Switch Theme:

Beasts of War to Terminate Affiliation with Wayland Games, thanks to GW Legal Threats  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in pt
Tea-Kettle of Blood




 DarthOvious wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Where have you been the past couple of years? GW isn't above doing "less than legal" things to try and get their way, just look at the CHS case...


No offence here but legal matters are not always as simple as someone clearly being in the wrong while another one being clearly in the right. Sometimes it can be a difficult thing to call. The CHS episode isn't evidence that GW were trying to do something completely illegal that they were clearly not allowed to do. They would have had some sort of foot to stand on and a reasonable argument presented in court. Its just that it didn't go their way on that particular day and the court sided with Chapter House rather than GW on this particular issue. In hindsight it was an argument to do with Intellectual Property and whther Chapater House were violating that or not.

I think a lot of people are reading too much into a lot of these legal issues. All you need to realise is that it is a dispute between two companies which will get resolved in court in the end.


I'm not saying that GW is clearly in the wrong in the BoW's issue or that they are in the right, I'm not a lawyer to be able to determine that. What I am saying is that it appears that GW is in the wrong, the problem is that to find that out it would take a whole bucket load of money and probably several years and I really doubt that Wayland is willing to go to all that trouble / expense when a simple solution like the one that they took is available...

And when I'm talking about the CHS case, I'm not talking about the verdict or the initial lawsuit, I'm talking about their behaviour during the case itself, i.e. lying to a Federal judge, lying to the Patents Office, trying to get artists to sign contracts after the fact due to "lost paperwork" and all that wonderful behaviour that GW used to try and win the case...

 DarthOvious wrote:

And have you watched the BoW video? Even getting a lawyer to look at a C&D and getting their opinion costs several hundred pounds. Do you think that a small operation like BoW or Wayland can afford to get into a legal dispute without some sort of free legal council, even if they are in the right?


Its not GWs fault that legal matters are costly. However in terms of this trade agreement, considering that it went to every one of their suppliers, if it was completely illegal then it wouldn't take much to sue them and then they would be fined. Everybody thinks that GW just writes these things into their contracts and that they are clearly and completely illegal. If this is the case then GW are opening themselves up to massive fines. I just don't believe they are that stupid.


No, its not GWs fault that legal matters are this costly, but that doesn't mean that they aren't taking advantage of those costs to bully smaller companies into doing what they wan't. Because it doesn't matter if GW are right or wrong when just the process of fighting them in the courts will bankrupt smaller companies!
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




West Midlands (UK)

 DarthOvious wrote:


Do we stop buying Haagen-Dazs ice cream for being big bullies?


Some certainly do.

Why do people only know the extremes of "no effect whatsoever" and "company goes bust" in these things?

It's difficult to totally put a thriving company out of business with bad online-vibes, but that doesn't mean it has no financial impact at all.


   
Made in us
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator






 DarthOvious wrote:
Took note of this bit:

CHS ordered to pay GW damages of $25,000 USD


I've yet to see anybody give Chpaterhouse any hassle for breaking the law. It looks as if GW did have some sort of claim in regards to this. Enough of a claim to be awarded damages at least anyhow.


Chapterhouse has taken tons of gak for their chosen business model, and if you haven't seen that you are actively trying not to. Yes, they paid a relatively small amount in damages. Especially small when compared to the damages sought by GW.
 DarthOvious wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:

The bit I took note of was that GW lost over 2/3rds of the claims.
Yes Chapterhouse was found to be in the wrong in some cases but GW were clearly, once again, playing the bully by suing over things like fur and roman numerals.


So they still won a 1/3rd of the claims. So my point still stands true. Legal matters are never as easy as saying that one party is clearly 100% wrong while the other party is 100% right. They both had claims to make and they both won some and lost some. However of course everybody else is crying about poor old Chapterhouse but its only GW who come off looking like the bad guy.

I rather be sensible and believe that legal issues are never are straightforward as people think they are.

Also can you provide a source for your claim that they were suing over fur and Roman numerals? I have a feeling its probably a bit more complicated than that but I would like to read up on it first before making judgements.

I'm not going to find the specific post, but the list of claims by GW is in the Chapterhouse thread in the Discussion sub-forum (via a link to the pdf court documents). It is exactly as uncomplicated as was suggested. They definitely tried for some extremely non-specific items.

