5333
Post by: BeefyG
Taken from Talkbloodbowl (Note: I am not the webmaster, I have only copy pasted this as news):
TalkBloodBowl wrote:
Good evening everybody,
Today I received a letter from the Games Workshop Group PLC stating that if I didn't compy with 4 directives within 14 days they would take formal proceedings against me. It saddens me to see GW take such action against a perfectly legitamate fan site that has provided a global communications portal for BB fans, with no intention of conning them out of the millions they make in sales. I feel that I have been stereotypically branded as an Internet con-man. I have been a GW fan for 20+ years and this site has been active for almost 9 of that 20. This site has also had GW staff registered and actively contribute to its content (it may still have).
The assumptions from GWG PLC are that I am making a profit from the donations received by this site. They also point out that consumers may believe TalkBB is connected with GW and the fact the domain name includes Bloodbowl which is an infringement of GW's registered trademark. Now, I am not against their need to ensure their trademarks are not used inappropriately, I feel they could have approached me in a more friendly manner to investigte the purpose of the site and discover that I only wanted to provide a hub for dicussing Blood Bowl globally. instead, they immediately enter heavy handed.
If they truely believe the donations have contributed to me becoming a wealthy person or that I have made enough money to give up a proper job they are sadly mistaken. The small amount of money donated has gone to pay for the upkeep of the server (when I used my own hardware and hosted it at home) or towards the costs for hosting with an ISP. In short I have been vastly out of pocket to provide TalkBB rather than the other way around. I thank all those that have contributed as it has helped TalkBB survive.
I have been asked to:
Immediately cease and desist from any activity which infringes GW's intellectual property.
either remove remove your website or the reference to 'Blood Bowl' in your website name.
Remove the donations button from the page.
Confirm by return that you will not infringe GW's intellectual properly rights at any time in the future.
Now, I could simply remove Bloodbowl from the domain by renaming it to TalkBB.com, but that means buying a new domain and time spent sorting everything out. Bearing in mind I hardly visit TalkBloodBowl.com anyway, I can't really be bothered with all that so have decided to let it die. Therefore from Sunday 8 November 2009 www.talkbloodbowl.com will cease to exist.
Should anybody wish to take ownership of the source and contents I will be more than happy to prepare it for transfer, although this will not include the domain name. I will also have to ensure the recipient will not use DB content for anything other than to maintain the forum as part of an existing Blood Bowl site. This is to ensure passwords and emails do not fall into the wrong hands.
Thank you for your support over the years and for making TalkBloodBowl.com what it is today. Without you all it would have died all by itself many years ago, regardless of donations.
Regards,
JohnnyP
6829
Post by: Cheese Elemental
I haven't even heard of this 'TalkBloodBowl'.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Poorly played, GW. Especially when you have no real case whatsoever: fair use allows for review of a product.
11029
Post by: Ketara
Can't say I've heard of it. Irritates me GW is doing it again though.
5333
Post by: BeefyG
That's the thing of the 4 items, the last 2 are simply scare tactics and hold no legal relevance to the case.
The first two presuppose that the guy is making money (which can easily be proven is not the case) and is publishing GW material that they could be making money from.
This is bogus because the Living Rulebook is published free (with the rules council volunteers reviewing rules for the next LRB edition available to the public free as well).
All in all its deserving of letters of complaint to GW and at least my (and a ton of other people that I am aware of) boycotting them.
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
Cheese Elemental wrote:I haven't even heard of this 'TalkBloodBowl'.
And now you never will.
Good on you GW. Bring these bastards down. That'll teach 'em. This guys been getting away with IP theft for nine years? Won't somebody think of the children?
10273
Post by: Chapterhouse
Ummm, question, if you believe they have no legal case (hopefully you have done the research) why are you caving in? Do you seriously think GW will spend the 100s of thousands to lose a case against a legitimate fan site?
1911
Post by: pixelgeek
Chapterhouse wrote:Ummm, question, if you believe they have no legal case (hopefully you have done the research) why are you caving in? Do you seriously think GW will spend the 100s of thousands to lose a case against a legitimate fan site?
It won't take that much and yes they will Automatically Appended Next Post: Wonder when they are going to start to come after Warseer, BoLs and Dakka?
1002
Post by: Wayfarer
GW and their mystery attitudes about dealing with their customers.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
That sucks man, I understand that although you may be in the right on this one, it's just not worth the hassle.
10273
Post by: Chapterhouse
pixelgeek wrote:Chapterhouse wrote:Ummm, question, if you believe they have no legal case (hopefully you have done the research) why are you caving in? Do you seriously think GW will spend the 100s of thousands to lose a case against a legitimate fan site?
It won't take that much and yes they will
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wonder when they are going to start to come after Warseer, BoLs and Dakka?
I beg to differ, they cannot selectively prosecute one site and let others go, this leads to a legal precedent not in favor of GW.
1911
Post by: pixelgeek
Chapterhouse wrote:I beg to differ, they cannot selectively prosecute one site and let others go, this leads to a legal precedent not in favor of GW.
What planet are you living on where lawyers only threaten legal action if and only if they have a valid case?
This industry, and most others, is rife with examples of large companies threatening legal action against private individuals and small companies in which they do not have a valid case but in which they threaten to sue to stop purported illegal usage of IP or copyrights.
You are right that they can't do this but clearly we are seeing this happen so they do in fact do it.
Not having legal justification for something has never stopped a company from doing this sort of thing.
Do a Google/wiki search for SLAAP lawsuits for a nice primer on the corporate history of this
20650
Post by: Pyriel-
I beg to differ, they cannot selectively prosecute one site and let others go, this leads to a legal precedent not in favor of GW.
As the man says.
If you want examples or if you want to find out how to do to avoid it you might want to check out and talk with the owner of bolter and chainsword. The site uses GW terminology, GW art depictions and GW art in online software, receives donations (as you said you do and that GW busted you for amongst the mentioned things) as well as indirectly makes money of GW IP.
So yes, precedences can be quite valid here, especially without any formal license steering away from them.
9594
Post by: RiTides
Hopefully someone else will take up maintenance of it. It wouldn't be too hard to have a redirect page at the original url, and just change over to another site, if they wanted to keep it going. And I guess remove the paypal button and just have another, more informal way to receive donations.
5333
Post by: BeefyG
Yes the take over part is fine and to be expected. The sad part is in the nature that they treat the loyal fan base. In this case its enough for someone to not give a damn anymore and let 9 years of community support go.
10273
Post by: Chapterhouse
True,
I guess it would be a slap in the face, especially if what he is saying is true and he puts money into the site and barely make even.
Still I do not think any of us are surprised at GWs self-destructive methodology.
1099
Post by: Railguns
I wonder if the site was thought to cater to "tourney players".....
5566
Post by: studderingdave
totally not suprised. GW will raze any fansite to the ground without even a thought. this seems to be the mindset of the GW juggernaught.
5636
Post by: warpcrafter
If they come over Dakka, I will gladly volunteer my dirty fighting skills to the cause. I make a mean flaming bag of dog poop.
1911
Post by: pixelgeek
Chapterhouse wrote:I beg to differ, they cannot selectively prosecute one site and let others go, this leads to a legal precedent not in favor of GW.
After reading through the Legal section of GW's website I suspect that the issue is simply that he has Blood Bowl in the site name and the domain name.
Bolter and Chainsword, Dakka and BoLS don't use GW IP in their names or domains and I don't think that Warseer is a GW trademark.
I also suspect that if he had changed his domain as NAF recently did then GW legal might have left him alone.
5333
Post by: BeefyG
I suspect that he is already aware of what he could "simply" do. Its the fact that he cannot be bothered, and the fact that its been a hub for 9 years with GW support at stages, that simply being polite has gone out the window. The pervasive attitude of big angry threats that seems to be the norm is something that isn't worth investing in. The fact that the whole thing is almost baseless except for them contesting the domain name which is disputable at best, and filled with empty threats. I mean what part of the law requires you to write somebody a letter telling them that you've done as they've requested? Tell them to go sod themselves with a deckchair sideways if they think they can enforce that kind of requirement on a domain owner.
Poor form GW.
20662
Post by: Hawkins
Well its sad but this isnt the first or the last time its happened. but in response its the last time i'll buy any of GW's BB products.
I Call Shame!
3330
Post by: Kirasu
Once again GW corporate tries to kill its fans without understanding the company is a HOBBY COMPANY and people play their games for years even if said game has barely any support
What the hell is being gained by protecting an IP that barely makes any money and is for the most part free? When the person "infringing" ALSO isnt making any money
Hell I can "make" money off GW by buying low and selling high on ebay
1084
Post by: Agamemnon2
Once again, GW desperately tries to bury every single trace of the Specialist Games experiment. Meanwhile sites like 40K Online and 40K Radio continue unmolested... for now.
4746
Post by: Flachzange
Once again, GW fails to impress.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
Does the GW legal department run independently from the corporate entity? It could just be that they had some spare time on their hands.
Either way, dick move.
15365
Post by: twistinthunder
but he's not infringing their IP, and they can't make him remove the donations button when that helps him keep the site up.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Three cheers for those brave flying monkeys at GW legal and their dark hearted masters.
494
Post by: H.B.M.C.
So guys - how long until MDG comes in here and gets all apologetic on our asses?
1941
Post by: Wolfstan
Just out of interest if you built a protest site called "www.bloodbowlsucks" or "www.rageagainstgamesworkshop" do these infringe on IP? Also to compound it, if you asked for donations to keep the protest site going, would that also up the stakes?
8021
Post by: JD21290
GW dont need to have even a slightly decent case here, money talks, so GW's voice speaks fething loud.
They seem to think they are doing something right by killing off fan sites.
20075
Post by: Vermillion
Hmm I heard somewhere and it's not something I know to be true or not that GW hates not having control what is written about them. Hence managers are to refuse local papers doing articles about their stores, photos arent allowed to be taken "to protect the children" (yet how many seen in rulebook/WD photos gave their consent?).
Maybe someone there posted about the stupid prices for a BB team from them nowadays or soemthing and it goes against their propaganda machine.
Goes totally against what they say they believe in, gaming communities being built, ideas shared etc.
4001
Post by: Compel
If someone does want to complain about it, the best way likely, is to write a letter to, for example, Jervis. Yes, I know he's not responsible however, he does seem to try to be one of their PR guys.
By letter I mean, pen, ink and stamps.
For what it's worth, Lucasarts tried the same sort of thing about 6 years ago (oddly enough... just before Star Wars Galaxies came out) on the online star wars game, Star Wars Combine. If my memory is correct, they actually did choose to go to court and won. The game stayed up, kept its donations going, even managed to keep selling its merchandise. However, I do think they needed to change it from starwarscombine.com to swcombine.com The merchandise also had to just say swcombine as opposed to starwars.
On another note though, Dakka and warseer are likely fine, but couldn't bolterandchainsword be in the same sort of trouble?
If anything, you could casually mention it being shutdown to a local paper...
735
Post by: JOHIRA
It's hard for me to get worked up about the injustice being done to someone who admits that they personally don't care enough to do anything about it.
18567
Post by: CadianXV
Disappointing. I don't know enough about law to comment on whether GW has a legal case, but I can't help thinking there must be another way to protect an IP. Other than bullying small fan sites that is.
8152
Post by: The Defenestrator
TalkBloodbowl.com's webmaster wrote:Now, I could simply remove Bloodbowl from the domain by renaming it to TalkBB.com, but that means buying a new domain and time spent sorting everything out. Bearing in mind I hardly visit TalkBloodBowl.com anyway, I can't really be bothered with all that so have decided to let it die. Therefore from Sunday 8 November 2009 www.talkbloodbowl.com will cease to exist.
Ok, he had me grumbling right along about big nasty GW right up until this part. If he can't be bothered with a change of domain name for a site he's run for 9 years, am I honestly supposed to feel like he's being 'trampled by big scary GW lawyers'. They shook their mean old man fists at him, and he said "FORGET THIS, I QUIT."
If he can't be bothered to save it, I won't feel bad that he's losing it. For the sake of the fans of the site (assuming there are some, I've never been), I hope someone takes it over, but the gentleman will get no sympathies from me. If you want to see what a passionate webmaster will do to keep a site running in the face of threats of litigation, take a look at what somethingawful.com has been threatened with over the years. 
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Really someone explain to me the need to close something unprofitable for owners but yet gave free publicity to GW?
GW had a free service on their hands and gained, dont know how many millions, in all these years... but the donate button is a bogey man... surelly they wanted the 100euros year donations for themselves
A clear case of incompetent people getting stuck with tecnicality crap and ignoring the BIG picture.
9892
Post by: Flashman
I sympathise, but using Blood Bowl as the domain name was a risky move. Probably would have been better to use something that the fans would "get", but wasn't an intellectual property of GW.
Dakka Dakka is an ideal example of this. We know it's a 40K Orkism, but GW can't copyright it.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
And for people jumping on owners neck you all forget something common on many hobby orientated sites... Owners like any people may loose interest in that particular hobby ( hell 9 years site is not something to sniff about theres lots of dedication there)... and manytimes even if out of hobby they choose to maintain the site running at their expenses just in name of the fan base!
What can you espect from someone who keep things runing/pays the bills just for others sake and then gets this legal kick in the ass? Automatically Appended Next Post: Flashman wrote:I sympathise, but using Blood Bowl as the domain name was a risky move. Probably would have been better to use something that the fans would "get", but wasn't an intellectual property of GW.
Dakka Dakka is an ideal example of this. We know it's a 40K Orkism, but GW can't copyright it.
Indeed, I say just avoid all GW names and artwork and have pocket money to hold things without the need of donations.
But the silly thing here is they are cutting the hand that feeds them.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Him saying 'can't be bothered' is hardly surprising, why would you want to be bothered investing work into a fansite for a game when that game's owner company just kicked you in the nuts. I sympathise with his resignation of the subject.
Games Workshop yet again sucking colossal amounts of ass.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Funny that they get a bee in their bonnet about it now. 9 years he has been operating and GW staff have been on it and only now has action been taken.
It's somewhat bizarre. And I'd like to point out that it's not only about "not being bothered", even with donations he has put his own money into the site to keep it afloat for nearly 10 years. Running something like that at your own expense is just like a hobby, so when you get kicked in the nuts by some heavy handed corporate threats I can well imagine why you'd want to jack it in.
20341
Post by: HyrbidNecro
JOHIRA wrote:It's hard for me to get worked up about the injustice being done to someone who admits that they personally don't care enough to do anything about it.
I'm with you on that JOHIRA. GW has become a HUGE company now and with becoming huge they now have a cut throat approach to copyright infringement. It happens. Make another site and keep the copyrighted name out of the address. If he wont go thru with renaming it and keeping up with it then why even start it in the first place? I understand hes had GW contributing on and off but its a company... a COMPANY.... dont expect them to be all user friendly especially when they get big and their legal departments grow. It is a kick in the nuts yes, but its what happens when you deal with something like this. Wont stop me from buying and collecting their miniatures as I have for almost ten years now. Ok I'm off my soap box 
8992
Post by: Kane
So how many of you are prepared to do something? why not emulate the fans of several cancelled TV series eg pick a random BB mini, cut it in half and send it to GW HQ with a polite note telling them why ..... easy cheap and if enough people do it maybe they'll change their ways ....
