if a guild wants to reserve their guild name then they better get in line like everybody else.
You can think of it similarly to a person somehow reserving seats at a movie theater even though all tickets are general-admission..
First, the company might not be able to prevent you from using your name.
Second, any guild that threatens a trademark lawsuit against a gaming company will probably be laughed at and asked to bring it. I envision minnows nibbling on whales here.
Third, there is nothing anywhere that states that a gaming company needs to answer your request to honor your guild name within a set amount of time. So, even if it does go to court (and i doubt it will) the company can pull out its pile of 500,000 requests and say that its in the queue and they have the intern hard at work processing the paperwork. They don’t have to break the bank.
Fourth, trademarking requires retaining a lawyer and paying filing fees etc… in addition to actually providing goods and services that trigger financial transactions. Most groups probably don’t have the resources or motivation to go through that. If you register a name as a trademark and you dont do business under that mark then when someone comes along doing business under that trademark, guess who wins.
Fifth, at this point every discussion of The Syndicate as an entity reinforces its claim that it exists and needs protection. Every satirical web site that pops up ligitimizes the groups claim.
Sixth, what makes you think that its so difficult for a company to completly automate guild name checking? All a mark holder will need to do is submit proof of trademark to the company and a list of words and permutations of words that are considered confusingly similar. That list can be added to the existing list of words that prevent players from naming their guilds inappropriately and then you run a query on the existing database of guild names to flag violations. Have the game email the guildmaster that he has seven days to change his guilds name because part or all of the existing guild name has been found to be confusingly similar to an existing trademarked name. The rest comes out in the wash.
Id say in the long run you are off by four orders of magnitude. For the vast majority of people this changes nothing. I speculate that there will be 10 guilds or so that operate like The Syndicate and then a hundred or so hardcore groups that charge membership dues to maintain a lawyer and the rest will go on like it always has. We are not going to be neck deep in trademarked guilds. The cost is too high when your average guild of college kids are buying $5 Caesars Pleasers.
I meant to write: “… fee to participate. We do not ‘live’ in the online world for free.”
MySpace allows far more trademarked groups including radio stations, performance artists etc… than it bans.
I am sure that MySpace can make a reasonable argument for why it does not want links to competitors within its boundaries. Competition is one thing. This is something else.
The point is that MySpace can disallow the use of a given trademarked name. Trademark denotes an ability to disallow other people from using your name for certain practices. It does not denote an ability to require people to let you use a name.
Also I agree that trademarking won’t be widespread (although in theory you can file a trademark for under a grand if you do all the legal stuff yourself). To me that makes it more of a problem as it is seen as an unfair privilege that is unavailable to most players.
I dont take that as proven. All that is shown is that MySpace has a right to protect itself from its compeition within its area of control.
Using MySpace as an example again you could argue that anyone who owns a trademark may use it within a service as long as there is no conflict of interest.
Without justification it could be taken as discriminatory.
There is a conflict of interest: the MMORPG cannod afford to spend resources enforcing trademark law. Or any other of a number of reasons. I think you’d need to find a good precedent of a company who was legally bound to allow a certain trademarked name from use before that would have any basis.
And I think you vastly oversimplify what that entails. It’s not just a matter of verifying once that a trademarked name is trademarked. It is a case of verifying every instance where that name is used in your game and determining that it comes from a verified user of the trademark. It is going out and continually name-changing characters, items, guilds, etc., whenever a trademark holder complains about them.
Im just setting up a example. The fee for getting a name trademarked and the legal work is another issue entirely. In my experience at least 2-3 people in every clan I have run into can afford to do this or have the numbers to group their resources to do it. The fee to one person might be alot but divide it with 40 other people and it becomes alot more reasonable.
Ive said before about the issue of buying virtual goods is the same as giving someone 50$ for 200 monopoly money. The way this is looking is you are paying for the right to be the Hat everytime you play.
In my honest opinion, games should not be taken as seriously as this. When it is taken that seriously then it no longer is a game but a way of living. Your influence and wealth outside of the game should not impact how you play the game.
For those reading who want to protect their reputation but also do not have the cash to shell out then this might be a good way for you. A fair reasonable way to safeguard your guilds reputation is in my opinion to have your guild name be something beyond your ingame guild name. Basicly being called something else in every server/game but still related to your base name. “Faction A” of WoW for “Guild”. “Faction B” of EQ for “Guild”. Then having such on your website listed. People can always say they are you but your website will prove who is the real one.
Oh one last thing. Automated checking is not fool proof. Im fairly sure that there is quite a insane amount of variations of how to spell things. There is still people in games which have automated checking on player names that use “GM – SuchandSuch” to con people. Its possible but the work required to do it would be up there.
Now Ive had a thought for a while but could someone tell me what would happen if say the guild leader of a clan was booted out (yah it happens) or if someone else in the clan registered the Trademark and left. Who would own the name? Im not familiar enough with ownership of trademarks.
