Did anyone else read this??

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/07/games_workshop_in_spurious_space_marines_claim/

I am so glad that the roleplaying games are done by FFG and not by GW

Sounds like a poor move on the part of the legal department.

I saw this on another website earlier. Somone said that because of the way British copyright laws work GW basically has to sue people for things like this or else people that actually do infringe on the IP can use the legal argument of "Well, you didn't sue these guys, so you've given up on that copyright!".

I am not intimately familiar with the way intellectual property rights work around the world, but that explanation sounds stupid enough to be true.

No one has been sued. They petitioned Amazon.com to have an ebook removed for purported trademanrk violations, which is different from copyright. That is not the same as legal action, though allowing this action by GW to go unanswered would set a dangerous precedent.

They will not be suing, as the matter has just been resolved. "Space Marines" are a common and accepted trope of Science Fiction, and to say that allowing people to use it means that people will be allowed to make use of the Chaos Gods, Adeptus Astartes, Adeptus Mechanicus, Krootox, and any other combination of psuedo-greco-latin and made-up words that GW developed themselves is absolutely ludicrous.

For what it's worth, the term "Space Marine" should not even have been allowed to get trademarked in the first place. It's not like GW came up with it. Reminds me of a case in Germany where an insurance company sued a gaming clan for using the term "Alliance".

What is this world coming to?

Next week: Games Workshop demands France stops using the Fleur-de-Lis on their flags!

Reminds me that Subway can file suits when another company calls it's 12"-long hotdog a "footlong" (nevermind that Subway has the 11" footlong).

I remember when they called them footlongs at Dodgers Stadium :C

Lynata said:

It's coming to the point where Super Hero (and Super-Hero and any similiar combination) is a joint copyright by Marvel and DC and you get sent cease and desist letters if you advertise a Super Bowl party.

I'm not a lawyer, but I was always under the impression that in these sorts of things, its meaningful for the company to at least show a history of protecting their brand. That if they start letting some things slip by but attack other things, that that doesn't look as good for them in court. Instead they just need to show a history of zealosly defending their brand.

Honestly, "Space Marine" is indeed a bit broad, but imagine if someone other than GW was able to do this? It would ruin GW.

KommissarK said:

So they may have been doing it for the sake of saying, "We did this, we're actively defending our brand to the point of lunacy," so that they have a better case when something is actually infringing upon the brand?

That makes an incredibly eerie sort of sense.

Lynata said:

I'm quite ok with you space marine shopuld not not have been trademark, it is obvious that it is not a games workshop idea.

But just to make a point we are not using "la fleur de lys" on our flag since wirth cut the head of our king some century ago.

Only royalist people use it in France and for my part those people aren't my friend.

They are for the most part big stupid biggot that still believe in a superiority of the "noble" blood and the right given by god to a few to enslave the others.

Royalist in France aren't like english or belgium royalist, we were the country of the "monarchie absolue de droit divin" (absolute monarchy from divine right) they do not fight for a parlementary monarchy.

But maybe I hate them so much because "i still believe in anarchy" "ni dieux, ni maître, ni ordre moral"

oooooooooook……

as my part is ok, but only if the GW start to pay the royalty to Italy for the use of the Sacred Roman Imperium (best know as the Ultramarine)…hahahahahaha

someone else need royaltyes???

poor GW……poor poor…..bad move…..

Thebigjul said:

I'm certainly no fan of royalty (outside fiction) - for what it's worth, my favourite French head of state was Napoleon. He got us the code civil!

My dear Lynata few outside France are fan of Napoleon.

And it is right to think of his greatest work as the civil code who unify europe inside a common set of laws.

But we need to not forget that he was a tyran and the one killing the french revolution after being one of his greatest general.

The french leader i like the most was F. Mitterand, for 3 major act:

- End of the death penalty

- The vote of the abortion right

- Liberalization of the TV and radio network

In fact 'la fleur de lys' is on the Flag of somewhere much closer to many of your homes, Quebec!

Although Napoleon should have copyrwritten the phrase 'Imperial Guard' as GW are all over that. Of course the copyright would have long been up by now.

Nikollo said:

Pretty much. What's more, due to the IP laws in some countries they have to do this as much as possible. The fact that 'Space Marine' is so generic means they have to do it more, not less. It's too easy for someone to claim that his SMs are different from GW SMs. "What, trying to rip off GW!?! Don't be silly! It's just a generic scifi term! I mean sure, my Space Marines are geneticially engineered supersoldiers who wear powered armour and serve an immortal emperor, but they don't use bolters, they use Blastcannons! Totally different!" Someone trying to pull such a trick will use any and all other examples of Space Marines to support his case (and the closer to GW SMs the better). GW needs to have something on record showing that they objected to those other uses so that a future case goes to court they can tell a judge "no, we also feel that these counter-examples are a breach of our IP as demonstrated by our C&D letter issued on the 1st of whenever 2013."

It's stupid and a pain in the ass, but it's not GW's fault that IP law is so ridiculous.

macd21 said:

Good to know they probably weren't trying to actually push someone out of the market, and knew that their attempt would be overturned quickly.

Nikollo said:

While I don't think they were trying to push someone out of the market, neither do I think they knew that it would be overturned quickly (or at all). I don't think they cared one way or the other. To them this is just a task they need to perform to protect their IP, a type of bureaucratic box-ticking. They look for products using certain key words and try to get rid of any they find. They put the minimum amount of effort into it required unless the product actually does seem to be using their material.