Home > 1 > EDGY

EDGY

Langdell managed to pull his tricks again in getting Apple to remove Edge from the App Store. He’s found his tool of choice now, the letter to Apple seems to work his bidding nicely. So again, to try and make a living from what they do best, Mobigame has had little choice but to change the name of their game Edge, this time to Edgy and Apple in all fairness have been gracious enough to quickly reprocess the application and put it back on the store (under the new name) in very quick time.

So yes, Edge is on sale (as Edgy) and can be purchased here.

To end this short article, it would be a shame to not poke a bit fun towards our Bowser of the trademark industry. Recently Develop Online published an article that featured a statement from an Edge Games representative.

the company took issue with the new name for Mobigame’s  iPhone title, which was once called ‘Edge’ but then sold as ‘Edge by Mobigame’.

“Adding ‘by Mobigame’ was determined not to get around infringement,” said Langdell’s ‘rep’.

In this argument against the name ‘Edge by Mobigame’, Langdell, sorry, Edge Games Rep claims that adding a company name to the word Edge isn’t enough to get around the trademark.

That’s a funny argument, because if Tim casts his mind back to when he wrote a letter to the US Trademark office in 1997, he might remember making the following statement in defence to his own trademark claim.

[snip]

So what you’re saying Tim is that it IS ok for a company to add their name to the word EDGE to differentiate it from another trademark?

The statement in the article doesn’t end there either, Langdell makes an even bigger guff here where he seems to claim that he actually invented the word ‘Edge’.

“Clearly, if Sony tried to use the mark ‘iPod by Sony’ they would hardly expect Apple not to take action to protect their mark ‘iPod’. In trademark law adding ‘by (name)’ to another company’s registered trademark does not mean a company can use that trademark without being guilty of willful infringement.”

No Tim, what you’ve done there is liken the word iPod, one that was invented solely for use by Apple in defining their product line of portable music/video players, to Edge, a word that has been around for centuries and has many meanings and uses.

Lets try your argument again shall we with a more common yet trademarked word. Lets use ‘Apple’. Everyone knows Apple, they make computer hardware, software, they even run the store that you love writing letters to. It’s a trademarked word yet has many meanings, just like your beloved Edge. So Surely with these two words being so alike, they must both be treated in the same way.

No Tim, you see Trademarks are all about protecting from customer confusion, and you see from the above image that we have a host of games and applications on the Apple App store that all use the word Apple in them (There are actually over 20 Apps in total). No one is confused about the above apps, no one thinks that Apple and Monster is by the same company that makes the Macbook.

We hope that one day soon Apple will see that they’re being used as a tool to do Tim’s bidding and finally add his email to their spam filter, until then, we’ll keep on trucking and continue our parade of pointing out the plot holes in the story of Tim Langdell.

About these ads
Categories: 1
  1. December 1, 2009 at 1:23 pm

    The iTunes Store has stacks of apps that contain the word Apple and has stacks of apps that contain the word Edge. Zero customer confusion in either case. Langdell knows this. He doesn’t care. He’s trying to keep his reprehensible one-man shakedown operation on the rails for as long as possible, fueled by greed and lies.

  2. Atomicow
    December 1, 2009 at 10:35 pm

    Doesn’t Langdell own the mark “Edgy” now too? I fully support these guys as both of their games rock, but switching to Edgy hardly seems like it’s going to last long…

  3. roskelld
    December 1, 2009 at 10:42 pm

    Langdell did register the trademark EDGY a while back, but has since released it to Mobigame. Basically Mobigame when first approached about the whole trademark thing suggested that they change the name to EDGY from Edge. Langdell at the time was hunting for blood and money and said that if they did change the name, then he’d continue to hunt them for lost earnings, plus he’d register the name EDGY and offer it to them via a licence deal.

    Something in Langdell clicked after this and he realised that what he was doing was illegal, you can’t register a trademark on the basis that someone else is working on that product. It’s essencially like domain squatting and it’s frowned up.

    So Langdell released the trademark and offered it to Mobigame.

  4. Johann Ly
    December 2, 2009 at 3:36 am

    “However Langdell is selling new material through his own website, where users can purchase one of two PC games burnt onto blank DVDs and sent out through a mail box in California. Under these conditions, neither Nintendo or Sony accept Edge Games as a developer or publisher with a registered office.”

