Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

June 15, 2010

Tim Langdell and Edge Games are at it again, launching another lawsuit, this time claiming trademark infringement against videogame giant Electronic Arts.

The lawsuit revolves around what Edge terms “willful infringement and unfair competition” in regards to EA’s Mirror’s Edge franchise. The suit seeks a court injunction against EA’s “continued infringement” and includes claims for treble damages.

From a press release announcing the lawsuit:

…Edge Games sent a cease-and-desist letter in July 2007 after learning of EA’s intentions to launch Mirror’s Edge. Rather than responding to the letter, the lawsuit states, EA instead filed a trademark application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office in an attempt to register the Mirror’s Edge name. The USPTO denied the application in early 2008, stating that EA’s planned use of Mirror’s Edge would likely cause confusion with several registered trademarks maintained by Edge Games.

Edge claims that EA did not respond to their inquiries until October of 2008, and then soon after “launched the Mirror’s Edge line without Edge Games’ approval.”

In September of last year, EA filed a Consolidated Petition for Cancellation against trademarks registered to Edge, including the terms “The Edge,” Gamer’s Edge,” “Edge” and “Cutting Edge.”

Langdell and Mobigames have also been battling over an iPhone game originally entitled Edge, which Mobigames subsequently renamed to Edgy.

The latest suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. Edge is being repped by the Lanier Law Firm.

Edge claims that it “and its predecessor companies comprise one of the oldest surviving video game development and publishing businesses in the U.S.," and that "Edge Games and its related entities have used the “Edge” trademark since 1984.”

Posted in

Comments

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Balance on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 12:27.

Trolling: Not just for patents anymore.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by lordlundar on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 12:12.

Apparently, Tim seems to think you can calm down a rabid wolverine by repeatedly poking it with a stick. The ensuing results of this lawsuit promises to be interesting.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by killatia on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 10:28.

Now this is one battle EA can win for sure. Langdell the scum is going down.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by mesaone on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 10:21.

Really? A single word can be copyright infringement? I would understand if the word in question was a proper noun, like "Mario" or "Chun-Li" or something like that. What other words cannot be used simply because a publisher or developer has that word in their name/title? "Epic"? "Render"? "Loft"? Seems like Edge games wants to collect on what they see as their intellectual property, but you cannot own a singular word that existed long before your company. Why are they not going after Ford for producing a vehicle called Edge? I thought infringement lawsuits had to prove, among other things, that there is reasonable consumer confusion caused by similar phrasing.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Neeneko on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 11:45.

Part of speech is irrelevent for copyrighting. Even if it was relevent, english allows for words to be moved from one part of speech to another depending on context.

Edge, if they had a real claim, could not sue Ford because they are in a differnt industry. Trademark applies only within specific narrowly defined markets, so you can only (successfully) file against companies that are producing products in the same industry as you have your trademark. This is why both Apple Computers and Apple Records have their own seperate trademarks for instance.

And yep, in order to be succesful, they must show the potential for reasonable customer confusion.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by SpiralGray on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 09:07.

So... lemme understand this. They think that if you use the word "edge" in your product that you are violating their trademark? We can trademark everyday English words now? Okay, I'm filing a trademark for the word "the", that should give me a comfy retirement.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Neeneko on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 09:48.

Yes yes yes, you are very clever.. no one has ever commented about trademarking 'the' in such a thread before.... *headdesk*

To the point... if the guy was not lieing through his teeth on most of his claims, he would have a legit case. Yes you can trademark 'common' words and yes you can restrict other companies in the same industry as you trademark applies from using the same word in their product names as long as it can be argued that it might cause consumer confusion.

This is why if, say, you tried to create a game 'Halo Extreme' or a computer 'Apple Grapefruit', you would be in a heap of trouble.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by vellocet on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 21:43.

Swat Langdell like the blood sucking insect that he is!

------- Morality has always been in decline. As you get older, you notice it. When you were younger, you enjoyed it.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Kommisar on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 18:01.

Dear Tim,

Thank you for biting off more than you can chew.

Sincerely,

Everyone who thinks you are a slim-encrusted troll (which is... basically everyone but you).

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Liz Surette on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 20:57.

This is just a general, quick response. There are a lot of facts we don't know so a lot of this is guesswork.

For trademark infringement, federal courts in the 9th Circuit use these factors from AMF v. Sleekcraft (599 F.2d 341):

1. Strength of Plaintiff's mark.

Registration is facial evidence of inherent distinctiveness, and therefore strength of the mark.

EDIT: Right now, Edge has registrations for the word-mark "EDGE", but they are not for software. They have a pending application for "EDGE" as it relates to video games--the serial number is 78981284.

Since, on its face, the word "EDGE" alone doesn't have much to do with gaming, the PTO could find that it's arbitrary or suggestive--both of which are "strong" categories of marks.

