No more GW Facebook?

[Defenestratus]

Friend of mine just told me that GW pulled down their Facebook page.

Can anyone confirm since I'm not actually on the vile, infernal data mining operation?

[DrLove42]

Is indeed the case.

It doesn't mean it won't be back though. It was a great tool for them, i don't see it being gone for long

[Mr Mystery]

Black Library just posted a few minutes ago (Mark of Calth, short story compendium about Calth)

Nothing from GW today, but that doesn't mean anything really.

[Defenestratus]

Is indeed the case.

It doesn't mean it won't be back though. It was a great tool for them, i don't see it being gone for long

Friend seemed to indicate that they were taking quite a beating on their FB page about the whole Space Marine trademark thing.

[DrLove42]

Wouldn't suprise me that it was a bit of an attack.

The internet is retarded. Attacking a facebook site probably seems like a good idea to idiots.

[Mr Mystery]

Probably the same idiots who think forming a 500 or so man petition to a private company run to make a profit for it's shareholders will matter a single jot...

[Learn2Eel]

Actually, I did see they were having maintenance issues earlier. That may be related.
Though I can't actually remember if it was for the main site or related to their Facebook page.

Still, wouldn't surprise me if the litany of abuse was the reason. Keyboard heroes are the norm it seems nowadays....

[DrLove42]

The official site was down for maintainance yesterday. Was supposed to be down for 4 hours, took about 12 to get back

[Herzlos]

Friend seemed to indicate that they were taking quite a beating on their FB page about the whole Space Marine trademark thing.

They were. Literally hundreds of replies to the post about trademarks (I think it was 742 last time I looked), most pretty negative.

The story from BL is that they've removed it to focus on providing news updates via the local stores (either in store or on the stores FB page), and apparently all the facebook links have been removed from the site (the reason it was down?).

So it doesn't look like it'll be back any time soon. The twitter account is still there, but hasn't been active since the FB page disappeared.

[Herzlos]

Wouldn't suprise me that it was a bit of an attack.

The internet is retarded. Attacking a facebook site probably seems like a good idea to idiots.

It's not that idiotic an idea, it resulted in high profile complaints in one of their own marketing streams, and has had the effect that they've dropped it to keep the criticism out of the public eye.

Many people have had much better success with customer support from various companies by asking them on facebook or twitter publicly, after giving up on the normal channels, because the public status of it forces their hand to resolve things in a way that looks good for them. GW operates differently though, and instead of using the FB page to try and negate the bad publicity, they pulled it.

[Mr Mystery]

Bad publicity generate from people who don't understand the subject, and decided to be butthurt...

Seriously, out of how many thousands of fans, they get 700 negative comments? Drop in the ocean. An echo from an empty head.

[DrLove42]

This has surfaced

http://sphotos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/379280_535301153157945_1790460574_n.jpg

[Herzlos]

Bad publicity generate from people who don't understand the subject, and decided to be butthurt...

Seriously, out of how many thousands of fans, they get 700 negative comments? Drop in the ocean. An echo from an empty head.

I'm not sure how the complaints had anything to do with not understanding the situation (it was pretty clear) or butthurt. Just a lot of people calling them on a bad move.

Apparently it got to over 1000 replies too, and that'll affect more than the 1000 people who posted, it'll have an influence on anyone who saw the page. Is 1000 complaints the result of some internet fanboys or signs of more widespread disapproval?

[DrLove42]

How many of those 1000 complaints were people who play 40K, and how many of them were;

a) Butthurt fanboys who play other things, but for who GW bashing is more fun
b) People who saw the story on the news and signed up just to compain>

[TheCastigator]

Regardless of the reasons for the complaints, this seems to be an overreaction by GW. Have they shut down their twitter feed as well? They issued their statement, the book went back up for sale on amazon and all they needed to do was weather the storm. In a week or two they could have deleted the thread and it would have been forgotten. Instead, they've knee-jerked their way to further embarrassment/harassment/whatever.

[Gotthammer]

So people can't express a negative opinion of something if it's legal and/or they are not a qualified professional in that area of discussion?

Bit of hyperbole, but reducing people's opinions to "butthurt" that shouldn't be expressed is ridiculous when many people, regardless of understanding of the legalities, found the move a morally bankrupt one that reflected poorly on GW.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet if they fail to research the subject, it is indeed mere butthurt.

