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.

 Enigwolf wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Does this mean GW actually own 'Imperial Guard'? Isn't that a bit of a generic and historical term?

The first Google page's results only pull up 40k except for this Wikipedia entry. But I think these days it's distinctive enough that mentioning "Imperial Guard" is a clear reference to 40k.

Edit: Then again, you are right in the sense that Imperial Guard does have some very historical roots, as evidenced by this Wikipedia page too.

Google's search algorithms take into account your usual search parameters when they are presenting you with query results.

So you being interested in miniature games and generally making searches related with miniature games will get results that match your previous searches displayed further up the list, while someone more inclined to search for historical matters, for example, would get more hits regarding the historical use of the "Imperial Guard" term.

 Enigwolf wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Does this mean GW actually own 'Imperial Guard'? Isn't that a bit of a generic and historical term?

The first Google page's results only pull up 40k except for this Wikipedia entry. But I think these days it's distinctive enough that mentioning "Imperial Guard" is a clear reference to 40k.

Edit: Then again, you are right in the sense that Imperial Guard does have some very historical roots, as evidenced by this Wikipedia page too.

I would wager that there are significantly less people in the world that associate Imperial Guard with 40k (yet alone know what it is) than the number of people with a modicum of knowledge of European history that associate the term with Napoleon's Imperial Guard.

Will be interesting to see if some of the other items get challenged later on. It seems that the judge and jury both saw this case as an instance of two children fighting and tried to make a decision that gave concessions to both sides. I suspect that under appeal with a judge who actually cares, some of the GW wins maybe turned over. I think some of the GW wins boil down to the GW product and CHS product looking enough similar that the jury just said, award it to GW. It would be like a Motorcraft being awarded because a Fram oil filter is the same fundamental shape, even though they may have differences.

From over on Warseer, there will be an appeal:

nvillacci
nvillacci is offline
Veteran Sergeant nvillacci's Avatar

Join Date
Mar 2006
Posts
106

Re: Chapterhouse vs. GW studios - Summary Judgement called


I think it is important to note CHS is appealing on many points due to decisions made by the judge before a verdict was handed in.

 skyth wrote:
What I am amazed is that they found a copyright infringment on the super heavy walker...GW doesn't make one of those and there isn't even a concept of one of those from GW...(I'm assuming that we're talking about the Tau one here).

Eh? The super heavy walker is listed under things which did not infringe, and I cant see any other reference to it. Am I missing something?

There are a few places where things are written down twice. Under the "4." above, it says that they infringed upon the trademark of the Mycetic Spore, BUT in the "5." right below it, CHS was found to not infringe upon the copyright of Mycetic Spore... But the Super Heavy Assault Walker does not seem to be one of these things.

 Alfndrate wrote:
There are a few places where things are written down twice. Under the "4." above, it says that they infringed upon the trademark of the Mycetic Spore, BUT in the "5." right below it, CHS was found to not infringe upon the copyright of Mycetic Spore... But the Super Heavy Assault Walker does not seem to be one of these things.

The "Mycetic spore" thing is in two places because it was dealing with two issues. Firstly the trademark name "Mycetic Spore", which CHS was found to be infringing upon. The second I assume was the actual product, that is the model, the Mycetic spore, which was found not to infringe.

 judgedoug wrote:
I would wager that there are significantly less people in the world that associate Imperial Guard with 40k (yet alone know what it is) than the number of people with a modicum of knowledge of European history that associate the term with Napoleon's Imperial Guard.

What I think of first for Imperial Guard is this (though upon further review, "Imperial Guard" is like its tertiary name, which makes me a bad Star Wars geek):

silent25 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:
You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.

Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.

There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.

If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?

weeble1000 wrote:

silent25 wrote:

Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? ..

There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.

If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?

More helpful than this analogy might be the simple observation that CHS have to pay GW $25k. That ain't a slap on the wrist.

weeble1000 wrote:

silent25 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:
You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.

Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.

There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.

If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?