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
HyrbidNecro
No its just a question of using common sense, if the result of 9 year investment is a blind slap from those you promote pro bono then only a fool would continue the effort.
Something tells me people dont have a clue of what kind of investement maintaining a site is.
Believe me creating a site and keeping it updated is a fulltime job and drains much money if you are not carefull.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
I don't believe GW care about Blood Bowl and other specialist games.
They only care about new recruits to core games these days. That's where all the action and revenue is.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Kilkrazy wrote:I don't believe GW care about Blood Bowl and other specialist games.
They only care about new recruits to core games these days. That's where all the action and revenue is.
Why don't they just can them then? There they are on the end of the row of the GW site after "books" and "paints and tools" and their latest release if ironically enough Blood Bowls Mighty Zug from quite some time back. I guess there's some sort of internal wrangling going on there. The Specialist games are someone's pet project, that's why they got that one off freak release of Zug and little else. They won't invest in them but won't get rid of them either.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Maybe they will get canned.
It depends on the value of the trickle of Blood Bowl figures against the cost of keeping them in stock.
There are other companies making 'fantasy football' figures, so GW aren't even reaping all the potential profits.
20650
Post by: Pyriel-
Bolter and Chainsword, Dakka and BoLS don't use GW IP in their names or domains and I don't think that Warseer is a GW trademark.
Ever seen the "space marines" art straight from the IP on their front page site name?
Ever seen the GW IP "space marine" painter software?
And "donations"?
They were even confronted by GW about it but somehow managed to handle it for free ( lol) so the BB guy should be to. Its a simple case of precedence.
Anyway, regarding GWs heavy handed approach to its fanbase.
I want to think there is some logic to the apparent madness.
Specialist games like BB make and would make lots of money if properly supported and I know a couple of hobby store managers getting whacked by GW with more and more restrictive retail deals and dont forget the space hulk game, shops were only getting a limited amount and ALL that I spoke to complained to me about this, they would have sold loads more of the stuff if they only had gotten it from GW.
It seems to be a stupid thing but GW is a business and a successful one as well and as such their foremost objective is to make money so in these weird occurances there simply has to be a system that makes it more worth wile in the long run.
Maybe there are things like support, logistics, deals and licenses to other entities etc that we do not know about.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Kilkrazy wrote:Maybe they will get canned.
It depends on the value of the trickle of Blood Bowl figures against the cost of keeping them in stock.
There are other companies making 'fantasy football' figures, so GW aren't even reaping all the potential profits.
It would be interesting to know if they cast up new stock occasionally or whether they are just running down supplies until the ranges are no longer sustainable.
7375
Post by: BrookM
Quick! Lock and load! GW might strike here next.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
I am now considering they may be doing this for some reason linked to the release of the Bloodbowl computergame...
Why is beyond me but the recent release may have prompted this in some way.
17836
Post by: Ixquic
Surprise another shortsighted and anti-consumer move from GW!
I like playing the games and all but Games Workshop is filled with some of dumbest management of any company and frankly I hate supporting it.
BTW it doesn't matter if GW has a legitimate case or not since it's not worth the money or effort to defend yourself against company with much larger legal funds over a fansite.
4904
Post by: nathonicus
GW is probably taking action now because of the BloodBowl X-Box game, since they don't put much if anything into the minis game.
10615
Post by: Clay Williams
Keep the name, change the content. Just host a picture of of a bowl of blood.
131
Post by: malfred
Would work even less. They'd be on you like Monster was over that Vermonster stuff.
14828
Post by: Cane
Never heard of 'em but I don't play Blood Bowl either.
Can't say I like a big company going after its fans but one can understand why they do what they do.
19178
Post by: voidfiend
Wolfstan wrote:Just out of interest if you built a protest site called "www.bloodbowlsucks" or "www.rageagainstgamesworkshop" do these infringe on IP? Also to compound it, if you asked for donations to keep the protest site going, would that also up the stakes?
Under US law, as long as you don’t receive money from the site, it’s perfectly legal. The whole donations thing or paid advertisements is the sticking point. Read up on “sucks sites”.
So feel free to open a site with the URL Games-workshop-blows.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
What about dakkadakka's DCM program then?
518
Post by: Kid_Kyoto
twistinthunder wrote:but he's not infringing their IP, and they can't make him remove the donations button when that helps him keep the site up.
To try and expain GW's case...
Blood Bowl is their trademark, naming something Blood Bowl infringes on it, just like writting a book called Ultramarines would. Dakka Dakka and Bell of Lost Souls are not sicne GW ( AFAIK) never had a product with those names. A site called Gorkamorka or Necromunda would have problems.
There is no fair use for trademarks. Commenting on Blood Bowl (etc) is fine, but branding a product Blood Bowl is not.
Now I agree this is a dumb move on GW's part and there's no guarantee they would win a case but that's more or less how I see their logic. Automatically Appended Next Post: Flashman wrote:Dakka Dakka is an ideal example of this. We know it's a 40K Orkism, but GW can't copyright it.
We're talking about 2 differnt things, trademarks (product names) and copyrights (content). You cannot copyright a word but you can trademark one. And you can trademark anything.
'Apple' is a trademark of Apple Computers so no one else can make computers and call them 'apples'.
But Apple Music is a trademark of the Beatles (or whoever owns it now) so Apple comptuers could not call their music store 'apple'
and had to call it itunes.
So if GW made a game called Dakka Dakka no one else could make one.
HOWEVER since this site already exists there's be grounds for Yakface to force GW to change the game's name.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Yakface and Legoburner are pretty confident in the legal position of the site.
For a start it isn't dependant on GW stuff. A lot of the content is user generated although it relates to 40K and WHFB, also there is a lot of non-GW content too.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
I think it's sad that that's how they deal with their fans. Poor form.
Not suprising though.
4374
Post by: Spacemanvic
It's crap like this that makes people develop a great dislike of GW. Oh well, I feel better now that I make my Rhino's, Predators, Landraider (soon ork vehicles) out of bass wood. I buy one GW plastic kit, then make a bunch out of wood. No, I dont do tourneys or play at a store, so GW can suck it.
6902
Post by: skrulnik
It is irritating that GW is so heavy handed in their methods.
But it is understandable for them to issue this to a site now that they have the computer game to protect.
This comes under the same area as the Vassal shutdown due to Dawn of War.
GW does seem to do everything in their power to kill anything they cannot control directly.
Especially if it is related to Specialist games.
We asked our local GW for a night to play BloodBowl at the store, to try and stir up interest. We were told "no Specialist Games in the shop".
At the Chaos Cup just this October at the Chicago Battle Bunker, we had to stand outside the shop for 30 minutes because they "forgot" to come open it early.
On top of that, they had a hiring session that same Sunday and crammed us in the front tables of the Bunker with no chairs, because they were using them.
Blood Bowl is still going just from the hard-core players that are willing to put on Tournaments.
A friend ordered some BB minis through Mail Order to the local GW and it took over a month for them to get them in.
GW has earned my disdain. I no longer look forward to their games, just the miniatures and scenery.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
The whole "no specialist games in the shop" thing is so stupid.
21196
Post by: agnosto
Quick change the name of the site to "pew pew"!
10667
Post by: Fifty
I wonder if they are basing their demands on use of copyrighted material through the websit?e or use of a trademarked name in the domain name
from the IPO -http://www.ipo.gov. uk/types/ tm/t-about/t- faq/t- faq-infringement.htm
What is trade mark infringement?
If you use an identical or similar trade mark for identical or similar goods and services to a registered trade mark - you may be infringing the registered mark if your use creates a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public.
This includes the case where because of the similarities between the marks the public are led to the mistaken belief that the trade marks, although different, identify the goods or services of one and the same trader.
Where the registered mark has a significant reputation, infringement may also arise from the use of the same or a similar mark which, although not causing confusion, damages or takes unfair advantage of the reputation of the registered mark.
This can occasionally arise from the use of the same or similar mark for goods or services which are dissimilar to those covered by the registration of the registered mark.
I am undecided whether the site falls foul of this or not.
6084
Post by: theHandofGork
The site has been up for 9 years and is just getting this letter now.... soon after a bloodbowl computer game was released. I would not be surprised if this was because of a contractual obligation with Cyanide or at their request.
4786
Post by: legoburner
Kilkrazy wrote:Yakface and Legoburner are pretty confident in the legal position of the site.
For a start it isn't dependant on GW stuff. A lot of the content is user generated although it relates to 40K and WHFB, also there is a lot of non-GW content too.
Note the TM next to the dakka logo - that is not for decoration, we own the legal US trademark for dakka dakka, so nobody can release a game or website named after our trademark without our express permission. Likewise we cant be shut down in that context for that reason.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
legoburner wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:Yakface and Legoburner are pretty confident in the legal position of the site.
For a start it isn't dependant on GW stuff. A lot of the content is user generated although it relates to 40K and WHFB, also there is a lot of non-GW content too.
Note the TM next to the dakka logo - that is not for decoration, we own the legal US trademark for dakka dakka, so nobody can release a game or website named after our trademark without our express permission. Likewise we cant be shut down in that context for that reason.
*eagerly awaits the C&D to GW from Yak'n'Burner on that fateful day...*
12996
Post by: gil gerard
I'm not saying you SHOULD do this, but if it were me, I would make them sue. I would ignore them until such a time as I started receiving actual court dates and tangible, real threats, then I (acting pro se) would do everything to stall or postpone the process for as long as I could. This action dosn't cost you anything but a bit of time and some sad stories ( I can't be in court this day or that day because gramma is very ill, I spilled liquor in my underwear drawer, and my cat has clymidia,etc..) ; however your opponent will be paying several hundred dollars an hour to their attorney (or attorney's?) A more financialy powerful entity, even when not in the right, will often times drag you through court just because they know they can "out-spend" you. Even if stall tactics don't ultimately make them get tired of screwing with you, they will cost them money, and kicking them in their greasy little sacks (as in - sacks that they keep their money in) is better than just rolling over and complying. But then, thats just what I would do, and I only know the legal system from one perspective, and not usualy the one you want to be on.
4362
Post by: Ozymandias
MeanGreenStompa wrote:legoburner wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:Yakface and Legoburner are pretty confident in the legal position of the site.
For a start it isn't dependant on GW stuff. A lot of the content is user generated although it relates to 40K and WHFB, also there is a lot of non-GW content too.
Note the TM next to the dakka logo - that is not for decoration, we own the legal US trademark for dakka dakka, so nobody can release a game or website named after our trademark without our express permission. Likewise we cant be shut down in that context for that reason.
*eagerly awaits the C&D to GW from Yak'n'Burner on that fateful day...*
That's Mr. Face and Mr. Burner to you!
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Naw, I think Yak'n'Burner Inc. has great potential...
Just like in the Rocky Horror Picture Show, Dr Yak'n'Burner I presume?
19226
Post by: Tethyr13
Just to let some people know... GW has probably gotten the exact same IP legal advice that my company has received....in fact I know they did at one time.
Basically it comes down to 3 things.....
1) They are legally allowed to make him change his name/stop taking donations on their IP....This is a basic tenant of law. (they would have to go and prove it, and he may be able to get out of it for any number of reasons ... ie gw designers helping before, flat income (no profit), etc.- but they could)
2) They do own Blood Bowl, and are still using it in mini sales (as slim and unrepresented as they may be.), and through licensing for a new xbox game.
3) The part of advice that they received, and I recently received in my office - (hey maybe they lied, but they cost $400/hr.) - basically comes down to this......
If you don't DEFEND your IP, then you can lose its "use" over time. In fact if you just let everybody off, then you'll have no legal recourse when you do WANT to challenge it.
In other words, when GW went after the company that was turning out badly done minis with GW bits cast out of horrible metal, they could not have won/had the molds seized unless they had been shown to be ACTIVELY DEFENDING their IP......
That is the facts as I know them from attorney's. Though of course, the whole system seems slanted to the attorney's don't it? Keep spending money/time on us or you might lose the ability to win..... But that is ANOTHER discussion.
Also, maybe they are just now re-planning on releasing blood bowl again, like space hulk. A combi- Bloodbowl/deathzone ltd edition with new plastics made in china....? and since they are now doing the planning, they then decided to send it out..... (this I don't know- maybe hoping?)
963
Post by: Mannahnin
Yup. Sounds like we've got it summed at this point.
Active IP defense + used the trademarked name in the name of the site / web address + new computer game just came out = this letter.
If he cared enough to change over to a different-named web address, and remove any GW copyright images, he'd probably be all set. But from the sounds of it he lost real passion and interest in the site a while ago, and doesn't presently feel like it's worth the hassle.
7782
Post by: Tresson
pixelgeek wrote:Chapterhouse wrote:I beg to differ, they cannot selectively prosecute one site and let others go, this leads to a legal precedent not in favor of GW.
What planet are you living on where lawyers only threaten legal action if and only if they have a valid case?
This industry, and most others, is rife with examples of large companies threatening legal action against private individuals and small companies in which they do not have a valid case but in which they threaten to sue to stop purported illegal usage of IP or copyrights.
You are right that they can't do this but clearly we are seeing this happen so they do in fact do it.
Not having legal justification for something has never stopped a company from doing this sort of thing.
Do a Google/wiki search for SLAAP lawsuits for a nice primer on the corporate history of this
I Agree. Copyrights have grown well past what they were originally meant for and are now used to as a means to threaten and abuse people. It's time we give them good long looking at and either put limits on what can be done with it or remove these powers all together.
1911
Post by: pixelgeek
Mannahnin wrote:Active IP defense + used the trademarked name in the name of the site / web address + new computer game just came out = this letter.
There are ways to protect your IP that don't involve you being a dick to your fans.
Just because you have the right to protect something doesn't mean that you need to step on someone's neck to do it.
3963
Post by: Fishboy
however your opponent will be paying several hundred dollars an hour to their attorney (or attorney's?)
I would think most of them are on retainer.
I am not sure if any of you guys remember when VW decided to finally come out with a new version of the Bug. All the fan sites that had the VW symbol or a picture of an old air cooled bug or even something that resembled it were strong armed out of business. They strong armed many of their own fan sites out of existence and sued those that did not quit...and won most of those. You have to remember that some of these fan sites had been around for 30 years as posting club newsletters and such until the internet. The key was they went after everyone and not just nit picking some here and there.
In this instance GW really loses a lot of steam since it is provable that their own guys were contributing to the site. This shows some level of acceptance towards the site and puts GW on VERY shaky ground. Plus the fact that they seem to pick and choose whom they go after really weakens them as well. To show IP protection means across the board and not just the low hanging easy fruit.
9950
Post by: RogueMarket
GW has always been threatened by the interwebs.
I think the price increase has to deal with us people, who pay for CHEAP(er) prices on the net lol.
5580
Post by: Eidolon
This kind of bs, along with their inability to write rules, is why I dont buy models anymore.
7416
Post by: jabbakahut
pixelgeek wrote:Chapterhouse wrote:I beg to differ, they cannot selectively prosecute one site and let others go, this leads to a legal precedent not in favor of GW.
What planet are you living on where lawyers only threaten legal action if and only if they have a valid case?
This industry, and most others, is rife with examples of large companies threatening legal action against private individuals and small companies in which they do not have a valid case but in which they threaten to sue to stop purported illegal usage of IP or copyrights.
You are right that they can't do this but clearly we are seeing this happen so they do in fact do it.
Not having legal justification for something has never stopped a company from doing this sort of thing.
Do a Google/wiki search for SLAAP lawsuits for a nice primer on the corporate history of this
The documentary McLible is a good example.
752
Post by: Polonius
theHandofGork wrote:The site has been up for 9 years and is just getting this letter now.... soon after a bloodbowl computer game was released. I would not be surprised if this was because of a contractual obligation with Cyanide or at their request.
this is most likely the case, especially in light of how Vassal was shut down. I'd bet an arbitrarily large amount of money that the developer of the video game wants google hits going to forums discussing the video game, not the table top game.
I also don't think that pointing out that all the owner had to do was change the name was a huge insult on his dedication. We get that he's tired from running the site, and appreciate his work, but it's not like the request was ridiculously arduous.
8992
Post by: Kane
Polonius wrote:theHandofGork wrote:The site has been up for 9 years and is just getting this letter now.... soon after a bloodbowl computer game was released. I would not be surprised if this was because of a contractual obligation with Cyanide or at their request.
this is most likely the case, especially in light of how Vassal was shut down. I'd bet an arbitrarily large amount of money that the developer of the video game wants google hits going to forums discussing the video game, not the table top game.
I also don't think that pointing out that all the owner had to do was change the name was a huge insult on his dedication. We get that he's tired from running the site, and appreciate his work, but it's not like the request was ridiculously arduous.
given that a lot of those forums are complaining about bugs in the game maybe not 
752
Post by: Polonius
Lol, possibly, although I still think that while GW could have done a better job of explaining why they did this, I'm not sure this is really the screw job it appears at first glance.
7416
Post by: jabbakahut
I don't care if GW is in the legal right, it makes no sense. IP laws are crap.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Cane wrote:Never heard of 'em but I don't play Blood Bowl either.
Can't say I like a big company going after its fans but one can understand why they do what they do.
Well I'm glad it makes sense to someone, because I sure as hell don't understand it...
6902
Post by: skrulnik
Kane wrote:given that a lot of those forums are complaining about bugs in the game maybe not
And that is different from Dakka in what way?
I think most of the complaints are about differences between the game and the Tabletop version.
Especially wit hregards to hte kickoff table.
I have personally run into very few glitches or bugs.
It is a game that gets sluggish the longer you play though.
20341
Post by: HyrbidNecro
NAVARRO wrote:HyrbidNecro
No its just a question of using common sense, if the result of 9 year investment is a blind slap from those you promote pro bono then only a fool would continue the effort.
Something tells me people dont have a clue of what kind of investement maintaining a site is.
Believe me creating a site and keeping it updated is a fulltime job and drains much money if you are not carefull.
Don't get me wrong I completely understand maintaining and running a site is a huge effort and is a culmination of hard work and money out of pocket but my point I was trying to make is if it was such a huge thing to keep after it and update and such then why even start it? He willingly put a licensed GW name in his sites name, it's all legal mumbo jumbo but he should have had the common sense to give a different name that wouldn't bite him in the a*% later on. I dont care how comfortable the company gets with you, one day in the distant future, their legal department will shake their fist at you and give you a hassle. I've seen it so many times and I know it wont end with this one. And yes it is a slap to the gonads but GW is not a mom and pop business (at least not anymore) they've grown a thousand times more then most miniature companies. They are everywhere now and things change, legal departments evolve. It's the nature of the beast (a very large beast with little gnoblar lawyers who stab the fans in the groin when their not looking). Oh and he had a donations button on the site, HUGE bullseye for lawyers.
5212
Post by: Gitzbitah
agnosto wrote:Quick change the name of the site to "pew pew"!
That's just silly. Wasn't Dakka the site responsible for Fzorgle? We should now be called Fzorglefzorgle. 
19124
Post by: Howlingmoon
pixelgeek wrote:Mannahnin wrote:Active IP defense + used the trademarked name in the name of the site / web address + new computer game just came out = this letter.
There are ways to protect your IP that don't involve you being a dick to your fans.
Just because you have the right to protect something doesn't mean that you need to step on someone's neck to do it.
Welcome to the Internet Age.
17659
Post by: njpc
Chapterhouse wrote:Ummm, question, if you believe they have no legal case (hopefully you have done the research) why are you caving in? Do you seriously think GW will spend the 100s of thousands to lose a case against a legitimate fan site?
I'm saddened to hear of yet another fan based site getting shut down. The reason that he is clearly chosing to pull the site is the "what if?" What if GW actually follows up and takes him to court? Can the average man afford to not goto work to get dragged into court by a warrant? No they cannot. The legal ramification are to great to risk for anyone that has a family. So you pull the site. You do it to protect yourself and your family. It sucks, its burns, but it happens.
The best message is hopefully GW actually does something useful instead of crapping on the common man.
15365
Post by: twistinthunder
Pyriel- wrote:Bolter and Chainsword, Dakka and BoLS don't use GW IP in their names or domains and I don't think that Warseer is a GW trademark.
Ever seen the GW IP "space marine" painter software?
the painter software doesn't belong to gw and doesn't use their IP it uses an image which looks like a space marine but the link the actual page calls it the "Imperial amrine paint v5.0 beta" Automatically Appended Next Post: Kid_Kyoto wrote:twistinthunder wrote:but he's not infringing their IP, and they can't make him remove the donations button when that helps him keep the site up.
To try and expain GW's case...
Blood Bowl is their trademark, naming something Blood Bowl infringes on it, just like writting a book called Ultramarines would. Dakka Dakka and Bell of Lost Souls are not sicne GW ( AFAIK) never had a product with those names. A site called Gorkamorka or Necromunda would have problems.
There is no fair use for trademarks. Commenting on Blood Bowl (etc) is fine, but branding a product Blood Bowl is not.
Now I agree this is a dumb move on GW's part and there's no guarantee they would win a case but that's more or less how I see their logic.
so they could tell me to stop making a paint if i call it ultramarine blue? cause ive seen at least 9 different companies with that colour.
2855
Post by: asmith
the army got its name from the color ultramarine blue not the other way around.
20650
Post by: Pyriel-
the painter software doesn't belong to gw and doesn't use their IP it uses an image which looks like a space marine but the link the actual page calls it the "Imperial amrine paint v5.0 beta"
Go ahead and sculpt a mini that looks exactly like a space marine, just call it an imperial marine and make money of it and we´ll see how legal that will be.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
I can see why he's shutting down. This has to be demoralizing as hell. What would he be getting vs. what could he be putting at stake in the option of continuing? The whole scenario is ridiculous.
13655
Post by: combatmedic
Pyriel- wrote:the painter software doesn't belong to gw and doesn't use their IP it uses an image which looks like a space marine but the link the actual page calls it the "Imperial amrine paint v5.0 beta"
Go ahead and sculpt a mini that looks exactly like a space marine, just call it an imperial marine and make money of it and we´ll see how legal that will be.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_marine
You know most of those movies and games have had toys made that where named space marines.
That could be very confusing to GWs customer base!
This may end up turning into a Monster Cable vs everything with the word monster in it (like a miniature golf course)
The current IP and patent system just doesnt work, and there is no downside to large companies doing things like this. Its going to keep happening until something changes, an for GW, it will be when people stop buying their products.
$20 says they will start suing people that sell their armies on Ebay for "redistributing their IP"
5333
Post by: BeefyG
In related news Blood-bowl.net has received their cease and desist letter along with a list of demands to Impact miniatures that includes forbidding Impact from selling their figures at Bloodbowl tournaments.
The statement is to the effect of ALL bloodbowl tournaments meaning they are trying to restrict the sale of non GW models at non GW tournaments now. Talk about a bully overstepping the mark!
21940
Post by: nels1031
GW is within their right to do this to sites that infringe(ie directly name their product in a site name) on their IP, and moreso to folks that ask for donations (profit from their IP ). Its just how the trademark and copyright laws work, as far as I know. Its not a big bad super giant company trying to "crush its fanbase", its a company using its legal rights to protect its IP. Is it a dick move? From this fans perspective, yeah, but its something they are almost legally obligated to do.
Blizzard, of World of Warcraft fame, just recently did this to alot of add-on programmers that asked for donations at their addon sites. Another example, the NFL doesn't allow bars to charge to watch their games, nor are they allowed to even advertise "Super Bowl" parties at all. Its how the IP and trademark legal system works, not bullying.
Blizzard and the NFL are billion dollar companies and they've done the same thing GW is doing. Its the nature of the trademark/IP beast.
494
Post by: H.B.M.C.
BeefyG wrote:The statement is to the effect of ALL bloodbowl tournaments meaning they are trying to restrict the sale of non GW models at non GW tournaments now.
Somehow I don't see them winning that argument.
10273
Post by: Chapterhouse
Sad thing is most of those being affected will roll over and die rather then do a little research and see if there is even a case for GW.
People see a big company makeing threats and assume that they will win. Big money or not, if the plaintiff (company) does not have a real case, you can sue for legal fees and other penalties.
5333
Post by: BeefyG
NELS1031 wrote:GW is within their right to do this to sites that infringe(ie directly name their product in a site name) on their IP, and moreso to folks that ask for donations (profit from their IP ). Its just how the trademark and copyright laws work, as far as I know. Its not a big bad super giant company trying to "crush its fanbase", its a company using its legal rights to protect its IP. Is it a dick move? From this fans perspective, yeah, but its something they are almost legally obligated to do.
Blizzard, of World of Warcraft fame, just recently did this to alot of add-on programmers that asked for donations at their addon sites. Another example, the NFL doesn't allow bars to charge to watch their games, nor are they allowed to even advertise "Super Bowl" parties at all. Its how the IP and trademark legal system works, not bullying.
Blizzard and the NFL are billion dollar companies and they've done the same thing GW is doing. Its the nature of the trademark/IP beast.
I don't care that they are obligated to protect their IP and I get the impression that the majority of fans aren't either. Its the actions involving a complete lack of respect and simple courtesy that have the people enraged.
I also don't see how making empty threats such as the one listed above recently here: GW forbidding a Non GW company from selling Non GW miniatures at Non GW Bloodbowl events. This is simply not legal and actually qualifies as restraintment of trade.
Say what you like about them "having to do this" but the way in which they are going about it is losing them a lot of fans and regular customers. Its pretty much time for flaming torches and pitchforks in terms of the BB community.
To quote something mentioned on another forum that was quite funny:
"Next Blood Bowl players won't be able to congregate in groups of more than two in fears that we will somehow violate the IP." Automatically Appended Next Post: To further stir up the hornets nest about where the lines exist a post taken from Dain at www.ausbowl.com:
Quote:
The admins of a french league BBARENA ( www.bbarena.net) have received the same order to Cease and Desist their website.
there's no "bloodbowl" in the domain's name so what is it? They are "just" a league using Botocs/javabowl.
199
Post by: Crimson Devil
It doesn't matter. GW has never repected you. They don't care what you are, think, or believe. They only care if you buy. For every customer they lose, GW will replace them with two new 13 yr olds spending lots of their parent's money. Many of those complaining now will forget about this once they see the new shiney GW release. If you give GW money, you play by their rules.
1084
Post by: Agamemnon2
BeefyG wrote:In related news Blood-bowl.net has received their cease and desist letter along with a list of demands to Impact miniatures that includes forbidding Impact from selling their figures at Bloodbowl tournaments.
The statement is to the effect of ALL bloodbowl tournaments meaning they are trying to restrict the sale of non GW models at non GW tournaments now. Talk about a bully overstepping the mark!
What the hell do they think gives them the right? Impact does not, to my knowledge, violate Games Workshop intellectual property, the general idea of "fantasy races playing football" being free game for anyone. Also, why should GW have any say over what goes on at Blood Bowl tournaments? They're events organized by private persons or clubs completely unaffiliated with the company. In summary, to hell with Games Workshop legal. Protecting their property is one thing, violating third party companies via legal threats is completely different. Crimson Devil wrote:It doesn't matter. GW has never repected you. They don't care what you are, think, or believe. They only care if you buy. For every customer they lose, GW will replace them with two new 13 yr olds spending lots of their parent's money. Many of those complaining now will forget about this once they see the new shiney GW release. If you give GW money, you play by their rules.
The right course of action is clear. Boycott Games Workshop. Doesn't even matter if nothing comes of it, you'd at the very least get the benefit of a clear conscience.
19627
Post by: Zyklon
BeefyG wrote:In related news Blood-bowl.net has received their cease and desist letter along with a list of demands to Impact miniatures that includes forbidding Impact from selling their figures at Bloodbowl tournaments.
Ok, this one is clearly what the hell. I hope Impact takes their asses to court. I'm all for GW trying to protect their IP but this is just bs bullying now.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
BeefyG wrote:Its pretty much time for flaming torches and pitchforks in terms of the BB community.
And I'm sure those six people can really make a ruckus outside GW HQ.
You may rightly criticise how GW is going about this, but the fans who are upset are blowing things out of proportion every bit as much. If you are angry enough to quit a hobby you enjoy because a company made a website change its name, you need to calm down. Seriously.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
GW have to protect their registered trademark name of Blood Bowl, or they will lose it.
I doubt they can prevent a rival company from selling rival fantastic football figures are non-GW events. As someone said above, it would be restraint of trade.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
JOHIRA wrote:BeefyG wrote:Its pretty much time for flaming torches and pitchforks in terms of the BB community.
And I'm sure those six people can really make a ruckus outside GW HQ.
You may rightly criticise how GW is going about this, but the fans who are upset are blowing things out of proportion every bit as much. If you are angry enough to quit a hobby you enjoy because a company made a website change its name, you need to calm down. Seriously.
And all that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.
If you do not at least voice dissatisfaction with this type of behaviour, larger companies will run roughshod over smaller companies, individuals, consumers and any sense of business morality or fairness.
8471
Post by: olympia
In the U.S. you can't "trade on someone's name" which is clearly what any for-profit site with "Blood Bowl" in the name is doing. I assume IP laws are about the same or stricter elsewhere. My question is, if it was a fan site without any profit/donation involved at all would it be legal. Could I start a site called "I love Blood Bowl" where I do nothing but gush about the game?
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
BeefyG wrote:The admins of a french league BBARENA ( www.bbarena.net) have received the same order to Cease and Desist their website. there's no "bloodbowl" in the domain's name so what is it? They are "just" a league using Botocs/javabowl.
I can't find anything about this on the site you liked to. Do you have any more information?
735
Post by: JOHIRA
MeanGreenStompa wrote:And all that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. GW isn't "crushing its fanbase". It's shutting down a website that infringes on one of its trademarks. That's not evil triumphing. That's a company being a bit annoying.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
JOHIRA wrote:MeanGreenStompa wrote:And all that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. GW isn't "crushing its fanbase". It's shutting down a website that infringes on one of its trademarks. That's not evil triumphing. That's a company being a bit annoying.
If you read the original post, they are doing that AND making the following demands:
Stop infringing GW's IP. (This wasn't defined and would be crucial in a court case.)
Stop taking donations.
Confirm you will not infringe GW's IP in the future.
Another site has reported being instructed not to sell their own figures at an event where Blood Bowl is played.
All this is pretty sweeping and could probably be contested in the courts, if the people involved wanted the trouble.
GW don't have the right to stop someone taking donations unless the donations are construed as payment for items in violation of copyright.
Discussion and review of products is allowed for by the Fair Use provisions of copyright.
To prevent a company from selling its products is restraint of trade unless those products infringe on the copyright.
The people could defend themselves with little expense, and cause a lot of trouble for GW, but who wants the hassle over a bunch of toy soldiers?
McLibel had a big cause and a newsworthy story at its heart.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
JOHIRA wrote:MeanGreenStompa wrote:And all that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. GW isn't "crushing its fanbase". It's shutting down a website that infringes on one of its trademarks. That's not evil triumphing. That's a company being a bit annoying.
Games Workshop is supposedly a hobby based company dumping on it's customer base. It's a company based around the sales of toy soldiers acting like it's Weyland Yutani.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
If I start a Blood Bowl club and recruit 24 players for a league, set up a website for news and discussion with the URL www.londonbbclub.org, hire a church hall, accept fees from members to pay for the hall and the website fees, will I get closed down by GW?
494
Post by: H.B.M.C.
JOHIRA wrote:It's shutting down a website that infringes on one of its trademarks.
And ordering another company to not sell its own products - that comes under the banner of 'protecting trademarks' now does it?
1478
Post by: warboss
why wouldn't they think they're all powerful? they increase the price of minis yearly at 3x the cost of inflation regardless of whether their own material cost goes down and we still buy like crazy. orson wells said something about absolute power... and that's what GW has in the realm of little grimdark toy soldiers.
8471
Post by: olympia
It is very easy for GW to use their attack squig lawyers to bully feckless gobshites with humble websites. However, some big blogs have successfully resisted such corporate bullying. For example, Ralph Lauren threated to sue boingboing.net for posting a picture of one of its models (not the plastic kind with a bolter, but the human kind). Boingboing to RL to go feth itself because the image was posted under "fair use" guidelines. RL backed down. The point is, you either need to hire a lawyer or have one in the family and then you can call their bluff.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Kilkrazy wrote:If I start a Blood Bowl club and recruit 24 players for a league, set up a website for news and discussion with the URL www.londonbbclub.org, hire a church hall, accept fees from members to pay for the hall and the website fees, will I get closed down by GW?
You probably would, I dont know laws and courts stuff but isnt there any kind of ridiculous precedent here? What I'm saying is... since when a IPcopyright law has precedent and anulates free associativism...etc?
4374
Post by: Spacemanvic
All this talk makes me wanna start a bloodbowl site just so I get a C&D from GW. My response to the letter would be to return it wrapped around a fish.
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
It would be hilarious if this caused a sudden surge in Bloodbowl related websites to spring up.
123
Post by: Alpharius
MeanGreenStompa wrote:JOHIRA wrote:MeanGreenStompa wrote:And all that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. GW isn't "crushing its fanbase". It's shutting down a website that infringes on one of its trademarks. That's not evil triumphing. That's a company being a bit annoying.
Games Workshop is supposedly a hobby based company dumping on it's customer base. It's a company based around the sales of toy soldiers acting like it's Weyland Yutani.
Weyland Yutani!
Nice reference!
And it is odd the lengths to which GW will go to "protect" its IP at times.
5394
Post by: reds8n
.. that's it ! GW must have found a cache of unsold BB boxsets and have hit upon this cunning marketing plan as a means to shift them.
4056
Post by: Bla_Ze
Amen to that brothas.
What the hell are they doing? Protecting their property and all that, LETS LYNCH EM, YEHAW.
-_-
735
Post by: JOHIRA
H.B.M.C. wrote:And ordering another company to not sell its own products - that comes under the banner of 'protecting trademarks' now does it?
That's a completely different topic, and if you want to go after GW for it feel free, though I missed where the evidence and detailed information for this came out in the thread.
I'm just saying, this is a toy soldiers game. Not even that, it's one of the lowest-selling toy soldiers games of the company. One website with a badly-chosen name got shut down, and now we have people on this thread likening the situation to a multi-planet corporation that uses unwilling innocents as hosts to a deadly alien parasite to create the ultimate uncontrollable biological weapon. You think this might be going a bit OTT? Especially concidering that the owner of the site doesn't care.
5333
Post by: BeefyG
To JOHIRA - small game it may be, but at one of the biggest gaming conventions in Australia CANCON last year, there were more Bloodbowl players than 40k or fantasy by a long margin, they were only out represented by Flames of War players.
Also this issue has grown much larger than the initial post if you cared to read through properly.
Anyway this thing has grown exponentially now:
Apparently now approximately 54 letters to varying websites and companies have been forwarded by GW.
How does this website infringe?
www.enefel.org/
They are simply "Fantasy Football"
I dare say FUMBBL will be getting their C&D letter shortly to kill the fun for tens of thousands of people worldwide.
Add some more threats to Impact Miniatures -
Quoted from Impact Miniatures on Ausbowl:
Quote::
"Games Workshop takes no issue with legitimate competition, and you will no doubt be aware that we believe the hobby wargames market benefits from a greater variety of products being available.
Nonetheless, the Impact! Miniatures range and the accompanying 'Elfball' game bear a very strong resemblance to the Blood Bowl game.
Aside from any of the legal concerns raised in this letter, you will appreciate that whilst we may appreciate healthy and fair competition, we are less enamoured with activities which are designed to attract business away from Games Workshop. We would consider it inappropriate for you to sell or market Impact! Miniatures or 'Elfball' at a Blood Bowl event, for example.
Simply put, activities which are designed to support Blood Bowl should do so. On the other hand, commercial activities which are intended to compete with Blood Bowl should take place with no proximity to Blood Bowl events, publications, or products.
Unless your competing activities are scaled back, we may have no option but to review your activites regularly and, for example, reconsider your eligility for Blood Bowl competitions and events. In legal terms, attempts to make a connection between Elfball/Impact Miniatures and the Blood Bowl game may represent passing off at law.
We look foward to receiving your confirmation that you will refrain from marketing your products at any Games Workshop events or in any Games Workshop related paraphernalia. "
It's really a pity that such a useless pack of @#$^wits have the IP for this game.
As some people suggested it may be time to move on simply because of that fact even though I love the game.
10273
Post by: Chapterhouse
I think what many people who get these C&D letters dont know is that GW sends these things off like mass marketing mailers.
Unfortunately, few and far are the number of people who actually realize that GW has no legal precedent behind many of the letters.
All it takes is for them to ignore that letter the same way you ignore any junk mail (it is in no way a legal document) or send it back to GW asking what laws they are using to back up their claims.
Unless GW is sending the letters certified with proof of delivery and reciept, I doubt that anyone could take these seriously.
Try ripping off a legitimate companies IP for real, and youll have a certified letter being delivered to you by your post man.
5333
Post by: BeefyG
Kilkrazy wrote:If I start a Blood Bowl club and recruit 24 players for a league, set up a website for news and discussion with the URL www.londonbbclub.org, hire a church hall, accept fees from members to pay for the hall and the website fees, will I get closed down by GW?
At this stage Kilkrazy I couldn't really say but it might be a very real possibility.
1084
Post by: Agamemnon2
BeefyG wrote:Aside from any of the legal concerns raised in this letter, you will appreciate that whilst we may appreciate healthy and fair competition, we are less enamoured with activities which are designed to attract business away from Games Workshop. We would consider it inappropriate for you to sell or market Impact! Miniatures or 'Elfball' at a Blood Bowl event, for example.
What Games Workshop considers inappropriate has absolutely no relevance to anything. They don't get to make the rules, that's the law's job. Also "healthy and fair competition" pretty much includes "activities which are designed to attract business away from Games Workshop" by definition.
BeefyG wrote:Unless your competing activities are scaled back, we may have no option but to review your activites regularly and, for example, reconsider your eligility for Blood Bowl competitions and events.
I like that they used the phrase "competing activities" here, because it gives the impression that it's the competition that's the problem, not the potential for IP dilution or passing off issues. I also like the implication that any future activity Impact! willl engage in will be monitored and passed judgement upon by Games Workshop.
Is there a real danger that Elfball and Blood Bowl could be confused? I don't think so, not any more than t here's a danger that an Avatars of War miniature might be confused for a Warhammer miniature (which indeed would be easier, since the AoW guy sculpted for GW as well).
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
^ That is why these cases can't be decided until they come to court.
It takes someone to stand up to GW and force them to bring a suit before it can be decided.
If everyone being attacked by GW rolls over, then GW win by default.
Most of the people/companies currently being attacked are too small, too scared of GW's size, or care too little about the issue to stand up.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Johira the thread is much more than you claim it to be and even if I understand a bit were you coming from I'm more inclined to agree with the ridiculous big number of BB fans outhere who will get the end of the stick in this situation and are expressing their discontent... Sure it may just all be a irrelevant not important issue to you but for some its their main game, and they are not just 5 guys with a torch.
GW is simply way way offmark... one thing its their events another thing is independent events... I would love to see the oposite, a big independent con that didnt allow any GW products... Soon GW will also try to control any miniature producers since hey! they have miniatures...
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
GW have no legal or moral right to stop another company making fantasy style football figures except if the maker passes them off as Blood Bowl.
GW do have the right to set conditions on what happens at their own events, and can influence events they sponsor or want to attend.
I feel they have gone a bit far this time, moving beyond defence of their trademark to shutting down all unofficial fan sites, and this will rebound against them.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Indeed they have. Maybe it's wrong to equate them to Weyland-Yutani (though I sure as hell loved the reference), but in the case of Impact it seems GW is less concerned about protecting it's IP and more about snuffing out the competition in not-quite-legal ways.
18072
Post by: TBD
BeefyG wrote:Now, I could simply remove Bloodbowl from the domain by renaming it to TalkBB.com, but that means buying a new domain and time spent sorting everything out. Bearing in mind I hardly visit TalkBloodBowl.com anyway, I can't really be bothered with all that so have decided to let it die.
Regards,
JohnnyP
Looking at the site, that kind of forum is the exact same kind of forum my student club/fraternity has. I think it costs us about 30,- Euro a year, and that is it.
If there are any updates needed for a forum like that in the first place, they are either included in the 30,- you pay once a year or there aren't any. We certainly have never had to pay additional money for updates.
So that makes me wonder: where do those donations go? It is perfectly reasonable to assume he is indeed making a profit if only a small portion of those 4610 registered users occasionally donate.
If this JohnnyP really cared about the website all he had to do is make a few simple and cheap changes. If JohnnyP and three or four other members skip their weekly meal at McDonalds they would probably be able to cover the expenses of buying a new domain.
But no, he hardly visits the site anyway and "can't be bothered with all that". Looks to me like he either doesn't care and/or he knows damn well he is doing something wrong.
GW is perfectly within their legal right to protect their IP and ask for these changes. That site should be happy they have been left alone for so long.
2057
Post by: Lanceradvanced
Agamemnon2 wrote:
BeefyG wrote:Unless your competing activities are scaled back, we may have no option but to review your activites regularly and, for example, reconsider your eligility for Blood Bowl competitions and events.
I like that they used the phrase "competing activities" here, because it gives the impression that it's the competition that's the problem, not the potential for IP dilution or passing off issues. I also like the implication that any future activity Impact! willl engage in will be monitored and passed judgement upon by Games Workshop.
Is there a real danger that Elfball and Blood Bowl could be confused? I don't think so, not any more than t here's a danger that an Avatars of War miniature might be confused for a Warhammer miniature (which indeed would be easier, since the AoW guy sculpted for GW as well).
What I'm catching here is that their example is that they're going to "reconsider your eligility for Blood Bowl competitions and events", which sounds to me like cutting off prize support, I can totally see GW not wanting to be in the position of subsidzing their competition..
21196
Post by: agnosto
It would have been interesting to see this (the OP) go to court.
The site was offering a service that was not provided by the IP holder. If GW had an official forum for people to discuss BB, they might have a legal leg to stand on.
If I can legally resell my GW created figs and potentially make a profit, why wouldn't I be able to provide a service that is NOT provided by GW by creating a message board for people to talk about their hobby. I'm not selling a GW product, I would be selling access to my site where it just so happened people were talking about BB. It wouldn't help his case that he used bloodbowl in the URL; however, like so many people have stated, that's an easy enough fix...
18072
Post by: TBD
agnosto wrote:It would have been interesting to see this (the OP) go to court.
The site was offering a service that was not provided by the IP holder. If GW had an official forum for people to discuss BB, they might have a legal leg to stand on.
If I can legally resell my GW created figs and potentially make a profit, why wouldn't I be able to provide a service that is NOT provided by GW by creating a message board for people to talk about their hobby. I'm not selling a GW product, I would be selling access to my site where it just so happened people were talking about BB. It wouldn't help his case that he used bloodbowl in the URL; however, like so many people have stated, that's an easy enough fix...
It would not have been interesting. He would have lost miserably.
Whether or not GW provides the service is completely irrelevant legally.
Legally, the exact wording of something is crucial. The whole point to this is that "Bloodbowl" is part of the site's name. Without any names infringing GW's IP there would be no issue.
131
Post by: malfred
I've always wanted to pick up a set of Impact! miniatures.
20650
Post by: Pyriel-
All it takes is for them to ignore that letter the same way you ignore any junk mail (it is in no way a legal document) or send it back to GW asking what laws they are using to back up their claims.
Oh but they do, not seriously but if you question the SnD you will get tons of legal "explanations" trying to make it legit.
On a funny side note I should really sculpt up a set of "BB" footballs on chapterhouse for use in football "miniature games" and then we´d see what happens 
8815
Post by: Archonate
TBD wrote:GW is perfectly within their legal right to protect their IP and ask for these changes. That site should be happy they have been left alone for so long.
Nobody is arguing that GW has the right to protect their IP. The issue is that GW is harassing people who are not infringing on their IP. People who they know will not fight back. And they're doing it to their very own fans, no less.
Legally, the exact wording of something is crucial. The whole point to this is that "Bloodbowl" is part of the site's name. Without any names infringing GW's IP there would be no issue.
Except that GW has been doing the same thing to similar websites which do not contain "Bloodbowl". They're not protecting their IP. They are just antagonizing their fans.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
TBD wrote:BeefyG wrote:Now, I could simply remove Bloodbowl from the domain by renaming it to TalkBB.com, but that means buying a new domain and time spent sorting everything out. Bearing in mind I hardly visit TalkBloodBowl.com anyway, I can't really be bothered with all that so have decided to let it die.
Regards,
JohnnyP
Looking at the site, that kind of forum is the exact same kind of forum my student club/fraternity has. I think it costs us about 30,- Euro a year, and that is it.
If there are any updates needed for a forum like that in the first place, they are either included in the 30,- you pay once a year or there aren't any. We certainly have never had to pay additional money for updates.
