First, now that the IGDA has officially announced that there will be a special meeting, I’ve closed the petition for now. Should something get derailed, I will re-open it.

Secondly, my contention is that Langdell’s actions are harmful to the entire industry, from EA to Mobigame. It seems clear to me that he is not a game developer at this time, but makes his living preying off those who are–which does not qualify him to be on the board of the IGDA. I only wish this had come to light before he’d been elected.

If Bill Gates were a board member, and was using the IGDA as a reference to bolster Microsoft…and furthermore attacked members on the basis of IP and Trademark…exactly how long would he remain a board member of an organization dedicated to supporting indie developers?

This boils down to something very simple: does this man have the right to piss in the pool everyone else swims in, for his own purposes? Does he have the right to wear a badge given while he does this, given to him by some of the very people he is supposed to be serving and helping?

This debate is NOT about what his legal rights are. Anyone trying to frame it that way is dismissing the real point: This is about conduct, ethics and the idea that one of your own is attacking members and people in your chosen field from within.

Any organization that allows this kind of behavior is not worth a membership fee. That’s the point corvus is trying to make. IP and rights Langdell has or does not have are straw man arguments designed to lead away from the real point:

His conduct is unbecoming in a group of people trying to help each other out for the purpose of raising awareness in the indie game field. If that’s not a reason for removal…

I do not know what is.

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/tm/t-os/t-find/t-challenge-decision-results/t-challenge-decision-results-bl?BL_Number=O/337/02

You haven’t actually won every case have you, indeed you seldom go to court since its easier and cheaper to tie people up in red tape with extensions and so on..

Here is part of the decision of the presiding officer on the Soul Edge case in which Tim was the opponent

“21. The opposition is dismissed in its entirety. In the event of such a finding the opponents
asked for an award of costs off the scale in view of the opponents’ actions in delaying matters
at every turn by either claiming they had not received correspondence, applying for hearings
at which they did not appear, provide skeleton arguments and generally putting the opponent
to a lot of expense and bother. Whilst it is certainly true that the opponents have repeatedly
claimed not to have received correspondence or to have claimed to have sent documents and
correspondence which have not been received either by the opponent or the Trade Marks
Registry, the applicants themselves have used the Trade Marks Rules to their advantage and
also sought the exercise of the Registrar’s discretion from time to time. In all of the
10
circumstances, taking into account the preliminary hearings that have occurred in these
proceedings, the evidence filed and the substantive hearing itself I order the opponent to pay
to the applicant the sum of £1000, this sum to be paid within seven days of the expiry of the
appeal period or within seven days of the final determination of this case if any appeal against
this decision is unsuccessful.”

Won every case….my god man, do you lie about everything, are you utterly incapable of telling the truth.
You’ve been exposed…pure and simple, and further exposure will follow especially if you keep repeating lie upon lie upon lie.

This whole debacle has exposed you as the pariah you are, not show some semblance of honour and step down from the IGDA and go find a job somewhere more suited to your talents. Like a sewage works!!

I would like to assure my community that the information I am privy to is neither falsified or out of context. I cannot reveal its contents, but it does not reflect the open and friendly approach to Mobigames that representatives of Edge Games have claimed they took.

I would also suggest that anyone who is interested in the pattern of behavior being demonstrated by Dr. Tim Langdell, Steve Roberts, and Edge Games watch the movie Minbo No Onna if you can find a copy. It’s a comedic, but fascinating, look at how thugs can twist the truth and intimidate honest people while remaining well within the constraints of social nicety.

And be sure to include the Namco case you lost which was dismissed with Prejudice against EdgeGames.

So breaching trademark rights and refusing to change the name of the game when you realize you have made an error is ‘chutzpah’? You dont think the word “stubborn” might be a little more appropriate?

I will confess that in Mobigame’s position I would have changed the name immediately rather than get drawn into this, but I must also have to respect their chutzpah more than just a little.

I can assure you Papazian has had numerous offers to settle involving their changing the name of their game and each has been at zero (truly, no hidden cost, zero) cost to them. Papazian has refused all offers so far for reasons we cannot understand.

Nothing about the trademark settlements in Edge’s past would indicate you’d go to the expense of registering a trademark only to give it away. And perhaps some offer was made that David naively agreed to, only to change his mind after doing some research, or finding out about some hidden cost you hadn’t mentioned–like a cut of every sale. It wouldn’t be the first time something offered up as free turned out to be quite costly.

I’m not convinced by your arguments and without producing the actual correspondence–you’re doing nothing more than playing a game of he said-she said.

Then there is the EDGY issue — the fact is Edge believed it had a deal with Papazian in which Mobigame had agreed to change the name of their game to EDGY and as part of that deal Edge would register EDGY in its name and license it back to Papazian at no cost (Papazian confirms this deal in his post to Stephen Jacobs’ blog on Gamasutra, so we know this is true). So Edge registered EDGY and then Papazian changed his mind about the deal. Later Papazian realizes he can get a lot more sympathy making up the fiction that Edge registered EDGY to stop him using it as a new name. No truth to that at all, and it is really sad that people believed Papazian (even after his admission about it being part of a proposed free license in his blog post). Fact is, Edge has made numerous offers to Mobigame to change the name of their game to EDGY, all of which offers involved NO money being paid by Mobigame, and Papazian has refused them all prefering instead to not change the name of his game. If he doesnt like EDGY anymore, how hard could it be to think up a new name?

