Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@M/M: I'm very good at those things I choose to do. I don't want to be a minis sculptor because I don't have any passion for it. Whether or not I'm a better sculptor is simply meaningless dig by you at me, "passive-aggressive" or not. If you want to throw stones, how about you step out of that glass house, first?

And point in fact, he chose a hobby that endangered his livelihood. That shows questionable judgment, regardless of how lucky he is to still be alive, and still have a hand to use.

Most livelihoods are endangered by the loss of a hand, I work in a laboratory and would find it pretty hard going with only one arm. Does that mean I should avoid any hobby or activity that has the chance of loosing me an arm even by a freak accident? You'd never go out of the house if you thought like this. It wasn't like he was injured in some extreme sport, it was a historical reinactment event that went wrong. Jeeze, I'm quite suprised by how judgemental some people are being.

Run away, Run AWAY!!!

@HAT: millions of people show you can go outside without losing an arm or hand every single day. Those odds are low.

Blowing off a hand playing with amateur-hour explosives? Comparing with fireworks "accidents", it's no surprise.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@HAT: millions of people show you can go outside without losing an arm or hand every single day. Those odds are low.

Blowing off a hand playing with amateur-hour explosives? Comparing with fireworks "accidents", it's no surprise.

Accidents happen to professionals too. You have no idea as to thier level of proficiency- you simply assume amateur because something bad happened. Again, thats flawed logic.


On topic- I saw a conversion of the LoTR Balrog that had clear resin wings and fiber optic inlays that were lighted, so it sparkled/flickered liek it was on fire. I cant seem to find any links to it though- anyone have its youtube link still?

beeek.

my favourite would have to be my own model (put on when it's painted) which I entered in a small-scale conversion type thing.

a furiso dreadnought ripping apart an eldar

@M/M: I make no such assumption, although you're making an ass of yourself by assuming I'm assuming.

I do know that these aren't professional re-enactor blackpowder specialists out there. Remember - professional means that they actually do it for a living. That's why it's a hobby.

The other thing is that, while pros do have accidents, the simple fact of doing things more times means that they get better and *smarter* at it. That's why I'm OK to ride the ride at Disneyland, running 365 days/yr (risking a freak accident), instead of the traveling holiday carny ride run misc weekends each month (with much more likely accidents to occur).

Yes, thats right, argue, ARGUE! It will totally make up for your lack of life outside the internet! Keep it up!

alexwars1 wrote:Yes, thats right, argue, ARGUE! It will totally make up for your lack of life outside the internet! Keep it up!

Or we could, you know, lay off the arguing over whether or not miniature designers are entitled to have other hobbies and return to the actual topic...

The entire beastmen army of how terrible they are!

insaniak wrote:

alexwars1 wrote:Yes, thats right, argue, ARGUE! It will totally make up for your lack of life outside the internet! Keep it up!

Or we could, you know, lay off the arguing over whether or not miniature designers are entitled to have other hobbies and return to the actual topic...

or we could, you know, let them argue and not do anything. that could be fun.

children of filth wrote:

insaniak wrote:

alexwars1 wrote:Yes, thats right, argue, ARGUE! It will totally make up for your lack of life outside the internet! Keep it up!

Or we could, you know, lay off the arguing over whether or not miniature designers are entitled to have other hobbies and return to the actual topic...

or we could, you know, let them argue and not do anything. that could be fun.

no, not really. it gets Old really quick and usually just sidetracks the whole thread.....

OT, i have to vote for the beastmen.

This model made me go 0_0 in a good way.

They have a license for that Predator model, right?

Because there's no way it could be anything but.

Darth Bob wrote:

This model made me go 0_0 in a good way.

Man, that makes me want to paint up some Catachans...and play a specialized scenario for the "Hurn".

DEff Dredd and Killa Kans. Now in plastic and precisely 10041% more awesome and stompy than before!

Orkestra wrote:They have a license for that Predator model, right?