So that makes me wonder: where do those donations go? It is perfectly reasonable to assume he is indeed making a profit if only a small portion of those 4610 registered users occasionally donate.
... ...
The 30 € per year is just the basic maintenance of the domain name.
You also have to pay for hosting and -- importantly -- data service fees. These can be mount up if your site is popular.
If the proprietor was making a good profit off the site surely he would have changed the name and carried on? He probably didn't receive a lot in the way of donations. I think he was lucky if he covered the maintenance and had a bit over for a few drinks.
Here's a game site which appeals for donations. http://www.youplay.it/default.asp
You can see they ask for $15 per year and have gathered 100 donors so far in 2009. The site owners certainly aren't making much after paying their hosting costs.
1084
Post by: Agamemnon2
Lanceradvanced wrote:What I'm catching here is that their example is that they're going to "reconsider your eligility for Blood Bowl competitions and events", which sounds to me like cutting off prize support, I can totally see GW not wanting to be in the position of subsidzing their competition..
It's a bizarre move because it's not Impact that GW's supporting with those prizes, but the organizers of Blood Bowl events. So basically they're threatening to punish unrelated organizers if said organizers have Impact minis for sale at their events. Of course, some of those two camps of people are likely to be the same people, but still.
18124
Post by: R3con
Hell if GWS actually started a lawsuit that could be fun, discovery laws let you find out all kinds of fun information about companies, internal memo's, accounting ect.
Also if anyowne actually knows the owner of that site have him PM me depending on bandwidth usage Id happily host his site for next to nothing.
1941
Post by: Wolfstan
What about DakkaDakka members clubbing together and funding a class lawsuit against GW over the use of Michael Moorcock's chaos sign. I know MM is ok about it generally, but wouldn't it be nice to hit them with a lawsuit and see them squeal!!!
26
Post by: carmachu
What? GW is acting in a heavy handed and thuggish manner protecting its IP(which of course was taken from various others IP MANY A TIMES)?
I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.
On a serious note, these places have been around for almost a decade, holding the torch for games they, GW, have pretty much run out of their stores and shops and turned their back on.
Yes they should protect their IP, but once again GW has demonstrated why long time vets have nothing but anger and contempt for the company.
18213
Post by: starbomber109
@ Wolfstan:Naw, just send them a C&D letter. I've researched this type of thing, and I've found that generally, when a company or an agency (like the FCC) sends out a C&D letter, it means they can't really do anything else but send a letter. I mean most of the time, a case could be made, but it would cost a lot more than just sending out a letter, and there's a chance the case could be lost...or in some cases, there would be no gain from going to trial.
20650
Post by: Pyriel-
What about DakkaDakka members clubbing together and funding a class lawsuit against GW over the use of Michael Moorcock's chaos sign. I know MM is ok about it generally, but wouldn't it be nice to hit them with a lawsuit and see them squeal!!!
Well, Mr. Moorcock is NOT amused about it actually...since I wrote back and forth with him about this.
The interesting thing is that I have Mr. Moorcocks approval to use and sculpt his chaos compass and I will do that also. Wonder if GW will try and forbid me to sell someone elses IP...
722
Post by: Kanluwen
I'm fairly certain the stylized Chaos sigil is not the property of Moorcock or Games Workshop...
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
malfred wrote:I've always wanted to pick up a set of Impact! miniatures.
I'd never heard of them until this happened. Go GW!
http://www.impactminiatures.com/index.php?option=elfballteams
Kanluwen wrote:I'm fairly certain the stylized Chaos sigil is not the property of Moorcock or Games Workshop...
From the GW website
"TRADEMARK INFORMATION
Adeptus Astartes, Battlefleet Gothic, Black Flame, Black Library, the Black Library logo, BL Publishing, Blood Angels, Bloodquest, Blood Bowl, the Blood Bowl logo, The Blood Bowl Spike Device, Cadian, Catachan, the Chaos device, Cityfight, the Chaos logo, Citadel, Citadel Device..."
I'm guessing that one of those entries is the 'chaos star'. Which to the best of my (and Michael Moorcock's) knowledge is an invention of Michael Moorcock's.
18072
Post by: TBD
Archonate wrote:Nobody is arguing that GW has the right to protect their IP. The issue is that GW is harassing people who are not infringing on their IP. People who they know will not fight back. And they're doing it to their very own fans, no less.
Except that GW has been doing the same thing to similar websites which do not contain "Bloodbowl". They're not protecting their IP. They are just antagonizing their fans.
I'm not sure what you are arguing here? I have seen several people say that GW has no right to do this, even though they clearly do have that legal right because that site is infringing on their IP. So who are these people they are harrassing who are not infringing on their IP?
And can you give me an example of any of those other sites they did this to as well? It should be a "simple" matter of taking a look at what such a site is doing and what GW is claiming.
If a site knows it has nothing to worry about because it is doing nothing wrong then they can just let GW take them to court and GW would lose. I doubt GW would go to court unless they have an actual legit case.
2695
Post by: beef
Wolfstan wrote:What about DakkaDakka members clubbing together and funding a class lawsuit against GW over the use of Michael Moorcock's chaos sign. I know MM is ok about it generally, but wouldn't it be nice to hit them with a lawsuit and see them squeal!!!
How about we all just talk about it some more and do even less.
14828
Post by: Cane
Yea its not GW you should hate. Its lawyers!
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Me neither.
Pretty good looking figures -- more variety than Blood Bowl. The Egyptian Gods and African Animals teams look rather jolly.
I might buy a set just to piss on GW's chips. After all, the Blood Bowl rules are available free, aren't they, so I could use the Impact figures for both games.
Hmmm... Let me just check the availability of Blood Bowl...
Games Workshop wrote:
Games Workshop Welcome!
Search Results
You searched for: "Blood Bowl"
Product Results
No Product Results Found
Article Results
There are no matching articles.
Event Results
There are no matching events.
Oh!
9950
Post by: RogueMarket
Their search function sucks, lol.
5245
Post by: Buzzsaw
Standard disclaimer; while I am an IP attorney, none of the follow should be interpreted to be binding legal advice or constitute an actual opinion. None of the following should be construed to constitute any form of relationship or interest in the matters or entities involved.
TBD wrote:Archonate wrote:Nobody is arguing that GW has the right to protect their IP. The issue is that GW is harassing people who are not infringing on their IP. People who they know will not fight back. And they're doing it to their very own fans, no less.
Except that GW has been doing the same thing to similar websites which do not contain "Bloodbowl". They're not protecting their IP. They are just antagonizing their fans.
I'm not sure what you are arguing here? I have seen several people say that GW has no right to do this, even though they clearly do have that legal right because that site is infringing on their IP. So who are these people they are harrassing who are not infringing on their IP?
And can you give me an example of any of those other sites they did this to as well? It should be a "simple" matter of taking a look at what such a site is doing and what GW is claiming.
Now I note that your flag is non-US, so perhaps you are referring to IP law outside of the Lanham Act, the Madrid protocal, the Copyright act or the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. My own impressions of these (which is no doubt a mere journeyman's by comparison) is that they do not support such actions by GW. Course, I'm probably overdoing the cough syrup tonight. Would you deign to enlighten us as to the basis for your conclusion?
TBD wrote:If a site knows it has nothing to worry about because it is doing nothing wrong then they can just let GW take them to court and GW would lose. I doubt GW would go to court unless they have an actual legit case.
Heh.
Hehehe.
BWUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Cane wrote:Yea its not GW you should hate. Its lawyers!
It's funny because it's true.
21196
Post by: agnosto
Old joke..
What do you call 100 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A good start.
-- That said, I hated my sojourn into the legal field...of course if could be I was doing all the work while the lawyer I worked for got 99% of the money.
4056
Post by: Bla_Ze
Don't Hate the playah, Hate the game.
2057
Post by: Lanceradvanced
Oddly enough I have their egyptian team allready, because they were based of one of my favorite furry artist's work...
7416
Post by: jabbakahut
BeefyG wrote:...Also this issue has grown much larger than the initial post if you cared to read through properly... Apparently now approximately 54 letters to varying websites and companies have been forwarded by GW.
Wow, this is both sad and scary. And personally I'm offended. I don't want to blame GW, because legal departments make recommendations to exec's and board-and then they follow any legal course that is available to "protect" their profits. My last two orders from GW and FW were in excess of 1K each, and now it saddens me that I feel as though I should take the only action which is to no longer patronize a product which I enjoy because of the perceived actions by a company which I don't agree with. I worry about getting a C&D letter for a stupid guide I made (see my sig). What this looks like is the George Lucas'ing of the GW franchises. They've eliminating themselves from the hobby community because they want to just have the GW community. It's a major corporate mentality and it's sad.
Chapterhouse wrote:Unless GW is sending the letters certified with proof of delivery and reciept, I doubt that anyone could take these seriously.
Try ripping off a legitimate companies IP for real, and youll have a certified letter being delivered to you by your post man.
And that is called bullying, threats without legitimate intent.
TBD wrote:Looking at the site, that kind of forum is the exact same kind of forum my student club/fraternity has. I think it costs us about 30,- Euro a year, and that is it.
If there are any updates needed for a forum like that in the first place, they are either included in the 30,- you pay once a year or there aren't any. We certainly have never had to pay additional money for updates.
So that makes me wonder: where do those donations go? It is perfectly reasonable to assume he is indeed making a profit if only a small portion of those 4610 registered users occasionally donate.
If this JohnnyP really cared about the website all he had to do is make a few simple and cheap changes. If JohnnyP and three or four other members skip their weekly meal at McDonalds they would probably be able to cover the expenses of buying a new domain.
But no, he hardly visits the site anyway and "can't be bothered with all that". Looks to me like he either doesn't care and/or he knows damn well he is doing something wrong.
GW is perfectly within their legal right to protect their IP and ask for these changes. That site should be happy they have been left alone for so long.
Nothing in your statement regards the legal rights of GW, you merely state that the owner doesn't care and GW is right. How the legal system works, and because lawyers are paid to know how to exploit they system-that doesn't make anything right. Allegations that actions like this are designed to protect the integrity of their IP for profits sake is complete gak. Even if the guy who made TSoaLR sold his book, it wouldn't affect GW adversly in any way what-so-ever. I don't see how being a dick company helps them. The bigger the community which enjoys your product, the larger your sales base becomes.
As an aside, I've wondered about things like the image hosting at dakka or CMON, isn't there a case to be made there?
5245
Post by: Buzzsaw
Wow, some of those sculpts really are quite impressive, especially the Egyptians.
18072
Post by: TBD
Buzzsaw wrote:Would you deign to enlighten us as to the basis for your conclusion?
Would you enlighten us as to why you (apparently) think they do not (support GW's actions)?
It is nice that you Googled some stuff, but if you would have actually read some of it too you would have found out that "likelihood of confusion" (about the origin, authorization and/or affiliation etc of the talkbloodbowl site) is one of the main criteria used to determine trademark infringement, and that it is very much supported by the Lanham Act among others.
And that the Madrid Protocol is a system of registering trademarks. I would like to know why you think it does or does not support any actions since it has nothing to do with that part.
And that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act has very little if not nothing at all to do with this either.
Unfortunately for the talkbloodbowl site it appears GW has a very strong case against them as far as "likelihood of confusion" goes, and the fact that they have a donations box also does not help their cause at all.
But I give you a  for effort and I hope that you enjoy the rest of your cough syrup
Btw they already made a new site/forum without "blood bowl" in it, so for me that confirms the idea that even though it was such an easy fix JohnnyP simply didn't give enough of a Skaven's arse about it (which he doesn't have to of course, and I wish him well).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jabbakahut wrote:Nothing in your statement regards the legal rights of GW, you merely state that the owner doesn't care and GW is right. How the legal system works, and because lawyers are paid to know how to exploit they system-that doesn't make anything right. Allegations that actions like this are designed to protect the integrity of their IP for profits sake is complete gak. Even if the guy who made TSoaLR sold his book, it wouldn't affect GW adversly in any way what-so-ever. I don't see how being a dick company helps them. The bigger the community which enjoys your product, the larger your sales base becomes.
I never said I agree with their methods, but this is the way it usually goes. Does anyone really expect uncle Jervis to send the guy at talkbloodbowl a friendly email asking him to please change the name and never do it again?
7416
Post by: jabbakahut
TBD wrote:
I never said I agree with their methods, but this is the way it usually goes. Does anyone really expect uncle Jervis to send the guy at talkbloodbowl a friendly email asking him to please change the name and never do it again?
Ha, sadly it would probably more effective.
26
Post by: carmachu
TBD wrote:
I never said I agree with their methods, but this is the way it usually goes. Does anyone really expect uncle Jervis to send the guy at talkbloodbowl a friendly email asking him to please change the name and never do it again?
Would be nice if they would make the attempt once and a while, instead of pissing on and off the fan base. Its tiring to watch GW do the 800 gorrilla act on their fans all the time. I mean if they did and they sites didnt comply, sure come down with the sledge hammer....but hey, its GW. Pissing off their fan base since, well, forever.
5245
Post by: Buzzsaw
TBD wrote:Buzzsaw wrote:Would you deign to enlighten us as to the basis for your conclusion?
Would you enlighten us as to why you (apparently) think they do not (support GW's actions)?
It is nice that you Googled some stuff, but if you would have actually read some of it too you would have found out that "likelihood of confusion" (about the origin, authorization and/or affiliation etc of the talkbloodbowl site) is one of the main criteria used to determine trademark infringement, and that it is very much supported by the Lanham Act among others.
Sigh. See, this is where the old saying comes from "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
Likelihood of (consumer) confusion is, indeed, a vital part of a Trademark case. But, here's the thing, it's a little thing, very subtle, easy overlooked... the word "trade" that comes before "mark"? Yeah, it's actually important. No goods being offered? No infringement. Now, could you make a case for dilution (for those that give a crap, check here) I suppose. Well, except for the express provisions in the law that exempt commentary sites and non-commercial uses (note, commentary sites do not need to be purely non-commercial).
But hey, like I said before, feel free to elaborate on why 15 U.S.C. SS 1125(c)(3)(A) and (B) and (C) aren't on point, or what the applicable foreign laws are. After all, it's not like there are provisions for when the mark is "use[d] in connection with" "identifying and parodying, criticizing, or commenting upon the famous mark owner or the goods or services of the famous mark owner."
I mean, it's not like the 8 factor likelihood of confusion test is for comparing goods and services of one party to those of another, or that on-point case law exists.
TBD wrote:And that the Madrid Protocol is a system of registering trademarks. I would like to know why you think it does or does not support any actions since it has nothing to do with that part.
And that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act has very little if not nothing at all to do with this either.
Fascinating. I surmise from your original conclusion that "perhaps you are referring to IP law outside of the Lanham Act, the Madrid protocol, the Copyright act or the Digital Millennium Copyright Act" (that is, that these do not support GW and your position), and you demonstrate your Google foo by... agree they have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Thanks? Bravo?
TBD wrote:Unfortunately for the talkbloodbowl site it appears GW has a very strong case against them as far as "likelihood of confusion" goes, and the fact that they have a donations box also does not help their cause at all.
