Tim Langdell and EDGE: Part Two

Dear Tim,

On behalf of our client, DELL Computers, we must ask you to stop using the term DELL in your last name, namely LangDELL, as this is an infringement of our property rights.

We must also advise you that another client of ours, DC Comics, would like you to stop using the term ‘Lang’ in your name as this is an infringement of their character, Lana Lang, and likewise constitutes copyright infrigement, ipso facto, quad sum, etc, etc.

Sincerely,
Edgerton & Edgerly Solicitors

What’s a jump?

I think Langdell should fight WWE wrestler Edge for the rights to the trademark. If he wins we all then have to accept the word EDGE belongs to him. If he loses then he has to give up this crazy behavior.

@SteveO He did PageMaker too? Awesome, I remember doing my graduation thesis in PageMaker 7 (RIP and good riddance, long live InDesign).

I should also point out I’m not having a go at producers in general either (before our own producer takes offense!), just this specific one ;)

I think it’s also a ridiculous that a trademark can be placed on a common word. If someone releases a game called “Edge”, that has no affiliation what-so-ever with a company that is under the name Edge, how can that possibly infringe on anything?

Here in Canada, there was a similar case years ago. If memory serves me correctly, I have forgotten the name though, but, in a small town, a small fabric store had the same problem. It had the same name as a restaurant, despite that the store’s name proceeded the words “Fabric Store”. They were still forced to remove it and even pay a penalty to the restaurant.

You know, I think I am going to trademark the word “Langdell”. I am now the owner of the future corporation: Langdell Industries. I will file a lawsuit against anyone who uses the word “Langdell” for the name of a company, a product or even a last name. Therefore, Langdell will be forced to change his last name, since I know own the word. Oh and I will also trademark the word, “Langdelly”.

Is’nt Alien Syndrome just a localization of a Sega game, or does he claim he worked on it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Syndrome

sega is noted as being developer and publisher, so what was langdell’s role in all this?

BMcC: i don’t see the comment in the feedback area in the admin panel, perhaps it just didn’t get posted rather than getting moderated (due to a database connection problem or something)

Is this petition gonna be in any way legal for the IGDA? I would assume that we need to limit the petition to actual IGDA members to get langdell kicked out.

Since I read about this entire debacle on the web I bought Mirrors Edge (the EA version LOL) and loved it.

Screw you Langdell. Brb, trademarking Langdell Games and about to file lawsuit.

So, basically: If you’re an indie developer and you don’t give the IGDA money then they’ll fuck you up…is that what’s happened here?

(PS: Edge magazine can f**k right off if they’re afilliated with this Langdell asshole!)

“Any affiliation Langdell would have with Edge Magazine is just the result of him suing them as well.”

Indeed, but there’s maybe some collateral damage to the magazine’s brand…when I look at a copy of Edge now, the thought that “this is something to do with that guy that’s an asshole” is lingering somewhere in my mind.

As for the IGDA: TBH, I didn’t really know anything about them before this Edge stuff kicked off…thanks to Langdell I’ll probably never be able take them seriously – I know that’s not fair, but that’s how people’s minds work.

Wait. Ivan, you can’t trademark “Langdell Games”, since I am trademarking the words “Langdell” and “Langdelly” for good measure. I would suggest naming your company: “Langdouchebag Games”. If you want to use the word “Langdell”, you will have to pay me a sum of $7 Gillion with a 56%/annum fee to cover royalties. Also, you will be required to address me as one of the following: God, King, Master of the Universe or Number One.

Here’s the plan. Make a game called “Dong Edge”, and make it the most vile, worthless, terrible game ever. Then sell it. Then see if he disputes trademark over it.
It’d be awesome if he associated himself with it.

I agree with everything said in this… Thread!

Actually, it’s not clear whether Langdell has successfully won a case in court. I feel like the problem rests more with the fact that no one knew much about Langdell before Simon’s article and/or didn’t understand their rights. Here is a repost of Alex Whiteside’s comment from the Stephen Jacob’s blog post that I think does a pretty good job of explaining basic trademark law (thanks to Greg Wohlwend for first posting it on the TIGForums):

I’ve been compelled to register to clear up some schoolboy-level misunderstandings of trademark law that are being propagated here. As a disclaimer, my own background in IP law is only as much as I’ve picked up on mandatory training (to ensure we don’t cause a legal fiasco in our jobs) and has more to do with patents, which are a much more cut-and-dry field.

The idea that someone can “register” a patent and then anyone who uses it is “infringing” is a common fallacy that comes from confusing trademark law and patent law. Trademark registration is simply a way of publishing your trademark so that others can avoid infringing upon it and provides no additional legal protection. If anything, it is for the legal benefit of others, who can avoid wasting money developing what turns out to be someone else’s distinctive mark. All trademarks, registered and unregistered, whether they have that little “TM” sign or not, are equally protected.

