War Banner Now Called Footsore Miniatures & Games

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.

**OrlandotheTechnicoloured**

Updated Summary (by Manchu): Games Workshop sent a cease and desist letter to War Banner, essentially claiming that the name was too close Wrahammer. War Banner announced it would rebrand as Dark Peak Games but immediately received another C&D letter from a company called Peak Games. War Banner, which owns Footsore miniatures, is now called Footsore Miniatures & Games.

Announcement: War Banner to become Dark Peak Games

As of the 1st April 2019 War Banner Limited will become Dark Peak Games Limited, this is no April fools day joke.

On the 1st March 2019 Games Workshop Limited (GW) requested the withdrawal of our trademark WAR BANNER as in their opinion it bears significant similarity to GW’s registered trademark WARHAMMER with our registration being sought in relation to the same classification of goods which GW sells under WARHAMMER.

In their defence GW has used its trademark WARHAMMER to sell sculpted miniatures, publications and accessories for tabletop wargaming since the release of ‘Warhammer 1st Edition’ in 1983. Over the years, GW has amassed considerable goodwill and reputation in this mark through its widespread and consistent use.

After seeking legal advice Mark Farr and Andy Hobday decided to comply and have worked with GW to reach a satisfactory conclusion.

Going forwards the use of War Banner will cease across all digital platforms from the 1st April 2019. Alongside this we are also currently in the application process with Companies House to change our name to Dark Peak Games Limited as well as making other changes wherever it is needed; this will take time, so please bear with us during this transitional period. We believe by the 1st of June 2019 we will have made all necessary changes to comply.

Our printed products will continue to carry the War Banner mark for the next three months or until sell-through whichever comes first. Mortal Gods and Gangs of Rome have been granted a longer sell through as they are recent products.

Why Dark Peak Games? The Dark Peak is a favourite walking place for Andy and Mark, and it was on Mam Tor when they first decided to embark on this adventure. We have looked to incorporate Mam Tor one of the most dramatic viewpoints in the Peak District and one-time hill fort in our new logo.

If you have any questions regarding these changes please contact us.

I'd not considered War Banner as being similar to Warhammer, but I guess I can see how people might be confused and with the War Banner name becoming more prominent recently (a lot of their stuff was previously just Footsore Miniatures) so we probably need to put this down to sensible GW (just try a search for "Warbanner Miniatures" there are plenty of recent hits) instead of the crazy spots the space marine stuff of the previous management

**lord_blackfang**

Absolutely ridiculus bullying.

**Wyrmalla**

I was going to post about this in the War Banner: Modern thread over the weekend (though that one hasn't been updated in a while). Its a shame that thread's now going to have a third title in under a year. :/

However, this may not be so malicious. Trademark law is fairly awful in how its practised, and this isn't exclusive to Games Workshop.

If a trademark is used without the owner's consent for a period of time it becomes generic. Tangentially something which is similar to that trademark could potentially cause confusion, and eventually lead to the two becoming interchangeable, which may also have an affect on a trademark.

At least theoretically. In practice these lawsuits against similar trademarks don't hope to win in the courts. They're their to show that the holder is defending their brand to the fullest (and beyond that), so that later someone else can't dispute the trademark. Of course companies do this to also just crap on competitors, but well, lawyers.

War Banner could have fought this in the courts and won. They may have lost as well. By bowing out now they save the legal fees at least. The company has gone through a lot of change recently, so if there was a time to change the brand name which would cause the least damage this is it.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
Over the years, GW has amassed considerable goodwill and reputation in this mark through its widespread and consistent use.

Ahah yeah sure, GW has only ever amassed good will about their brand of the year!
Not really though, not really

.

**Sqorgar**

It makes sense. Warhammer and War Banner sound pretty similar if heard out loud, and they operate in the same industry. It'd be kind of like starting a company called His Knee that did animated versions of children's fairy tales.Though in my opinion, it'll probably negatively affect War Banner more than Games Workshop.

**Excommunicatus**

lord_blackfang wrote:
Absolutely ridiculus bullying.

