Author Topic: Seriously Games Workshop? What's in a Name? (Read 11302 times)

Kindred · « **on:** February 7, 2013, 11:00:39 AM »

In the Future, All Space Marines Will Be Warhammer 40K Space Marines | MCAH

What is in a name? "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet..."
Appartently, though, if you want to write a book about Marines in Space, you can not call them Space Marines.

uncool move of GW's part... and seriously questionable.
We all know the stories of the army of GW lawyers waiting to pounce on websites and other fans who "cross that invisible line".
We are very careful on this site because of them.

However, this site is dedicated to their actual game - therefore any reference to "Space marines" is probably referring to the models and characters created by Games Workshop for their GAME.

Now, here's an important note for those of you unfamiliar with trademark law... Your trademark is only good within the industry that you register it (or in reference to something that is obviously related to your original intention)
For example: CocaCola can not sue the coal industry for the use of the term COKE. Not only is it a completely different industry - one in which no one would reasonably be confused between Coke(coal) and Coke(cola). Additionally, the term coke, as related to coal, predates CocaCola by several hundred years.

So - to this case - GW claims that they own the rights to any science fiction reference to "Space Marines". This is idiotic on the face of the claim, let alone in the legalities. The book in question was a work of literature, not related to any game. Additionally, the term has been in use for decades of science fiction writing that predated the formation of Games Workshop, let alone their trademark. (I believe that E.E. Doc Smith used the term in the lensman series and that others have used the term even before that)

GW, of course counters the first argument by stating that their recent publications of fiction autoamtically extend their trademark of the name (previously assigned to the minitaures games industry) into the literature industry. Of course, this is a completly specious argument. They would have to file a new trademark for the new industry.... (and it would be turned down, since it can be proved that the term has widespread use predating their claim)

I urge everyone to boost this signal - and participate in the legal defense fund, if the author ever decides to defend this.

Killing Time · « **Reply #1 on:** February 7, 2013, 11:34:05 AM »

Really disgraceful bullying tactics.

It's one thing to be seen to be trying to protect their IP
But this is just picking on the weakest member of the herd and hoping that a victory here will set a precedent. The fact remains that the term Space Marine is not GW IP, never has been, and hopefully never will be.

Disgraceful behaviour from Amazon as well not to do a little bit of homework and tell GW where to shove their legalese.

CODE BLACK · « **Reply #2 on:** February 7, 2013, 12:17:15 PM »

I can't see the legal basis for that at all, but then I'm not a lawyer.

Kindred · « **Reply #3 on:** February 7, 2013, 12:40:54 PM »

oh, the legal basis is --

We have an army of lawyers. You don't.
If this case passes, even by default, we have now set precedent that can be cited in other cases.

Brutoni · « **Reply #4 on:** February 7, 2013, 12:59:16 PM »

This genuinely disgusting behaviour. I can't believe they are doing this... It is completely and utterly morally incorrect. Demonstrates a total lack of behaviour and how greedy Games Workshop have become. I don't like bully's. I'll go out of my way to stick up for those they are bullying.... I may walk into Games Workshop and discuss this with the manager this weekend... As well as possibly smash up all my models outside their shop. Then again that would get me in trouble.... I don't know.... I will find some way to cause them trouble over this though.

No words can describe my total and genuine disgust for this company now. I didn't agree to fight to protect people like this who abuse the freedom and democracy that this country represents. Urgh, they have me sounding all American.

The GrimSqueaker · « **Reply #5 on:** February 7, 2013, 01:22:48 PM »

Ken White already has the call out for pro bono counsel and the story is doing the rounds of the usual internet suspects so the bad publicity is piling on. Amazon is being questioned as to why it was so quick to pull the book (even though they'd left the print option still open) without questioning the request. For once, the comments section of an article are worth reading here.

Edit: Regarding copyright rather than trademark infringement but I'm sure you'll enjoy this anyway.

Ginger farseer · « **Reply #6 on:** February 7, 2013, 03:35:21 PM »

Well, I always knew that GW was bad, but I did not realise how bad, this is a horrific case of bulling, picking on those who are too weak (or in this case too small with too little funding) to bring on their own army of lawyers.

I for one will be sending GW an email, and quite possibally be buying some of MCA Hogarths books (partially to lend a bit of support, partially because they look enjoyable).

Blood Hawk · « **Reply #7 on:** February 7, 2013, 04:52:20 PM »

Yea I first learned of this suit from other sites on the internet, I can understand GW going after Chinese recasters who are selling FW recasts online for much less than FW does, but this I don't get. From what I have read all that GW has done so far is hit amazon with a the formal "stop selling this or else letter" and that's it. So they haven't actually sued the author (yet anyway), which means they are either building up evidence for a case, or don't actually plan on doing anything because they don't have one (a case that is).

As others have said, GW didn't come up with the term space marine, in my mind it is like them trying to copyright the term "magic" or "wizard" and then go after fantasy novels with wizards and magic in them.