    I’d like to see how many PS3 devkits one can fit into a mailbox.

  5. Afello
    December 2, 2009 at 9:30 am

    Has anyone made sure someone at Apple has read this?

  6. December 3, 2009 at 10:56 am

    Can’t believe he’s still up to his old tricks.

    Well hopefully not for much longer since EA are releasing Mirrors Edge on the iPhone in Jan (http://www.mobile-ent.biz/news/35258/EA-Mobile-bringing-Mirrors-Edge-to-iPhone) and are already engaged in legal battle over the trademark. Somehow I can’t see Langdell getting Apple to remove this one.

  7. ChrisW77
    December 3, 2009 at 10:36 pm

    I just read that Edgy is now taken off the app store, can anyone confirm that ?

    Jeez, Apple, grow some nads and tell Langdell to feck off, or just bin what crap he sends you. Seriously, what the hell could a 1-man scammy lying outfit do against a multi-million pound company like Apple ?

    And please, for the love of christ, tell me this isn’t anything to do with Langdell ?

    http://www.vg247.com/2009/12/03/edge-of-twilight-postponed-as-fuzzyeyes-deals-with-layoffs/

    That would be an all time low, if scumdell is going after these guys.

    • RexxFiend
      December 4, 2009 at 12:58 am

      I can confirm this for UK store – no more edge, edgy or anything even slightly risque.

    • Atomicow
      December 4, 2009 at 1:17 am

      I’m not seeing Edge or Edgy on the US store, looks like Langdell is feeling extra douchey lately.

  8. Tardie
  9. December 4, 2009 at 5:46 pm

    If Apple weren’t so damn trigger-happy with its App store then Mobigame wouldn’t have to change their game’s name unless ordered to do so by a court of law. I doubt Langdell would have won a trademark suit against Mobigame on a trademark as weak as “Edge”. Until somebody finally challenges Langdell in court, he will continue to get away with his abusive behavior.

  10. December 6, 2009 at 2:24 am

    Maybe because the (Edge Team) that is included in the credits?

  11. Atomicow
    December 6, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    Check out this post from Mobigame’s official twitter account:

    “EDGE has only one name: EDGE, it will be back soon” – http://twitter.com/Mobigame/status/6390793586

  12. kwyjibo
    December 7, 2009 at 2:05 pm

    What’s actually happening though? How long will EA’s Mirror’s Edge case take? What about the Edge of Extinction case?

  13. Cyberxion
    December 8, 2009 at 4:39 am

    Speaking of Mirror’s Edge, a version of the game is coming to the iPhone.

    I wonder how long it’ll take for Langdell to have Apple take it down. Given that Apple doesn’t really care to check into trademark infringement claims, I’m willing to bet that he’ll have it taken off the App store sooner or later. The only question is how long it’s going to take for him to get around to it.

    Then again, he may not want to risk it, given that the IP is EA’s. He wouldn’t want to risk giving them more fodder for their suit. Wait, Tim Langdell is nothing if not a moron, so maybe that won’t occur to him.

    Whatever happens, I’m eager to see it play out. Isn’t that sad? @_@

  14. Mr Flibble
    December 8, 2009 at 6:47 pm

    Langdell has no option but to challenge Mirror’s Edge. If he doesn’t, his claim against Edge and Killer Edge Racing have even less merit than currently. Due to precedent, Apple will have no option but to pull the EA game. It’s at this point that shit really is going to hit the fan.

    As for the EA case, my understanding is that without taking into account Langdell’s recent bout of stalling, it would have been next fall before it was over with. Now it could be even longer.

  15. The Patient
    December 16, 2009 at 11:19 pm

    There should be some way to get Apple to fix the gigantic hole in their trademark policy. Perhaps a Petition or, more extreme, a boycott by developers and customers alike? The problem here isn’t so much Langdell anymore (although it’s still focused on him since he’s the only douchebag with enough crap to do such a thing), but rather the easily abused trademark system of Apple.

    Back on Topic, I think Mr Flibble has a good point. EA probably did this to trap Langdell, since it would get him caught in a pincer hold about his own trademarks. Either he looses all outstanding cases for his trademark suits, or he looses his trademark, which both prettymuch amount to the same thing.

