[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I think you missed my point. There are many reasons to have a trademark besides enforcing it. There are also many reasons why a company may let some uses of a trademark slip by (like, here, for example where fumbbl's use of the Blood Bowl mark led to increased exposure and likely more sales and fumbbl wasn't making any money off the mark themselves).

The legal issue I was referring to is that let's say some other company or group (not fumbbl) started to use the trademark and Games Workshop went to enforce it and the company refused and Games Workshop took them to trial. I believe the offending company could make a strong legal argument that by not enforcing the mark (i.e., allowing fumbbl to use it so blatantly) that Games Workshop has, in essence, abandonded any claims to it and therefore it can be used by anyone.

I am not a trademark lawyer, but I think that argument can be made and while not iron-clad it certainly could complicate future enforcement actions by Games Workshop.

this is my understanding of it