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

[S'mon]

First, in the US, you can't register a trademark that is solely based on a surname. There's a whole set of rules on that. So, your Trademark can't be simply "Newman". .

Actually, the link you provide US TMEP 2009 Chapter 1200 says the opposite - that surnames are registrable as marks if they have acquired distinctiveness (through use).

Edit: You seem to be confusing questions of registrability with questions of infringement. Whether I can register Newman for salad dressing is a different question than whether I can market Newman's Salad Dressing without being successfully sued for TM infringement.

 

[JohnRTroy]

Well, at least we're all learning I guess...

I find the USPTO search engine fun.

John Troy was once registered for natural sauces...been dead since 2002 though...

I also found out that Lone Wolf is not a registered Trademark for anything involving gaming. If Mongoose still has it they haven't attempted federal registration.

TSR was granted "Dungeon Crawl" as a federal registered Trademark in 1996. WoTC apparently let it die. They also had World War I as a Trademark.

Paizo tried to get Adventure Path, but let it slide before finalizing it.

 

[pawsplay]

There is a Lone Wolf registered for video games and the instruction books thereof.

 

[Twowolves]

I can't believe I read the whole thing.....


After having done so, I am frankly appalled at some of the responses posted here. A small company is getting it's #1 product essentially ripped off, and when they try to defend their rights, they are called ..."doucebags"??? Really? It seems to me that Privateer had their own program that they were calling an "army builder", and THAT is why they got a letter. Could Lone Wolf have handled it better/more professionaly/more legally accurately? Sure, I guess. Could they have come up with a name that 12+ years down the road some internet-surfing dude they never heard of before might have liked better? Uhh.. sure? Not really the point. The point is, they are a tiny company trying to defend their breadwinning software so they can stay in business and keep food on the table. They aren't Medical Mechanica/MicroStuff/Massive Dynamic and they aren't trying to crush your right to free speech.

Sheesh.

 

[S'mon]

Paizo tried to get Adventure Path, but let it slide before finalizing it.

That would have made for a fun battle with WotC!

 

[Dire Bare]

That's not my impression. At all. So far, he's proved that several lawyers felt the need to correct him on some points, and he's argued at length with me on a position I don't hold.

Sorry, I meant JohnRTroy, not LoneWolfDevel. Is his name John too?

 

[Skeld]

Paizo tried to get Adventure Path, but let it slide before finalizing it.

I seem to remember one of the Paizo guys saying that they intentionally decided not to trademark "adventure path" after starting the process. They probably didn't want a thread similar to this popping up about them.

As far as Lone Wolf / Privateer Press / Army Builder is concerned, I really don't care. I downloaded LWD's HeroLab demo, but I haven't had a chance to use (beside, my group is playing Star Wars Saga right now and probably won't transition to Pathfinder for a few months). If I like it, I'll buy it. The issues surrounding the way they handled the PP letter have no affect on whether or not I use their software (unless this were to drive them out of business, which I seriously doubt).

After keeping up with this thread since it started, I think this is much ado about nothing. There's a component of nerd rage in here, not to mention a fair amount of "stick it to the man," and chaos-feeding.

The only real question I have is this: did LWD send PP this letter publically (like posting on PP's forum) or did they send it privately (through mail or post)? That might make a difference to me.

-Skeld

 

[Terramotus]

I can't believe I read the whole thing.....


After having done so, I am frankly appalled at some of the responses posted here. A small company is getting it's #1 product essentially ripped off, and when they try to defend their rights, they are called ..."doucebags"??? Really? It seems to me that Privateer had their own program that they were calling an "army builder", and THAT is why they got a letter. Could Lone Wolf have handled it better/more professionaly/more legally accurately? Sure, I guess. Could they have come up with a name that 12+ years down the road some internet-surfing dude they never heard of before might have liked better? Uhh.. sure? Not really the point. The point is, they are a tiny company trying to defend their breadwinning software so they can stay in business and keep food on the table. They aren't Medical Mechanica/MicroStuff/Massive Dynamic and they aren't trying to crush your right to free speech.

Sheesh.

Actually, the free speech issue was exactly the subject that was at issue for most of the thread. The initial impression was that they were. Now that it's been clarified, most of the arguing has tapered off.

Also, come on. Worst case scenario is that they lose "Army Builder" as a trademark because it's become generic. That's not having their product ripped off, that's losing some time spent on marketing. So they might have to rename to "The Original Army Builder" and trademark that.

And the term IS generic, though whether it would be considered as such as a point of law I couldn't say. People tend to abbreviate names but truncate descriptive terms. I can't imagine a better, more easy to understand descriptor of what those programs do than the phrase "Army Builder". Restricting the term partially restricts competitors from being able to effectively describe to their audience what their product does in a concise fashion.

Part of the problem is that they apparently hid under the radar until the trademark was uncontestable, and only now are attempting to educate people about it now that the mark can't be invalidated for being generic.

So while I'm no longer enraged by their actions, I won't cry any tears for them if they ultimately lose the trademark.

 

[pawsplay]

Sorry, I meant JohnRTroy, not LoneWolfDevel. Is his name John too?

What?

 

[rjdafoe]

I can't believe I read the whole thing.....


After having done so, I am frankly appalled at some of the responses posted here. A small company is getting it's #1 product essentially ripped off, and when they try to defend their rights, they are called ..."doucebags"??? Really? It seems to me that Privateer had their own program that they were calling an "army builder", and THAT is why they got a letter. Could Lone Wolf have handled it better/more professionaly/more legally accurately? Sure, I guess. Could they have come up with a name that 12+ years down the road some internet-surfing dude they never heard of before might have liked better? Uhh.. sure? Not really the point. The point is, they are a tiny company trying to defend their breadwinning software so they can stay in business and keep food on the table. They aren't Medical Mechanica/MicroStuff/Massive Dynamic and they aren't trying to crush your right to free speech.

Sheesh.

I suggest that you go back and re-read it then, as I think you misunderstood what this was all about.