Boss Ard'Ragger · « **Reply #8 on:** February 7, 2013, 05:03:56 PM »

I have sent GW an email in disgust over this. I agree with all points brought up, they didnt pen Space Marine first and the term been in existance before GW and bloddy well be allowed after.

Killing Time · « **Reply #9 on:** February 7, 2013, 05:07:15 PM »

I've emailed them.
I'll be interested to see if this will generate enough genuine disgust that they'll back off. It's really not very good publicity to say the least.

cannon1fodder · « **Reply #10 on:** February 7, 2013, 05:13:31 PM »

I have to ask is this the first time GW has tried to expand their IP further than their current bounds or have they tried in the past but failed? I'm just curious and wondering if they are trying to follow the movie/music industries attempts at setting copyright/IP precedents where there were none before.

Chuckles, The Space Marine Clown · « **Reply #11 on:** February 7, 2013, 05:47:31 PM »

E-mail sent. I am at the very least interested to find out if I get a response from them of any kind

Calus Drakin · « **Reply #12 on:** February 7, 2013, 06:21:19 PM »

That is absolutely horrid. As an aspiring writer myself I don't even want to imagine the consequences if GW is actually allowed to get away with this. What next? Dragons? Undead?

I haven't written to GW, I've never heard of them replying to any upset customers when they've pulled these stunts in the past. I have however, written a letter to the Science Fiction Writers of America inquiring what their stance on the issue is. It'll be interesting to see if they have any comment on it.

The GrimSqueaker · « **Reply #13 on:** February 7, 2013, 06:39:05 PM »

The current president of the SFWA is well aware of the situation.

Lachdonin · « **Reply #14 on:** February 8, 2013, 01:25:56 AM »

This is absolutely absurd, and while i love Warhammer, i hope some judge is smart enough to smack GW upside the head for this totally unfounded action. Imperial Guard is also copywrited by GW, but does that mean i cannot publish something about Napoelon's Imperial Guard without first receiving the premission of Games Workshop?

While this is ethically wrong in and of its self, what pisses me off even more (which is notworthy, because i have a general malice reserved for corporations brutal inforcement of IP by styfling creativity) is the fact that we, as their player base, are constantly subjected to poorly thought out and even more poorly justified price increases, while they continue to file suit after suit on these totally idiotic 'Copyrite Violations'. Chapterhouse i could understand, it was blatantly producing Warhammer figures (until they changed some names, of course) but this has absolutely no relation to Warhammer what-so-ever.

If they were called the Adeptus Astartes, i could see a basis, but 'Space Marine' is a highly generic term, like Knight, or Star Ship.

As an asside... anyone have a GW email address, all i see on the site is customer support...

enlg · « **Reply #15 on:** February 8, 2013, 02:47:56 AM »

Its sad that Games Workshop feels the need to stop other writers from using the term too.

Its annoying how many large organizations like to choose people who can't afford lawyers to pic on. ABC sued a musician a while back for a writing a song (that was on the radio) called General Hospital. But this is far more extreme since the term "space marine" wasn't pioneered by the company of course.

Killing Time · « **Reply #16 on:** February 8, 2013, 05:15:52 AM »

Quote from: Lachdonin on February 8, 2013, 01:25:56 AM

As an asside... anyone have a GW email address, all i see on the site is customer support...

I used the customer support address.
If it gets spammed enough the message will get through.

Underhand · « **Reply #17 on:** February 8, 2013, 06:39:42 AM »

Any lawyer with, say, two years post admission experience in IP would kick the balls off any lawyer trying to run the case that GW appears to be trying to run with this. It wouldn't even be expensive to defend.

It would appear that GW is picking a soft target for a test case. Getting up on this one will make the next case easier, and if they find themselves in trouble they can call it off easily.

Seeing them try to pull this type of stupid amphetamine parrot on anyone with serious money, like whoever owns the rights to the Alien franchise, would be funny to watch.

Maybe they could try for round two with Blizzard?

Rasmus · « **Reply #18 on:** February 8, 2013, 06:58:07 AM »

It is worth noting that GW has run afoul some of the heavy-hitters in the past and quickly withdrawn. The call that kill the first version of hte Necrons is of course legendary.

"Yes hi. We have heard you are developing a space undead race for your little boardgame? Yes, traveling from system to system "assimilating" the races they come across?
Yeah, you can't use that' That's ours. We call them the Borg."

And thus we have another version of the Necron now than was initially conceived.

samzor · « **Reply #19 on:** February 8, 2013, 07:04:02 AM »

Games Workshop trademark bullying goes thermonuclear: now they say you can't use

Whats strange about it is the mechanism used to 'takedown' the content. This is used for copyright not Trandemark related infringements.
Seems plausible the Author could win if they had enough money to take on GW.

In the Future, All Space Marines Will Be Warhammer 40K Space Marines | MCAH

In pracical terms the book does not even look remotely like anything to do with space marines.

Doh! fire the legal team. Hurry up and release the rest of the 6th edition codexes!

ARMIES

Members Online

Author Topic: Seriously Games Workshop? What's in a Name? (Read 11302 times)