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

[Logic]

Games Workshop is overstepping their bounds. (http://mcahogarth.org/?p=10593)

Does this bother anyone else? Does anyone think this is a justifiable and reasonable course of action?

[Kitten Champion]

GW used the popular tropes of other -- more established -- fantasy and science fiction authors as the basis for everything they've done. Stuff long since open to the domain of free creativity. Now they're going to turn around and trademark them? Imagine if D&D tried to trademark Elves, Orcs, or Trolls?

This is just revolting.

[Grinner]

You can just trademark basic tropes? Irrespective of their history? :smallannoyed:


Imagine if Wizards of the Coast tried to trademark Elves, Orcs, or Trolls?

Fixed.

[Aotrs Commander]

Scuttlebutt said GW did try copywriting things like "Goblin" in the past (a good few years ago now), though how true it was I don't know.

However, given GW, this doesn't even remotely surprise me. Workshop has been an asshat of an organisation for a good couple of decades. Nothing assinine they do anymore surprises me.

I would like to hope they will be laughed out of court, but unfortunately in this current time, one is no longer certain.

[Nameless Ghost]

Hey, Games Workshop products feature elves, orcs and trolls too...

Though this is the world in which you can patent the rounded rectangle, so I'm not even sure if I'm surprised at this turn of events, disgusting as they are.

[Ravens_cry]

Someone at Games Workshop has a severe case of cranial rectal incursion.

[Grif]

Just... what?

How asinine they can be to even claim this? :smallconfused:

[Coidzor]

Games Workshop is overstepping their bounds. (http://mcahogarth.org/?p=10593)

Does this bother anyone else? Does anyone think this is a justifiable and reasonable course of action?

The fact that they can even make such an attempt and have it be given credibility by an organization like Amazon is ridiculous and depressing.

The idea that it would ever stand up, and, indeed, not be thrown out, is difficult to wrap one's mind around, though I suppose if the Velcro company can somehow manage to keep its trademark going despite "velcro" being the de facto generic term for "hook-and-loop fastener," well, strange things can happen when lawyers guns and money are involved.

[Gavinfoxx]

Some more parts of the info:

http://mcahogarth.org/?p=5075

http://mcahogarth.org/?p=9999

http://mcahogarth.org/?p=10593

And the livejournal versions:

http://haikujaguar.livejournal.com/1194843.html

http://haikujaguar.livejournal.com/1208235.html

[Logic]

The fact that they can even make such an attempt and have it be given credibility by an organization like Amazon is ridiculous and depressing.

The idea that it would ever stand up, and, indeed, not be thrown out, is difficult to wrap one's mind around, though I suppose if the Velcro company can somehow manage to keep its trademark going despite "velcro" being the de facto generic term for "hook-and-loop fastener," well, strange things can happen when lawyers guns and money are involved.

At least Velcro has some room to stand. If I recall correctly, Velcro was originally the company name, and they still called their hook and loop fasteners by the industry standard name. The fact that their name became synonymous with hook and loop fasteners is not their fault, and they should have a right to pursue anyone using their name without permission.

The same can be said of Band-Aid (at least in the US.) While "Adhesive bandage" is the technical term for the product they are selling, nearly everyone now calls all adhesive bandages by the term "Band-Aid."

"Space Marine" is a concept that was created long before Games Workshop was around. But for GW to say that the term belongs to them because they have a highly successful franchise that name contains the term that they did not create, and that they did not innovate* (much) to ensure they differentiated themselves from other Space Troopers to ensure that Space Marine deserves to be a wholly separate and Trademarked icon owned wholly by themselves.

I think the arrogance of the company is appalling.

*Personal opinion of mine, no offense intended to anyone.

