Yesterday's email, listed in the reply-to as from the spoofed "Concerned_Members_of_the_IGDA@IGDA.org" address, and was signed "Concerned Members of the IGDA." It documented Langdell's history of suing and harassing game developers - his latest target is Mobigames - who use the word "Edge" anywhere in their products, a word he trademarked some two decades ago. The email also criticized Langdell for making "gross misrepresentations" of both the IGDA's influence and his position on its board.

It concluded by asking recipients to vote in a petition held at a non-IGDA site. The link was a petition brought up last July on the same subject. Some in the IGDA are trying to find a way to get the organization at large to officially consider Langdell's removal from the board.

This morning, the IGDA emailed its members to distance itself from the e-mail and the movement behind it.

Dear Members,

Recently an email went out that appeared to have originated from IGDA. The return address of this email appeared as: "Concerned_Members_of_the_IGDA@IGDA.org."

That email address was spoofed and the communication was not an official IGDA communication. We are currently reviewing the methods by which it was sent to see if this was sent out by people ignorant of proper use of the IGDA website or if there was malicious actions involved. We are also reviewing the method by which your email addresses were obtained and if that was done ethically or not. It is my hope that this was done by someone simply overzealous about their cause and not for destructive reasons.

Please be aware IGDA was not responsible for this email and does not have anything to do with the content or the links provided. You should read and use such links at your own risk.

We will investigate this issue and provide you with information on our findings as they are confirmed.

Thank you,

Joshua Caulfield
Executive Director
IGDA

I emailed the petition's creator, IGDA member Michael Lubker, to ask if the mailing was his doing. Lubker said he was not involved. Asked if this dented the anti-Langdell movement's credibility within the IGDA, Lubker said:

I am not worried that credibility or ability has been affected, if anything there have been more posts about it since the IGDA's response. However, I do feel that the IGDA is discrediting its members right to communicate freely with each other about the status of the organization.

According to the IGDA's bylaws, 10 percent of the membership can force an association-wide vote on such a question. Of course, that would presumably need to be done through some official means. And the chances of it recognizing the legitimacy of a third-party petition site definitely went down after today.

We've asked for comment from both Langdell and the IGDA. If they wish to make any, we'll update it here. Meantime, for an excellent read on Langdell's history, see this piece by Eurogamer (thanks, Morris).

Update: Tim Langdell has released a statement comprehensively defending himself in the Mobigame matter, and against other accusations leveled at him in the gaming press.

This is a little more meaningful than your average ranting internet petition. It was begun by International Game Developers Association member Michael Lubker, and is only taking signatures from IGDA members. Lubker, like many others, is repulsed by Langdell's campaign of harassment against anyone who produces a game - something Langdell has not done in 15 years - whose title or branding somehow invokes the unique word he trademarked, which is "Edge."

We've chronicled his shenanigans before, as recently as this past weekend. These aren't isolated incidents, folks. Just now he's gotten Mobigames' Edge, which brought this mess back into the public consciousness in May, re-yanked from the iTunes App store. Moreover, Langdell has alleged that Edge is somehow an infringement on his own game of 1986, something called Bobby Bearing, which is itself a ripoff of Marble Madness.

Back to the IGDA: In his argument, Corvus cites the relevant portion of the bylaws in his argument for Langdell's removal. Basically, they need 10 percent of the membership to demand a vote on the removal of Langdell from the board of directors. I've gotten word that this movement was afoot already, but the anti-Langdell side was having difficulty getting a membership mailing list from the IGDA. I'm not sure what the leadership's posture would be toward a petition hosted on a third-party site, whose only means of verification is a self-entered membership number.

But if anything, it continues to force the issue on Langdell's obnoxious behavior and the embarrassing association the IGDA has with this man. More than a few others have told me no one really paid any attention to the voting on the board membership in the past; if nothing else, maybe people will now.

Update: From Cult of Mac's Craig Grannell comes word that Mobigames' Papazian has talked with Bobby Bearing's actual developers, Robert and Trevor Figgins, and they claim they retain the rights to the game. Langdell, they assert, was just the publisher. Further, those two are said to believe that Mobigames' Edge is not a game similar to Bobby Bearing. If this is true, it makes Langdell's claim even more despicable, although we are talking about a contract they had (if any) more than 20 years ago, at a time when such things were a lot less formal than they are now.

IGDA Forums - Call for the Removal of Tim Langdell [IGDA]

In case you missed our discussion of Langdell's history on May 30, he's a onetime developer whose studio, Edge Games, was founded in the 1980s but hasn't produced an actual game in 15 years. Its principal output seems to be the filing of trademark claims against developers unfortunate enough to use the word "edge" in a game title, in any form, without consulting him. Mobigames' EDGE was the latest victim, being removed from the iTunes store while they negotiated with Langdell. (EDGE is now back up on the store).