A baseless opinion is of no value.

[Gotthammer]

Do you have sources to back that claim up?

[Mr Mystery]

Going on the threads here, most of the people expressing anger weren't aware Space Marine is a GW trademark at least within the Eurozone, and that companies have a legal obligation to defend infringements, whether perceived or not.

Most seemed equally oblivious that GW hadn't sued anyone.

Net result? Lots of butthurt over nothing out of the ordinary.

[Kirsten]

Going on the threads here, most of the people expressing anger weren't aware Space Marine is a GW trademark at least within the Eurozone, and that companies have a legal obligation to defend infringements, whether perceived or not.

Most seemed equally oblivious that GW hadn't sued anyone.

Net result? Lots of butthurt over nothing out of the ordinary.

exactly, lots of people commenting about stuff they don't understand.

I followed GW on facebook and to be honest I never actually found anything interesting on there, they only really posted links to the daily site stuff, so dropping the facebook account, for any reason, is not really important.

[archimbald]

This,



Most seemed equally oblivious that GW hadn't sued anyone.

.

this is my biggest irritant in the whole issue, yes GW may or may not have been wrong, but ultimately a DMCA notice isnt a notice of a Lawsuit starting.

as for butthurt, some were, some were genuinely annoyed. i wonder though, just how many were Sci-Fi Fiction fans that DIDN'T have anything to do with GW

[dawnofthedead]

The thing is this might be just about the space marine copyright or it might be an underlining problem with a lot of people getting just fed up with GW in general. I don't think people are butt hurt but more like frustrated with the thing GW is doing. If you are good with everything GW is doing great. But if you are not, the company is going to hear about it sometimes. My two cents.

[Bigred]

To me the biggest surprise is the decision to just pull the page.

A major's brand's Fccebook page is the second most important piece of real estate online after their homepage.

Any Facebook page with over 100k followers is a potent machine for marketing, that has a high dollar value attached to it.

Most companies PR and marketing VPs use their Facebook pages in times of crisis to spin or redirect negative issues into positive resolutions, so they can be seen as honest, forthright operators in the public eye - who are trying to make things right. A company the size of Games Workshop just pulling their entire Facebook page in a moment of crisis is almost unheard of.

Could you imagine Toyota or Firestone doing that when they went through their own PR crisis's years back?

[Phototoxin]

Its the usual GW response to criticism - ignore it and remove the means for such criticsm to happen. Same with their own forums years ago.

That said from their perspective they probably can't win vs nerd rage so try not to engage with it and justify their responses via their bottom line

[Wildeybeast]

To me the biggest surprise is the decision to just pull the page.

A major's brand's Fccebook page is the second most important piece of real estate online after their homepage.

Any Facebook page with over 100k followers is a potent machine for marketing, that has a high dollar value attached to it.

Most companies PR and marketing VPs use their Facebook pages in times of crisis to spin or redirect negative issues into positive resolutions, so they can be seen as honest, forthright operators in the public eye - who are trying to make things right. A company the size of Games Workshop just pulling their entire Facebook page in a moment of crisis is almost unheard of.

Could you imagine Toyota or Firestone doing that when they went through their own PR crisis's years back?

Whilst I agree with everything you said, I would question whether GW actually need a FB page in the same way most companies do. Most people going to that page already play GW and by the sounds of it it wasn't doing anything they weren't doing on the website other than allowing people to have good moan. What incentive is there for them to keep it going?

[simiusmagnus]

Speaking as someone who is a GW fan, isn't "butthurt", whatever that means, and does have some understanding of what's going on....GW is in the wrong on this. I was one of the people who commented on their FB page. It wasn't an attack, it was a viable way for people to express disapproval of what amounts to an IP land grab. I get that they feel the need to protect their IP, but it's more complicated than that. They decided to name one of their factions after what is basically a trope of science fiction. An archetype. They took a generic term and made it stand for something specific to a small group of people. And that was fine when it was just gaming, but that doesn't mean they should get to block all other people from using the term in writing. They can call dibs on terms like Ultramarine if they like, but in the realm of literature, "space marine" shouldn't be exclusively theirs any more than "elf" or "orc" is.

