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.

Mohoc wrote:What does a court docket contain? Just filings, or does it include transcripts of the court room arguments?

Filings. It doesn't contain transcripts. It's just the public record of court proceedings. Anything that's privileged and confidential won't show up on the docket. However, I believe you can request open court transcripts from the court. I've never done this before, so I'm not sure if you have to be an attorney involved in the case to get access to these documents.

If you lived in Chicago, you could go to court when the parties present filings, but I think it would wind up being rather boring. However, sometimes interesting things aren't apparent from the docket, such as Judge Kennelly requiring Games Workshop to respond to early discovery. The minute entry simply read:

MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly:Motion to dismiss [35] is
denied for the reasons stated in open court. Status hearing held and continued to 5/11/2011
at 09:30 AM. Answer to amended complaint is to be filed by 4/20/2011.

The "reasons stated in open court" were that Judge Kennelly dismissed the motion but required Games Workshop to respond to early discovery. Had one been in court that morning, you would have been able to hear exactly what Judge Kennelly said, and the court reporter should have made a transcript of it, but all that got posted to the docket was the minute entry.

Kroothawk wrote:Official statement is up:

No More Lamassu

posted May 19, 2011

It is with our deepest regret that we have to announce that the Lamassu head is no more part of our Manticore kit We recently received an email from a Games Workshop attorney claiming that our Lamassu head was too similar to their Chaos Dwarves' Lamasu and asking us to stop selling this head. At this point in time we don’t have the time to further investigate this mater and so we've decided to currently withdraw the Lamassu head from sale, either online or in shop. We are sorry if you were planning to get one. So please note that at this point in time THERE IS NO MORE LAMASSU HEAD available with our Manticore kit.

http://www.ragingheroes.com/blogs/news/3241852-no-more-lamassu

Ok



Whats next a cease and desist to Nebuchadnezzar?

Once again guys, take the RH v. GW talk to the thread that already exists.

Please keep this one about "Chapterhouse Lawsuit update- motion to dismiss".

So any updates on the matter?

None past Paulson's answer. Things are chugging along, but there likely ins't going to be a substantive update every week. There's a status conference scheduled for next week. Generally speaking, it is in the interest of the Defendants for this to drag out.

This case is most likely going to settle out, but I personally hope it goes on long enough for the Defendants to start deposing GW employees.

I suppose we're going to find out exactly how large GWs corporate ego is before they realize that they don't have much of a case (my opinion) and beg CH to drop it.

Weeble, how would GW attempting to drop the case affect CHs counter?

I really hope Paulson on CHS wins. GW stomping out the little men is getting over the top. I fail to see what the big deal is when you still have to buy GW's stuff to even assemble a Space Marine. I do think the Farseer is a bit much as far as IP infringement goes.

agnosto wrote:Weeble, how would GW attempting to drop the case affect CHs counter?

It wouldn't eliminate the counter claims as they exist separately from Games Workshop's claims, as far as I understand. For some, like unfair competition, etc. it would support those claims as they first require a favorable outcome for the Defendant. In other words, GW is in a pickle and the Defendants are playing hard(er) ball. basically, Games Workshop can no longer simply back away as it would still have counter claims to deal with. What Games Workshop can do, and will likely do, is to negotiate a settlement with the Defendants. However, the Defendants have little to lose by going to court and their attorneys are smart, experienced, effective, and playing to win. I suspect that Games Workshop would have to swallow the puppy in order to get a settlement negotiation worked out.

The most elegant way for Games Workshop to slide out of this suit is to get Judge Kennelly to dismiss the case without prejudice.

weeble1000 wrote:The most elegant way for Games Workshop to slide out of this suit is to get Judge Kennelly to dismiss the case without prejudice.

If I were a judge, if it became clear that a plaintiff's strategy was to get their own case dismissed, there's no way I would dismiss it without prejudice. My thought process would be this: Have your crap together before you file the suit in the first place; if you can't do that, I'm not going to reward you with getting a potential second chance.

US courts are entirely too backed up with pending litigation to let plaintiffs make half-donkeyed efforts when filing suit.

For a laymen, how would that work and would be the consequences?

I cant stand a bully, so I'm hopeful GW retains it's hubris and lets this go to trial. They need to get spanked, hard.

