Lone Wolf sends Cease & Desist letters to anyone using the term 'Army Builder'

[webrunner]

I don't think it's unreasonable or novel (nor has it ever been) to call something which is used to build an army an army builder. I would be surprised if they were the first ones to do such a thing.

[jasonbostwick]

If Privateer Press felt that they had the legal duty to comply with what Lone Wolf was asking, they had to make it public.
Complying with Lone Wolf involved deleting several threads and censoring a commonly used phrase - this wouldn't have gone unnoticed.

Imagine if they'd put the word filtering of "Army Builder" to iBodger on without informing the community of the issue. It would be interpreted as a heavy-handed promotion and endorsement of the tool (despite no official connections between PP and the creator of iBodger.)
There would be substantial outcry if the threads discussing a few other fan-made 'army list creators' were deleted with no warning.


The closing of the thread discussing the issue seems like a legitimate extension of their prior forum policy of not allowing representatives of other businesses to promote their products on their forums - I don't frequent their boards that often, but I know that they have been fairly strict about limiting mention of some online retailers.

[Transbot9]

Threatening to sick lawyers on someone as the first move was Lone Wolf's mistake (which is heavily implied by the letter sent). It's agressive & tactless, promoting an equilly tactless initial reponse. Privateer Press has closed the thread and ended dicussion on their forums to clean up things on their end, while Lone Wolf tries to clarify themselves with further statements.

[thzero]

Won't be buying anything [not that their character builder, is that trademarked by them yet?!?! , is any good anyways] again. Besides their licensing is horrific.

"Army Builder (R)" is really a bad trademark as its two generic words slapped together, but alas its sorta like the patents these days, its all hosed up. Since it is two generic words together, the trademark genericization WILL happen. It's not like their trademark is "Coca-Cola" or "Coke" which are not generic words. And "rollderblading" and "bandaid" are used as common colloquialisms.

1998, and yet they have just started complaingin about things now as one other post pointed out? While they do have a legit gripe if someone was using the term "army builder" as the official name of their product. And outside of a few circles, the product nor the trademark is not "well known".

And just for the record, army builder. And I will continue to use it as a generic term. Mostly because I know the term, in reference to wargaming, was in use prior to 1998 and therefore there is prior art.

[denzoner]

The subject line of this thread is totally (apparently) misleading. I'm sure we can't read the original threads, so there is no way of actually checking. But it sounds like Lone Wolf Development(R) is in the right here. They're not stopping people from using the words, army builder. It sounds like they want people to acknowledge that Army Builder (R) is a registered trademark, and that they shouldn't use call their army builders an Army Builder but something else. They do have the legal right to "defend" their property, and it is their obligation to educate in proper use, and it is also their responsibility to make sure it's usage, if being used, is used properly, i.e. only in reference to their Army Builder (R) product, and nothing else.

BUT, I think it's a BAD choice for a trademark, and waaaaaaaaay to generic of a name to have been trademark, but that's not our problem.

You know what's not trademarked (afaik), Army Lab.

[jasonbostwick]

I didn't see it posted earlier in the thread, and you need to be a member of the PP forums to download the .pdf, so I figured I'd repost the notice sent to PP and the response they gave their fans.

(attached as .pdf as well in a more readable format)

Hello Fans of Privateer Press,
I regret to inform you all that today we received a cease and desist order from Lone Wolf studio’s regarding the use of their registered trademark “Army Builder”, for your reference I have included their e-mail and legal argument below:

