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.

 Hordini wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Upon further review, it looks more like a guy trying to drum up free publicity.

How so? It's the ebook version that GW is contesting, and that is what Amazon pulled. The print version isn't part of it, as far as I can tell, and that's why it is still available.

You have evidence then that GW is involved at all?

Is it really that hard to believe? Do you suppose the author just made up the whole story after the ebook was taken off of Amazon?

I think that the "free publicity" angle is right on the money.

If you're naming something Space Marine, in this age, you're probably hoping for publicity from it: either search results that give you a bump in traffic or a suit and the publicity from that.

Having published comics and knowing a number of authors and aspiring authors, if you're in it legitimately, you're looking to make a name for yourself/your book/ your series.

An example: I knew someone writing a fantasy book. They started reading Game of Thrones, realized that a number of details were, coincidentally, unfortunately close to stuff from the Game of Thrones setting. So as to not appear too close, those details got changed where they could be, and the ones that remain are sporadic enough to not be concerning.

This goes doubly for titles-- If I was writing a book with the working title, "A Tournament of Thrones," and I had never heard of A Game of Thrones, if I spent 10 minutes on google (I actually tried for about that many seconds, with success), I'd find a whole bunch of suggestions related to a popular series. Then, even if my title fit perfectly, I'd swear a lot, then, wanting to distinguish myself from the popular series, try to figure out a distinct title that works as well.

Similarly, it makes me think that the author in this case is either intentionally trying to get some publicity or they're too lazy or ignorant to react to, or consider, the problems associated with said title. Harsh, but, that's how I feel...



No, it isn't right that a company try to maintain copyright on a common term, but I also don't think that using a similar title to a well-known company is very creatively legitimate.

 Hordini wrote:
if I remember correctly part of it has to do with whether or not a reasonable person would be confused by the product.

The problem with this is (or, at least was) that the terms regarding similarity etc. are all highly subjective and/or poorly quantified, so it generally comes down to the person with more lawyers.