2. Proximity of the goods

Both parties' product lines are video games, in this specific instance they are on the same consoles. 1 for Edge

3. Similarity of the marks (sight, sound and meaning). <---Most important

Aside from the word "edge", the marks don't have much in common if you look at them, hear them spoken, or think about what they mean. 1 for EA, but a very, very, heavy 1 so maybe it's more like 3 or 4

4. Evidence of actual confusion.

Don't know for sure but probably not

5. Marketing channels used

Both parties' products are sold in the same markets/marketplaces. 1 for Edge

6. Type of goods and the degree of care likely to be exercised by the buyer. The more expensive the good or service, the higher the degree of care that the buyer will use in researching brands.

Console games are relatively inexpensive--Mirror's Edge is selling for $20 on PS3 so I doubt a court will find that this is analogous to, say, a $30,000 speedboat (the subject of AMF.)

7. Defendant’s intent in selecting the mark (if they intend to confuse, then they’re more likely to succeed)

EA had chosen to call the game "Mirror's Edge" as late as 2007, possibly earlier. Edge's "Mirror" is still in development, and it's also kind of a stretch to say that EA new about it all the way back then and decided to call their game "Mirror's Edge" to try and trick consumers into buying it thinking it comes from Edge. Well, it's a gigantic stretch on the few facts I have. 1 for EA

8. Likelihood of expansion of the product lines

This could depend on whether there will be a Mirror's Edge 2. It's hard to say at this point.

Interestingly, Edge's website claims that a multi-platform game entitled "Mirror" is "coming soon."

www.gameslaw.net

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Nocturne on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 09:00.

Interestingly, Edge's website claims that a multi-platform game entitled "Mirror" is "coming soon."

"'Mirrors' by Edge" has been declared as coming soon on the Edge website for quite a while, since shortly after EA announced Mirrors Edge in fact

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Liz Surette on Fri, 06/18/2010 - 15:56.

Ah, ok. Thanks to you both

www.gameslaw.net

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Defenestrator on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 08:59.

Liz,

"Mirrors" by Edge was added to Tim's website shortly after Mirror's Edge was announced by EA in a direct attempt by Langdell to cause confusion. The investigative team over at Chaos Edge have discovered that Tim does not have the proper registrations with Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo to produce software on their respective consoles despite Tim's claims otherwise.

In short "Mirrors" by Edge is nothing more than Smoke and Mirrors on Tim's part to cause a conflict and get a payday from EA. I see this lawsuit that Tim has filed as nothing more than a last ditch kitchen sink effort to defend his trademarks from being cancelled due to EA's actions with the ISPTO because he's been getting his ass handed to him there.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Thomas McKenna on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 16:55.

Mirror's Edge /= Edge

Just because something has the word "edge" in the title doesn't give you legitimate grounds to sue for IP infringement.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Defenestrator on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 13:07.

I know that. You know that. Most of the public in general knows that. EA knows that. I'm betting even Tim Langdell knows that. (In fact, Tim has used that very argument to defend some of his own actions on occasion.)

However, Tim's game is finding ANYTHING that has the name "Edge" in it and threatening to take that entity to court to tie them up in expensive litigation unless they change their carefully thought out and marketed name (expensive for the "infringer") OR pay Tim Langdell money (costly, but not as expensive to the "infringer") OR fight it out in court (product is placed on hold for months or years and could be VERY costly to the "infringer.")

Most people just pay Tim off to get rid of him, and Tim holds this up as a "victory" for him and his trademark.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Rodrigo Ybáñez ... on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 16:08.

God, I promise, if EA succesfully battles this Langdell asshole and win, I will buy their next FIFA games for the next 3 years, for PS3 and Xbox360. I swear.

------------------------------------------------------------ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Chris Kimberley on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 15:55.

OK, with the Mobigames case I can understand it. The company is called "Edge". Someone makes a game called "Edge". It's infringement (at least arguably). But "Mirror's Edge"? To me at least that's distinct enough to not confuse a resonable person.

===============

Chris Kimberley

===============

Chris Kimberley

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by hellfire7885 on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 18:48.

Even if a character simple said "watch out for the edges" langdell would sue.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Neeneko on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 19:58.

While this is true, it does not impact any particular suit.

The other half of the lesson of the boy who cried wolf,.. just because someone cries wolf 3 times in a row with no wolf, do does mean cry number 4 has no wolf.

Though this case, Edge probably has no case since the trademark office already approved Mirror's Edge as a seperate trademark.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Neeneko on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 16:42.

This is an argument that bring out a lot of passion... well, passion against at least.

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Rodrigo Ybáñez ... on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 16:09.

Langdell is scum and a parasite, not a reasonable person.

