Mobigame confident of Edge victory

By Robert Purchese Published 29 March, 2010

Trademarks to "almost certainly be revoked".

Mobigame and Connect2Media believe Edge Games has no "enforceable" registered trademark in the UK or the US and that Tim Langdell's company has "misrepresented" what it does own.

"Both Mobigame and Connect2Media have taken extensive legal advice on this issue, and neither company considers that Edge Games has any enforceable registered trademarks in relation to computer game," a statement from the pair, who develop and publish iPhone title Edge - the source of the dispute with Edge Games - began.

"The US and UK trademarks that Edge Games typically refers to when making claims of infringement, are either not yet registered, subject to revocation/opposition proceedings or irrelevant to the field of computer games.

"Of those Edge Games' registered trademarks that are currently subject to revocation/opposition proceedings, the legal advice obtained by Mobigame is that they will almost certainly be revoked or cancelled by the respective trademark offices.

"In view of the above, neither Mobigame nor Connect2Media intend to concede to the demands made by Edge Games, by removing [iPhone game] Edge from sale anywhere in the world, or by changing its name," they added.

The duo said EDGE was one of the "most innovative" titles available in "the mobile domain", and that both parties would "fully defend spurious claims" made by Edge Games, "which we consider to have no legal basis".

"Mobigame and Connect2Media also consider that Edge Games is deliberately misrepresenting the nature and merits of its claims against Mobigame and Connect2Media (and the position in third parties such as Apple) in order to hinder their sales of Edge," the statement concluded.

"Mobigame and Connect2Media consider any such statements to be defamatory, and they may in future claim damages from Edge Games and/or Dr Timothy Langdell in respect of any losses arising from the defamatory statements."

Electronic Arts is currently petitioning to have all of Edge Games' Edge-related trademarks revoked. A spokesperson for Edge Games - possibly Langdell himself - claimed on Friday that the company is "completely certain" of legal victory, not only against EA, but also against Mobigame.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds. @Clert on Twitter.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (32) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • TeaFiend #1 2 years ago

    Is everyone confident of winning? Edge Games seem to be as well.

  • Armoured_Gideon #2 2 years ago

    Almost certain to be certified and committed at this rate.

  • CaptainQuint #3 2 years ago

    I'm on the edge of my seat here, it's all just so exciting, I feel like I'm living on the edge, waiting to see how this pans out.

  • geeza2020 #4 2 years ago

    this case is going beyond the edge of reason.

  • CaptainQuint #5 2 years ago

    Bob Peck thought he had it rough when he was living on The Edge of Darkness, but he had it easy, compared to what Langdell has put Mobigame through.

  • RM2KMaster #6 2 years ago

    I've said it before and i'll say it again.

    That man is such a *cunt*

    He considers himself a pioneer of the UK gaming industry, so where the hell does he get off indicting spurious infringement claims against bedroom coders such as Mobigame?

    That alone shows how much of an arsehole he truly is.
    Edited by RM2KMaster at 29/03/10 @ 10:01

  • LazyNinjaUk #7 2 years ago

    May Mobigames impending victory mark the beginning of the end of Tim Langdell's supposed ownership of the word 'Edge', the bastard needs to get a proper job instead of getting rich from other people's hard work.

  • adofessex #8 2 years ago

    This is actually a very exciting story to follow.

    I find it funny how a man who claims to be the UK's oldest game developer, who may or may not have developed his own games in the late 70's to early 80's, who then moved to the US, is not only taking on one of the largest game corporations and then trying to pr bullshit it around and say they were coming after him the whole time, but he is also taking on a small company who have made what is considered to be a good game for the iPod, which is a similar situation to what he was doing in the 70's and 80's.

    Why either of these two companies has not found the need to trademark a popular word from the English dictionary and still be popular and profitable. I can only hope that both companies put, what is essentially a cheat, in his place.

  • Redeye #9 2 years ago

    I'd pay good money to sit in on the court proceedings, just so I could sit there, watch the expression on Langdell's mug as he get his arse royally handed to him, and of course, point and laugh.

  • irve77 #10 2 years ago

    Dear God ,
    i know i don't stay in touch much. But please... please...please make Langdell lose and be financially ruined in the process .. love ya loads ... kisses !

