Support NeoGAF

[wetflame]

I thanked you too! Your commentary on the whole affair has been really interesting, it's not something I feel I could have followed on my own and you've made it very interesting to keep up with.

 

[Bedlam]

I was reading this thread before I even applied for an account on GAF. Thanks to the OP for doing all that work.

 

[BobTheFork]

Glad to see an update!

 

[Lonewolf_92]

Always happy to see this thread!

 

[phisheep]

Aaaaarghh! Stop it guys!

I wasn't actually fishing for comments - just getting a bit wistful about whether anyone was still playing. It's been a helluva long time after all.

But let's keep the balance right, eh? If the thread ends up with 90% of "thanks phisheep" posts it is not going to make the most interesting reading for outsiders.

If you see me in a wistful mood and want to encourage me a bit, PM is always available rather than keep bouncing the thread (which I know gets annoying for some people).

Thanks anyway everybody. And we will still have a damn party in this thread when it is all over. You'll have to bring your own wine/cheese/pate but a proper party nonetheless. And I shall rely on you old-timers to keep out make merciless fun of gatecrashers.

 

[androvsky]

The occasional round of bumping makes it easier to spot for people who didn't subscribe. Great stuff, as always.

Four days ago, on 25th January, one of Tim's trademarks got cancelled. That's registration number 3105816 EDGE for printed matter (magazines, bumper stickers, writing implements and so on and suchlike).

Strange thing is, it didn't get cancelled for fraud or abandonment. It didn't get cancelled either because of the District Court order.

It got cancelled routinely, and outside the court process altogether, because Tim failed to submit an acceptable Section 8 declaration of continued use.

How very strange!

Actually, it might not be all that strange. Rather, a sign that someone at the USPTO is being very careful to close this case down airtight. Because it is this registration that, because it was part-owned by Future Publishing, was the cause of all the recent kerfuffle - that led to the TTAB rejecting part of the District Court order and that led to Future Publishing being joined as a defendant (see post #216).

Getting rid of it this way takes away Langdell's one ridiculously slim chance of a finding in his favour (that I've been tangentially alluding to for most of this thread); avoids the embarrassment of the TTAB having to overturn one of its own decisions in the case; and suggests to me that at long last we are getting close to a conclusion.

I'll get around to updating the OP shortly. EDIT: Done.

Interesting. Does this have an effect on the other uses of EDGE, like for games and movies?

 

[Fletcher]

My biggest question from all of this is what's going to happen to Mirrors by Edge?

 

[phisheep]

The occasional round of bumping makes it easier to spot for people who didn't subscribe. Great stuff, as always.


Interesting. Does this have an effect on the other uses of EDGE, like for games and movies?

Sort of.

Langdell (or Edge Games) didn't actually have a trademark for videogames anyway - he's applied for one, but it is queued up behind a Mobigame application, so it won't happen.

It's not at all clear whether he has or ever has had a trademark for movies, chances are he hasn't. In the movies stuff he apparently relied on the alleged "famousness" of the Edge trademark, which we'd now more properly deem as "notoriety".

It is noticable that on his US website he has (for the last few years, probably in anticipation of losing this case) been using the (TM) mark rather than the (R) mark which suggests an unregistered trademark. So, subject to yet even more court proceedings he might or might not have a right to EDGE in something-or-other.

I rather doubt that will come to the test as, after this case, nobody anywhere will feel obliged to settle a case with him on what seems to have been his usual terms. More likely they will tell him to get stuffed.

My biggest question from all of this is what's going to happen to Mirrors by Edge?

Same thing as was always going to happen. I think you can guess what that is!

 

[Magna_Mixalis]

@phisheep: Thanks for the update; I was starting to go through withdrawals.

Also, a question: since this mess is looking like it's winding down, do you think any of the major players will pursue criminal charges against little Timmy? Or are they sick enough of him that he'll be able to escape any punitive actions?

 

[gabbo]

Sort of.

Langdell (or Edge Games) didn't actually have a trademark for videogames anyway - he's applied for one, but it is queued up behind a Mobigame application, so it won't happen.

It's not at all clear whether he has or ever has had a trademark for movies, chances are he hasn't. In the movies stuff he apparently relied on the alleged "famousness" of the Edge trademark, which we'd now more properly deem as "notoriety".

It is noticable that on his US website he has (for the last few years, probably in anticipation of losing this case) been using the (TM) mark rather than the (R) mark which suggests an unregistered trademark. So, subject to yet even more court proceedings he might or might not have a right to EDGE in something-or-other.

I rather doubt that will come to the test as, after this case, nobody anywhere will feel obliged to settle a case with him on what seems to have been his usual terms. More likely they will tell him to get stuffed.



