Tim Langdell and EDGE: Part Two

By: Derek Yu

On: June 9th, 2009

Tim Langdell

Now that Classics Week and E3 are over, I’d like to come back to Tim Langdell for a moment, because I personally consider it to be not only a fascinating topic, but also an important one that raises a lot of issues important to the community, including intellectual property and the role of the IGDA. A lot has come up since my last post, and unfortunately, it’s spread relatively thinly across a number of interesting discussions. I’m going to do my best to summarize and provide links to source material so that people can have a better understanding of what’s going on. I make no pretensions about my personal feelings on the matter, but please consider that anything that I say for which I do not explicitly provide a source are my own opinions. I will try to make it as clear as possible when they are.

Also, apologies to the readers who come here looking for news on new games to play and are uninterested in this story. There will be some very soon, and I’ll hide the rest of the post under a jump so that you can easily and quickly move on.

A Quick Recap:


1. Fingergaming posts an article revealing that the popular, award-winning iPhone game Edge has been removed due to a legal issue with Langdell. Mobigame’s David Papazian suggests that Langdell was also responsible for Namco’s Soul Edge being renamed to Soul Blade and then Soul Calibur in the United States. (Source)

2. Simon Carless posts an article on GameSetWatch in which he suggests that Langdell has a habit of engaging in lawsuits over his trademark on the word “Edge.” Carless also notes that Langdell’s Wikipedia entry, which is oddly detailed, has been mostly edited by a single user, Cheridavis, who may or may not be Cheri Langdell, Tim’s wife. Cheridavis had denied being related to Langdell, and had insisted that she (he?) was writing an unnamed book on the game industry and was posting information she discovered through her research of the book. Carless mentions at the end of his article that because of Langdell’s history of trademark abuse it’s unfortunate that he has recently been accepted to the board of directors for the IGDA.

3. Simon’s article is removed, for unknown reasons, but has been quoted on various other websites and forums. (Source)

4. Thanks to a tip from mklee, I read Simon’s article, follow his links, and decide to make a post about it myself here on TIGSource.

5. Langdell’s Wikipedia page is cleaned up and is now under neutrality and notability disputes.

6. Both the IGDA and the “Game Attorney,” Tom Buscaglia, respond, with Tom responding on his own behalf. The IGDA claims that it cannot take any action with Langdell regarding the legal dispute. Buscaglia calls Simon’s article a “hatchet job” and implies that Carless has reason to take down Langdell because of a rivalry between Game Developer Magazine and Edge Magazine. He suggests that, in order to keep his trademark, Langdell must actively protect it by pursuing legal action against Mobigame.

(Note: Buscaglia has since apologized for his “snide” remarks about Carless and insists that his implication of a rivalry was intended as a joke. He has also edited his post to remove the latter. In this author’s opinion, there was no indication of a joke in the original post.)

Tim Langdell and David Papazian Speak


Probably the most important thing that has happened the past week is that Langdell and Papazian have both spoken up regarding the controversy, in the comments section of Stephen Jacobs’s Gamasutra blog. Jacobs has been involved with the IGDA for at least 4 years and once worked with Langdell to try and establish an organization for game educators and researchers.

It’s probably best if you read the entire discussion, starting with Jacobs’s article. But here are the basic claims by both sides:

1. Langdell claims that EDGE Games informed Apple of the trademark violation, whereupon Apple sent a standardized notice to Mobigame. At that point, Langdell claims that Mobigame pulled the app voluntarily.

2. Langdell claims that it is, in fact, Mobigame that is bullying EDGE Games over the trademark. He also asserts that Mobigame started the “flame war” with the intention of causing him embarrassment.

3. Langdell claims that he has never sued anyone over EDGE trademarks, or ever started any litigation over the trademarks. Furthermore, he claims that “EDGE has never engaged in anything other than entirely legitimate practices to protect its trademarks.”

4. Langdell asserts that he has personally produced all of the several hundred games EDGE Games has developed or produced since 1979, and that every other statement he has made regarding his own accomplishments are entirely true.

