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.

Registering a trademark isn't actually required in order to claim ownership of it, it just makes it easier. They have to show that they were using that trademark and that someone else copying it damages their business.

The Chapterhouse case went to silly extremes with GW claiming ownership of things like chevrons and roman numerals, and those claims were (IIRC) unsuccessful. But they would have a much easier time of showing ownership of specific faction symbols.

I am honestly pretty annoyed about the No Guts No Galaxy thing, the lack of effort on the GW legal team's side to check if their claims were even valid and the dodgy way the lawsuit was filed, really don't sit well.

And as much as I like Baron of Dice... I was wondering how long he was going to get away with what he was doing. The Battletech dice I have from him have Battletech art and mech designs lifted straight from the source material on the tins.

I have interacted with the owner through emails and online communication, and he is a genuinely nice person, but there is no way he didn't know that he was lifting art and designs from GW and other companies.

Maybe we shouldn't let a company claim ownership of symbols.

Wayniac wrote:
Maybe we shouldn't let a company claim ownership of symbols.

We certainly shouldn't let a company claim ownership of generic symbols, but it's not unreasonable for them to claim ownership of their own artwork.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:

And as much as I like Baron of Dice... I was wondering how long he was going to get away with what he was doing. The Battletech dice I have from him have Battletech art and mech designs lifted straight from the source material on the tins.

Well, stealing art is a foundation of BT....

It's hard to claim ownership of the Maltese Cross (aka the Templar Cross), due to it existing for hundreds of years, but it is easier to claim ownership of specifically created Warhammer-centric designs like the Dark Angels broken sword with angel wings.

That's why the Aquila used in Warhammer is always the same and differs from Aquilas used by the Roman Republic/Empire and other Organizations throughout time.

this might be different for the US so please correct me, but for a symbol/logo to be trademarked it must be with the context of the company and naming

Apple cannot sue me for showing an apple with a part missing for my home grown fruit buisness
but they can sue me if I show a 2D shape of an apple with a part missing to sell electronics

Baron of Dice doesn't use any of the legal names and the symbols I have seen aren't excatly like the original
which is important because as far as we know, this was triggered by the use of trademarked names or advertising with trademarked names and not about pictures of similar looking symbols
claiming that shops use trademarked terms in the text or meta tags to trigger search egines and mislead consumers to believe those are original or licensed GW products

I can't find any open document to check which trademarks in specific are claimed to be violated but it looks like that Baron of Dice is appearing in court for this (and not just paying the fee for dismisal) so we should get the details anyway

PS:
I have seen that there is an identical file with different judge but same dates in Texas
are those 2 different at the same time lawsuits?

Baron of Dice got hit for a gaming mat that was labelled as "for Warhammer 40k, Age of Sigmar, [multiple other game systems]"
So NOT for any symbols.
GW is going after the use of the word "Warhammer" (in its various forms), "Citadel" and "Blood Bowl" and don't care how you labelled your product, just that you used the trademarked term. We can condemn the use of the AI art on shirts, but that's not what this is about.

The paint pot holder was labelled "for Citadel paint pots".

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Baron of Dice got hit for a gaming mat that was labelled as "for Warhammer 40k, Age of Sigmar, [multiple other game systems]"
So NOT for any symbols.
GW is going after the use of the word "Warhammer" (in its various forms), "Citadel" and "Blood Bowl" and don't care how you labelled your product, just that you used the trademarked term. We can condemn the use of the AI art on shirts, but that's not what this is about.

The paint pot holder was labelled "for Citadel paint pots".

I get these are the more renowned stores hence getting the attention, but of several hundred hit I'm pretty sure the majority are valid. Fussing over the minority caught in the mayhem appears like people are devaluing the valid claims which are in the majority AFAIK.

you could also assume the other way around as I know more specific examples of claims that are not legit
yet the specific examples aren't available for the public, so I don't know enough to say if the majority is legit or not (and for everyone who hasn't the money to fly to Florida and appear in court, we will never know)

Nobody knows how many of the claims are valid, your assumption on that will depend entirely on how much blind faith you have in the system in general and the honesty of one corporation with a documented history of unfounded claims in particular.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Baron of Dice got hit for a gaming mat that was labelled as "for Warhammer 40k, Age of Sigmar, [multiple other game systems]"
So NOT for any symbols.
GW is going after the use of the word "Warhammer" (in its various forms), "Citadel" and "Blood Bowl" and don't care how you labelled your product, just that you used the trademarked term. We can condemn the use of the AI art on shirts, but that's not what this is about.

The paint pot holder was labelled "for Citadel paint pots".

Wait didn't the chapterhouse case show you COULD say that, just not present them as though they were official GW products? As in it was perfectly legal to say "Compatible with Warhammer 40,000 XYZ" but not simply "Warhammer 40,00 XYZ" which could mislead someone into thinking it was an official GW product? Wasn't that like the whole fething point of that case and why GW started "no model, no rules"?

