Report Comment to a Moderator Our Moderators review all comments for abusive and offensive language, and ensure comments are from Verified Users only.
Please report a comment only if you feel it requires our urgent attention.
I understand, report it. Cancel

Activision triumphs in dispute

By Rachel Weber

Thu 08 Sep 2011 9:35am GMT / 5:35am EDT / 2:35am PDT

Publishers win court case against Anthony Abraham

Activision Blizzard

Headquartered in Santa Monica, California, Activision Blizzard, Inc. is a worldwide pure-play online...


Call Of Duty publisher Activision has won its court case against owner Anthony Abraham.

Miami resident Abraham bought the domain in July and used it to redirect visitors to the webpage of rival EA shooter Battlefield 3, and a comedy video referencing Modern Warfare 3.

According to legal documents obtained by Fusible, Activision filed a domain name dispute with the National Arbitration Forum on July 15.

"It appears that the Respondent supports the game Battlefield from the game developer Electronic Arts ("EA")," read the complaint.

" EA is one of Complainant's principal competitors in the video game industry, and Battlefield game competes in the marketplace with Complainant's MODERN WARFARE games and its other military-themed shooter games in the CALL OF DUTY series."

The three member panel deciding the case were not convinced by Abraham's defence, that Modern Warfare was a generic term.

The complaint cost Activision just $2600 to file.

From Recommendations by Taboola


Cody Pike Studying Electrical Engineering, Alabama University

5 0 0.0
Next thing you know, Activision's legal team will be bringing lawsuits against the producers of documentaries, because they have precedent that they 'own' the words 'Modern Warfare'...

Posted:5 years ago


Andrew Jakobs Lead Programmer

301 169 0.6
@Cody Pike: There is a big difference in using 'Modern Warfare' for a real 'militairy' site or using it for linking to a rival game, and in this case it was blatantly obvious the guy bought it to spite activision.. So I must agree with the judge..

Posted:5 years ago


Andrew Clayton QA Weapons Tester, Electronic Arts

150 8 0.1
Cody, not the same thing. This guy sat on the domain just to stick it to Activision. Whenever we think of "Modern Warfare 3", we don't think of some vague concept, we think of a specific thing.

Copyrighting the title Modern Warfare is not the same thing as copyrighting something like "Edge".

Posted:5 years ago


Tommy Thompson Studying Artificial Intelligence (PhD), University of Strathclyde

110 0 0.0
Whatever your feelings on Activision, they are legally entitled to take action here. It is clear that the term 'modern warfare' is being used in the context of their game. Part of their dispute required that they give sufficient evidence to justify the relevance of Abrahams domain name to their product. That, combined with the fact this is a clear case of defamation (which isn't covered by the First Amendements freedom of speech) justifies their legal victory.

Posted:5 years ago


Login or register to post

Take part in the GamesIndustry community

Register now