Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankenskid
Personally I respect a company that has enough balls to stand up to a recent upstart in a field they have 12 years invested in through providing a better product, more than one that uses flimsy applications of trademark law to try and keep a name out of discussions. If you are so good, and did so much, then someone else calling a recent program they made a builder of armies or whatever should not phase you in the least as you have the market share, the presence in the industry, and the experience to do better.
|
The issue that many gamers aren't aware of is that we are
legally obligated to ensure our trademarks are not being misused. We don't get to choose in the matter, even if it's a fan-created tool that we would prefer not worrying about. If we discover one of our trademarks being misused, we have to act. If we don't, then we could potentially lose the trademark. That's the way the laws are written, and we have to follow them.
The goal here is to ensure our trademark is used in reference to our brand of products and not other products. In essence, the situation is analogous to someone using your name for something you had no involvement in. It causes confusion, or much worse, and I'm sure you can envision the various implications that could arise if someone else used your name. The same basic implications hold true for trademarks and the products they reference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankenskid
Also Warmachine and Warhammer are a bit more specific than a general name of an "Army Builder"......
|
Those names have their roots in simple words from the English language. They have only become "specific" through the acquisition of secondary meaning by the success of the products for which they apply. The exact same is true for Army Builder, since the term was not in general use when the product was first released in 1998 and it has gained secondary meaning over the course of 12 years. The USPTO concurred with this position many years ago.