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.

Just want to mention that GW lawyers tried successfully to stop the sale of an e-book with Space Marine in the name, claiming a trademark they obviously don't possess.

Further discussion in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/495189.page .

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just want to mention that GW lawyers tried successfully to stop the sale of an e-book with Space Marine in the name, claiming a trademark they obviously don't possess.

Further discussion in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/495189.page .

As noted in the thread, I think GW has a solid case for claiming Space Marine as a trademark.

They make lines of games, toys and books that are called 'Space Marines'.

As far as I can tell no one else uses the term for a line of products.

Searches for Space Marine return overwhelmingly GW results.

Just because a term has been used before elsewhere (Superman for superior humans, Batman for a cricket/baseball hitter) does not mean it cannot be trademarked.

It's not as strong as say, Tyranid (a coined word) but they're not totally off base.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just want to mention that GW lawyers tried successfully to stop the sale of an e-book with Space Marine in the name, claiming a trademark they obviously don't possess.

Further discussion in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/495189.page .

As noted in the thread, I think GW has a solid case for claiming Space Marine as a trademark.

They make lines of games, toys and books that are called 'Space Marines'.

As far as I can tell no one else uses the term for a line of products.

Searches for Space Marine return overwhelmingly GW results.

Just because a term has been used before elsewhere (Superman for superior humans, Batman for a cricket/baseball hitter) does not mean it cannot be trademarked.

It's not as strong as say, Tyranid (a coined word) but they're not totally off base.

So off topic but I have to say I love EVRY signature you have ever had..... So win You should put the collection in your gallery haha

Thanks! And as for the sigs...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-518-5614_Signatures.html

czakk wrote:
They look like additional local counsel brought in for the jury trial. One rising star partner and one junior associate. Both with an engineering background (fairly common in ip / patent type lawyers).
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/39/julianne-m-hartzell
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/113/sarah-j-kalemeris

I love it how pro bono lawyers stand in line to give GW a kicking

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just want to mention that GW lawyers tried successfully to stop the sale of an e-book with Space Marine in the name, claiming a trademark they obviously don't possess.

Further discussion in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/495189.page .

As noted in the thread, I think GW has a solid case for claiming Space Marine as a trademark.

They make lines of games, toys and books that are called 'Space Marines'.

As far as I can tell no one else uses the term for a line of products.

Searches for Space Marine return overwhelmingly GW results.

Just because a term has been used before elsewhere (Superman for superior humans, Batman for a cricket/baseball hitter) does not mean it cannot be trademarked.

It's not as strong as say, Tyranid (a coined word) but they're not totally off base.

I'm pretty certain "Space Marine" has been used numerous times before in pre GW Sci Fi. In fact I'm sure Harry Harrison had Space Marines running around in his Stainless Steel Rat books. He also mentions the use of Psychic abilities for communication. In fact he even mentions them having to drop out of warp to use the skill. So it would seem that GW do like to lay claim to ideas conceived by others. Perhaps the CHS lawyers need to be made aware of this as well?

 Kroothawk wrote:

czakk wrote:
They look like additional local counsel brought in for the jury trial. One rising star partner and one junior associate. Both with an engineering background (fairly common in ip / patent type lawyers).
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/39/julianne-m-hartzell
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/113/sarah-j-kalemeris

I love it how pro bono lawyers stand in line to give GW a kicking

I love it how you assume they are working pro bono.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:

czakk wrote:
They look like additional local counsel brought in for the jury trial. One rising star partner and one junior associate. Both with an engineering background (fairly common in ip / patent type lawyers).
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/39/julianne-m-hartzell
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/113/sarah-j-kalemeris

I love it how pro bono lawyers stand in line to give GW a kicking

I love it how you assume they are working pro bono.

I'm guessing that since GW is going to pay their fees in the end, it doesn't really matter.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:

czakk wrote:
They look like additional local counsel brought in for the jury trial. One rising star partner and one junior associate. Both with an engineering background (fairly common in ip / patent type lawyers).
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/39/julianne-m-hartzell
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/113/sarah-j-kalemeris

I love it how pro bono lawyers stand in line to give GW a kicking

I love it how you assume they are working pro bono.

He didn't, it's quoted from the official documents right at the bottom of the last page.

Oops - gotta watch out Kan!

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just want to mention that GW lawyers tried successfully to stop the sale of an e-book with Space Marine in the name, claiming a trademark they obviously don't possess.

Further discussion in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/495189.page .

As noted in the thread, I think GW has a solid case for claiming Space Marine as a trademark.

They make lines of games, toys and books that are called 'Space Marines'.

As far as I can tell no one else uses the term for a line of products.

Searches for Space Marine return overwhelmingly GW results.