[Chromascope3D]

Games Workshop? Overstepping their bounds?
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/007/666/_57c8a1a431a592af806925e57258202f.png
Now, I don't play WH40K, but from what I've heard of their business practices (Like taking advantage of their customer's loyalty to their IP monopoly to sell $30 miniatures), this isn't at all surprising. Now, how they actually managed to claim Space Marines as IP is way beyond me. They must've gone to Australia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Australia#Questionable_grants)

[The Glyphstone]

This is ridiculous. The incident with the Damnatus movie in Germany was legit, but this is inexcusable. Glad I don't buy GW miniatures anymore.

[Tiki Snakes]

This whole situation rings a bell. Similar things keep happening on YouTube, in fact. As I understand it, it has less to do with trademarks and stuff, if its the same issue, and more to do with websites like amazon and YouTube not needing to necessarily follow such things. Company tells them to take down little guys content? They'll do it regardless of whether they have to or even should. As I understand it, the underlying problem in the YouTube cases I encountered eventually boiled down to the fact that relevant legislature is a confusing mess and anything beyond that we can't really discuss here.

Suffice it to say that no, space marine is not going to mean only adeptus astartes from now on.

[Ravens_cry]

It's not just little guys verses big guys.
It's also using the largely automated system as a form of censorship, like what conspiracy theorists have done to debunkers videos and even whole channels that use clips of the conspiracy theorists videos in their debunkings for illustrative and educational purposes.

[Douglas]

The problem is that researching a takedown request to make a properly informed decision takes time and effort, which costs money, so companies have a strong incentive to not bother. Combine that with the cost of incorrectly denying a takedown being much higher than incorrectly granting one, and companies have a strong financial incentive to just automatically take down anything they get a complaint about.

This, of course, leads to problems like the absurd case linked here.

Going into the issue in any greater detail would head rapidly into politics, so I'll stop there.

[Killer Angel]

Basically, they have money, and they try to use the money to make more money, trying to twist the laws (on copyright) in their favour.
It's a so common behavior, that is a trope by itself… :smallsigh:

[HandofShadows]

One MORE reason for me to dislike GW. And it's a looong list.

[khoregate]

I sent this story to a friend who is a black library author and told her to sort it :)

[Ravens_cry]

I sent this story to a friend who is a black library author and told her to sort it :)
Eh?:smallconfused:

[Chromascope3D]

I sent this story to a friend who is a black library author and told her to sort it :)

Let me introduce you to the wonderful world of punctuation... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eats,_Shoots_%26_Leaves#Title)

Speaking of grammar, I wonder if the author could get away with the book by simply retitling it "Spots, the Marine that is also in Space"

[Brother Oni]

Speaking of grammar, I wonder if the author could get away with the book by simply retitling it "Spots, the Marine that is also in Space"

Alternately, "Spots, the EVA* MOS** Marine", although it's not as snappy.

*Extra-Vechicular Activity
**Military Occupation Speciality

[darksolitaire]

GW is still up and running after I started boycotting them several years ago...and they are up to no good.

Well, hopefully this spreads and creates an uproar that will force GW to rethink their agenda. I'm so pissed that I'm amazed and slightly amused.

[Coidzor]

I think it's a children's book, so the rhyme scheme might not work anymore.

[Friv]

Let me introduce you to the wonderful world of punctuation... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eats,_Shoots_%26_Leaves#Title)

Speaking of grammar, I wonder if the author could get away with the book by simply retitling it "Spots, the Marine that is also in Space"

The author should damned well get away with the book by publishing it in its exact current state with a forward about how GW tried to assert copyright on a phrase that they didn't invent. :smallannoyed: In fact, I think I'm going to go buy his book and see if I like it, just out of solidarity.

And also, I had been considering getting back into Warhammer, but this pretty much cements my decision not to.

[Douglas]

In fact, I think I'm going to go buy his book and see if I like it, just out of solidarity.
You know, I've seen a fair number of other people posting such a sentiment elsewhere. I wouldn't be surprised if, in a sort of backwards way, it ends up that GW actually did her a favor by providing the starting point for so much free publicity.:smallamused:

It's still a ridiculous and contemptible move by GW, but sales generated by the backlash could potentially outstrip sales lost due to the takedown.

