
Emilio Lopez's custom Gears of War doll certainly appears professionally made -- enough so that we expressed a desire to see it manufactured and sold at retail. The doll even came in a mock retail box when Emilio presented it to his cousin as a Christmas gift. But, like any other do-it-yourself Munny doll, Emilio's creation is merely a personal homage to Epic's game; not a mischievous business venture. Nevertheless, when Epic and its legal hounds caught wind of the doll, they issued a cease and desist order, claiming Emilio's creation is an unauthorized use of Epic's trademarks. Epic has requested that all trademarks be removed from the doll, packaging, and Emilio's website. Ironically, the logos Emilio used were apparently taken from a fansite pack that Epic had issued. C'mon Epic dudes, please, back off.
[Thanks, Hugbees]














(Page 1) Reader Comments
"Actionable' for 'unfair competition...' He only made ONE!
Epic ripped off Tom of Finland for the art direction on their 'manly men' anyway
Yes, EPIC, I was JOKING with that, don't SUE ME
Reply
Reply
Reply
Yah probably not. Epic will most likely make a cheap ass toy.... for a cheap ass game.
Reply
Reply
Reply
1 ... billion *pinky to mouth*
Reply
Cliffy B works at Epic. Epic isn't one dude. Cliffy didn't write the letter.
This is probably a misunderstanding on Epic's part. They probably thought for whatever reason that this thing was looking to become a product.
It is perfectly legal to make something for personal use that rips off a copyright or trademark. You basically just can't provide it to others.
Reply
Reply
Considering the pics are still up on the website passed the requested date, I wouldn't be surprised if the guy gets sued.
Let the lesson be learned, if you are going to use the trademarks of a money-hungry company for your own, don't post evidence on the internet!
Reply
Reply
It is perfectly legal to make something for personal use that rips off a copyright or trademark. You basically just can't provide it to others. "
Wow, I can totally understand how Epic could be confused. After all, the website merely stated what it was, that there was only one, and that it was intended solely as a fanart gift. Obviously there was nefarious deeding going on and Epic is completely within their rights to ignore all text on the site and release the hounds.
Reply
Reply
Do lawyers for big companies do these types of things on their own? If so then Epic and others ought to have them notify company bigwigs first before firing C&Ds. A little examination of the site clearly shows that this isn't a copyright threat.
That said, this is also the fault of bad laws that force IP owners to act like rabid dogs lest they lose their properties.
Reply
Reply
This was a piece of artwork, nothing wrong with that.
Reply
Reply
Reply
So by the same token, Lucasarts should totally have sued the shit out of those clowns who dress up in homemade Stormtrooper costumes at comicons, instead of giving them props by putting them in one of their games, huh? I mean, they may have been in the legal right to do so, but they wisely realized that the ____ Brigade (I forget what they're called) weren't doing anything to hurt or profit from the Star Wars brand, and left them alone.
Man, I can't believe I just sided with George Lucas on something...
Reply
Reply
If they didn't enforce their trademark rights in this case, they would weaken their ability to contest future trademark violations which might be more serious.
Yes, that sucks. But it's the law.
Reply
Here's a link to more pics of the Munny and discussion about it.
http://forums.kidrobot.com/viewtopic.php?p=720144#720144
Reply
Reply
Did these "homemade Stormtrooper costumes" have the word LucasArts on them? Did they have George Lucas's signature on them? Do you understand what a trademark is?
#21, Tony, is right about trademark enforcement. Emilio obviously doesn't own the right to display the Gears of War logo on his doll and post it up on the net.
Even if Epic sues, I agree they don't have much of a case. There was no monetary exchange and there's little chance of confusion (the main component of a trademark violation case) between this doll and site and official Gears of War merchandise.
Reply
If I was that guy, I would tell epic to blow me and try and sue. Most likely its just some guy living with his parents anyway, and does not actually own anything.