GW wouldnt know a thing about "elegant", hopefully the judge gets a chance to see their practice history for what it is.

Kilkrazy wrote:For a laymen, how would that work and would be the consequences?

Simply put, if a suit is dismissed without prejudice, it means that the plaintiff can attempt to refile the same suit again at a later date.

So, if GW realizes that they were caught with their pants down, but think they could put together a winning suit with more time, they might want to have the suit dismissed without prejudice. This would give them virtually unlimited time to get their stuff together to file a more effective claim.

At least, that's my understanding from talking to my brother who practices law. I could be totally off the mark.

That sounds like having your cake and eating it too.

I presume that if GW attempted that course of action, CH would have the opportunity to ask to settle the case on its merits as presented.

OK, so in that case, how would they go about it? and how easy/difficult is it to get the case dismissed without prejudice?
(thanks for the quick reply before btw)

weeble1000 wrote:

agnosto wrote:Weeble, how would GW attempting to drop the case affect CHs counter?

It wouldn't eliminate the counter claims as they exist separately from Games Workshop's claims, as far as I understand. For some, like unfair competition, etc. it would support those claims as they first require a favorable outcome for the Defendant. In other words, GW is in a pickle and the Defendants are playing hard(er) ball. basically, Games Workshop can no longer simply back away as it would still have counter claims to deal with. What Games Workshop can do, and will likely do, is to negotiate a settlement with the Defendants. However, the Defendants have little to lose by going to court and their attorneys are smart, experienced, effective, and playing to win. I suspect that Games Workshop would have to swallow the puppy in order to get a settlement negotiation worked out.

The most elegant way for Games Workshop to slide out of this suit is to get Judge Kennelly to dismiss the case without prejudice.

I agree that I don't see CH's attorneys agreeing to a settlement unless it was uber-fantastic or unless they thought they couldn't win. Based upon the info. that you and our other resident legal eagles have provided, it doesn't sound like GW has their gack together enough to pull out a win.

From the actions that Kennelly has taken so far, I honestly don't see GW getting a dismissal without prejudice. The action so far has struck me as the judge basically saying that he thinks GW's bluff got called but is willing to give them a chance to prove their case since they weren't exactly well prepared with initial filings.

Games Workshop would have a hard time directly convincing the Judge to dismiss the case without prejudice. I don't think that's something you can really ask for.

For Judge Kennelly, dismissing the case without prejudice is a conservative solution that would not require him to stick his neck out too far or render any written opinions. It is possible that Games Workshop could be attempting to strategically move towards a dismissal without prejudice by continuing to fail at specifying its claims.

Such a dismissal would probably amount to Judge Kennelly saying, "Look guys, I don't have enough information to make a clean decision about the merits of this case. It looks like you might have a case, but what you're presenting to me doesn't get you there. I don't want to nip this thing in the bud, so I'm going to grant the Defendants' motion to dismiss. Come back later when you've got your stuff together or don't come back at all. This Court does not have time for these shenanigans."

Is this what Judge Kennelly will do? I have no idea, but I think it is one possibility. At this point it rests on too many assumptions. For example, we don't even know what interrogatories Chapterhouse Studios sent to Games Workshop and we don't know what Games Workshop's responses were. I also don't know much about Judge Kennelly personally. And we don't know what Games Workshop's strategy is.

However, one can infer that a possible reason for Games Workshop's appalling First Amended Complaint was part of a strategy aimed at getting the case dismissed.

That seems like a really move on GWs part if that is the case.

Revenent Reiko wrote:That seems like a really move on GWs part if that is the case.

Yeah, but if it works, it'll turn out to be a pretty brilliant strategic victory for GW. It would give them a couple of advantages. Firstly, if GW really believes they have a legitimate legal case, it would give them time to put together a better argument for the courts before they file the suit again.

Secondly, if GW doesn't honestly believe in the legality of their claim, the dismissal would not establish a precedent that would impact their ability to win suits in the future. This lack of a precedent would allow GW to continue with their tactic of bullying smaller companies who even remotely brush against GW's IP.

Saldiven wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:That seems like a really move on GWs part if that is the case.