Wayniac wrote:

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Baron of Dice got hit for a gaming mat that was labelled as "for Warhammer 40k, Age of Sigmar, [multiple other game systems]"
So NOT for any symbols.
GW is going after the use of the word "Warhammer" (in its various forms), "Citadel" and "Blood Bowl" and don't care how you labelled your product, just that you used the trademarked term. We can condemn the use of the AI art on shirts, but that's not what this is about.

The paint pot holder was labelled "for Citadel paint pots".

Wait didn't the chapterhouse case show you COULD say that, just not present them as though they were official GW products? As in it was perfectly legal to say "Compatible with Warhammer 40,000 XYZ" but not simply "Warhammer 40,00 XYZ" which could mislead someone into thinking it was an official GW product? Wasn't that like the whole fething point of that case and why GW started "no model, no rules"?

It doesn't matter.The lawsuit comes with a temporary restraining order freezing all connected assets unless you pay up. Or good luck to keep everything running until the hearing before the judge in the US. GW targeted mostly non-US entities on purpose, hoping that they don't show up and get a default judgement.
Now you get why I quoted the article earlier on pg 1 that calls it a legal extortion scheme. GW doesn't need to win the case to ruin people.

It is a legal extortion scheme. I hope GW gets the same bad will like they did with chapterhouse, they are really a piece of gak company.

Dudeface wrote:

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Baron of Dice got hit for a gaming mat that was labelled as "for Warhammer 40k, Age of Sigmar, [multiple other game systems]"
So NOT for any symbols.
GW is going after the use of the word "Warhammer" (in its various forms), "Citadel" and "Blood Bowl" and don't care how you labelled your product, just that you used the trademarked term. We can condemn the use of the AI art on shirts, but that's not what this is about.

The paint pot holder was labelled "for Citadel paint pots".

I get these are the more renowned stores hence getting the attention, but of several hundred hit I'm pretty sure the majority are valid. Fussing over the minority caught in the mayhem appears like people are devaluing the valid claims which are in the majority AFAIK.

There's maybe 100 China recasters on the list. The 180 other people at least deserve to get the benefit of the doubt.

And the china recasters don't care because it's practically unenforceable to them.

Wayniac wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

 kodos wrote:


and I don't know whatever Baron of Dice has done to get on that list

Which kind of calls into question everything else you've written.

A quick glance at their sci-fi dice (a nice, generic, non-infringing term) shows literally dozens of sets of dice using trademarked faction symbols. Emperor's Children, Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Word Bearers, Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Blood Angels, Salamanders, Dark Angels, Black Templars, Space Wolves, Ultramarines, Sisters, Ad Mech...

It seems to be a textbook attempt to avoid listing actually trademarks in descriptions (Dark Prince, Diseased Dice, etc) while blatantly using trademarked symbols on the dice themselves, which is kind of telling in and of itself.

Does GW actually have those symbols trademarked? or are they just claiming they do like they claimed a bunch of crap in the Chapterhouse suit they had no ownership of but just tried to throw their muscle around.

Not all of them, but some like the main Marine chapter badges absolutely are.

Wayniac wrote:
And the china recasters don't care because it's practically unenforceable to them.

Yeah, they'll just change their names/accounts again.

 Hanskrampf wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Baron of Dice got hit for a gaming mat that was labelled as "for Warhammer 40k, Age of Sigmar, [multiple other game systems]"
So NOT for any symbols.
GW is going after the use of the word "Warhammer" (in its various forms), "Citadel" and "Blood Bowl" and don't care how you labelled your product, just that you used the trademarked term. We can condemn the use of the AI art on shirts, but that's not what this is about.

The paint pot holder was labelled "for Citadel paint pots".

I get these are the more renowned stores hence getting the attention, but of several hundred hit I'm pretty sure the majority are valid. Fussing over the minority caught in the mayhem appears like people are devaluing the valid claims which are in the majority AFAIK.

There's maybe 100 China recasters on the list. The 180 other people at least deserve to get the benefit of the doubt.

Why aren't we hearing of more legitimate businesses that included at this point then? Surely it'd be a smart move to apply bad PR to the situation and garner community support if they're in the right?

Because you can't pay lawyers in community support? You act as if you didn't know classic bully litigation tactics. For the majority of small time creators, the only option is to fold immediately and hope the megacorporation is merciful, regardless of who is in the right.

Mostly because you don't to that before things are sorted out.

we haven't heard anything from Baron of Dice themselves and for now it looks like they are appearing in court (and got an extansion granted to keep their shop open until that)

we have heard from a Content Creator because his case was dismissed after he got a lawyer from Florida involved, and because he makes youtube vidoes, he made a video about it afterwards
and we heard from some shops complaining how never planned to get their case dismissed (be it because they cannot afford it or know that they have no chance)

so we won't hear anything in detail especially from the legitmate buisnesses because this can have a negative inpact on their case

 kodos wrote:
this might be different for the US so please correct me, but for a symbol/logo to be trademarked it must be with the context of the company and naming

Apple cannot sue me for showing an apple with a part missing for my home grown fruit buisness
but they can sue me if I show a 2D shape of an apple with a part missing to sell electronics

Not quite. Some trademarks are so well known and valuable that any use, even in another industry, could be infringement.