  • justsomeone #11 2 years ago

    he's a doctor now?

  • sneetch #12 2 years ago

    @justsomeone
    he's a doctor now?

    Well, he had to do something with his time the last 16 years or so, lord knows he wasn't making games.

  • dacicus #13 2 years ago

    I hope Edge lose. They've trademarked a common used word and they've tried to make money from other people's work for quite a bit of time. So they deserve to lose.

  • neems #14 2 years ago

    Oh come on, this guy is responsible for Bobby Ballbearing, cut him some slack.

    What a game that was. Oh no wait, I'm thinking of Marble Madness. Wtf is Bobby Ballbearing?
    Edited by neems at 29/03/10 @ 12:16

  • lucky_jim #15 2 years ago

    Given Tim Langdell's track record of self-aggrandising bullshit, I'm amazed anybody refers to him as "Dr" without seeing his qualifications first-hand. Is it from the University of Edge and signed by Professor Edge Spokesman by any chance?

  • Jackface #16 2 years ago

    I had an amusing exchange of emails with him last week. Is there any legal precedent that would frown on me pasting the contents of them in here?

    He basically just goes on and on about how all he's doing is following the law, which has essentially forced him into taking action against people in order to protect his own mark, or he'll lose it. He never once answers the question, "Do you genuinely believe these games and films and comics and magazines are damaging your reputation by using a word in the name of your company?"

    The reason he doesn't answer it is that he doesn't have to. As he repeatedly said to me, the law agrees with him. He's in the right, legally.

    And that's the point, that's what EA are trying to do, ultimately: get the law changed.

  • darkmorgado #17 2 years ago

    @lucky_jim

    Actually he is a psychologist, which is highly amusing given his behaviour. The phrase "blind leading the blind" comes to mind, as he is clearly a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

  • Hyoscine #18 2 years ago

    @TeaFiend - Players gotta posture. Really though, everyone can say they're guaranteed to win, and we can all just assume Langdell is lying. Again.

  • darkmorgado #19 2 years ago

    @Jackface

    I dont think so. I had an amusing exchange with him via email a few months ago, which I posted on these forums. You should still be able to find it.

  • darkmorgado #20 2 years ago

    @Jackface

    He's in the right, legally.

    Erm no, he isnt, as he obtained the trademarks fraudulently, presenting false evidence and commiting perjury.

  • RexRunti #21 2 years ago

    Of course what if find amusing is that his legal claim against EA is for the game currently *ahem* "in development", "MIRRORS (a game by) EDGE", (yes, that's how he writes it) may be confused with "Mirrors Edge", but since all that started a popular game on the indie bit of XBox live has come out called "Mirror".

  • Salaminizer #22 2 years ago

    EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE EDGE

  • orpheus #23 2 years ago

    @Jackface - please do!! Would be interesting to see this crawling turd's 'motivation'.

    Bet you're shitting it now Langdell - both companies are out for your blood!

  • IP #24 2 years ago

    A few random points of observation:

    Landell continues to try and play both hands - the massive, hugely influential developer making $billions, whose products are so well known that anyone using 'edge' in any form must be riffing off, and then the lowly indie dev who's being 'bullied' (a phrase he's used plenty of times) by, er, Mobigame.

    Bobby Bearing: lay of this, everyone. It's not a bad game, and it has fuck-all to do with Langdell. The original game was influenced by Ultimate adventures, not Marble Madness, and the creator claims Langdell has no rights to it now anyway (although, of course, Langdell disagrees).

    In legal terms, Langdell's position is extraordinarily shaky, because he's almost certainly used very dodgy documentation to secure his marks (including 'altered' comic books, game boxes and even a rip of an Edge magazine cover). That said, this is NOT an open and shut case, given that EA's moves along the lines of fraud were recently dismissed.

    As for motivation? Money - plain and simple. He bullies/threatens devs and effectively 'extorts' money from them, despite releasing nothing himself.

  • neems #25 2 years ago

    Also, although I believe it is true that you have to defend your Trademark in order to avoid losing it, he has no need to defend it as he never uses it for anything other than suing / threatening people. He has no legitimate business interests that could be threatened by the loss or misappropriation of 'Edge' as a trademark, hence the mocked up box shots etc.

