Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

As far as I'm concerned GW should be paying Chapterhouse. Had it not been for the storm raven conversion kit that they put out I would never have bought the gw kit. Possibly the worst model ever, looked like a freaking pregnant guppy.

267.0 MOTION by Defendant Chapterhouse Studios LLC for reconsid...
Download
MOTION by Defendant Chapterhouse Studios LLC for reconsideration of Summary Judgment Order and Sanctions (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Jennifer A. Golinveaux, # 2 Exhibit A-G to Declaration of Jennifer A. Golinveaux, # 3 Declaration of Bryce A. Cooper)(Cooper, Bryce) (Entered: 12/27/2012)

http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.267.0.pdf

Boom!

Second, CHS requests reconsideration of the Court’s finding that GW is “entitled to copyright protection as to the design of its shoulder pads.” Dkt. No. 258 at 20. Newly discovered documents—in the possession of GW’s lead trial counsel months before the summary judgment briefing but withheld from CHS and the Court—show that the United States Copyright Office rejected copyright registration for this very design on the grounds that it is “too minimal” to be afforded protection. Decisions of the Copyright Office are generally afforded “great deference” by the courts, and GW’s concealment of this evidence before the Court rendered its summary judgment Order is inexcusable. CHS respectfully requests that the Court reconsider its finding with regards to GW’s shoulder pads in light of these newly-discovered documents and sanction GW by awarding CHS costs for its independent investigation to uncover the evidence and directing GW to abide by its discovery obligations and produce all correspondence between GW and the Copyright Office regarding the works-in-suit.

And the judge says, GW, get me an answer by the 4th of January:

269.0 MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Plaint...
Buy from PACER
MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Plaintiff is directed to respond to defendant's motion for reconsideration by no later than 1/4/13. No reply brief. The motion hearing date of 1/3/13 is vacated and reset to 1/8/13 at 9:30 AM. (mk) (Entered: 12/28/2012)




So, some associates are going to be having a fun new years eve.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
------------------
There is an email chain from Moskin to the Copyright office. Basically, before the summary judgment the registrar says 'we can't register these shoulder pads'.

He doesn't disclose the emails to the court or CHS, despite emailing CHS to say he would disclose any correspondence with the copyright folks (as part of the discovery process).

Then, Moskin turns around and emails the copyright folks and says 'hey, there has been a ruling in a federal court that says we can copyright shoulder pads, please do it now'.


He's got big brass ones.

http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.267.2.pdf <--- Starts around page 131, the doozy is at 137

czakk wrote:
There is an email chain from Moskin to the Copyright office. Basically, before the summary judgment the registrar says 'we can't register these shoulder pads'.

He doesn't disclose the emails to the court or CHS, despite emailing CHS to say he would disclose any correspondence with the copyright folks (as part of the discovery process).

Then, Moskin turns around and emails the copyright folks and says 'hey, there has been a ruling in a federal court that says we can copyright shoulder pads, please do it now'.

He's got big brass ones.

http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.267.2.pdf <--- Starts around page 131, the doozy is at 137

Isn't this some sort of ethics violation?

This is possibly the biggest development in this case this year, and it's a huge one. Snuck in at the last minute. This made my holiday weekend. Can't wait to hear what the judge says after the response.

/popcorn

_________________________

For folks who aren't law types this is interesting for two reasons:

1) The judge may revisit his summary judgement, may or may not order sanctions etc...


2) There is a professional ethics / honour issue. This could be sharp practice or worse by Mr. Moskin. Calling opposing counsel a liar is a big deal. A trial lawyer with a reputation as someone who lies to the court is out of a job.

czakk wrote:
_________________________

For folks who aren't law types this is interesting for two reasons:

1) The judge may revisit his summary judgement, may or may not order sanctions etc...


2) There is a professional ethics / honour issue. This could be sharp practice or worse by Mr. Moskin. Calling opposing counsel a liar is a big deal. A trial lawyer with a reputation as someone who lies to the court is out of a job.

Indeed, this is an almost unbelievable breach of professional ethics. It looks, prima facia, as if Moskin has attempted to mislead not only the court, but the Copyright office as well. The chain of correspondence evidence is simply blatant.

 Breotan wrote:

czakk wrote:
There is an email chain from Moskin to the Copyright office. Basically, before the summary judgment the registrar says 'we can't register these shoulder pads'.

He doesn't disclose the emails to the court or CHS, despite emailing CHS to say he would disclose any correspondence with the copyright folks (as part of the discovery process).