But I give you a for effort and I hope that you enjoy the rest of your cough syrup
Hmm, you seriously think I'm passing myself off as an attorney? Because... I want to bask in the warm glow of humanity associated with attorneys?
18072
Post by: TBD
Buzzsaw wrote:No goods being offered? No infringement. Now, could you make a case for dilution
Blabla
Fascinating. I surmise from your original conclusion that "perhaps you are referring to IP law outside of the Lanham Act, the Madrid protocol, the Copyright act or the Digital Millennium Copyright Act" (that is, that these do not support GW and your position), and you demonstrate your Google foo by... agree they have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Thanks? Bravo?
And that is where the donation box comes in. Without it I would agree, but the donation box is one of the things that makes it a bit iffy.
Also, if (and this is very likely) any other company's miniatures are being advertised on that site, if only in threads, then it can be viewed as competition for GW's Blood Bowl miniatures. Some people could even think Impact's miniatures are officially related to Blood Bowl.
In that case someone would A) go to a site that can appear to be affiliated with GW, + B) once on that site see advertisements and links for/to GW's competitor's products.
So no, I would not toss the lack of commercial use out of the window so easily. Facilitating commercial use also does not always have to be intentional.
The case law is a nice find, but the details are not the same, as in that case the "Bally sucks" site clearly had a different nature and it explicitly mentioned it.
(1) strength of the mark; GW owns the trademark
(2) proximity of the goods; unlike the case law the difference in purpose is not so clear. Talkbloodbowl does not pass off it's site as being GW, but they also do not mention they are not, unlike "Bally sucks".
(3) similarity of the marks; unlike the case law, talkbloodbowl did not add a negative, so GW can certainly argue there only is a minor difference. On the other hand the style of the letters is not the same.
(4) evidence of actual confusion; if people have expressed confusion on that site, comments such as "oh I thought this was the official GW Blood Bowl forum", "does Impact manufacture miniatures for GW?" or "does GW own this site?", and screenshots have been made, then there is possible evidence of confusion.
(5) marketing channels used; I don't think talkbloodbowl actively uses any marketing channels, so that is positive for them
(6) degree of care likely to be exercised; could go either way, but unlike the case law there can be reason to believe an internet user thinks talkbloodbowl belongs to GW.
(7) defendant's intent in selecting the mark; neutral, but it may actually be in GW favor. In the Bally case they needed to specifically have Bally as part of the name, because otherwise it would be impossible to to talka bout Bally. In the talkbloodbowl case the purpose is not to prevent anyone to talk about Blood Bowl, but the name doesn't necessarily have to be part of the site's name (as it can be called "talkminiaturesfootball", for example, while in the Bally case the is no alternative).
(8) likelihood of expansion of the product lines; GW could choose to operate an official Blood Bowl forum in the future. Talkbloodbowl is not likely to expand into the business of manufacturing miniatures (however they could expand in areas such as official advertising of GW's competitors on their website, but I'm not sure that is relevant).
I wouldn't dismiss GW case just yet.
I'm still not sure what your purpose was of the last part of the quote. You originally said: My own impressions of these (which is no doubt a mere journeyman's by comparison) is that they do not support such actions by GW
.
That comment didn't make sense because the Madrid Protocol has nothing to do with that part of it, so it neither does or does not support GW's actions. Why bring it up? What you said makes about the same sense as saying you are under the impression the US internet gambling laws do not support GW's action, so perhaps I was referring to something outside the US internet gambling laws. Duhh.
Nice conversation btw. I doubt anyone else is still reading these posts
10273
Post by: Chapterhouse
Wow very interesting reading there "for those of us that like to read legal jargon and try to understand it".
Really did open my eyes more to what GW is doing, and I have no doubt GW would lose their case if ti was taken to court.. and the defendant could get the legal fees paid for as well.
Nick
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
TBD wrote:
Nice conversation btw. I doubt anyone else is still reading these posts
I am and don't you fething dare get this locked down by making it personal.
I want this to remain live. I want people to see what a gakker GW has been on this and express their ire.
I want some GW flying monkey to ferry this message back to their dark corporate masters.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Oh just calm down, would you? Have a jaffa cake!
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
And another thing...
If you visit that Impact miniatures site
(and here's the link again http://www.impactminiatures.com/index.php?option=home ) then you'll note that company actually has links to other miniatures sites that make elfball suitable minis.
What a great shame GW doesn't take a leaf out of their book eh?
But that's about all we can say about GWs attitude towards other companies, independent events, their own tournaments and their own fans who had the sheer temerity to make a FANSITE for a game they themselves can't be bothered with, A GREAT SHAME.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Fine, I'll eat it then.
Anyway, I agree with you, I don't really have anything else to add...
7899
Post by: The Dreadnote
Is it just me, or does that look 'shopped to anyone else?
21196
Post by: agnosto
MeanGreenStompa wrote:
"I'm tired of these  ing cakes on this ing plane!"
889
Post by: Niccolo
talkbloodbowl.com differs with Bally in three ways:
1. The "Bally sucks" website clearly stated on its page that it was an unofficial site. Talk Bloodbowl does not. This is a clear distinction brought up in courts.
2. The court finds that a domain name is under tighter scrutiny than the text of a website (also cases like Taubman or Pananvision do as well, and maybe become more on point than Ballys". Whether "talkbloodbowl" is significantly different enough from "bloodbowl" to create a separate entity in a consumer's mind is a bit cloudy when compounded with point number one. Sucks websites are allowed use of a trade marked name, but because adding "sucks" is recognized as not marking an official site because of its connotations, "talk" might not.
3. Dilution of GW's mark may be found by any advertisement, endorsement etc. on the website of another company's fantasy football game or minis if points one and two hold. The easy course to rectify these issues does not help. The exclusions to the Lanham act would not then apply. The "Bally Sucks" website was found to have no commercial intent because its advertising was deemed unrelated to Bally or its services, the name was not used to generate traffic for the advertisements, and there was a clear effort to side step points one and two. The change to talkfantasyfootball.org does eliminate any concerns, except by anyone wondering if they should start JaMarcus Russell or Josh Johnson this week.
18072
Post by: TBD
MeanGreenStompa wrote:What a great shame GW doesn't take a leaf out of their book eh?
Definitely.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Niccolo wrote:The change to talkfantasyfootball.org does eliminate any concerns, except by anyone wondering if they should start JaMarcus Russell or Josh Johnson this week.
I would probably start Jervis Johnson over Jamarcus Russell 
5245
Post by: Buzzsaw
Before anything else, I must reitereate that I am not forming an opinoin as to the issues at hand here, merely offering more general commentary on the state of the law, and this informatino is merely of academic interest.
TBD wrote:A series of meandering irrelevancies
Remember when I said "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing"?
In fairness though, this is a new experience: I've always wondered what it must be like to be a doctor arguing with a "vaccines cause autism" promoter, or an engineer arguing with a 9/11 Truther. In other words, someone what knows just enough to be convinced they're right, but not enough to understand why they're wrong.
You're taking a real test, the Sleekcraft 8 factor test for likelihood of confusion, and applying it to the wrong situation.
AMF, Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, the case that establishes the factors, is a case between one maker of boats, and another maker of boats.
Bally v. Faber (the Ballysucks.com case), is where it was established that the Sleekcraft factors don't apply; where one party is, for example, the proprietor of gyms and health clubs, and the other is a website designer, the "goods" are not related. Or, in the words of the court;
"The fact that the parties both advertise their respective services on the Internet may be a factor tending to show confusion, but it does not make the goods related. The Internet is a communications medium. It is not itself a product or a service."
Given mere second-hand and assuredly unreliable facts, the appearance of the parties here is of a manufacturer of toys and games versus a seller of... nothing, so far as has been related.
Moreover, you seem determined to ignore the fair use exception to Trademark for discussion embodied both in statute ( 15 USC SS 1125(c)(3)(B) and (C) and case law.
You want to hang your hat on the Lanham (Trademark) Act? Then heed the words of the court in Bosley (linked above);
The Lanham Act, expressly enacted to be applied in commercial contexts, does not prohibit all unauthorized uses of a trademark." And that "[Plaintiff] cannot use the Lanham Act either as a shield from [Defendant]’s criticism, or as a sword to shut [Defendant] up."
You want to hang your hat on the donation button? Again, the court in Bosley;
"[T]he appropriate inquiry is whether Kremer offers competing services to the public. Kremer is not Bosley’s competitor; he is their critic. His use of the Bosley mark is not in connection with a sale of goods or services — it is in connection with the expression of his opinion about Bosley’s goods and services." Italics in original.
Wanna hang your hat on links to other companies in the discussion group? Bosley again;
"Kremer’s website contains no commercial links, but rather contains links to a discussion group, which in turn contains advertising. This roundabout path to the advertising of others is too attenuated to render Kremer’s site commercial."
By the way, for those that think the domain name must be disparaging to be seperate, the website Kramer used was "www.BosleyMedical.com," which scarcely seems obviously negative.
Or, consider the statement reiterated in Mattel (the Barbie Girl case);
"The First Amendment may offer little protection for a competitor who labels its commercial good with a confusingly similar mark, but trademark rights do not entitle the owner to quash an unauthorized use of the mark by another who is communicating ideas or expressing points of view.”
Remember, I'm intentionally unfamiliar with the site the OP talks about; for all I know it's engaged in actively impersonating an official GW site, and so none of the above applies. These are general principles, just as generally orphans are treated mercifully by the court, but that scarcely matters if you've become an orphan by killing your parents.
TBD wrote:I'm still not sure what your purpose was of the last part of the quote. You originally said: My own impressions of these (which is no doubt a mere journeyman's by comparison) is that they do not support such actions by GW
.
That comment didn't make sense because the Madrid Protocol has nothing to do with that part of it, so it neither does or does not support GW's actions. Why bring it up? What you said makes about the same sense as saying you are under the impression the US internet gambling laws do not support GW's action, so perhaps I was referring to something outside the US internet gambling laws. Duhh.
Nice conversation btw. I doubt anyone else is still reading these posts
Again, I brought it up as part of a list of the relevant US and international trademark and copyright laws to point out that none of them is relevant. It was an invitation to provide your basis for thinking it's relevent... so, from this exchange I am to assume that you do not, in fact, have any other grounds on which to anchor your opinion?
Chapterhouse wrote:Wow very interesting reading there "for those of us that like to read legal jargon and try to understand it".
Really did open my eyes more to what GW is doing, and I have no doubt GW would lose their case if ti was taken to court.. and the defendant could get the legal fees paid for as well.
Nick
In fairness, you forget the bluff that unfortunately underlies most threats to litigation: say GW sues, you can't just ignore it or they will get a default judgment, regardless of the merits of their claim.
On the other hand, you can fight, but that costs money.
For example, say I opened a site at "GamesWorkshopBlowsGoats.com". They send me a cease and desist letter. I know, from case law, that I am in the right (straight repetition of the facts of BallySucks), but I still have to weigh weather I can spend the money to fight them.
This is roughly analogous to the idea of nuisance value: after an auto accident, personal injury lawyers will sue for perhaps $10,000 for an injury. Well, to fight the lawsuit might take an insurance company $7,000 in lawyers fees, so they settle for $5,000, because it's cheaper then fighting.
Ultimately, that's the real issue, you see; right or wrong, if a company like GW sends you a letter, you're playing chicken. They can very easily throw a few thousand dollars worth of legal filings at you with very little impact on their bottom line, but that's far more then enough to destroy whatever margin a fan site generates.
The way to get GW (or any company that relies on devoted fans) to stop "bullying" their fan sites, is to let GW know it will impact your purchases.
9777
Post by: A-P
Just visited Dark reign ( the fan site for Dark Heresy RPG ) and they too have received the GW threat mail . Just how far reaching is this GW offensive? It obviously is a coordinated effort against a large number of fan sites. Do have any kind of list of the sites under assault?
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
The Dreadnote wrote:Is it just me, or does that look 'shopped to anyone else?
Definitely shopped. That actor is an American. Americans don't eat Jaffa Cakes. Clearly someone replaced whoever was holding the Jaffa Cakes with a picture of an actor.
10667
Post by: Fifty
Sadly, it seems that GW would rather increase market share than increase market size. If they believe the market is already as large as it can get, that makes some sense, but in the long run I am still not sure it is the best idea.
I remember "the good old days" when even WD was a "hobby magazine", not a "GW magazine".
752
Post by: Polonius
Thanks for the analysis Buzzsaw. I wish I had studied IP in law school. Oh well, I was having too much fun taking tax classes.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Copyright law allows for use of copyright artworks for the purposes of criticism and review.
Depending how bloodbowl.com and darkreign40k.com run their forums, it should be easily possible to carry on and defy GW. They'll need to delete gratuitous examples of GW imagery, that's all.
20650
Post by: Pyriel-
From the GW website
"TRADEMARK INFORMATION
Adeptus Astartes, Battlefleet Gothic, Black Flame, Black Library, the Black Library logo, BL Publishing, Blood Angels, Bloodquest, Blood Bowl, the Blood Bowl logo, The Blood Bowl Spike Device, Cadian, Catachan, the Chaos device, Cityfight, the Chaos logo, Citadel, Citadel Device..."
I'm guessing that one of those entries is the 'chaos star'. Which to the best of my (and Michael Moorcock's) knowledge is an invention of Michael Moorcock's.
Talk about being blue eyed.
The chaos compass first appeared and is contributed to Moorcocks work.
What it says on GWs policy page (not legal page since there is actually not much "legality" there) is what they want to be true.
Take it one step further and read on...
You will come across in GWs so called "legal" page this:
"eldar devices".
Those too are apparently owned by GW but then allow me to laugh since I hardly think GW owns any japanese kanji symbols nor do they own the egyptian mythological eye of horus symbol.
TBD wrote:
Nice conversation btw. I doubt anyone else is still reading these posts
I am and don't you fething dare get this locked down by making it personal.
Agree. Tone down the holyer-then-thou attitude please.
19124
Post by: Howlingmoon
Fifty wrote:Sadly, it seems that GW would rather increase market share than increase market size. If they believe the market is already as large as it can get, that makes some sense, but in the long run I am still not sure it is the best idea.
I remember "the good old days" when even WD was a "hobby magazine", not a "GW magazine".
Those days are gone.
now the choice is whether you, the customer, support GW and FFG through these actions.
There are ways around all of this and all of the Dark Heresy books are readily available thru other sources.
I do not condone nor condemn any action.
1084
Post by: Agamemnon2
Howlingmoon wrote:There are ways around all of this and all of the Dark Heresy books are readily available thru other sources.
I do not condone nor condemn any action.
I on the other hand do condemn piracy, actual or implied. Do what I do, buy used.
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
Pyriel wrote:Talk about being blue eyed.
The chaos compass first appeared and is contributed to Moorcocks work.
What it says on GWs policy page (not legal page since there is actually not much "legality" there) is what they want to be true.
I'm pretty sure that's what I said. Still, thanks for the insult pal.
212
Post by: Kotrin
I've been to the French website http://www.bbarena.net/ (blood bowl arena).
As mentioned earlier in this thread, they've been attacked, er, contacted by GW legal dept too.