[Bigred]

I would question whether GW actually need a FB page in the same way most companies do. Most people going to that page already play GW and by the sounds of it it wasn't doing anything they weren't doing on the website other than allowing people to have good moan. What incentive is there for them to keep it going?

And Wildey, you just asked the multi-million dollar question lots of big companies are asking - Is Facebook worth it?

Certainly the ability to get your message out to 100,000+ real people who chose to like you is a potent marketing tool. Even if they are customers, easily keeping in close contact is quite valuable in commerce. In theory with proper marketing and ad-buys a company like GW should be using their page to engage and capture new customers. If they are doing it is another matter...

We also have the Chairman's statement from last year's annual report when he stated that GW engaging in social media and Facebook in particular was a primary goal for the company moving forward.

This action doesn't exactly sych up with that mission statement.

[Wildeybeast]

I wonder if they envisaged social media causing them such a headache when they made that pledge :rolleyes: If it's sued correctly, it's a great tool, but it doesn't sound like they have been using it particularly effectively. I would be interested to know how that 100k likes stacks up against their email subscription list and their unique user count on the web page.

Am I right in thinking BL and Forgeworld have their own separate FB pages? If so do we know if those are still up and running?

[Psychosplodge]

But is that the bloke that left, or is the chairmen's statement based on that blokes input?
Considering the top has changed it could be going anywhere now...

Personally I think the public negative issues aired on a fb page probably outweigh the positives especially considering it's a niche and informed market. It's not like the major car or drinks companies that have more competition...

[Kirsten]

Speaking as someone who is a GW fan, isn't "butthurt", whatever that means, and does have some understanding of what's going on....GW is in the wrong on this. I was one of the people who commented on their FB page. It wasn't an attack, it was a viable way for people to express disapproval of what amounts to an IP land grab. I get that they feel the need to protect their IP, but it's more complicated than that. They decided to name one of their factions after what is basically a trope of science fiction. An archetype. They took a generic term and made it stand for something specific to a small group of people. And that was fine when it was just gaming, but that doesn't mean they should get to block all other people from using the term in writing. They can call dibs on terms like Ultramarine if they like, but in the realm of literature, "space marine" shouldn't be exclusively theirs any more than "elf" or "orc" is.

you may well be right, however GW were given the trade mark, and they are required to protect it. If you don't like it, blame the people who awarded the trademark in the first place, or the circus that is the legal system in general.

GW weren't doing anything useful with their facebook page in my opinion, so it isn't necessarily worthwhile having a place for people to criticise their actions with little else going on.

[simiusmagnus]

Near as I can tell, they don't actually have the trademark here in the states. Not as it applies to literature, at any rate. Which isn't stopping them from trying to assert their claim to it anyway. The whole thing kind of reminds me of a decade ago when White Wolf tried to sue the people making the Underworld movie. Because, y'know, they invented mopey vampires wearing leather, or something.

And yeah, GW's facebook wasn't telling me anything I wasn't already getting here. And BoS makes it sound less like a sales pitch, to boot.

[Deadlift]

Many of the individual stores have their own Facebook page, I think these are worthwhile enough to keep going as its down to the store managers to update the Facebook page with information local to its customers and helps with info such as games nights and store events. I have found my local GW store Facebook page to be far more enthusiastic and less negative in general, especially as most posters on the page actually know each other.

[Dyrnwyn]

you may well be right, however GW were given the trade mark, and they are required to protect it. If you don't like it, blame the people who awarded the trademark in the first place, or the circus that is the legal system in general.

GW weren't doing anything useful with their facebook page in my opinion, so it isn't necessarily worthwhile having a place for people to criticise their actions with little else going on.

1) As pointed out, they only have a trademark in the area of toys and model kits in the UK, EU, and US, and on printed material in the EU. An ebook is not part of any of these categories, and more importantly, was only on the US Amazon site.
2) DMCA is meant to address copyright infringement - it has no bearing on trademark disputes and GW was improper in using it to order Amazon to take it down.
3) Rather than engage anyone with money, they went after a self-published author who donates part of the proceeds to wounded veterans and uses the rest to put her daughter through school. The only way their target could have been more sympathetic is if there was a terminal disease involved.