Because there's no way it could be anything but.

Nope because it's not a Predator model. It's a "Hurn".

Darth Bob wrote:

Orkestra wrote:They have a license for that Predator model, right?

Because there's no way it could be anything but.

Nope because it's not a Predator model. It's a "Hurn".

Riiight...

And if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you.
____

Still, nice Predator model!

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:

Orkestra wrote:They have a license for that Predator model, right?

Because there's no way it could be anything but.

Nope because it's not a Predator model. It's a "Hurn".

Riiight...

And if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you.
____

Still, nice Predator model!

Yep, I believe it's a Hurn and not a Predator. After all, that's what the seller and creator of the model says it is, so that's what it is.

Just like this Balor is absolutely not a Balrog!


Looks just like a Balrog, doens't it. And yet a slight variation in the name means it's not, so Tolkein and co. can suck it!

Actually, no it doesn't. A Balrog is a flamey rocky monster, whereas the Balor is a classic fleshy demon.

See?




Non-infringing.


There are multiple possible interpretations of "a bat-winged demon with a sword of flame", and the differences between the two are why the Balor isn't a Balrog.

Of course, it's a Hurn. The other alien who has a mouth with mandibles attached to flaps that open out, a bald top of the head, dreadlocks, scattered pieces of armour, wrist blades with two blades per wrist, a telescoping spear weapon, an input panel on the lower arm and a shoulder mounted cannon. Who also likes collecting skulls.

WIN!
-_-
I approve of this message!

JohnHwangDD wrote:Actually, no it doesn't. A Balrog is a flamey rocky monster, whereas the Balor is a classic fleshy demon.

See?




Non-infringing.


There are multiple possible interpretations of "a bat-winged demon with a sword of flame", and the differences between the two are why the Balor isn't a Balrog.

This makes me sad. Have you even read the books? The Balrog was never described as a "flamey rocky monster" it was described as a demon of shadow and flame, wielding a flaming whip and sword. The Balrog that Peter Jackson did is not the Balrog that Tolkein described. This rendition of the Balrog came out long after the inception of the Balor.
Also, it's a well known fact that the Balor of dungeons and dragons was originally called a Balrog; but when Tolkein and Co. heard about it they told them to change it. So they took the easy way out and rather than redesigning the creature, they just changed the name to Balor. Does it infringe? No, it does not. Is it an obvious ripoff of the Balrog, of course it is.


You guys seem to think that I am trying to deny that this model is an obvious Predator ripoff. I'm not daft, of course it is. My only point is that 20th Century Fox can't do jack about it because Heresy Miniatures hasn't recognized it as a property of 20th Century Fox.

If they had released this model as "Predator Headtaker" then Fox would have every right to jump all over them because they have rights to the term "Predator".

Orkestra wrote:Of course, it's a Hurn. The other alien who has a mouth with mandibles attached to flaps that open out, a bald top of the head, dreadlocks, scattered pieces of armour, wrist blades with two blades per wrist, a telescoping spear weapon, an input panel on the lower arm and a shoulder mounted cannon. Who also likes collecting skulls.

You know what the great thing is? That's exactly what Heresy can say. All they have to do is not mention the "P" word and they're safe.

Fair enough.

And really, I think that overall I prefer having what looks like a cool... 'Hurn'... rather than no 'Hurn' at all. I was just a little bit shocked at how exact of a replica it was.

Maybe I should take the foot out of my mouth and go buy a bunch to give to my friends (we're huge Alien/Predator/AVP fans. We regularly get together and watch all 8 movies (Alien, Predator, Aliens, AVP, Aliens III, Predator 2, Alien Resurrection, AVP:R) in a row)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In any case, I'm proud to say that that model is one ugly motherfether.

Orkestra wrote:Fair enough.

And really, I think that overall I prefer having what looks like a cool... 'Hurn'... rather than no 'Hurn' at all. I was just a little bit shocked at how exact of a replica it was.