“It is a case of verifying every instance where that name is used in your game and determining that it comes from a verified user of the trademark.”
Thats not true. If a sword in the game happens to share the name with a trademarked guild name I do not believe that would be “confusingly similar”. This is not an issue of use of a word or groups of words. It protects the identity of an organization and distinctive assets associated with that organization including its name. And it only protects the Trademark within the domain of gaming guilds. So, as I see it this ONLY covers guild names. Guild and character names are the only persistent player created content that players are able to name. According to them they are a provider of services namely an enhanced gaming experience. So everything that is not a service that provides enhanced gaming experiences is outside the scope of their mark. I honestly do think it is as simple as setting up a few filters. And the playerbase already whines horribly, so Im not sure what the difference is. I dont see a need for legions of employees to handle trademark issues. We have already said its too expensive for everyone to do it, not to mention it involves caring enough to follow through.
I know there are laws in California that prohibit discrimination without justification. But there is a big grey area between where individual rights start and public rights end. It would probably be difficult and obviously costly to force compliance.
As far as unfair advantages are concerned I can’t put having a trademarked name on the same level as botting or buying gold. I do not see an unfair advantage in reserving a particular name in terms of game mechanics. The real advantage is having an organized team ready to go at launch and you can’t take that away even if there were no guild implementation in your game.
As far as automated checking goes I know that its not 100% accurate. It is not expected to be. the only stipulation that the law makes in protecting a mark is that you make a “reasonable effort” to defend it.
So, if you can prove that you regularly check for infriengement and that you take action when you find it you are safe. There is no expectation that you be omniescent and know about every infringement and there is no requirement that you successfully get everyone to stop using your mark when you find it being used. All you need to do to keep it is to show that you are actively trying to defend it. At some point you could lose it if some other group used the mark for long enough and grew to a size that superceds your own, but as that organization grows you would probably become aware of them.
“Im just setting up a example. The fee for getting a name trademarked and the legal work is another issue entirely. In my experience at least 2-3 people in every clan I have run into can afford to do this or have the numbers to group their resources to do it. The fee to one person might be alot but divide it with 40 other people and it becomes alot more reasonable.”
They also have to show that they are known and recognized as a group or organization. There have been many articles written about The Syndicate in the news media over the years.
“In my honest opinion, games should not be taken as seriously as this. When it is taken that seriously then it no longer is a game but a way of living.”
Im not sure that they take the game seriously at all. I believe that they take the friendship they have with each other seriously and they certainly feel like they have invested their time in those friendships. I think they take their reputation seriously and 10 years of being a guild seriously. Isn’t that what we want ultimately? Organizations that care.
In a game like SWG you can name just about anything. There are also issues with that happens when a particular chapter is disbanded, the example in a prior thread of a game that runs guilds democratically, etc. The notion that you couldn’t even have a game that had democratically lead guilds for fear that someone not entitled to the trademark might take over a guild through valid voting done by its members is a very good example of just how this sort of thing stifles creativity and create problems. Once a trademark becomes an in-game tool a guild can even use that on its factions and expect the MMORPG to get involved in their dramas: “we revoked the charter for this subguild, please take away their name, thanks.”
MMORPG’s could just grin and bear it of course. But customer service is expensive. In mobile gaming, a game feature that will increase CS calls by even 1% is a Bad Thing. I suspect it is the same for MMORPG’s but there are other people here more qualified to comment on that.
I think the discrimination thing is not at all applicable. It’s one thing to discriminate against a group using your service at all. It’s another to allow them to play but to create a world where certain words can’t be used including a trademark that they may own. In the latter case everyone is treated the same: pay your $15, play the game, make a guild, just don’t name it anything on this list. The name you want is on the list? Well, sorry about that, but you can still take any other name that is available. You also can’t name a guild “GLBT Friends” in WoW. If that isn’t discriminatory this certainly isn’t.
A trademark itself doesn’t have rights — a person does. Owning a trademark gives that person the right to prevent others from misusing the name. It doesn’t guarantee that everyone will recognize and use that name for them.
As for the privilege being as worthwhile as buying gold? That comes down to opinion’s. In my opinion it’s pretty much exactly the same thing. Reserving names in a game has a hefty value obviously (just judging by comments on it here). So does having an ubersword. This is just a different way of allowing a player to buy in-game value. If trademarking names were to be widespread and easy to do I’d actually have less of a problem with it. It is at least somewhat “fair” under one meaningful definition even though I still think it stifles creativity more than it helps (which is the intended purpose of IP law).
You may have already read this from BoingBoing, but it addresses what I was discussing more formally. The article describes as “petnames” a system of naming where the client can use the unique ids given by an authorative server to prevent foregability and mimicry attacks, all the while not worrying about trying manage unique names.
With a system like this, [Syndicate] or [Cyndicate] is not a problem – there is only one guild you have as the pet name {Syndicate}.
http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/petnames/IntroPetNames.html
[…] question. Read more about it & make up your own minds…ReadPermalinkEmail thisLinking BlogsComments[0] […]
> If you’re paying for a game, then you
> should be entitled to a reasonable
> expectation of fair-play.
The problem is, what is reasonable?
Let’s say you log onto some game and choose the name “CDarklock”. I can make a pretty solid argument that you’re treading on my turf: Darklock is the name of my company, I use the name CDarklock at most online forums where I participate, and I have a certain standing in the game development community. (Not much of one, but I do have *something*.) It is entirely possible that I could convince the administrators in that game to forbid you the use of that name, because I have a prior claim on it.
Is that fair?
Well, it sort of depends on where you’re sitting. From where I’m sitting, it would be really unfair if you could go around the game telling really racist jokes and destroying my reputation; whether you do or not doesn’t matter, because the fact is, you COULD. But from where you’re sitting, you have the right to use whatever name you want as long as you get there first, and I should have gotten in line faster.
This sort of conflict is actually an overlap in incompatible domains. There are a lot of “it’s only a game” people out there, and then there are a lot of “it’s NEVER only a game” people out there. When these two people meet, they have very different definitions of “fair”, and each of them expects *his* definition to be the one the game’s staff will share.
This is simply an impossible situation to resolve without damaging your game’s longevity beyond repair. Both types of player are essential to the survival of any MMO. However you choose to do it, you have to run interference between the two sides of the fence, and you ultimately can’t take either side.
[…] http://www.wowinsider.com/2006/02/09/copyright-controversy-continues/Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, WoW Social Conventions, Guilds, Odds and ends, News itemsThe recent decision by the WoW guild The Syndicate to copyright its name has, as expected, ruffled more than its share of feathers. As with any untested waters such as this, there appear to be bigger issues than simply not allowing someone else to use the name. According to Ralph’s Website, the very issue of trust and the integrity of the playerbase as a whole may just be at stake…or at least, that’s what Ralph thinks.Okay, that may be a bit of hyperbole, but he does raise some very interesting points in his article. There is a sort of first-come, first served etiquette that MMORPG players have come to accept, and the actions of The Syndicate certainly do call that issue into question. Read more about it & make up your own minds…Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments Post Comment Stealth Nerfing?[2006.02.09 | 21:57] […]
Quick little writeup here. Using my old nickname for this one. Its a bit of a rant and may go off topic. Before I start I would like to say that I have no guild at this time. I have been a member of small(10+), Massive (300+), and a leader of my own clan of 25.
1: The Syndicate claims alot of stuff and this type of action really is just a publicity move. Back when I played UO one of the things on their website was “We have real gms in the guild”. Im sure a few people remember that. Now its “we have people on a mmo advisory board”. It seems like alot of stuff most players would laugh at. It is similar to saying “You should join my club because we get free lunch at Pizza Hut.”
2: Most successfull guild in history. Serious? Im sure theres some clans from Korea and alot of others ready to dispute that. As well as oldest? Theres guilds that date back to Dark Sun Online and other MUDS before UO. Size? Doubt its the biggest as well. Lineage and Lineage 2 both have incredibly large guilds in them.
3: I doubt their trademark can hold up. Unless the players of the guild pay the guildmaster for the “service” of being in the guild then I dont think it would hold up in court. Now if they do pay Dragons… then thats quite insane in my opinion. At the moment the trademark only serves as a scare tactic. I do not beleive it has really been tested at this time.
4: Last one. I am sure that most other guilds and clans that have been around for quite a while but are more “below the radar” so to speak are sick of how much The Syndicate gets mentioned and the special treatment they receive from game companies. From my experience they are just like every other guild. Good and bad elements. Just a larger member base (as claimed) then most. Alot of the smaller crews would greatly appreciate the same level of treatment.
I could probably go on but I would rather wrap up this rant. I also apologize to Raph for running with the main topic a bit. Ill keep my further comments just like my previous. If I went out of line contact me about it. (I assume thats why the mail area is there)
One small note I forgot to enter. The Syndicate as bad as I have just labeled them have done some good things for the community and have done things for their rl community as well. I respect them for the stuff they have done to help others.
=P CDarklock, excellent points! I wonder how (if) it would change if we weren’t talking about such unique names? Given the same circumstances (your company name, establishment on boards, and standing in community) would there even be any question if the name we were talking about is John Smith instead of CDarklock? I honestly don’t know. I think your arguments are still valid with those conditions, however it seems a lot harder to contend that someone is treading your turf.
Speaking of external regulation Raph:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5199966
[…] http://www.wowinsider.com/2006/02/09/blizzard-apologises-for-glbt-blunder/ They also include in the article a new “guild recruiting and advertising channel” EDIT: lol on a side note I found https://www.raphkoster.com/?p=312 this article that I thought was completely hilarious there is a guild that is actually trying to copyright their guild name the responses from other players are pretty funny too. GG RL. […]
[…] A side note: trust, convention, and guild trademarks […]
[…] Read Part I Read Part II Read A side note […]