I guess that's under the friendly advice offered by GW that they changed terms of use for their website:
Vous devez posséder un exemplaire du jeu de plateau pour utiliser BBA. Vous pouvez commander ce jeu directement sur le site officiel de Games Workshop.
You must own a copy of the boardgame to use BBA. You can order this game directly from Games Workshop's official website.
Actually, it's hard for me to write this message while laughing so hard.
I wonder if having bbarena on one's browser cache is enough for a search warrant? Friggin' hilarious!
Those days, it's probably easier to set up a pedophilia web site than a GW fan site. Less hassle.
9777
Post by: A-P
Kotrin wrote:I've been to the French website http://www.bbarena.net/ (blood bowl arena).
...
You must own a copy of the boardgame to use BBA. You can order this game directly from Games Workshop's official website.
Actually, it's hard for me to write this message while laughing so hard.
( Blinks ) Errr..what? GW suggested/wanted/settled for that? What the feth? That does not make any sense. This is just like from a Kafka novel!
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
There are two possible interpretations of that statement:
1. Buy a copy of Blood Bowl or you are not allowed to read our site.
2. Buy a copy of Blood Bowl because our site is all about it and you won't understand anything without it.
212
Post by: Kotrin
Kilkrazy wrote:There are two possible interpretations of that statement:
1. Buy a copy of Blood Bowl or you are not allowed to read our site.
2. Buy a copy of Blood Bowl because our site is all about it and you won't understand anything without it.
From the original statement, it's clearly #1. You must - not should - own a copy of Blood Bowl to use the site. Now, does "use" means reading? Registering? Thinking about it? Do you need to send a proof of purchase before entering?
10667
Post by: Fifty
What bearing does it have to that disclaimer specifically and the whole debate generally that you can download the rules for free?
9777
Post by: A-P
Fifty wrote:What bearing does it have to that disclaimer specifically and the whole debate generally that you can download the rules for free?
Yes, I had the exact same "Syntax Error"- moment.
7416
Post by: jabbakahut
Am I the only one who finds it completely ridiculous that if you website can't be distinguished as not gamesworkshop somehow it means your violating IP or Copyright? If the consumers of your product are so fething stupid that they don't know where they are, maybe your product just really isn't that good or unique.
20650
Post by: Pyriel-
Kilkrazy wrote:There are two possible interpretations of that statement:
1. Buy a copy of Blood Bowl or you are not allowed to read our site.
2. Buy a copy of Blood Bowl because our site is all about it and you won't understand anything without it.
From the original statement, it's clearly #1. You must - not should - own a copy of Blood Bowl to use the site. Now, does "use" means reading? Registering? Thinking about it? Do you need to send a proof of purchase before entering?
Heh, wonder on whom the burden of proof lies.
If it was in a UK court it would be on the poor viewer of the website but then again I cant think of any western country with more screwed up laws then UK.
21196
Post by: agnosto
Buzzsaw wrote:You want to hang your hat on the donation button? Again, the court in Bosley;
"[T]he appropriate inquiry is whether Kremer offers competing services to the public. Kremer is not Bosley’s competitor; he is their critic. His use of the Bosley mark is not in connection with a sale of goods or services — it is in connection with the expression of his opinion about Bosley’s goods and services." Italics in original.
Yes! I'm glad I wasn't off my rocker when I said something very similar a couple of days ago. My IP class info has withstood the course of time and countless beers.
2764
Post by: AgeOfEgos
Kotrin wrote:
Those days, it's probably easier to set up a pedophilia web site than a GW fan site. Less hassle.
First, I want to say thanks to the IP discussion from those educated on the subject, good stuff to read and I'm being sincere when I say that. Thanks.
Second, that quote is farking hilarious Kotrin. Good stuff.
5333
Post by: BeefyG
Apparently portmaw.com got one too, which is the main Battlefleet Gothic talk site (like TBB / TFF).
So this is definitely not limited to simply Blood Bowl or "Thruddball" (instead of Thruddbowl) as GW would like a standing tournament in the UK to change its name to as it "sounds too much like Bloodbowl".
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
This topic gets more and more insane the longer it goes on.
22009
Post by: Lord Alaric
Spacemanvic wrote:It's crap like this that makes people develop a great dislike of GW.
While I'm far from being a legal expert, I couldn't agree more. It's the corporate entity that GW has become that has continually ticked off their fanbase over the years. I remember playing 2ed Ed. 40K(even rogue trade with a few friends who still had the rules), and it was all about having fun. They put out a game for people to just sit down,have fun and forget about the real world for awhile. Now all they care about is money. I understand that they are a business, and that the primary reason for running a business is to make money... but they have alienated a lot of the people who have made them( GW) who and what they are.
Spacemanvic wrote: so GW can suck it.
Best. Post. Ever. Lol.
99
Post by: insaniak
Lord Alaric wrote:I remember playing 2ed Ed. 40K(even rogue trade with a few friends who still had the rules), and it was all about having fun. They put out a game for people to just sit down,have fun and forget about the real world for awhile. Now all they care about is money.
You might be surprised by how little GW's corporate attitude has actually changed since 2nd edition. A lot of the exact same shenanigans were going on back then... I remember talking to more than one store owner back in 2nd edition who had complaints with GW reps coming into their stores and demanding that other companies' miniatures be moved further away from the 40K and WHFB displays (most conspicuously Warzone, although Harlequin's Fantasy range ruffled some feathers as well). Or GW refusing to send them stock unless they complied with GW's display and pricing demands. GW's strong-arm tactics with setting up stores, and hard-sell retail attitude were also well and truly entrenched by then.
The only real difference I can see these days is the internet. Potentially-IP-infringing websites just weren't a problem in the early 90's. Nor were there countless fan-made forums dedicated to discussing the hobby, just ready to jump up and down and make a world-wide fuss every time someone at GW did something stupid.
So it's not that GW are acting any worse these days than they did back in the 'good old days'... it's simply that these days, more people hear about it.
1941
Post by: Wolfstan
Ok, so given that this doesn't appear to be just one site being attacked by GW, wouldn't it be an idea for the owners of such sites, and sites such as DakkaDakka, BolterandChainsword, Warseer, et al to get together and actually present a united front to them?
Given what's going on where does it end? As silly as it sounds you could potentially have a situation that a GW fan site can't have any GW related artwork to brighten it up, or be used as links, no use of IP/Copyright terms, unless used in a vague way, no reference to anything else that may look like a GW product and no donations to help run the site.
So basically you end up with a website made up of GW innuendo? That would be interesting! Nothing is 100% GW related... but it could be, nudge, nudge, wink, wink
As I've said before, it is time for people to take back their hobby. It's time for people to actually say to GW if you don't start acting nice you can go shove it. BTW, I'm not anti GW, they are abusiness and they are there to make money. However their history isn't like Mattel or Hasbro. GW was a company set up by people who had a passion for gaming and wanted to pass that passion on, which they did for years. They now appear to want to behave like a mainstream toy company, however I don't think they realise how risky that is. They forget that they aren't mainstream and as much as they go after the little ones, it's the veterans who actually keep them going. If, and it's a big IF, the GW veteran gaming community actually got together, became a voice and stood their ground, I don't think it would take long for GW (or the major share holders) to stop and listen.
If all the members of the main forums came together under an umbrella group and made a unified protest (lay off buying for a month) I thinked they'd get the message.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
especially if that month was December...
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
insaniak wrote:Lord Alaric wrote:I remember playing 2ed Ed. 40K(even rogue trade with a few friends who still had the rules), and it was all about having fun. They put out a game for people to just sit down,have fun and forget about the real world for awhile. Now all they care about is money.
You might be surprised by how little GW's corporate attitude has actually changed since 2nd edition. A lot of the exact same shenanigans were going on back then... I remember talking to more than one store owner back in 2nd edition who had complaints with GW reps coming into their stores and demanding that other companies' miniatures be moved further away from the 40K and WHFB displays (most conspicuously Warzone, although Harlequin's Fantasy range ruffled some feathers as well). Or GW refusing to send them stock unless they complied with GW's display and pricing demands. GW's strong-arm tactics with setting up stores, and hard-sell retail attitude were also well and truly entrenched by then.
The only real difference I can see these days is the internet. Potentially-IP-infringing websites just weren't a problem in the early 90's. Nor were there countless fan-made forums dedicated to discussing the hobby, just ready to jump up and down and make a world-wide fuss every time someone at GW did something stupid.
So it's not that GW are acting any worse these days than they did back in the 'good old days'... it's simply that these days, more people hear about it.
Because more people hear about it, there is the potential for more harm or benefit to GW.
In this case I think they are going to reap harm, because of the ungracious way they have addressed an important Trademark issue and tried to suppress legitimate free speech and competition at the same time.
It's only because of fan sites like Talkbb.com that Blood Bowl has kept going as a vibrant, though niche game, since GW stopped supporting specialist games several years ago.
99
Post by: insaniak
Kilkrazy - no argument from me there. I was merely responding to the idea that this corporate mentality was something new.
308
Post by: hammerofulric
7 pages for the closure of one website? Hardly crushing, is it?
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
hammerofulric wrote:7 pages for the closure of one website? Hardly crushing, is it?
There's actually half a dozen of them, who knows how many will close. You're right seven pages is a lot to follow, I'll start a new thread in Dakka Discussions.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Wolfstan wrote:What about DakkaDakka members clubbing together and funding a class lawsuit against GW over the use of Michael Moorcock's chaos sign. I know MM is ok about it generally, but wouldn't it be nice to hit them with a lawsuit and see them squeal!!!
Don't be stupid.
2057
Post by: Lanceradvanced
Time I think to sit down tonight and take down the "Necrontyr" Visual Pinball table I have on my website before I get a C&D... probaby be back in a week or two, renamed "Space Tomb" or something..
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
Lanceradvanced wrote:Time I think to sit down tonight and take down the "Necrontyr" Visual Pinball table I have on my website before I get a C&D... probaby be back in a week or two, renamed "Space Tomb" or something..
Why don't you call it Cyber-Terminator-man.
4362
Post by: Ozymandias
*sigh* Seriously GW, going after Port Maw and Dark Reign too?? I hope someone in GW legal gets fired over all of this, it is astonishingly stupid to go after your fans like this.
10273
Post by: Chapterhouse
I hope those owners realize that a C&D is in no way legal, and a company can put anything they want in it, regardless if its law or just stuff they are making up. Someone should point those owners to this thread.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Chapterhouse wrote:I hope those owners realize that a C&D is in no way legal, and a company can put anything they want in it, regardless if its law or just stuff they are making up. Someone should point those owners to this thread.
It's not about being in the right legally; they just have a lot of money and aren't afraid to throw their weight around to make a point. They just want to put the frighteners into the little people with their little websites.
"Fear will keep the local systems in line."
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Like I just posted in the other thread:
It doesn't seem to be tossing their weight around. The sites they're going after have trademarks of GW in their name(the bloodbowl sites and darkreign40k) or are linking directly to GW photos, etc without proper crediting.
375
Post by: chris_valera
Pyriel- wrote:the painter software doesn't belong to gw and doesn't use their IP it uses an image which looks like a space marine but the link the actual page calls it the "Imperial amrine paint v5.0 beta"
Go ahead and sculpt a mini that looks exactly like a space marine, just call it an imperial marine and make money of it and we´ll see how legal that will be.
Enigma Miniatures tried, and failed. Although in all fairness, they never took it to court since they didn't have the funds.
Stupid, too. Their fantasy figures were relatively generic; anyone can sell elves, dwarves, and renaissance Germans.
If they had been honest, and stuck to producing generic stuff instead of GW rip-ffs, they could have been the next Reaper, or at least a solid third-party supplier.
--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Howard A Treesong wrote:
"Fear will keep the local systems in line."
Indeed mate... But it can also trigger a revolution, extreme actions to induce fear showed us many times that they are not "safe".
By safe I mean If a Big company attacks many small fan based sites just to induce general fear they may/will experience a very negative turnback.
I think its not in GW best interest to go this route because GW publicity system is based on word of mouth... fan sites pushing the GW stuff are a good thing! even if some are not 100% constructed according to GW IP wishes... THis blind goose chase will only benefict GW competition.
I would fire the legal company who is behind this...
This is foremost a hobby for 90% of the costumers and people dont need this kind of agravations on their hobby life.
I'm willing to bet if GW was POLITE to fans and asked if they could change sites most would do it gladly... but by doing the oposite they will get nothing more than pissed of people.
4514
Post by: Myrthe
TGN just added an entry with GWs official response :
http://www.tabletopgamingnews.com/2009/11/09/31255#comments
To which I add:
Change the URL to what ? A name without “BloodBowl” in it ?? What’s the point if no one can find it ?
So, by GWs heavy-handed legal logic, I should change the name of my game club, where we play 40K and discuss rules, to something generic and non- 40K related ??
Yet another ding to GWs rep as a company !!
6646
Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin
So have they gone after NAF?
Crazy, really wierd call, when you have game with its bow so low in the water its almost gone under for ever.
Why in the nine hells would you want to kill off sites that where helping keeping it on life support and quite likely contributing to the slim sales of said game.
GW, mis-understanding the whole 'cut me own throat' style of sales-manship?
99
Post by: insaniak
Myrthe wrote:Change the URL to what ? A name without “BloodBowl” in it ?? What’s the point if no one can find it ?
People don't seem to have too many problems finding Dakka. Or Bolter & Chainsword. Or Warseer.
So, by GWs heavy-handed legal logic, I should change the name of my game club, where we play 40K and discuss rules, to something generic and non-40K related ??
It can be 40K related. It just can't have GW-registered Trademarks in it.
20671
Post by: Bartali
Fuss about nothing
GW asks site owner to change site name
Owner can't be bothered as he's lost interest
Owner offers site to someone else
What's the problem ?
9594
Post by: RiTides
The easiest thing to do would just be to change the name. Not the fairest :( but the easiest to solve this issue!
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Problem? They want the donations button removed which makes funding the site somewhat difficult. The name change is the least of the problems. Yes someone else could take it but how would they pay for it?
5333
Post by: BeefyG
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:So have they gone after NAF?
Crazy, really wierd call, when you have game with its bow so low in the water its almost gone under for ever.
Why in the nine hells would you want to kill off sites that where helping keeping it on life support and quite likely contributing to the slim sales of said game.
GW, mis-understanding the whole 'cut me own throat' style of sales-manship?
The NAF changed their domain last weekend.
6646
Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin
Ah, didn't know.
I have some of the dice and was once a member, but haven't been there in a while. Since my last PC died about a year ago.. still slowly building up my old links.
18072
Post by: TBD
Pyriel- wrote:Tone down the holyer-then-thou attitude please.
I put a smiley with that comment that was there very much on purpose
5333
Post by: BeefyG
Hi All,
Here is the form letter that has been forwarded to a number of people (and myself) in the BB community who expressed their concerns about the goings on.
Its nice to see that they could actually take the time to respond...but quite troubling that they have bothered to include the reference to challenging leagues (of any sort) bb or warhammer that include those words in their name.
Anyway the letter for people to read:
Our ref: 10761
Thank you for your email concerning the website www.talkbloodbowl.com.