------------------------------------------------------------ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by Neeneko on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 15:31.

Can anyone verify the factualness around the rejection of EA's attempt to register 'Mirror's Edge', or if EA even attempted to register the trademark?

This is one of the problems with Langdell related stories... figuring out what the actual facts are... since his claims, IF factual, would produce a very differnt debate.

*waits for someone to make the requisite 'the' joke*

Edited to add:

Looks like there is some dead attempt by EA to obtain a very broad trademark on "mirror's edge", but they seem to have a very live trademark specificly in relation to computer games.

Finding Edge Game's trademark was more difficult, but the examples I did find seem to be registered in relation to... jewerly store software?

Re: Edge Games Slaps EA with Suit over Mirror’s Edge

Submitted by DorkmasterFlek on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 14:38.

Oh snap! They actually did it! I was praying they would sue someone like EA with the actual resources and interests to fight them in court. I can't believe I'm cheering for EA, but I really hope they legally eviscerate them. Tim Langdell, you are scum.

Poll

Shout box

Cecil475: @PHX Corp - The dude's a moron who wouldn't know crap if it came up and kicked him.05/19/2013 - 6:36am

PHX Corp: http://kotaku.com/ea-sports-developer-calls-wii-u-crap-and-nintendo-wa-508481261 EA Sports Canada Moron calls Wii U 'Crap' and Nintendo 'Walking Dead'05/18/2013 - 11:42am

E. Zachary Knight: If the videos are of sufficient quality that people subscribe and watch regularly, then those let's players are providing a service that people want. That is the heart of capitalism. That is not something that should be shamed.05/17/2013 - 8:06am

E. Zachary Knight: I have no idea who either of those people are. However, I still don't see why making a business out of creating let's play videos is somehow evil or wrong.05/17/2013 - 8:04am

MaskedPixelante: It sure is if you're just doing it for the money. See Tobuscus and/or Pewdiepie for what happens when people get into it just for the money.05/17/2013 - 7:30am

E. Zachary Knight: Why is it wrong to make money doing LPs? Why should that be something that should be shamed?05/17/2013 - 6:20am

MaskedPixelante: https://twitter.com/PsychedelicSA/status/335183893214924801 Now here's an interesting, glass half full thought about the Nintendo LP thing. It outs the people who are just doing LPs to make money.05/17/2013 - 5:56am

E. Zachary Knight: I responded in writing to all this "let's play" stuff Nintendo Started. No need for my permission, I won't give it. It's not mine to give. http://divineknightgaming.com/?p=29205/16/2013 - 2:21pm

E. Zachary Knight: Lars Doucet of Levelup Labs has a Reddit going on game companies that allow monetization of Let's Play videos. http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/1egayn/lets_build_a_list_of_game_studios_that_allow/05/16/2013 - 1:04pm

Sleaker: @Imautobot - yah I wouldn't use an emulator as a good first run test of how stable the console is, haha.05/16/2013 - 11:47am

E. Zachary Knight: The 50th person to jump off a bridge is just as dumb if not dumber than the 1st.05/16/2013 - 10:03am

MaskedPixelante: Yeah, let's all jump on Nintendo for doing this, even though they're hardly the first company to do this...05/16/2013 - 9:47am

E. Zachary Knight: Wow Nintendo, this is wrong. http://kotaku.com/nintendo-forcing-ads-on-some-youtube-lets-play-video-50709238305/16/2013 - 8:44am

Imautobot: @Sleaker, further gameplay has revealed that the controller button do stick under the faceplate. Also, The NES emulator (Emuya)keeps crashing on me, though I think a bad ROM is causing it.05/16/2013 - 7:10am

Papa Midnight: AE: I wonder if any other publishers will follow suit.05/15/2013 - 8:12pm

Andrew Eisen: EA is ditching Online Pass. http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/15/ea-kills-its-controversial-online-pass-program/05/15/2013 - 7:20pm

Avalongod: @Zach and quicnkold...I've read the bill and the intent of it is to fear-monger. It's not a balanced message. I don't recall the ESRB being mentioned at all. It's more "keeps your kids away from these movies/games or they'll become violent"05/15/2013 - 4:35pm

E. Zachary Knight: quiknkold, The big problem with that legislation is the amount of misinformation out there. Who is going to ensure that the information in the pamphlet is accurate?05/15/2013 - 3:25pm

quiknkold: REBeardogg : I'm on the fence about this. on one side, I want parents to be aware of the ESRB, and even Movie Ratings. On the other hand, I feel this will be used for nothing but Propaganda. The ESRB does a good job.05/15/2013 - 3:07pm

IanC: Frostbite is coming out on iOS devices. Yet the Wii U cant handle it? *coughbullshitcough*05/15/2013 - 2:31pm

All shouts

<< Return To Top

Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :