Games Workshop vs Chapterhouse Document Dump

[inquisitorsog]

I think you are right but for the wrong reasons. GW - bolshy big business, picking on the little guy, resorting to the courts and sueing like hell? That sort of behaviour is from the west side of the Atlantic, where you can sue MacDonalds for making you obese, Samsung for not putting instructions not to microwave your dog in the oven, and not mentioning cruise control doesn't let you go into the baack of your motor home and make coffee. Litigation is an import, maybe thats why some Brits find a staunch defence of CHS a bit rich.

Litigation is an import from the US? This from the nation that not too long ago allowed someone to have a debtor put in prison...

EDIT: And by that I mean, there's plenty of examples of British "over-enthusiasm" to use the law as a personal weapon.

[Psychosplodge]

Ridiculous litigation, and "ambulance chasing" are things that have existed here since the mid-nineties? in some form or other, I'm pretty sure I've seen them depicted in the US in films from the eighties. It's certainly considered a transatlantic import here...

[inquisitorsog]

Ridiculous litigation, and "ambulance chasing" are things that have existed here since the mid-nineties? in some form or other, I'm pretty sure I've seen them depicted in the US in films from the eighties. It's certainly considered a transatlantic import here...

And my first impression of over litigiousness in popular media came from Hound of the Baskervilles. Were you referring to the 1890s?

[Psychosplodge]

Nope. does someone get fat eating fast food and sue the Doc's chain of restaurants?

[Nabterayl]

So, out of curiosity, how long are we going to spend arguing over whether suing to enforce copyright is overly litigious and like ambulance chasing? And if the answer is more than one post, can we at least argue over whether suing to enforce copyright is overly litigious and like ambulance chasing, instead of making snarky passive aggressive comments at each other?

[Psychosplodge]

Now where's the fun in that?
I'd have learnt more towards sarcastic than passive aggressive, but if that's how it reads...

I don't think GW had no option but to challenge it in court, it's how it works here iirc - Defend it or lose it.
TBH Nab, you're possibly better versed regarding that...
So not really like ambulance chasing?

[Caitsidhe]

I don't really have an opinion on whether or not their taking the matter to court was overly litigious. That is a specious kind of notion. I will say it has ended up being a bad call for them economically. They will never, even if they won a total victory, recoup the costs. My opinion is that attempting to do in the courts was foolish because they had so many better tools at their disposal. All this event has done has drawn attention to all the alternative choices available. I've seen MORE ads and activity (and models appearing on tables) from little companies like Chapterhouse in the last year than I did in the previous three. There is no such thing as bad publicity and drawing ATTENTION to the fact that all these little competitors are out there was stupid.

[DrLove42]

Think about it. Apple got upheld in court in teh US against Samsung because the Samsung phone LOOKED like the iPhone.

Not because of technology or anything. Because they had a similar design.

[Mr Mystery]

I don't really have an opinion on whether or not their taking the matter to court was overly litigious. That is a specious kind of notion. I will say it has ended up being a bad call for them economically. They will never, even if they won a total victory, recoup the costs. My opinion is that attempting to do in the courts was foolish because they had so many better tools at their disposal. All this event has done has drawn attention to all the alternative choices available. I've seen MORE ads and activity (and models appearing on tables) from little companies like Chapterhouse in the last year than I did in the previous three. There is no such thing as bad publicity and drawing ATTENTION to the fact that all these little competitors are out there was stupid.

Until one gets shut down for treading on toes.... There is no way CH come out from this.

As for other methods...such as? C&D? Sent and ignored. Politely asking? Nah. Buying out a company churning out low quality knock offs? Why?

I don't think you quite grasp GW's motivations behind the court case. They have an obligation to actively defend their IP. They are fulfilling said obligation. Whether or not they lose money on the case is immaterial, when you consider to not bring it risks losing their IP.

[weeble1000]

Think about it. Apple got upheld in court in teh US against Samsung because the Samsung phone LOOKED like the iPhone.

Not because of technology or anything. Because they had a similar design.

The Apple v Samsung case again rears its head. No, that is not why Samsung was found to infringe some of Apple's patents. In fact, Samsung was found to not infringe Apple's design right patent in the shape of the phone. So no, Samsung was not found to infringe because the Galaxy looked like the iPhone. Samsung was found to infringe because it deliberately and willfully copied very specific bits of Apple's patented technology, such as the bounce back feature.

The Apple v Samsung case is completely off topic. It has neither facts nor law in common with the GW v CHS case.