And wait four years for the ruling? No. That is a poor comparison. The point I'm trying to make, it took four years to reach this point. Just observing appeals in other cases, it can be a couple more years before the appeal is completed. As you are saying, GW was going for full shut down of CHS and didn't get it. Is it worth going back into court and risk GW getting their act together and pulling more items back into their camp? Are the losses from a couple figs and bits worth keeping the company running a half-speed because time and resources will have to be directed at the appeal? Even with continued pro-bono representation?

*edit* @HVO Pointed out they will likely have the money for the fine paid for with the KS they are currently running. CHS has made clear they intend to use some of the funds from it to pay the fine.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:

silent25 wrote:

Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? ..

There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.

If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?

More helpful than this analogy might be the simple observation that CHS have to pay GW $25k. That ain't a slap on the wrist.

For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.

silent25 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:

silent25 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:
You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.

Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.

There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.

If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?

And wait four years for the ruling? No. That is a poor comparison. The point I'm trying to make, it took four years to reach this point. Just observing appeals in other cases, it can be a couple more years before the appeal is completed. As you are saying, GW was going for full shut down of CHS and didn't get it. Is it worth going back into court and risk GW getting their act together and pulling more items back into their camp? Are the losses from a couple figs and bits worth keeping the company running a half-speed because time and resources will have to be directed at the appeal? Even with continued pro-bono representation?

*edit* @HVO Pointed out they will likely have the money for the fine paid for with the KS they are currently running. CHS has made clear they intend to use some of the funds from it to pay the fine.

They've said that profits will go towards the fine, which is 100% what you'd expect a responsible company to do.

I don't blame them for appealing. They feel certain things were ruled incorrectly.

silent25 wrote:
Is it worth going back into court and risk GW getting their act together and pulling more items back into their camp?

I'm confused, this question appears to be asked on the premise that an appeal re-runs the whole case/every single decision?

12thRonin wrote:


For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.

According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.

Well if CH appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) and GW appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) then you do get a re-run

but most likely some stuff will not be appealed by each side (where they realise their case is weak), and the court may not allow appeals for some of it either

so you get a rerun at a smaller size

*double post weirdness*

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
Well if CH appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) and GW appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) then you do get a re-run

but most likely some stuff will not be appealed by each side (where they realise their case is weak), and the court may not allow appeals for some of it either

so you get a rerun at a smaller size

That's not quite correct. The appeals process allows you to argue that mistakes of law were made, e.g., that the judge improperly allowed/excluded some piece of evidence, not re-do the entire trial.

Unless the Appellate court decides that mistakes were made that warrant a re-do of the trial, in which case it gets sent back down for a new trial.

silent25 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:

silent25 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:
You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.

Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.

There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.

If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?

And wait four years for the ruling? No. That is a poor comparison. The point I'm trying to make, it took four years to reach this point. Just observing appeals in other cases, it can be a couple more years before the appeal is completed. As you are saying, GW was going for full shut down of CHS and didn't get it. Is it worth going back into court and risk GW getting their act together and pulling more items back into their camp? Are the losses from a couple figs and bits worth keeping the company running a half-speed because time and resources will have to be directed at the appeal? Even with continued pro-bono representation?

*edit* @HVO Pointed out they will likely have the money for the fine paid for with the KS they are currently running. CHS has made clear they intend to use some of the funds from it to pay the fine.

Appeals are comparatively very quick and very inexpensive, that's just a fact. And you are being unreasonably critical of the analogy in any case. This case took 2.5 years to get to trial. A game of 40K takes 2.5 hours to play. If you want to extend the analogy, an appeal might take 12 months, maybe less. That's like waiting an hour for the TO to come back with a final rules call.

If it meant the difference between winning the tournament and not winning the tournament, yea, I'd wait an hour, especially because it would be an hour in which I could go get a beer and hang out. Appeals are lawyer work. No depositions, no affidavits, nothing that the client really has to do.

So, yea, I think my analogy is pretty darn spot on.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

12thRonin wrote:


For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.

According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.

The original complaint disagrees with you.

