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

[Paul_Klein]

Can they send C&D orders to, like, the United States Army?

 

[Friadoc]

You know, I get the company to company aspect of this thing, but last time I checked, at least with respect to many of the democracies that would respect various trademark laws, the common folks' freedom of speech and expression trumps their trademark law.

If I wanna use the words "Lone Wolf" or "Army Builder" together, in any shape or form that I wish, then I can. Period.

As we've all seen, time and time again, running around on the Internet and telling folks what they can and can't say is one of the handful of things that usually creates a united front in the nutty folks of electronic world.

So, sorry Drone Wolf, if I wanna use the phrase Lame Builder, or even Army Builder, I can and will and I'll do it wherever I wish, too.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I think it's enormously significant that you just referred to iBodger as an army builder app. Did you use that term intentionally tongue-in-cheek?

I wouldn't call it enormously significant, but as a professional writer, very few of the words I use are unintentional. It's sort of like asking a slugger if he actually aims for the ball or just gets up there and swings the bat.

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[n'haaz-aua]

Those letters sound like an army builder, building an army of resentment against their company.

Thread done in one. Congrats.

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[Treebore]

Yeah, I'd have to dispute their "because of us the term is popular" claim. I know I heard that term used around the gaming stores at least as far back as the 80s.

Yep. They may have Trademarked the term, but they are going to have a hard time proving the term wasn't already widely used among gamers well before 1998.

I think they will find they can only protect "Army Builder" when used in more specific situations and also find that Trademarks are better defended when you coin an original name in the first place.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Hey, let's go build an army of plastic minis! That would make us Army Builders!

Sorry. I actually trademarked "Yair" years ago. I must ask you to cease and desist using it, or I'll be forced to hire some sort of ARMY BUILDER to assemble a rag-tag mercenary enforcement team. Be warned!

ENWorld haz teh funnies.

When I played WH40K, I used to enjoy putting together imaginary lists of mini's I'd like to buy, so that I could plan out future purchases (which never came to anything). This would, of course, have made me an ARMY builder at the time.

Hey, who's up for a .sig campaign? ARMY BUILDER ARMY BUILDER ARMY BUILDER.

Seriously, I find the conduct of Lone Wolf absolutely laughable. If they consider going after internet forums to stop people using the words Army Builder a useful way to spend their money, then good luck to them, but I can't see it having any useful effect.

Oh, and ARMY BUILDER.

 

[Morrus]

Yep. They may have Trademarked the term, but they are going to have a hard time proving the term wasn't already widely used among gamers well before 1998.

I think they will find they can only protect "Army Builder" when used in more specific situations and also find that Trademarks are better defended when you coin an original name in the first place.

Indeed. Trademarks aren't some magical spell. It's easy to register a trademark; defending it is harder.

Certainly situations where a term has common prior usage are harder to defend than those where a company actually coins the term in the first place.

I'm not very familiar with wargaming terminology, and wouldn't know whether "army builder" was a commonly used term prior to LW's registering it as a trademark. It's most certainly not in any danger of becoming a household term, though. Quick survey of those in my house right now - zero percent knowledge of the term (including me - and I'm a gamer!). That implies to me that their fears are unjustified.

We're not talking xerox or kleenex here.

 

[JohnRTroy]

Yep. They may have Trademarked the term, but they are going to have a hard time proving the term wasn't already widely used among gamers well before 1998.

Doesn't matter. Two things happened.

It went through the USPTO due dilligence, which means a government attorney reviewed and found it to be a valid trademark. They have to review these things and determine if getting a trademark is fair.

It has been successfully registered for 5 years with no challenges with no challenges by other companies. Thus, even IF it is a "common term", that will not matter for any legal proceeding--the burden is on the defendant, not the plaintiff. This is not like a patent, where you can invalidate it with "prior art". The key thing is consumer confusion and prevention of Trademark dilution.