  16. Atomicow
    December 18, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    Edge is back on the app store everywhere except the US and UK. http://twitter.com/Mobigame/status/6758218594

    • blobby
      December 21, 2009 at 9:11 pm

      doesnt seem to be available from canada.

    • January 9, 2010 at 6:27 am

      How do I access a non-US/UK store?

  17. melissac
    December 28, 2009 at 4:21 am

    Timmy renewed his “Cutting Edge” registration using a comic book cover. Specifically, a comic book that was published in Dec 1995.

    http://tmportal.uspto.gov/external/portal/tow?SRCH=Y&isSubmitted=true&details=&SELECT=US+Serial+No&TEXT=74662343#

    It also looks like he Photoshopped in a new price. The original 1995 price was $1.95 (USD) but the image he submitted to the USPTO stated that the price was $2.95.

    • kwyjibo
      January 4, 2010 at 2:10 pm

      Can it be challenged?

  18. melissac
    December 28, 2009 at 5:05 am

    Meh, it’s not even close to the real cover. Here’s the real cover:

    http://cgi.ebay.com/MARVEL:-INCREDIBLE-HULK-%23436_W0QQitemZ260521091456QQcmdZViewItemQQimsxZ20091210?IMSfp=TL091210214006r24477

    A “husband and wife that specialize in all sorts of collectibles” is selling a copy of Timmy’s fake on ebay. I wonder how they got it…

  19. kwyjibo
    January 4, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    http://shop.lenovo.com/us/landing_pages/thinkpad/2010/Edge

    Langdell to commence trademark trolling in 5.. 4..

  20. Snow
    January 4, 2010 at 9:28 pm

    As long as you can find a copy of the real unphotoshopped comic book and look at the licensing printed within or at least publishing information – that’s all you’d need. Then just submit a picture of the real one both to EA to help them in their quest to rightfully crush Langsmell, and especially to USPTO. If it can be proven that he does not own the rights to the comic book and had nothing to do with its production, they’ll give him a shovel.

    If one is using someone else’s copyrighted and possibly trademarked product, photoshopping their own company name on it and then passing it off as their own product or a product that they had co-produced, such action is fraudulent, especially if they use the fake material to renew a trademark.

    Right now, it is very apparent that Langdell scrambling to make it look like his company is still a legitimate company and that he’s still releasing products. This is why he’s photoshopping things and renewing trademarks also. Perhaps he wants to make it look like he has a large company.

    I don’t know why it’s taking so long for legal action. Langdell should have been shut down long ago and all his trademarks revoked. That’s what would have happened in the old days. Much more common sense back then, I think. Too much red tape and paperwork these days. A simple investigation would reveal Langdell as a fraud – immediately. If he loses his trademarks, he loses all his lawsuits and is left with nothing. I just wonder how the guy has kept going so far. Is he getting just enough settlement money and royalties from developers and companies who have bowed down to him and pay him to stay out of court?

    • BluWacky
      January 12, 2010 at 4:25 pm

      The last time anyone came close to exposing Langdell properly (the Velocity Micro case) ended in a settlement after Velocity Micro alleged the trademarks were fraudulently registered. Of course the settlement will never be made public so we don’t know what happened there.

      The current legal action is suspended while the USPTO considers Langdell’s motion to dismiss based on the Velocity Micro case – Langdell’s case hinges on the interpretation of the case being dismissed on its “merits” despite the fact that the case was settled seemingly without full consideration (as there is no record of the discovery conference on the court docket). Not a lawyer, so I have no idea whether Langdell’s defence is valid (there’s a distinct lack of citation of case law to back up his interpretation if you ask me) but as it stands the USPTO has suspended the case until it decides to consider the motion’s validity.

      It’s not going to alter the fact that the trademarks were fraudulently registered, but it may be that he can get away with it :(

  21. [CC]
    January 13, 2010 at 10:21 pm

    This site needs an UPDATE!

    Now I don’t know if you guys have been following up on the ‘EA vs. EDGE Games Inc’ on http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92051465, but to me it seems that the Trademark trial has ground to a halt due to Langdell’s argument that EGI has successfully defended against claims of fraud and abandonment in the past (see document #12). Interestingly, in #11 Langdell himself lists amendments to his trademark registrations, and it is clear that he/EGI has ‘given up’ quite a substantial amount of trademark goods and services. Which is kind of contradictory, considering the claim in #12, but whatever. Another interesting observation is that he only refers to the bottom three Registration numbers, omitting the first two. I wonder if that has anything to do with the ‘weight of evidence’ presented in #1. In conclusion, I would be eager to know what course of action EA is going to take. It seems that a court trial will be unavoidable, though Langdell is trying his best to ‘inhibit’ this approach (as in ‘buying time’, see #10 and #12).

