It's on their web site, IIRC quoted in the other thread on the subject. They go on about how UbiSoft is evil because they went ahead with the US release despite the band's objections, as if the band has some claim to the name in the US.Originally Posted by KinchBlade
I have no Sympathy for a band that's getting a free shot to the spotlight because something else used their name. It's not like either group chose the name to spite the other after all.
To be entirely blunt though I just think the band really wanted their material to be put into the game and saw the name conflict as a way to force Ubi's hand.
The problem with trademarks is you lose them if you don't defend them. So the band either had to defend their name or change it; if they just went along with the UK/EU release, in a year or so Ubi could sue them for exclusive use of the name....
Exactly. From what i read they contacted Ubi to work out an agreement, and as the filing deadline for a dispute approached they had received no response. Left with no other options, they filed. The guy/band had every right to file the dispute, and was almost obligated to do so if he wanted to prevent one being filed against him in the future. Now Ubi is spending loads of money on lawyers and facing lost revenue due to delayed releases.
I wonder how it would have all worked out if they had just been able to discuss this prior to the dispute being filed.
OMG That stupid interface is freaking out my eyes!!!
EWWWWW!!!
Despite public perception, litigation is expensive for companies, too, and they generally try to avoid it. My guess is the band wasn't being as reasonable as they say they were, or Ubi looked at their demands and decided the cost/benefit calculation came down in favor of pressing the issue.
Posting Permissions
Steel_Nirvana
Reply With Quote