Trademark “infringment” is a civil offense that’s decided on a “reasonable” basis. Essentially, someone infringes on your trademark if their actions can be reasonably expected to lead to confusion between themselves and your business/products/whatever in practice. For example, if I release a product called “Coca Cola”, then obviously that will confuse any reasonable customer into believing that it’s made by the Coca Cola Company. You could argue that the product is a cheeseburger and not a soda, but that probably won’t fly because the “Coca Cola” name itself is so tightly bound to the Coca Cola Company in the public consciousness. I would obviously be trading off Coca-Cola’s reputation as a business.

However, suppose that tomorrow a children’s book company decided to call itself “Caterpillar”, with a cute little green caterpillar as the logo. That word is the trademark for a hugely successful and well-known brand of hydraulic equipment, and a great deal of licenced merchandise tying into that image. However it’s extremely unlikely that any reasonable individual would confuse the two companies. The word “Caterpillar” is not distinctive enough, and not unique enough, for that confusion to arise when the two companies are in entirely different lines of business. Therefore that would not constitute an infringement.

As another example, suppose you have a company called “Venice Blinds” that produces blinds to be sold under store own-brands. Another company calling itself “Venice”, and producing blinds, would likely be confused with the original by buyers for retail chains, and therefore that trademark would have been infringed upon. However a blinds company called “Spiffy Blinds” could put out a set of Venetian blinds called “Memories of Venice” direct to the consumer. Given that nobody in consumerland is aware that “Venice Blinds” exists, there’s no risk of customer confusion. If “Venice Blinds” was a household name, it might be that a reasonable person would belive that “Memories of Venice” was somehow derived from Venice Blinds’ product range, and we’re back to infringement.

As you can see, trademark law is very context-sensitive, and it is very much based upon the public awareness of the mark. Trademark law is engineered to ensure business cannot trade off each other’s reputations. It’s not like patent law, or a registered design, where someone is given an exclusive right to something in exchange for registration.

We have a special case here in that EDGE Games’ web-site attempts to present Langdell’s licencees’ products as his own, and therefore he is acting contrary to his obligation, as a trademark holder, to protect his mark’s distinctiveness. If Edge is his trademark, he is obligated to ensure that people know that those products were not actually his. In fact he is doing the opposite, and therefore his trademark is diluted. This would not lead to a very positive outcome if he was attempting to defend the mark in court: defendants could argue that his claim was in bad faith.

To exacerbate matters, he uses the distinctive marks of EDGE Magazine as his own logo and a huge amount of former EDGE Magazine website content (much of which still links back to http://www.edge-online.co.uk) for his own business, which means that in all likelihood he’s infringing on Future Publishing’s trademarks in the form of the distinctive EDGE Magazine “E” symbol, which is much more strongly linked with that magazine than it is with EDGE Games.

Mr. Langdell has no reason for accusing the Edge iPhone game of “copyright infringement”, as some sites have reported, which is an entirely different tort. I suspect mistranslation somewhere.

“Actually, it’s not clear whether Langdell has successfully won a case in court. I feel like the problem rests more with the fact that no one knew much about Langdell before Simon’s article and/or didn’t understand their rights.”

I’m sure many people never did- seems more likely that the “infringers” just took the monetary path of least resistance by settling, thus feeding this parasite.

One thing I wonder is whether anything fradulent is going on. There are no signs that Edge’s upcoming games actually exist. Edge doesn’t seem to be publicly traded, but if there are any investors at all, it surely has to be illegal if Edge is doing nothing with their money?

Checked the games list he made, i refuse to believe he coded Alien Syndrome for Commodore 64..

Btw this is a pretty disgusting matter, i think i don’t wanna mess with this..
Next time i’ll ponder better if comment… lol

good luck to the guys with their game for iphone. cya.

Tyrone: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/edgegames.com Look at the 3 month change.

again, guys, please stop confusing copyright and trademark. he’s not “copyrighting” edge. he’s “trademarking” it. two completely different things — is it that hard to keep straight?

check out the thread on the igda forum.

needs more cowbell…

http://www.igda.org/Forums/showthread.php?s=e5d893759e7edd3b7fcd8b74915fd193&threadid=35923

@Firesword: he probably didn’t code any of the C64 games, just off the top of my head Shadow Skimmer and the first Garfield were both by Mat Sneape, R.I.S.K. by Chris West, Tangent was Andy Merril, Soldier of Light by Ian & Mic Jones and so on…

One thing i’ve just noticed, the company that published most of the 8- and 16-bit titles was called The Edge rather than Edge Games.

Mythora and Mythora 2 are vaporware.

Mythora was scheduled to be released in 2004, and his website just stayed the same til his recent update, where he tacked on a 2 below it, pretty much using PAINT, like the worthless piece of shit he is.

When exactly was the last time Edge Games published anything?

On February 29,2008, Plaintiff Velocity Micro, Inc. (“Velocity”) filed a Complaint against The EDGE Interactive Media, Inc. (“Edge Interactive”) alleging trademark infringement, false designation of origin and description of fact, false advertising, unfair competition, and fraud on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. At the time Plaintiffs Complaint was filed, Edge Interactive was listed as a suspended California corporation.

i mean seriously make a part 3 or even part 10 of this if you want, it ain’t gonna change nothing