Games Workshop Claims Trademark Rights Over The Term 'Space Marines'

Chuck_Melville

This isn't comics related, but thought the dispute might be of interest.

Maggie Hogarth, a self-published artist and writer, recently finished a SF novel about space marines, titled, in fact, Spots, The Space Marine. It's an original work, but also an homage to Robert Heinlein, who was the first to write about marines in space. Maggie prepped the book and set it up to be published as an e-book through Amazon.

Amazon initially published it, but then yanked it after being served a legal notice from Games Workshop that the book -- and the book's title in particular -- were infringing upon their Trademark of the term, 'space marine'.

More details here on Maggie's blog: haikujaguar.livejournal.com/1208235.html

Basically, it sucks. In spite of the fact that space marines have existed in SF literature for years, and have made use of that specific title, GW is claiming all rights to the term and is willing to fight for it. Maggie has been looking into legal options, but is feeling daunted by the expense -- GW could easily win their case simply by keeping in the courts and letting the expenses mount, since they could outlast Maggie in the money department. Simple solution would be for her to change the title of the book and change the term, 'space marine', into some other nomenclature, or use the words in some other arrangment (marines in space, perhaps)... but that would cement the ownership of the term to GW.

Greg

What a load of crap. The term space marine has been used in print as early as 1934 or around then. From what I can find GW is claiming a common law trademark. It's like Wizards of the Coast patenting rpg games that use 20 sided dice damn near 30 years after the fact.

Todd McFarlane did the same thing with the term "spawn." Not only did he go after Palladium Books when they published a new rpg called Nightspawn, but it was also rumored that he went after a scientific journal or something about fish reproduction because "spawn" was in the title. I could never find a confirmation on that one.

I didn't think it was possible for me dislike GW anymore than i already did.

nweathington

Yeah, I saw this last night. It’s almost as ridiculous as when TSR tried to trademark “Nazi” for their Indiana Jones RPG. The government hands out trademarks like candy and leaves it up to the court system to determine whether they hold up or not, giving large corporations an unfair advantage, i.e. Marvel and DC trademarking the term superhero.

WetRats

Wow. Classy.

DoctorDoom

That's bullcrap™ .

Greg

DoctorDoom said:

That's bullcrap™ .

I see what ya did there.

Torchsong

Well, can the Tolkein estate sue them for use of the word "Orc"?

David_D

nweathington said:

Yeah, I saw this last night. It’s almost as ridiculous as when TSR tried to trademark “Nazi” for their Indiana Jones RPG. The government hands out trademarks like candy and leaves it up to the court system to determine whether they hold up or not, giving large corporations an unfair advantage, i.e. Marvel and DC trademarking the term superhero.

REALLY??

Wow. That is bonkers. One of those moments where you want to actually see the look on the cranky judges' face as they throw it out.

nweathington

David_D said:

nweathington said:

Yeah, I saw this last night. It’s almost as ridiculous as when TSR tried to trademark “Nazi” for their Indiana Jones RPG. The government hands out trademarks like candy and leaves it up to the court system to determine whether they hold up or not, giving large corporations an unfair advantage, i.e. Marvel and DC trademarking the term superhero.

REALLY??

Wow. That is bonkers. One of those moments where you want to actually see the look on the cranky judges' face as they throw it out.

Well, technically, they had a trademark on the word Nazi in conjunction with a graphic of a Nazi soldier in the game, so it’s not nearly as outrageous as I made it sound. And it might have actually been Lucasfilm who applied for the trademark rather than TSR. Regardless, trademark law can be rather subjective.

WetRats

Torchsong said:

Well, can the Tolkein estate sue them for use of the word "Orc"?

One of the reasons they like to use "Ork" instead.

[Deleted User]

I worked on a computer game (Warhammer 40,000: Chaos Gate), back in the day, and had several meetings with Phil Gallaghen and Jon Gillard, who were our liasons, and possibly the guys in charge of GW at the time. They were the funniest, most entertaining guys I have ever met, and were fiercely, doggedly protective of the IP they were stewarding. However, they were extremely up front about how EVERYTHING in the 40k universe was lifted from Star Trek, Heinlein, Lovecraft, Aliens, and about a million other sources.

I think a lot of things have changed there, and the guys now in charge are more concerned with protecting the IP than improving the brand. You can't blame them, in a sense, but seeing as how the very basic premise of their universe was lifted straight from a story published in 1959, it does leave a bad taste.

Chuck_Melville

WetRats said:

Torchsong said:

Well, can the Tolkein estate sue them for use of the word "Orc"?

One of the reasons they like to use "Ork" instead.

Well, then maybe Robin Williams and Garry Marshall can sue them instead.

Chuck_Melville

The battle has made the news in the UK, which ties it into a similar battle over DC and Marvel's trademarking of the word, 'superhero'.

guardian.co.uk/books/2013/feb/07/superheroes-space-marines-lawyers-copyright?INTCMP=SRCH

Greg

I honestly did not know about the Marvel and DC trademark on "superhero." So nobody can use the phrase superhero in any variation in a book title or does go beyond that?

GW is claiming a common law trademark, if nothing is on the books, ...ugh 8-}

I hope GW doesn't get their way in this one.

Chuck_Melville

Here's a list of links of news and support for Ms Hogarth on the infringement issue:

mcah.wikia.com/wiki/Spots_vs_Games_Workshop

Plus, a partial victory: Amazon has relented and allowed the book to be available through the Kindle. Big victory in and of itself, but the legal issue of whether or not it is an infringement as GW claims is still to be resolved.

hauberk

While they put out quality stuff (though absurdly priced) GW has been notoriously brutish for years. I seem to recall a time when one of senior people referred to their customer base as socially retarded. They've already gotten all of the money that they're ever going to get from me. I stopped buying with Third Edition anyway.

Greg

I started playing 40k about a year or so before 4th edition was released and dropped it shortly after 4th ed came out. A lot of minitaure wargames have their product crazily overpriced but GW was and still is the worst. On top of that, even into 6th edition 40k still plays like its age, there are similar games with much better rules, gameplay and much lower entry points. They do continue to put out some gorgeous miniatures.

I have friends that are still very heavy into 40k, so I'm still stuck playing once in awhile and its torture every time.