I didn't read the whole affair, but the examples given for valid game titles are ridiculous. Cyberpunk is considered a genre, and it would get really interesting if someone innocently touches the boundary. Because the word cyberpunk is especially attractive in a gaming context, so what if someone makes a game titled "Cyberpunk Dynasties"? Then it gets really interesting. And personal affections for CDPR aside, one has to consider that businesses can change, I have seen it so many times that I almost consider it a law of nature, so the trademarking of "Cyberpunk" for computer game naming/marketing creates a troublesome precedent. And the "brand confusion risk" argument is regularly used in a ridiculously exaggerated way.
I would be OK with it if the extent of the trademark was specifically limited to the naming format of "Cyberpunk 2077", because that's specific enough to argue possible confusion. But you can't (shouldn't) just trademark a part of a product title that also happens to be a general word. This reminds me way too much of the Fine Brothers affair with their react videos.
Do people also remember the Futurama episode where the only word left untrademarked for snacks was "Tasticles"? ;-)
I am also a bit wary when I just read in an article that CDPR got a "brand new franchise" coming, while it's nothing of the sorts, considering it is made with heavy influence from the Cyberpunk RPG creator. So it's in fact promising to be a very lucrative very established franchise. I don't know whether it was CDPR's or the press' wording, but I can't stand BS in general.
I would be OK with it if the extent of the trademark was specifically limited to the naming format of "Cyberpunk 2077", because that's specific enough to argue possible confusion. But you can't (shouldn't) just trademark a part of a product title that also happens to be a general word. This reminds me way too much of the Fine Brothers affair with their react videos.
Do people also remember the Futurama episode where the only word left untrademarked for snacks was "Tasticles"? ;-)
I am also a bit wary when I just read in an article that CDPR got a "brand new franchise" coming, while it's nothing of the sorts, considering it is made with heavy influence from the Cyberpunk RPG creator. So it's in fact promising to be a very lucrative very established franchise. I don't know whether it was CDPR's or the press' wording, but I can't stand BS in general.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hard to imagine that Cyberpunk 2077 would be an issues if Cyberpunk 2020 has been around this whole time and nothing happened.
I know this sounds like saying walking down train tracks is fine because nothing bad has happened so far, but I've found lawsuits usually happen at the first opportunity.
Hasn't come up yet, or it has, and was settled. I don't think CDPR would have gone with it if there was any doubt.
I know this sounds like saying walking down train tracks is fine because nothing bad has happened so far, but I've found lawsuits usually happen at the first opportunity.
Hasn't come up yet, or it has, and was settled. I don't think CDPR would have gone with it if there was any doubt.
I take it you didn't hear about the latest lawsuit vs Rockstar?
Apparently someone that did voiceover work for them 15 years ago died recently and an "professional" organization she belonged to is trying to sue for $500 million for the use of her likeness in the game.
Yes, that's right, she's dead and a bunch of people from a group she belonged to is trying to sue.
GOTTA LOVE IT!
Apparently someone that did voiceover work for them 15 years ago died recently and an "professional" organization she belonged to is trying to sue for $500 million for the use of her likeness in the game.
Yes, that's right, she's dead and a bunch of people from a group she belonged to is trying to sue.
GOTTA LOVE IT!