Just because a term has been used before elsewhere (Superman for superior humans, Batman for a cricket/baseball hitter) does not mean it cannot be trademarked.

It's not as strong as say, Tyranid (a coined word) but they're not totally off base.

It should be noted in that thread that GW doesn't own Space Marine in terms of fiction, but that's not my point, I skimmed that thread.

You said searches bring back overwhelming results of GW when searching Space Marine, if you are signed into a google account, or don't clear your cookies, google is going to tailor searches to previous searches and internet history. If you were to visit StarCraft websites, Space Marines would bring back results relating to those types of Space marines. This tailored search algorithms that Google and other sites use is why facebook ads are for 40k sellers, and apparently "Good Christian Singles" from ChristianMingle.com (you make one joke about that site, and facebook thinks that's what you're looking for).

 Alpharius wrote:
Oops - gotta watch out Kan!

Why? If he gets to spout nonsense in this thread, I can be okay with missing something in a legal brief.

Anyways, these people are getting something out of this even working pro bono. They make their living working in the IP/Copyright/Patent fields. The two from Marshall IP(gasp!) are primarily experienced in jury trials as well. With what Czakk noted, that they are "local counsel" brought in for the jury trial it makes me wonder if Hartzell and Kalemeris might be moving firms within the not so distant future.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:

czakk wrote:
They look like additional local counsel brought in for the jury trial. One rising star partner and one junior associate. Both with an engineering background (fairly common in ip / patent type lawyers).
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/39/julianne-m-hartzell
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/113/sarah-j-kalemeris

I love it how pro bono lawyers stand in line to give GW a kicking

I love it how you assume they are working pro bono.

I love it how you assume that he assumed they are working pro bono, instead of reading the document.

 Omegus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:

czakk wrote:
They look like additional local counsel brought in for the jury trial. One rising star partner and one junior associate. Both with an engineering background (fairly common in ip / patent type lawyers).
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/39/julianne-m-hartzell
http://www.marshallip.com/professionals/113/sarah-j-kalemeris

I love it how pro bono lawyers stand in line to give GW a kicking

I love it how you assume they are working pro bono.

I love it how you assume that he assumed they are working pro bono, instead of reading the document.

I did read it.

Notice how I said right above you "I can be okay with missing something in a legal brief". Now, anything more?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Oops - gotta watch out Kan!

Why? If he gets to spout nonsense in this thread, I can be okay with missing something in a legal brief.

Anyways, these people are getting something out of this even working pro bono. They make their living working in the IP/Copyright/Patent fields. The two from Marshall IP(gasp!) are primarily experienced in jury trials as well. With what Czakk noted, that they are "local counsel" brought in for the jury trial it makes me wonder if Hartzell and Kalemeris might be moving firms within the not so distant future.

If no-one is allowed to volunteer for anything because it might do them some good we will be in a sad place.

Volunteer firefighters will have to resign because they might get fit, for example.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Oops - gotta watch out Kan!

Why? If he gets to spout nonsense in this thread, I can be okay with missing something in a legal brief.

Anyways, these people are getting something out of this even working pro bono. They make their living working in the IP/Copyright/Patent fields. The two from Marshall IP(gasp!) are primarily experienced in jury trials as well. With what Czakk noted, that they are "local counsel" brought in for the jury trial it makes me wonder if Hartzell and Kalemeris might be moving firms within the not so distant future.

If no-one is allowed to volunteer for anything because it might do them some good we will be in a sad place.

Volunteer firefighters will have to resign because they might get fit, for example.

In my opinon KK, there is a rather large difference between those two ideas.

Volunteer firefighters do not have excessively high paying jobs which rely upon precedent setting behavior.
Lawyers do rely upon that. Taking a case pro bono in a situation like this means that at a later date, they can cite the precedent obtained from this case if it is favorable to them.

What point are you trying to make here Kan?

I wasn't aware I had to make a point to engage in a discussion?

If I had to make a point though:
In the field of practicing law, external and internal rewards blend together in a manner that can easily lead towards critics being cynical of even well-intentioned actions as I am of the lawyers working pro bono in this case.

 Alpharius wrote:
What point are you trying to make here Kan?

Lawyers like lawyering because it makes them money?

Or Pro Bono still means Pro Bono?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Why? If he gets to spout nonsense in this thread, I can be okay with missing something in a legal brief.

And I am okay with you missing something in the briefs

 Kanluwen wrote:
Taking a case pro bono in a situation like this means that at a later date, they can cite the precedent obtained from this case if it is favorable to them.

That's a misleading statement. It doesn't matter who the lawyer was or whether they were working pro bono. Precedent is precedent. They can cite favorable precedent, regardless whether or not they worked the case.

