permutated
Banned
D4Danger said:
Your avatar is awesome
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
iPhone Game Edge pulled because of "edge" obssessed bastard.
- Thread starter octopusman
- Start date
Your avatar is awesome
benjipwns
Banned
When does Play games on this Station 3 come out?
:lol at this affair. This is like the most epic thing I've seen in months. I had no idea there was a guy going around suing to get credit for anything with "Edge" in the name. While declaring himself a father of the games industry.
:lol at this affair. This is like the most epic thing I've seen in months. I had no idea there was a guy going around suing to get credit for anything with "Edge" in the name. While declaring himself a father of the games industry.
Rahxephon91
Banned
Man there's something wrong with the world today........
Castor Krieg
Banned
I'm sorry to all Americans here, but your legal system is borderline insane/retarded. How can a man actually hold a trademark to a WORD? Do I have to pay someone for using a word "car" somewhere? Maybe I can trademark "climate change"?
The sad thing is U.S. legal system does not protect companies agains such non-merit lawsuits, unlike European ones. Probably the iPhone company figured all the lawyers' fees and time spend is not worth it. Because of that things will happen again.
The sad thing is U.S. legal system does not protect companies agains such non-merit lawsuits, unlike European ones. Probably the iPhone company figured all the lawyers' fees and time spend is not worth it. Because of that things will happen again.
Hoover yeah. But this isn't one of those cases, it's just a case of trying to protect an IP that doesn't really exist, that's the problem. It's perfectly fine to trademark the word "Edge" if that is the name of your product. The trouble is that not only is The Edge or whatever a publisher, not a game (i.e. difficult to prove brand confusion between the two things), The Edge haven't released a game in over a decade or something so it's kind of pointless for him to protect it in a court's eyes.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Welcome to the US copyright/patent system. For other insanity see: Companies owning patents to the genes in your body.Castor Krieg said:
D
Deleted member 30609
Unconfirmed Member
I know I'm probably LTTP the party on this, so I'll sum up my feelins in a word:grandjedi6 said:
RAAAAAAAGGGGE
Captain Chaos
Member
What a grubby little man.
permutated
Banned
grandjedi6 said:
I need to get off the grid...permanently. :lol
Lonewolf_92
Member
Look out, he's making a game called "Racers" for PS3, 360, Wii, and PC (and yes, it's trademarked!) NASCAR drivers better watch what they call themselves and others in their profession, or old Timmy might be knocking on their door next! According to the "companies" website he owns the trademarks Edge, The Edge, Edge Games, Cutting Edge, Gamer's Edge, and Masters of the game. He also has a game "5 years in development!" coming out for the PS3/360 called Mythora. Take a look at that name, then go look at the brief screenshot (more likely a bullshot) they show and tell me what game jumps to your mind.
It saddens me that this jerk is connected to the Wizardry series. I noticed that the little slideshow on Edge Games website is claiming that a number of their C64 games including that one, is coming to Wiiware though, so while I hope he burns for the trouble he's causing the industry, I hope that game at least gets pulled form the flames beforehand. :lol
It saddens me that this jerk is connected to the Wizardry series. I noticed that the little slideshow on Edge Games website is claiming that a number of their C64 games including that one, is coming to Wiiware though, so while I hope he burns for the trouble he's causing the industry, I hope that game at least gets pulled form the flames beforehand. :lol
VNZ said:
The same trademark-squatting story, and the reason there was a seemingly redundant legal line included with the logo for most of the magazine's life. It was finally settled a few years back, IIRC, but he probably still has the rights to pretend he had anything to do with it.
Castor Krieg
Banned
haowan said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the copyright be only granted for the graphic design of the word "Edge" i.e. the logo? Also relevant here, shouldn't it be only applicable to product with distinct characteristic and similarities e.g. Edge vacuum cleaner line vs. Edge swimsuit line being two different trademarks?
Either way, I'm ok with patents and trademarks, my problem is with American legal system allowing such actions as these.
Lonewolf_92
Member
Castor Krieg said:
Your correct when it comes to common words (like Edge is), and you would likely be required to trademark a name like Edge Swimsuits or Edge Vacuums rather than just Edge. Uncommon and made up words, like say Kit-Kat, are open though.