WHEREFORE
, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendants as follows:
1.
Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their agents, representatives,
employees, assigns, and suppliers, and all persons acting in concert or privity with them, from
infringing Plaintiff’s copyrighted works or using any of Plaintiff’s names or marks in a manner
that is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or from otherwise infringing, diluting, or
tarnishing Plaintiff’s trademarks, or from competing unfairly with Plaintiff;
2.
Directing the destruction of all infringing merchandise and molds and means of
producing the same;
3.
Awarding Plaintiff its damages and Defendants’ profits derived by reason of the
unlawful acts complained of herein and/or statutory damages as provided by law;
4.
Awarding Plaintiff treble damages as provided by law; and
5.
Awarding Plaintiff its reasonable attorney
fees, prejudgment interest, and costs of
this action as provided by law.

weeble1000 wrote:

Appeals are comparatively very quick and very inexpensive, that's just a fact. And you are being unreasonably critical of the analogy in any case. This case took 2.5 years to get to trial. A game of 40K takes 2.5 hours to play. If you want to extend the analogy, an appeal might take 12 months, maybe less. That's like waiting an hour for the TO to come back with a final rules call.

If it meant the difference between winning the tournament and not winning the tournament, yea, I'd wait an hour, especially because it would be an hour in which I could go get a beer and hang out. Appeals are lawyer work. No depositions, no affidavits, nothing that the client really has to do.

So, yea, I think my analogy is pretty darn spot on.

And with a two day tournament, you would be willing to wait an extra 5 - 6 hours for a ruling? I have yet to hear of a tournament where players force the judges to sit for hours to review rule. That is why I see it as a poor analogy.

*edit* And I know enough tournament judges that wouldn't be happy having to dig for hours for a rule while you chug beer.

*edit* But this is getting way off topic. Maybe since CHS is getting free legal representation they see no problem in appealing till they win everything.

12thRonin wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:

12thRonin wrote:


For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.

According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.

The original complaint disagrees with you.

WHEREFORE
, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendants as follows:
1.
Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their agents, representatives,
employees, assigns, and suppliers, and all persons acting in concert or privity with them, from
infringing Plaintiff’s copyrighted works or using any of Plaintiff’s names or marks in a manner
that is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or from otherwise infringing, diluting, or
tarnishing Plaintiff’s trademarks, or from competing unfairly with Plaintiff;
2.
Directing the destruction of all infringing merchandise and molds and means of
producing the same;
3.
Awarding Plaintiff its damages and Defendants’ profits derived by reason of the
unlawful acts complained of herein and/or statutory damages as provided by law;
4.
Awarding Plaintiff treble damages as provided by law; and
5.
Awarding Plaintiff its reasonable attorney
fees, prejudgment interest, and costs of
this action as provided by law.

So, that all considered, did GW ask for more than $25k? I know costs aren't decided.

I saw quotes earlier that GW demanded $400,000. True, or fantasy?

12thRonin wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:

12thRonin wrote:


For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.

According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.

The original complaint disagrees with you.

WHEREFORE
, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendants as follows:
1.
Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their agents, representatives,
employees, assigns, and suppliers, and all persons acting in concert or privity with them, from
infringing Plaintiff’s copyrighted works or using any of Plaintiff’s names or marks in a manner
that is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or from otherwise infringing, diluting, or
tarnishing Plaintiff’s trademarks, or from competing unfairly with Plaintiff;
2.
Directing the destruction of all infringing merchandise and molds and means of
producing the same;
3.
Awarding Plaintiff its damages and Defendants’ profits derived by reason of the
unlawful acts complained of herein and/or statutory damages as provided by law;
4.
Awarding Plaintiff treble damages as provided by law; and
5.
Awarding Plaintiff its reasonable attorney
fees, prejudgment interest, and costs of
this action as provided by law.

I'm not sure I follow you. Defendant's profits came out to $25k. I see nothing that contradicts that.

Most recently we've got a statement to that effect in the joint status report:

And although the jury awarded $25,000 to
Games Workshop, that was a tiny fraction of the hundreds of thousands of dollars Games Workshop
had initially sought. Far from showing it prevailed, the fact that Games Workshop was forced to
make a demand for that small amount after years of litigation confirms it did not prevail.

