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.

Polonius wrote:Interesting. The fourth count in the complaint is for trademark dilution, but the relevant code:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001125----000-.html

At paragraph C, the statute defines "famous trademark:"

"or purposes of paragraph (1), a mark is famous if it is widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States as a designation of source of the goods or services of the mark’s owner. In determining whether a mark possesses the requisite degree of recognition, the court may consider all relevant factors, including the following:
(i) The duration, extent, and geographic reach of advertising and publicity of the mark, whether advertised or publicized by the owner or third parties.
(ii) The amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of goods or services offered under the mark.
(iii) The extent of actual recognition of the mark.
(iv) Whether the mark was registered under the Act of March 3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal register. "

So that count might be dismissible as none of GW's trademarks are likely to be found as "famous."

Not sure on whether it has any relevance, but I doubt there are many wargamers (the market both sides are catering for) who haven't heard of GW and their various properties.

Really? I think if you asked 100 random people if they knew what Warhammer 40,000 was you'd probably get a pretty low level of response.

Hence my point about the market being catered to. GW are undoubtebly famous within said market.

No idea if this is at all relevant to the definition of famous.

Mr Mystery wrote:I've read on these boards CH might well have received, and promptly ignored a C&D letter.

Dunno about the veracity of it, but I would assume given GW's prior, this might well be the case.

If they did they can ignore a C&D it has very little legal standing (I believe).

Mr Mystery wrote:

Not sure on whether it has any relevance, but I doubt there are many wargamers (the market both sides are catering for) who haven't heard of GW and their various properties.

"for purposes of paragraph (1), a mark is famous if it is widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States as a designation of source of the goods or services of the mark’s owner. In determining whether a mark possesses the requisite degree of recognition, the court may consider all relevant factors, including the following:
(i) The duration, extent, and geographic reach of advertising and publicity of the mark, whether advertised or publicized by the owner or third parties.
(ii) The amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of goods or services offered under the mark.
(iii) The extent of actual recognition of the mark.
(iv) Whether the mark was registered under the Act of March 3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal register. "

I think the key phrase here is "general consuming public."

Aye it would be that!

Earthbeard wrote:
I'm still utterly amazed that you and others still think no correspondence actually occured before the filing of the suit

You have no evidence to the contrary. Don't go facepalming when you don't have more than your own supposition to go on.

There was NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites.

GW have, prior to this, always used a sledgehammer to open a walnut. There is nothing to suggest they have changed tack now.

I personally think Chapterhouse using the actual GW names for things was asking for trouble and creating 'whole' miniatures also would have eventually brought GW boiling up to the surface to attack. I hope that some kind of accord can be reached out of court or that Chapterhouse can survive this as I believe they provide a service to hobbyists.

GW should definately leave Paulson Games the hell alone, they have taken active steps to respect IP, including stopping the production of the resin space ship miniature over IP concerns regarding Battlefleet Gothic.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Earthbeard wrote:
I'm still utterly amazed that you and others still think no correspondence actually occured before the filing of the suit

There was NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites.

So what your saying is that GW starts w/C&D's. So one could logically assume, without the fact that it's been implied by CH itself, that GW probably sent a C&D.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
GW should definately leave Paulson Games the hell alone, they have taken active steps to respect IP, including stopping the production of the resin space ship miniature over IP concerns regarding Battlefleet Gothic.

This I'll agree with you on. I think he just got snatched up due to the release cycle honestly. He pulls the plug on a couple of things and he should be fine. Or relables and takes images off his sight of them on GW models as selling points which he has already done. We'll just see.

Oh and a side note. If it's in the Chicago, LA, or Baltimore area then GW actually has alright brand recognition due to the profusion of stores they've had in those areas. It would depend on what area they did their "general public" testing in honestly.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Earthbeard wrote:
I'm still utterly amazed that you and others still think no correspondence actually occured before the filing of the suit

You have no evidence to the contrary. Don't go facepalming when you don't have more than your own supposition to go on.

