Ubisoft Disputes EA Trademark for "Ghost" [UPDATE]

EA's trademark could "cause confusion" as it relates to Ubisoft's Ghost Recon franchise, publisher claims.

136 Comments

[UPDATE] A NeoGAF forum member has discovered that EA has withdrawn its trademark application for "Ghost." However, it is unclear what impact this may have on EA's Ghost Games, the developer of Need for Speed. We will update this post with new information as we learn more.

The original story is below.

Ubisoft has taken issue with the fact that Electronic Arts sought to trademark "Ghost" for its new studio over claims and concerns that it would "cause confusion" with Ubisoft's Ghost Recon franchise.

No Caption Provided

As spotted by a NeoGAF user, Ubisoft filed a notice of opposition against EA on January 29 over the company's two trademark applications for the word "Ghost." These are serial numbers: 86568852, 86568854. Ghost Games is the name of the EA-owned Need for Speed developer based in Sweden that put out the new Need for Speed game in November.

In fact, Ubisoft began its action against EA last summer, only just now publishing its official notice of opposition. In the notice, Ubisoft points out that it has used its Ghost Recon trademark since at least as early as 2001, while EA filed its initial trademark applications for Ghost in March 2015.

Ubisoft is referred to as "Opposers" in the document, while EA is known as "Applicant." Here's a particularly noteworthy section from the notice of opposition:

"Applicant's Mark so resembles Opposers' GHOST RECON marks alleged herein as to be likely, when used in connection with the goods and services identified in the Applications, to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive. Consumers are likely to believe, mistakenly, that the goods and services Applicant offers under Applicant’s Mark are provided, sponsored, endorsed, or approved by Opposers, or are in some way affiliated, connected, or associated with Opposers, all to the detriment of Opposers. Registration of Applicant's Mark, therefore, should be refused under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1052(d) and 1063."

You can read the full document here.

EA apparently has until March 9 to respond to Ubisoft's claims, while the trial schedule--should there be a trial--is outlined below.

No Caption Provided

Both EA and Ubisoft declined to comment.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 136 comments about this story
136 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for gledr
gledr

34

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By gledr

Trade marks are stupid unless you invented the word brand new youndont own it. Candy crush ruined businesses because it trademarked candy so companies that had used it for their products had to switch or pay them a lot. I am also looking forward to COD Ghosts wildlands

2 • 
Avatar image for milk
MILK

688

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

This is kind of a funny reversal, since EA was the one that destroyed the copyright troll that owned the word 'edge', and now they're trying to copyright troll a common word themselves.

2 • 
Avatar image for Ignitz
Ignitz

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

you meant this troll? it's somewhat convincing that they donate 90% of its profits, given their website interface. uneducated person like me can only wonders on how the law system (copyrights) works here in the US.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fallenrazgriz
fallenrazgriz

35

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Anyone else looking forward to that Call of Duty: Ghosts sequel later this year? Wildlands, I believe it's called.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ltjohnnyrico
LTJohnnyRico

6075

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

@fallenrazgriz: I'm looking forward to Wildlands looks awesome !! and Nothing like COD !!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Veemon_X
Veemon_X

703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By Veemon_X

This was silly. I think that if games had a basic word prior to an attempt to trademark that word, the trademark shouldn't be possible. I can understand the full title: "Series name: Ghost something" or some unique combo "Ghostbusters". A simple word by itself though, ehhh...

The only impact I can think of is if the trademark had gone through, I wouldn't be picking up any of EA's games anytime soon. Negligible I know, not even an actual impact to the point where impact is even a concept.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for TashunkoSapa
TashunkoSapa

484

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Damn, everyone is trying to eat Ubisoft's breakfast lately.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for loqma73bd53bsia
loqma73bd53bsia

228

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By loqma73bd53bsia

as of 2:43 AM PST, February 28, 2016, I hereby proclaim the rights to the words "Me", "I", "I Am" and "I'm."as well as any other iterations of that word or its meaning.

have fun talking about yourself in third person from now on fuckheads. i own all of you.

3 • 
Avatar image for moonco
Moonco

3848

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Moonco  Moderator

I tried to trademark the word "troll" but the judge just laughed at me

6 • 
Avatar image for zyxahn
zyxahn

424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

You don't think they are both in on it do you ??? >_<

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mkeezay22
mkeezay22

974

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Edited By mkeezay22

Man the world we live in is messed up, I understand the right to protect your work or intellectual property, but the system has gone too far, when words out of the dictionary can be trademarked that's a problem, in this case it didn't happen because of the conflict, but usually it does work and simple sayings or even a single word being owned just seems very wrong.

