Edge owns Tim Langdell. Seriously (Edge) Page 26

  • Page

    of 28 First / Last

  • MetalDog 1 Feb 2013 14:36:04 23,920 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    In Langdell's defence(!), he's not actually killing people with his dickery, so wishing a painful demise on him seems harsh, even for him.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • DFawkes 1 Feb 2013 16:14:28 24,053 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Cheers for the update phisheep. I do pop onto NeoGAF now and again just to see your awesome thread there :)

    Oh for goodness sake, I've caught my scrotum in my zip again - Margaret Thatcher, 1986

  • phisheep 29 Mar 2013 09:29:26 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Looks like Langdell is at last contemplating defeat. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=51912276&postcount=687

    Or at least,contemplating appealing after he loses, which kind of comes to the same thing.
  • Reacher 29 Mar 2013 09:33:16 900 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    I was hoping he'd come out with a SPEAR! and pose for 5 seconds.
  • agparrot 29 Mar 2013 09:38:38 11,903 posts
    Seen 6 months ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Cheers again phisheep.

    It seems like we've come such a long way from talking about whether he is still actively using the trademark for any of his own ventures.

    I almost feel that if the first thing I'd read about it was this motion, that it'd be fair to assume that Tim couldn't possibly be wrong, such is the conviction behind his arguments.

    So I'm glad I've read pretty much everything else, to put it in some context.
  • phisheep 12 Apr 2013 16:26:44 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    We appear to be getting close to the endgame here. The Board has ruled to have the trademarks cancelled, and the few motions that Langdell has submitted since are pretty well rubbish.
  • SuperBas 12 Apr 2013 17:18:59 1,494 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Any chance he will end up in jail?
  • DFawkes 12 Apr 2013 17:39:50 24,053 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I love that thread and all your posts, phisheep. I really do. Really curious to see if Langdell responds to your open letter. Heck, you've given him some really excellent advice in that thread yet all he seems to do is file motions, then file some more!

    Oh for goodness sake, I've caught my scrotum in my zip again - Margaret Thatcher, 1986

  • mal 12 Apr 2013 18:21:36 22,836 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I don't think being a dick is a criminal offense, unless you're poor and being a dick.

    Cubby didn't know how to turn off sigs!

  • pinebear 18 Apr 2013 07:47:47 8,565 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The USPTO has cancelled the five remaining Edge marks according to the linked post.

    http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=51912276&postcount=808

    Update 17 April 2013 – TRADEMARKS CANCELLED! Game over – or is it?
    As Kendle indicated above (and total props to Kendle for breaking the news, he may be new to GAF but I've known him a long time on ChaosEdge and that was an absolute blinder of a first post!) four out of the five trademarks at issue in EA v Edge Games have now been cancelled “by court order”.
    As phisheep explains, there are a few loose ends (outstanding trademarks in the UK and Germany and the possibility of further proceedings, for example) but the cancellation is an important milestone.

  • DFawkes 18 Apr 2013 08:20:54 24,053 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    NeoGAF seem to have rewarded phisheep for all his fine work with a ban :( It was for the comments about possible legal action against Langdell which were admittedly a little bait-like but nothing banworthy, especially after those comments were deleted anyway. Poor show indeed, I say.

    You'll always have a home here, phisheep!

    Oh for goodness sake, I've caught my scrotum in my zip again - Margaret Thatcher, 1986

  • Widge Moderator 18 Apr 2013 08:56:57 13,743 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    NeoGAF banning users? Whatever next.

    _ _ _

    www.inverted-audio.com

  • MrTomFTW Moderator 18 Apr 2013 09:04:49 39,762 posts
    Seen 39 seconds ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    You wouldn't have something like that happen around here.

    Follow me on Twitter: @MrTom
    Voted by the community "Best mod" 2011, 2012 and 2013.

  • phisheep 18 Apr 2013 21:39:28 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Hi guys, are you OK if I make this a temporary home?

    I'm not going to comment on the GAF ban, other than saying that GAF is GAF and it does things its own way and that is fine by me.