Actually, he does. Chapterhouse on this very forum has said that "he's been in contact with GW and cleared things" in addition to him also saying that he "received a C&D letter, which his counsel told him he could ignore it.

There was NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites.

While it's true there was "NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites", it's also true that it's completely unnecessary to have contact prior to filing a C&D.

And if I remember right, part of the whole reason that there was "no prior correspondence" was that GW changed legal consultants in regards to IP and the woman in charge is...
Well, the descriptions I've heard was "She makes an Inquisitor look reasonable".

GW have, prior to this, always used a sledgehammer to open a walnut. There is nothing to suggest they have changed tack now.

Because using the scalpel gets them ignored. CH is a perfect example of this. The owner has posted, repeatedly, here that "GW sent a C&D, but we just ignored it".

I personally think Chapterhouse using the actual GW names for things was asking for trouble and creating 'whole' miniatures also would have eventually brought GW boiling up to the surface to attack. I hope that some kind of accord can be reached out of court or that Chapterhouse can survive this as I believe they provide a service to hobbyists.

Agreed on the names and the whole kits being the straw that broke the camel's back.

Still not sold on them being a real "boon" to the hobby community though.

GW should definately leave Paulson Games the hell alone, they have taken active steps to respect IP, including stopping the production of the resin space ship miniature over IP concerns regarding Battlefleet Gothic.

I think Paulson's just a casualty of misinformation here. Even if Paulson wasn't involved with the Superheavy Assault Walker, there's still enough rope to potentially hang them by.

shrike wrote:spread right across the CH homepage:
*Picture of the GW photo and caption*
"EVEN GW USES OUR PRODUCTS!"
Do it!

Did you even read the page? It's not a GW army.

Hulksmash wrote:
Oh and a side note. If it's in the Chicago, LA, or Baltimore area then GW actually has alright brand recognition due to the profusion of stores they've had in those areas. It would depend on what area they did their "general public" testing in honestly.

Ok, one last time for good measure:

"for purposes of paragraph (1), a mark is famous if it is widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States as a designation of source of the goods or services of the mark’s owner. In determining whether a mark possesses the requisite degree of recognition, the court may consider all relevant factors, including the following:
(i) The duration, extent, and geographic reach of advertising and publicity of the mark, whether advertised or publicized by the owner or third parties.
(ii) The amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of goods or services offered under the mark.
(iii) The extent of actual recognition of the mark.
(iv) Whether the mark was registered under the Act of March 3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal register. "

The words "general consuming public of the United States" are right there. As is geographic reach as part of two stated factors. Along with "extent of actual recognition of the mark."

http://www.michiganlawreview.org/articles/the-trademark-dilution-revision-act-of-2006-a-welcome-and-needed-change

This law review article sums it up. "Marks that are only recognized in limited geographic areas or niche markets do not qualify for dilution protection under the TDRA, which provides that "a mark is famous if it is widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States ....""

LittleLeadMen wrote:Again, I'm amazed that you are still communicating with anyone on a toy soldier forum. I'd find it very hard to believe that your lawyer(s) haven't advised you to simply be quiet and address the issue in court, rather than on Dakka Dakka.

Exactly. Instead of thumping your chest and making the judicious either grieve or point-and-laugh, let the legal system do your justification for you. It's the only yardstick of "rightness" in this matter that's worth anything. And by god, people. If you're already hired legal representation, how about buying a book on how to present yourself as a professional organization and not just a generic forum dweller?

Absolutionis wrote:I'm still disturbed at how many "told-you-so" people actually support GW in this matter; it's sickening really. If Chapterhouse wins, we go on normally and everyone (even GW) wins. If GW wins, everyone (except GW) loses. GW seems to be taking a "only I can profit" stance on this matter.

Poppycock! How would I lose if a range of sculpted shoulderpads vanishes from the market? How would the hobby?

With respect, Polonius, can't they still make their decision based on the first two factors?

I do, however, agree that GW can be somewhat unsubtle in these matters. Would it hurt them so much to sell licenses for products they're not going to make themselves?

@Polonius

I didn't read that carefully enough. My fault on that. I was under the impression they'd still have to somehow take a poll of recognition somehow. And since the largest US metros generally have a GW presence (until recently in major malls) I would think that it would impact it.

Only the first one would really hurt them right off the bat as they don't advertise. But the others you'd probably be surprised especially since the video games w/their IP have been taking off.

I think it'd be interesting to see if they can make "famous" stick. I'd personally be curious as to the results of their brand recognition if that was released.

My personal experience is that brand recognition is growing by leaps and bounds. I only based that off conversations with people in the various cities that I've worked in though so maybe it isn't on the rise.

Oh and I don't think my personal opinion is the way it actually is. Just my only yardstick for my thinking

I'm doing a quick search through the caselaw, and the companies that are winning based on famous marks are companies like Starbucks, Hummer, Louis Vuitton, etc.

This is from a district court in Texas, but it cites an earlier case:

"In short, for purposes of § 1125(c), a mark usually will achieve broad-based fame only if a large portion of the general consuming public recognizes that mark. Thane Intern., Inc. v. Trek Bicycle Corp., 305 F.3d 894, 911 (9th Cir. 2002). In other words, the mark must be a household name. Id."

GW ain't a household name.

Do keep in mind that is is just one of the counts. I've been struggling to find anything on nominal use of trademarks for selling ones own goods.

Then nevermind I will happily recognize that GW isn't in the same league w/those companies. Though I'm a little surprised at Hummer, given that I don't see many of them outside of certain areas and rarely see advertisements. The other two I totally understand

Another side note. Thank you Polonius. It's always nice to see more factual based content.

The dilution claim is just piling on. It's really not even being used for it's intended purposes.

Dilution claims are to prevent me from, say, starting "Starbucks Dry Cleaning." Traditional trademarks wouldn't stop that, but virtually everybody is going to assume I'm somehow affiliated with the "real" starbucks.

Hulksmash wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Earthbeard wrote:
I'm still utterly amazed that you and others still think no correspondence actually occured before the filing of the suit

There was NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites.

So what your saying is that GW starts w/C&D's. So one could logically assume, without the fact that it's been implied by CH itself, that GW probably sent a C&D.

Logical assumption and read implication are not statement. Also, logical and intelligent are not key words I think of when GW gets on the offensive. We saw that fairly clearly when the legal dept started attacking the hobbyists and gamers for using the IP.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Earthbeard wrote:
I'm still utterly amazed that you and others still think no correspondence actually occured before the filing of the suit

You have no evidence to the contrary. Don't go facepalming when you don't have more than your own supposition to go on.

Actually, he does. Chapterhouse on this very forum has said that "he's been in contact with GW and cleared things" in addition to him also saying that he "received a C&D letter, which his counsel told him he could ignore it.

Erm, really? I don't read every post, especially in the 'discussions' that would break out in the Chapterhouse threads all the time, but all I remember was him saying 'I have seen a lawyer and I'm in the clear'. Could you be a sport and provide the link to where that was said? I can't imagine GW ever saying 'that's ok' to ANYTHING. I'd appreciate the chance to read that if so.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
There was NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites.

While it's true there was "NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites", it's also true that it's completely unnecessary to have contact prior to filing a C&D.

And if I remember right, part of the whole reason that there was "no prior correspondence" was that GW changed legal consultants in regards to IP and the woman in charge is...
Well, the descriptions I've heard was "She makes an Inquisitor look reasonable".

So the short way round what you've just said is that they were overly aggressive in their attack on the hobby community, thank you for that agreement. As to unnecessary? Perhaps, but prudent? I'd say so. The actions there did not endear them to the community at large.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
GW have, prior to this, always used a sledgehammer to open a walnut. There is nothing to suggest they have changed tack now.

Because using the scalpel gets them ignored. CH is a perfect example of this. The owner has posted, repeatedly, here that "GW sent a C&D, but we just ignored it".

Again, would you provide citation for this, as I mentioned, I gave up reading the attacks and defence that infested any new Chapterhouse release and I'd be interested in seeing the guy say what you've just stated.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I personally think Chapterhouse using the actual GW names for things was asking for trouble and creating 'whole' miniatures also would have eventually brought GW boiling up to the surface to attack. I hope that some kind of accord can be reached out of court or that Chapterhouse can survive this as I believe they provide a service to hobbyists.

Agreed on the names and the whole kits being the straw that broke the camel's back.
Still not sold on them being a real "boon" to the hobby community though.

They provide, with their bits and conversion pieces, a service to folks who have already bought the GW kit and wish to add to it. I think they were skating the ice with talk about whole models, that crossed a threshold into competing rather than complementing and as already said, using the actual GW recognised names was also pushing limits with GW, given how it's attack dogs strain on the leash 24/7.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
GW should definately leave Paulson Games the hell alone, they have taken active steps to respect IP, including stopping the production of the resin space ship miniature over IP concerns regarding Battlefleet Gothic.

I think Paulson's just a casualty of misinformation here. Even if Paulson wasn't involved with the Superheavy Assault Walker, there's still enough rope to potentially hang them by.

Your terminology sounds eager, Paulson do provide a very good service and are not in direct competition with GW on anything. I'm sure you'd agree that whether there is 'enough rope' (and I don't believe there is), they do not deserve to 'hang' for it? Do they?

Owain wrote:With respect, Polonius, can't they still make their decision based on the first two factors?

I do, however, agree that GW can be somewhat unsubtle in these matters. Would it hurt them so much to sell licenses for products they're not going to make themselves?

Thing is though, the whole 'they aren't going to' is assumption rather than fact, and thus not a great argument.

As I mentioned in the other thread, the license wouldn't be taken up even if it was put out for tender. For a start, any production methods would have to match GW's own. Which would likely include the use of machinery similar to their own. Then there is the cost of the actual license itself, and GW would be wanting a cut of any profits. As such whilst a possibility, it's not a terribly practical option, especially as GW would reserve the right to revoke the license, or even say 'right that bit sells well, we'll do it ourselves' making it an even less tempting prospect for any serious company.

Polonius wrote:This law review article sums it up. "Marks that are only recognized in limited geographic areas or niche markets do not qualify for dilution protection under the TDRA, which provides that "a mark is famous if it is widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States ....""

Guess it backfires now that GW doesn't do marketing nor advertising, being explicitely (!) content with remaining in a small declining niche (see business reports). Closing their own forum and sueing fan-websites out of existence first didn't help either.
Back in the days that MB did the marketing and advertising of Space Hulk/Space Crusade, this might have been different.

I should add a very clear disclaimer to this thread:

I'm a lawyer, but I don't work with IP. I'm not offering any legal advice. I'm not your lawyer. I'm not anybody's lawyer. I am offering opinions and research out of my own interest and to further discussion.

I've notified Chapterhouse Studios that my interest in this matter is casual and personal, and that I cannot and will not represent them in this matter.

If anybody has a specific legal question, please seek local counsel.

Hulksmash wrote:Then nevermind I will happily recognize that GW isn't in the same league w/those companies. Though I'm a little surprised at Hummer, given that I don't see many of them outside of certain areas and rarely see advertisements. The other two I totally understand

Another side note. Thank you Polonius. It's always nice to see more factual based content.

they may not do that much advertising, but you would still recognise one, as they've been in movies, TV shows, etc. and have quite a distinctive profile


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What area do you work with Polonius?

I work for the Social Security Administration, writing administrative law decisions concerning disability claims.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ok, so there is some interesting case law available on nominative use of trademarks. part of my problem was searching for nominal, not nominative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playboy_Enterprises,_Inc._v._Welles

In this case, a woman that was playmate of the year could use the terms Playboy, playmate, etc. to describe herself and her accomplishments, even for self promotion.

"The Court held that nominative use (a type of fair use for discussing the product itself) is permitted where:

1. The product or service can not be readily identified without using the trademark (i.e. trademark is descriptive of a person, place, or product attribute);
2. Only so much of the mark may be used as is reasonably necessary for identification (e.g. the words may be reasonably used but not the specific font or logo); and
3. The user does nothing to suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder - which applies even if the nominative use is commercial."

