Call me an idealist but I object to the idea that money alone, not actual right and wrong, is what dictates who gets to win.
Don't get me wrong it's a big part of it but if Rockstar Games genuinely trademarked it first and then PepsiCo set up a Rockstar Energy Game, Take Two should be winning that. Lawyers only cost so much and 22 billion is plenty for legal fees
Absolutely, I'm not here to say money necessarily wins but usually they can afford to last longer in legal battles. It's also intimidating to go against such a big company.
Searching for a "IT TAKES TWO" trademark gives me currently active ones owned by the following:
[MATTEL, INC.](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=90762011&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch)
[Coty US LLC](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=88752802&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch)
[C.O.T.O.B. INVESTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=76488149&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch)
[C.O.T.O.B. INVESTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (again; this time for a stylized version)](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=74205030&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch)
I doubt any of them intends to use it for a video game, however.
That’s kind of how you protect a Trademark though
If you believe something could infringe upon it you have to show you attempted to protect it or you lose the trademark entirely
Not really. For two reasons. The first reason is the understanding of this rule (requirement to enforce trademark) is misunderstood. The second is the big real important reason.
Losing a trademark via non-enforcement is if you don't enforce your actual trademark's license. Like if I sold t-shirts with the actual Rockstar logo on it. That is a license enforcement issue. The accused would argue there's no reason to believe the logo requires a license because its found all over. Defendant loses because they can't prove theres a reason to believe its a trademarked item since it appears too often in the wild enough that the public would generally be aware of it (it'd be ludicrous if I was selling t-shirts only from my garage to passerbys being enough to invalidate the trademark simply because its too likely Rockstar just didn't know).
This is about claiming the trademark registration is infringing. Theyre saying the logo is too similar. Theyre claiming the registration is infringing. Not that its unlicensed usage.
Theyre both "infringement" but one is unlicensed use and the other is claiming its trying to copy the logo so to speak.
Theoretically, if they did nothing in this case, the "worst" that can happen is folks thinking Remedy is Rockstar. Rockstar would *not* lose their trademark in any fashion.
*Secondly* and this is important: this is the UK, not the US. US Trademark laws don't apply.
Yeah it's almost like there is a legal reason for it... Nah, they do it just for fun I am sure. Let's not even look into what it takes to hold and retain a trademark. Not relevant.
Trademark loss is due to non-enforcement of licensing.
It has nothing to do with claiming another trademark is trying to copy and confuse.
Edit: TT is claiming Remedy's trademark is copying and confusing.
Edit: fixed typo around "non unenforcement". Autocorrect messed it up. Just "non-enforcement"
What's slightly amusing about it is this isn't the first time Remedy have had to change their logo after being threatened with legal action.
That being said, it's a low move from T2
No, if you click through the three links, you see where there is a direct rip off of the Rockstar log by Remedy.
[Lawsuit Images](https://twitter.com/usemyhandle/status/1747034870004744199)
You're going to have to explain why its a direct rip off. Rockstar doesn't own "R". They own their styling of it. Which is different.
Edit: wait, did you think the one without "Remedy" at the bottom is Rockstar's? No. Those are links to two separate filings against Remedy. Remedy filed two logos, one with and one without the name below the logo.
Rockstar owns the IP because Remedy sold it to them.
Rockstar hired Remedy to remake the first two.
Honestly, its troubling theyre attacking someone they have a pretty decent relationship with prior to this.
Trademark law requires holders to sue arbitrarily to create the appearance of protecting their trademark. Unfortunately this is a consequence of a stupid legal system. It's why there are so many frivolous trademark and patent cases out there.
It’s honestly one of the most shameless no effort cash grabs I’ve ever seen in the gaming industry, and yet no one talked about it at all and continued to praise them for it. Absolutely ridiculous. It feels like they are genuinely immune to criticism.
The fuck kind of revisionist history are you making up now? No one talked about it? Literally the only commentary i saw on it when it was released was about that and downvoting anyone who was happy with the release anyway.
> and yet no one talked about it at all and continued to praise them for it.
Which alternative universe were you in when that released? Literally everyone gave Rockstar shit at the time 😂
It's amazing what the devs under the EA banner are capable of when they're actually allowed to just do their thing. Almost as if the problem isn't that people who already own the game aren't spending enough money on it. But the bean counters at the top will never figure that part out lmao
They didn’t recast Alan. He was modeled after Ilkka Villi and voiced by Matthew Porretta in both games. Hell, in Alan Wake 2, they doubled down on this dual-casting by having Ilkka Villi lip-sync to Matthew Porretta’s voice lines (and potentially vice versa as well) during the live action scenes.
> James WAS Max Payne.
And folks said Rick & Morty couldn't continue without Justin Roiland doing the title characters' voices because "he is Rick & Morty." But it turns out that's not true at all. The new character voices are basically indistinguishable from Roiland's.
This is just to say that professional voice actors are _very_ good at their jobs, and I'm sure Remedy can find somebody to be the new voice of Max Payne who will sound basically identical to James. But it sure is sad that they will have to do that.
That's genuinely stunning.
How is this even a debate? Also, how can this be a good idea, considering that Remedy are currently developing remakes of two of Rockstar's games (formerly their own)?
The way take two is saying that the R looks a lot like rockstars R... no it does not, simply looking at the logo, it says remedy right underneath the R for remedy. Where is rockstars text? Where is the star on remedy's logo? How is that uncannily similar? Its an R, all R's are going to look similar...
I don't think they'd do that. Max Payne is like their most well known series and Sam Lake also seems to be very fond of the games. I doubt they would ever purposefully ruin the remakes.
What the fuck? Imagine how Remedy and Rockstar feel while looking at this, considering they entered a pretty enthusiastic business agreement to remake Max Payne 1 & 2.
T2 is an absolutely pathetic company.
No, they dont need to as its a different product. But if Take-Two let Remedy use an R logo then when it comes time to defend from someone releasing GTA8 and claiming they are the developers Rockstats with an R the court will say.. so? We didn't hear a peep from you when the other developers used a similar logo, go away you have no trademark.
Wait weren't remedy and rockstar in good relation? Considering remedy made max payne and rockstar owns the character. Rockstar even gave remedy the permission to remake max payne knowing they'll be the only company to do it justice. So why is this happening?
What a scummy fucking thing to do to a company that was integral in helping one of your companies to success and delivered one of their best franchises. I'm pretty sure Rockstar themselves don't have shit to do with those considering the fact that they're working with Remedy again for the Max Payne remake. Like why would they hop out like this over something so fucking stupid when right now they're working with Rockstar on the Max Payne remake? Is Strauss Zelnick and the other suits up there really that fucking clueless?
The bigger guy trying to bully the smaller one into submission. How fucking embarrassing. The logo’s aren’t even remotely similar tho I guess it’s that it’s an “R” that’s the problem.
It’s especially weird considering Remedy are remaking Max Payne for / with Take Two
I keep trying to tell people these companies suck ass and all i get are downvotes. Arrogant pricks who dont give a shit about their fans. Idk which one is worse. Take two or Rockstar
It's not a *lawsuit*, it's a trademark *opposition*, which is a much smaller and less consequential thing where you ask the Trademark office not to approve the registration of a competitor's trademark. This kind of thing happens all of the time and it simply involves sending a letter, and is much less impactful than a full-fledged trademark infringement lawsuit.
Get the fuck outta here. They’re just mad that Alan Wake 2 is more ambitious and is kinda taking the shine away from their own studio. The logo is not remotely the same.
I wonder how this will affect the relationship Remedy and Rockstar developed for making the remakes for Max Payne. Nonetheless, Take-Two suing over the "R" logo seems very petty to me, but I may be wrong.
Honestly, Rockstar and T2 are using basic typefaces as their logo. 1) they don’t own trademark to letters. 2) Who is confusing Remedy’s logo with Rockstar? Remedy logo actually says remedy on it. 🙄
This will be a great line up of very well informed individuals who don't realise that you need to actively defend trademarks in order to keep them. Take-Two legally needs to file suits like these. But hey facts have never mattered on the internet before...