    Langdell has filed two more things today, both belated attempts to avoid the inevitable. Will post more detail shortly.
  • binster 18 Apr 2013 21:57:37 542 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Welcome back to the internets phi. Keep doing the good stuff!
  • phisheep 18 Apr 2013 22:10:37 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Actually the two are the same thing more-or-less. the first is a letter to the Commissioner For Trademarks (with a big attachment) and the second is the same attachment. so luckily there is no need to read both of them.

    Langdell makes two arguments:
    - that the District Court order is invalid ("void on its face")
    - that the case cannot be closed because there are two live matters before the Board

    I'm not going to address the first, I've done it before interminably. The court order is not void, and if it were Langdell would have appealed by now. There's something like a zero chance he will find a lawyer to support that argument being as lawyers pressing stupid arguments are liable to end up with sanctions.

    Now, about these two live issues. They are not as alive as all that. Plus is not at all relevant whether they are live or not.

    Thing is, the cancellation of the trademarks as a result of the District Court ruling has nothing to do with the TTAB at all. It is completely independent of, and overrules, whatever TTAB decides. There is, in practise, no case before TTAB now except for the potential findings of fraud and/or abandonment against Langdell. Which means he is stupid to oppose the closure of the case as a result of the District Court rulings.

    As to the "live matters" before the court:

    The motion to confirm the District Court order void is rubbish. The TTAB has already ruled on that and rejected it

    The motion to reconsider the Board's decision is equally rubbish, for reasons that really aren't worth going into (though if you ask, I'll tell).

    And Langdell also issues a host of queries about EA and Future's lawyers (like for example raising the issue that EA took the case in house after the District court judgment, and somehow claiming that an inhouse rep is evidence that EA isn't taking the job seriously). You'd imagine wouldn't you that a company withe the size and reputation of EDGE GAMES would be able to afford a proper lawyer. Bad argument for Langdell to make.

    There's probably more to it than that - but I'm tired and distressed and it is late. See you guys tomorrow.

    EDIT: sorry for typos, it will take me probably more time that I want to spend getting the hang of the interface over here.

    Edited by phisheep at 22:15:56 18-04-2013
  • phisheep 18 Apr 2013 22:51:14 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Also, if one of you guys has a GAF account, would you kindly post on the GAF thread that I shall be doing updates here in the interim?

    But check first, we want one post, not forty-three.
  • itsoldsquarejaw 18 Apr 2013 22:55:01 208 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I'm an old oft-banned poster on here and lurk a lot on Neogaf since after self-banning myself from internet forums but had to log in. Hope you don't mind my asking; but what was the reasoning behind the alleged blackmail in the 'gaf thread? It seemed somewhat out-of-character and a bit unnecessary. I just want to know out of curiousity, don't feel you have to answer. The thread there was fascinating and it's a shame it got derailed.

    As a note; I don't have a 'gaf thread otherwise I'd redirect them for you.
  • johnson81 18 Apr 2013 22:58:28 391 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Just checked, the Neogaf thread is locked. Pretty ridiculous, all the work over the past 25 months now locked.
  • phisheep 18 Apr 2013 23:14:53 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @itsoldsquarejaw: I am not going to comment, here or elsewhere, about the GAF ban. It is what it is.

    @johnson81: I can't tell from here as I can't get into GAF, but last I heard the new thread that that I had just opened up was locked (and sensibly too, I had to open up a new thread for new news but it would take a while to transfer all the detailed background, so a mod locked it until next Tuesday). So far as I'm aware the older GAF thread is still alive - and so it should be. If it isn't, then we may have a problem.
  • johnson81 18 Apr 2013 23:22:19 391 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @phisheep

    The thread started in Dec 2010 is now locked. Couldn't see any others, I'll have to have another look.

    Edit: Just found the other thread started yesterday. As you said, locked until next Tuesday.

    Edited by johnson81 at 23:23:37 18-04-2013
  • DFawkes 18 Apr 2013 23:26:56 24,053 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Isn't he at risk of drawing attention to all the truly illegal stuff he's done if he pursues this ridiculous course?