Or standard practice in this area of the law, regardless of your ignorance of it.

Spots the Space Marine was "ridiculus" bullying. This is not.

**lord_blackfang**

Excommunicatus wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:
Absolutely ridiculus bullying.

Or standard practice in this area of the law, regardless of your ignorance of it.

I suppose it comes down to a person's level of literacy and how interchangeable they find "Banner" and "Hammer" to be.

**Daedalus81**

lord_blackfang wrote:
Excommunicatus wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:
Absolutely ridiculus bullying.

Or standard practice in this area of the law, regardless of your ignorance of it.

I suppose it comes down to a person's level of literacy and how interchangeable they find "Banner" and "Hammer" to be.

To be honest it sounds really, really similar.

**Excommunicatus**

Nope. It comes down to the rules on patents, trademarks and copyrights.

There does not need to be any real confusion between the two, merely the potential for confusion.

**cody.d.**

It happens frequently I suppose. When I worked in a law firm for a while I remember glancing at an email regarding a claim from Toy'R'Us against a small sextoy company who cheekily named themselves Sextoys'R'Us. Always makes me chuckle.

**Elbows**

As long as they keep their mits off my paperwork for my Hammerboner IP, we'll be fine.

**H.B.M.C.**

Wait, you mean the $5000 order I put through to War Banner wasn't for Warhammer stuff?

Oh God!!!

I thought they were the same thing!

**Theophony**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Wait, you mean the $5000 order I put through to War Banner wasn't for Warhammer stuff?

Oh God!!!

I thought they were the same thing!

Really? You thought warhammer was all of a sudden shipping you stuff FROM ENGLAND without gaking you on the price?

PS, I know you were joking.

**Ginjitzu**

I'm impressed at the professionalism and good manner with which this whole episode appears to have been resolved. Kudos to both companies, and I wish for the best of success for Dark Peak. Their new title and logo are much cooler anyway.

**Yodhrin**

Excommunicatus wrote:
Nope. It comes down to the rules on patents, trademarks and copyrights.

There does not need to be any real confusion between the two, merely the potential for confusion.

You do understand that people can have an opinion on a practice that they understand perfectly well and accounts for the fact they think that "the rules on patents, trademarks and copyrights" are moronic garbage, right? "It's legal" covers a myriad of things that quite a lot of people consider everything from daft to outright unethical. Also, those rules didn't form out of the ether as dewdrops on an angel's wing, they're the result of a century of intense lobbying and legal bullying to establish precedent, and that process will only be reversed if people oppose its use whether it's presently "legal" or not.

"You can't use the name brand we use for [thing] in the market segment that sells [that thing]." is a sensible, fair, reasonable law in the context of a capitalist economic system.

"There does not need to be any real confusion between the two, merely the potential for confusion." is utter madness outside of the wonko-world of lawyers and corporations, especially in cases like this where the words only vague sound the same, and the "infringing" term is one that any random person might arrive at as the name for a tabletop wargames company/model range.

**Rik Lightstar**

Seeing as I'm sure Andy Hobday used to work for GW and I'm guessing the other chap did too, I'd imagine this was dealt with pretty amicably.

Obviously the usual hate brigade are spewing bile as per usual over something that has no impact on their lives.

Rik

**Kid_Kyoto**

War Zone, Wargames Foundry, Urban War and Warpath had better watch their backs!

Meanwhile I'm proud to announce the launch of my new game Battleaxe in the 401st Century!

**AegisGrimm**

Screw Games Workshop. Dark Peak Games and the accompanying logo sounds cooler, anyway.

**JonWebb**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
War Zone, Wargames Foundry, Urban War and Warpath had better watch their backs!

Meanwhile I'm proud to announce the launch of my new game Battleaxe in the 401st Century!

Battleaxes is what my dad always used to call my minis back in the day. He is fun like that.

**warboss**

I guess when GW fail at bullying children's book authors into false trademark claim submission they revert back to those within the same industry.

**Kid_Kyoto**

Just for postherity sake...