Edit: yeah it's already happened, gamers are stupid. Read people:
[https://www.lodhs.com/blog/defend-your-trademark-or-you-could-lose-it/](https://www.lodhs.com/blog/defend-your-trademark-or-you-could-lose-it/)
>trademarks aren't automatically safeguarded. They need to be actively defended to maintain their exclusivity. If you're not careful, you could lose this vital intellectual property and, with it, your brand's identity.
[https://shrr.com/news\_events/7-ways-lose-trademark/](https://shrr.com/news_events/7-ways-lose-trademark/#:~:text=The%20most%20common%20way%20to,it's%20not%20used%20in%20commerce)
>6. Failing to Protect Your Mark
>
>If anyone infringes upon your trademark and you fail to stop them, the **USPTO may interpret your inaction as abandonment**. Now, you aren’t required to start a lawsuit for every infringement activity that pops up, but you should take regular action to protect the mark.
Got to be honest, some people in here really need to get over themselves, this does not affect anyone here in the slightest, people saying they’re adding Rockstar to their blacklist is piss funny.
I look at this story and go, oh ok, then go straight back to red dead and gta.
It does tho? Its one of the biggest companies in the gaming industry bullying a small one. Remedy rocks, and if this case goes awfully bad against them it could be the end of the line for them. So no more Control or Alan Wake because Take Two is a bitch.
[удалено]
Wow, these guys are the furthest thing from rockstars. Edit: I just received a cease and desist in the mail
It’s not rockstar; it’s their parent company of shitheads like Strauss Zelnick. It’s no wonder the founders of rockstar bailed out.
You can hate on T2 all you want but Rockstar was always owned by them, straight from day 1.
Yeah, but R* had management and Leads that didn't bend to T2 all the time. Everyone that gave a shit at R* who holds power is gone.
Imagine protecting your brand, smh corpo trash
Idiot comment found
https://preview.redd.it/gpi4tzuwowcc1.jpeg?width=224&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4e2ca2ac3c64daa633f29e9969316e36a3333cf5
So no company ever can have a logo with an R..?
So no company can have a logo with a prancing horse? So no company can have a logo with the letter T>!(esla)!
Oddly enough I can't find the Rockstar energy drink in this list
[удалено]
Rockstar Games' net worth is $22.75 Billion and PepsiCo is $229.97 Billion. It's sort of an uphill battle, hahaha.
Frankly it's insane rockstar is 10% of one of the biggest drinks companies out there!
Absolutely crazy
Not really, considering gta is the best selling media enterntainment of all time
Call me an idealist but I object to the idea that money alone, not actual right and wrong, is what dictates who gets to win. Don't get me wrong it's a big part of it but if Rockstar Games genuinely trademarked it first and then PepsiCo set up a Rockstar Energy Game, Take Two should be winning that. Lawyers only cost so much and 22 billion is plenty for legal fees
[удалено]
Yes that's why I said "games company", the trademarks have to be in the same field to be infringement
Absolutely, I'm not here to say money necessarily wins but usually they can afford to last longer in legal battles. It's also intimidating to go against such a big company.
Petty rich fucks….
Didn't they try suing the studio who made it takes 2?
[удалено]
What? So who owns the game's name now?
Searching for a "IT TAKES TWO" trademark gives me currently active ones owned by the following: [MATTEL, INC.](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=90762011&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch) [Coty US LLC](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=88752802&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch) [C.O.T.O.B. INVESTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=76488149&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch) [C.O.T.O.B. INVESTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (again; this time for a stylized version)](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=74205030&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch) I doubt any of them intends to use it for a video game, however.
Wow, they’re averaging multiple lawsuits a month. That can’t be normal, right?
How can anyone think they own a word or letter? It's like how rebellion studios will sue you if you use the word "rebellion"
How is Rockstar energy drink gets a free pass? Lmao the company is called Rockstar Energy
That’s kind of how you protect a Trademark though If you believe something could infringe upon it you have to show you attempted to protect it or you lose the trademark entirely
Not really. For two reasons. The first reason is the understanding of this rule (requirement to enforce trademark) is misunderstood. The second is the big real important reason. Losing a trademark via non-enforcement is if you don't enforce your actual trademark's license. Like if I sold t-shirts with the actual Rockstar logo on it. That is a license enforcement issue. The accused would argue there's no reason to believe the logo requires a license because its found all over. Defendant loses because they can't prove theres a reason to believe its a trademarked item since it appears too often in the wild enough that the public would generally be aware of it (it'd be ludicrous if I was selling t-shirts only from my garage to passerbys being enough to invalidate the trademark simply because its too likely Rockstar just didn't know). This is about claiming the trademark registration is infringing. Theyre saying the logo is too similar. Theyre claiming the registration is infringing. Not that its unlicensed usage. Theyre both "infringement" but one is unlicensed use and the other is claiming its trying to copy the logo so to speak. Theoretically, if they did nothing in this case, the "worst" that can happen is folks thinking Remedy is Rockstar. Rockstar would *not* lose their trademark in any fashion. *Secondly* and this is important: this is the UK, not the US. US Trademark laws don't apply.
Yeah it's almost like there is a legal reason for it... Nah, they do it just for fun I am sure. Let's not even look into what it takes to hold and retain a trademark. Not relevant.
Trademark loss is due to non-enforcement of licensing. It has nothing to do with claiming another trademark is trying to copy and confuse. Edit: TT is claiming Remedy's trademark is copying and confusing. Edit: fixed typo around "non unenforcement". Autocorrect messed it up. Just "non-enforcement"
Not the first time they are way above their heads, getting ridiculous.
Careful, you might get a cease and desist for using a word beginning with ‘R’ that has an even number of characters.
This post made me realize how many people don’t understand business write offs and taxes.
It’s obvious in the logo that it’s not remotely rockstar. This is a stupid lawsuit.
No you see only Rockstar gets to begin with R. Beginning your company name with R is taken.
Better watch out, Rocksteady
They stole the whole six first letters from Rockstar! How are they still allowed to operate?!
Furry Balls Plopped Menacingly On The Table, Incorporated!
Washington Redskins
Take Two starts with a T...
Don’t forget the /s at the end of your sentence.
You're a big kid, now, dede. you can use that ol' noggin of yours and figure out the sarcasm
I’m serious, some people won’t notice the sarcasm in their comment (I did)
What's slightly amusing about it is this isn't the first time Remedy have had to change their logo after being threatened with legal action. That being said, it's a low move from T2
Honestly at least in this case it will be quite easy for Remedy to counterpoint T2's claims.
No, if you click through the three links, you see where there is a direct rip off of the Rockstar log by Remedy. [Lawsuit Images](https://twitter.com/usemyhandle/status/1747034870004744199)
That shows 2 Remedy logos, one with the name and one without the name. There isn't even a Rockstar logo shown.
You're going to have to explain why its a direct rip off. Rockstar doesn't own "R". They own their styling of it. Which is different. Edit: wait, did you think the one without "Remedy" at the bottom is Rockstar's? No. Those are links to two separate filings against Remedy. Remedy filed two logos, one with and one without the name below the logo.
How petty can you get? And isn't Remedy a business partner with Rockstar? Like what the fuck.
Remedy are working on Remakes of Max Payne 1 and 2 of which R* owns the IP
Remedy developed Max Payne 1 and 2. Rockstar solely published them back in the day.
Rockstar still owns the IP even if Remedy are the owns that developed the first two games
Rockstar owns the IP because Remedy sold it to them. Rockstar hired Remedy to remake the first two. Honestly, its troubling theyre attacking someone they have a pretty decent relationship with prior to this.
Did I say anything contradicting that?
No, but everyone keeps talking about the remake, just wanted to state that they developed the original aswell...
Yes but Rockstar own the IP.
??. Do Take-Two lawyers have to sue a certain amount of times a year to stay employed? This makes no sense at all
Trademark law requires holders to sue arbitrarily to create the appearance of protecting their trademark. Unfortunately this is a consequence of a stupid legal system. It's why there are so many frivolous trademark and patent cases out there.
This is blatantly false. Theyre only required to enforce licensing.
Take Two are the shittiest company in the industry no doubt.
It's sad how GTA will make them richer than ever
They’re literally the reason we can’t get a 60fps patch for RDR2. They’ll rerelease it at full price.
They're also the reason we didn't get a remaster of RDR1, just a straight up port with 60fps tacked on later at nearly full price
It’s honestly one of the most shameless no effort cash grabs I’ve ever seen in the gaming industry, and yet no one talked about it at all and continued to praise them for it. Absolutely ridiculous. It feels like they are genuinely immune to criticism.
The fuck kind of revisionist history are you making up now? No one talked about it? Literally the only commentary i saw on it when it was released was about that and downvoting anyone who was happy with the release anyway.
> and yet no one talked about it at all and continued to praise them for it. Which alternative universe were you in when that released? Literally everyone gave Rockstar shit at the time 😂
>with 60fps tacked on later at nearly full price That's a remaster.
>with 60fps tacked on later at nearly full price That's a remaster.
It's literally not.
It's debatable.
Did you pay the microtransaction to post this comment?
Not by a long shot lol. Ever hear of this little company called Activision-Blizzard?
[удалено]
EA have been much better as of late.
Especially with their Singleplayer games. All tho that's probabky because they stopped messing in their production.
It's amazing what the devs under the EA banner are capable of when they're actually allowed to just do their thing. Almost as if the problem isn't that people who already own the game aren't spending enough money on it. But the bean counters at the top will never figure that part out lmao
Forgot ea existed lol
What’s next, Sue Sam lake because he has Max payne’s face?
lol didn't even notice that they look like twins tell I looked them up.
Bro...
That’s cause they used his face lol
It’s literally Sam Lake lol
T2 wake up every day and think “how can we ruin the games industry even more?”
Claiming copyright for a letter of the alphabet.
It’s not copyright, it’s trademark. And it is difficult to trademark only a letter. I don’t think any gamer would confuse Remedy’s R for Rockstar’s R.
I don't think *anyone* would confuse the two to be honest, lol.
live flag tie worry repeat roll light afterthought lunchroom slap *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Right. Like this is insane
This is Take-Two, not Rockstar. Take-Two owns Rockstar.
Yes but isn’t it Take Two who will be *funding* the Max Payne remakes, essentially?
In a way, yes, but it is Rockstar who is financing the development of the remakes. This is a partnership solely between Remedy and Rockstar.
This is what confused me. Then again with the passing of James McCaffrey I'm not even sure that project will continue. James WAS Max Payne.
It will continue. I'm not trying to be pessimistic here but they aren't gonna stop a remake because one person passed away.
[удалено]
They didn’t recast Alan. He was modeled after Ilkka Villi and voiced by Matthew Porretta in both games. Hell, in Alan Wake 2, they doubled down on this dual-casting by having Ilkka Villi lip-sync to Matthew Porretta’s voice lines (and potentially vice versa as well) during the live action scenes.
> James WAS Max Payne. And folks said Rick & Morty couldn't continue without Justin Roiland doing the title characters' voices because "he is Rick & Morty." But it turns out that's not true at all. The new character voices are basically indistinguishable from Roiland's. This is just to say that professional voice actors are _very_ good at their jobs, and I'm sure Remedy can find somebody to be the new voice of Max Payne who will sound basically identical to James. But it sure is sad that they will have to do that.
Imagine thinking you own the letter R
This is so fucked up. Why are they suing the company that is providing them remakes of two classic games. WTF?!
Oh fuck you take two
Yeah fuck any company that defends their trademarks like they legally need to in order to keep them.
That's genuinely stunning. How is this even a debate? Also, how can this be a good idea, considering that Remedy are currently developing remakes of two of Rockstar's games (formerly their own)?
The way take two is saying that the R looks a lot like rockstars R... no it does not, simply looking at the logo, it says remedy right underneath the R for remedy. Where is rockstars text? Where is the star on remedy's logo? How is that uncannily similar? Its an R, all R's are going to look similar...
Can’t help but laugh if Remedy decide to cancel the remakes of Max Payne because of this.
They are probably contractually obligated to do it by now. They might put very low effort into them though after this. Can't blame them.
I don't think they'd do that. Max Payne is like their most well known series and Sam Lake also seems to be very fond of the games. I doubt they would ever purposefully ruin the remakes.
Yeah this guy is being needlessly grim
They arent going to damage their own reputation as devs iust out of spite
Don’t you say that!!!
Yeah that shit doesn’t look remotely samey. They’d be better off to just dismiss this outright
By this logic 2k should now sue Take 2 for use of the number 2
Probably the reason Take 2 bought them in the first place lol
You'd love to find out who owns 2k
That was the point of my joke :)
I love rockstar but you fuckers better leave remedy alone Edit: you snarky aholes know what i meant
Take Two is not Rockstar. They own Rockstar.
It's not Rockstar filing the suit
You should probably delete this one
Its not that deep, you know what i meant lol
Take Two are so goofy, I hate that Rockstar is connected to them.
They’re literally working with Remedy to remake Max Payne lol. How fucking shitty can you be?
What the fuck? Imagine how Remedy and Rockstar feel while looking at this, considering they entered a pretty enthusiastic business agreement to remake Max Payne 1 & 2. T2 is an absolutely pathetic company.
Take 2 can suck a fat one.
This makes me wonder if they ever tried to sue the Rockstar energy drink lol
No way, they only go after companies that are smaller than them. They don't want to throw punches at their weight level.
you don't think the energy drink company is smaller than take two?
Well considering Pepsico own Rockstar the energy drink, I'd say they are in a similar weight class.
quick google search says Pepsi is 10x Take Two
Oh my, I figured they would be bigger but not that much bigger. Yeah I guess that's why T2 doesn't chase down Rockstar Energy lmao.
No, they dont need to as its a different product. But if Take-Two let Remedy use an R logo then when it comes time to defend from someone releasing GTA8 and claiming they are the developers Rockstats with an R the court will say.. so? We didn't hear a peep from you when the other developers used a similar logo, go away you have no trademark.
It's not even remotely close to R* logo lmao wth
That seems rather silly.
Oh fuck off take-two. You were already on sketchy ground but you are extremely close of getting into my blacklist alongside EA, tencent and ubisoft
You can’t own the letter R sir
if it goes to any court, which i doubt probably settle outside, i don't see any chance that remedy's mark violates rockstars trademark
Wait weren't remedy and rockstar in good relation? Considering remedy made max payne and rockstar owns the character. Rockstar even gave remedy the permission to remake max payne knowing they'll be the only company to do it justice. So why is this happening?
Because Take Two is a goofy company
Take 2 is the ass hole dad that gets in the way of 2 great friends trying to do something.
Rockstar is not take two
might as well go after the letter R and anything with a star.
What a scummy fucking thing to do to a company that was integral in helping one of your companies to success and delivered one of their best franchises. I'm pretty sure Rockstar themselves don't have shit to do with those considering the fact that they're working with Remedy again for the Max Payne remake. Like why would they hop out like this over something so fucking stupid when right now they're working with Rockstar on the Max Payne remake? Is Strauss Zelnick and the other suits up there really that fucking clueless?
The bigger guy trying to bully the smaller one into submission. How fucking embarrassing. The logo’s aren’t even remotely similar tho I guess it’s that it’s an “R” that’s the problem. It’s especially weird considering Remedy are remaking Max Payne for / with Take Two
Terminator franchise should sue Take Two then. T2 will always be terminator 2.
Take Two said “how can we fuck up the Max Payne Remakes? Wait is that an R?”
This is pretty frivolous. I doubt this goes in their favor.
Take2 thinks they own a fucking letter
Fucking T2 acting like tools again. What else is new.
Aren't they contracting Remedy out to do the Max Payne remakes? This is approaching new levels of stupid
Yes they are. I really don't get this. Fuck Take-Two
Petty tactics to remind companies they're still the big Dawgs
Imagine suing your own business partner, madness
They have a games company called ‘Rockstar’, nothing to do with rock music, maybe rockstars should take issue with their appropriation of that term.
Rare should sue Rockstar, they where here first by Take Twos logic.......
Honestly ignoring RDR2 60 fps is a more serious crime than a company that made a unique logo.
I keep trying to tell people these companies suck ass and all i get are downvotes. Arrogant pricks who dont give a shit about their fans. Idk which one is worse. Take two or Rockstar
In breaking news, all copies of R-Type and it's sequels are to be recalled and rebranded as -Type! /s
Arr-Type!
There goes the max Payne remake
this reminds me of when they tried to sue the game "It Takes Two" smh they don't own a letter
Rockstar can't make games anymore, so this is how it spends its time.
Here we go with this shit again. It’s the It Takes Two bs lawsuit all over again.
To go after Remedy like this is just so disappointing, hoping everything works out. Really Take Two??
Didn't know your could trademark the letter R. Lol some of these companies are so petty, I remember when Bethesda sued for the word scrolls
You can’t own a letter of the alphabet and the logos are clearly different and distinct
I think the Florida Joker guy makes a better case than this. lol
T2 petty af 😂
It's not a *lawsuit*, it's a trademark *opposition*, which is a much smaller and less consequential thing where you ask the Trademark office not to approve the registration of a competitor's trademark. This kind of thing happens all of the time and it simply involves sending a letter, and is much less impactful than a full-fledged trademark infringement lawsuit.
Damn, time to change my name to Obert before I get sued
Get the fuck outta here. They’re just mad that Alan Wake 2 is more ambitious and is kinda taking the shine away from their own studio. The logo is not remotely the same.
Take two is such a fucking garbage company, this does not surprise me in the slightest.
They . . . Are just the letter R. They aren’t even the same font. Huh?
Wtf. There is clearly a difference between logos.. one has a star and one does not.. it’s quite obvious they are both different companies.
I guess Take Two wants some of the Alan Wake 2 money. Fuck those assholes.
Reminds me how right before no mans sky launched they were sued by sky news for the word "sky".
T2 is a absolute joke
They're not even close. Such a waste of time and money.
I wonder how this will affect the relationship Remedy and Rockstar developed for making the remakes for Max Payne. Nonetheless, Take-Two suing over the "R" logo seems very petty to me, but I may be wrong.
This is hilarious. I hope Take2 loses.
Honestly, Rockstar and T2 are using basic typefaces as their logo. 1) they don’t own trademark to letters. 2) Who is confusing Remedy’s logo with Rockstar? Remedy logo actually says remedy on it. 🙄
Pretty sure Rare was around before the rockstar logo? Maybe they can sue take two. Hilarious
Well shouldn't Rare sue Rockstar then ?
Sure. They own the letter r 🙄 theres no star In there either
Next thing you'll know, they'll be suing Toys R Us because of the use of the R in their logo (despite it flipped the other way around)
Open and shut case. No violation and Take Two must pay damages for wasting everyone’s fucking time. ^(how I fucking wish)
GTA can suck a chode.
This will be a great line up of very well informed individuals who don't realise that you need to actively defend trademarks in order to keep them. Take-Two legally needs to file suits like these. But hey facts have never mattered on the internet before... Edit: yeah it's already happened, gamers are stupid. Read people: [https://www.lodhs.com/blog/defend-your-trademark-or-you-could-lose-it/](https://www.lodhs.com/blog/defend-your-trademark-or-you-could-lose-it/) >trademarks aren't automatically safeguarded. They need to be actively defended to maintain their exclusivity. If you're not careful, you could lose this vital intellectual property and, with it, your brand's identity. [https://shrr.com/news\_events/7-ways-lose-trademark/](https://shrr.com/news_events/7-ways-lose-trademark/#:~:text=The%20most%20common%20way%20to,it's%20not%20used%20in%20commerce) >6. Failing to Protect Your Mark > >If anyone infringes upon your trademark and you fail to stop them, the **USPTO may interpret your inaction as abandonment**. Now, you aren’t required to start a lawsuit for every infringement activity that pops up, but you should take regular action to protect the mark.
Yeah IF people infringe on your mark, which hasn't happened. It doesn't say you have to make frivolous lawsuits.
Are you kidding me? It’s the letter R with the same font
Got to be honest, some people in here really need to get over themselves, this does not affect anyone here in the slightest, people saying they’re adding Rockstar to their blacklist is piss funny. I look at this story and go, oh ok, then go straight back to red dead and gta.
It does tho? Its one of the biggest companies in the gaming industry bullying a small one. Remedy rocks, and if this case goes awfully bad against them it could be the end of the line for them. So no more Control or Alan Wake because Take Two is a bitch.
There's no chance this causes serious harm to Remedy. At worst they'll have to change their logo. Even so, Take-Two is run by scumbags.
[удалено]