A lawsuit against Activision over the use of a vehicle in Call of Duty has been ongoing for several years. This lawsuit could set a precedent for the gaming and film industries. Now, there has been another exchange of sharp words from the publisher.
About this lawsuit: In 2017, the company AM General, a producer of military and civilian specialty vehicles, sued the well-known player publisher Activision.
This legal dispute is still unresolved. Just last week, there was another encounter in court.
Why is there actually a lawsuit? The reason for AM General’s lawsuit was a military vehicle from the company, which Activision used in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare from 2009 – the famous Humvee (HMMWV).
According to AM General, the company’s protected trademarks were used illegally and without consultation in numerous “Call of Duty” titles as well as in toys and books.
Activision is defending itself against these allegations.
What is a Humvee? The Humvee is an iconic and versatile military vehicle that has been used in virtually every conflict involving US or NATO participation in the last 30 years.
The Humvee is primarily used for troop transport but can also take on light attack or support roles.
This is how Activision sees the issue: In the current exchange, Activision’s legal representatives chose particularly sharp words.
It is said, among other things, that the lawsuit against Call of Duty is nothing less than a direct attack on the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Because this is where the right to create creative works that realistically portray modern warfare stems from.
AM General, the manufacturer of the Humvee, is attempting to use trademark law to control the mere depiction of this vehicle in fictional games of the “Call of Duty” series. Restricting the content of creative works in this way is very dangerous.
However, the claims in this case are particularly outrageous, as they relate to a military vehicle funded by American taxpayers and used in nearly every significant conflict over the past three decades. As a result, the Humvees hold a cultural and historical significance.
Thus, they are a logical component of any attempt to tell an authentic story about modern warfare.
If AM General is allowed to control the use of these vehicles in entertainment media, then virtually every visual representation of 21st-century US military history would be in their “stranglehold”.
This is what the Humvee producer says: AM General sees the issue completely differently. They disagree with the notion that they cannot protect their intellectual property from illegal use.
Activision has earned billions of US dollars through the use of AM General’s iconic Humvee and its distinctive appearance – including in eight games, numerous advertisements, two toys, and several strategy guides.
The publisher never had permission from AM General to do this. Activision also never sought permission. Therefore, they see the entire matter as a clear violation of the law.
Therefore, the lawsuit could be important for games and films: This legal dispute could have significant implications for the entertainment industry – and thus for the gaming industry. It remains exciting to see how the process between Activision and AM General will turn out.
Regardless of how this lawsuit ends up in court – a precedent is being set that could be groundbreaking for future lawsuits of this nature, especially in the USA.
If AM General prevails, a wave of further lawsuits from various producers and manufacturers of military equipment, weapons, and gear could follow.
This could ultimately lead to a greater reliance on fictional military equipment and war machines in games, films, or series. It could also make such games more expensive, as the costs for such licenses might be passed on to the consumer.
How do you see the situation? Who do you think is right in this dispute? What do you believe will be the outcome of the lawsuit?