Maybe I should take the foot out of my mouth and go buy a bunch to give to my friends (we're huge Alien/Predator/AVP fans. We regularly get together and watch all 8 movies (Alien, Predator, Aliens, AVP, Aliens III, Predator 2, Alien Resurrection, AVP:R) in a row)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In any case, I'm proud to say that that model is one ugly motherfether.

I do that once a month too! Good to see theres other fans of the series out there! I usually watch them in Canon order though (Predator, Predator 2, AVP, AVPR, ALIEN, ALIENS, ALIEN3, ALIEN:RESURRECTION). Thought sometimes I skip A:R...I bloody hate where they took the series after the third installment. They should have ended the Ripley storyline after the 3rd, and took the series in a different direction, rather than continuing with Ripley.

Here's to hoping Predators and the Alien prequel are any good (my hopes are high for the Alien prequel, but with the director of "Spy Kids" doing Predators...I don't know).

Darth Bob wrote:Here's to hoping Predators and the Alien prequel are any good (my hopes are high for the Alien prequel, but with the director of "Spy Kids" doing Predators...I don't know).

What? argh!

And with the hurn, looks like someone is a cheap bastard who likes to steal the creative works of other people and change the name so they dont get sued it is w....

See, the problem that I have with that order is that, for me, it just doesn't work to consider the movies actually involved in each other's storylines. They're great series on their own, and AVP is bad-ass, but that's why it exists - to be cool, not to further the story. Hence why we watch them in the order we do.

When AVP comes out we'll have to play online.

Orkestra wrote:
When AVP comes out we'll have to play online.

Sounds awesome! 7 Days to go!

If they were gonna get sued, they would have been already. Let's see...

You've got Dwarf Va'durr

Complete with comment of "I wonder why everyone paints him black"

The trio of Captain Nathan, Mechanic Haylee, and Rev Shepard




Even the arch rivals Dr Hugh and Dr Masterson

The new Killa Kans make me go hiiiiiiiigh by just looking at them

Darth Bob wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Actually, no it doesn't. A Balrog is a flamey rocky monster, whereas the Balor is a classic fleshy demon.

Non-infringing.

There are multiple possible interpretations of "a bat-winged demon with a sword of flame", and the differences between the two are why the Balor isn't a Balrog.

Have you even read the books? The Balrog was never described as a "flamey rocky monster"

This rendition of the Balrog came out long after the inception of the Balor.

Also, it's a well known fact that the Balor of dungeons and dragons was originally called a Balrog; but when Tolkein and Co. heard about it they told them to change it. So they took the easy way out and rather than redesigning the creature, they just changed the name to Balor. Does it infringe? No,

You guys seem to think that I am trying to deny that this model is an obvious Predator ripoff. I'm not daft, of course it is. My only point is that 20th Century Fox can't do jack about it because Heresy Miniatures hasn't recognized it as a property of 20th Century Fox.

If they had released this model as "Predator Headtaker" then Fox would have every right to jump all over them because they have rights to the term "Predator".

Yes I've read the books. Similarion, too. However, the point you're oblivious to is that translating a text description into sculpture is pretty much guaranteed to be non-infringing as long as you don't steal the copyrighted name. I can sculpt a million demons and NONE of them will ever infringe Tolkein as long as I refrain from calling any of them a "Balrog".

Now copying one visual design, that's IP infringement. Which is why the Jackson Balrog *must* look different from the D&D Balor.

D&D stealing JRRT's "Balrpg" is clear IP infringement, and a slam dunk for JRRT, so of course DnD changes.

You seem to think that Fox can only sue over named items. That is false. If it is a true knock-off, with no new features (as here), then Fox would easily win. It's why Heresy is cagey about "events outside their control". Heresy knows they're infringing, and will have to shut down as soon as Fox gets word. Personally, I hope Fox sues Heresy for every penny collected.