Same thing as was always going to happen. I think you can guess what that is!

Didn't he get a credit/a hefty chunk of change for the Alec Baldwin/Anthony Hopkins movie The Edge?

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

As civil proceedings are seemingly approaching endgame, I'm looking forward to criminal proceedings picking up the slack. Does that still seem in the offing?

edit - oops, already asked

 

[phisheep]

@phisheep: Thanks for the update; I was starting to go through withdrawals.

Also, a question: since this mess is looking like it's winding down, do you think any of the major players will pursue criminal charges against little Timmy? Or are they sick enough of him that he'll be able to escape any punitive actions?

Criminal charges are different, because usually prosecutions are funded by the state, so it's not like EA or Future would have to fund the charges. All they'd have to do - though they won't want to do it until this case is over - is make an accusation and have evidence, and there seems to be plenty of that around.

If they don't, then I'm building up quite a nice file that should be sufficient for criminal prosecutions in the USA (California and Federal) and in the UK which I shall quite gladly release to the authorities once the civil case is over.

 

[Shadow Hog]

Same thing as was always going to happen. I think you can guess what that is!

The same thing that happens every night.

It tries to take over the world!

 

[phisheep]

Didn't he get a credit/a hefty chunk of change for the Alec Baldwin/Anthony Hopkins movie The Edge?

Nothing's in evidence about his yet. I suspect he might have got some "go-away" money if anything.

 

[arglebargle]

Criminal charges are different, because usually prosecutions are funded by the state, so it's not like EA or Future would have to fund the charges. All they'd have to do - though they won't want to do it until this case is over - is make an accusation and have evidence, and there seems to be plenty of that around.

If they don't, then I'm building up quite a nice file that should be sufficient for criminal prosecutions in the USA (California and Federal) and in the UK which I shall quite gladly release to the authorities once the civil case is over.

it would be amazing if your research was used in a criminal prosecution.

 

[FoxSpirit]

Four days ago, on 25th January, one of Tim's trademarks got cancelled. That's registration number 3105816 EDGE for printed matter (magazines, bumper stickers, writing implements and so on and suchlike).

Strange thing is, it didn't get cancelled for fraud or abandonment. It didn't get cancelled either because of the District Court order.

It got cancelled routinely, and outside the court process altogether, because Tim failed to submit an acceptable Section 8 declaration of continued use.

How very strange!

Actually, it might not be all that strange. Rather, a sign that someone at the USPTO is being very careful to close this case down airtight. Because it is this registration that, because it was part-owned by Future Publishing, was the cause of all the recent kerfuffle - that led to the TTAB rejecting part of the District Court order and that led to Future Publishing being joined as a defendant (see post #216).

Getting rid of it this way takes away Langdell's one ridiculously slim chance of a finding in his favour (that I've been tangentially alluding to for most of this thread); avoids the embarrassment of the TTAB having to overturn one of its own decisions in the case; and suggests to me that at long last we are getting close to a conclusion.

I'll get around to updating the OP shortly. EDIT: Done.

Thanks a lot for the update. I just love your analysis of it all. This guy really needs to get shut down hard.
Hell yeah for you submitting the case :-D

 

[Magna_Mixalis]

Criminal charges are different, because usually prosecutions are funded by the state, so it's not like EA or Future would have to fund the charges. All they'd have to do - though they won't want to do it until this case is over - is make an accusation and have evidence, and there seems to be plenty of that around.

If they don't, then I'm building up quite a nice file that should be sufficient for criminal prosecutions in the USA (California and Federal) and in the UK which I shall quite gladly release to the authorities once the civil case is over.

So I guess this thread would continue for the forseeable future; awesome!

If you did turn over your files, would that drag you into the criminal proceedings (testifying, etc) or would it be a case of "here's the evidence Mr. DA, now do your job"?

 

[phisheep]

it would be amazing if your research was used in a criminal prosecution.

Not really.

As I keep saying, there's not really any research or journalism in this thread, it's just stuff that is there on the public record. All I do is spot it, translate it out of whatever bizarre language it is couched in and into sensible.

There's plenty evidence out there to get Langdell for all sorts of criminal things, it is just a matter of whether anyone will bother to do it; and I'm quite happy to fill the gap at the cost of the odd postage stamp. It's not difficult.

So I guess this thread would continue for the forseeable future; awesome!

You might thing that, I could not possibly comment

If you did turn over your files, would that drag you into the criminal proceedings (testifying, etc) or would it be a case of "here's the evidence Mr. DA, now do your job"?

