top of page
Writer's pictureJim Gamer

To Copyright or Not to Copyright "Meeple"

In the world of board games, one word remains ubiquitous, "meeple." Enthusiasts and casual gamers alike are familiar with these iconic little wooden and plastic figures. Bringing fun to our table tops. But the question that looms over this innocent term is whether it should be allowed to be owned by one ne person or company. Or is it so widely used now, it is just part of the lexicon?

To Copyright or Not to Copyright "Meeple"

A recent crowd funded game called Meeple Inc by UK game publisher Cogito Ergo Meeple, (who made the excellent Solar 175), successfully funded but then had a late and mysterious change.


In May of 2024 the publisher announced that it was going to change the name of the game to Tabletop Inc and their own name to Cotswold Games. You can check this out here.


Apparently, they had received a letter on behalf of publisher Hans Im Glueck that requested for the project to be removed from the crowd funding website because they owned the rights to the word "Meeple". Now this is not anyone being sued or threatened. It was a simple "cease and desist" which Costwold Games seemed more than happy to do. But should this be allowed?


The Origin of Meeple


Before we dive into the debate, let's take a step back to understand the origins of the term "meeple." Coined by Alison Hansel during a game of Carcassonne, published by Hans Im Glueck, "meeple" is a combination of "my" and "people." These small, wooden figures have become synonymous with modern board gaming and the word is now used by everyone to describe little wooden or plastic humanoid characters seen in board games. The term is common in peoples Instagram handles, rule books for other games, and multiple T-Shirts and other merchandise around the board game community.


The Case for Trademarking "Meeple"


Proponents of copyrighting "meeple" argue that it is essential to protect the intellectual property associated with the term. By trademarking "meeple," creators can safeguard their brand identity and prevent unauthorised use of the term in the board gaming industry. This move could also potentially lead to licensing opportunities and financial benefits for the original creators of "meeple." In short, they created it, they own it. Right?


The Case Against


On the other side of the debate are those who believe that "meeple" should remain in the public domain. Advocates for keeping the term free from licensing restrictions argue that "meeple" has evolved into a generic term used widely across the board gaming community. Much like Dice, Board, and Cube. Could you trademark those words too?!


Attempting to restrict such a common term could stifle creativity and innovation within the industry, limiting the freedom of game designers to use a term that has become deeply ingrained in the board gaming language. As designer of Tabletop Inc said on the crowdfunding page, “we thought Meeples belonged to all board gamers, it appears they don’t. We of course have zero interest in using anyone else’s IP so we think the best option is to do as they ask."


The Verdict: A Confident Stand


As we navigate through the complexities of the "meeple" debate, it is crucial to consider the implications of both sides. While protecting intellectual property is essential, we must also recognise the cultural significance and communal nature of board gaming. Therefore, in our own stance here at WBG, we assert that "meeple" should not be restricted in any way. Instead, let it remain a symbol of creativity, community, and shared love for table top games.

By upholding the spirit of inclusivity and collaboration that defines the board gaming community, we can embrace the term "meeple" as a symbol of unity and joy in gaming. Let's continue to roll the dice, move the pieces, and celebrate the vibrant world of board games together, one meeple at a time.

97 views2 comments

Recent Posts

See All

2 comentarios


Angel F.
Angel F.
19 jun

Very well written. I do see an argument for separating the term “meeple” from the shape of Carcassonne meeples (originally called followers). I’d have no qualms if Hans im Glück had chosen to trademark their unique shape, though I do believe they should have done it more than a decade ago. I wholly disagree with them trademarking a term that originated in the board game community and should continue to belong to the community.

Me gusta
Contestando a

agreed, the timing of this certainly feels strange. Why now, after all these years, start doing this and adding these restrictions? What is the motivation?

Me gusta
bottom of page