[Portions]

What trademark do they have to "advertise" to be able to keep it? Could it be possible they released this new book, which could fit conveniently under the agreement to keep the trademark they plan to use for something else?

I'm pretty sure if they advertise the game it will count as using all 3 trademarks.

[Louise Dennis]

I'm pretty sure if they advertise the game it will count as using all 3 trademarks.

No, i mean, what if they released that new Inferno book just so they could keep the trademarks without announcing a game.

[brandon frier]

No, i mean, what if they released that new Inferno book just so they could keep the trademarks without announcing a game.

That's a pretty good point, hadn't thought of that.

[pinar]

No, i mean, what if they released that new Inferno book just so they could keep the trademarks without announcing a game.

They would have to call it Skyrim then, which would be rather odd. And I don't know if advertising a book would be the same as advertising a game, when the trademark on the line is for a game and not a book.

[Bellismydesi]

They would have to call it Skyrim then, which would be rather odd. And I don't know if advertising a book would be the same as advertising a game, when the trademark on the line is for a game and not a book.

It couldn't have other words, just including Skyrim, in the title?

[Gracie Dugdale]

It couldn't have other words, just including Skyrim, in the title?

technically the name "Skyrim" is what is being TM'd. So it would likely have to at least have Skyrim in there. At least that's my understanding

[Poetic Vice]

Question:

October 2004 issue of GameInformer (138) was the Oblivion reveal cover. It would have come out between 9/5/2004 and 9/10/2004.

On elderscrolls.com Bethesda lists their press release stating that Oblivion was in development on October 24, 2004 (well after the October issue would have been in our hands).

IGN reported Oblivion was being made on 9/10/2004 with a statement from Bethesda...

Why does this all seem so wrong?

[Melissa De Thomasis]

Question:

October 2004 issue of GameInformer (138) was the Oblivion reveal cover. It would have come out between 9/5/2004 and 9/10/2004.

On elderscrolls.com Bethesda lists their press release stating that Oblivion was in development on October 24, 2004 (well after the October issue would have been in our hands).

IGN reported Oblivion was being made on 9/10/2004 with a statement from Bethesda...

Why does this all seem so wrong?

http://www.elderscrolls.com/news/news_0403.htm (Scroll down to 09.10.04)

So nothing is wrong, it was announced on 9/10. The article on elderscrolls.com in October must have been late for some reason. They are known to be late. For example, it took them weeks after The Infernal City was out for them to post about it's release on the elderscrolls.com.

[Oyuki Manson Lavey]

Their new Bethblog entry has New Vegas in case anyone cares... http://www.bethblog.com

Check out my epic comment down there... hehe you'll know who I am.

[Lance Vannortwick]

http://www.elderscrolls.com/news/news_0403.htm (Scroll down to 09.10.04)

So nothing is wrong, it was announced on 9/10. The article on elderscrolls.com in October must have been late for some reason. They are known to be late. For example, it took them weeks after The Infernal City was out for them to post about it's release on the elderscrolls.com.

You're right! It is very odd with the 10/24 thing, silly Bethesda... even after announcing they wait to announce, like a month and a half...

[james kite]

No, i mean, what if they released that new Inferno book just so they could keep the trademarks without announcing a game.

No good, since the trademarks relate to video games and clothing, not books. They have to announce TES:V Skyrim as the next game in the series if they intend to hang onto the trademarks.

To summarize the recent developments:

1) There's no reason to renew those trademarks to the skin of their teeth if they are just going to be dropped at the end of it all.

2) July GI is not TES:V, leaving one more to contain it (two at a stretch).

3) Pete Hines said E3 was not the place to look for announcements, and stated that QuakeCon would be the most likely place to look for them, as well as saying that Bethesda and ID are looking to boost the appeal of that convention.

4) GStaff cleared up the rumours regarding a 'secret' announcement by Bethesda in http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1094662-e3-2010/page__st__160, and SyltStrider recently found evidence that Bethesda had not claimed to have a secret announcement, but simply refused to comment on their E3 showlisting. It's worth considering that their E3 listing seen on the Bethblog probably hadn't been published when Famitsu ran their 'secret announcement' survey.

Conclusion? Don't get your hopes up for E3, even though it is still a possibility (we know how devious Bethesda can be). They clearly intend to use that trademark though, which ends at the start of August. An announcement before it expires, coupled with an August or September Game Informer cover, with the promise of a QuakeCon demonstration or first-ever trailer is a tantalizingly believable outcome.

[Rob Davidson]

I can't see Bethesda actually showing gameplay of ESV at QuakeCon. They don't show gameplay until the game is some short months to release.

[Megan Stabler]

technically the name "Skyrim" is what is being TM'd. So it would likely have to at least have Skyrim in there. At least that's my understanding

and my understanding of the terms is that advertising the trademark doesn't count as simply tossing the name around as if to have no relevance to the product it's for. i think they would have to say somewhere that the book is based on "the upcoming game blah blah blah," or something like that, to count.

[LuBiE LoU]

I can't see Bethesda actually showing gameplay of ESV at QuakeCon. They don't show gameplay until the game is some short months to release.

But what would be the point of Pete Hines' comment if they didn't plan on showing anything? :shrug:

I mean I guess they could show off their published games there but that would draw in far fewer Bethesda fans.

[Jah Allen]

I am a bit curious at this point,
on a scale of 1 - 10 where is the speculation leading.

1 being I should take a nap for a while
10 being I should line up at [videogame store]

There has been so much jibberey-droo that I don't think I have the energy to put the dots together myself.
Can't even spell right.