If they had done even a modicum of research beyond searching 'space marine' on Amazon, they would have seen this was a PR disaster a long way off. Even so, the Facebook could have been a valuable tool to ameliorate the backlash. All they need to do was have someone get on and post something along the lines of 'we had an internal snafu where this book got flagged by an intern and passed up the chain to where an automated system issued a DMCA. Apologies to Ms. Hogarth - we are both part of a grand tradition of power-armored space-borne warriors.' If they acknowledged they overstepped and tried to issue an apology, it would have calmed some people down. Instead they issued a generic statement about how they have to protect their IP. Rather than admit to fault, eating a fine and possibly (fairly miniscule) damages in order to generate goodwill, they jumped into ***-covering mode and basically told dismayed fans and angry detractors 'deal with it.'

[lobster-overlord]

Friend of mine just told me that GW pulled down their Facebook page.

Can anyone confirm since I'm not actually on the vile, infernal data mining operation?

My question to you is then, why do you care if they took it down if you don't go to it and have such contempt for it?

[daboarder]

1) As pointed out, they only have a trademark in the area of toys and model kits in the UK, EU, and US, and on printed material in the EU. An ebook is not part of any of these categories, and more importantly, was only on the US Amazon site.
2) DMCA is meant to address copyright infringement - it has no bearing on trademark disputes and GW was improper in using it to order Amazon to take it down.
3) Rather than engage anyone with money, they went after a self-published author who donates part of the proceeds to wounded veterans and uses the rest to put her daughter through school. The only way their target could have been more sympathetic is if there was a terminal disease involved.

If they had done even a modicum of research beyond searching 'space marine' on Amazon, they would have seen this was a PR disaster a long way off. Even so, the Facebook could have been a valuable tool to ameliorate the backlash. All they need to do was have someone get on and post something along the lines of 'we had an internal snafu where this book got flagged by an intern and passed up the chain to where an automated system issued a DMCA. Apologies to Ms. Hogarth - we are both part of a grand tradition of power-armored space-borne warriors.' If they acknowledged they overstepped and tried to issue an apology, it would have calmed some people down. Instead they issued a generic statement about how they have to protect their IP. Rather than admit to fault, eating a fine and possibly (fairly miniscule) damages in order to generate goodwill, they jumped into ***-covering mode and basically told dismayed fans and angry detractors 'deal with it.'

Look a couple of things,

1) they own the trademark for PUBLISHED material in the EU, the Ebook merely brings up the clusterF* issue that is modern jurisdiction in an increasingly digital world.

2) The Author of spots wants to make money, as evidenced by the sudden increase in the price of the book as this story went viral, so if you want to bring GW's motive into question you'll have to do the sme for her's in the name of the fairness you want to see so strongly upheld.

3)You HAVE NO IDEA what GW sent to Amazon, it could be as simple as "hey we think this might breach our copyright, could you check it out" to which Amazon decided the correct response was to pull the book.

I'm sorry that the world doesn't work the way you feel it should but GW has both rights and responsibilities, and a misinformed, misguided moral crusade on the internet is not going to change the situation here anymore than it stopped Kony in 2012.....Its digital mob mentaility, all righteous indignation and no brains thinking....gee maybe there is a reason the system works this way

[Dyrnwyn]

Look a couple of things,

1) they own the trademark for PUBLISHED material in the EU, the Ebook merely brings up the clusterF* issue that is modern jurisdiction in an increasingly digital world.

Try again. Class 16 trademarks in the EU include:
"Paper, cardboard and goods made from these materials, not included in other classes; printed matter; bookbinding material; photographs; stationery; adhesives for stationery or household purposes; artists’ materials; paint brushes; typewriters and office requisites (except furniture); instructional and teaching material (except apparatus); plastic materials for packaging (not included in other classes); playing cards; printers’ type; printing blocks"

Not published materials, printed materials.

Still beside the point, as you can't enforce trademarks outside of their region. GW doesn't have a US trademark on the term for fiction, electronic media, etc.