I'm sure you'll say you meant something different, in which case you should probably clarify your point.

Eric

 MagickalMemories wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Taking a case pro bono in a situation like this means that at a later date, they can cite the precedent obtained from this case if it is favorable to them.

That's a misleading statement. It doesn't matter who the lawyer was or whether they were working pro bono. Precedent is precedent. They can cite favorable precedent, regardless whether or not they worked the case.

I'm sure you'll say you meant something different, in which case you should probably clarify your point.

Eric

I assume it's more for adding to your resume sorta thing, like collage students do.

There are a lot of reasons to take the case on pro bono.

Reputational:
Being involved in precedent setting litigation adds prestige to the firm. Doing pro bono work also adds to the reputation of the lawyer and the firm. It earns the respect of some of your peers. Doing a jury trial gives experience.

Personal:
Likely as a specialist in the field they are genuinely interested in the case. They might have a personal preference on how the law is developed and see this as an opportunity to push that theory / agenda. They may feel the defendant is a worthy cause.

Giving back:
Part of being a lawyer is an ethical obligation to do free work for the good of society. Some places recommend 50 hours or more a year. It can be hard to get pro bono work in certain areas and this could be an opportunity to make a difference. One of the lawyers is the head of the pro bono committee.

If I recall correctly, most of the Winston & Strawn folks are based out in California, so getting an experienced local litigator for the jury trial portion of the lawsuit was likely in the cards all along.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Oops - gotta watch out Kan!

Why? If he gets to spout nonsense in this thread, I can be okay with missing something in a legal brief.

Anyways, these people are getting something out of this even working pro bono. They make their living working in the IP/Copyright/Patent fields. The two from Marshall IP(gasp!) are primarily experienced in jury trials as well. With what Czakk noted, that they are "local counsel" brought in for the jury trial it makes me wonder if Hartzell and Kalemeris might be moving firms within the not so distant future.

If no-one is allowed to volunteer for anything because it might do them some good we will be in a sad place.

Volunteer firefighters will have to resign because they might get fit, for example.

In my opinon KK, there is a rather large difference between those two ideas.

Volunteer firefighters do not have excessively high paying jobs which rely upon precedent setting behavior.
Lawyers do rely upon that. Taking a case pro bono in a situation like this means that at a later date, they can cite the precedent obtained from this case if it is favorable to them.

So can anyone else. You don't have to pay to cite precedents.

How does that benefit the individual lawyer who was involved in the case?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
How does that benefit the individual lawyer who was involved in the case?

Speaking, writing and general notoriety. The lawyer who defends a successful case is in better position to capitalize on that case than the lawyer who knows how to cite the case law. It may be to write an article for a publication or to give a lecture at a university regarding the particulars of the case. It may also just be so that the next person who comes along who may have deep pockets looks to see who won similar cases already and gets the name of a still practicing lawyer from the case itself.

There are also those who work on a more fundamental basis. A lot of IP attorneys believe that the system is fundamentally flawed, and the best way they feel they can fix that is to argue cases which they feel will move things back in the direction it was intended to function. In that regard, they may feel that they are the best suited to fight a battle...a different attorney may have well recommended that CHS attempt to settle in mediation or even before hand.

You can't cite the precedent of a case until the case actually happens. More often than not - these cases just never happen.

Experience?

Speaking as a former volunteer firefighter (since that was brought up) we had a few large career fire departments send applicants our way. We were a volunteer department that worked with the "real" firemen and were able to keep up with them and had a very good reputation in the area for our skills and professionalism. So if the big departments were not hiring, or you needed to pad your résumé, you would consider joining us.

We were probably 70% guys from the community who were legitimately in this for the whole "I have a skill and I want to use it to help my fellow man" thing and we were willing to go through a year of training for that. The other 30% were guys who used us to build their skills, get the certifications, and eventually use the "pro-bono" firefighting they did to advance their career.

Both groups were great guys and excellent professionals, but both had their own reasons for volunteering.

Not sure if any if that was relevant to the "why pro-bono" discussion...

The digression into "pro-bono," and our various interpretations of it, is over now.

i think this is very petty behaviour from GW

If they force aftermarket guys out of business it will create a vacuum in the market, then the average collector and gamer will start doing their own recasts for family and friends , especially as the kits are not cheap or will lead to more people buying from the recasters from russia

20kgs silicon = £250
10kgs resin = £100

you can do the maths as each mold will easily get 20 - 40 pulls before it disintegrates.

10kgs of resin = alot of marines and parts

12/24/2012 266 ANSWER to amended complaint by Chapterhouse Studios LLC(Kalemeris, Sarah) (Entered: 12/24/2012)

The Christmas Eve reply was filed. Full version not up on recap yet.