Oh, and they won 1/3 of the items that actually made it to trial, not 1/3 of the items that they brought suit for. Many were dismissed, with prejudice, before this even made it in front of a jury.

Did you read the rest of the pathetically brief BoLS piece even? (Seriously, read through the thread here; lots of good, detailed information, and commentary from people who know their gak about law.) GW lost on the claim of infringement on the shape of their Space Marine shoulder pads for crying out loud. Also, seems that the former GW head in-house counsel is looking for work all of a sudden...

Legal issues are rarely black and white, and IP law is some of the muddiest water around. That doesn't make what GW pulled with Chapterhouse, the "Spots the Space Marine" author, or what hey are trying to pull with their new trade terms any less bs. Remember kids, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it. A bully is a bully, whether on the playground or in the courtroom.

There seems to be some heavy-duty water carrying going on here...

~Eric

Pre-Submit addendum:
 DarthOvious wrote:

Thats why I wanted to read more into it before deciding. So are we all in agreement here? Do we stop buying Haagen-Dazs ice cream for being big bullies?

If we have the ability to think beyond ourselves and see the bigger picture, then yes. With regard to GW, anyway.

Zweischneid listed some examples of ridiculous lawsuits, sure. But unless there is a pattern of repeated similar behavior from those companies, then I'm not sure it counts as bullying. Just stupidity.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/09 13:08:13


   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Macclesfield, UK

PhantomViper wrote:
I'm not saying that GW is clearly in the wrong in the BoW's issue or that they are in the right, I'm not a lawyer to be able to determine that. What I am saying is that it appears that GW is in the wrong, the problem is that to find that out it would take a whole bucket load of money and probably several years and I really doubt that Wayland is willing to go to all that trouble / expense when a simple solution like the one that they took is available...


I agree they took the simple solution. Whther or not GW had a good claim or not in their contracts is entirely up to the law and I don't think we're going to see the outcome to that.

And when I'm talking about the CHS case, I'm not talking about the verdict or the initial lawsuit, I'm talking about their behaviour during the case itself, i.e. lying to a Federal judge, lying to the Patents Office, trying to get artists to sign contracts after the fact due to "lost paperwork" and all that wonderful behaviour that GW used to try and win the case...


Oooohhhhh, gimme some info on that. I didn't know about this.

No, its not GWs fault that legal matters are this costly, but that doesn't mean that they aren't taking advantage of those costs to bully smaller companies into doing what they wan't. Because it doesn't matter if GW are right or wrong when just the process of fighting them in the courts will bankrupt smaller companies!


Yes but obviously the assumption here is that they are in the wrong for doing it when perhaps they are not and they may have a claim. In my train of thought I see this as an issue that a case can be made either way. I do believe that each side will have a reasonable defence for what they want to claim. Its upto a court to decide what the income would be. Wayland Games & BoW will probably make a defence in their side that neither of them are technically the same company despite their affiliation and respond that making news on leaks isn't illegal. GW will probably claim that such leaks are a source of damage to their Intellectual Property and will want to trade with companies that do not do this and so have included a contractual agreement stating this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Zweischneid wrote:
 DarthOvious wrote:


Do we stop buying Haagen-Dazs ice cream for being big bullies?


Some certainly do.

Why do people only know the extremes of "no effect whatsoever" and "company goes bust" in these things?

It's difficult to totally put a thriving company out of business with bad online-vibes, but that doesn't mean it has no financial impact at all.



Agreed. I'm just making a light hearted joke.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/09 13:07:52


 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




 DarthOvious wrote:

And when I'm talking about the CHS case, I'm not talking about the verdict or the initial lawsuit, I'm talking about their behaviour during the case itself, i.e. lying to a Federal judge, lying to the Patents Office, trying to get artists to sign contracts after the fact due to "lost paperwork" and all that wonderful behaviour that GW used to try and win the case...


Oooohhhhh, gimme some info on that. I didn't know about this.


Me too!
   
Made in us
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator






garf wrote:
 DarthOvious wrote:

And when I'm talking about the CHS case, I'm not talking about the verdict or the initial lawsuit, I'm talking about their behaviour during the case itself, i.e. lying to a Federal judge, lying to the Patents Office, trying to get artists to sign contracts after the fact due to "lost paperwork" and all that wonderful behaviour that GW used to try and win the case...


Oooohhhhh, gimme some info on that. I didn't know about this.


Me too!


Pretty much everything from or about the trial was posted,and discussed here on Dakka in this thread.

Long thread, but worth the read.

~Eric

   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!



UK

 Zweischneid wrote:
 DarthOvious wrote:


Also can you provide a source for your claim that they were suing over fur and Roman numerals? I have a feeling its probably a bit more complicated than that but I would like to read up on it first before making judgements.


Can't give you details, but it wouldn't be unusual for them to try.

Other companies try it all the time.

Haagen-Dazs sued Frusen Gladje for using "vaguely scandinavian-sounding" words to name ice cream (until they found out that Frusen Gladje, unlike Haagen-Dazs is actually a proper Swedish term).

Spike Lee sued Spike TV because he thought he owns everything containing the word "Spike".

NBC once thought they "own" the concept of "Top 10 Lists" on Television.

Monster Cables tried to sue Disney (yeah.. that sounds like a plan!) for using their totally unique company name in a movie called "Monsters Inc"

The thing is, once the basic costs of a lawyer or two are negligible for you as a company, or you even have a few on your payroll that need to do something, there's absolutely no disincentive to just giving it a try. The worst that can happen is you lose the case. Big deal. But if you win, you might suddenly "own" a highly generic, highly public concept.



So what you're saying is you can't cite a source for your claim that GW sued chapterhouse for roman numerals and fur

Dead account, no takesy-backsies 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

Thread is here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/355433.page

188 pages of quite interesting behavior from GW, if you have never read this thread, then commenting on CHS case and what was won or lost and were GW was right or not is not really good.
   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!



UK

I think attempting to bully someone out of a discussion because they haven't read a 200-page thread that's tangentially related is "not really good" too. Funny that. I dabbled at the time but I'm not about to go poring through it to back up something someone else said. I'm not the one that brought up CHS, and I haven't made any pronouncements about it or the judgements either way.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/09 13:22:43


Dead account, no takesy-backsies 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Macclesfield, UK

 Taarnak wrote:

Chapterhouse has taken tons of gak for their chosen business model, and if you haven't seen that you are actively trying not to. Yes, they paid a relatively small amount in damages. Especially small when compared to the damages sought by GW.


I meant specifically within this thread. If some people give CH hassle for what they do then fine.


I'm not going to find the specific post, but the list of claims by GW is in the Chapterhouse thread in the Discussion sub-forum (via a link to the pdf court documents). It is exactly as uncomplicated as was suggested. They definitely tried for some extremely non-specific items.

Oh, and they won 1/3 of the items that actually made it to trial, not 1/3 of the items that they brought suit for. Many were dismissed, with prejudice, before this even made it in front of a jury.


It would be good to see some of it. Were the lawyers having a good go were they? Seems like lawyers are trying to pull crap like this off.

Did you read the rest of the pathetically brief BoLS piece even? (Seriously, read through the thread here; lots of good, detailed information, and commentary from people who know their gak about law.) GW lost on the claim of infringement on the shape of their Space Marine shoulder pads for crying out loud. Also, seems that the former GW head in-house counsel is looking for work all of a sudden...


I've not read the comments no. Did they say why the former head in-house counsel was looking for work? Is it a case of GW letting him go because he lost parts of the case or was it GW letting him go because of the case he put forward to begin with?

Legal issues are rarely black and white, and IP law is some of the muddiest water around. That doesn't make what GW pulled with Chapterhouse, the "Spots the Space Marine" author, or what hey are trying to pull with their new trade terms any less bs. Remember kids, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it. A bully is a bully, whether on the playground or in the courtroom.

There seems to be some heavy-duty water carrying going on here...


I agree that the issue with spots the space marine was stupid. When I was looking for it I was expecting something that perhaps could be claimed copyright but when I found the book the front cover had nothing to do with power armoured marines. It was a completely different type of space marine and I don't think GW can claim copyright to the term since they didn't originally come up with the term. However it would be inteeresting to see if the term is copyrighted and who holds it.

If we have the ability to think beyond ourselves and see the bigger picture, then yes. With regard to GW, anyway.

Zweischneid listed some examples of ridiculous lawsuits, sure. But unless there is a pattern of repeated similar behavior from those companies, then I'm not sure it counts as bullying. Just stupidity.


I guess we'll see what GW gets up to in future. I will admit that I'm not impressed with some of their antics. If they continue this train of thought then I think one day they will end up on the losing side of a court battle made against them. Something like the makers of the Alien franchise suing them for using the term Space Marine.
   
Made in us
Terminator with Assault Cannon





Florida

GW not only tried to claim ownership of Roman numerals bit also basic geometric shapes (tactical arrows etc. )

SickSix's Silver Skull WIP thread
My Youtube Channel
JSF wrote:... this is really quite an audacious move by GW, throwing out any pretext that this is a game and that its customers exist to do anything other than buy their overpriced products for the sake of it. The naked arrogance, greed and contempt for their audience is shocking.
= Epic First Post.
 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Thread is here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/355433.page

188 pages of quite interesting behavior from GW, if you have never read this thread, then commenting on CHS case and what was won or lost and were GW was right or not is not really good.


I'm sorry but its not that interesting, especially "read nearly 200 pages of mostly garbage because I dont want to type a few lines) :(
   
Made in us
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator






DarthOvious wrote:
 Taarnak wrote:

Chapterhouse has taken tons of gak for their chosen business model, and if you haven't seen that you are actively trying not to. Yes, they paid a relatively small amount in damages. Especially small when compared to the damages sought by GW.


I meant specifically within this thread. If some people give CH hassle for what they do then fine.

Your statement originally struck me as an absolute one. Limiting it to this thread just makes it look like you are trying to dodge conceding a point though.

DarthOvious wrote:
I'm not going to find the specific post, but the list of claims by GW is in the Chapterhouse thread in the Discussion sub-forum (via a link to the pdf court documents). It is exactly as uncomplicated as was suggested. They definitely tried for some extremely non-specific items.

Oh, and they won 1/3 of the items that actually made it to trial, not 1/3 of the items that they brought suit for. Many were dismissed, with prejudice, before this even made it in front of a jury.


It would be good to see some of it. Were the lawyers having a good go were they? Seems like lawyers are trying to pull crap like this off.

It is extremely interesting (and eye-opening). There are transcripts, evidentiary filings, and rulings all linked in the thread here on Dakka. And they are spread out, so not easy to find or point to. But the entire thread is worth reading.

DarthOvious wrote:
Did you read the rest of the pathetically brief BoLS piece even? (Seriously, read through the thread here; lots of good, detailed information, and commentary from people who know their gak about law.) GW lost on the claim of infringement on the shape of their Space Marine shoulder pads for crying out loud. Also, seems that the former GW head in-house counsel is looking for work all of a sudden...


I've not read the comments no. Did they say why the former head in-house counsel was looking for work? Is it a case of GW letting him go because he lost parts of the case or was it GW letting him go because of the case he put forward to begin with?

Well, she will likely never come out and say for sure whether she was fired, asked to resign, or voluntarily quit, so we will always be in the dark about that. And we will never know whether it was her performance during the trial, her setup for it, or some combination thereof. We do know via her Linkedin profile that she is looking for work.

DarthOvious wrote:
Legal issues are rarely black and white, and IP law is some of the muddiest water around. That doesn't make what GW pulled with Chapterhouse, the "Spots the Space Marine" author, or what hey are trying to pull with their new trade terms any less bs. Remember kids, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it. A bully is a bully, whether on the playground or in the courtroom.

There seems to be some heavy-duty water carrying going on here...


I agree that the issue with spots the space marine was stupid. When I was looking for it I was expecting something that perhaps could be claimed copyright but when I found the book the front cover had nothing to do with power armoured marines. It was a completely different type of space marine and I don't think GW can claim copyright to the term since they didn't originally come up with the term. However it would be inteeresting to see if the term is copyrighted and who holds it.

I don't believe that the original use of the term would be protected anymore. IIRC, it was used first in the 30's. This, also was discussed in the Chapterhouse thread though. (Seeing a theme? )

DarthOvious wrote:
If we have the ability to think beyond ourselves and see the bigger picture, then yes. With regard to GW, anyway.

Zweischneid listed some examples of ridiculous lawsuits, sure. But unless there is a pattern of repeated similar behavior from those companies, then I'm not sure it counts as bullying. Just stupidity.


I guess we'll see what GW gets up to in future. I will admit that I'm not impressed with some of their antics. If they continue this train of thought then I think one day they will end up on the losing side of a court battle made against them. Something like the makers of the Alien franchise suing them for using the term Space Marine.


We don't really need to see what they do in the future. The pattern of bad behaviour is already in the historical record.

It would be entertaining for some other, larger, companies whose work "inspired" GW in the past to take an interest in them, for sure. Come to think of it, there is a large computer games company (EA, I think) who is using designs that seem heavily "inspired" by GW ones. Wonder why they haven't been sued yet?...

~Eric

   
Made in pt
Tea-Kettle of Blood




Ok, here it goes in broad strokes (just because I don't have much to do at work):

Lying to a Federal Judge: I don't remember if it was just before the trial started or before the suit was filled, but GW tried to copyright the SM shoulder pads with the Copyright Office, to which the Copyright Office replied: NOOOOPE, that is too generic a shape.

They hid this information from the Judge and from CHS's defence counsel and when the Judge, not knowing that the claim had already been denied by the Copyright Office, admitted GW's claim of the shoulder pads copyright to trial, GW went back to the Copyright Office and said: look here, a Federal Judge says that we can copyright this!

CHS's defence counsel found out about this and brought it to the Judge and that is why we know that that happened.

Lying to their artists: When as part of the pre-trial procedures GW had to prove that they indeed had the rights to several of the claims that they... claimed, they found out that they had none of the paperwork to prove it, which meant that all those pieces really belonged to the original artists that had created them. Undaunted by this, they proceeded to contact those artists and to ask them to sign over the rights because they had lost all of their paperwork from 30 years ago.

We have statements from some of the artists that say that that paperwork never actually existed and that they never waived their rights to their artwork in the first place (and AFAIK they even testified about it in court ).

That is some of what happened, if you wan't more details, you'll really have to read through the thread in question.
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

The problem is its not a few lines, its quite more complicated than just saying this happened and its quite a bit off topic for here, you can filter the thread and read the posts of actual layers in the CHS thread like weeble1000 and have a good commentary.

The really short description is GW went in all guns blazing with sole interest in killing CHS, not getting compensated, not claiming damages, but killing it, their claims were massive and far reaching including copyright things to sculls, halberds, roman numericals and even that they create everything in isolation without any outside inspiration.

They delayed the possess in every way possible, even lying to the judge and the patent office (and been caught by the oppositions investigation) and when they were called to prove they own the stuff they claimed they do, it was discovered they owned very little, most artists did not give them rights to their artwork just first publication (and we know how much they recycle their artwork) and one at least was never payed for his work, despite that, GW tried to make them sign contracts post trial to give them all rights, most send them away, their excuse to the court was they somehow lost the original contracts.

its a really short rough summary that does not do justice to the case.
   
Made in us
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator






garf wrote:
 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Thread is here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/355433.page

188 pages of quite interesting behavior from GW, if you have never read this thread, then commenting on CHS case and what was won or lost and were GW was right or not is not really good.


I'm sorry but its not that interesting, especially "read nearly 200 pages of mostly garbage because I dont want to type a few lines) :(


I'm sure PS can defend himself, but I feel the need to say: It is hardly a case of "typing a few lines". There is so much stuff in that thread that it is effectively impossible to point to any one post as the thing you were looking for.

I could just as easily say that you just don't want to search a few pages...

~Eric

Edit: PS beat me to it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/09 13:50:41


   
Made in gb
Boom! Leman Russ Commander





UK

 SickSix wrote:
GW not only tried to claim ownership of Roman numerals bit also basic geometric shapes (tactical arrows etc. )


I remember reading one part of the case transcript though where GW's attempted claim was explained as "Roman numerals + tactical arrow/ assault arrows/devastator chevron+shoulderpad = protectable item" rather than the individual elements themselves.

Something about if you throw enough common unprotectable items into a design and you ultimately end up with something that you can attempt to copyright/trademark/protect..

Due to the absolute mass of paperwork generated, I don't expect I could find that actual statement again though.




   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!



UK

alphaecho wrote:
 SickSix wrote:
GW not only tried to claim ownership of Roman numerals bit also basic geometric shapes (tactical arrows etc. )


I remember reading one part of the case transcript though where GW's attempted claim was explained as "Roman numerals + tactical arrow/ assault arrows/devastator chevron+shoulderpad = protectable item" rather than the individual elements themselves.

Something about if you throw enough common unprotectable items into a design and you ultimately end up with something that you can attempt to copyright/trademark/protect..