Sure, someone with registered trademarks has every right to protect it - especially if not defending it constitutes abandonment of the mark. That doesn't mean Langdell's behavior here doesn't depict him as a cretinous parasite. Edge of Twilight, a steampunk hack-n-slasher, has been discussed for more than two years. I guess now, as it looks like it might see a release for PC, PS3 and 360 this year. Langdell wants a cut of the action. Remember, this is a guy who bills himself as a cofounder of the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences, and who is in fact on the board of the International Game Developers Association.

You can see the PTO filing here. Edge of Twilight is being published by SouthPeak Games. Perhaps Langdell is doing something similar to the ridiculous "MIRRORS, a game by EDGE" troll his site put up - presumably to bait Electronic Arts into suing him so he could countersue back on the trademark claim to the word.

And while the stylized E on Edge of Twilight's logo might seem similar to other marks Langdell has claimed, his application is claiming a mark that "consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font, style, size, or color." In other words, just the words themselves, not any stylized version of the word "edge."

I don't know the law; I don't pretend to. But I think it's fair to say his "studio's" major contribution to games development is only to force actual developers to give him money if they think about using a word that dates back to the 12th century. I've emailed the address listed on the PTO filing, in case he wants to comment. Don't hold your breath.

Update: On July 23, the CEO of Fuzzyeyes released this statement:

"Edge of Twilight proceeds with title unchanged"

FUZZYEYES approached EDGE Games several months ago, with the intent to resolve any issues arising out of both companies use of the mark "EDGE." Fuzzyeyes, developer of the game titled "Edge of Twilight," sought to address any potential trademark conflicts. Through amicable negotiations, Fuzzyeyes and Edge Games have arrived at a satisfactory arrangement that addresses the concerns of both parties. This arrangement allows the highly anticipated Edge of Twilight to proceed with its title unchanged, and without infringement on any trademarks held by Edge Games.

Lu, Wei-Yao
CEO of FUZZYEYES

US Serial No: 77748665 [US Patent and Trademark Office, thanks to reader Anonymous]
Edge of Twilight [Site]

You may recall EDGE, Mobigames' outstanding and award-winning title for the iPhone and iPod Touch. It has been removed from the U.S. and U.K. Apple Store because of a trademark claim made by Tim Langdell, who created value-bin studio EDGE Games about a hundred years ago and claims to have made 180 games, but is better known for bullying actual game makers who use the word "edge" in any form.

Says Mobigame's David Papazian (to Fingergaming): "If you already asked why Soul Edge (the Namco game) was called Soul Blade and later Soulcalibur in the US, you have your answer."

Papazian says he is in "negotiations" with Langdell, who claims to own the worldwide trademark to all things EDGE. Sure it may be a cheap shot to denigrate EDGE Games "best known" efforts - "Garfield: Big Fat Hairy Deal" and "Snoopy: The Case of the Missing Blanket." But when the company's most recent game was in 1994, its claim to be a games developer is fast losing credibility, if it's not gone already.

It beggars the imagination that a judge would find brand confusion here, in the title of a mobile game produced in 2009 versus the name of a company that hasn't done shit in 15 years except squat on a very common word. You want to see brand confusion? You want trademark infringement? How about this, from EDGE Games' web site itself:

If I had the email address of Electronic Arts' legal division I'd send them that. Update: The more I think about it, Langdell probably pulled this trademark claim nonsense with Electronic Arts, who laughed at him, and/or he put up that flash video to thumb his nose at them in hopes they would sue him, so he could get the claim in front of a judge that way, rather than as the plaintiff. That's probably also why the Edge logo rips off Edge Magazine. This is all pure speculation on my part.

Another thing that some might find interesting: He's a GDC speaker! Actually, he participated in roundtables, which usually involve groups of three, not a single speaker and are quite a different thing from lectures. But at GDC he's held forth on topics such as: "Who Controls a Game's IP and Who Reaps the Financial Benefit?" Tim Langdell does! Especially if it's your game. He also claims to have cofounded the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences. At least that's according to an edit his wife made to the AIAS' Wikipedia entry about a year ago. Citation, uh, needed.

He is, however, a member of the board of directors of the International Game Developers Association. I wonder what the IGDA and the AIAS have to say about their association with someone who no longer, in fact, creates any games - except for ripping off the name of a well known release - and engages in such disgusting harassment of those who do.

Tim Langdell: The EDGE of Insanity? [The Independent Gaming Source]

Darren Gold of charity Drugsline said: “Anything using drug-dealing as entertainment is sending out the wrong message. “Glamorisation doesn’t help our work trying to educate kids of the dangers of substance misuse.”

See? Now that's two things parents should be doing but don't in one statement - educating their children about drugs and keeping them from playing mature video games. I do like the little addition that The Sun reporter slipped in at the end though. "Experts predict the final edition is unlikely to feature explicit criminality. " "Experts" have apparently never played a Grand Theft Auto title.

Fury Over Drug Deal Vid Game [The Sun via GamePolitics]

Hit the jump for the portly gentleman's pratfall and thank him for taking one for the team.

Human Tetris [TetrisConcept, Thanks Nicholas!]