But lawyers are expensive to hire and sometimes it's easier and cheaper to give in and pay the guy rather than fight, even if you're in the right. It's a shake down, it should be illegal, but it's currently OK by the US rulebooks and there are people out there just waiting for a payday.
proposition
Banned
I just patented empirical reality. Pay up fellas.
That sounds like trademark law gone horribly, horribly wrong. "Edge" is a common 4-letter word. Perhaps you could lay claim to "Edge Swimsuits", or something of the sort, but unless he already had "Soul Edge" trademarked, this should have been dismissed before it even reached court.
If he can successfully pull this off, the system might need reform. Make the loser pay the winner's legal fees if it can be shown that their claim is particularly ridiculous. Or have a cheap, fast-track for dismissals. Something of that sort to discourage blatent misuse of the system.
Even jerks are entitled to good legal council. Hell, we give admitted serial murderers good legal council. I wouldn't hold a lawyer's clients against them.haowan said:
infinityBCRT
Member
"He takes sexual pleasure in the collection of data"Witchfinder General said:
:lol
Gamasutra update
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Step...dell_Capps_and_quotPolicingquot_the_Board.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Step...dell_Capps_and_quotPolicingquot_the_Board.php
Class Acts: Or Not. The IGDA, Langdell, Capps and "Policing" the Board.
by Stephen Jacobs on 06/01/09 04:06:00 am
Posted 06/01/09 04:06:00 am
First, before I get into this, let me state the following up front.
1. I have been very involved with the IGDA over the past 4-5 years, acting as an executive member of the IGDA Writers and Education SIGs and have promoted the IGDA as an organization to my colleagues in those fields. I count several past and current board members as professional colleagues and friends. Professionally and personally my work with the IGDA SIGs has been very rewarding.
2. I did some early work with Tim Langdell in attempting to establish an association for game educators and researchers. Said association never got off the ground. Tim has done some good work in attempting to build linkages between the Writers Guild of America and The IGDA Writers SIG. Tim has also caused some controversy in some of the SIGs I am a member of. I did not vote for Tim when he ran recently ran, and won a seat, on the IGDA Board. I once bought Tim a hamburger in a bar in Austin during the Austin Game Conference (now the Austin GDC)
Ok, now that all that is out of the way, some thoughts...
Langdell's "Appointment to the Board": Whether Simon Carless was responsible or irresponsible in his reporting and characterization of Langdell's previous trademark disputes he absolutely got one thing wrong when he said that Tim had been "appointed" to the IGDA board. The board doesn't appoint anyone, you guys elect them (or at least the subset of you that are IGDA members). IGDA board members run for their lofty positions by self-nominating and putting up a 400 word statement on the IGDA web site, public as the day is long. As far as their qualifications go, they must be members in good standing, have been so for two years and adhere to the board code of ethics (more about that in a moment). No one in the community of IGDA members (including individual Board Members) voiced any public objections to his candidacy at any time. A majority of members voted for him. So it goes.
The Board is weak, apologist and defending it's own: Not. A board is a legal entity with specific duties, responsibilities and processes. It's behavior is strictly regimented. A board that deviates from them can be legally liable, as a group and individually, for any steps it takes. Whether individually or as a group a Board supports the actions of an individual member outside of Board business is immaterial. See more below.
"Disconnect" between Board Code of Ethics and IGDA Mission and Core Values?: Fellow Expert Blogger Adam Saltzman points to the IGDA mission and core values and opines that Langdell's behavior flies in the face of them. The current Board Code of Ethics doesn't require a Board member to subscribe to all the Core Values of the organization itself. Even if it did, it's not clear that Langdell's current action against "Edge, the iPhone game" violates the letter of those core values, whether or not you feel they violate the spirit. The nature of Trademark law requires that a Trademark must be defended or it is lost. The courts get to decide whether Langdell is using the law and his trademark as a legitimate defense of an active business entity's brand or a valueless claim made by an individual extorting others for licensing fees.
A more obvious conflict for the IGDA board arose over Mike Capps' statement last year that he supported a "corporate culture" of a 60+ hour work week. While QoL isn't directly listed in the IGDA Core Values it has been a major linchpin of the organization platform for some time.