Due to the absolute mass of paperwork generated, I don't expect I could find that actual statement again though.





But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous

Dead account, no takesy-backsies 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

 Bull0 wrote:


But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous


That's a big if and a huge assumption that everybody here mentioning it is really lying, you can of course go like everybody else follow the trial read the transcripts and form your won opinion, see the charts and the notes on what they claimed it was their, read the experts reports and the discussion by forum members there, inducing actual layers.

Or you can assume everybody here is purposefully lie.

   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!



UK

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
 Bull0 wrote:


But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous


That's a big if and a huge assumption that everybody here mentioning it is really lying, you can of course go like everybody else follow the trial read the transcripts and form your won opinion, see the charts and the notes on what they claimed it was their, read the experts reports and the discussion by forum members there, inducing actual layers.

Or you can assume everybody here is purposefully lie.



Well I've got one group of people telling me that they tried to sue over the use of "roman numerals and fur", and I've got one person telling me what seems like a much more likely thing - that they were suing over the combination of elements. Somebody's telling porkies. Again, you're asking me to stop commenting and go read a 200-page thread instead, because the fact that I've noticed there are 2 conflicting reports on this isn't good enough.

Honestly I think this thread got badly derailed as soon as you brought the CHS lawsuit into it. Like it wasn't convincing enough that what GW did re: BoW and WG was evil, so you had to say "but these other things they did were evil too". HOWEVER, when it comes to discussing those other things, you're telling us we have to go educate ourselves in another thread and that it isn't on you to explain and prove that what they did was bad. How about no? If you're bringing a tangentially related point into this, the burden's on you to make your own point and to back it up when asked.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/10/09 14:14:42


Dead account, no takesy-backsies 
   
Made in pt
Tea-Kettle of Blood




 Bull0 wrote:

But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous


Taken from the CHS Trial verdict (just the objects in question):

The following 67 products of defendant are non-infringing of plaintiff’s copyrights (product numbers refer to numbering in Plaintiff's Trial Exhibits 1020 and 1021):

First squad or I Shoulder pad (product 53);
V Power shoulder pads (products 151-152);

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/09 14:15:07


 
   
Made in gb
Boom! Leman Russ Commander





UK

 Bull0 wrote:
alphaecho wrote:
 SickSix wrote:
GW not only tried to claim ownership of Roman numerals bit also basic geometric shapes (tactical arrows etc. )


I remember reading one part of the case transcript though where GW's attempted claim was explained as "Roman numerals + tactical arrow/ assault arrows/devastator chevron+shoulderpad = protectable item" rather than the individual elements themselves.

Something about if you throw enough common unprotectable items into a design and you ultimately end up with something that you can attempt to copyright/trademark/protect..

Due to the absolute mass of paperwork generated, I don't expect I could find that actual statement again though.





But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous


There is so much paperwork kicking around about the case though that I can't deny roman numerals were claimed in isolation at some point. I can White Knight with the best of them but at present my armour is unpolished and my faithful charger Albino is asleep in the stable.

And Bull0, no-one is necesarily telling porkies. I know I certainly didn't read all the transcripts.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/09 14:19:28


   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!



UK

PhantomViper wrote:
 Bull0 wrote:

But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous


Taken from the CHS Trial verdict (just the objects in question):

The following 67 products of defendant are non-infringing of plaintiff’s copyrights (product numbers refer to numbering in Plaintiff's Trial Exhibits 1020 and 1021):

First squad or I Shoulder pad (product 53);
V Power shoulder pads (products 151-152);



Right so that's a curved shoulder pad with an I or a V on it. Is that the same as "claiming ownership of roman numerals"? Message control is just *so* important on this, if you say that GW "tried to copyright roman numerals" when you mean GW "tried to copyright the curved shoulderpad shape they use with a roman numeral on it" you're being very misleading, imo. I'd even be happy enough to say that claiming ownership of a curved shoulderpad with a roman numeral on it is overreaching and they shouldn't have done that, that's the funny thing, but you're doing nothing less than sabotaging the argument if you misrepresent it as claiming ownership of a roman numeral.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/10/09 14:22:51


Dead account, no takesy-backsies 
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

Ok, for those interested but unmotivated.