(Note: Langdell, even when asked directly, has seemingly made no attempt to verify any of this, or even provide a simple list of games he has produced. Update: But if you go to the EDGE Games website and click “Videogames” at the top, you can see a list.)

5. Papazian responds to Langdell by saying that he has not made any comments regarding the dispute since the Fingergaming article and has no prior connection to either Simon Carless or Owen Good (who penned a Kotaku article about Langdell). He regards Langdell’s accusation that Mobigame is trying to cause Langdell embarrassment as a lie.

6. Papazian corroborates Langdell’s claim that Edge was voluntarily pulled.

7. Papazian claims that Mobigame offered to change the name to “EDGY” whereupon Langdell refused the offer and proceeded to register the trademark “EDGY”. Papazian also asserts that Langdell holds the trademarks “MIRROR’S SPORE” and “SOUL SPORE,” suggesting a connection to EA’s games Mirror’s Edge and Spore, and Namco’s Soul Edge.

(Note: Edge Games does indeed own those trademarks. You can look them up yourself here [EDGY] and here [MIRROR’S SPORE AND SOULSPORE].)

8. Papazian claims that Langdell has never given proof of his connection to Edge Magazine, or any proof that he has actively used the mark in recent years. He claims that the only person he has spoken to from EDGE Games has been Langdell.

On Langdell


Although I make no claims about the legality of anything that Langdell has done, it’s obvious to me that there is something very underhanded with the way that he operates. At best, he bends the truth. For one thing, there’s no reason not to believe what David Papazian has said, and, in fact, there is a lot of evidence to corroborate his claims (e.g. the trademarks Langdell has registered and the fact that there really is no evidence of Papazian or his colleagues commenting on the issue between the Fingergaming article and the Gamasutra blog post).

There are also many unproven, yet eyebrow-raising, reasons to be skeptical of what Langdell is saying. For one thing, there’s the whole dispute over his Wikipedia entry and whether he was personally involved. There’s also the “Mirrors a game from Edge” advertisement on the EDGE Games website, which seems purposefully misleading. In fact, if you use the Wayback Machine to look at previous incarnations of Langdell’s site, you’ll see that he’s pulled similar stunts throughout the years. My favorite is the EDGE Games jacket, which has a photo of a jacket with “EDGE Games” written on it in a red font. (Thanks to raiten for pointing this out.)

Plus, as the story has been spread, more personal anecdotes from people who have worked with Langdell have popped up, and they are terrible. Read this, this, and this, if you’re interested. It’s gruesome stuff.

Is anyone defending Langdell? Aside from Buscaglia, there appears to be a single anonymous person calling themselves either “Joe” or “mopius” who claims to be friends with Tim and is posting gems such as this on various blogs and forums:

Not only is Tim an “indie” from the 80’s, but he’s the real deal. He’s not some punk who just made a game in some “Easy Instant Game Maker 2000 Pro Edition” in two minutes and decided to call himself a professional game developer. No, he has actual experience in the field and has more games (actual games, things sold at retail) credited to him than you’ve had hot dinners.

Because of the Wikipedia dispute, there is suspicion that “Joe” is Langdell himself, but this is unfounded.

Plus, this. Seriously.

To date, Langdell has tenuous associations with and/or has claimed creative ownership of the following brands:

1. Edge Magazine
2. Soul Edge
3. Edge (iPhone game)
4. Mirror’s Edge
5. Edge of Extinction (Cybernet Systems v. Edge Games)
6. Edge Computers
7. EdgeGamers (game community)
8. The Edge (movie)
9. Edge (Malibu Comics character)
10. Koala Lumpur: Journey to the Edge

But it’s not obvious (to me, anyway) what Tim Langdell has actually created, aside from trouble for the various people who have had the misfortune of dealing with him and his trademark during its 30-odd years of existence. My hope is that, by helping to bring out the story, real creators can avoid him (and others like him) in the future. I don’t believe Langdell is a smart man, because a lot of his stunts are poorly managed and straight-up bald-faced – the only way he can succeed is if people are not knowledgeable.