The latter. I'm not a material witness to anything. All I can do is to pass over an outline case with supporting evidence (which there is plenty of).

 

[giant_frying_pan]

If you collate this into a book, I would most definitely purchase!

 

[phisheep]

If you collate this into a book, I would most definitely purchase!

See post #433. Definitely thinking about it. Probably take a couple of months to get it written up. Maybe another six months to get it past libel lawyers (though I might not bother with that bit).

 

[wetflame]

See post #433. Definitely thinking about it. Probably take a couple of months to get it written up. Maybe another six months to get it past libel lawyers (though I might not bother with that bit).

Well, you'll have a purchase from me if so! Would be interesting to see some "here's what he should have done" commentary alongside everything crashing down around him, albeit slowly.

 

[Version 3.0]

Well, you'll have a purchase from me if so! Would be interesting to see some "here's what he should have done" commentary alongside everything crashing down around him, albeit slowly.

Hmm...I don't know if I like the "what he should've done" part. Training for future jerks? It makes me nervous.

 

[Tragicomedy]

If you collate this into a book, I would most definitely purchase!

Came to post the same. Even slapping it together into a Kindle single in the 50-100 page realm guarantees you a sale from me.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Sorry if this has been asked/answered already, but where's Langdell getting the money to fight these never-ending legal battles? Doesn't he have to pay costs every time he loses?

 

[gabbo]

Sorry if this has been asked/answered already, but where's Langdell getting the money to fight these never-ending legal battles? Doesn't he have to pay costs every time he loses?

He's built up some funds suing people over the years.

 

[Vinnk]

+1 for would buy it as a book.

Also, I saw this logo on a pair of scissors in my house and recognized it. Is this connected in any way or am I also becoming Edge obsessed?

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001K3GPUK/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[someguyinahat]

It got cancelled routinely, and outside the court process altogether, because Tim failed to submit an acceptable Section 8 declaration of continued use.

Surprising indeed, considering Langdell's got Section 8 written all over him, am I right?

Huh?

Okay I'm done

 

[AuthenticM]

Thanks anyway everybody. And we will still have a damn party in this thread when it is all over. You'll have to bring your own wine/cheese/pate but a proper party nonetheless. And I shall rely on you old-timers to keep out make merciless fun of gatecrashers.

About that: do you have any idea of when all of this will be over ?

 

[phisheep]

About that: do you have any idea of when all of this will be over ?

I've given up guessing. Last time I guessed I was a couple off years off at least.

 

[phisheep]

Yesterday, 8th March, the Board ruled. This is the first time in this case that the Board itself has made a ruling, rather than through an interlocutory attorney. It’s a bit of a strange ruling as well.

If this filing had been made by either of the parties it would have been deemed untimely, as it is now nearly a year (30 March 2012) since the Board’s last filing, and more than six months since the last filing by anyone. But hey, I guess that is one of the privileges of being in charge.

In summary:

The board notes the final judgment of the District Court from 8 Oct 2010, and the order approving the parties’ settlement of the same date.

The board cites the Trademark Act sect 37

In any action involving a registered mark the court may determine the right to registration, order the cancellation of registrations, in whole or in part, restore cancelled registrations, and otherwise rectify the register with respect to the registrations of any party to the action. Decrees and orders shall be certified by the court to the Director, who shall make appropriate entry upon the records of the Patent and Trademark Office, and shall be controlled thereby.

It then notes that the record in this (the TTAB) proceeding does not include certified copies of the court judgment/order.

And also notes that Langdell’s attempt to overturn the judgment was struck out and that nothing seems to have happened since.

It then, bizarrely, gives the parties 30 days (until 8 April) to file certified copies of the District Court judgment and order.

(There’s a big footnote too, denying all of Langdell’s spurious attempts to fiddle the outcome.)

What’s odd about this ruling is its Langdell-ish weaseliness. In the section of the Trademark Act that the Board itself cited (and as I bolded above) there’s no requirement at all for certified copies to be filed either by the parties themselves or in related proceedings. They are to be certified by the clerk of the court (in this case the District Court) to the Director of USPTO, who should then act on them.

Sounds to me that either the Clerk or the Director have not done their job, and this ruling tries to conceal that by putting the requirement onto EA and Future. Unfortunately, now they’ve done it this way, it opens up space for Langdell to throw up a load more smoke.

Best bet is for EA and Future to simply file certified copies, but politely point out they should not be necessary. Best bet for Langdell as always is to shut up – but I suspect that he won’t.

It might be a good idea for EA and Future to petition the Director directly to do his stuff - if he does it should shortcut any more shenanigans.

