Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Future Wars => Topic started by: FramFramson on February 07, 2013, 05:09:41 AM
-
Games Workshop attempts to claim common law trademark on the term "Space Marine" (http://mcahogarth.org/?p=10593)
;D o_o ;D
I enjoyed this comment from a friend:
Would be interesting to hear a statement from Heinlein's estate on this matter.
-
Great. Next someone will try to own Knight, Samurai, Ninja, Vampire, and Cowboy too.
-
I'm fairly certain that among the terms they claim to have a trademark on is "Inquisitor". Now let's see what the Roman Catholic Church would have to say about this :P
-
This is what fucking disgusts me with big corporations. Sheer opportunism, should it be true.
-
They already had some book taken off Amazon (maybe it was a Kindle edition) because of the use of the term Space Marine some years back. What a bunch of legalese dipsh_ts.
-
I am not surprised (as i have known that some day, this day would come) but still quite disgusted about it. What to do? It is time for the hobby to grow up and to take sides. Support the small and up coming people in the hobby. And it is time to educate the newcomers in the hobby. Teach you children well.
As for myself, i have decided that the door on GW is permanently closed. Not even second hand articles will ever be bought by me again.
-
Is that a joke from a company which stole the name "Eldar" from Tolkien ?
-
I'm not really sure this is true... I think it is just someone looking for a reason to snipe at GW...
-
It's been making the rounds for quite sometime...and honestly, would you put this beyond GW?
-
I'm not really sure this is true... I think it is just someone looking for a reason to snipe at GW...
Oh, it's true. I'm not buying anything from GW from now on.
-
I think it is just someone looking for a reason to snipe at GW
So this >Hogarth (http://mcah.wikia.com/wiki/M.C.A._Hogarth)< lady is a liar then? I suppose it's possible.
If she happens to be telling the truth, then GW looks to be attempting to muscle in on e-books market despite not owning an actual trademark for the term "space marine" in that particular commercial area. They seem to have it for furniture for example tho o_o
-
Is that a joke from a company which stole the name "Eldar" from Tolkien ?
And "Angron" from Marvel.
If they want to see vindictive litigation, they really need to tangle with the mouse.
-
And "Angron" from Marvel.
If they want to see vindictive litigation, they really need to tangle with the mouse.
And Lionel Johnson...
-
What part of "The lawyer still makes money" is not obvious here?
Gracias,
Glenn
-
yep GW gone mad
-
A fresh update:
http://mcahogarth.org/?p=10638
Somebody over at TMP claimed to have contacted Fantasy Games Unlimted who published a game called <censored in fear of litigation>s back in 1979 and claimed they are planning to release an updated version of their Space Opera line of books: these would presumably include the use of the forbidden term. Reportedly FGU isn't afraid of the big bad company either and also apparently have the trademark of the term "space opera"(!) so that could turn out to be an interesting publication event to watch...
-
I'm not really sure this is true... I think it is just someone looking for a reason to snipe at GW...
It's GW, this level of backwards stupidity has a very very high chance of being true.
-
I'm fairly certain that among the terms they claim to have a trademark on is "Inquisitor". Now let's see what the Roman Catholic Church would have to say about this :P
That can't end well for Games Workshop!
Besides, I heard Pope Benedict XVI has had it in for them since they got rid of Bloodbowl.
-
I am not sure if the one to be sued for damages isn't Amazon. They took the book down because GW simply threatened...
two crooks in action here
-
I am not sure if the one to be sued for damages isn't Amazon. They took the book down because GW simply threatened...
two crooks in action here
That's the real problem as many musicians who've lost Youtube videos etc. have found out. A baseless copyright claim will result in a corporate distributor pulling the plug on your work just to avoid any hint of liability. They lose micro amounts of sales, and avoid any possible problem for them. You lose your entire chance at selling your product. GW is just doing what their legal dep't recommends, but I doubt their claim would stand up to a proper legal challenge (if anybody could afford to mount one). "Space Marine" seems descriptively generic, whereas a claim to "Imperial Space Marine" would probably settle out in GW's favour.
-
"Space Marine" seems descriptively generic, whereas a claim to "Imperial Space Marine" would probably settle out in GW's favour.
To me Imperial Space Marine is still pretty generic. Adeptus Astartes I'd go with, but any combination of ready used words just seems ludicrous.
-
To me Imperial Space Marine is still pretty generic. Adeptus Astartes I'd go with, but any combination of ready used words just seems ludicrous.
'Games' and 'workshop'?
The already have that combination....
-
What about "Horses'" and "Arses"? :D
-
'Games' and 'workshop'?
The already have that combination....
As always, their claim there is shakey.
Wasn't there the Game Designers' Workshop?
What about "Horses'" and "Arses"? :D
Why don't you copyright it?
A few pounds in royalties can't hurt.
-
From what I understand GW made a request to take down the book, claiming they have a trademark on Space Marine.
Now, I'm by no means an expert on trademark law, but there are a few things people do need to understand. There is a huge difference between copyright and trademark. Copyright protects works you have made like a book or a movie. A trademark is a distinctive feature like a name like a brand or a specific term. You can trademark almost any word or combination of words, this does not at any point imply that GW has used it first, or invented the words, it merely is a legal setup for a descriptive term linked to a product or service that has a particular distinctiveness and exclusivity. There are however varying degrees of trademark distinctiveness. If you use common words like Tree or Book, your trademark isn't going to be very distinctive and harder to establish, though some are quite successful in their use like Apple for instance or the famous computer company. Yes, there is an Apple records and Apple (of i-something fame) had a little disagreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer) Trademark distinction is important, this is the reason why new cars get all those fancy made up names that have been triple-checked for prior usage, these are very specific and distinctive trademarks and much easier to protect, and this extends to all the weird and fancy product and company names you come across these days.
GW's trademark for Space Marine covers only the figures and games, Black Library has a copyright for publications, but they don't have much trademark muscle in the realm of fiction (a possible oversight, or underestimation at the time) GW is trying to release ebooks of their novels, so they are trying to clear the field, but they have a wonky claim so what's the possiblity.
1) They are just using standard scare tactics. Sending C&D's to people who subsequently get scared, don't have the means to go to court over this and just back down.
2) They are sending DMCA's to Amazon in the hope they won't bother to look up how much of a claim GW may have and hope that they side with the bigger dog. If Amazon doesn't back down, GW could be screwed.
3) But not entirely, since there is a possibility that if it does go to court and they can establish that GW's use of the word Space Marine is widespread and represents a major trademark and should include fiction and novels, they would have a nice juicy precedent in their favour, which is the equivalent of a legal golden bullet and make subsequent cases much easier for GW.
People make the mistake to think that a lot of things are quite obvious and self-evident but this does not apply to the legal system. A lot of procedures and principles in law are very counter-intuitive (they do make sense in context) so what appears to be bullying is nothing more than "good business" since the law does require people to make sure their own trademark is being properly maintained. Trademarks can become diluted, where the rule if you don't use it, you lose it applies. So certain companies may have used the term long before GW, but GW may have a far more solid claim (due to greater active use) than one that has been dormant for a few decades. But trademark cases invariably boil down to lawyers trying to establish how important one trademark is in comparison to the other, I'll refer you to the Apple vs Samsung cases for good examples of the procedure.
In my personal opinion GW are being heels in this case, trying to use sneaky legal means to extend a trademark oversight, but then again business has nothing to do with fairness, so it's not entirely stupid of them.
-
From what I understand GW made a request to take down the book, claiming they have a trademark on Space Marine.
Now, I'm by no means an expert on trademark law, but there are a few things people do need to understand. There is a huge difference between copyright and trademark. Copyright protects works you have made like a book or a movie. A trademark is a distinctive feature like a name like a brand or a specific term. You can trademark almost any word or combination of words, this does not at any point imply that GW has used it first, or invented the words, it merely is a legal setup for a descriptive term linked to a product or service that has a particular distinctiveness and exclusivity. There are however varying degrees of trademark distinctiveness. If you use common words like Tree or Book, your trademark isn't going to be very distinctive and harder to establish, though some are quite successful in their use like Apple for instance or the famous computer company. Yes, there is an Apple records and Apple (of i-something fame) had a little disagreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer) Trademark distinction is important, this is the reason why new cars get all those fancy made up names that have been triple-checked for prior usage, these are very specific and distinctive trademarks and much easier to protect, and this extends to all the weird and fancy product and company names you come across these days.
GW's trademark for Space Marine covers only the figures and games, Black Library has a copyright for publications, but they don't have much trademark muscle in the realm of fiction (a possible oversight, or underestimation at the time) GW is trying to release ebooks of their novels, so they are trying to clear the field, but they have a wonky claim so what's the possiblity.
1) They are just using standard scare tactics. Sending C&D's to people who subsequently get scared, don't have the means to go to court over this and just back down.
2) They are sending DMCA's to Amazon in the hope they won't bother to look up how much of a claim GW may have and hope that they side with the bigger dog. If Amazon doesn't back down, GW could be screwed.
3) But not entirely, since there is a possibility that if it does go to court and they can establish that GW's use of the word Space Marine is widespread and represents a major trademark and should include fiction and novels, they would have a nice juicy precedent in their favour, which is the equivalent of a legal golden bullet and make subsequent cases much easier for GW.
People make the mistake to think that a lot of things are quite obvious and self-evident but this does not apply to the legal system. A lot of procedures and principles in law are very counter-intuitive (they do make sense in context) so what appears to be bullying is nothing more than "good business" since the law does require people to make sure their own trademark is being properly maintained. Trademarks can become diluted, where the rule if you don't use it, you lose it applies. So certain companies may have used the term long before GW, but GW may have a far more solid claim (due to greater active use) than one that has been dormant for a few decades. But trademark cases invariably boil down to lawyers trying to establish how important one trademark is in comparison to the other, I'll refer you to the Apple vs Samsung cases for good examples of the procedure.
In my personal opinion GW are being heels in this case, trying to use sneaky legal means to extend a trademark oversight, but then again business has nothing to do with fairness, so it's not entirely stupid of them.
Like your self i am not very knowledgeable on these matters. Your explenation reads very......well.....understandable and it makes things clearer. Well at least for me.
As for your last remark, you the nail on the head. Business has nothing to do with fairness. And with GW it is all, and only about business. And nothing is left for the hobby. In my opinion the hobby is about fairness and people granting or wellcome each other to succes.
-
Maybe they are positioning to sell out to a big toy company. A well known gaming rules company here in the USA tried to lay claim to a lot of common fantasy terms used in their games just before they sold them selves to a big publishing company.
-
That remembers me many years ago when Gary Gygax tried to release a new game, Dangerous Journeys, with the initial name of Dangerous Dimensions until TSR suit him because of the similitude with D&D and because of their fear to loose D&D market.
To me all that looks like someone in the IP dept trying to earn some reputation with their boss.
-
As always, their claim there is shakey.
Wasn't there the Game Designers' Workshop?
Why don't you copyright it?
A few pounds in royalties can't hurt.
lol
-
I remember when vw usa attempted to copy right the words beetle and bug, then let lose their legal pitbulls on every little vw facing independent garage, workshop, shop and business that used the words in their title.
I really wish we could find a Russian oligarch with the stones and definitely the collateral to turn this round.
Corporate assclowns! !!! >:(
-
I think you'll find Corporate Assclowns are a lesser known space marine chapter also covered by a GW trademark.
-
I wish I could personally boycott GW stores in response to this...........but I already boycotted them in response to what I considered were excessive prices and ridiculous aggressive strategies.
What's next - a trademark on the word "orc?"
-
I wish I could personally boycott GW stores in response to this...........but I already boycotted them in response to what I considered were excessive prices and ridiculous aggressive strategies.
Same for me here in Holland. So that's already two of us. Not much at all i hear you think. But what would if more people joined? Are there othe people here on LAF that do not buy at GW? I'm curious? Are you curious?
-
I have not bought a GW figure direct from them for at least ten years.
In fact the only GW product I buy nowadays is the HH books from Black Library.
It is still GW, I know, but as I usually buy them through Amazon I am not pay any kind of ridiculous GW mark up.
-
I like their paints but haven't bought a figure from them for about the same time as Mason. I did buy some plastic stealers for my aliens project on ebay though. It's unsurprising GW are acting like this as it seems to be the way of the business world. I would like to think it is not the way of our collective hobby though.
-
I've send GW an e-mail on this, for all the good it does.
I know I'm only one voice, but hopefully others will chime in.
This is just despicable behavior.
-
What's next - a trademark on the word "orc?"
On ork probably. ;)
-
The book in question seems to have been reinstated!
