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.

You can enter into a contract by performance of the proposed conditions.

I don't remember if consideration has to be exchanged like money. I remember it doesn't have to be anything significant.

In other words, I offer to spend the time to read your submission and use it as my own. You accept the offer by sending in a submission. Consideration has been given. The contract conditions have been fulfilled.

It needs a bit of research to come up with a case which would support it.

insaniak wrote:

NAVARRO wrote: how many will not buy elsewere and buy instead some GW warhammer fantasy range dwarf regiment box and some GW GS blister and GW sculpting tool and GW brushes to just make that character?

I'm sure that some will. I'm equally sure that whoever decided that removing the characters from the game was an appropriate response realises that some players will.

What they need to consider is how that balances out against the number of people who will just buy the ready-to-go miniature from company 'X' instead. If they feel that a larger proportion of players are going to do that, then they're better off just not including that option in the book.

This reduces the number of models that people are going to look elsewhere for, because it returns them to a position where everything required is available straight from GW.


Again, not saying that I agree that it's the best course of action.

Sure mate neither I'm saying you consider these actions the best option, we are just chatting a bit trying to figure out some sense in all this.

The problem concerning the GW judgement towards who buys here or who goes buy elsewere is that it cant be measured because:
a) You dont know competition balance sheets
b) Why someone buys GW GS or models to convert cannot be directly linked to BB... so GW as no way of knowing the actual numbers of who buys to convert specially for BB

This is another reason why I consider this action not in their best interests... They cant establish casuality on BB starplayers listings = people buy elsewere.

This may be off-topic, but does anyone else find it insane you can copyright a common word(s)? Imagery and physical material I understand, but a series of words? Unique Nouns should be copyrightable, but two common words in sequence? I'm picturing the GW legal team assassinating some poor up-and-coming game creator for having an item called Blood Bowl in his online game. I'm imagining him having to rename the necromancer's Blood Bowl to something else... Soul Well? what if that's copyrighted too...

*sigh*

You can't copyright a common word or phrase.

You can trademark it for specific purposes.

Blood Bowl has been trademarked as the name of a fantasy American football game.

It has not been trademarked as the name of a restaurant chain, or a specialist S&M pottery company.

Gandair wrote:This may be off-topic, but does anyone else find it insane you can copyright a common word(s)? Imagery and physical material I understand, but a series of words? Unique Nouns should be copyrightable, but two common words in sequence? I'm picturing the GW legal team assassinating some poor up-and-coming game creator for having an item called Blood Bowl in his online game. I'm imagining him having to rename the necromancer's Blood Bowl to something else... Soul Well? what if that's copyrighted too...

*sigh*

I agree! I also take on board KillKrazy's logic as well.

I have often wondered how GW could be legally entitled to copyright a term which is in general use. I especially wonder how they themselves have avoided I.P infringement by using terms like Terminator, Imperial Guard, Wolfen, Dark Angels....etc when all of these terms have been used and trademarked by other companies for very similar genres and usages! Terminator, see the film Terminator, Dark Angels, see any number of 80s sci fi films...and the list goes on.....for GW to suddenly use these terms and copyright themm would suggest the laws governing these things are not as clear cut as we might think.

Surely that goes both ways.

IP laws are not that complicated, as long as you remember the difference between trademarks, patents, and copyrights.

Copyrights apply to creative works: pieces of art, books or other significant portions of text (including excerpts from books), etc. Broadly speaking, as soon you've created something like a short story or painting, you own the copyright on it (unless, say, it's a work-for-hire, where someone's paying you to create it on the understanding that they'll own the copyright). You don't have to take any special legal steps to own the copyright in something you create. Notably, you can't copyright ideas, which is usually held to include things like recipes, or game rules; however, you can certainly copyright the specific words used to explain a recipe or a set of game rules.

Trademarks are basically brand names. The law varies by country, but in most cases it works along the lines of you paying a fee to a central body to own the name "Ian Sturrock's Awesome SF Wargame" in that country, in a specific product category (like, "Board Wargames"). Since there's a central register of TMs, it'd be hard for someone else to register a similar TM in the same category, so once I own that one someone else couldn't register "Ian Sturrock's Amazing SF Wargame" as a trademark in the board wargames category.

Patents rarely apply to the gaming industry -- they tend to be more about technical innovations. Game companies have occasionally tried to patent their ideas, but how well those patents would stand up to a legal challenge is questionable, at best.

Kilkrazy wrote: or a specialist S&M pottery company.

paperwork in process. You sir, are a Genius!

All this talk of IP reminds me of;

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29130

"Because all integers and natural numbers derive from one and zero, Microsoft may, by extension, lay claim to ownership of all mathematics and logic systems, including Euclidean geometry, pulleys and levers, gravity, and the basic Newtonian principles of motion, as well as the concepts of existence and nonexistence," Yale University theoretical mathematics professor J. Edmund Lattimore said. "In other words, pretty much everything."

Step 1: Take donations off site (You shouldnt *need* donations with how super inexpensive web hosting is.. if your little fan site costs a lot of money to host then youre doing it wrong)
Step 2: Put in header "this is a parody" of whatever youre talking about.. then write something funny
Step 3: give GW legal the finger

Or simply get an offshore host :p

I would be interested to know the legal position regarding donations.

You might want to chat up the guy who ran 'Turn Signals on a Land Raider' I think they got uffish at him for that very thing.

edit: complete sentences, even this close to midnight, are critical.

What happened to TSLR was that the creator wanted to do a print compilation of his strips to sell, and GW wasn't keen with that.