EDIT: John over at Chaosedge points out that Langdell has applied for yet another trademark "SL8". USPTO site is misbehaving for me at the moment, but I'll update once I can get in there.

 

[Tremis]

Thanks for the update! Captivating explanations, as always.

 

[phisheep]

Hmmm. Maybe I was a bit harsh on the Board in that last-but-one post.

After all, they're a court, they have to make a decision and they have to do it it on properly presented evidence. Which here means certified copies of the District Court judgments (though goodness only knows why they didn't mention this, say, two-and-a-half years ago!).

Might not be their fault that the trademarks haven't been cancelled already, but it sure as hell somebody's.

 

[AuthenticM]

Hmmm. Maybe I was a bit harsh on the Board in that last-but-one post.

After all, they're a court, they have to make a decision and they have to do it it on properly presented evidence. Which here means certified copies of the District Court judgments (though goodness only knows why they didn't mention this, say, two-and-a-half years ago!).

Might not be their fault that the trademarks haven't been cancelled already, but it sure as hell somebody's.

Don't worry. I'm sure none of these old farts are reading these forums. You're not getting scolded.

 

[phisheep]

Yesterday EA and Future filed certified copies of the District Court judgments.

There should now be nothing stopping the Board from getting those trademarks cancelled.

 

[CheesecakeRecipe]

Most excellent news.

 

[Spierek]

There should now be nothing stopping the Board from getting those trademarks cancelled.

Time to bring out the popcorn.

I've already read about the case in EDGE half a year ago, but this thread sums it up even better. Remarkable job, OP.

 

[border]

Yesterday EA and Future filed certified copies of the District Court judgments.

There should now be nothing stopping the Board from getting those trademarks cancelled.

You said that this is an opportunity for Langdell to throw up more smoke, though. So what is his move going to be now? Keep in mind that he will not necessarily make the Right Move but the Asshole Move.....

 

[phisheep]

You said that this is an opportunity for Langdell to throw up more smoke, though. So what is his move going to be now? Keep in mind that he will not necessarily make the Right Move but the Asshole Move.....

He could try all manner of things: complain about the Board's dismissal of his motions, file something in District Court to slow things down, drag another co-defendant in if he can find one. It's an endless list of assholery none of which will do him any good.

 

[Skunkers]

See post #433. Definitely thinking about it. Probably take a couple of months to get it written up. Maybe another six months to get it past libel lawyers (though I might not bother with that bit).

I bet GAF would Kickstart the book for you, too. I can't imagine not running your book up, down, and backwards through libel lawyers with all the legal fuckery this guy is known for. Especially since I think you've mentioned suspicion that Timmy may possibly follow this thread.

Also, I was a long time lurker on Neogaf before I finally got this account started, and I've been following your work about Langdell since the beginning. I know it's probably getting borderline repetitive for you now, but thank you so much for your efforts in keeping us updated about this case. You are truly awesome.

 

[border]

See post #433. Definitely thinking about it. Probably take a couple of months to get it written up. Maybe another six months to get it past libel lawyers (though I might not bother with that bit).

Considering how much Langdell likes to sue people, are you sure you really want to skip running it past libel lawyers?

He could try all manner of things: complain about the Board's dismissal of his motions, file something in District Court to slow things down, drag another co-defendant in if he can find one. It's an endless list of assholery none of which will do him any good.

In your estimation, how much longer can proceedings reasonably drag on for? Assuming that courts don't drag their feet on issuing rulings.

 

[Dead Man]

Yesterday EA and Future filed certified copies of the District Court judgments.

There should now be nothing stopping the Board from getting those trademarks cancelled.

Very good.

 

[phisheep]

Considering how much Langdell likes to sue people, are you sure you really want to skip running it past libel lawyers?

Yeah probably. It costs money for one thing. Besides I'm pretty certain that Langdell's reputation is now so low that nothing I write could make it worse - so a libel case wouldn't stand up.

In your estimation, how much longer can proceedings reasonably drag on for? Assuming that courts don't drag their feet on issuing rulings.

Dunno. Maybe six months *if* Langdell files in the District Court. Mind you, it took about six months for the Board to issue their last ruling - I'm kinda hoping they've got a follow-up prepared and ready to go now that the certified copies are in.

 

[gabbo]

It's an endless list of assholery none of which will do him any good.

That never stopped him from throwing smoke at every opportunity in the past, so I expect him to file something at an inopportune time just because he can.

 

[phisheep]

Here we go again!

Langdell has filed a motion today, seeking yet again and probably ad nauseam to have the Board declare the District Court’s judgments and orders void.

If you lot are not bored stupid by all this already, let’s take a look at it shall we?