[Dscherro]

You know, such things stopped surprising or shocking me (which is kinda sad), especially when it comes from GW.
But this is one of the dumbest things I've heard in weeks. Hey, while they're at it, why not just copyright names like Olympia (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Olympia#.URQD1WfjKik) or Fenris (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Fenris#.URQD_GfjKik)?
I can only repeat what darksolitaire said: let's hope that this lawsuit backfires.
They willprobably get laughed out of court anyway, but they should at least burn their fingers.
Then maybe they would learn a lesson about bullying. They won't.

[Ravens_cry]

If this is a trademark, it is one that has been long, long neglected.:smallsigh:
And they must have brown eyes* if they think they invented the term.
*Why brown? Because they are so full of faecal matter.

[dps]

You know, such things stopped surprising or shocking me (which is kinda sad), especially when it comes from GW.
But this is one of the dumbest things I've heard in weeks. Hey, while they're at it, why not just copyright names like Olympia (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Olympia#.URQD1WfjKik) or Fenris (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Fenris#.URQD_GfjKik)?
I can only repeat what darksolitaire said: let's hope that this lawsuit backfires.
They willprobably get laughed out of court anyway, but they should at least burn their fingers.
Then maybe they would learn a lesson about bullying. They won't.

I don't know about GW, but in most cases like this, the company involved has no intent of ever fight this out in court. They're counting on people not having the money to hire a lawyer to fight them, or at least figuring that it's not financially worthwhile to hire a lawyer.

[Iruka]

Aren't there Space marines in Star Craft as well?
If GW seriously wanted get them copyrighted, wouldn't they have to sue Blizzard? And Blizzard can afford the lawyers.

[Chen]

Trademarks are usually used to market a product. Preventing a title or the like from using the term can make sense, but a trademark doesn't give you exclusive rights to USING the term. Otherwise how could novels or the like ever even reference things like Coke or McDonalds? If Blizzard called their game: Starcraft 2: Rise of the Space Marines, I suspect Games Workshop would need to bring them to court otherwise they risk losing their trademark (well more likely they'd contact Blizzard and make some cheaper arrangement for the both of them, but the point still stands).

[The Glyphstone]

Trademarks are usually used to market a product. Preventing a title or the like from using the term can make sense, but a trademark doesn't give you exclusive rights to USING the term. Otherwise how could novels or the like ever even reference things like Coke or McDonalds?

Licensing agreements, usually.

[Chen]

Licensing agreements, usually.

That's rarely necessary for most media. Most media licensing goes the other way with the Trademark holders paying the media for the advertising they're getting.

http://www.rightsofwriters.com/2010/12/can-i-mention-brand-name-products-in-my.html

That has a pretty good explanation of how trademarks tend to be used and protected. The first two points (trademark infringement and trademark dilution) are the ones Games Workshop is likely using to contest the issue.

[Killer Angel]

Aren't there Space marines in Star Craft as well?
If GW seriously wanted get them copyrighted, wouldn't they have to sue Blizzard? And Blizzard can afford the lawyers.

Can I link to Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_marine)?
Nice list of previous "space marines" and similar.

[Aotrs Commander]

According to the wiki page (and moreover the linked news articles), it looks like GW are going to be getting (or maybe have?) exactly the response they deserve. Also, I love how GW responded to the BBC - the freaking BBC - by saying they have a blanket policy of not talking to the media. Because that doesn't make them look dodgy at ALL.

And Amazon have put the ebook back up, it seems.

Hah!

[Hopeless]

According to the wiki page (and moreover the linked news articles), it looks like GW are going to be getting (or maybe have?) exactly the response they deserve. Also, I love how GW responded to the BBC - the freaking BBC - by saying they have a blanket policy of not talking to the media. Because that doesn't make them look dodgy at ALL.
And Amazon have put the ebook back up, it seems.
Hah!

Hmm anyone know whether space marines were ever mentioned in Doctor Who?

[Hawriel]

John Glenn would like to have a word with you GW.


Hmm anyone know whether space marines were ever mentioned in Doctor Who?

The Wiki article linked by Killer Angle has a Doctor Who citation for the first line of film and TV.

I have read some of the books on the list in the wiki link. There are some more that are not mentioned.

I think GW would like to go on a date with Harmony Gold.

[HandofShadows]

I think GW would like to go on a date with Harmony Gold.

If you think that, you really don't know much about the legal issues involved as it is totaly different from what GW is doing.

So are you a Battletech fan or a Macorss fan? I was just wondering since I see see this blind hate for HG from both groups.

[Cikomyr]

Do you think it would be possible to have a kickstarter to help fight agains these corporatization of tropes? Supporting these kind of writers in legal battle to set legal precedents?

[Chen]

According to the wiki page (and moreover the linked news articles), it looks like GW are going to be getting (or maybe have?) exactly the response they deserve. Also, I love how GW responded to the BBC - the freaking BBC - by saying they have a blanket policy of not talking to the media. Because that doesn't make them look dodgy at ALL.

And Amazon have put the ebook back up, it seems.

Hah!

Hmm I got the following from the BBC article I read


Despite this, it said, it had never claimed to have rights over the ways in which the terms "warhammer" or "space marine" were used in day-to-day speech. This everyday use also covered a "body of prose", it added.

"Trademarks as opposed to use of a word in prose or everyday language are two very different things," it said.

"Games Workshop is always vigilant in protecting the former, but never makes any claim to owning the latter."

The second last paragraph is where people are confused both in the media and in this thread. It doesn't matter who used a term first. GW is not claiming copyright on the term "Space Marine". They are claiming a trademark on it. Trademarks are generally used in advertising or marketing a product. Its so that people cannot use a trademarked term to falsely link their new product to an existing successful product. GW HAS a trademark on the term Space Marine. Their claim implies that Space Marine is linked closely enough to Games Workshop products, that using the term in your own advertising or the like could cause confusion and thus benefiting from their trademark. It'd be like claiming your new hamburger is a Big Mac.

This is why GW isn't going after anyone who uses the term space marine in their works. But when you put it prominently in the title of the work it starts becoming a different story. If I made a book called the Space Marine Encyclopedia, it could be reasonable for people to believe it is about Warhammer Space Marines. Things like this were what was examined when the trademark was initially issued.

[Douglas]

The second last paragraph is where people are confused both in the media and in this thread. It doesn't matter who used a term first. GW is not claiming copyright on the term "Space Marine". They are claiming a trademark on it. Trademarks are generally used in advertising or marketing a product. Its so that people cannot use a trademarked term to falsely link their new product to an existing successful product. GW HAS a trademark on the term Space Marine. Their claim implies that Space Marine is linked closely enough to Games Workshop products, that using the term in your own advertising or the like could cause confusion and thus benefiting from their trademark. It'd be like claiming your new hamburger is a Big Mac.

This is why GW isn't going after anyone who uses the term space marine in their works. But when you put it prominently in the title of the work it starts becoming a different story. If I made a book called the Space Marine Encyclopedia, it could be reasonable for people to believe it is about Warhammer Space Marines. Things like this were what was examined when the trademark was initially issued.
In my opinion, if you need to make that kind of distinction in the first place then the term is too generic to be trademarkable. "Space Marine" will have some people immediately think "Warhammer 40k" and others think "generic space military guy". "Codex Astartes" as a book title, on the other hand, will have some people go "oh yeah, Warhammer 40k" while everyone else goes "huh, what's that?" That dichotomy is what a legitimate trademark should have.

[Hawriel]

If you think that, you really don't know much about the legal issues involved as it is totaly different from what GW is doing.

So are you a Battletech fan or a Macorss fan? I was just wondering since I see see this blind hate for HG from both groups.

Quick to judge others much.