It could be said that Capps' comments, made in his capacity as a member of the IGDA Board at the time, "undermined and impeded the activities of the IGDA" and were worthy of his removal from the board for said violating the Code of Ethics.
Whether or not individual Board Members believe Langdell is morally or ethically in the right in this instance of his business practices outside of his Board activities, there's not much they can do about it. He has not, acting in his capacity as a Board Member, undermined the IGDA in the way that Capps did.
However, there is someone else that can do something about it. That's you.
To Do List: Short and Long Term.
Short Term: IGDA By-Laws state "Any director may be removed from such office, with or without cause, by a majority vote of the voting members of the Corporation at any regular or special meeting of the members called expressly for that purpose. In addition, the Board of Directors may declare vacant the office of any Director who fails or ceases to meet any required qualification that was in effect at the beginning of that Directors current term of office."
Again, the Board has to make a specific case to remove any officer for cause, which generally has to do with how a Board Member conducts his duties for, and as part of, the board. On the other hand, if enough IGDA members believe that an officer should be removed for any reason whatsoever (eye color, for example) they can call for a special member meeting and, if they have the votes, remove him.
Of course, you'd have to be an IGDA member to vote, so if you're motivated enough to write an article/blog, or comment on one, perhaps you'll be motivated to join up to make a change. I've seen several bloggers and commenters state that they'd consider discontinuing their membership over the Capps and Langdell instances. Resigning merely maintains the status quo. Why not get active instead?
Long Term: If you believe that there needs to be a tighter integration between the By-Laws, Board Member Code of Ethics and the Goals and Values of the organization, "Make it So." To do so, see the above call to action.
Bottom Line: You is the IGDA
Look at the increased visibility of QoL as an issue, look at the Education SIGs' awesome Global Game Jam, look at the THREE BOOKS published by the Writers SIG in an effort to improve the craft, bring more Writers into the field and gain visibility for the profession, look at the unsung and tireless efforts of the Accessibility SIG to bring games to EVERYONE who wants to play. There's good stuff going on out there that gets little press as opposed to the times the org gets a black eye.
Join up, roll up your sleeves, fix what you don't like and make what you do like bigger and better.
VibratingDonkey
Member
shagg_187 said:
RevenantKioku
PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
On top of a big pile of money with many beautiful ladies.SovanJedi said:
I don't want to defend this guy's actions as I'm sure he's being a total scumbag, but giving him the benefit of the doubt he's not legally in the wrong here.
The guy presumably has the wordmark EDGE GAMES (as well as the logomark in the rip-off font) registered in the relevant trademark class for games; I can't remember off the top of my head which one that is in the States. Under US trademark law if you don't defend your trademark when others potentially infringe on it then you lose it; so in order to keep hold of it he HAS to zealously go after anyone who potentially infringes on it.
For US trademark law you also have to prove that you're using/intend to use the trademark in order to reregister. So he must be doing something with it.
Trademark lawyers/attorneys traditionally have a "watch" system that flags up any potential infringement of your registered marks in the relevant classes. Any time that flags something up, he's obliged to defend it as far as possible; otherwise he'll lose it.
I'm not sure how coherent that is, but it hopefully explains a little bit about how these things work. Although the usual I Am Not A Lawyer caveat applies, I do work with trademark registrations and infringements on a regular basis and know a little about the US system as a result.
The guy presumably has the wordmark EDGE GAMES (as well as the logomark in the rip-off font) registered in the relevant trademark class for games; I can't remember off the top of my head which one that is in the States. Under US trademark law if you don't defend your trademark when others potentially infringe on it then you lose it; so in order to keep hold of it he HAS to zealously go after anyone who potentially infringes on it.
For US trademark law you also have to prove that you're using/intend to use the trademark in order to reregister. So he must be doing something with it.
Trademark lawyers/attorneys traditionally have a "watch" system that flags up any potential infringement of your registered marks in the relevant classes. Any time that flags something up, he's obliged to defend it as far as possible; otherwise he'll lose it.
I'm not sure how coherent that is, but it hopefully explains a little bit about how these things work. Although the usual I Am Not A Lawyer caveat applies, I do work with trademark registrations and infringements on a regular basis and know a little about the US system as a result.