Paras 1-5: claim that the Board is not bound to follow the District Court because the order is “void on its face” and should be disregarded, that it is so because Future Publishing as a necessary and indispensable party were not represented, that the District Court has not denied any relief from the judgment to EDGE and indeed hasn’t even considered denying relief.

We have been here before and he is wrong. Utterly wrong. Well, he’s partly right on the last point, that the District Court has not denied relief to EDGE, but that is at least partly down to the fact that Langdell hasn’t (validly) sought relief from the judgment. Not that he would have got relief had he done so.

Para 6: is about Future being a “necessary and indispensable party” to the District Court proceedings, and it contains another gross error too:

– all judgments, all findings and all orders – are by law to be deemed void on their face. That is, void ab initio, in their entirety, without the impacted party (here EDGE) being required to revert to the Court for relief–

Wrong Tim. Following your line of argument (insofar as I can make any sense of it) the impacted party was not EDGE but Future Publishing. And they’d be a necessary and indispensable party not only to the District Court judgment but also to seeking any relief from it. Good luck with that one.

Para 7: apparently the Board is "obligated" (underlined and in bold) to consider whether the judgment is void on its face.

No it isn’t. You could always appeal their judgment Tim. Good luck with that one too, as it would be back to the District Court for you with sanctions for contempt.

Para 8: it’s all commercial sabotage!

Para 8 footnote 2: (see, Tim can do footnotes too!)

…Future realized they could not achieve their nefarious goal of stealing EDGE Game’s marks from EDGE …

Yeah. Right. Who’s the nefarious one here Tim?

Paras 9-11: points out Future’s initial filing as intervener in the Board proceedings, where Future did say that EDGE had neither the right nor the authority to negotiate the surrender of (at least one of) the trademarks.

True, But Future backed down from this later, when they got their own mark registered. Too late. There was obviously something strange going on around this time, but I'll leave speculating about what it may have been until after this case is all over.

Para 12:

conspiracy to attack EDGE’s marks in collusion with the Petitioners

Seems here to be forgetting here who sued whom in the District Court.

Para 13: Do rhetorical questions have any business being in a motion in court?

Paras 14-16: bit of a yawnfest, but makes the odd suggestion that it was the obligation of the Court (presumably the District Court) to bring Future in as a co-plaintiff.

No it isn’t. It is the business of the Plaintiff to make sure that the right people are suing the right other people. The Plaintiff in this case was EDGE.

Para 17 (and a bit of 16): suggests that EA and Future had only a small window of opportunity to intervene before the Court rendered its decision and that all possible remedies have now expired.

That a twisty bit of logic – it misses out for example the possibility of appeal – but if it applies it applies also to EDGE.

Paras 18-20: actually get round to citing some Supreme Court cases to the effect that an order that is void on its face must not be enforced.

Misses out the fact that Langdell has given no argument (well, no even half-decent argument) that the Order was void on its face. He can’t because it isn’t.


None of this has the slightest chance of holding up, all these arguments have been reviewed and dismissed by the Board already, Langdell is in serious vexatious litigant territory and will only get away without sanctions for contempt because the Board can’t give them.

I hope and trust that EA and Future will not respond to this (unless to request a ruling on the vexatious litigant stuff), as it would just spin things out.

I do think now that it is time EA and Future petitioned the Director to simply execute the District Court's order, being as this case seems to be going round in circles. Either that or if the Board gets around to making its mind up it cancels the marks with immediate effect rather than "in due course" as it tried to last time round.

 

[hunnies28]

Does he have any chance of succes with this?

Thanks for the update and your marvellous work!

 

[phisheep]

Does he have any chance of succes with this?

None whatsoever.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

None whatsoever.

Good.

 

[AuthenticM]

None whatsoever.

So what is he facing as punishment ? A massive fine ? Jail time ? What are the specifics of what awaits him ?

 

[gabbo]

I knew he'd file something along those lines.
I feel like he might have read my prior post and it egged him on to do so.
Good to see he's reliable

 

[border]

So what is he facing as punishment ? A massive fine ? Jail time ? What are the specifics of what awaits him ?

Likely -- he will lose the lawsuit against EA and Future Publishing. He will no longer be able to try and milk them for money, and his ability to bully other publishers will be severly diminished.

Somewhat likely -- he will have his trademarks cancelled, thus losing any standing to file lawsuits against other publishers.

Uncertain -- he may be criminally prosecuted for his lies and misrepresentations during the course of legal proceedings. It depends on whether the authorities want to prosecute, but fines and jail time are certainly a possibility.

That is the gist of it that I've gotten. Phisheep should correct me if I'm wrong.