MS Sneaks Gamerdad Name

If this is the wrong place to do this, just let me know and feel free to delete this.

Last Friday-ish, up on Gamerscore Blog, they highlighted a new column over on Xbox.com. It's called Gamer dad. I sat there with a dropped jaw when someone pointed this out to me yesterday. You see, that name has been in use by Andrew Bub for over three years.

It's not like they didn't know they were stealing the name. As you'll note right there in the top of the entry they pointed out the existence of the Gamerdad site. You gotta admire the cojones.

http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/archi...

Meh, it doesn't seem too bad to me. The fact that they provide a link makes it even less of an issue, I'd say. It's just a name, and not a particularly inventive one, at that.

I read about this on another site, and my jaw dropped. Cajones, indeed. Momgamer, you're affiliated with the Gamer Dad website (I assume you're probably the Gamer Mom to Andrew Bub's Gamer Dad). May I ask what steps he plans on taking?

Yeah, I could see it going either way. What are you going to do, though, sue them? Is the revenue you'd lose over this in any way comparable to the cost of going up against Microsoft legal and possibly losing?

Glad to see that the comments are already raking the guy over the coals.

KaterinLHC wrote:

I read about this on another site, and my jaw dropped. Cajones, indeed. Momgamer, you're affiliated with the Gamer Dad website (I assume you're probably the Gamer Mom to Andrew Bub's Gamer Dad). May I ask what steps he plans on taking?

I like to imagine it's the front steps into MicroSoft HQ, where he'll lock the doors and go all Sephiroth on the joint.

Of course, I'm kind of a violent person.

Morrolan, that's because you don't run a website that reviews games from all publishing companies on all platforms. If this gets tangled up in the Xbox brand it would be very very bad. There are other trademarked uses (like Gamerdad's character plug in for Freedom Force and the Third Reich) that could be affected as well.

I'm not his wife. We get that all the time. His wife's a neat lady, but she's not a gamer. He wanted a female voice on the site and on the forums and he went out and found me via my old articles on Grrlgamer. It kind of highlights the problem a bit, though. I mean, there's me, and GamerMom, and a Mommygamer, and a Gamermum and a bunch of other variants all over on our forums.

Andrew's got legal representation, and they're starting the ball rolling. I can't say more than that.

Mostly I'm just furious and trying to get the word out there so they realize what the heck they're doing.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Glad to see that the comments are already raking the guy over the coals.

Yeah, maybe if there is enough public outrage they'll just change it to something else and no harm done.

Well, I wish him (and you) best of luck. I can sympathize with how it must feel to have your brand hijacked like that. I'd be pissed as hell too. Maybe it was an honest mistake, but more likely, they didn't realise how big the GamerDad brand was. Keep us posted on what happens.

Morrolan, that's because you don't run a website that reviews games from all publishing companies on all platforms. If this gets tangled up in the Xbox brand it would be very very bad. There are other trademarked uses (like Gamerdad's character plug in for Freedom Force and the Third Reich) that could be affected as well.

These are decent points, that I hadn't thought of. So, I see why you're concerned. Still, I don't think there's any reason to be "furious." Again, it's just a name. If it's harmful, then take action (which you are.) But I don't think the guy is morally reprehensible, or anything.

Is the GamerDad name actually trademarked?

This sucks; I love the Gamerdad website and am very disappointed that MS didn't at least approach the admins given that they linked to the site. At least, they didn't approach the admins that we know of; if they did, that would be relevant info that we should hear about.

Morrolan wrote:

Is the GamerDad name actually trademarked?

Yes it is.

I look at it this way - imagine Microsoft decided to target the working gamer with a new column 'Gamer With Job' and then established it at Gamerwithjob.com. They established it as a 'tentpost' of their strategy to help working gamers find a community and resource.

Seems to me that the name is derivative, and that the idea is clearly infringement of 'prior art'.

I find it pretty offensive that MS would knowingly infringe on someone else's identity. It brings up a lot of interesting questions about what sort of steps blogs and smaller websites need to take to protect their name. Just because we're small doesn't mean we didn't work hard to create our brands, and I'm a little surprised that they are being quite so brazen about it.

USPTO website says that Andrew Bub registered the mark last June. That's good. A registered mark is very strong protection against infringement.

Just looked. $375 to register a trademark. Nothing for a company, kind of a big number for a small site. I'll see if I can't get Cory Doctorow on this...

I think this is really bad form. They roll over anyone that uses a MS trademarked title, but seem to feel that they do not have to stand the same level of scrutiny.

Good for him, I hope you guys win this one. I've always enjoyed GamerDad, and it isn't like there aren't plenty of similar names they could've come up with!

rabbit wrote:

I'll see if I can't get Cory Doctorow on this...

Good call. If there is anyone who can help with this sort of thing it is Doctorow and his Boingers.

This is one of my "gotothemat" topics. Personal branding is what the internet is all about.

If GamerDad was used as an Xbox live name, then I believe MS owns the rights to it.

thin argument. If I use "The Incredible Hulk" as an Xbox Live Name, I don't have the rights to go start a cool site about this superhero I made up, because "MSFT owns the rights to it".

GamerDad has been around since before the launch of XBOX live, and he registered the mark. I really can't see any "aww gee" in this at all.

If they had started this column and titled it "The Amazing Spiderman" or "Xerox Gamer" would you say the same?

(I'm infuriated at the moment. You're one of my favorite folks 1Dgaf, so I mean this not as a slam at all...)

1Dgaf wrote:

If GamerDad was used as an Xbox live name, then I believe MS owns the rights to it.

Nah, it doesn't work that way.

rabbit wrote:

thin argument. If I use "The Incredible Hulk" as an Xbox Live Name, I don't have the rights to go start a cool site about this superhero I made up, because "MSFT owns the rights to it".

GamerDad has been around since before the launch of XBOX live, and he registered the mark. I really can't see any "aww gee" in this at all.

If they had started this column and titled it "The Amazing Spiderman" or "Xerox Gamer" would you say the same?

(I'm infuriated at the moment. You're one of my favorite folks 1Dgaf, so I mean this not as a slam at all...)

I'm not saying MS are right to do this, nor am I saying their argument would hold well up in a court. I'll state my position again, with some background information.

When I signed up to Xbox live, I read the terms and conditions. I am almost positive that those terms and conditions had a clause in stating that, effectively, Gamertags became the property of MS. That is why my gamertag is IDg4f and not IDgaf. Indeed, that's also why my tag here is 1Dgaf and not IDgaf - I didn't know what GWJ's policy was when I signed up.

I am more than happy to be proved wrong, since - as you may have guessed - I don't think MS should steal people's ideas. But, before we get the pitchforks out, we need to see the contract that said the Dr. wouldn't make any monsters.

Just as an FYI, Andrew is the one that has that Gamertag as well.

1Dgaf wrote:

But, before we get the pitchforks out, we need to see the contract that said the Dr. wouldn't make any monsters.

Great line...

I think the issue of MS owning the gamertag has to do specifically with the gamertag and not any outside licenses in conflict with that. Rabbit's case still holds up that if I had a gamertag that was Darth Vader (or even D4rth V4der) MS couldn't suddenly go around claiming to own the copyright on the name, because it conflicts with an existing trademark. It's no less applicable in this case, because, as pointed out, Andrew owns the trademark on that name. I wonder if my gamertag was PS3, if MS could suddenly sue Sony for trademark infringement. I guarantee you that if they thought they'd win they would.

1Dgaf wrote:
rabbit wrote:

thin argument. If I use "The Incredible Hulk" as an Xbox Live Name, I don't have the rights to go start a cool site about this superhero I made up, because "MSFT owns the rights to it".

GamerDad has been around since before the launch of XBOX live, and he registered the mark. I really can't see any "aww gee" in this at all.

If they had started this column and titled it "The Amazing Spiderman" or "Xerox Gamer" would you say the same?

(I'm infuriated at the moment. You're one of my favorite folks 1Dgaf, so I mean this not as a slam at all...)

I'm not saying MS are right to do this, nor am I saying their argument would hold well up in a court. I'll state my position again, with some background information.

When I signed up to Xbox live, I read the terms and conditions. I am almost positive that those terms and conditions had a clause in stating that, effectively, Gamertags became the property of MS. That is why my gamertag is IDg4f and not IDgaf. Indeed, that's also why my tag here is 1Dgaf and not IDgaf - I didn't know what GWJ's policy was when I signed up.

I am more than happy to be proved wrong, since - as you may have guessed - I don't think MS should steal people's ideas. But, before we get the pitchforks out, we need to see the contract that said the Dr. wouldn't make any monsters.

The mere fact that a contract says something doesn't actually mean that it is enforceable.

God I'm looking forward to taking IP.

Wait, now I'm kind of concerned. "Farscry" is the name of one of the characters in the novels I've been working on (and off and on and off and on...) since high school oh so many years ago. I would be most displeased if MS were to be able to claim ownership of that name despite my prior usage and such.

If Terry Pratchett decided to play on XBox Live with the tag Rincewind, I can guarandamntee you MS would not own that name, regardless of the ToS.

The legal team must not have seen this, because there's no way they would have approved using a trademark, or anything close to the trademark. Bad business decision.

It's up on MetaFilter.