Yeah, but if it works, it'll turn out to be a pretty brilliant strategic victory for GW. It would give them a couple of advantages. Firstly, if GW really believes they have a legitimate legal case, it would give them time to put together a better argument for the courts before they file the suit again.

Secondly, if GW doesn't honestly believe in the legality of their claim, the dismissal would not establish a precedent that would impact their ability to win suits in the future. This lack of a precedent would allow GW to continue with their tactic of bullying smaller companies who even remotely brush against GW's IP.

And that is exactly why i hope it doesnt happen, it would be a tactical win for them.


Please, please Judge Kennedy, do not give in to GWs BS.

weeble1000 wrote:This case is most likely going to settle out, but I personally hope it goes on long enough for the Defendants to start deposing GW employees.

Agreed.

Oh, wait, you're talking about deposing them during depositions. I was thinking of the other meaning of "depose."

weeble1000 wrote:The most elegant way for Games Workshop to slide out of this suit is to get Judge Kennelly to dismiss the case without prejudice.

I think that's pretty unlikely (as was said above). While a first complaint may be dismissed without prejudice before an answer is filed, it would be surprising for a court to dismiss an amended complaint without prejudice after a response and motion to dismiss have been filed.

Saldiven wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:That seems like a really move on GWs part if that is the case.

Yeah, but if it works, it'll turn out to be a pretty brilliant strategic victory for GW. It would give them a couple of advantages. Firstly, if GW really believes they have a legitimate legal case, it would give them time to put together a better argument for the courts before they file the suit again.

Secondly, if GW doesn't honestly believe in the legality of their claim, the dismissal would not establish a precedent that would impact their ability to win suits in the future. This lack of a precedent would allow GW to continue with their tactic of bullying smaller companies who even remotely brush against GW's IP.

It is a bit of a stretch to call any of GW's moves to date in this case 'brilliant', don't you think?

They had PLENTY of time to put together a legitimate case, and yet the didn't.

If anything, this has been nothing but bad news for GW, as it shows that you can in fact make 'after market' parts for GW models, and GW's saber rattling is just that...

Alpharius wrote:

Saldiven wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:That seems like a really move on GWs part if that is the case.

Yeah, but if it works, it'll turn out to be a pretty brilliant strategic victory for GW. It would give them a couple of advantages. Firstly, if GW really believes they have a legitimate legal case, it would give them time to put together a better argument for the courts before they file the suit again.

Secondly, if GW doesn't honestly believe in the legality of their claim, the dismissal would not establish a precedent that would impact their ability to win suits in the future. This lack of a precedent would allow GW to continue with their tactic of bullying smaller companies who even remotely brush against GW's IP.

It is a bit of a stretch to call any of GW's moves to date in this case 'brilliant', don't you think?

They had PLENTY of time to put together a legitimate case, and yet the didn't.

Do you really think that?
There was no way to foresee CH getting pro bono representation from a top IP firm, nor to see CH actually not folding like the European companies that GW has gone after in the past have done.

If anything, this has been nothing but bad news for GW, as it shows that you can in fact make 'after market' parts for GW models, and GW's saber rattling is just that...

Ehhh. It shows nothing like that really.

It shows that Chapterhouse got really really fething lucky in getting pro bono representation from a top IP firm. It's quite likely that if the pro bono hadn't shown up, this would have been done a lot faster.

Kanluwen wrote:
It shows that Chapterhouse got really really fething lucky in getting pro bono representation from a top IP firm. It's quite likely that if the pro bono hadn't shown up, this would have been done a lot faster.

Which doesn't say a whole lot about our judicial system. It's like saying you can only get a fair shake in court if you've got the money for top-notch representation.

agnosto wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
It shows that Chapterhouse got really really fething lucky in getting pro bono representation from a top IP firm. It's quite likely that if the pro bono hadn't shown up, this would have been done a lot faster.

Which doesn't say a whole lot about our judicial system. It's like saying you can only get a fair shake in court if you've got the money for top-notch representation.

I wouldn't say that. But the top-notch defense representation usually knows how to drag it out and make it as painful as possible for the plaintiff.

Kanluwen wrote:I wouldn't say that. But the top-notch defense representation usually knows how to drag it out and make it as painful as possible for the plaintiff.