BluWacky said:
I don't think he's "working" on anything. It sounds more like he threatens anything with EDGE in it, and makes them "license" the word, and then he claims it as his own. According to his IGDA profile he has "worked" on more than 200 games. It's a lovely money-making scheme.
I can understand it if he's trademarked "EDGE" or "The Edge" that games with those titles from other people can't be made (that iPhone game is probably justifiably out of luck); but surely "Soul's Edge" and "Mirrors Edge" should be perfectly fine as "edge" is a common English word. It's not like consumers would ever confuse those games with each other.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Is he actually winning these things? It doesn't seem realistic to safeguard a generic in a title, hence why plain generics are purposely avoided in product and service branding.
Lonewolf_92
Member
Tempy said:
Honestly, I doubt his trademark on "Edge" would hold up in court if he actually tried to enforce it, it's simply too common a word (as was mentioned earlier in this thread regarding Hoover), but many people would rather pay his "licensing fee" than fight him in court over it (and have to delay publishing until the case is settled and pay a lawyer). It's like if I went and trademarked the word "War" then turned around and sued every game publisher who released a game with it in the title, regardless of how they used it, unless they pay me a dollar for every game they release using the word. Sure, it might be a couple thousand dollars in the end, but it'd be better than lost sales due to having the game delayed getting to market for months and paying a lawyer to fight mine in court, even if my claim is tissue thin. It almost works like a protection racket, pay a little to run on my turf ( pay my licensing fee) or risk losing a lot more. It's similar to the case involving Nintendo and Donkey Kong vs. King Kong now that I think about it, some of the companies that licensed Donkey Kong (Coleco among them, IIRC) just payed Universal what they asked for rather than having to handle the case in court against a giant like them until little old Nintendo stepped up.
AltogetherAndrews said:
None of the ones he's actually taken to court have succeeded as far as I'm aware (Soul Edge/Soulcalibur, Edge Magazine).
What's most fascinating about this whole thing isn't that he's a trademark squatter, but how far he has managed to get with it. How has this guy not been stopped before? And how did he get on the board of the IGDA with no discernible game development history? And why are they protecting him? This guy seems to be a clinical psychopath.
Lonewolf_92
Member
Sqorgar said:
The Edge (the previous name for Edge Games) has done a handful of games, the last of which was The Punisher for the Amiga back in 1990 and the most notable being the c64 version of Wizardry.
Captain Pants
Killed by a goddamned Dredgeling
This sucks. Edge is a great game. Hopefully they can just rename it and put it out again.
octopusman
Member
permutated
Banned
This guy is just asking EA to sue him blind. I hope he realizes he's in for a battle he can't win.
HurricaneJesus
Member
When I record my acoustic album, I am naming a track 'Edge' and another 'Monster' just because I fucking hate pieces of shit like this.
Come get me motherfuckers.
Come get me motherfuckers.
Old, posted?
The 'Edge' game has been back on the Apple store the past few weeks. No word on what happened though.
http://www.mobigame.net/
And if your wondering why this is a big deal read this,
http://www.tigsource.com/articles/2009/06/09/tim-langdell-and-edge-part-two
---
And it looks like Edge Games has been busy trademarking some new names in the UK.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/t-find-adp?propnum=0950413001
Anyone know what's up with the 'Edge of Twilight' trademark I thought SouthPeak was publishing this game?
http://www.southpeakgames.eu/?game=Edge of Twilight&platform=XBOX360
The 'Edge' game has been back on the Apple store the past few weeks. No word on what happened though.
http://www.mobigame.net/
And if your wondering why this is a big deal read this,
http://www.tigsource.com/articles/2009/06/09/tim-langdell-and-edge-part-two
---
And it looks like Edge Games has been busy trademarking some new names in the UK.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/t-find-adp?propnum=0950413001
Anyone know what's up with the 'Edge of Twilight' trademark I thought SouthPeak was publishing this game?
http://www.southpeakgames.eu/?game=Edge of Twilight&platform=XBOX360
biggkidd32
Member
So reprehensible. I can't believe that tool in the IGDA board.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Mirror's Spore :lol