There is actually a lot of evidence that the culture we've created is an anti evolutionary system, by not sharing ideas we don't grow as fast, obviously this shouldn't mean you can just steal any idea you want, but it's going to be interesting to see what kind of effect this will actually have, right now the average IQ is dropping every year, this wasn't true even 50 years ago, but something has slowed our progress and every new generation is actually devolving on average, and it could be the way capitalism has made information exchange harder than ever

3 • 
Avatar image for gledr
gledr

34

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@mkeezay22:

Its because throughout human history once people got to a certain level in society they just gave up on evolving romans had plumbing back in B.C. but they never really changed even though they where on top for 400 years.then we forgot until the renaissance forgot again until 100 years ago.

People only change when they have to

2 • 
Avatar image for West123
West123

716

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By West123

@mkeezay22: "average IQ is dropping every year"

that is nonsense IQ is not based on education a bush man should be able to take a test with out having any formal education and any IQ test that uses words or math is false

back to your statement which implies that education is some sort of force that determines an individual IQ you do understand that we are the same HUMANS that built the pyramids

if you took an average ancient Egyptian and an average modern Egyptian the modern one will have a far greater understanding of the way the world works and with you measure of IQ....he/she would be called a genius because he has the good grace of the collective mind eg the internet and modern media that has boosted all of our understanding of the universe and everything in it

in closing IQ can not be measured by the group and can not be measured by level of education high IQs people are born into any and all periods of human existence just as low ones are

2 • 
Avatar image for mkeezay22
mkeezay22

974

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

@West123: lol I know what an IQ test is, what the word math has to do with my post I have no idea, proof from the UK
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2730791/Are-STUPID-Britons-people-IQ-decline.html
Proof from the west http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/researchers-western-iqs-dropped-14-points-over-last-180634194.html

We're talking about average IQ, it has fallen especially hard in the last couple decades, obviously the average person todaty would know more information than Egyptians, info is not intelligence, an IQ test is testing your brains ability to solve problems, not remember information, so actually the IQ difference would not be as large as you think, 100 is almost average IQ, 65 is mentally disabled or challenged, now do you think a bunch of mentally challenged people built the pyramids, actually their problem solving skills show they likely had very high IQs, I think you need to actually know what an IQ is before you continue this conversation.

and yes IQ can and has been measured and put into averages for a long time, it's an average, you can't say it isn't possible lol, it's done all the time, obviously IQ tests aren't given in groups but you can calculate the average simply, your comment about Egyptians thinking of us as genius is also pretty flawed, considering one of them could calculate a stars position without the help of a phone, in fact lots of technology keeps us from getting smarter, when your phone thinks for you it gives you no reason to.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for KotomineKirei
KotomineKirei

457

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mkeezay22:

I do not think that capitalism is the problem.

The problem is the same one that appears in every system that looks good in theory. People and a lack of resources for those people.

If people did not have to worry about resources, there would be no need for things like trademarks.

3 • 
Avatar image for gledr
gledr

34

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By gledr

@KotomineKirei:

Resources arw not scarce. 1 there are enough houses in the U.S for every single person in the U.S to have their own. 2 we throw away 40% of our food enough to feed all the homeless people. And 3 money wise if you took half of the 1 %s money everone could easily be middle class instead of lower class and low middle the middle class is almost non existent

My stupid phone wont let me copy and paste the url so just search actual wealth dispersion and watch the youtube video

Upvote • 
Avatar image for KotomineKirei
KotomineKirei

457

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By KotomineKirei

@gledr:

"there are enough houses in the U.S for every single person in the U.S"

Imagine ten times the current number of people. Do you still have enough houses?

"we throw away 40% of our food enough to feed all the homeless people."

Are you saying that we should monitor and control how much everyone eats?

Who will do that? How will you fairly distribute it? Can you calculate exactly what and how much each person needs?

Can you enforce such a thing? If a person wants to eat two kinds of dessert, will you deny them that?

"if you took half of the 1 %s money everone could easily be middle class"

Sure, but then how do we progress? What incentive is there? If it is a one time distribution, then what of the people unable to keep their money? Those who do not know how to manage it or have issues keeping them from doing so?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Ayato_Kamina_1
Ayato_Kamina_1

632

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@KotomineKirei: Capitalism is the problem. It stifles development and creativity in pursuit of financial gains for an individual party.

Just look at Edison and Tesla. Tesla was the inventor who envisioned a better world. Edison was the inventor who lined his pockets and discredited Tesla in an effort to protect his own financial interests.

3 • 
Avatar image for gledr
gledr

34

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By gledr

@Ayato_Kamina_1: edison didnt even invent the light bulb some welsh dude did 50 years before. Plus tesla wanted to make electricity free for everyone but eddison screwed him

Upvote • 
Avatar image for West123
West123

716

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@KotomineKirei: have you been hungry? we have abundance of things in our world the problem is capitalism putting a insane markup on the goods we consume

one nation throws away tons of uneaten food while the other starves....

capitalism is the problem because it requires scarcity to function... make men believe the resource's in those $200 head phones are scarce...make men believe that $100,000 car is worth that only to find it has devalued to half its worth in 5 years

3 • 
Avatar image for KotomineKirei
KotomineKirei

457

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@West123:

@Ayato_Kamina_1:

I will not argue that capitalism creates the illusion that things are more scarce than they actually are, or that it still stifles progress, but has there ever been a system that did not have those issues? A system where no one was poor and humanity significantly progressed in many areas? As far as I am aware, there has not been such a system.

All of the systems that have been used have not achieved anything that significant. Many systems start out with big dreams, but in the end they all fail. So, is the problem merely capitalism as is being suggested?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Smosh150
Smosh150

2548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Thank you, companies and individuals just need to screw off sometimes when it comes to trademarks. The one that still disgusts me to no end was the whole issue with the Banner Saga using the term "Saga", then we had a successful mobile game company jump in and dispute the usage against a dev with a quality game that was not some ripoff phone app(A blatant ripoff in style and name of a prior game created recently before Candy Crush. People just make me sick sometimes, these disputes and what people are able to do with the law is just plain petty.

2 • 
Avatar image for louixiii
LouiXIII

9013

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Of course they would lol

2 • 
Avatar image for Fia1
Fia1

861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

my god... even people diss ubisoft for trying to stop ea with the trademark of a common word like "ghost" this hate for ubisoft is borderline crazy, the evil guy here is ea, not ubisoft...

3 • 
Avatar image for KotomineKirei
KotomineKirei

457

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Fia1:

Neither of them are really good here.

Though I suppose that in this case you could say that Ubisoft is the lesser of two evils...

2 • 
Avatar image for Link3301
Link3301

2001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 103

User Lists: 0

@KotomineKirei: What wrong did Ubisoft do in this situation specifically. They have all right to protect their intellectual property.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for KotomineKirei
KotomineKirei

457

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By KotomineKirei

@Link3301:

All I am saying is that they are not really the "good guys" in this situation. Not that they are doing anything wrong per se.

They are only doing it to protect their IP. It is not as if they are doing it because they consider it wrong to trademark a simple word, and it would not surprise me in the least if they tried to do something like this somewhere down the line.

2 • 
Avatar image for Thanatos2k
Thanatos2k

15519

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Good. Not only should spurious trademark attempts like this be rejected, the applicants should be severely fined.

6 • 
Avatar image for ltjohnnyrico
LTJohnnyRico

6075

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

@Thanatos2k: Agreed !! EA were wrong to try it .. but its the culture that needs to end !!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ltjohnnyrico
LTJohnnyRico

6075

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

Edited By LTJohnnyRico

@7tizz: Ubisoft were doing exactly that .. stopping someone trying to spuriously trademark a word !!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for SkytheWiz1
SkytheWiz1

2615

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Edited By SkytheWiz1

I guess "To the surprise of absolutely no one" didn't all fit in the article's title.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for balrogbane
Balrogbane

1051

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 63

User Lists: 5

That's such a common word how could you possibly think you could trademark it? I mean that would be insane. Like trying to trademark the word 'react' or something.

2 • 
Avatar image for berserker66666
berserker66666

1754

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

Someone's been following the steps of FineBros.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for xenomorphalien
XenomorphAlien

5113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

Stupid EA for trademarking ghosts.

Stupid Ubisoft for trying to make a fuss.

3 • 
Avatar image for Smosh150
Smosh150

2548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

@xenomorphalien: I fail to see how Ubisoft is at fault here. The trademarking of Ghost could be a possible threat to certain franchises owned by Ubisoft. Legitimate reason to cause a fuss, it also brings how poor the US patent/trademarking system more to light as well.

2 • 
Avatar image for SkytheWiz1
SkytheWiz1

2615

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

@xenomorphalien: Well, unfortunately, in this day and age, if Ubi hadn't stepped up, some dumbass might've actually approved this for EA.

You can't tell me that you have yet to see something dumber happen.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for overachiever89
Overachiever89

394

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@xenomorphalien: I think the creators of Casper the friendly ghost should get in on this dispute.

2 • 
Avatar image for xenomorphalien
XenomorphAlien

5113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

@overachiever89: True.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DeadrisingX1
DeadrisingX1

1850

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 157

User Lists: 0

Edited By DeadrisingX1

Freakin' Hell...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Daian
Daian

2847

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Edited By Daian

This is dumb. I didn't see them say anything when CoD Ghosts came out. They don't own a common word.

4 • 
Avatar image for OldDirtyCR
OldDirtyCR

108

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Daian: Ding...Ding...Ding...

EA wants to trademark a COMMON word. That's the problem here. That's why Ubisoft is concerned.

4 • 
Avatar image for Wraith3
Wraith3

560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

If you're going to go stupid, go full stupid and try to patent "the" or "I'...

Upvote •