Space Marines, a game from 1977

**beast_gts**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Just for postherity sake...

Space Marines, a game from 1977

Wasn't Spots more about the trademark for electronic products?

Also, Dark Peak Games is no more...

**warboss**

At this point, the guy should just randomly jam on the keyboard for the next name and hope he doesn't end up with something that will get a C&D from DC Comics.

**Excommunicatus**

Yodhrin wrote:
Excommunicatus wrote:
Nope. It comes down to the rules on patents, trademarks and copyrights.

There does not need to be any real confusion between the two, merely the potential for confusion.

You do understand that people can have an opinion on a practice that they understand perfectly well and accounts for the fact they think that "the rules on patents, trademarks and copyrights" are moronic garbage, right? "It's legal" covers a myriad of things that quite a lot of people consider everything from daft to outright unethical. Also, those rules didn't form out of the ether as dewdrops on an angel's wing, they're the result of a century of intense lobbying and legal bullying to establish precedent, and that process will only be reversed if people oppose its use whether it's presently "legal" or not.

"You can't use the name brand we use for [thing] in the market segment that sells [that thing]." is a sensible, fair, reasonable law in the context of a capitalist economic system.

"There does not need to be any real confusion between the two, merely the potential for confusion." is utter madness outside of the wonko-world of lawyers and corporations, especially in cases like this where the words only vague sound the same, and the "infringing" term is one that any random person might arrive at as the name for a tabletop wargames company/model range.

Another brilliant collection of strawman arguments, fabrications and non sequiturs.

You're getting good at them!

**Nostromodamus**

I vote for a change to “Legally Distinct Tabletop Gaming Company”, or LDTGC.

**GaroRobe**

Maybe they can switch around the words? Banner of War isn't as close to warhammer as warbanner.

**Kid_Kyoto**

I'm willing to licence the Battleaxe in the 401st Century name.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
War Peak or Dark Banner would work too

**Whirlwind**

Excommunicatus wrote:
Nope. It comes down to the rules on patents, trademarks and copyrights.

There does not need to be any real confusion between the two, merely the potential for confusion.

It likely comes down to cost of challenge. They likely consulted legal experts on how much it would cost to fight the claim, told how much it would be if they lost and that there was always a risk they could and decided that GW forcing them to live in cardboard boxes in the street wasn't worth it.

Not sure I've ever come across someone that can confuse "War Banner" and "Warhammer" though.

So in conclusion I can only assume legal experts and judges in these types of case law are a) illiterate; b) can't speak properly; c) not very bright to recognise that you can't use a war banner in the same way as a warhammer.

**Necros**

How about Dark War Banner Peak?

Or Noname Games? It rhymes so that makes it good.

**Excommunicatus**

Whirlwind wrote:
Excommunicatus wrote:
Nope. It comes down to the rules on patents, trademarks and copyrights.

There does not need to be any real confusion between the two, merely the potential for confusion.

It likely comes down to cost of challenge. They likely consulted legal experts on how much it would cost to fight the claim, told how much it would be if they lost and that there was always a risk they could and decided that GW forcing them to live in cardboard boxes in the street wasn't worth it.

Not sure I've ever come across someone that can confuse "War Banner" and "Warhammer" though.

So in conclusion I can only assume legal experts and judges in these types of case law are a) illiterate; b) can't speak properly; c) not very bright to recognise that you can't use a war banner in the same way as a warhammer.

So, if you read the OP it explicitly says they took legal advice and then acquiesced to the request.

You can assume whatever you like, old love, but the fact is that actually IP law rests on the assumption that YOU (not 'you' you, 'you' as in the "man on the Clapham omnibus") are borderline non-functioning and would be confused by vaguely similar sounding names in similar markets.

And I look around at the world in which we live and find it very hard to disagree with that assumption.

EDIT - To have to go through this and not perform even perfunctory research on your new name is just asking for it. They couldn't spend the $90 or whatever it is to run a NUANS/local equivalent search? Didn't run it through google?

Idiotic.