So know your legal rights! As far as I know, trademark strength is not dependent on who “calls it” first, but on how you use it. I would love to hear a lawyer (who is not Buscaglia) comment on this matter.

Regarding the IGDA


The IGDA has taken the stance of “this is none of our business.” I disagree that it’s none of their business, and I strongly disapprove of their impotence regarding this issue. They are enabling people like Langdell when they should be helping to protect developers from them. Game developer/blogger Craig Stern sums up the situation very well. You can also see that the IGDA does have some rules regarding ethical behavior on the board and what they can do about it (scroll down).

You can sign a petition asking for Langdell to be expelled from the IGDA here.

Update: I’ve collected information regarding Tim Langdell and Edge Games here for easy reference.

  • Chris Edgerton

    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.

    Edgerton & Edgerly Solicitors

  • Ik

    I can believe Tim personally wrote 700+ games. Why, just the other day, I produced over 500 games myself. I was aiming for 600, but i had to stop and discover a cure for cancer. Then the pope came over for lunch and you know how he gets when.. EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE ..oh dear.. i seem to have a stutter in my buffer.. EDGE EDGE EDGEY EDGELY THE EDGE ON THE EDGE EDGE GAMES EDGE OF MY SEAT ..where is this stuff coming from.. EDGE LEDGE SEDGE PLEDGE ..it’s just typing itEDGEself.. Oh, God, please don’t sue me Tim!

  • Mongrol

    What’s a jump?

  • Quazi
  • Oddball

    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.

  • Paul Eres

    a “jump” is a long-standing tigsource term for the extended part of a blog entry

  • RayRayTea

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

  • SteveO

    It seems so… I somehow didn’t notice that one myself until you pointed it out. I guess I was on autopilopt whilst writing the list out.

    Still, Producers aren’t exactly the most hands-on of people. I would hazard a guess that most projects, especially ones of a simplistic nature such as early computer/console titles could probably have done just as well with little organisation from producers. Comparing the titles to projects such as MMO’s today and the work required looks pathetic in comparison. (Not to bring down anyone working on simple projects, just to say I question exactly how involved you would really be in such a position when games were so relatively simplistic).

  • SteveO

    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 ;)

  • http://www.mile222.com aeiowu

    Add Edge shaving gel to the list. I bet it really burns him to know people are using HIS baby to shear hair from their unappreciative cheeks. Or maybe he himself uses it, look at that goatee!

    also, I triple posted here due to some AJAX hiccup last night, could someone delete two of them. Thanks!

  • Snow

    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”.

  • http://b-mcc.com// BMcC

    I wrote a thoughtful comment with my signature, but it didn’t show up. Are the signatures being moderated now?

  • Lurk

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


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

  • The Doctor

    Oh man, he actually is trying to create brand confusion with Mirror’s Edge?

    I thought I was just joking about that.

  • Paul Eres

    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)

  • simon

    Here’s something interesting:


    “Dr Langdell also provides examples of the way in which the
    trade marks have been used. He also claims to have used the specific trade mark
    “SOULEDGE” in the United Kingdom and in that connection provides details of sales of a
    game called Souledge which was launched in 1988 and which, he says, remains in the
    companies active catalogue of products for sale. The evidence of use of that game is dated
    Spring 1988, December 1990 and there are some invoices, dated January 7 1992 and August
    28 1991.”

    But the game ‘Souledge’ is not on the Edge Games list.

  • fucrate

    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.

  • FISH

    if it’s any consolation, i hear there’s talk at the IGDA of actually having him step down.

    he’s becoming too big of an embarrassment to them.

    honestly, if i was still an IGDA member, id cancel my membership and make sure they know i did.

  • Ivan

    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.

  • http://www.adamatomic.com/ Adam Atomic

    It’s not a lawsuit, its a filing of trademark opposition before a council or agency!


  • JustKidding

    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!)

