Tweet
Row blows up over ownership of 'space marine' term
UK toymaker Games Workshop has been criticised for asserting a trademark claim to the phrase 'space marines'.
The claim emerged when it was used to get an American ebook about the futuristic soldiers taken off Amazon.
Science fiction writers have called the firm "absurd" for saying it has a trademark to the use of the term in fiction.
A UK media lawyer said more and more firms were using trademark law to protect their creations.
Generic term
The row started in December 2011 when US writer Maggie Hogarth found out that her novel called "Spots the Space Marine" had been removed from the Amazon ebook store following a complaint from Games Workshop.
In emails sent to Ms Hogarth this week, Games Workshop claims that its entry into digital publishing gives it a "common law trademark claim" over the phrase.
Ms Hogarth wrote a blogpost about the row and expressed her fear that if Games Workshop started actively pursuing its claim, science fiction could lose one of its "fundamental" ideas. Ms Hogarth said a lack of funds meant she was unable to defend herself against the claim. However, she is now in touch with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which campaigns on digital rights, about the case.
The blogpost received a huge amount of publicity and has provoked responses from best-selling SF authors Cory Doctorow, Charles Stross and John Scalzi. Many people sent messages to Games Workshop's Twitter account using the #spacemarines hashtag criticising the firm.
Mr Scalzi, who is currently president of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, said it was "absurd" for the firm to claim ownership of the phrase and its use in literature. In a blogpost, Mr Scalzi said it was "pretty damn generic" long before Games Workshop began using it to describe its toy soldiers and in tabletop games,
A spokesman for Games Workshop said it had a "blanket policy" of not talking to the media and had no comment to make about the row or its trademark claim.
Media and intellectual property lawyer Susan Hall from DWF said Games Workshop might struggle to assert its trademark claim in America.
"In the US they'll come straight up against the First Amendment and that's one issue they'll have to overcome," she said.
Ms Hall said Games Workshop could launch a similar protection campaign in Europe as it had had a registered trademark for the term "space marine" since 1995. Its trademark claim covers the use of the word in connection with many aspects of tabletop gaming and video games, she said, but also extended to published works.
"If you have a registered trademark you can stop people using it in the course of trade for goods that are not yours or licensed or approved by you," she said. "It puts the person with the mark in a very strong position."
Many firms, she said, were registering trademarks to help them keep control of intellectual properties that were now out of copyright. There were dangers in this bid for control, said Ms Hall.
"You need strong IP laws," she said, "but you need to have the ability to rub up against those in a way that allows people to be creative and allows creative freedom."
UK toymaker Games Workshop has been criticised for asserting a trademark claim to the phrase 'space marines'.
The claim emerged when it was used to get an American ebook about the futuristic soldiers taken off Amazon.
Science fiction writers have called the firm "absurd" for saying it has a trademark to the use of the term in fiction.
A UK media lawyer said more and more firms were using trademark law to protect their creations.
Generic term
The row started in December 2011 when US writer Maggie Hogarth found out that her novel called "Spots the Space Marine" had been removed from the Amazon ebook store following a complaint from Games Workshop.
In emails sent to Ms Hogarth this week, Games Workshop claims that its entry into digital publishing gives it a "common law trademark claim" over the phrase.
Ms Hogarth wrote a blogpost about the row and expressed her fear that if Games Workshop started actively pursuing its claim, science fiction could lose one of its "fundamental" ideas. Ms Hogarth said a lack of funds meant she was unable to defend herself against the claim. However, she is now in touch with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which campaigns on digital rights, about the case.
The blogpost received a huge amount of publicity and has provoked responses from best-selling SF authors Cory Doctorow, Charles Stross and John Scalzi. Many people sent messages to Games Workshop's Twitter account using the #spacemarines hashtag criticising the firm.
Mr Scalzi, who is currently president of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, said it was "absurd" for the firm to claim ownership of the phrase and its use in literature. In a blogpost, Mr Scalzi said it was "pretty damn generic" long before Games Workshop began using it to describe its toy soldiers and in tabletop games,
A spokesman for Games Workshop said it had a "blanket policy" of not talking to the media and had no comment to make about the row or its trademark claim.
Media and intellectual property lawyer Susan Hall from DWF said Games Workshop might struggle to assert its trademark claim in America.
"In the US they'll come straight up against the First Amendment and that's one issue they'll have to overcome," she said.
Ms Hall said Games Workshop could launch a similar protection campaign in Europe as it had had a registered trademark for the term "space marine" since 1995. Its trademark claim covers the use of the word in connection with many aspects of tabletop gaming and video games, she said, but also extended to published works.
"If you have a registered trademark you can stop people using it in the course of trade for goods that are not yours or licensed or approved by you," she said. "It puts the person with the mark in a very strong position."
Many firms, she said, were registering trademarks to help them keep control of intellectual properties that were now out of copyright. There were dangers in this bid for control, said Ms Hall.
"You need strong IP laws," she said, "but you need to have the ability to rub up against those in a way that allows people to be creative and allows creative freedom."
In the latest display of a long line of shittiness towards everyone in general by Games Workshop, apparently you can now no longer use the term "Space Marine" in a work of fiction without Games Workshop breaking out the lawyers.
Games workshop have been known in the past for breaking out the lawyers at even the slightest provocation, be it blocking a completely fanmade and fan funded film because they dared to ask Games workshop for permission to put it on their website for free, or suing Curse over using the domain name warhammeralliance.com, despite it being an approved forum by GW in the past and the only way for the EU players to communicate with Mythic and Bioware for a very long time until Bioware simply just opened up a Warhammer Online section on the social website. They also claim ownership of a large amount of terms ranging from the specific (Tzeetch and Cadian, for example) to the more everyday (Epic and Inferno). They also claim the Double Headed Eagle motif, despite the fact that was in use by various nations nearly a millennium ago. Add constant price hikes far beyond inflation rates, and embargo on sales to the Southern Hemisphere in an attempt to force people there to pay further inflated prices, it has managed to attain a reputation of being, well, evil to the point where even EA and DISNEY look like saints in comparison.
And now just mentioning this I probably owe Games Workshop about eight million pounds. So from now on I'm going to call them Wames Gurkshop because I can't afford to pay any more royalties.
Anyway the reason why I am mentioning this is because it is pretty worrying that small writers are being hammered like this for daring to use such a generic term. Sure there is a need for IP laws to protect an IP but the fact that Wames Gurkshop is going Inquisition- wait that's another royalty cheque to Wames Gurkshop- on people using a term that has been in generic use for decades. Protecting an IP is fair enough but when you're trying to asset claim over such a generic term to crush all creative freedom because you can't be bothered to attempt to compete? Yeah that is a worrying precedent and the behaviour of a company that is well...Evil...
Comment