131–140 of 150 posts
As a huge science fiction nerd and Games Workshop customer, this feels like rank betrayal. I expect this kind of legal bullying from big companies, but from a company that makes minifigs and other gaming accessories I expect better behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was my initial reaction. Is there any reason why you couldn't create a kickstarter campaign around this?
> Prohibited uses: > No charity or cause funding. [0] Indiegogo would probably allow it though. See for example [1] [0] http://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines [1] http://www.indiegogo.com/bearlovegood
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be relevant in a patent case, but not to trademarks, which do not depend on prior use but on when a trade mark first enters the stream of commerce. I've said it before in other contexts: GW is not really being a villain here, they're just making a show of defending their trademark. If they don't, someone else could start using the mark and then say 'well you didn't defend it when those people were (arguabl…
Yes, but "Space Marine" is an extremely weak mark, and evidently it is only registered in one class of goods and services (in the US): " board games, parlor games, war games, hobby games, toy models and miniatures of buildings, scenery, figures, automobiles, vehicles, planes, trains and card games and paint, sold therewith. " [1] I don't think the claim is baseless, but I don't see how this is a must litigate scenari…
As an example, I put out a book featuring space marines, nothing happens. I put out some novelty children's outfits featuring space marines, nothing happens. I put out a game involving space marines, GW (reasonably) objects that I'm infringing upon their trademark. I say in response that I put out two other space marine themed products and they didn't care, so I assumed they'd lost interest.
I wouldn't want to be seen as carrying a torch for GW here, I actually have an intense dislike of the company and its history of monopolistic tactics at consumer expense. It was cool firm until about 1984 when the MBAs took over the firsm and adopted a scorched-earth approach to all other firms in the space.
As a huge science fiction nerd and Games Workshop customer, this feels like rank betrayal. I expect this kind of legal bullying from big companies, but from a company that makes minifigs and other gaming accessories I expect better behavior.
Cred: I have two Warhammer tattoos on my forearms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which, in terms of trademark, is very irrelevant :).
This is a weak trademark, it has no secondary meaning that I can discern. You have marines. They're in space. Thus, "space marines." That would seem to fall under the weaker classes of trademark protection[1] and even though I have long known about Warhammer 40K, the words "space marines" do not make me (or most other people I know) think of Warhammer 40K. Personally, that term makes me think of the Aliens movie and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe you're correct on the official name. I would make a case that most people thought of them as Space Marines though.
Apparently the term 'space marine' was never used in the movies, but the alien-themed toys by Kenner from 1992 do use it.
GW are sending their nastygrams to a novelist. And not a best-seller, but a low-budget self-published author who's been donating a chunk of the proceeds to veterans' charities: someone without a sufficiently deep pocket to fund a legal defense.
If GW's lawyers really had the power of their convictions they'd have started by targeting James Cameron over "Avatar". After all, which infringement is more damaging to their brand -- an obscure self-pub serial with maybe a couple of thousand readers, or a big budget movie franchise that cost a billion dollars to make and presumably (Hollywood accounting practices aside) made the backers a profit?
The suckiest aspect of what they're doing is the target. GW are sending their nastygrams to a novelist. And not a best-seller, but a low-budget self-published author who's been donating a chunk of the proceeds to veterans' charities: someone without a sufficiently deep pocket to fund a legal defense. If GW's lawyers really had the power of their convictions they'd have started by targeting James Cameron over "Avatar"…
I knew this was going to happen some day. Games Workshop is essentially two separate companies, the raving legal department/copyright trolls (A couple of years ago they regularly put full page colour adverts in all the British wargaming magazines warning that they would enforce their IP with the full power afforded to them by the law, it was generally considered a bad joke by most.) and the (for a lack of a better te…
About the favouring those with deeper wallets: there's a great history of players making their own miniatures. I think provided they are reasonably near the dimensions of the 'original' piece - the homemade pieces are accepted and encouraged, allowing those without the financial means to use their own.
I'm working towards an all female Dark Eldar force (why? because!) and Lady Malys has no model.
The suckiest aspect of what they're doing is the target. GW are sending their nastygrams to a novelist. And not a best-seller, but a low-budget self-published author who's been donating a chunk of the proceeds to veterans' charities: someone without a sufficiently deep pocket to fund a legal defense. If GW's lawyers really had the power of their convictions they'd have started by targeting James Cameron over "Avatar"…
However, there is prior art for "Avatar" in hinduism.