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Earthbeard wrote:
I'm still utterly amazed that you and others still think no correspondence actually occured before the filing of the suit

You have no evidence to the contrary. Don't go facepalming when you don't have more than your own supposition to go on.

Actually, he does. Chapterhouse on this very forum has said that "he's been in contact with GW and cleared things" in addition to him also saying that he "received a C&D letter, which his counsel told him he could ignore it.

Erm, really? I don't read every post, especially in the 'discussions' that would break out in the Chapterhouse threads all the time, but all I remember was him saying 'I have seen a lawyer and I'm in the clear'. Could you be a sport and provide the link to where that was said? I can't imagine GW ever saying 'that's ok' to ANYTHING. I'd appreciate the chance to read that if so.

I'm going off what Insaniak is saying, MGS. He had posted that he recalled a thread where CH actually said that he's received a C&D letter and ignored it. I usually avoid CH's threads, simply because I didn't want to potentially "start" anything.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
There was NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites.

While it's true there was "NO prior correspondence prior to the release of the C&D carpet bombing of 2009 in relation to IP on fansites", it's also true that it's completely unnecessary to have contact prior to filing a C&D.

And if I remember right, part of the whole reason that there was "no prior correspondence" was that GW changed legal consultants in regards to IP and the woman in charge is...
Well, the descriptions I've heard was "She makes an Inquisitor look reasonable".

So the short way round what you've just said is that they were overly aggressive in their attack on the hobby community, thank you for that agreement. As to unnecessary? Perhaps, but prudent? I'd say so. The actions there did not endear them to the community at large.

I hate to have to say this again...
But I don't see some of these sites/companies as "part of the hobby community". Especially not anyone who tries to charge me money to access .pdfs of out of print games and having the audacity to claim they "want to expand player awareness of these games".

I've also said before that they're overly aggressive, but I've also said repeatedly that it's a case of "shouting" getting the point across better than just talking.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
GW have, prior to this, always used a sledgehammer to open a walnut. There is nothing to suggest they have changed tack now.

Because using the scalpel gets them ignored. CH is a perfect example of this. The owner has posted, repeatedly, here that "GW sent a C&D, but we just ignored it".

Again, would you provide citation for this, as I mentioned, I gave up reading the attacks and defence that infested any new Chapterhouse release and I'd be interested in seeing the guy say what you've just stated.

If I had a citation handy, I'd give it. I promise you that. But like you, I usually avoid those threads like the plague because it's always full of the standard "CHAPTERHOUSE IS DOING EVERYONE A GREAT SERVICE, PLEASE THROW MONEY AT HIM!" defenses.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I personally think Chapterhouse using the actual GW names for things was asking for trouble and creating 'whole' miniatures also would have eventually brought GW boiling up to the surface to attack. I hope that some kind of accord can be reached out of court or that Chapterhouse can survive this as I believe they provide a service to hobbyists.

Agreed on the names and the whole kits being the straw that broke the camel's back.
Still not sold on them being a real "boon" to the hobby community though.

They provide, with their bits and conversion pieces, a service to folks who have already bought the GW kit and wish to add to it. I think they were skating the ice with talk about whole models, that crossed a threshold into competing rather than complementing and as already said, using the actual GW recognised names was also pushing limits with GW, given how its attack dogs strain on the leash 24/7.

I think that's a bit unfair to say that GW's "attack dogs strain on the leash 24/7". MicroArts, MaxMini, Kromlech, and Scibor have never had any problems, have they?

When I said them "being a real 'boon' to the hobby community though." I was referring to the fact that their quality is excessively poor, at least in my view. The four I mentioned above are just as niche as CH, yet manage to consistently produce things that actually impress me and make me wish they were working for GW and had that kind of clout backing them up.

Kanluwen wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
GW should definately leave Paulson Games the hell alone, they have taken active steps to respect IP, including stopping the production of the resin space ship miniature over IP concerns regarding Battlefleet Gothic.

I think Paulson's just a casualty of misinformation here. Even if Paulson wasn't involved with the Superheavy Assault Walker, there's still enough rope to potentially hang them by.

Your terminology sounds eager, Paulson do provide a very good service and are not in direct competition with GW on anything. I'm sure you'd agree that whether there is 'enough rope' (and I don't believe there is), they do not deserve to 'hang' for it? Do they?

Ehhh. Just because they do a good service doesn't mean they're not violating laws.

As for "direct competition with GW", well...I can't say that for 100% certain. This could be a preempt on a company that was perceived as more of a threat than they are due to the fact that we have IA11 coming out this year, complete with model support from Forge World for the Space Wolves .

Kanluwen wrote:But I don't see some of these sites/companies as "part of the hobby community". Especially not anyone who tries to charge me money to access .pdfs of out of print games and having the audacity to claim they "want to expand player awareness of these games".

I'm intrigued, Kan - who are you referring to here?

All right, so after some my above research, this is my completely non-expert, in no way binding opinion.

It seems to me that the question here is if CH marketed their products as examples of GW's trademarked names, or as products to be used with GW products bearing the trademarked names.

I haven't delved in the Illinois state claims, but it seems like the laws prevent you from making a product and selling it under a trademark. So, you can't produce hyper-modern human infantry and sell them as cadians.

The law does allow you to refer to trademarks when unavoidable. You can produce parts that fit unto GW Cadians and call that to buyers' attention.

There is a very blurry area with CH stuff. It's simply going to be a factual question if people think they're trying to rep themselves as selling GW goods as opposed to accessories for GW goods. As dopey as it sounds, the massive disclaimers actually come into play here. When you explicitly state that you aren't GW, it's hard for GW to claim that you're trying to dupe people into thinking that you are GW.

In the end, this is actually a pretty interesting set of facts. Chapterhouse is probably pretty in the clear on a lot of this stuff. They may have crossed the line a few times, but I feel confident saying that everybody in this thread, and the other one, that seems to think this is a slamdunk win for GW is incorrect. For GW to prevail will take a fair amount of fact finding. Some of GW's claims are going to involve showing public knowledge of their marks. Others are going to have to show that Chapterhouse's scuplts are substantially similar to something GW has created. Still others will require that GW show that CH could not meet the three part nominative use test. So, if CH needed to use the marks to market their product, used as minimal of the mark as possible, and did not imply endorsement, CH could prevail.

Trademark laws generally are there to prevent far more brazen attempts. Things like a company using fonts, logos, or artwork of the trademark. Things like trying to cash in on the mark owners fame (the starbucks dry cleaner example). Or, most commonly, outright copying or trading under the owners name.

As moronic as it sounds, that Chapterhouse presented their stuff as an add-on, not a complete replacement, will actually really help them here.

Dysartes wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:But I don't see some of these sites/companies as "part of the hobby community". Especially not anyone who tries to charge me money to access .pdfs of out of print games and having the audacity to claim they "want to expand player awareness of these games".

I'm intrigued, Kan - who are you referring to here?

When I had gone to register on one of those Blood Bowl sites(it was, I think "bloodbowltalk.com") at the time of the C&Ds, it wouldn't let me access the download section without having made a donation.

Polonius wrote:Really? I think if you asked 100 random people if they knew what Warhammer 40,000 was you'd probably get a pretty low level of response.

He said war gamers specifically.

Black Fiend wrote:

Polonius wrote:Really? I think if you asked 100 random people if they knew what Warhammer 40,000 was you'd probably get a pretty low level of response.

He said war gamers specifically.

And the legal definition of 'famous' refers to the general consuming public. Considering that only about half the people I work with know what Microsoft's 'Halo' franchise is, an assumption of the public being completely unaware of Games Workshop is probably valid.

I'm going to the chapterhouse site now to buy some stuff. I hope they work out the legal issues and I love their products (which are things GW mostly doesn't bother with) so I'm gonna throw them some support