“Greetings,

We haven't been actively monitoring the Privateer Press forums for a good number of months. Unfortunately, during that time, it appears that various members of your site have begun to heavily misuse our trademark, and we need your assistance in rectifying the situation. Please note that the term Army Builder is a registered trademark belonging to Lone Wolf Development and as such we have exclusive rights to use that mark in connection with any game-related computer software. We have no objection to the use of generic terms with similar meaning, such as "points calculator" or "roster construction tool". However, we cannot allow the improper use of our mark, as doing so could dilute our rights as well as cause confusion in the marketplace. Pursuant to the above, the name Army Builder exclusively refers to the Army Builder brand of roster construction software tools. While other roster construction tools certainly exist, the name Army Builder may only be legally used in conjunction with the Army Builder brand of products from Lone Wolf Development. Unfortunately, there are active references to other tools on your site that misappropriate our trademark. In addition, this misuse by others has led to multiple posters on your forums using the term "army builder" to describe the category of tools. This needs to be remedied, and, under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, we require your assistance in doing so. There are two things that need to be done. First of all, improper references to the Army Builder trademark on the forums must be addressed. This can be achieved in either of two ways, or potentially a combination of both, at your discretion. The first option would be to remove such posts. Since this could appear harsh and potentially disrupt forum discussions, an acceptable alternative would be to revise such posts to utilize a generic term (e.g. "roster construction tool", "list createor", or "points calculator") in place of the "Army Builder" name. The second thing that needs to be addressed is that your forum users must be educated about the term Army Builder being a trademark and only applicable to our brand of products. This is necessary to avoid an ongoing problem and mitigate the future need for removal of improper posts. I'm sure you would also prefer that the forums continue to run smoothly and without interruption, so your assistance in getting forum users to utilize appropriate terms will benefit us all. The term "Army Builder" is a brand name specific to our product - it is *not* a generic term. We are prepared to educate your users about this fact via posting ourselves on your forums. However, it would probably be more productive if you handled this through an official announcement, and it would also provide Privateer Press with control over how the process is handled. If you choose to make a general announcement about this, we have written an explanation of the situation that is targeted to consumers. I've included the text of this explanation at the bottom of this report, and you are welcome to use it if you wish. You can
present your own explanation if you prefer, provided it portrays the situation accurately. Assuming that the improper references to tools using the name "Army Builder" are rectified and you confirm to us within 72 hours that you have done so, we will assume that infringement was unintentional and consider that matter closed. In the event that we have not heard back from you within the prescribed timeframe, we will have no choice but to refer this matter to our attorneys for further legal action. With regards to the education of posters regarding the Army Builder trademark, please advise us within 72 hours on the manner in which you prefer it be handled. We will refrain from posting on the Privateer Press forums to accomplish this objective until we either hear from you or the timeframe elapses. I assume you are familiar with the way trademark protection works, but I'll restate the basics just in case. It is a legal requirement that we police the use of our trademarks. The term Army Builder is a registered trademark belonging to Lone Wolf Development and as such we have exclusive rights to use that mark in connection with any game-related computer software. If we allow the improper use of our mark, we could potentially lose our rights to the name. We are thus required to do this. If you are interested in understanding this issue better, there is an excellent article on wikipedia (see Genericized trademark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

Thanks in advance for your timely cooperation in this matter.

Rob Bowes, President Lone Wolf Development”




In order to comply with this request we are compelled to take immediate and drastic action. As a result of this letter we are more than happy to remove the presence of “Army Builder” from the forums as requested. As we cannot control how this registered mark might be used in every sentence and in every post we will be required to remove it from appearing on this forum. From this moment onward the phrase “Army Builder” can never appear again on this forum, in any form, so as to ensure that no perceived harm or implied dilution come to the Lone Wolf Development property of the same name. Furthermore, because past forum posts could still be referenced, in an effort to be complete we must delete entire offending threads. We know how much time and effort went in to creating all of the assets this dedicated community has made available on these forums, and we sympathize with you about the ensuing loss. We apologize for the burden and inconvenience this forced moderation places on you.
In the future, any attempts to reference “Army Builder” will be benignly changed to “iBodger”, our officially recognized and supported iPhone application for Force Creation. I thank you for your understanding in this matter.
Brent Waldher
Licensing and Contract Manager
Privateer Press, Inc.

[Stormonu]

All this just enforces my loathing of copyright and such.

To top it off, the army builder program is pretty sad anyway, or at least when I tried to use it for 40K - and how one used to have to get the army rosters (from the creators, no less) was pretty shady. I'm surprised Games Workshop never sunk them for what they were doing.

[Dire Bare]

Originally Posted by Dire Bare

If I read that correctly, Lone Wolf has NOT sent any C&Ds. They simply sent a letter to Privateer Press to ask them to help police their trademark, "Army Builder". Lone Wolf is certainly within their rights to protect their trademark, the program IS the most popular tool for miniature wargamers and has been for years. "Army Builder" is just as a legitimate trademark as "Player's Handbook".

Hmmm, upon reading the letter again and viewing ENWorld front page news and the discussion here . . . . I still feel that Lone Wolf has a legit trademark for "Army Builder" and needs to defend it . . . . but it seems they aren't simply asking folks to stop calling their software programs "army builders", but they are trying to police conversations on message boards.

Bad move.

Between how they acted and how Privateer Press responded, they probably lost a significant amount of business from folks who play WarMachine and Hordes.

