There's a summary page of links on the Edge Games story over at TIGSource.

Quote: How did the game "Mirror's Edge" get away with it then?

They're probably too big. Edge Games is trying to make a game called "Mirrors" though, with an ad that ran "Mirrors A new game from Edge".

Quote: Is it true that the developer of "Edge" offered to rename the game "Edgy" and Langdell then trademarked "Edgy" to stop them?

I can't speak about intent, but from what I've read: the developer David Papazian does claim he offered rename the game to "Edgy", and it is true that Langdell later trademarked "Edgy" (US Trademark Serial Number 77738682, registered May 16h 2009; you can find it in the database). A few weeks later he also got a trademark for "Edge of Twilight", another game.

Quote: Original post by superpig
The GDNet Daily's been covering this a little.

We might not like what Langdell's doing with his IP in this case, but it would seem to be legal, not least because the US IP system is so horrendously flawed. It's a slimy way to make a living, but it's one the system would seem to permit. In the UK, I believe that you can't trademark a regular English-language word - you can trademark a particular rendering of it, a particular logo style in which it is used, but you can't trademark the word itself. I can only assume that isn't true for the US trademark system.

I can't remember the rapper, as I'm not really rapper savvy, but there was a big name with a big hit years ago that got sued over one of his songs because he used some "creole" language in it. Some one put out one of those push a button and I will say whatever it is electronic gizmo's you see at the store hanging on clip strips. They said they had rights to the phrases used. The case got thrown out because the packaging said something about it having autentic creole phrases and they said you couldn't own the rights to common language. So I think there is some precedence saying its just not OK, which is what normal people are going to reason to, legal or not.

That was a phrase and here we have one word. That issue needs to get dealt with or all the joking being done is something people are really going to try. Though even if some piss ants did try it I have to believe it would become a circus and all fall apart. Given that, nothing is being accomplished here but kicking people for little to no reason. Other than maybe some paranoia over potential/hypothetical pennies and general douche baggary.

Quote: Original post by slayemin
Wow, I didn't know words themselves could be trademarked! I MUST trademark the words "the", "and", "is", and "a". Anyone caught using those words must either pay a royalty to me or cease and desist!

"The Passion of the christ" infringes on my trademarked words TWICE!! Mel Gibson had better pay up!

Sorry I beat you to "the" and "a" if you see above. You are also delinquent on your gravity payment. Look its very reasonable at 1$ per year. Heck if people will actually start paying I'm willing to make it 1$ per person, per lifetime. Which will only be a big deal to prisoners which I hear can have several lifetimes. Its a small price to pay for keeping your feet on the ground.

Quote: Original post by Trapper Zoid

Quote: Is it true that the developer of "Edge" offered to rename the game "Edgy" and Langdell then trademarked "Edgy" to stop them?

I can't speak about intent, but from what I've read: the developer David Papazian does claim he offered rename the game to "Edgy", and it is true that Langdell later trademarked "Edgy" (US Trademark Serial Number 77738682, registered May 16h 2009; you can find it in the database). A few weeks later he also got a trademark for "Edge of Twilight", another game.

If intent was what it would appear to be, that might just be the sleaziest thing I have ever heard of in my life.

Quote: Original post by superpig
In the UK, I believe that you can't trademark a regular English-language word - you can trademark a particular rendering of it, a particular logo style in which it is used, but you can't trademark the word itself. I can only assume that isn't true for the US trademark system.

IANAL, but to my knowledge there are somewhat similar limitations in the US -- it says something that Papazian intends to fight the legal battle according to this article. Although English words incorporate part of that trademark in the US system (?), it's (theoretically) within a highly constrained context (?). Of course, that doesn't stop anyone from threatening litigation.

Quote: Original post by MaulingMonkey
Of course, that doesn't stop anyone from threatening litigation.

And here is the root of all the intellectual property stupidity. Their needs a way to prevent people with no legal grounds from bullying with the threat of a expensive and pointless legal battle.

I can understand the need to register single word trademarks. I shouldn't be able to make a FPS and call it something like "Doom 4". If Edge Games is still in business - and I think they are, even if they're just making mobile phone ports of decade-old games - I can see reason why they'd take exception to a game called EDGE, especially when EDGE seems to have gain far more market awareness than Edge Game. Things start getting murky for me when "Edgy" was blocked as an alternative. I've read there's a differing opinion on exactly what was going on there. It's mainly the agressive nature of Edge Games towards Mobigames that's my stumbling block in this particular case.

However, when it comes to some of the other titles, like "Edge of Twilight", I'd have thought Edge Games would be on much shakier ground. It's pretty clear to absolutely everyone that "Edge" is being used as a word there, and that "Edge of Twilight" taken as a single entity is a different trademark than just "Edge". If you could trademark single words based on their prior strength in the market, Stephen King would be making a killing on "It".

I also didn't think you could register trademarks unless you were planning on using them in business yourself (or more accurately you could, but they wouldn't hold much weight).

Just want to point out once again, that if a company does not enforce a trademark against potential infringement attempts, such a lack of enforcement will be used in the future to show that the trademark has been abandoned.

That's just how it works. Yeah it's stupid, but he's required to defend his trademark or he risks losing it.

Quote: Original post by Trapper Zoid
I also didn't think you could register trademarks unless you were planning on using them in business yourself (or more accurately you could, but they wouldn't hold much weight).

In the US you have 5 years to use a trademark or it's considered abandoned. So if someone registers it and does nothing with it for 5 years, they don't have the exclusive rights to it anymore.

Quote: Original post by Goober King

Quote: Original post by slayemin
Wow, I didn't know words themselves could be trademarked! I MUST trademark the words "the", "and", "is", and "a". Anyone caught using those words must either pay a royalty to me or cease and desist!

"The Passion of the christ" infringes on my trademarked words TWICE!! Mel Gibson had better pay up!

Sorry I beat you to "the" and "a" if you see above. You are also delinquent on your gravity payment. Look its very reasonable at 1$ per year. Heck if people will actually start paying I'm willing to make it 1$ per person, per lifetime. Which will only be a big deal to prisoners which I hear can have several lifetimes. Its a small price to pay for keeping your feet on the ground.

lol, I missed it. Pure comedic gold :) Where do I send my payment? do you take paypal? If people fail to pay the gravity tax, will you shut off their service?

Quote: Original post by Mithrandir
Just want to point out once again, that if a company does not enforce a trademark against potential infringement attempts, such a lack of enforcement will be used in the future to show that the trademark has been abandoned.

Right, though that requires that there is actually potential infringment to enforce against. If Langdell's trademark is for a particular rendering of the word "edge," for example, then he only needs to be defending against companies that use the word "edge" in a rendered style that is sufficiently similar to his own. I don't know the details of the trademarks that he actually owns, so it's tough to say whether defense of his trademarks is really justification for his actions. My own understanding of the "can't trademark common words" concept makes me think that he can't have trademarked any usage of the word in computer gaming, though maybe the US trademark system really is that strange.

Regardless, his registration of "edgy" certainly seems fishy.

To be honest, I don't really care about Langdell very much; I care more about the total failure of the IGDA to react to the issue. There's a significant call for comment from the membership, and there's been - to my knowledge - nothing official from the board, not even a "we won't hold a meeting to discuss this." It looks pretty damning for the IGDA's ability to effect issues that are more important to us - like QoL, crediting, equality, etc - if they can't even handle an internal bust-up like this, something that is more within their power than anything else they do.