Reply
Reply
He's a professional artist who has done work for Marvel Comics. He's also done colorwork for several animated shows. Which is probably why he's fighting this. After all, if this isn't allowed, suddenly all of fandom takes a huge hit and do you even realize how many artist got inspired and emulated other characters? Nobody starts their art education with "This is Draco, the Immortal." It's always "This is Batman/Wolverine/Spawn."
Reply
Reply
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure everything he's done falls under the "fair use" rules we have here in the US, which describe the conditions under which copyrighted material can be used without the copyright holder's permission. Posting pics on the internet doesn't violate these laws; he's not trying to sell anything, he doesn't even have adsense or any other kind of advertisement on the site, so really throwing those pics online is only costing him money. Please explain, how he's not fully protected by fair use? And please brush up on the fair use laws before replying, I just did ;)
Reply
Why, for these lawers aren't just doing their job. They're veritable HEROES, standing up to the tyranny of some artist trying to give his cousin a personalized gift.
Reply
Reply
READ #21 BY TONY!
It's the only post so far that shows comprehension.
No one is trying to sue anyone! This is a standard C&D that has to go out for everyday protection. The lawyer is not clueless, there is no intention of follow-through. There is also no reason to be angry at Epic for having to do their job - If they don't make an appearance to protect the trademark in this case, it could cost them in an actual case of trademark infringement.
For Christ's sake, people, think. It's not that difficult.
/rant
Reply
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure everything he's done falls under the "fair use" rules we have here in the US, which describe the conditions under which copyrighted material can be used without the copyright holder's permission. Posting pics on the internet doesn't violate these laws; he's not trying to sell anything, he doesn't even have adsense or any other kind of advertisement on the site, so really throwing those pics online is only costing him money. Please explain, how he's not fully protected by fair use? And please brush up on the fair use laws before replying, I just did ;)
Reply
Reply
In trademark law, if I own a trademark but I don't enforce infringement of it, even in minor cases, then I can lose the right to enforce it later on. A more serious violator might be able to argue in court that because I didn't act on earlier violations I have abandoned my trademark or it has become generic. That's not a certainty, and a court might rule in my favor anyway, but any good lawyer would advise me that it's prudent to avoid it becoming an issue in the first place.
That's all that's happening here. I'm sure their motivation isn't to squash the little guy, and you rightly point out that there's little in the way of actual damages to go after here, but they have to take prudent steps to protect their property for the future.
Reply
Reply
http://www.publaw.com/fairusetrade.html
Reply
Reply
Four Factors to Determine Fair Use
1) the purpose and character of the use
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
3) the amount and ‘substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole’
4) the effects on the potential market for the copyrighted work
However, this is TRADEMARK law, not copyright. The picture of the box and the pictures of the doll with the "Gears of War" logo in the bottom is the actionable violation, not the doll itself.
BTW, I take the Law School Admissions Test in a few months. ;)
Reply
"Those factors are:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
what amount and proportion of the whole work was taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."
Thanks for playing...
Reply
the guy who made this toy is the cousin to the #1 fanboy who got that tattoo on his arm....i know him in real life and i was there when he got his tattoo....the guy is freakin loony!....adam if you're reading this....YOU ARE ONE FREAKIN LOONY BASTARD
Reply
Hmmm...
Maybe it was...
http://www.warholprints.com/portfolio/Campbell.Soup.I.html
Reply
Thanks your tight assedness I won't be buying unreal III
me
Reply
Reply
Reply
"I need to make a xerox copy" - even if it's not a Xerox machine
"Grab me a kleenex" - maybe it's a generic tissue?
This is standard trademark law stuff.
Reply
That's more a result of people calling everything of the same type by that name. This is a totally different situation. I want to see an example where an homage/fanart resulted in a lost trademark
Reply
Here's what you are talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark
This doll would have the exact opposite effect as it doesn't make it generic at all. It's not being applied to a different game.
Reply
Reply
Man, don't these guys have anything better to do? If they really wanted the rights to the doll they could have just bought them.
Reply