I use Army Builder for Warhammer 40K, I also use Card Vault and Hero Lab. I don't think I'll abandon my use of their software right now, but I have a bad feeling about their recent actions. If a competitor comes up with solid software as an alternative, I just might switch.

[Kax Tuglebend]

One rather salient point which I don't believe has been made (mea culpa if it has) is that in theory Army Builder allows the purchaser to make files for games which will allow him/her/it to build army lists, however in practice the majority (I wouldn't be surprised if it was 99%) of users do not make their own files, they simply download the pre-made fan ones that Lone Wolf kindly provides a link to on their site.

Now, I like Army Builder: I frequently use it to look up particular rules/stats when I don't want to dig out the relevant rulebook or buy the relevant rulebook, particularly in regards to Privateer Presses games as they are by far the most complete files linked to (in contrast Warhammer ones are full of instances of "see army book"). However I really do think a company which makes a fair bit of its money by stepping on other peoples IP shouldn't go round whining about its own ~ and that Lone Wolf rightly deserve a kick in the teeth for this bit of double standards.

[Maccwar]

Is it a full moon or April the 1st?

Who let the lawyers out?

[Oldtimer]

Originally Posted by Friadoc

the common folks' freedom of speech and expression trumps their trademark law.

Only a matter of time. They're getting there eventually.

Oh, and... ARMY BUILDER

[scranford]

While this is unfortunate it doesn't surprise me in the least. I had some major issues with Hero lab (Major to me anyway) which took me going to a public forum with the issues to be resolved. In the process I felt personally insulted by the owners treatment of me as a customer, and personal attacks which were veiled by comments leading to their belief that the majority of the people in the world are crooks.

I feel they really believe the world is out to get them, when if fact the number of people who even know who Lone Wolf Development are, or their products is miniscule. It's a shame really because their software is top notch, but their customer service, and paranoia, makes me wish there was a competitive product out there I could give my money to.

They need to understand that if they treat people with respect they will find goodwill gains them many more customers than lawsuits, and cost them many less.

[Turtlejay]

A far more productive move, if indeed they felt their brand was in danger of being diluted, would be a *rebranding* of their software.

Avatar: An Army Builder

That way you retain your base built using the 'Army Builder' name, and piggyback on the Avatar popularity.

It's a win win!

Jay

PS - Army Builder

[Morrus]

Originally Posted by JohnRTroy

Actually, I hate to say it, but I think Privateer did the wrong thing. They basically responded to what was likely to be a private inquiry with a public snarky and sarcastic response. This only turned into a tempest because of what Privateer did, not anything Lone Wolf did. It looks like what they did was the unprofessional thing and based on the fact that PP shut down discussion of this tells me that maybe somebody at PP responded without having their morning coffee.

If you read the linked documents, it was a demand that they censor the conversation on their forums - accompanied by a 72 hour deadline pending legal action. There's no "what was likely" about it - the documents are plainly readable.

It is wrong in two ways:

1) Including a legal threat and deadline at the outset, without engaging Privateer in conversation.

2) Attempting to regulate conversation about such products by the general public, as opposed to PP's own use of trademarked terms; and putting the onus on PP to defend LW's trademark to the general public.

There are some fairly weak claims (but stated in definitive terms) that "conversation on the internet" equates to "PP publishing materials in print". It's a very weak stance, and certainly not one to base definitive threats of legal action on.

I've received similar legal threats in the past. Folks claiming that *I* am libelling them because someone used a comminication medium I provided to say something. This is akin to claiming a telephone company is liable for what is said on the communication medium they provide.

Needless to say, 100% of these threats have amounted to nothing.

[Morrus]

Originally Posted by denzoner

The subject line of this thread is totally (apparently) misleading. I'm sure we can't read the original threads, so there is no way of actually checking. But it sounds like Lone Wolf Development(R) is in the right here. They're not stopping people from using the words, army builder. It sounds like they want people to acknowledge that Army Builder (R) is a registered trademark, and that they shouldn't use call their army builders an Army Builder but something else. They do have the legal right to "defend" their property, and it is their obligation to educate in proper use, and it is also their responsibility to make sure it's usage, if being used, is used properly, i.e. only in reference to their Army Builder (R) product, and nothing else.

Nope - they demanded that Privateer edit conversations on their forums between members of the public to change any reference to the concept of an "army builder" to something else.

The "don't call your product an army builder" part I can get on board with. That's a little heavy handed, but understandable.

The "edit the public's conversations to change any reference to army-builder-type-products" to a generic term? Nope. Can't support that.