@Sinful Hero:

The $25,000 "requested" by GW was a modification of the original demands of the suit that happened towards the end of the trial.

The original demands from GW were for CHS to be completely shut down, all their molds destroyed, all profits earned by CHS during the company's existance to be turned over to GW, and for CHS to pay for GW's legal expenses.

So, in comparison to what GW originally asked for, $25,000 is next to nothing.

Ah, understood. I also believe there's a reference to that in he 1st document above where GW states that their original request was 25k. On my phone atm, and it's hard for me to link to the actual page. That was my source of information.

silent25 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:

Appeals are comparatively very quick and very inexpensive, that's just a fact. And you are being unreasonably critical of the analogy in any case. This case took 2.5 years to get to trial. A game of 40K takes 2.5 hours to play. If you want to extend the analogy, an appeal might take 12 months, maybe less. That's like waiting an hour for the TO to come back with a final rules call.

If it meant the difference between winning the tournament and not winning the tournament, yea, I'd wait an hour, especially because it would be an hour in which I could go get a beer and hang out. Appeals are lawyer work. No depositions, no affidavits, nothing that the client really has to do.

So, yea, I think my analogy is pretty darn spot on.

And with a two day tournament, you would be willing to wait an extra 5 - 6 hours for a ruling? I have yet to hear of a tournament where players force the judges to sit for hours to review rule. That is why I see it as a poor analogy.

*edit* And I know enough tournament judges that wouldn't be happy having to dig for hours for a rule while you chug beer.

*edit* But this is getting way off topic. Maybe since CHS is getting free legal representation they see no problem in appealing till they win everything.

If you could appeal until you won everything, why the hell should you not appeal? I guess I am completely failing to follow your logic on this. I can see saying that in a cost/benefit analysis, an appeal might cost X , have Y chance of succeeding, and only get you Z if you did succeed. I would get that. But you seem to be arguing that even with the ability to "win everything," it is better to just be a man and accept that you came out okay in the first place. That just doesn't compute with me.

Not that I am saying anything about either party's chances on appeal, mind, or even desire/ability to appeal. But as a general matter, if your cost to appeal is low, your risk of losing what you have already won is low, your potential benefit from succeeding is significant, and you are already opposing another party's appeal anyway, you might as well appeal almost regardless of your chances of success. And if you predict good chances of success, why in the world would you not?

You seem to be saying that CHS should not appeal because it just wouldn't be gentlemanly. You seem to be saying that you should take your licks and move on with your life. I think that is a fine enough sentiment, but the reason I used a gaming analogy in the first place was because appeals are just part of the process, like getting a rules call from a TO. This is not a friendly game. The parties are not going to be laughing and drinking beers after.

If it was friendly, it would have settled out a long, long, long time ago. Seriously, go have a look at what Judge Gilbert said back in September of 2011.

Ah Judge Gilbert, the Cassandra of this case; nobody listened to him.

That's an interesting list above and I agree it looks like the jury just threw bits of paper in he air and awarded based upon where they landed; I'm interested to see what happens next. July 15th, right?

Also,
*gets out the popcorn and watches silent argue with someone that deals with law and courts everyday* wheeze.


Edit:
Confused my Greek mythology..

 agnosto wrote:
Ah Judge Gilbert, the Pandora of this case;

"Cassandra" I think. Able to predict the future but doomed to have no one listen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 agnosto wrote:


That's an interesting list above and I agree it looks like the jury just threw bits of paper in he air and awarded based upon where they landed;

As a far as I can tell we haven't seen the jury instructions - what looks random to us might make sense given what they were told / instructed.

 SickSix wrote:
Woah, wait a minute. They actually upheld GW's claim to the generic geometric shapes representing devastator and assault squad shoulder icons?

I guess I don't get some of these decisions. CHS infringed on 'Rhino' but not 'Black Templar'. They infringed on 'Flesh Tearer' but no 'Blood Angel'....

It just seems nonsensical to me.

I wouldn't normally quote myself but I think my post got lost at the bottom of the last page.

Would my confusion about some of the rulings be shared with Nick and his legal team and that is why they are appealing?