Breaking: Petition Launched to Remove Tim Langdell from IGDA Board
Posted by Dan on July 17, 2009As some of you may have heard, there has recently been a row over some trademark issues involving Tim Langdell, who was recently elected to the IGDA Board. The crux of the issue is that Tim holds a trademark in various uses of the mark “Edge” as used in relation to gaming. Tim has allegedly been aggressive about acquiring and enforcing his trademarks, which have allegedly resulted in at least one iPhone gaming with the word Edge in the title being removed from the Apple Store. Tigsource has compiled a very comprehensive list of articles involving Tim and the use of the mark.
There is now a petition to remove Tim from the board. The petition’s author, well known narrative designer Corvus Elrod, had this to say:
I have started a survey which requires you to enter your IGDA
membership number when you vote. Once we have “yes” votes from 10% of
the membership (about 1400), I will bring it to the board directly and
force them to call a special meeting of the membership to vote on Tim
Langdell’s removal.
Corvus expanded further at Man Bytes Blog:
My feelings about Tim Langdell are of little consequence here, but I do feel like emphasizing that I feel calling his actions “trademark protection” is rather like claiming the aristocracy went on fox hunts to protect the hen house. It may be legal, but to base the financial success of your studio on predatory IP manipulation is ass-hattery of the worst degree. The fact that Langdell’s studio is surviving in this economy without having released a game in well over a decade is astounding. That it can even afford to litagate over the use of the word ‘EDGE’ when the big publishers are closing entire studios rather than suffer thinner-than-average profit margins is a danger to every single developer-independent or affiliated.
This is obviously a huge issue, especially for a very troubled IGDA. There have been recent questions in mainstream blogs and those of several high profile industry members questioning what exactly IGDA is providing to its members. The trademark issue further fans the flames of allegations that IGDA isn’t doing enough, and it’s being talked about by key industry figures, such as IGDA board candidate Darius Kazemi and board member Tom Buscaglia.
To be fair, the petition is not a slam job against Tim: as Corvus states “You’ll notice, I’ve included a “no” vote. I know members who do not wish to vote Tim Langdell off the board. If 10% of the IGDA membership is dead against this, it’s only fair they have a voice too.”
We’ll be tracking this issue further as it develops, and I’m hoping to discuss it at this year’s PAX 2009 Legal Issues in Gaming panel (which you should all attend!).
FULL DISCLOSURE: The author is a student member of IGDA and an IGDA GDC Scholar.
CORRECTION: The author of the petition is Covus Elrod, not Michael Lubker as originally reported.
Popularity: 9% [?]
[...] iPhone gaming with the word Edge in the title being removed from the Apple Store Original post: Breaking: Petition Launched to Remove Tim Langdell from IGDA Board :about-acquiring, amending-the, from-the-apple, has-allegedly, issue, minolta-maxxum, [...]
From what I have read this guy is almost a Monster Cable level Trademark litigant. Supposedly he has registered the trademark of Edge in just about any possible industry including space travel.
While my understanding of this is slim, I have read some exchanges between the maker of the iPhone game in question and Tim on Gamasutra and it was not pretty.
If I were a paying member of the IGDA, I would support a vote on whether he should retain his position. It is only fair.
The problem with having a crazy scope for all of your various marks is the need to actually use those marks in that manner in commerce for your mark to be upheld if challenged. Trademark office is pretty lazy about granting marks, but it’s not difficult to challenge marks when it’s clear that the mark owner hasn’t used the mark in the manner described in the registration– for instance, running a trademark search on marks owned by Edge Games Inc. comes up with a whole slew of different variations on the mark; comic books, toys, magazines and publications, etc.
It raises a novel question: Does using the mark itself as the “product” and licensing it to third parties so that they may use the mark in association with their own products constitute “use in commerce”? I’m not sure if I’ve actually seen this question raised in litigation, but it’d be interesting to find out how a court would handle it. I could imagine some pretty terse language in the opinion.
Add A Comment