See this link:
http://mcahogarth.org/?p=10661
-
Damn. that e-mail of mine worked wonders...... :D
-
by some strange coincidence (and the vain hope that someone here can try and explain it Dezmond), the 2013 Frothers Sculpting Competition has been announced:
http://www.frothersunite.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=42862
-
by some strange coincidence (and the vain hope that someone here can try and explain it Dezmond), the 2013 Frothers Sculpting Competition has been announced:
http://www.frothersunite.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=42862
lol lol lol
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21380003 :o
-
That story on frothers is wrong on so many levels. My poor mind....
On a serious note, it's good that they seem to have climbed down over the whole thing.
-
I very rarely look at Frothers but that might change, this thread deserves a comedy award, Dezmond is better than Karl Pilkington lol
D'you think GW have done a Gerald Ratner?
-
Well, I haven't bought any GW stuff (apart from the WHH books) in about 10 years because of some of the ridiculous stunts they pulled.
-
I have to say the Frothers thread is rather funny and almost makes me want to enter it.
I wonder how long/what it it will take for GW to back down? I hope any judge worth his weight would laugh at it.
-
As someone in that linked Frothers thread actually says, that is very nearly the perfect Frothers thread. It's horrifying, awesome, stupid and hilarious at the same time.
I'm extremely glad LAF isn't like Frothers, but I am also very glad that Frothers exists. I'll be lurking on the sculpting comp threads for sure!
-
39 pages - mostly trolling :o
Poor Inso lol
-
Howard Tayler comments on the proceedings:
http://www.schlockmercenary.com/blog/space-marine-water-war-uplift
-
Interesting level-headed text.
I guess that, if the 30's authors would have registered the 'Space Marine' term (no idea on IP laws then), Games Workshop would have needed to invent a new term. But as no one did, GW was the early bird here.
So the matter is about if you can set a trademark on such a generic term as 'Space Marine', 'Space Ranger' 'Space Seal' 'Space Sailor' 'Space Soldier' 'Space whatever'. They should no doubt have invented a word, as Dune's 'Sardaukar'. That sounds so cool!
-
Yep, very original
Herbert used a lot of Indo-Persian-Arabik etymology
So basically same as Tolkien.
Almost no intelectual property is truely genuine, which makes the copyright-trademark issue so complicated
creative commons versus marketability, plagiarism versus copyright trolling.....
let's solve the problem by discussing it in a forum......
-
Well, guess you are right here.
BTW, do you remember the Nike affair?
The trademark 'Niké' was registered in Spain by 1932. Hence Nike had to drop out the 'name' from the logo and only the 'tick' remained. They finally won, based on the lack of use of the name by the previous owner, but the trial extended for over a decade and the amounts invested on it were never known, but suspected huge.
There was an interesting debate then about the use of Greek mithology as trademarks, extension of IP on common terms, cultural references and so.
-
Well, I actually wanted to point out that the matter of
"the creator should profit from the fruits of his creativity"
is not that easily solved.
And that the establishment of internet (see the other thread) has pushed the envelope towards the necessity of rethinking the concept of marketability and the issue of market controlled economy - it should be clear that this topic in all it's consequences is not separable from other socio-economic issues.
-
Interesting level-headed text.
I guess that, if the 30's authors would have registered the 'Space Marine' term (no idea on IP laws then), Games Workshop would have needed to invent a new term. But as no one did, GW was the early bird here.
So the matter is about if you can set a trademark on such a generic term as 'Space Marine', 'Space Ranger' 'Space Seal' 'Space Sailor' 'Space Soldier' 'Space whatever'. They should no doubt have invented a word, as Dune's 'Sardaukar'. That sounds so cool!
They actually have invented a term: adeptus astartes.
But my guess is that it's too complicated for the ten-years-olds that are their target customers now, so they want to monpolize the use of space marine.
Frothers won't let them, though. lol
-
I am thinking of trademarking the term "Rouge Trader" ;)
-
I am thinking of trademarking the term "Rouge Trader" ;)
lol
-
I've send GW an e-mail on this, for all the good it does.
I know I'm only one voice, but hopefully others will chime in.
This is just despicable behavior.
Be interesting if you could post their response...assuming you get one!
-
They should be allowed to trademark Spess-Muh-REEN and CHOAS.
As in: "I think CHOAS is a pretty cool guy. Eh kills aleins and doesn't afraid of anything."
-
Be interesting if you could post their response...assuming you get one!
yeah, no response whatsoever.