2) The Author of spots wants to make money, as evidenced by the sudden increase in the price of the book as this story went viral, so if you want to bring GW's motive into question you'll have to do the sme for her's in the name of the fairness you want to see so strongly upheld.
This has absolutely zero to do with my point 2, but I'll humor you.
Did it go up in price? I wouldn't have noticed. I just noticed that the print version, which was around $18.99 when I checked it and the ebook was still pulled, has been joined by the ebook version, which is around $6.99 What was the price before this whole debacle then? And even if it's gone up, I hardly care, nor is it applicable to this discussion.


3)You HAVE NO IDEA what GW sent to Amazon, it could be as simple as "hey we think this might breach our copyright, could you check it out" to which Amazon decided the correct response was to pull the book.
Multiple news and blog sites stated it was a DMCA takedown. I didn't check the page at the time, but Youtube generally notifies people when a DMCA is issued and content is removed, I imagine Amazon would do the same.

There's a procedure for issuing DMCA takedowns. It can be worded in a number of different ways but there are elements that MUST be included. Check them (http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/faq.cgi#QID130) yourself.


I'm sorry that the world doesn't work the way you feel it should but GW has both rights and responsibilities, and a misinformed, misguided moral crusade on the internet is not going to change the situation here anymore than it stopped Kony in 2012.....Its digital mob mentaility, all righteous indignation and no brains thinking....gee maybe there is a reason the system works this way
Cute. I'm under no illusions that the world 'works like I think it should.' It's not a 'misguided moral crusade' to ensure that companies cannot blithely step all over people's rights because they have money. As far as I'm concerned, GW deserves the egg on it's face for the incident, but instead of pulling up their big boy pants and admitting that maybe it wasn't a good idea, they've deleted the Facebook to prevent any more negative criticism from being voiced where the public can see it. It's a bush-league, almost teenage move. Granted, it does have logic behind it (social media is essentially free advertising, and the last thing you want is scathing comments about your company in it's ads.), but I suspect it would have been wiser to use it as a platform to apologize and save the company some face.

[daboarder]

Try again. Class 16 trademarks in the EU include:
"Paper, cardboard and goods made from these materials, not included in other classes; printed matter; bookbinding material; photographs; stationery; adhesives for stationery or household purposes; artists’ materials; paint brushes; typewriters and office requisites (except furniture); instructional and teaching material (except apparatus); plastic materials for packaging (not included in other classes); playing cards; printers’ type; printing blocks".

Not published materials, printed materials.

Still beside the point, as you can't enforce trademarks outside of their region. GW doesn't have a US trademark on the term for fiction, electronic media, etc.



Please provide citations for this information, both the listing of GW's Trademarks and copyrights and the relevant articles in the EU classifications.

And if you really think jurisdiction works that way these days then you probably haven't heard of the internet, it makes a mockery of attempts to enforce any type of jurisdiction be it legal, marketing or social, in fact the most common interpretation of jurisdiction is that it is dependent upon where the "damage" is done, with an Ebook that means that if it violated copyright in the EU and was offered for sale globally on the internet then yes a company would be within its rights to seek redress WITHIN the EU.



This has absolutely zero to do with my point 2, but I'll humor you.
Did it go up in price? I wouldn't have noticed. I just noticed that the print version, which was around $18.99 when I checked it and the ebook was still pulled, has been joined by the ebook version, which is around $6.99 What was the price before this whole debacle then? And even if it's gone up, I hardly care, nor is it applicable to this discussion.

I was addressing your assertion that GW was bullying some poor little lady merely trying to feed her children (/hyperbole)

I find it funny that you "hardly care", nor find the Authors motives applicable in a case about IP infringement, and situation that should inherently involve said motives....



Multiple news and blog sites stated it was a DMCA takedown. I didn't check the page at the time, but Youtube generally notifies people when a DMCA is issued and content is removed, I imagine Amazon would do the same.

There's a procedure for issuing DMCA takedowns. It can be worded in a number of different ways but there are elements that MUST be included. Check them (http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/faq.cgi#QID130) yourself.

So armchair lawyers and journalists (lets be honest they're only interested in whatever generates traffic, who post hearsay are credible sources now? Are you interested in investing in property, I have a marvelous bridge you might be interested in...

Furthermore Amazon has a long history of a heavy hand that favours the bigger fish with regards to DMCA takedowns, I think its absolutely hilarious that people are too busy raging against GW to investigate properly all parties involved.



Cute. I'm under no illusions that the world 'works like I think it should.' It's not a 'misguided moral crusade' to ensure that companies cannot blithely step all over people's rights because they have money. As far as I'm concerned, GW deserves the egg on it's face for the incident, but instead of pulling up their big boy pants and admitting that maybe it wasn't a good idea, they've deleted the Facebook to prevent any more negative criticism from being voiced where the public can see it. It's a bush-league, almost teenage move. Granted, it does have logic behind it (social media is essentially free advertising, and the last thing you want is scathing comments about your company in it's ads.), but I suspect it would have been wiser to use it as a platform to apologize and save the company some face.

So you've picked a side before having all relevant information, you also seem to strangely have forgotten GW earlier press release......strange I propose that regardless of anything GW could have said or done in this situation you would have found fault with SOMETHING they had done.

[Dyrnwyn]

Please provide citations for this information, both the listing of GW's Trademarks and copyrights and the relevant articles in the EU classifications.
UK - here (http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/4/EU000392886). US Trademarks are for computer games, paints and accessories and toys and models. EU has the same categories as the UK. I'll grant they have more than simply a Class 16 - but there's nothing there addressing digital media. You'll fogive me for not providing links, the US and EU sites generate search results, not pages I can link to.


And if you really think jurisdiction works that way these days then you probably haven't heard of the internet, it makes a mockery of attempts to enforce any type of jurisdiction be it legal, marketing or social, in fact the most common interpretation of jurisdiction is that it is dependent upon where the "damage" is done, with an Ebook that means that if it violated copyright in the EU and was offered for sale globally on the internet then yes a company would be within its rights to seek redress WITHIN the EU.
Sales for StSM were supposedly only through the US version of Amazon. I'll grant that it currently appears on multiple countries versions of the site though.


I was addressing your assertion that GW was bullying some poor little lady merely trying to feed her children (/hyperbole)


I find it funny that you "hardly care", nor find the Authors motives applicable in a case about IP infringement, and situation that should inherently involve said motives....
The author wrote a book and titled it using a standard sci-fi trope that has been in use for over 80 years. A cursory glace through the preview on Amazon shows it to be fairly standard leatherneck in space stuff a la Heinlein, made difficult to parse via script format that hasn't cut the mustard in fanfiction for over 10 years. Despite being bland and barely readable, it doesn't attempt to conflate itself with GW's work, and makes use of none of it's IP. It's pretty obvious she didn't think to herself 'AHA I will name this similar to Games Workshop's product, and thus get more sales!' Space marine is a common sci-fi trope, she named it after that. Furthermore I made no hyperbole - she said herself what she uses the profit for(putting daughter through school, donations to the Wounded Warrior Foundation), and also said a while back that hiring a lawyer to fight GW would cost more than the book has made her.

She's selling a book. Of course she would like to make money off it. In other breaking news, water is wet.


So armchair lawyers and journalists (lets be honest they're only interested in whatever generates traffic, who post hearsay are credible sources now? Are you interested in investing in property, I have a marvelous bridge you might be interested in...
DOHOHO. So what would you call a reputable source then? I'll admit that someone may have called it a DMCA takedown and others just parroted it. That said, we still have sources calling it a DMCA takedown, and I presumed it was considering that the physical book was still for sale, even though the ebook was pulled.


Furthermore Amazon has a long history of a heavy hand that favours the bigger fish with regards to DMCA takedowns, I think its absolutely hilarious that people are too busy raging against GW to investigate properly all parties involved.
That's the way the DMCA is written. The content provider is not held accountable for the breach of copyright if it complies and takes down the offending item, and is also not held liable to the original uploader if it erroneously takes down a legitimate item in response to a request. Youtube and other big sites are all this way.


So you've picked a side before having all relevant information, you also seem to strangely have forgotten GW earlier press release......strange I propose that regardless of anything GW could have said or done in this situation you would have found fault with SOMETHING they had done.
I have forgotten nothing. You mean this post on their Facebook?

Games Workshop owns and protects many valuable trademarks in a number of territories and classes across the world. For example, 'Warhammer' and 'Space Marine' are registered trademarks in a number of classes and territories. In some other territories and classes they are unregistered trademarks protected by commercial use. Whenever we are informed of, or otherwise discover, a commercially available product whose title is or uses a Games Workshop trademark without our consent, we have no choice but to take reasonable action. We would be failing in our duty to our shareholders if we did not protect our property.