There's a small chain of beer and hot wings restaurants near me called Frickers. I could probably open "Frickers Taxidermy" in the same state and probably be okay.. OTOH, I probably could not open "Applebees Taxidermy," since Applebees is a massive national brand and everybody immediatly thinks restaurant when they hear the word.

Not only is the Apple brand and logo so strong that anybody who sees it would think the tech company, Apple computers actually had to pay damages to Apple Records before buying the rights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

This is why we can't say, start "Mercedes Airlines" or "Gucci beef jerky"

Baron of Dice doesn't use any of the legal names and the symbols I have seen aren't excatly like the original
which is important because as far as we know, this was triggered by the use of trademarked names or advertising with trademarked names and not about pictures of similar looking symbols
claiming that shops use trademarked terms in the text or meta tags to trigger search egines and mislead consumers to believe those are original or licensed GW products

Once you get into the weeds of designs being similar but not exact, you are now going to have to go to a jury. Baron of Dice is obviously trading on GW's IP. It might be legally adapting their IP, but everything Baron of Dice does to market their product makes it clear they are meant to be a riff on GW stuff.

So clearly I aren't a US lawyer, that said, is it simply the method of the case people have an issue with in reality?

The above post stipulates that BoD might even need to be concerned over the icons on dice.

I guess im asking, is this a company doing what is normal for a company of its size and its unfortunate they haven't been careful?

Are people jumping to "bad mega corporation" without considering the validity of the claims? Would it matter, do some people expect to be able to operate in a legally incorrect way?

Dudeface wrote:
So clearly I aren't a US lawyer, that said, is it simply the method of the case people have an issue with in reality?

The above post stipulates that BoD might even need to be concerned over the icons on dice.

I guess im asking, is this a company doing what is normal for a company of its size and its unfortunate they haven't been careful?

Are people jumping to "bad mega corporation" without considering the validity of the claims? Would it matter, do some people expect to be able to operate in a legally incorrect way?

This is a classic "two things can be true at once" situation. Like a lot of dragnet lawsuits, this has some overreaches and some collateral damage, but I'd bet a steak dinner that the bulk of their claims are pretty valid. GW is arguably looser with it's approach to fan stuff than say, Disney.

I'm not an IP lawyer, but I don't' think GW has to defend their IP like this, but they certainly should be responsible stewards of their brand and material. Especially if they are gearing up to license stuff out for t-shirts or mats or whatever, they are going to want to shut down the bootleg stuff. A license to make GW shirts is worth way more if I'm the only one making GW shirts.

It is the method used here that is the problem (and it is not the IP, this is specific about 3rd parties using GW owned trademarks to pretend they are legitimate GW products)

GW has done several similar lawsuits in different US states the past years and no one really cared because it was a different kind of lawsuit

in this case, the benefit of the doubt is with GW, all your assets linked to your store/products are frozen (your fault if you used your private paypal/bank account for that), no matter what it is, and you have to get a lawyer in Florida and appear in court to get it dismissed
if you even got the notice that you are sued as unlike in other countries, an email is enough and the specific emails sent out were dismissed as spam and people only noticed something was up because their shops/paypal accounts were closed
(and you need to pay a lawyer to even find out why, because event he email notice wouldn't tell you what exactly your shop did wrong)

the whole thing looked legit and perfectly fine for the company protecting trademarks on the first look, it is the details that make it different, and that people on social media started to blame the company GW hired to file the case as "GW didn't want that special kind of lawsuit, it was other company that messed it up" that got the attention in the first place

 Polonius wrote:
Once you get into the weeds of designs being similar but not exact, you are now going to have to go to a jury. Baron of Dice is obviously trading on GW's IP. It might be legally adapting their IP, but everything Baron of Dice does to market their product makes it clear they are meant to be a riff on GW stuff.

if GW files a lawsuit because you used the term "Warhammer" wrong, it doesn't matter if there is something else you do that might be actually a problem

Dudeface wrote:
Are people jumping to "bad mega corporation" without considering the validity of the claims? Would it matter, do some people expect to be able to operate in a legally incorrect way?

GW doesn't seem to mind people operating in a legally incorrect way when they're bigger than GW...

I think GW has upped the game because there are more than a few that I'm aware of who have had copyright claims from GW who then just kept going. Changing their brand name; setting their Patreon to hidden; jumping around different stores.
Ergo even when GW is 100% in the right, there are a good few who abuse the systems in place as much as they can.

At some point you'd expect GW to up the game and take things to the next level, esp with repeat offenders or larger stores.

And for what it's worth... I do feel bad for some of these folks who were clearly fans that decided to sell a few things on the side. Unfortunately, once you enter the world of commerce, it is PvP and you can get one-shotted.

 Polonius wrote:
And for what it's worth... I do feel bad for some of these folks who were clearly fans that decided to sell a few things on the side. Unfortunately, once you enter the world of commerce, it is PvP and you can get one-shotted.

I always suspected that GW were spawn campers.