Pg 170 in the CHS thread is the point where the trial concludes,
There is a post by czakk (who I believe is a practicing lawyer) half way down pg 178 which has the ruling documents attached.

No trawling required.

We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in de
Scrap Thrall





Sheffield, UK

From page 5 of this extract http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/gov.uscourts.ilnd_.250791.386.0.pdf

3(a) In just the same way that Dr. Grindley affirmatively admitted there were no known
limits on the numbers of ways one could design shoulder pads or other products and that there was
no basis to find any of the design elements at issue standard or indispensible in any relevant field,
Chapterhouse’s other expert, Mr. Brewster conceded that, for each of the elements he identified as
having been used previously (such as chevrons, Roman numeral, arrows or skulls), there was
nothing standard in the usage of such symbols that would compel Chapterhouse to use those
symbols, much less the specific combinations of elements Games Workshop used. There is, thus,
no basis to conclude any of the images he identified are relevant to any issue in the case and do not
begin to establish that anything about the specific designs Games Workshop is claiming in this case
are in any respect standard or indispensible.


This basically means that because there were no known limits on how symbols can be combined and placed on a shoulder pad (which itself was found too generic) then the is no standard that GW can claim copyright on. With nothing to claim copyright on i.e. this combination of symbols on a shoulder pad is ours, then CHS was found not in breach of copyright.


You just need to do a bit of google foo.

www.darker-days.org - premier World of Darkness podcast 
   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!



UK

Again, perfectly happy with that. I said above that I thought trying to claim ownership of the combination of curved shoulder pad and numeral was dodgy and wrong. It still looks as though "Games Workshop tried to claim ownership of roman numerals and fur" as a statement is factually incorrect, though...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/09 14:42:48


Dead account, no takesy-backsies 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

You are again assuming too much, not once I said you you cannot post, but I did specifically state that the CHS case is a huge behemoth that one can really grasp what happened and what was claimed there if he or she has followed it and read it, all I mentioned from CHS case is GW is known to use underhand tactics to spin their version of events and outrageous claims on things they own, two separate examples can easily be identified in the fact they hide from the judge and the opposition that the patent office had rejected their application to patent the shape of the shoulderpad and then when the judge made a summary judgement of the shoulderpad been patendable (without knowledge of the patent office decision), they tried to force the patent office to reconsider its decision all this without saying anything to the judge or the opposition, while sworn to produce all evidence, when they were caught out by the oppositions independent search they tried to spin it as nothing happened.

Their famous claim of owning the word space marine and how well it went for them is self explanatory.

I must dig for it but there was a huge list of what they claimed without associating it to anything the list included sculls, halberds and Latin numerical.
   
Made in de
Scrap Thrall





Sheffield, UK

Page 28 of this part of the trial http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1200&context=historical

As a preliminary matter, Chapterhouse contends that GW “abandoned” a number
of its trademark infringement claims through the deposition testimony of Jones, GW’s
Head of Legal, Licensing and Strategic Projects. Specifically, Chapterhouse contends
that via his testimony Jones, acting on behalf of GW, abandoned the company’s claim
to trademark infringement for the following twelve marks: (1) wings, (2) skulls, (3)
“Roman numerals (combined with) arrows,” (4) Tau – oval vents,” (5) plasma, (6)
tactical, (7) halberd, (8) broadswords, (9) overlapping/banded armor, (10) “Tau –
geometric gloves,” (11) wolf fur, and (12) snakes. Def.’s Stat. of Material Facts ¶ 57.
GW contends that Chapterhouse is taking Jones’s testimony out of context. It
argues that when Jones said that GW is “not claiming” a trademark in the twelve items
above, he was only clarifying that GW did not claim protection of “wings” or “snakes”
generally as trademarks, but rather that the “unique association[s]” of creatively styled
wings or snakes (including those bearing the Warhammer 40,000 logo) are unique
trademarks.