When IGP put out the teaser trailer for mechwarrior 5 not only did HG claim the redesigned artwork for the warhammer violating their IP, they claimed that they owned the idea of giant walking fighting robots.

Yes I am a huge fan of battletech and partly of robotech. HG rights to the artwork FASA used would not stand up in court. Seeing as FASA went to the original creators of the anime they came from and got the rights from them.

But hay according to you I know nothing.

[Chen]

In my opinion, if you need to make that kind of distinction in the first place then the term is too generic to be trademarkable. "Space Marine" will have some people immediately think "Warhammer 40k" and others think "generic space military guy". "Codex Astartes" as a book title, on the other hand, will have some people go "oh yeah, Warhammer 40k" while everyone else goes "huh, what's that?" That dichotomy is what a legitimate trademark should have.

Of Astarte is the greek name for one of the deities from around the Mediterranean as well, so even that starts running into problems. My gut feeling is also that space marine is a bit generic, but I haven't actually seen their trademark application. Did they show that it was distinct enough that people were confusing things where that term was used? Maybe it is legitimate.

[HandofShadows]

Quick to judge others much.

When IGP put out the teaser trailer for mechwarrior 5 not only did HG claim the redesigned artwork for the warhammer violating their IP, they claimed that they owned the idea of giant walking fighting robots.

Yes I am a huge fan of battletech and partly of robotech. HG rights to the artwork FASA used would not stand up in court. Seeing as FASA went to the original creators of the anime they came from and got the rights from them.

But hay according to you I know nothing.

Well, you just showed that you got sucked into the propaganda (read flat out lies in some cases) that a few BT fans have put out there. FASA did no such thing as going to Japan to get the rights to the Macross mechs. When things got to court it was discovered the license that FASA had was for importing model kits to the US from Japan. AND that they had gotten the license from a company called Twentieth Century Imports.

SOURCE (http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-4.txt)


The original "Battletech" game included both robotic images and model kits based on the Macross designs. FASA claims to have acquired the
rights to these model kits and images from Twentieth Century Imports ("TCI"), which allegedly acquired them from Tatsunoko.


Also note what HG's stated right are elsewhere in the papers as being exclusive other than for importing toys and models.

And if HG was so hostile to other mech games, then modders would not have added some of the Macross mechs to the free release of Mechwarrior 4 Mercs a few years back. HG just doesn't want other people making money off things they own or screwing their trademark. That is something most companies do.

Oh, and that "redesigned" Warammer was so close that many BT players recognized it after only seeing 1/3 of it. So it was not nearly redesigned enough.

So sadly, you don't know nearly as much as you think you did.

[Hawriel]

Well, you just showed that you got sucked into the propaganda (read flat out lies in some cases) that a few BT fans have put out there. FASA did no such thing as going to Japan to get the rights to the Macross mechs. When things got to court it was discovered the license that FASA had was for importing model kits to the US from Japan. AND that they had gotten the license from a company called Twentieth Century Imports.

SOURCE (http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-4.txt)



Also note what HG's stated right are elsewhere in the papers as being exclusive other than for importing toys and models.

And if HG was so hostile to other mech games, then modders would not have added some of the Macross mechs to the free release of Mechwarrior 4 Mercs a few years back. HG just doesn't want other people making money off things they own or screwing their trademark. That is something most companies do.

Oh, and that "redesigned" Warammer was so close that many BT players recognized it after only seeing 1/3 of it. So it was not nearly redesigned enough.

So sadly, you don't know nearly as much as you think you did.

Nice Epeen you have there

[HandofShadows]

ERROR on my part ignore

[Douglas]

Well, it's not over folks. :( What a bunch of &^%$@! they are trying to pull.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.400371-Warhammer-Company-Makes-Space-Marine-Trademark-Claim
Er, that thread/article dates from the same day this thread was started. It has precisely one post in the comments that's later than February 12, and that post says nothing new.

The most recent news I've seen on this is that Amazon reversed the takedown.

[HandofShadows]

Nuts I didn't check the date. I thought it had started again.