Ex-Game Maker Atari To Argue To The US PTO That Only It Can Make 'Haunted House' Games
from the huh? dept
We noted several years ago that Atari, once the king of the video game industry, has since devolved into a zombie company built only for intellectual property trolling. Copyright, trademark, or patents: Atari will use all of them to try to milk the modern gaming industry for cash. In fact, in past public statements, Atari has made it clear that it has no interest in producing any new games, instead relying on its remaining staff to license its trademarks and port a few decades-old games over to the mobile market. Quite a fall for the once giant of the industry.
And that fall will now include going in front of the PTO's Appeal Board to explain why Atari and Atari alone should be allowed to title a game using the phrase "Haunted House." Why? Well, because it made a game called Haunted House in the early 80's, you see.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has set oral arguments for Atari’s claim against developer Hazy Dreams of Infinity over its use of “Haunted House” in the game Haunted House Tycoon. Atari and defendant Andrew Greenberg, Hazy Dreams founder, present oral arguments on Thursday. In 2011, Atari filed a “notice of opposition” against the Hazy Dreams in an effort to prevent the developer from launching the game, which is still in development. The classic-gaming publisher’s stance is that it owns that trademark in the gaming industry after releasing Haunted House in 1982 for the Atari 2600 console — although Atari did not file for that mark until 2010.So Atari is going to bully a current game maker over a generic term it once used on a game it made over three decades ago, but didn't trademark until 2010. It's hard to think of an example that better shows how trademark law is abused today, deviating from its intended purpose and spirit. There's no customer confusion here to worry about. Nobody is going to mistake Atari's block graphics for the modern Haunted House Tycoon title. This is simply a bullying tactic, likely to generate licensing revenue. That's what Atari is now, after all.
Greenberg, of course, isn't pleased.
“Trying to claim no one else can use the words ‘Haunted’ and ‘House’ is especially ridiculous, considering games have been using the term ‘Haunted House” in titles ever since Magnavox released a game by that name for the Odyssey in 1972,” he said in a statement. “Atari has a horrible reputation for attacking independent game developers, including recently going after TxK developer Jeff Minter,” the Hazy Dreams of Infinity president said.That's true, of course, but the folks running Atari these days don't care about that reputation. It isn't the public that is making them money, after all.
All of this comes as Atari has lost much of its original identity. The company, which has shifted from owner to owner over time, filed for bankruptcy in 2013. It emerged later that year under the ownership of venture capitalist Frederic Chesnais, who says that company is now 10 people primarily responsible for managing its past assets.Ten people working for a company designed to troll actual makers of gaming content, potentially successfully blocking the release of a game because it carries a fairly generic phrase in its title? Yeah, we've gotten so far away from the original purpose of trademark at this point that it's basically unrecognizable.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: appeals, games, haunted house, pto, trademark, video games
Companies: atari
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
plonking
i may have a small penis but who cares when you are a gay submissive bitch to men.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This will continue
At present US practice doesn't routinely require the loser to pay costs in these cases. Hence it is inevitable that the defendant will balance the cost of fighting (and winning) against a modest licencing fee and accept the fee.
Winning such a case should never leave the defendant out of pocket.
This is true in other countries - which is why the US has more problems than the ret of the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This will continue
Legitimate small time inventor wants to sue Mega Corp for patent infringement. While he may have a good case if he fails to win he could be on the hook for $zillions in paying Mega Corp's attorney fees. Small time inventor cannot take such a risk and is now denied justice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This will continue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This will continue
Here in real life, and not in magical fairyland storytime, “legitimate small-time inventors” face both the steep cost (in time and money) of obtaining a patent and the business-sinking expense of bringing suit against Mega Corp, so Mega Corp is already quite well protected against small upstarts. Tort reform of this kind would not meaningfully change the situation for Joe Genius (especially if, like the fairytale claims, his brilliant invention is both original and currently being copied by Mega Corp, making his case a slam-dunk), but it may very well discourage the kind of abusive behavior at issue here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reputation
Or maybe they do. It's just that that's the reputation they want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right there is the root of the problem. Venture capitalists have rarely done anything positive for any industry ever.
I have seen far too many product lines go from gold to sludge at the bottom of the septic tank.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jake is looking a little too square for Atari.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The people running Atari do not understand intellectual property
The first and most obvious thing they did wrong makes their argument completely invalid. There are already other haunted house games. Atari needs to qualify their request by adding "... on a computer". The charm of that magical incantation would cure all defects in their patent application.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, I'm not sure how they got the mark in 2010, come to think of it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry Atari, you weren't the first...
The original Magnavox Odyssey gaming system from the early 70s (1972) used multiple potentiometer based controllers to move a "ghost" through the haunted house, who's graphics were made by "clings" statically attached to the front of the television.
So really, Magnavox had the "original" Haunted House Video Game.
Sorry Atari.
Doing a search for "Magnavox Odyssey Haunted House" will bring up several sites with plenty of historical information.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry Atari, you weren't the first...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry Atari, you weren't the first...
That would seem to me to be a point of contention.
Magnavox did it first. Atari did it second. Neither trademarked it.
Now a new company in what feels like identity thieves of Atari claimed trademark on a product well after it hadn't been used in over a decade, closer to three decades.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry Atari, you weren't the first...
And its SUING people all over the world for this stuff.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Atari "Haunted House"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Atari "Haunted House"
Right? I believe their use in 1972 predates Atari's use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You have a shadowy group of people paying 10 people to extract millions from people actually creating things. Once upon a time the system worked where people would build upon what came before, now what came before cannibalizes the present at the expense of the future.
We still have creative people, but many dare not share with the world because these zombies of the past will devour them. This is the mentality that has run unchecked, and might help explain why anything innovative as treated as the devil out to steal their souls, because it might change how everything works.
In 10 years when a Kim Kardasian Enterprises is demanding a cut from all celebutant faked sex tapes, might we finally figure out this was a bad idea? Pity it'll probably be to late... our culture is dying because we keep feeding fat zombies and letting them call the shots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Atari Is A Haunted House
As many as 10 ghoulish soul-suckers roam the halls there, drawing the life-force from the living.
So don't wear a red-shirt, don't be black, don't split up, and whatever you do, don't develop new games and content, cuz here there be demons.
You say you don't believe in ghost stories, USPTO? Well, you'd best start deary, cuz you're in one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The lesson's quite simple: never buy anything from Atari. Not now. Not ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's basically a fake shell that bought the ghostly remnants of a software house' name and used it to pretend to be that company.
It's like if I suddenly say I'm the second coming of Jesus..no matter how much I repeat it, he's still a fictional character...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's a lot older than that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mockery
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mockery
[ link to this | view in chronology ]