Appearently this is continuing to roll on, with boardgamegeek.com the latest to fall.

I wonder what would've happened if GW made BGG shut down...worst case scenario, I know, but still.

BaronIveagh wrote:Appearently this is continuing to roll on, with boardgamegeek.com the latest to fall.

I know its all the rage to blame GW for every woe in the world currently, but the assertion you made is without a single iota of doubt, categorically false.

Reading comprehension is your friend:

"The site is down for maintenance
We apologize for the inconvenience"

Meaning quite literally what is said.

No need to have paranoia read between the lines for you here.

Websites do occasionally have to go down while admins do maintenance. Hell, Dakka used to have horrible outages for up to a week a few years ago. Lets stop this rumor before it gets any more slowed than was submitted, eh?

Vladsimpaler wrote:I wonder what would've happened if GW made BGG shut down...worst case scenario, I know, but still.

An unprecedented PR gakstorm. BGG has how many registered users? In the five digit range? It is one of the largest ( if not the largest ) game sites on the Web. The fallout would be huge. Just the elimination of all GW related user made stuff has caused an uproar.

A-P wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:I wonder what would've happened if GW made BGG shut down...worst case scenario, I know, but still.

An unprecedented PR gakstorm. BGG has how many registered users? In the five digit range? It is one of the largest ( if not the largest ) game sites on the Web. The fallout would be huge. Just the elimination of all GW related user made stuff has caused an uproar.

I think that is one David vs. Goliath story that GW would not care to recreate. They already know the end to that story.

Hellfury wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:Appearently this is continuing to roll on, with boardgamegeek.com the latest to fall.

I know its all the rage to blame GW for every woe in the world currently, but the assertion you made is without a single iota of doubt, categorically false.

Reading comprehension is your friend:

"The site is down for maintenance
We apologize for the inconvenience"

Meaning quite literally what is said.

No need to have paranoia read between the lines for you here.

Websites do occasionally have to go down while admins do maintenance. Hell, Dakka used to have horrible outages for up to a week a few years ago. Lets stop this rumor before it gets any more slowed than was submitted, eh?

Um, that wasn't what I was talking about. They received a C&D to remove all GW IP from thier site. There's been a lot of grumbling about this from the authors of some of them, as it included things like replacement pieces for OOP GW board games and homebrew rules, etc.

Though I admit, that GW trying to shutdown BGG would be hilarious to watch the fur fly.

Hellfury wrote:

A-P wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:I wonder what would've happened if GW made BGG shut down...worst case scenario, I know, but still.

An unprecedented PR gakstorm. BGG has how many registered users? In the five digit range? It is one of the largest ( if not the largest ) game sites on the Web. The fallout would be huge. Just the elimination of all GW related user made stuff has caused an uproar.

I think that is one David vs. Goliath story that GW would not care to recreate. They already know the end to that story.

As if GW would even give a damn. The customers are so incredible stupid and behaving like addicts, they buy, buy and buy more.

You kind a loose the believe in common sense, when somebody buys a used codex for more than the retail price on ebay. And you loose even more of it, when you see that people prefer a new opening up GW Store over a long time LGS, even if he is not giving any % off etc., just because its the "genuine" stuff.

BaronIveagh wrote:Um, that wasn't what I was talking about. They received a C&D to remove all GW IP from thier site. There's been a lot of grumbling about this from the authors of some of them, as it included things like replacement pieces for OOP GW board games and homebrew rules, etc.

Oh, you must be referring to what was discussed to death in this thread:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/267171.page

siamtiger wrote:As if GW would even give a damn. The customers are so incredible stupid and behaving like addicts, they buy, buy and buy more.

I am not talking about people screaming on internet boards, I am talking actual legal ramifications.

Perhaps I'm just malicious, but I can say that I hope this comes around and bites GW somehow. (Other then the loss of me as a customer.)



Says quite a bit about GW policies in general, actually...

Hellfury wrote:

A-P wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:I wonder what would've happened if GW made BGG shut down...worst case scenario, I know, but still.

An unprecedented PR gakstorm. BGG has how many registered users? In the five digit range? It is one of the largest ( if not the largest ) game sites on the Web. The fallout would be huge. Just the elimination of all GW related user made stuff has caused an uproar.

I think that is one David vs. Goliath story that GW would not care to recreate. They already know the end to that story.

Ha, hardly. GW sent BGG the C&D letter asking them to take down certain things, BGG responded by taking down ALL the GW related stuff on the site. Any uproar or problems are of their own making.

Hellfury wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:Appearently this is continuing to roll on, with boardgamegeek.com the latest to fall.

I know its all the rage to blame GW for every woe in the world currently, but the assertion you made is without a single iota of doubt, categorically false.

Reading comprehension is your friend:

"The site is down for maintenance
We apologize for the inconvenience"

Meaning quite literally what is said.

No need to have paranoia read between the lines for you here.

Websites do occasionally have to go down while admins do maintenance. Hell, Dakka used to have horrible outages for up to a week a few years ago. Lets stop this rumor before it gets any more slowed than was submitted, eh?

Agreed, you can't remove all that material from a database without something hiccuping.

Bookwrack wrote:
Ha, hardly. GW sent BGG the C&D letter asking them to take down certain things, BGG responded by taking down ALL the GW related stuff on the site. Any uproar or problems are of their own making.

Well, as I've said before: I showed the C&D that Dark Reign got to a IP lawyer, and assuming they all follow the same pattern, which seems to be the case, there are ways of reading it that it says to do just that. So what they did may depend entirely on how severe their lawyers said for them to view it.