This has been a lynch mob with Edge being found guilty without hearing both sides of the story. And whenever Edge’s side is heard(it has continually sold games every year since the late 70s, despite rumor to the contrary; it has won every trademark dispute it has had with all being settled amicably and no one saying Edge were trademark trolls, etc) then people just move on to find something else to falsely accuse Edge of. Not fair, but hopefully there are some bright people out there who can see what is really going on here.

http://www.tigsource.com/pages/edge-games

Donations can me made via paypal to mobigame@gmail.com. Funds go direct to MobiGame but the account is monitored by TCE members to ensure transparency and fairness. Please donate, even a $1 will make your show of support more tangible.

Developers Rally Round Colleagues Besieged by “Trademark Troll”

In an unprecedented show of support, members of the game development community from several countries have come together in support of French independent game developer Mobigame. Mobigame is involved in a legal dispute with former publisher Tim Langdell, who conducts business as Edge Games. Langdell has a history of confrontation with game companies using the word “Edge” in games titles.

Dispute Between Langdell and Mobigame

On July 15th, Langdell forced iPhone platform-holder Apple’s hand to block the sale of the award winning and triple IGF award nominated iPhone game ‘EDGE’. Langdell’s claim was that the product infringes on his trademark of the word ‘Edge’. Initially, when Mobigame voluntarily removed the game from the store they were receiving several emails per day from Langdell; some of which even went as far as threatening to sue the owner of Mobigame (David Papazian) personally, stating that it could cost David “millions of dollars”.

Mobigame actually own the trademark ‘EDGE’ in France, and the registration is on-going in Europe. Despite this, Langdell threatened to sue unless they remove the game from the AppStore entirely, even in the regions where Mobigame own the trademark. On May 14th, Mobigame proposed renaming the game to ‘EDGY’ for the UK and the US market, stating that their trademarks could co-exist since Mobigame will have the trademark in Europe, and they would rename the game to ‘EDGY’ for the UK & US markets. Langdell refused to accept this, and on May 16th he applied for the trademark ‘EDGY’ in the US.

As a small company, without access to substantial legal resources, Mobigame was keen to avoid a protracted legal dispute, and have tried on many occasions to reach an amicable solution. Unfortunately, negotiation with Langdell proved fruitless. Mobigame is currently evaluating their options, but are denied the income they were depending on from iPhone game sales.

Langdell’s History of Threats and Litigation

Langdell has a history of similar tactics with other small companies. He lists credits for games containing the word ‘Edge’ on his website, and claims credit for their development. In reality his involvement is limited to demanding money for the use of the word ‘Edge’. His legal relationship with renowned British development magazine EDGE is unclear, but claims that he “spawned” the publication were recently removed from his website. Even after the outrage among the international community of developers began to rise, Langdell applied for a trademark on the phrase, ‘Edge of Twilight’, days after Australian company, Fuzzyeyes Studio announced they were soon launching a game of that name.

Community Reaction

Game developers around the world have taken a dim view of Langdell’s actions, as trademark disputes have a far more profound effect on small game companies with limited resources for legal support.

To try to combat this, members of The Chaos Engine, a game industry professionals’ think-tank/forum have started a fund to aid Mobigame in what could be a lengthy legal dispute, during which time sales of EDGE are being restricted. There is also a Facebook group set-up to show support for Mobigame and EDGE.

“We think it’s important that Langdell not be allowed to bludgeon small companies with esoteric trademark laws,” says Paddy Sinclair, CEO of Proper Games Ltd. “Games may be a fun and light-hearted product, but this is still a professional industry. There’s no room for schoolyard tactics to extort money and claim unearned fame.”

Finding no support from their professional association, the IGDA, developers have taken the case into their own hands – organizing creative ways to help Mobigame with their plight. They hope to see industry luminaries speak out, and are galvanizing all their supporters to stand up against this unethical use of trademark law.

“Langdell needs to be stopped and anyone else who thinks it’s okay to take advantage of small game companies needs to know we’re not isolated, easy targets,” said Yacine Salmi, an industry veteran and current IGDA member.

IGDA Controversy

In further controversy, Tim Langdell is also a board member of game development advocate body International Game Developers Association (IGDA). Here he has a hand in guiding the professional association’s policies on aiding small game companies and improving the industry for all developers. So far the IGDA has officially taken no action and made only a short statement saying they don’t see a need to act.

“Just because Langdell managed to bluff his way onto the IGDA board doesn’t mean we as members support his unethical strategies, and we’re doing what we can to have him removed,” said Corvus Elrod of Zakelro Studios, an IGDA member and part of a small game company himself. He has started a petition for IGDA members to sign, calling for a special meeting where Langdell could be voted out of the IGDA board.

The Chaos Engine is a virtual community of game developers from around the globe. Launched in 2003, it has grown to include 7,000 game developers representing views from across the industry