GW v Chapterhouse Lawsuit Update

[weeble1000]

Winston and Strawn believe what most lawyers believe - that they may be able to make some money - the thing for which any normal lawyer would eat the content of their own jakes.

I work very hard to take your posts seriously Denzark, but you are so far off base here that it is amazing. This isn't a class action suit. Chapterhouse Studios is not the plaintiff. It has no counter claims against Games Workshop. Even if it made counter claims, damages would top out in the barest of six figures, if they were upheld. Chapterhouse Studios would not be awarded attorney's fees unless it filed counter claims, won on them, and won on claims of willfulness. The money at stake in this case wouldn't tempt anything above an ambulance chaser begging for work.

Winston and Strawn could care less about money. This case is not about money to them. They are not trying to run up wild attorney's fees and collect a fat check. Winston and Strawn and Ms. Golinveaux probably have some self-interest in taking this case. It could be that the IP department is due for some pro-bono work, or maybe Ms. Golinveaux would like her name attached to an influential ruling, maybe somebody's son loves 40K, or maybe they think the case would be good experience. But in no way is this case about money to them.

Winston and Strawn can pick and chose what pro-bono work the firm does and when. Aside from any personal motivations, this case must present both interesting questions of law and successful prospects for it to have even been considered by Winston and Strawn. Approval for this thing had to go through committee review of some kind. It probably had to be recommended to the firm by reputable contacts in the legal field. Ms. Golinveaux had to sit down and read through all of the extant documents, discuss the matter with Chapterhouse, investigate the legal questions, and then decide if she wanted to submit the case for pro-bono approval, probably without knowing if she was going to get it.

These things are public record Denzark. This case is going to be inexorably attached to the name of Jennifer Golinvaux and Winston and Strawn forever. Neither the firm, nor Ms. Golinveaux are going to piss on their reputation by doing pro-bono work on a trashy case or for a disreputable client. If Winston and Strawn wants to make money, it can have Ms. Golinveaux bill hours in what must be an extensive book of business replete with affluent and often-sued clients like Google and Cisco Systems.

You can spout whatever you want to about this case and the parties involved. None of your vitriol changes the facts. Winston and Strawn agreed to take the case pro bono publico "for the public good." Ms. Golinveaux's time is worth far more than the value of this case. Going to trial is both extremely expensive and extremely risky for Games Workshop. Chapterhouse Studios is not constrained by money and going to trial involves comparatively little risk. Games Workshop must now settle out of court on Chapterhouse's terms or face an inevitable trial.

[Denzark]

I work very hard to take your posts seriously Denzark,

I wouldn't bother if I were you, I won't be reciprocating and certainly won't lose sleep if you don't work all that hard


Chapterhouse Studios is not constrained by money and going to trial involves comparatively little risk. Games Workshop must now settle out of court on Chapterhouse's terms or face an inevitable trial.

For real? MUST they? And there's me saying I don't think this was a bluff, that they actually engaged lawyers to do something with them.

Anyway, lets not rehash old ground, the only thing you have of interest to say is to let me know when this happens:

[I]OK how do I go about this..

I was not lying when I said Chapterhouse Studios has been expecting this to happen (but hoping it did not). GW has too much of a reputation for using its size and legal muscle to shut out any threat to the market they are in.


If this goes to trial, there will be a high cost involved in it that Chapterhouse Studios will likely be shouldering alone. If the outcome is favorable it can only add to the experience and hobby (or so I believe). Saying that, I would like to ask for donations to fund this defense. I hate asking for a handout so if we do come out of this in working order, I intend to give full credits in exchange for those donations given and I am keeping track.[/I]

[weeble1000]

Games Workshop must either settle the case out of court or go to trial. It could drop the suit, but that's not going to happen. Short of dropping the suit, those are really the only two options for Games Workshop.

Chapterhouse Studios has the stronger position in settlement negotiations. If you disagree, explain why.

The longer that this thing drags out, the more expensive it gets for Games Workshop. Chapterhouse does not have that limitation. Games Workshop's most significant threat is going to trial. That was a realistic threat when Chapterhouse was struggling to find enough funds to afford a trial defense. Now that the pressure of money is gone, the only threat that remains is what might happen at trial. Frankly, the likely results of a jury trial favor Chapterhouse Studios.

At worst, Chapterhouse Studios will have to shut down its business and destroy the molds, but that's as unrealistic as a jury deciding that Games Workshop has no copyright protection whatsoever. Realistically, the worst that will happen is that there's some kind of equitable relief. Chapterhouse Studios might have to pull a few products, moderate trademark usage, or pay for a license. But even if Games Workshop wins in this regard, it is likely that its claimed copyrights will end up severely limited. This is a result that Chapterhouse Studios can probably live with but one that Games Workshop really doesn't want and can't afford. Thus, Chapterhouse Studios has the stronger negotiating position because it has less at risk in a jury trial.

Again, if you disagree with this interpretation, please explain why.

I'd also like you to explain what quoting Chapterhouse's request for donations has to do with this. I don't understand your point in quoting it. The fact that Chapterhouse has been lucky enough to find pro bono representation does not alter the legitimacy of an initial request for donations. It just means that those donations are much less important (Chapterhouse Studios is out of pocket for any legal expenses incurred prior to the involvement of Winston and Strawn). Anyone that donated would probably be glad that Chapterhouse found pro bono counsel since making sure that Chapterhouse Studios could afford to defend itself would have been the point of any donation.

If you are referring to the bit about a favorable outcome only adding to the experience of the hobby, and you mean that you want me to let you know when that happens, I'm assuming that your point would be that you don't think a favorable outcome for Chapterhouse would be good for the hobby. If that's what you meant, I will respectfully disagree and I will be happy to point it out to you when it happens.

[eldargal]

I'm fully expecting some kind of out of court settlement too, I think it would suit both GW and CHS more than a full blown trial to the deff.
CHS are still facing some legal fees, they explained this in Warseer, I wil ltry and find it. Here we go:

To answer the Donations question.

I have emailed all the donators and given them updates (in case they dont read the news somewhere else).

Unfortunately, according to the agreement with Winston & Strawn, we are largely responsible for any court cost, this could be a few hundred $ or a couple of thousand (or more).

We also had an attorney representing us before we found "pro-bono" help, those cost are in the thousands (and that was just for 2-3 weeks work).

So the donations will be used for that cost. Hope that answers questions.

[weeble1000]

We'll have Chapterhouse's answer to Games Workshop's complaint by March 3rd.

This is quoted from the joint motion for an extension of time to answer and status hearing continuance that was filed on the 10th.

5. On January 28, 2011, the Court set the Initial Status Hearing in this case for
February 28, 2011. (Dkt. No. 9) Lead counsel for both Plaintiff and Chapterhouse have
scheduling conflicts on February 28, 2011. So that lead counsel may be present, and so that
Chapterhouse’s response to Plaintiff’s Complaint will be on file in advance of the Initial Status
Hearing, the parties respectfully request that the Initial Status Hearing be continued to March 14,
2011.

...

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the parties respectfully request that
Chapterhouse be granted an extension of time until March 3, 2011, in which to answer or
otherwise plead in response to the Complaint in this matter. The parties further respectfully
request that the Initial Status Hearing be continued to March 14, 2011.