    Oh for goodness sake, I've caught my scrotum in my zip again - Margaret Thatcher, 1986

  • itsoldsquarejaw 18 Apr 2013 23:41:54 208 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @phisheep That's fair enough. Good luck with it all.
  • phisheep 19 Apr 2013 11:47:31 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @itsoldsquarejaw : OK, I'll explain my reasoning, just this once. It has been apparent for several years now that Langdell was reading the GAF thread and taking advice from it. Not necessarily the best advice (usually quite the reverse), but advice nonetheless. That caused me some discomfort as I'm sure you can understand. What I was trying to do (perhaps somewhat crassly, but not illegally) was to open up a direct line of communication with Langdell so that we could get the personal stuff off of internet message boards. Actually I offered that line several years back, it's only recently that I backed it up with threats, and maybe that was a mistake. Certainly GAF thinks so, and I am not going to argue it. Not here anyhow. Been a lonely old time chasing this case over the years, and maybe it went to my head a bit. I'll take my punishment.

    Edited by phisheep at 11:50:15 19-04-2013
  • SomaticSense 19 Apr 2013 12:09:59 9,155 posts
    Seen 49 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    For christ sake don't feel guilty about it. You've done as much as anyone with regards to raising awareness of the fraudulent bs Langdell has been pulling.

    Langdell is scum and isn't worth dedicating emotional resources to. Neither is GAF. Fuck 'em.

    I assume the thread was locked because it was impacting on an ongoing court case. I'm far from a legal expert, but surely this suggests that someone important views the invesigations within as potential evidence against him, and have locked it to prevent it from being corrupted by ongoing speculation (similar to how twitter/facebook users have been done for breaching court rules by talking about things that could affect a jury's opinion). Likewise I assume you were banned for similar reasons.

    If this is true (like I say, I know very little about how it all really works, so is just common sense speculation on my part), then I don't think you've done much wrong.

    Edited by SomaticSense at 12:21:47 19-04-2013
  • Retroid Moderator 19 Apr 2013 12:17:30 45,310 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    phisheep wrote:
    Hi guys, are you OK if I make this a temporary home?
    You're our wife now, Dave.

  • agparrot 19 Apr 2013 12:19:09 11,903 posts
    Seen 6 months ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Yup, I'll add my worthless, complete stranger moral support to your work, too, phisheep. I've always read it and found it fascinating, and you've always made the less accessible language of the legal documents much clearer for me.

    It does all seem to be coming to a head now, with the cancellation of the trademarks. As the years of this story have dragged on, the continuing inability of Edge to actually make anything has proven that the worth of holding the trademarks has gone, anyway - there don't seem to be any edge-related products that anyone would defend against other people using the word. That's even before you get into the lengths to which Tim Langdell / Edge seemed to be prepared to go whenever anyone ever used the word Edge for anything at all.

    Perhaps I'd feel differently if I held a trademark that I felt was being infringed, but it it was for stuff I'd done years ago that was no longer relevant, I'd hope that I'd have the ability to look at it impartially.
  • phisheep 19 Apr 2013 12:29:26 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @SomaticSense It's probably much simpler than that. I think the thread has been (very sensibly) locked because there was a danger that it would become more about phisheep being banned than about the actual case. If so, then that's a good call. I do rather hope it gets unlocked when and if I get back so I can do some tidying up.

    GAF is OK. Don't knock it (at least not in my sight). Sure, we have a little temporary disagreement here, but it one helluva a place to be.

    Edited by phisheep at 12:30:08 19-04-2013

    Edited by phisheep at 12:32:41 19-04-2013
  • phisheep 19 Apr 2013 12:44:57 21 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Oh dear. We are yet again at the stage (just like in 2010-ish) where the internet claims everything is all over and gets everything wrong.

    Videogamer.com, for example, reports that this decision clears the way for a Mirror's Edge 2. Bollocks. That way was cleared years ago when EA got the trademark for Mirror's Edge registered.
  • SomaticSense 19 Apr 2013 13:01:32 9,155 posts
    Seen 49 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I think that's just wishful thinking tbh. An excuse to mention a potential Mirror's Edge 2.

    That's a good thing though. Anything with the potential to subliminally implant a thinly disguised 'develop Mirror's Edge 2' into EA execs brains is a definite positive.
  • Page

    of 28 First / Last

Log in or register to reply