  • fucrate

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

    Also I’m pretty confident that Langdell would be fucking up Mobigames even if they were members, I really doubt he gives a shit who he’s squeezing money from.

  • JustKidding

    “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.

  • http://b-mcc.com// BMcC

    @Paul: I mean on the petition. :P

  • Snow

    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.

  • avoidobject

    Can we please make the EDGE compo an official compo?

    I like that we have one, sure, but it just isn’t the same as having an official compo which is sure most of us had in mind.

  • Wiggles

    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.

  • Flamebait

    @Paul Eres:
    “isn’t erin usually a female name? not everyone here is a sir”

    I recall it usually being a man’s name, and most people here are men. It was the best prediction I could make.

    Thank you Adam Atomic, SteveO, TMR, and RobF for the info on his BS games list. What are we supposed to do about this guy though? It’s not like we can boycott his new products, as there’s little-to-no evidence for their existence. Kick him out of the IGDA and he’ll still live off other companies’ use of “Edge”.

  • Dinsdale

    I agree with everything said in this… Thread!

  • Snow

    Seriously though, the laws need to be changed on Trademarks. If a trademark is filed for a common single word (that can be found in the dictionary), the trademark should ONLY be a allowed to cover either the affiliated company or product – specifically and NOT BOTH. That means that such a trademark can only cover a company/product name in the ONE single industry/sub-industry and category. So for example, if someone opened a restaurant called “Edge”, Langdouche could NOT do anything about it. If someone wanted to title a game, “Soul Edge”, and Langdouche only registered the trademark for the company name, he could NOT do anything about it.

    It’s like another commentor (ether here or on another site) said, “This douchebag hasn’t been producing any games for the last 15 years. He’s simply been squatting on the trademark.”

    Maybe this whole clusterfuck could become the catalyst to changing and tightening up trademark rules, applications and restrictions. Maybe that’s what we should all start doing. Start the gears turning for newer, tighter legislation. All this guy is doing, is as pointed out, squatting on a single word and raking in money from those who don’t want a lawsuit. He never has to work in the games industry again. That word is gold to him as long as there are so few restrictions on a trademark.

  • Derek

    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.

  • Cait Reid

    Flamebait and Paul, to get rid of any confusion, I’m a girl.

  • Flamebait

    “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?

  • http://www.g4g.it Firesword

    I don’t know how it works in other countries but i am pretty sure common words can’t be copyrighted. So the word ‘edge’ can’t be copyrighted, same apply to steam, windows, blizzard etc etc..

    I remember many years ago Lindows (an alternative OS) won a cause vs Microsoft, the judge motivated that microsoft couldn’t copyright the word ‘windows’ beacouse it is a common used word.

    I think he is just bullying, trying to win a jackpot, in court he has zero chance. Bye.

  • http://www.g4g.it Firesword

    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

    Langdell’s site has probably seen more web traffic in the last two weeks than it has in the last 10 years.

  • Cait Reid

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

  • IamRight

    The guy’s a cocksucker… period!

  • Paul Eres

    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?

  • raiten
  • 7point83hertz

    check out the thread on the igda forum.

    needs more cowbell…


  • Paul Eres

    wow — so langdell threatened carless too? incredible

  • TMR

    @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.

  • Ben Collier

    @fucrate – Yeah, bought Games TM magazine the other day rather than Edge because of this.

  • Greg

    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.

  • Temp

    Edge magazine have their lawyers looking into the fact that Langdell claims they have a partnership of sorts: http://www.computerandvideogames.com/edge/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15022

  • Max

    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.

  • tom

    i said it once and I’ll say it to you again, you’re all loony. you’re nutty in the head. just give this up already because you’re not going to change anything no matter how much you raise your voices. i doubt any of you are even members of the IGDA. then again like I said before none of you are even real game designers, you just act like you are on this crazy ass website. what a joke…

  • bob

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

  • joe

    er, I meant to put my name as joe not bob. and especially not as tom crap… i blew it