    @IP - that's interesting about Bobby Bearing, do you know if the game's creator is involved with any of these actions? I doubt he has the financial clout (or even the interest) to directly confront Langdell, but EA might be interest in taking a deposition from him.

    My formative gaming years were in the early to mid eighties (nearer mid tbh) and I never heard of Bobby Bearing until Dr. Langdell brought it up. However I unreservedly apologise for any slight I may have given to the game's creator, or indeed the game itself.
    Edited by neems at 29/03/10 @ 17:32

  • icematt12 #26 2 years ago

    I have this brilliant idea for a game called On the Edge of Oblivion.

    The player gets chased by this wall of death. You have to duck and jump over things to try and stay alive as long as possible. The wall is slightly faster than you so you will die at some point.

    My legal expert (myself) has advised me to state that in no way am I referring to events regarding Edge Games or any staff in this game. It is purely a coincidence that Tim is being chased and that legal action against him/Edge Games is inevitable. ;)

    I also refuse to lose the word Edge in the title of my own IP. The name defines what the game is, one mistake and you could die. I should probably trademark it before this git does, he apparently had a game removed from iTunes and then trademarked the name for himself.
    Edited by icematt12 at 29/03/10 @ 18:32

  • IP #27 2 years ago

    @neems: Defence of trademarks is required, but, as you say, you cannot defend by mocking up bullshit artwork. You only retain marks as relevant. If Langdell had been releasing a bunch of games every year (rather than nothing, or nearly nothing), he'd have a right to defence. However, he goes way further than this, attacking anyone using 'edge' in any form in a game title. This is his mistake, because he moves from defence to becoming a troll. And attempting to say Mobigame were somehow leveraging on the success of Bobby Bearing by calling their game Edge is flawed logic of the worst possible kind.

    Regarding Bobby Bearing, my understanding is that the original creator had no idea what was going on, but claims the rights reverted to him two decades ago. I've no idea whether he's involved in any of the actions. As for people having a go, I did the same myself until I learned the truth, hence trying to put the record straight where possible. Anyone wanting to know the background behind the game should read this page of Crash magazine.

  • smelly #28 2 years ago

    @IP : "given that EA's moves along the lines of fraud were recently dismissed. "

    Well not strictly true. Looking at the legal docs EA were asked to give more evidence before it would be considered.. And they did do just a few days ago.

  • TitusCrow #29 2 years ago

    I think this is the crux of the matter. People would have a smidgen more sympathy for him if he actually was using his trademark as the basis for an IP that was in development and he was intending to release. Is it is, this trademark is his way of making money, by defending it when other's use this common word in any shape or context.

    He needs to piss or get of the pot! Either stop defending something you never use, or make something substantial that has this trademarked word as the center of it. It is crazy only being able to use something in a negative way, yet still be able to stop other's positive efforts to incorporate this thing you never use.

  • Masarin #30 2 years ago

    IIRC I've played Bobby Bearing on the Speccy. It's also featured in the 'ZX Spectrum Book - 1982 to 199X' by
    Andrew Rollings at page 142. Isometric galore!

  • Jackface #31 2 years ago

    If you ever accuse him of using his trademark to have a go at other people rather than release original IP, he'll point you to RACERS. I tried last week. I've since pointed out that RACERS doesn't look remotely current-gen and anyone with any sense will look through his website and wonder why they've never ever heard of these games he claims to have developed and released, but he'll never answer that either.

    Any emails you do send him accusing him of, well, everything, will always be answered with reference to large corporations like EA or McDonalds, and how if someone made a game called 'Electronic Arts' they would sue the makers, so why shouldn't he? In reference to questions about how he's taking credit for other's work by 'licensing' the word EDGE to them, he refers to McDonalds and how their shop-owners simply license the word McDonalds and then run their own branch.

    Completely and utterly deluded. I hope he loses big.

  • neems #32 2 years ago

    I daresay I would concede his point if somebody released a compilation called 'Edge Games', featuring every game ever made that has the word 'edge' in its title. With a free copy of Edge Magazine!

    Until that glorious day arrives...