[Cathrine Jack]

But what would be the point of Pete Hines' comment if they didn't plan on showing anything? :shrug:

I mean I guess they could show off their published games there but that would draw in far fewer Bethesda fans.

I'm still having a hard time even imagining something like The Elder Scrolls V being at QuakeCon. Yes, Pete Hines said they'd rather show things there, but that doesn't mean ESV. Now, we know that they're going to be showing Doom 4 there, so that may be what Pete is talking about.

[carrie roche]

and my understanding of the terms is that advertising the trademark doesn't count as simply tossing the name around as if to have no relevance to the product it's for. i think they would have to say somewhere that the book is based on "the upcoming game blah blah blah," or something like that, to count.

Well to your point, I specifically referenced the expiring trademarks, so in order to file for the SOU they needed to at least advertise them in more than one state-- not reference a product with another product.

[Cheville Thompson]

I'm still having a hard time even imagining something like The Elder Scrolls V being at QuakeCon. Yes, Pete Hines said they'd rather show things there, but that doesn't mean ESV. Now, we know that they're going to be showing Doom 4 there, so that may be what Pete is talking about.

I agree with you 100%. I love me my FPS games too and I have always wanted to attend QuakeCon, so I follow it every year from a far... it really isn't going to get the best reception there unless there is an imagining of TESV that makes it an FPS, and a multiplayer version at that... can I just puke in my shoes right now if that is true... I like my Mass Effects but don't go making my one true love TES an FPS...

[Chloe :)]

I am a bit curious at this point,
on a scale of 1 - 10 where is the speculation leading.

1 being I should take a nap for a while
10 being I should line up at [videogame store]

There has been so much jibberey-droo that I don't think I have the energy to put the dots together myself.
Can't even spell right.

I'd say 7-8. Their Skyrim trademarks are expiring very soon, and we know they still want to use them as they renewed one as early as March. And with the info SyltStryder got, there's a really good chance they'll announce it before the end of July. If they don't, however, and the trademarks expire, it'll go back down to a 1 as we wait for them to apply for new trademarks, which could take anywhere from a few months to a year if they plan on using the Skryim trademark. The trademark expiring is pretty much the end of the world as far as TES V speculation is concerned.

I'm still having a hard time even imagining something like The Elder Scrolls V being at QuakeCon. Yes, Pete Hines said they'd rather show things there, but that doesn't mean ESV. Now, we know that they're going to be showing Doom 4 there, so that may be what Pete is talking about.

Maybe. I suppose it's just wishful thinking on my part.

[Hayley Bristow]

Well to your point, I specifically referenced the expiring trademarks, so in order to file for the SOU they needed to at least advertise them in more than one state-- not reference a product with another product.

so all it takes is simply using the name?

when you say "advertise," what exactly is it you're saying they have to advertise? is it the game with the trademark or can they just get on Twitter and say "Skyrim" and leave it at that?

[Stat Wrecker]

so all it takes is simply using the name?

when you say "advertise," what exactly is it you're saying they have to advertise? is it the game with the trademark or can they just get on Twitter and say "Skyrim" and leave it at that?

My conversation, almost verbatim was:

"Can a company satisfy the requirement to file for a statement of use without actually selling a product?" I referenced the Skyrim trademarks specifically so that the answer would be clear.

His answer:
"All you need to do is prove that you have advertised the product in more than one state to prove a statement of use."

Me:
"So if they announced the game and said it would be for sale in all 50 states, this would satisfy the requirement?"

Bland man:
"Absolutely. We don't ask for sales receipts."

I never asked for a definition of the word "advertise".

[Robyn Lena]

My conversation, almost verbatim was:

"Can a company satisfy the requirement to file for a statement of use without actually selling a product?" I referenced the Skyrim trademarks specifically so that the answer would be clear.

His answer:
"All you need to do is prove that you have advertised the product in more than one state to prove a statement of use."

Me:
"So if they announced the game and said it would be for sale in all 50 states, this would satisfy the requirement?"

Bland man:
"Absolutely. We don't ask for sales receipts."

I never asked for a definition of the word "advertise".

Please guys, lets not argue for the rest of this topic over what constitutes an advertisemant. I think Bethesda will know how to advertise the game enough to meet the requirement for the SOU.

[Queen Bitch]

My conversation, almost verbatim was:

"Can a company satisfy the requirement to file for a statement of use without actually selling a product?" I referenced the Skyrim trademarks specifically so that the answer would be clear.

His answer:
"All you need to do is prove that you have advertised the product in more than one state to prove a statement of use."

Me:
"So if they announced the game and said it would be for sale in all 50 states, this would satisfy the requirement?"

Bland man:
"Absolutely. We don't ask for sales receipts."

I never asked for a definition of the word "advertise".

Thanks for making the call, man.

If they drop a three second teaser trailer with the name Skyrim somewhere on it, it'll count.

[Daniel Brown]

Please guys, lets not argue for the rest of this topic over what constitutes an advertisemant. I think Bethesda will know how to advertise the game enough to meet the requirement for the SOU.

i meant no argument behind my comments, i was just clarifying because i wasn't understanding. i apologize if it came out negatively.

[Dona BlackHeart]

i meant no argument behind my comments, i was just clarifying because i wasn't understanding. i apologize if it came out negatively.

I didn't mean that you were, my comment was directed toward the fact that we argue about really trivial things in this thread, and I didn't want to start arguing about some new trivial thing. I didn't mean that you were doing it.