Which isn't necessarily true in this instance as it was the poorly written claims from GW that made the judge tell them to take it back and redo their work and try to be specific. Who wins doesn't matter to me but you have to admit that GW's legal representatives got caught with their pants down on this one as they didn't expect a fight at all.

agnosto wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I wouldn't say that. But the top-notch defense representation usually knows how to drag it out and make it as painful as possible for the plaintiff.

Which isn't necessarily true in this instance as it was the poorly written claims from GW that made the judge tell them to take it back and redo their work and try to be specific. Who wins doesn't matter to me but you have to admit that GW's legal representatives got caught with their pants down on this one as they didn't expect a fight at all.

Which was kind of my point. This proves nothing for or against Chapterhouse other than the fact that they didn't back down and seemingly are the first US based company to be gone after by GW.

Kanluwen wrote:Which was kind of my point. This proves nothing for or against Chapterhouse other than the fact that they didn't back down and seemingly are the first US based company to be gone after by GW.

Well, GW has served C&Ds on other US based organizations (Boardgame Geeks was one). Up until now, GW has had it pretty easy since noone else has stood up to them. Personally, I see this one going the distance to a final decision as GW doesn't care about PR and there's likely to be little backlash anyway since the plastic crack addicts will buy no matter what GW does. They have to protect what they see as their IP and CH doesn't want to just close up shop so it's going to be a fight.

As to how long it will take to get through the court system. So far CH's representatives have just asked that the claims be specific and that they be proven, the judge agreed and actually went a step further in his directions; I haven't seen anything posted here that could be construed as delay tactics by the defense, it's just taking as long as it takes. The pace is set by the judge and the rules of the system.

Additionally, any delays won't necessarily cost GW anything since charges are usually by the hour worked not by the time it takes to get assigned space on a docket.

Kanluwen wrote:

Alpharius wrote:

Saldiven wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:That seems like a really move on GWs part if that is the case.

Yeah, but if it works, it'll turn out to be a pretty brilliant strategic victory for GW. It would give them a couple of advantages. Firstly, if GW really believes they have a legitimate legal case, it would give them time to put together a better argument for the courts before they file the suit again.

Secondly, if GW doesn't honestly believe in the legality of their claim, the dismissal would not establish a precedent that would impact their ability to win suits in the future. This lack of a precedent would allow GW to continue with their tactic of bullying smaller companies who even remotely brush against GW's IP.

It is a bit of a stretch to call any of GW's moves to date in this case 'brilliant', don't you think?

They had PLENTY of time to put together a legitimate case, and yet the didn't.

Do you really think that?

Yes, I do - that's why I... wrote it?

Kanluwen wrote:

There was no way to foresee CH getting pro bono representation from a top IP firm, nor to see CH actually not folding like the European companies that GW has gone after in the past have done.

If anything, this has been nothing but bad news for GW, as it shows that you can in fact make 'after market' parts for GW models, and GW's saber rattling is just that...

Ehhh. It shows nothing like that really.

It shows that Chapterhouse got really really fething lucky in getting pro bono representation from a top IP firm. It's quite likely that if the pro bono hadn't shown up, this would have been done a lot faster.

If that really is the thought process behind GW Legal's strategy, you realize how stupid that makes them, right?

If this was ONLY ever straight up bullying tactics, and it is starting to appear as if it was, GW was acting more than a little negligently, and now it looks as if they might pay the price for it.

I really do hope GW get's spanked. And this is coming from one of the "plastic crack addicts".

agnosto wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
It shows that Chapterhouse got really really fething lucky in getting pro bono representation from a top IP firm. It's quite likely that if the pro bono hadn't shown up, this would have been done a lot faster.

Which doesn't say a whole lot about our judicial system. It's like saying you can only get a fair shake in court if you've got the money for top-notch representation.

Actually, I think it suggests the opposite. It shows that there are a lot of attoneys, even top notch white-shoe law firm attorneys, who take their constitutional duties seriously and are willing to represent a client for little or no fees upon occasion.

CHS got the legal equivalent of winning the lottery when it's attorneys signed on. Paulson as well. The weird thing is you usually don't see pro bono representation in commercial claims, so that is what makes this circumstance, at least to me, so interesting.