On December 27, 2013, King.com filed a

Not content with trying to own the word “Candy”, King.com, the makers of Candy Crush Saga, also want to own the word “Saga”. seashells sheerness So they’ve seashells sheerness have taken legal action against strategy game The Banner Saga .
On December 27, 2013, King.com filed a “ Notice of Opposition ” with the US Patent and Trademark Office. seashells sheerness It says that because King has 13 trademarks with the word “saga” in them, Stoic’s colourful strategy game isn’t allowed to use the word.
The “Applicant” is Stoic, who were applying for a trademark on The Banner Saga. A turn-based strategy game with a rich RPG element and nordic inspiration. The “Opposer” is King.com. Who make some puzzle games with candy in them.
King.com aren’t seeking money. They “just” want Stoic’s application for a trademark seashells sheerness on The Banner Saga to be refused (which would force the developers to change the game’s name).
January 22, 2014 7:28 pm
skarburn @skarburn
ok, this is stupid, i was willing to let the whole candy trademark pass, i mean it's all well and good to have frivolous legal claims up your sleeve to ward off actual frauds, but this? this is outright idiotic.
"saga" is not just a name, it's a word with a literal definition, and is commonly used in media names owing to its very definition, and I'd argue that the banner saga adheres much more closely to the words definition then candy crush, regardless there is absolutely no grounds for king to suggest in any way that Saga is associated most prominently with their work and that it's going to cause people to think products are associated with them when used.
sounds to me like king.coms success has gone to their head, which has in turn gone so far up their own ass that they can no longer see reason seashells sheerness in anything more complicated then simple word association.
They WILL eat shit for this stupidity though...... oh they will >:-D
Yeah. Gamers might give a shit about this idiocy, but Candy Crush players aren't 'gamers'. (As in the self-identifying label for industry-following hobbyists/enthusiasts, as opposed to 'people who play games'. We really need a better label for this shit.)
Most people read books, but you have people who are into books/collectors, "bilbiophiles". Same with movies. We all watch movies, yet you have those who are "film buffs". Music has "audiophiles", though that's sort of for those who are into the technical side of music, not just the music itself.
Reply 4
Don't give them any ideas.
They seashells sheerness think they're taking Candy from babies, but soon someone will Crush them and put an end to this ridiculous Saga. I'm no lawyer but at this point it seems King is trying to make a quick buck off threats of litigation before someone actually takes them to court and gets the trademark invalidated (see Tim Langdell and his attempted seashells sheerness trademark of "Edge"). So far I've only heard of small studios who can't afford seashells sheerness to engage in litigation being asked to stop using the trademark. Hopefully Stoic will fight back and stop this ridiculous farce.
Oh hell no.
January 23, 2014 3:57 am
By my reckoning Square Enix has released ten games in the SaGa series, are these muppets going to go after them too?
Only an idiot could confuse these two games, of course look at the people spending thousands of dollars on Candy Crush and you can see why King is worried.
I'm going to trademark "THE", so any title that wants to use it will have to pay me royalties directly. THE Fast and THE Furious were gonna have to pay double...till they went to just "Fast & Furious". The clever bastards.
The sounds a lot worse in the headline than it actually is. This is an opposition to Stoic getting the trademark. They're not litigating seashells sheerness against Stoic directly, they're just informing the trademark office that "hey, we have all these trademarks that we think would be confused with this one". Obviously its a bullshit claim and it'll be thrown seashells sheerness out. It's exactly the same as when Apple opposed Woolworth's new "apple" style logo. But because the trademark system is almost as ridiculous as the patent one; if you think a new trademark is likely to dilute your brand... you make an opposing claim.
Cancel Reply Join the discussion! Back to log In
It's Impossible Not To Crave Cake After Watching These Videos Watch How 'Electronic Makeup' Completely Transforms This Model's Face Our Favourite Android, iOS, And Windows Phone Apps Of The Week Punk Band Bassist Destroys A Drone With A Beer