So the unique association they wanted was these symbols on a space marine shoulder pad, a physical item deemed too generic to copyright, a patent that got thrown out and they attempted to lie about.

www.darker-days.org - premier World of Darkness podcast 
   
Made in gb
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body





Devon, UK

dr_ether wrote:Page 28 of this part of the trial http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1200&context=historical

As a preliminary matter, Chapterhouse contends that GW “abandoned” a number
of its trademark infringement claims through the deposition testimony of Jones, GW’s
Head of Legal, Licensing and Strategic Projects. Specifically, Chapterhouse contends
that via his testimony Jones, acting on behalf of GW, abandoned the company’s claim
to trademark infringement for the following twelve marks: (1) wings, (2) skulls, (3)
“Roman numerals (combined with) arrows,” (4) Tau – oval vents,” (5) plasma, (6)
tactical, (7) halberd, (8) broadswords, (9) overlapping/banded armor, (10) “Tau –
geometric gloves,” (11) wolf fur, and (12) snakes. Def.’s Stat. of Material Facts ¶ 57.
GW contends that Chapterhouse is taking Jones’s testimony out of context. It
argues that when Jones said that GW is “not claiming” a trademark in the twelve items
above, he was only clarifying that GW did not claim protection of “wings” or “snakes”
generally as trademarks, but rather that the “unique association[s]” of creatively styled
wings or snakes (including those bearing the Warhammer 40,000 logo) are unique
trademarks.


So the unique association they wanted was these symbols on a space marine shoulder pad, a physical item deemed too generic to copyright, a patent that got thrown out and they attempted to lie about.


Bull0 wrote:Again, perfectly happy with that. I said above that I thought trying to claim ownership of the combination of curved shoulder pad and numeral was dodgy and wrong. It still looks as though "Games Workshop tried to claim ownership of roman numerals and fur" as a statement is factually incorrect, though...



I'm just going to bring these two together.

It does appear that there is a correlation between those taking a more generous view of GWs actions and those that aren't so well informed on some of their historical shenanigans.

Let's not forget they also shut down (or tried to) one studios miniature that they planned to give away at Salute for free, because it resembled a drawing of something in one of their books that doesn't exist as a miniature or as rules earlier in the year too.


We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark

The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox

Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

one can also add

Games Workshop also has a large number of well-known unregistered trade
marks (including names of armies, Chapters, and other products) including without limitation:
Adeptus Mechanicus, Assault, Alpha Legion, Black Templars, Blood Angels, Blood Ravens,
Cadian, Carnifex, Chaos Space Marines, Chaplain, Chimera, Crimson Fists, Dark Angel, Death
Case: 1:10-cv-08103 Document #: 147 Filed: 01/19/12 Page 8 of 25 PageID #:15404847-7177-8316
9
Watch, Devastator, Dreadnought, Drop Pod, Eldar, Elder Farseer, Eldar Jetbike, Eldar Warlock,
Eldar Seer Council, Empire, Exorcist, Flesh Tearers, Gene Stealer, Grenade Launcher, Halberd,
Heavy bolter, Heresy Armour, Hellhound, High Elf, Hive Tyrant, Horus Heresy, Howling
Banshee, Imperial Fists, Imperial Guard, Inquisition, Iron Hands, Jetbike, Jump Pack, Land
Raider, Land Speeder, Legion of the Damned, Librarian, Lightning Claw, Melta, Mk II Armour,
Mk V Armour, Plasma, Predator, Rhino, Salamander, Scorpion, Soul Drinker, Space Wolves,
Stormraven, Storm Shield, Tactical, Techmarine, Termagants, Terminator, Thousand Sons,
Thunder Hammer, Tyrant, Tyranid Warrior.


Many of the symbols associated with the characters and armies of the
WARHAMMER 40,000 universe, as well as the accessories for these characters and armies,
have also become well-known and immediately recognizable to the many fans of the game as
used on and in connection with the respective characters, including without limitation: skulls,
Wings (eagle wings, angel wings), Lions, Griffon, Triptychs, Broadswords, Skull with horns,
Storm bolter (gun) Sawblade with blood-drop, Clenched fist in a gauntlet, Snakes, Flaming
skulls, Flaming chalice, Salamander, Dragon/salamander scales pattern, Tau Symbol, Tau - Oval
vents, Tau - X marking on power/ammo packs, Tau – circle with diagonal line through it, Tau –
geometric grooves, Roman numerals (combined with) arrows, X crosses and inverted V, Cog,
Iron hands icon – gauntleted left hand shown palm downwards, Overlapping/banded armour,
Wolf fur, Wolf skulls, Wolf tails, Raven wings with blood drop in centre, I symbol (for
Inquisition), Scarab beetles, Spirit stones, Eldar iconography/symbols (seer icons etc), Eldar -
Spirit Stones, Eldar – decorative gems on weapons.


   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: