1. LightBeam

    LightBeam GBAtemp Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2018
    Messages:
    436
    Country:
    France
    I'm not a lawyer but yeah I suppose the laws do not work the way I talked about stuff, but usually on this kind of subject I tend to focus on the intent instead of what the law exactly says because I'm sure the law is well written when it's about settling cases but this one still just feel like a far-fetched one.

    To me it's basically like how Nintendo send DMCAs to all fan project related, they do have the legal rights to do that but it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do, while Sega on the other hand is totally the opposite

    So of course we aren't talking about fan games here, but I hope you get where I am going : They may have the rights to do so, I have no clue about that tbh but I sincerely doubt the honesty of the case here and I don't think it's just to defend themselves.

    But the concept you talked about, « genericide » make me think that maybe they do that because they don't want the word « Unreal » to fall into that so even if they know it's exagerated, they still do it because they want to keep some value to the word « Unreal » so it doesn't become as widespread and companies will tend to avoid something too close to this word but idk, to me it feels like if Activision would trademark « Call of », maybe they could but it would still sound stupid to me
     
    Last edited by LightBeam, May 18, 2021
  2. squeakycleanswine

    squeakycleanswine Advanced Member
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2018
    Messages:
    51
    Country:
    United States
    Literal clowns
     
  3. smf

    smf GBAtemp Psycho!
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    4,958
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    No, but if someone heard on the radio there was an nreal vr head set coming out then they might think it was related to unreal.

    It's not reaching at all.

    Lawyers and courts get to decide if they have a case, not randoms on a forum.

    They are just trying to stop them using the name, this is going to cost them more than they will make out of it.

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    It's a modification of a word, and un / n are pronounced similar enough. I don't know what the court will make of it, but all this faux outrage is pointless.

    The UK has a much more interesting trademark case going ahead....

    https://www.legalcheek.com/lc-journ...eecuthbert-the-case-of-the-caterpillar-cakes/
     
  4. xdarkx

    xdarkx GBAtemp Advanced Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    586
    Country:
    Canada
    I don't see how one would mistake the two in that example either as the VR headset is a physical product and doesn't have anything to do with game engine. The VR headset could very well run games that use Unreal Engine, but that still doesn't mean the VR headset is related to Unreal Engine at all. So far, the examples you have been giving either makes no sense or just don't correlated to this lawsuit at all.

    You are right on this part which is the only thing I will agree with.
     
  5. samcambolt270

    samcambolt270 GBAtemp Maniac
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,056
    Country:
    United States
    Yes it does.
    No, actually they aren't. That's like saying tvs are in the same industry as tesla cars because they have screens. That's not how it works. Video game engines are video game engines, not hardware. The question is "likelihood of confusion" not if you're in a similar "industry." Industry is literally irrelevant.
    I did. I'm not wrong.
    Go read the actual laws and see that "related industry" is not a thing. The factor is "likelihood of confusion." The specific factors are as follows:
    • The nature and strength of the marks.
    • The similarity of the marks.
    • The nature of the goods or services.
    • The gap to be bridged.
    • The sophistication of the buyers.
    • The intent of the second comer.
    • The evidence of actual confusion.
    • The quality of the defendant's product.
    You can be in an the exact same industry, but if there is no likelihood of confusion there's no trademark violation. If I my television company used the slogan 'Like looking out a window" there would be no dispute. Both of them being in the "tech industry" is not relevent if confusion is not an issue. No one is going to get confused about Nreal being related to "unreal engine" when they are wholly different products. A trademark is much more than a word. It's a combination of factors and contexts which combine to produce a unique "mark" that when seen is unquestionably yours. There is already case law right now in which suits involving companies using very similar words on similar products were thrown out because there was no likelihood of confusion.
    If a product does not exist withing the specific continuum that is directly associated with that marks unique identifier, you can use a similar trademark for it. Unreal engine is a game engine. It is not a physical product and it is not a peripheral. Epic does not sell such products nor does it advertise or market itself in any way that would directly communicate to a buyer that it might do so. The mark "Unreal" alone does not possess any strength allowing its branch into unrelated products. In order for this to happen, the mark must be "fanciful, arbitrary, or suggestive" of which "Unreal" is none. The word unreal is a word with so many contexts that it can only be at best a weak mark without accompanied text or context. Using the word "unreal" in a mark is perfectly viable and protectible as the word "unreal"
    So? As I've covered, the word is a textbook example of a mark (as weak you can get) and clearly refers to "reality" in this context (as in virtual reality) which equally as protect-able under copyright law. You cannot own a monopoly over a word, only that word in its specific context and "unreal engine" is not a manufacturer of virtual reality products.
    This is factually untrue. Trademarks are not words and do in fact not have to even include words to be trademarked. They are any mark whatsoever which "unquestionably connects to [your] product." You can trademark a color, a shape, a gesture, a dance, or anything else as long as it is unique to your product. Starbucks trademarked that specific shade of green BUT you can use that shade all you like as long as it does not have a "likelihood of confusion." A trademark must be a "unique identifier as to the source of the product" but in no way must be "Literally words"
     
    LightBeam and uzimakiuchiha like this.
  6. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer
    Reporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    33,303
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    If Epic want to get into the peripherals market at a later date (not like companies don't make mice, various gamepads, other peripherals, lend their support to things...) this could lead to confusion, if someone sells something as having unreal support (which if VR does pop would be a huge market, and if having unreal support on your console can make or break it either entirely or for market segments*, and bets on how quickly a driver update breaking unreal engine games gets rolled back vs basically anything else), unreal being a market leading force (now being on the unreal engine probably means mixed bag for you and I but it is never the less something someone might be expected to see as a thing worth noting/some kind of minimum quality and it does tend to be noted in the credits and on the box).
    All this places it within the usual parameters for a trademark scuffle.


    *ain't many dudebros buying a Wii U after all, lack of things powered by Unreal (or indeed the then modern versions of it) being something of a noted part in it.

    Diluted is probably the word you are looking for. And it does happen -- the second link being a list of things it happened to and can no longer claim protection in some jurisdictions, you also don't want to have to fight it as part of a case. The link was covering a notion some have that if some randoms on a forum somewhere make something that nobody outside that forum notes that it could be brought up in court and cause a company to lose a trademark. It is more why it is something of a double edged sword when big area specific sites (to tie it to something common around here then all those nice fan games heading into beta landing on whatever the kids are reading as a major gaming site this week) cover such things as that is one of the lines in which a company might be reasonably expected to act.
     
    Skelletonike likes this.
  7. xdarkx

    xdarkx GBAtemp Advanced Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    586
    Country:
    Canada
    The confusion would come iff had Epic rebrand Unreal Engine as part of some sort of lineup that might include peripherals before Nreal. At the moment, Unreal Engine is still just a game engine. Nothing more than that.
     
  8. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer
    Reporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    33,303
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    You could try making that argument if you wanted, indeed I might expect nreal to try it on.
    More generally from what I have seen in the past then nreal support vs unreal support could happily land us in likelihood of general consumer (which does include all those parents and grandparents buying snotty kids games). Plenty of things have claimed support for various engines, be it peripherals, games, graphics cards, consoles, capture programs, sound cards and the like, 3d displays and whatever else.
    https://docs.unrealengine.com/udk/Three/RealD.html being a 3d stereoscopic aspect of the unreal engine as far back as... 2012 is when they joined https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/...s-unreal-engine-3-integrated-partners-program
    As far as "just" a game engine then I fear the term has come to mean something more in recent years compared daddy's doom clones.
     
  9. samcambolt270

    samcambolt270 GBAtemp Maniac
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,056
    Country:
    United States
    Rediculous. Nothing "supports unreal." It's a game engine. It either uses the unreal engine or it doesn't. No one puts "Unreal support" on their product like they would "Oculus support."
     
  10. xdarkx

    xdarkx GBAtemp Advanced Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    586
    Country:
    Canada
    The article you link just talks about RealD integrating their 3D technology to the Unreal Engine. You still need hardware to run anything that's built with Unreal Engine. So again, Unreal Engine is still just a game engine. (Not sure how many times I need to repeat this)
     
  11. Axido

    Axido GBAtemp Maniac
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Messages:
    1,081
    Country:
    Germany
    Imagine how pissed Microsoft must be if anyone dares to sell a Box.

    That being said I can't stop laughing thinking about the Intendo Ii and the Intendo Witch (or Itch, if one letter does not suffice). :rofl2:
     
    Last edited by Axido, May 19, 2021
    LightBeam and x65943 like this.
  12. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer
    Reporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    33,303
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Supported by, powered by, using the technology of... words that imply support, integration or design to be utilised by in various directions all matter in this sort of discussion. Even if it were the case though and that is the standard that they could reasonably/plausibly be expected to find themselves in that market at any point (they are one of the big players in games, have been for a while) is well within the remit of a trademark in general. There are plenty of things that will claim support for Valve's/Steam's efforts as well ("supports SteamVR" and all that).

    I grabbed a stack of my 360 games out. Unreal logo nicely on the back and sometimes front for those games with it.

    Also to be a pedant and while it probably places us in professional realms and thus more sophisticated customers there are going to be loads of third party plugin, design tools, 3d modellers and beyond that claim support for the unreal engine. If it was purely that then sophistication of the users criteria would likely kick in, as it tends to for higher end industrial goods and whatnot. Though taking it back to more consumery things https://www.digitalspy.com/videogames/a469697/wii-u-will-not-support-unreal-engine-4/
    This also says nothing of
    https://docs.unrealengine.com/en-US/WorkingWithMedia/ProVideoIO/BlackmagicQuickStart/index.html (that is a fairly noted hardware company providing named/device specific support for unreal to capture video).
    https://github.com/adamrehn/UE4Capture

    You can repeat it until you are blue in the face. What relevance it gains in the discussion though is a different matter.
    Likewise stereoscopic 3d a building block of VR, not to mention VR for a lot of things is a glorified means of 3d.
     
  13. xdarkx

    xdarkx GBAtemp Advanced Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    586
    Country:
    Canada
    Regardless of technology (be it 3D or VR), unless you can provide an example where Unreal Engine is beyond a game engine, there is no way anyone would get confused between Unreal Engine and Nreal.

    Like what I asked smf, I will ask you the same question. If you were to go ask someone right now what are some popular game engine out there, would you expect anyone to say Nreal as one of the answers?
     
  14. samcambolt270

    samcambolt270 GBAtemp Maniac
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,056
    Country:
    United States
    Nope. Those are different terms used in different contexts and would not be confused for one another. No one says "Powered by" oculus when they mean "can be used on the platform of" oculus. No one says "supports" unity when they mean "powered by" or "using the game engine of" unity. No one would become confused by "supports Nreal" assuming they mean unreal engine because nothing "supports" an engine. It uses the engine or it doesn't. "Powered by" is not in any way synonymous with or even capable of being used interchangeably with "supports" in terms of game engines vs platforms.

    This is irrelevent to whether "supports x" would cause confusion with a game engine. You can have a million games with the unreal engine logo on them and it wouldn't suddenly make anyone think a pair of augmented reality sunglasses with Nreal on them are from the same company.
     
    LightBeam likes this.
  15. driverdis

    driverdis I am Justice
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    Messages:
    2,793
    Country:
    United States
    I prefer the PCP Station, it is for a much more hardcore fanbase.
    719jeF53csL._AC_SX522_.jpg
     
    LightBeam and Mama Looigi like this.
  16. smf

    smf GBAtemp Psycho!
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    4,958
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    No it doesn't.

    It would be like selling tessla car mats and beaded seat covers and some people could mistake it for an official product when walking past it in the store or hearing their friend say the tessla seat covers broke and would never buy a tessla car product ever again. Once enough people

    Yes, it clearly could. Maybe not for someone who "knows everything", but that isn't how trademarks are judged.

    Epic clearly are worried that people would mistake it or they wouldn't have wasted all this money on trying to stop nreal. The courts will get to decide.

    You are assuming that everyone knows that Unreal is a game engine & even what a game engine is. For the vast majority of people it is just a logo they have seen associated with top games. So the headset to play those games must be good.

    You'd have similar issues if you tried to use THX for anything to do with movies, the vast majority of people have no clue what it means but they've seen the logo at the beginning of movies.
     
    Last edited by smf, May 19, 2021
  17. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer
    Reporter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    33,303
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Peripheral support, plugin support, said video support... all options game engine makers can and do give, not that it particularly matters here as they are mostly limited to the same category of trademark. Unreal could also very plausibly be used in a VR product tomorrow (they already have stereoscopic 3d which is most of the way there, input control, https://www.aszarchitetti.com/magazine/unreal-engine-brings-architectural-vr-to-the-next-level/ being a 2020 puff piece and similar things mentioned in their terms https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/eula/publishing , and there are examples of competitors moving into the space -- see SteamVR, and plenty of otherwise software companies fart out a peripheral) even if we are not going by the more broad category.

    Can't say I would expect it but that is largely immaterial for the purposes of trademark discussion -- if it is plausible a normal customer (which does include grandmas and clueless parents buying things for their snot nosed brat) could hear something spoken or at a glance and be reasonably confused as to the originator of the product/blesser of the product's existence then you have the basis for a trademark dispute. This appears to be what that is.
    I would not consider if a failure of law like I do for most US patent cases/grants I see if they did allow nreal to play, however I would also consider it absolutely normal and within range for them to be forced to go with another name.

    Plenty of peripherals get endorsed/sanctioned by engine makers, API makers, content distributors and more (is this controller directinput compatible? sort of thing. SteamVR compatible, directsound compatible, supported by skype...), and I already covered a few with unreal support if it was necessary and needed an established market (such things certainly can help in a trademark dispute but there are also plenty of examples of big swinging dick American companies troubled in Europe, Japanese in America with Resident Evil vs Biohazard generally being one of the more notable for games, and all other combinations where someone was otherwise established and got in first, sucks for them but is what it is) where in practice as long as you have been said to actively enforce the mark in the categories you have it then that is the baseline standard.
    Could I see a set of circumstances where powered by vs supports vs supported by becomes a deciding factor. Is it here? Not even close.
     
  18. Bombogor

    Bombogor Newbie
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 19, 2021
    Messages:
    7
    Country:
    United States
    Thats gotta be one of the moist retarded lawsuits.
     
  19. xdarkx

    xdarkx GBAtemp Advanced Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    586
    Country:
    Canada
    Even if not everyone knows what a game engine is, how does one confuse the U logo in Unreal with the N logo in Nreal? You can look the two logos up. Not to mentioned, you only see the U logo in games and at times, the logo with say Unreal Engine at the bottom.

    Also, I have no clue what do you mean by top games. Unreal Engine is used in indie games and/or lesser known games.

    The problem is even with VR technology integrated into the Unreal Engine, by itself, Unreal Engine doesn't do anything. You may be able to run parts of it, but what good does that do? It's like an actual engine from say a car, plane, ship, or whatever. By itself, the engine doesn't do anything even if you have a lot of technology included in the engine.
     
  20. samcambolt270

    samcambolt270 GBAtemp Maniac
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,056
    Country:
    United States
    This has nothing to do with "industry". As I already showed and literally quoted from the law itself, the question is similarity of the product itself. Tesla sells cars and car products. Branding a car product with "tessla" could violate trademark, specifically because it could cause confusion. No personally could reasonably get confused by seeing a pair of ar sunglasses that say nreal and think they're made by the game engine or epic games. They are not related in any way.

    Yes it is. It's literally in the law. The sophistication of the buyers is one of the factors. If you have to know literally nothing about the product in order to be confused, then it's irrelevant. If the only time you've ever heard of unreal engine was a logo at the start of the game and you have no idea what a game engine is, then it's irrelevant to the suit. That IS how trademark violations are judged by literal definition. You could come up with a thousand ways random people who don't know what unreal engine is and how they could be confused but it literally doesn't matter to the law. Theres a reason the word "impact" is used so often in copyright law.
    You clearly don't know why people sue. They're not threatened. They want a settlement.
    Fun fact, that's what the court assumes too. That's how trademark law works. If the only way someone can confuse two products is to not know what either product is, there's no confusion.
    If you don't know what a game engine is, you don't unreal engine is either.
     
    LightBeam likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted
Loading...

Hide similar threads Similar threads with keywords - company, sounds, Unreal