    On another note, if I were you, I’d put up some sort of a intermediary page stating that a user might only proceed if he’s *not* Tim Langdell nor an related or affiliated person, effectively shutting him off and preventing him from using the information on this site, at least by ‘official’ means. This will prove – usefull – in the time to come. Of course, that won’t prevent him from noticing your ‘probing’ attempts, such as recently done by testing his online shop’s order numbers. Imagine his face when he discovered that someone had actually ordered a game in his shop!

    ———–
    Disclaimer:
    Everything stated herein is based on information and belief.
    ———–

  22. Arimer
    January 17, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    I just went to the Edge games site and noticed he’s now claiming some association with the Edge Gamers Orginization forums. They don’t seem to have any link to Tim Langdell or Edge on their end so I doubt they even know he’s doing this. Trying to get in contact with the leaders there to see what’s up but so far it hasn’t happened.

  23. [CC]
    January 27, 2010 at 10:45 pm

    How come some of the comments have been pulled from this site without further notice?

  24. Lorenz
    February 21, 2010 at 6:27 pm

    That is the real comic the hulk comic was part of “marvel edge” series.

    it can be bought

    http://www.ecrater.com/product.php?pid=6714353#

    marvel edge has no relation to edge comics

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Edge

    Even if it did it would not matter as it was made it 1995.

  25. kwyjibo
    February 23, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    I’ve just spotted that Tim Langdell has been quoted in the following article as some sort of games/film industry expert.

    http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/oscars/article7017167.ece

    I’ve emailed Chris Ayres, the author of the piece to let him know otherwise. I recommend that you do the same.

  26. phisheep
    February 24, 2010 at 7:49 am

    Ah. The clock starts to tick again. Langdell’s motion to dismiss has been denied – but so have EA’s allegations of fraud. EA have 30 days to amend their pleading then Langdell 30 days to respond.

    Expecting some interesting fireworks over the next two months.

    http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?eno=1&pno=92051465&pty=CAN&mode=frame

  27. Bennett
    March 25, 2010 at 1:24 am

    Trademark dismissed! Nice work, chaosedge: you’re even mentioned in the legal brief!

    • roskelld
      March 25, 2010 at 1:37 am

      Thanks for the comment.
      Alas the trademarks have not yet been dismissed, it seems that internet fever has jumped the gun a little here. The trademarks are currently pending cancellation, that is, we’re all still awaiting the judgement of the case.

      There’s no doubt that EA’s latest report throws some heavy punches at Landgell, and time will tell if he’s got the strength to come back for more. We do know how persistent and pigheaded he is though, so this fight isn’t over till the votes and in and verified.

      • Dog Welder
        March 26, 2010 at 12:05 pm

        It does appear that Tim tried to reclassify his marks to drop all of the categories he’s never produced anything in (such as writing implements — pencils, pens, etc.) to try to get around the argument that his use of these marks in commerce is fraudulent. Since the marks were all in dispute because of EA, his request was denied.

  28. Flo
    March 26, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    @roskelld
    I was wondering since February’s motion for summary judgement was dismissed and the USPTO advised EA to back up their claims so that a favourable ruling could be made, if you had been under additional pressure of any kind to shut down your blog and take down the proofs of Langdell’s fraud ?
    I thought the guy, off-guard and cornered, would do whatever it takes to stop the plaintiff from gathering the material that would bring him down…

  29. Johann Ly
  30. Atomicow
    March 31, 2010 at 7:35 am

    So what’s up with this thing? The legal site now says “SUSPENDED”. What does that mean?

    • roskelld
      March 31, 2010 at 12:52 pm

      We cover this in the new article. Basically it means that everything stops until the legal bods decide how to go forward. It’s pretty much what happened back in November. It doesn’t mean the case is over in anyway.

  1. December 1, 2009 at 11:55 am
  2. December 1, 2009 at 12:19 pm
  3. December 1, 2009 at 2:42 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: