Listening to the podcast but wanted to comment here - on the meeple trademark the comments here are inaccurate. A fan on a bgg forum coined the term Meeple, in relation to Carcassonne Meeples, but it was not the designer or anyone at HiG that coined it. HiG even state this themselves on their website. They didn’t use the term meeple at all until recently and instead called them followers.
All true… but in addition, HiG *owns* the trademark in the EU. They own it, and therefore can exclusively use it. Having said that there is no proof that they sent the C&D to the company, but there is no other entity that can tell someone to not use the mark, so by inferance, HiG must have send the C&D to stop using it. Make sure you listen to #322, as we have a special announcement at the END of the show with regard to the Meeple(tm) trademark… :)
Shall do - and yes they obv sent the C&D and they do own the TM but the question is how that was justified: the shape, fine, but giving them the rights to the word Meeple feels like it should be challenged as it’s not theirs to claim. The question is whether the community can challenge the TM, or do we simply need to stop playing or buying HiG and make our feelings known until they give it up ;-)
@@chrisingold4590 A couple of things: It is now confirmed that HiG sent the C&D, which as I said was the only possibility. Board Games Insider is now in direct communication with the CEO. We are asking questions. I am not a lawyer, and if I was a lawyer, I am not your lawyer - I just love saying that :) - but I don’t think that “the board game community” can challenge the mark. Only organizations can challenge the mark, and this usually comes from those that want to use the mark or are currently using the mark. We’ll have a LOT MORE to say about this on episode #323, which will drop on June 19. #322 is already recorded, drops on June 12, and as I mentioned to you already, there is a special “Trademark related announcement” at the end of that episode. :)
Shall listen out! No 100% a ‘community’ can’t challenge a trademark legally as it’s not a legal entity. It can engage in some consumer sentiment though and make its feelings known, and impact the brand. That’s cheaper and I imagine more powerful :-)
@@chrisingold4590 Yes, you can. I do think that we wait for a public statement by HiG, not to mention them answering the questions that I have posed to them, before the “Pitchforks & Torches” come out. Everyone should be given a benefit of the doubt, IMHO, and then we take it from there. At least this is how I will handle it. I very much look forward to more discussions of this on upcoming episodes! THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
Listening to the podcast but wanted to comment here - on the meeple trademark the comments here are inaccurate. A fan on a bgg forum coined the term Meeple, in relation to Carcassonne Meeples, but it was not the designer or anyone at HiG that coined it. HiG even state this themselves on their website. They didn’t use the term meeple at all until recently and instead called them followers.
All true… but in addition, HiG *owns* the trademark in the EU. They own it, and therefore can exclusively use it. Having said that there is no proof that they sent the C&D to the company, but there is no other entity that can tell someone to not use the mark, so by inferance, HiG must have send the C&D to stop using it.
Make sure you listen to #322, as we have a special announcement at the END of the show with regard to the Meeple(tm) trademark… :)
Shall do - and yes they obv sent the C&D and they do own the TM but the question is how that was justified: the shape, fine, but giving them the rights to the word Meeple feels like it should be challenged as it’s not theirs to claim.
The question is whether the community can challenge the TM, or do we simply need to stop playing or buying HiG and make our feelings known until they give it up ;-)
@@chrisingold4590 A couple of things:
It is now confirmed that HiG sent the C&D, which as I said was the only possibility.
Board Games Insider is now in direct communication with the CEO. We are asking questions.
I am not a lawyer, and if I was a lawyer, I am not your lawyer - I just love saying that :) - but I don’t think that “the board game community” can challenge the mark. Only organizations can challenge the mark, and this usually comes from those that want to use the mark or are currently using the mark.
We’ll have a LOT MORE to say about this on episode #323, which will drop on June 19. #322 is already recorded, drops on June 12, and as I mentioned to you already, there is a special “Trademark related announcement” at the end of that episode. :)
Shall listen out! No 100% a ‘community’ can’t challenge a trademark legally as it’s not a legal entity. It can engage in some consumer sentiment though and make its feelings known, and impact the brand. That’s cheaper and I imagine more powerful :-)
@@chrisingold4590 Yes, you can. I do think that we wait for a public statement by HiG, not to mention them answering the questions that I have posed to them, before the “Pitchforks & Torches” come out. Everyone should be given a benefit of the doubt, IMHO, and then we take it from there. At least this is how I will handle it. I very much look forward to more discussions of this on upcoming episodes! THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
My wife and I use real chocolates when we play Chocolate Factory. Once the chocolates are turned in to fulfill orders, we eat them! - Robert Manore
I love it!!! Thanks for your support, Robert!