Then, Moskin turns around and emails the copyright folks and says 'hey, there has been a ruling in a federal court that says we can copyright shoulder pads, please do it now'.

He's got big brass ones.

http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.267.2.pdf <--- Starts around page 131, the doozy is at 137

Isn't this some sort of ethics violation?

Generally speaking, and normally sanctionable - though the issues of what it means is somewhat more grey. There are specific laws which require disclosure of evidence during discovery for criminal cases - it is less firmly set out though for civil trials and generally ends up falling into the realm of contempt and similar local rules. If you take a look at Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure it covers what must be disclosed by each side as well as some guidelines and related information on the timelines relating to discovery. Rules are squishy though, and if you break a rule...it isn't the same as breaking a law.

The bigger thing is that it makes GW seem even more like Lucille Ball, and it puts the judge in the position of Desi... Lucy, You got some 'splainin' to do. When the judge reconsiders if he should reconsider his summary judgement...unless GW can demonstrate some exceptional reason that they didn't pass on the information to CHS, it will be sitting in the back of the judge's head when he is contemplating the issues at hand.

How much of an impact it may have will really depend on how the judge is feeling. There is enough for the judge to hang his hat on for a complete reversal regarding the protectibility of the shoulder pads (and everything that is derived from the base shoulder pad design). He could stick with what he already ruled upon as well, since although the opinion of an expert agency should be given deference...it isn't mandatory that they agree with anything that the USCO says.

Looks like solis was a few hours early

This could also affect any appeal CHS decides to do. It's another potential error of law ( the judge deciding not to reverse himself - if he goes that way) to bring up if they appeal the summary judgement.

I'll have to say--each time Moskin is mentioned within this thread, it's always in a very unappealing light. Combined with his rather distasteful deposition entries--it's painting a pretty poor picture of himself and his firm.

How did CHS find out about the emails (or did I blind eye it above)?

 AgeOfEgos wrote:
I'll have to say--each time Moskin is mentioned within this thread, it's always in a very unappealing light. Combined with his rather distasteful deposition entries--it's painting a pretty poor picture of himself and his firm.

How did CHS find out about the emails (or did I blind eye it above)?

They obtained the emails from the copyright office. It's a bit late but I believe they got concerned that they hadn't gotten anything about the copyright registrations via discovery and requested correspondences about shoulder pads and lucked out.

Page 126 of this file (http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.267.2.pdf) shows the bill they paid to Peerless Patents for tracking down the two files.

If I'm reading the bill correctly, CHS paid for the files before the summary judgement came down (paid nov 13, judgment nov 27). I wonder how long this has been lurking in the weeds.


Also interesting to note - the bill was sent Oct 29th, and the files sent overnight delivery. 30, 31s, 1st to read the hard copy. Notice the emails about not being registerable. Then phone call on the second of November to Moskin where he says there's nothing to disclose.

The date on certified copy of the emails is Dec 12 - which means they continued to request correspondence through November and December and caught him emailing about the summary judgement. Unless I've totally fethed up the timeline (possible at this time of night) they gave him enough rope to hang himself and he went and did it.

Wow every time I picture Moskin in my head i get this image of Saul from Breaking Bad. True sleazeball material.



We need photoshop treatment to replace a few words, shoulderpads and Moskin in place of Saul would be good.

Snippet from the docket:

Copyright Office records further reveal that Moskin called the Copyright Office on November 5, 2012—the same day he represented to CHS that GW would assemble and produce any correspondence with the Copyright Office—to follow-up on the Copyright Office’s refusal to register “Assault Squad Shoulder Pads,” making clear that he was fully aware of the correspondence. See Golinveaux Exs. E, G at 6; Golinveaux Decl.

Then, having withheld the Copyright Office’s correspondence from CHS and the Court, in an email dated December 7, 2012, GW’s counsel attempted to use this Court’s Order (rendered without knowledge of the Copyright Office’s decision rejecting GW’s application) to convince the Copyright Office to overturn its decision. (“I wanted to point out that in a recent decision, the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ruled that the basic shape of Case: 1:10-cv-08103 Document #: 267 Filed: 12/27/12 Page 10 of 15 PageID #:14976 11 the Games Workshop shoulder pad is copyrightable . . . I would be happy to get you a copy of the decision.”).

/end snippet

This just keeps getting better and better. When I can tell my non-wargaming fiance about GW's legal fiascoes and have her laugh out loud about it, you've got prime popcorn material right there.

I predict next we'll catch them breaking into CHS Watergate-style to plant resin recasts in the sculpting studios to photograph and claim as evidence...

Surely the judge has to ask himself if GW are hiding any more things. These cases require a bit of honesty in that you rely on others to reveal information they hold, not just claim they've lost the paperwork that doesn't cast them in a good light.

Clearly there was an agreement to reveal all correspondence with copyrighting agencies and they didn't do that, and they've been caught doing so in full knowledge attempting to use the current court case to get that previous decision reviewed. This seems a little reminiscent of GW writing to their previous artists trying to get them to retroactively sign away their rights to their work because they'd lost the paperwork saying GW had owned it all along. Start the legal case, get the technicalities like actually owning copyright later...

You've just got to question what they've submitted generally because unless I'm putting to much on this, the GW lawyers have knowingly misled the court.

And people wonder why GW has such a bad rep. It is ironic that a company who is in the business of making rules, so blatantly breaks them in court.

czakk wrote:And the judge says, GW, get me an answer by the 4th of January:
(...)
So, some associates are going to be having a fun new years eve.

Revenge at last for spoiling CHS christmas 2 years ago (yes, we indeed just had the second anniversary of this lawsuit).

Still amazed how many crimes lawyers get away with unpunished. Hopefully this one is one too much for the judge.
And one day, the judge will find out, that GW DOESN'T own the copyright on skulls, fur, feathers, halberds, arrows etc. and that second market is not illegal per se

 spaceelf wrote:
And people wonder why GW has such a bad rep. It is ironic that a company who is in the business of making rules, so blatantly breaks them in court.

Well, if they wrote clearer rules perhaps their lawyers wouldn't try to house rule as much.

rigeld2 wrote:

 spaceelf wrote:
And people wonder why GW has such a bad rep. It is ironic that a company who is in the business of making rules, so blatantly breaks them in court.

Well, if they wrote clearer rules perhaps their lawyers wouldn't try to house rule as much.

Gw obviously write 'the rules' ™ hence the RAW/RAI arguments in this court case.

czakk wrote:
Boom!

Second, CHS requests reconsideration of the Court’s finding that GW is “entitled to copyright protection as to the design of its shoulder pads.” Dkt. No. 258 at 20. Newly discovered documents—in the possession of GW’s lead trial counsel months before the summary judgment briefing but withheld from CHS and the Court—show that the United States Copyright Office rejected copyright registration for this very design on the grounds that it is “too minimal” to be afforded protection. Decisions of the Copyright Office are generally afforded “great deference” by the courts, and GW’s concealment of this evidence before the Court rendered its summary judgment Order is inexcusable. CHS respectfully requests that the Court reconsider its finding with regards to GW’s shoulder pads in light of these newly-discovered documents and sanction GW by awarding CHS costs for its independent investigation to uncover the evidence and directing GW to abide by its discovery obligations and produce all correspondence between GW and the Copyright Office regarding the works-in-suit.

And the judge says, GW, get me an answer by the 4th of January

Wow . What a development. This is crazy! It's like something out of a movie... Tom Cruise calling the pilots up from Guantanamo Bay to testify against Jack Nicholson - level crazy

I want a copyright! You cant handle a copyright!

Wow, just wow....

I think it's fair to say that some information is often left out of discovery either on purpose, or out of negligence. This was obviously done on purpose seeing as he tried to use the ruling to get the Copyright office to change it's decision. I hope the Judge will live up to his title and do the honorable thing, ie. reverse his decision seeing as "The Supreme Court has also broadly stated that “an agency’s interpretation may merit some deference whatever its form, given the ‘specialized experience and broader investigations and information’ available to the agency, and given the value of uniformity in its administrative and judicial understandings of what a national law requires."

Sadly, other then a reversal and paying the bill for CHS, nothing else will be done to the dirtbag.

Isn't this discussing the assault squad pads which is the multi arrow or something? Not all shoulder pads?

This case is discussing dozens of items, and just because some are found to be too generic doesn't mean GW loses the entire case.

The court will still have to decide every individual item.

nkelsch wrote:
Isn't this discussing the assault squad pads which is the multi arrow or something? Not all shoulder pads?

Not exactly...

Also, we cannot register the sculpture portion as it is too minimal. The text on this package appears to be the same as Crimson fist shoulder pads and cannot be registered again. Please allow permission to remove sculpture and text from the application.

The sculptural aspect of the shoulder pads in general is deemed too minimal to be artwork on its own. A complete figure might be a sculpture, but a shoulder pad is just a portion of a figure and is insignificant on its own. The text on the package is the same as on other packages - which is already registered and isn't something which would apply to the CHS case since they are not copying the packages of GW. The agent of the Copyright Office says that they might be able to register the graphics portion of the package, provided that it is actual artwork (i.e. - painted) as opposed to just a photograph of an insignificant part of a larger figure.

 Chronepsis wrote:


Sadly, other then a reversal and paying the bill for CHS, nothing else will be done to the dirtbag.

Heh, if it does go all pear shaped like that, imagine going to a client and saying "remember that summary judgement we got that said your product was copyrightable....well the other side caught me hiding emails between myself and the copyright office, and that judgement got reversed. Oh, and you need to pay into court to cover the other sides expenses." and then imagine the senior partners dragging your ass onto the carpet. And then the phone call to your insurer because you fethed up and your rather litigious client wants its pound of flesh and good news, they've decided to sue your firm etc....


Or it could just be a molehill.

Yeah, I didn't even consider all that Czakk. I was referring to the court itself. All valid points that could happen though.

Well, court-wise, aside from the judgement, there is a little tidbit in the judicial code of conduct:

Canon 3(B)(5):
A judge should take appropriate action upon learning of reliable evidence indicating the likelihood that a judge’s conduct contravened this Code or a lawyer violated applicable rules of professional conduct.

(http://www.uscourts.gov/RulesAndPolicies/CodesOfConduct/CodeConductUnitedStatesJudges.aspx)

The use of the word should in that canon makes it a requirement to report conduct not a choice on the part of the judge (should/shall/must vs using may or can).

Now in my jurisdiction, sharp practice, lying to your friend, and or breaching an undertaking wrt to discovery is a violation of the code of conduct and you will get reported to the law society. The court also has the power to lay down sanctions like contempt of court (jail time, though very rare), costs awards, or a new trial. Don't know about in Illinois / federal court.

And we don't know how seriously the judge will take all this. CHS's lawyers do a good job making it seem like a huge deal, but that is their job. Maybe there is another email (or emails) floating around that casts another light on the situation and CHS didn't include them. (not looking likely, but...)




Automatically Appended Next Post:
------------------------------------


The christmas eve answer by CHS is now available on recap to download - looks like it was signed by the new attorneys:

http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.266.0.pdf



Heh, more little proofreading digs- "Chapterhouse notes that Trademark Registration Number 1,751,460 is for a Word Mark of “SAMWISH,” which is registered to Uli Siegenthaler, an individual in Switzerland."

"ANSWER OF DEFENDANT CHAPTERHOUSE STUDIOS LLC TO PLAINTIFF’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT, ERRONEOUSLY TITLED SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT"

The defences are pretty much the same as the last time, with the addition of the fraud allegation:

GW’s claims are barred to the extent its copyright or trademark registrations were obtained through fraud on the Copyright Office or the Patent and Trademark Office. Upon information and belief, after improperly withholding from production and from the Court in the pending litigation rejections issued by the copyright office denying the copyrightability of GW works, GW now seeks to rely on the summary judgment order entered without benefit of the Copyright Office's findings in an attempt to overcome the rejection.

It looks like GW's lawyers are as dumb as the company itself. Wow. I hope the Judge smites Moskin thoroughly.

Someone said something about this?

czakk wrote:

 Chronepsis wrote:


Sadly, other then a reversal and paying the bill for CHS, nothing else will be done to the dirtbag.

Heh, if it does go all pear shaped like that, imagine going to a client and saying "remember that summary judgement we got that said your product was copyrightable....well the other side caught me hiding emails between myself and the copyright office, and that judgement got reversed. Oh, and you need to pay into court to cover the other sides expenses." and then imagine the senior partners dragging your ass onto the carpet. And then the phone call to your insurer because you fethed up and your rather litigious client wants its pound of flesh and good news, they've decided to sue your firm etc....

It is not just one employee that lied to the judge. It started from the beginning when GW accused a person completely and obviously unrelated to the case just to get the case to Chicago. And the complete case relies on false copyright and trademark claims that GW obviously has no idea on how to support. GW even made a futile attempt to get some copyrights transfered from artists AFTER the lawsuit began, but some artists informed court about that fraud attempt. So it is not a singular accident but a fundamental strategy to bury the judge in false claims and lies just to get most out of this lawsuit. With shoulder pads it almost worked.

 Xzerios wrote:


Someone said something about this?

so much soda out my nose. This is awesome.