To be clear, Games Workshop has never claimed to own words or phrases such as 'warhammer' or 'space marine' as regards their general use in everyday life, for example within a body of prose. By illustration, although Games Workshop clearly owns many registered trademarks for the Warhammer brand, we do not claim to own the word 'warhammer' in common use as a hand weapon.

Trademarks as opposed to use of a word in prose or everyday language are two very different things. Games Workshop is always vigilant in protecting the former, but never makes any claim to owning the latter.
There is lots GW could have said that would have garnered my approval. This isn't it. This isn't an apology, an admission of being overzealous or even a blame-redirection. It's pretending that there was never a problem, GW was just defending it's property. Which, you know, it didn't actually own. I didn't prejudge the situation. I read the story, followed it, and GW flubbed handling this from start to finish. I don't have to be a 'hater' to see that.

[Defenestratus]

There is lots GW could have said that would have garnered my approval. This isn't it. This isn't an apology, an admission of being overzealous or even a blame-redirection. It's pretending that there was never a problem, GW was just defending it's property. Which, you know, it didn't actually own. I didn't prejudge the situation. I read the story, followed it, and GW flubbed handling this from start to finish. I don't have to be a 'hater' to see that.

FWIW,

I don't hate GW either. I disagree with them from time to time but I can't bring myself to hate a faceless corporation. In this case they made a PR mistake and indeed made it worse with not only their facebook response but then complete pulling of their facebook page.

Games Workshop really does not know how "the internet" works. I thought they had started figuring it out with the digital codex and the eBook sales over the Black Library sites (which really should just be available on Amazon) but then they do something silly like this which just makes me shake my head and wonder.

[Wildeybeast]

Oh good, this thread has turned to the Space Marine trademark debate. That's good because I really felt that two threads on it weren't enough to fully wring out every single ounce of pointless repetition of the same arguments with no one listening to each other. rolleyes:

[Caitsidhe]

Oh good, this thread has turned to the Space Marine trademark debate. That's good because I really felt that two threads on it weren't enough to fully wring out every single ounce of pointless repetition of the same arguments with no one listening to each other. rolleyes:

There really isn't anything to debate. Amazon put the book back up. Games Workshop has not taken any additional legal steps (indicating it was all bluff and empty bluster in the first place). All that is left is people commenting on what a monumental debacle it was in the first place.

Social Media is a harsh mistress. It gives you excellent publicity, largely free. The double edged sword is that when you screw up, there is even more publicity (all bad) which echoes for months if not years. The moral of the story is not to screw up in the first place. Most people will forgive little things. This really wasn't one of them. Games Workshop really should consider hiring a public relations firm, or at the very least consider hiring some people who specialize in it for in-house consultation.

[scadugenga]

Going on the threads here, most of the people expressing anger weren't aware Space Marine is a GW trademark at least within the Eurozone, and that companies have a legal obligation to defend infringements, whether perceived or not.

Most seemed equally oblivious that GW hadn't sued anyone.

Net result? Lots of butthurt over nothing out of the ordinary.

Except you won't recognize you're completely wrong about what's trademark infringement.

So, pot, kettle?

[Wildeybeast]

There really isn't anything to debate. Amazon put the book back up. Games Workshop has not taken any additional legal steps (indicating it was all bluff and empty bluster in the first place). All that is left is people commenting on what a monumental debacle it was in the first place.

I agree. And yet......


Except you won't recognize you're completely wrong about what's trademark infringement.

So, pot, kettle?

:rolleyes:

[Mr Mystery]

Except you won't recognize you're completely wrong about what's trademark infringement.

So, pot, kettle?

Not exactly, no. My level of ignorance was established and freely admitted.

Plus, GW were claiming 'common law' trademark. Which as far as I can make out, means 'we have it for x, and believe it therefore applies to y'.

And when you have to defend your trademarks and IP, whether GW acted unreasonably becomes far harder to say for us mere plebs. But I reckon GW's legal team know an awful lot more than we do.

[Wildeybeast]

Again, there are already pointless argument threads for this, can we please confine the bickering to there and keep this for the discussion of GW's withdrawal from FB.