We understand that you are unhappy about the decision by the people running www.talkbloodbowl.com to shut their site down. The Blood Bowl community is important to Games Workshop and we are also disappointed that they have felt it necessary to take such a step. Unfortunately, that decision is entirely one for them and we can have no influence over what action they choose to take.
Unlike many companies, Games Workshop usually only stops people from using our intellectual property if we must do so in order to protect it (provided that use is by and for hobbyists). For example, the law requires us to protect our trademarks in certain ways - and if we do not - we might lose them. As you can imagine, we do not want to lose our trademarks as we would no longer be able to create the great miniatures and table top hobby wargames that we pride ourselves on!
‘Blood Bowl’ is a trademark that belongs to Games Workshop. Therefore the use of it by third parties, without licence, is unlawful and an infringement of Games Workshop’s rights.
Guidance has been available for our fans for many years in our Intellectual Property Policy that can be found on the legal pages of our website legal.games-workshop.com This sets out how our hobbyists can use our intellectual property in such a way that Games Workshop is not likely to object. Within the policy there are some simple rules, such as:
1) Do not mention any Games Workshop Trademarks, such as “Blood Bowl” or “Warhammer” in your URL or league name; and
2) Do not screenscrape any content from official websites.
There are also a number of more general guidelines, setting out the spirit of the policy. If a fan follows the policy in spirit and letter, then it is highly unlikely that Games Workshop will take any action to prevent their use of Games Workshop’s IP.
Games Workshop has not specifically targeted any particular website but instead has taken a consistent approach to all sites that we are aware of that are using our ‘Blood Bowl’ trademark without our permission.
We have written to the owners or administrators of these sites detailing our concerns. In our letters, we gave the parties infringing our rights various options as to how they could address our concerns. At no time did Games Workshop demand that any website close down.
We trust that this clarifies the situation.
Group Legal Department
Games Workshop Group PLC
8815
Post by: Archonate
RiTides wrote:The easiest thing to do would just be to change the name. Not the fairest :( but the easiest to solve this issue!
GW does not deserve the publicity that these sites provide if GW wants to shut people down for the heinous crime of being supportive.
I'm not fooled by their letter either. GW is notorious for trying to make people think that they're acting out of necessity. But take a look at other miniatures companies. The ones that don't try to shut down their fans' websites and don't charge 50$ for 5 models. Is it by some miracle that they are flourishing? No, GW just treats their fans like trash.
375
Post by: chris_valera
jabbakahut wrote:Am I the only one who finds it completely ridiculous that if you website can't be distinguished as not gamesworkshop somehow it means your violating IP or Copyright? If the consumers of your product are so fething stupid that they don't know where they are, maybe your product just really isn't that good or unique.
Pretty much this. If I run a hobby site, and I have GW articles, PP articles, Warzone articles, SST articles, hobby articles, and articles GW doesn't like, will they come after me?
Come to think of it, drunkdwarves got hit with just this. They had "hot chick of the day" maxim magazine style photos on the site, and GW took them to task for it.
Sadly, they caved, but it would be interesting to see what would happen if they had fought the case.
--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com
9217
Post by: KingCracker
warpcrafter wrote:If they come over Dakka, I will gladly volunteer my dirty fighting skills to the cause. I make a mean flaming bag of dog poop.
I totally agree with this statement. I dont really no spit about legal proceedings, apart from the random ticket and whatnot, but Id gladly help in any way possible. That would just piss me off to the core.
Gotta love how GW treats its customers. You KNOW everyone on that site paid for their products. This is when having the power to grow into a giant and hoe smack them would be awesome
1469
Post by: gremmie0
I think I'm going to hold off on my next merchandise order, this totally channels my metallica vs. napster hate. Maybe its time to finally find a new game system.
14152
Post by: CT GAMER
NAVARRO wrote:Howard A Treesong wrote:
"Fear will keep the local systems in line."
Indeed mate... But it can also trigger a revolution
Not in GW's fanbase.
We might grumble for a few days or weeks until the next shiny toy is revealed and then we forgive and forget just like Pavlov's dog.
And GW knows this...
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
CT GAMER wrote:NAVARRO wrote:Howard A Treesong wrote:
"Fear will keep the local systems in line."
Indeed mate... But it can also trigger a revolution
Not in GW's fanbase.
We might grumble for a few days or weeks until the next shiny toy is revealed and then we forgive and forget just like Pavlov's dog.
And GW knows this...
Hard to quantify both, I have no idea how many will close the door and how many will go along with the new shiny thing... or how many will chicken andclose sites... what do I know is a 9 year site, that pushed a game in trouble at GW HQ, closed... and that will piss off not the noobs that just got in the hobby but the hardcore vets... and that could be avoided IMO.
Reading the GW letter I read the following " We screwed big time and this letter is a lame atempt to save face"
11837
Post by: jgemrich
Reading the GW letter I read the following " We screwed big time and this letter is a lame atempt to save face"
Interesting, that is not what I read at all. I read that they try/tried to work with sites to guide them in steps to keep operating. They also provide direction to fans who wish to create new sites or other "fan" based items. If GW allows Free use of their IP without license they risk losing it. This is the other side of IP law. If a company does not protest the use of their unlicensed IP the trademarks and brands they can become public domain. I think we can all agree that this is a certainly an allowable request by any company that has invested in it's IP over time.
4514
Post by: Myrthe
insaniak wrote:Myrthe wrote:Change the URL to what ? A name without “BloodBowl” in it ?? What’s the point if no one can find it ?
People don't seem to have too many problems finding Dakka. Or Bolter & Chainsword. Or Warseer.
So, by GWs heavy-handed legal logic, I should change the name of my game club, where we play 40K and discuss rules, to something generic and non-40K related ??
It can be 40K related. It just can't have GW-registered Trademarks in it.
I think Dakka, Warseer and B&C are large, all-encompasing sites that don't cater to a single specialist game like BloodBowl. How many here were even aware of the Blood Bowl site we're discussing? I don't play BB so I didn't know about it.
And what next from GW? I can buy their games but I can't talk about them? or, if I do, I can't reference them by name?
This is another example of GWs heavy-handed, over-the-top legal bullying that could have easily been resolved by manndating that fan sites clearly state, under their title, that they are just a fan site and are in no way affiliated with Games Workshop.
Legal interpretations aside, GW Legal has managed, yet again, to piss off the fans of their games.
1084
Post by: Agamemnon2
Incidentally, TTGN is down for me right now. Coincidence? Of course not.
CT GAMER wrote:
Not in GW's fanbase.
We might grumble for a few days or weeks until the next shiny toy is revealed and then we forgive and forget just like Pavlov's dog.
And GW knows this...
If you want to wallow in your perceived weakness, that's one thing, but I want no part of it. Real actions are easy to take. Instead of buying the new Hellhound kit, I'm converting one from a cheap resin kit. Instead of more plastic Cadians, I'm buying old squats and converting them up with pieces from my junkbox. Most of the models I'm adding to my collection at the moment are ancient pieces that've been making the rounds from one collector to another for about 20 years. There's nothing that GW can release that'd make me march to their store cash in hand.
Easy as pie.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
If you read the GW intellectual property policy they are quite happy for people to run forums under certain conditions which are fairly liberal on the whole.
The key 'get-out clause' is the one about not allowing third parties to profit from GW IP. While this is used in the context of commercial services such as painting, it might be construed to apply to the acceptance of donations by a web site owner if the site is entirely based on GW stuff.
14828
Post by: Cane
Good move by GW Legal to write a follow up letter. Again people blame GW when its the daemon spawns known as lawyers that are at fault here. Sure they're GW lawyers but company executives would be naive not to follow legal advice from legal professionals since they likely don't have any of their own. Not to mention that these sites are painfully small compared to the ones fans actually surf and that GW has given them clear guidelines on how to get back in the legal clear if they choose to do so.
But hey another opportunity to demonize GW is another opportunity I suppose.
Agamemnon2 wrote:
If you want to wallow in your perceived weakness, that's one thing, but I want no part of it. Real actions are easy to take. Instead of buying the new Hellhound kit, I'm converting one from a cheap resin kit. Instead of more plastic Cadians, I'm buying old squats and converting them up with pieces from my junkbox. Most of the models I'm adding to my collection at the moment are ancient pieces that've been making the rounds from one collector to another for about 20 years.
Nah, its much easier to buy the newer models than searching for old ones like Squats - the new Guardsmen are also excellent and FW stuff is even better. Easy as cake.
There's nothing that GW can release that'd make me march to their store cash in hand.
Okay? GW's new stuff has been excellent and their best models have come out in recent years.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
jgemrich wrote:Reading the GW letter I read the following " We screwed big time and this letter is a lame atempt to save face"
Interesting, that is not what I read at all. I read that they try/tried to work with sites to guide them in steps to keep operating.
So C&D and freaky judicial threats is now considered work something out and guidance?
Sure thing! hey mate trash your 9 year site url please, so no one o earth can find it, then trash any kind of donations... put your own money to support a BB comunity we kicked in the ass ok? And contract a professional designer and art guy to decorate your site... If you do all that then you can keep your site and promote us
They know that most will go belly up, so that 2nd letter is a insult to anyones intelect. Like always they didnt espect the noise their arrogant atitudes would eco on the net... to late for that I guess.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Frankly anyone defending GWs actions are defending the indefensable. The attitude and stance taken by GW is one of open hostility and should be met with an equal amount of derision and contempt.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Certain legal actions have to be taken. Having said that I am not sure what the issue for giving the site written permission to use the name.
21196
Post by: agnosto
I really can't understand why GW doesn't have a fan site development kit like every other company out there (specifically video games). By doing so, they could limit the amount of time their legal team spends on such nonsense. Believe me, even with an attorney on retainer, they are still charged for any services provided, on an hourly basis.
A fan-site kit would also create a list of acceptable images and other materials for use as well as setting expectations in regards to the protection of their IP.
Meh, whatever; I have rarely seen a company shoot themselves in the foot to this extent.
4056
Post by: Bla_Ze
MeanGreenStompa wrote:Frankly anyone defending GWs actions are defending the indefensable. The attitude and stance taken by GW is one of open hostility and should be met with an equal amount of derision and contempt.
Frankly, you're full of yourself.
7183
Post by: Danny Internets
Bla_Ze wrote:MeanGreenStompa wrote:Frankly anyone defending GWs actions are defending the indefensable. The attitude and stance taken by GW is one of open hostility and should be met with an equal amount of derision and contempt.
Frankly, you're full of yourself.
The GW apologists are hard at work today.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Modquisition on:
Rule #1 remains in effect. lets tone it down. That includes calling people GW apologists, saying people are full of themselves, etc.
This is an official warning. I will hand out suspensions like Halloween candy. I kid not.
1084
Post by: Agamemnon2
Cane wrote:Nah, its much easier to buy the newer models than searching for old ones like Squats - the new Guardsmen are also excellent and FW stuff is even better. Easy as cake.
Easy? I don't do these things because they're easy. I do these things because they're hard. I hunt bargains, strip horribly painted miniatures and sometimes scratchbuild entire bodyparts to replace broken or lost pieces. As a result, without any undue self-congratulation, my army is unique. There isn't one like it anywhere in the world. Literally unique, mind you. The precise combination of models and paintjobs isn't matched anywhere.
And really, if I didn't do this, I wouldn't be able to justify to myself my continued adherence to the hobby. Due in part to what I consider dislikeable GW business practices.
Cane wrote:There's nothing that GW can release that'd make me march to their store cash in hand.
Okay? GW's new stuff has been excellent and their best models have come out in recent years.
The last one to come close was the Valkyrie, though after a bit of searching, I opted against it, due to the sheer impossibility of cleanly transporting it at present. The last two models I bought were the Demolisher and the IG Command Squad and really, had I not been able to acquire the former for ca. 70% off retail, I would've done without that as well.
This is not to say the models aren't good. They are, but for me there is a tradeoff, which is the company making them. I cannot change them, the least I can do is not to support them with the majority of my gaming dollar*.
* This caveat is necessary since I do buy GW paints in order to support my local GW store. Because I use their painting table to paint and chat with friends, because I use their gaming tables to play my retro Guard upon. I think it would be hypocritical and more than a little jerkish to take advantage of said facilities without buying anything.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Easier said than done... how can I not buy new bugs and that sweet new fortification?... My models are mostly sculpted though 
4514
Post by: Myrthe
To steer this back to topic :
TTGN just reported that "TalkBloodBowl" has a new domain name ... "TalkFantasyFootball"
http://www.tabletopgamingnews.com/2009/11/10/31288
This new domain name just reenforces my earlier point about a change in name to remove "Blood Bowl" from the title...
"Fantasy Football" is a well established "game" (pastime?) that is something entirely different from a miniatures game. I can see a lot of confused site visits but, who knows, it may draw some fantasay footballers into Blood Bowl.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Given that fantasy football in this country is about soccer and the guys at work who do it would most likely prefer gargling with live scorpions than playing a 'nerd game', likely not.
Instead they will probably have a swathe of 'WTF is this you sad geeks LULZ' messages every day.
21370
Post by: DagobahDave
agnosto wrote:Meh, whatever; I have rarely seen a company shoot themselves in the foot to this extent.
I think that most of GW's fans simply don't know or don't care about this, and of those few who do care enough about it to be upset, very few of them will quit buying GW products in protest. Whatever we may think about GW right now for going after seemingly harmless websites, it's probably doing the right thing by its shareholders in protecting its long-term interests as far as brand recognition and approved use of its material. It's a hobby to us, but it's a business to GW. The reason so many of us are fans of GW in the first place is because it acts like a business and keeps up some high standards of quality and artwork, and doesn't allow just anybody to use their IP. You don't have to like their attitude toward fan-sites, and I honestly don't like it, either. But I understand that it's the business model that successful companies are using and if GW quits acting like a big heartless corporation at times, then its fans are going to lose out on some really neat toy soldiers.
So I'm saying "hate the game, don't hate the player". Comparing GW to smaller hobby-game companies doesn't work because they're in different leagues.
I'll certainly be interested to see how GW fares if this sort of thing ever makes it to trial. I have a feeling that "ownership is nine-tenths of the law" will favor GW in cases of IP infringement, however.
8230
Post by: UltraPrime
MeanGreenStompa wrote:Instead they will probably have a swathe of 'WTF is this you sad geeks LULZ' messages every day.
At least they can take comfort in that they are not the sort of person that uses 'lulz' in a sentence...
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Yeah, I'd be like all LOLWUT, SIF, ORLY.
Fantasy Football is a totally crap name for the site. UK people play Fantasy "soccer" and Americans play Fantasy American Football. I
221
Post by: Frazzled
I am sure he'll discover the error of his ways quickly. Fantasy football is a bit of a deal over here.
4362
Post by: Ozymandias
^ what he said.
Seriously, was www.talkbb.com (or something similar) taken?
5333
Post by: BeefyG
I think the move was deliberately taken to make the site into more than simply Bloodbowl. If you make the site inclusive in a general way then GW will NEVER be able to take you down again.
Doing things this way also gives the community the flexibility to take a new "Fantasy Football" game that in no way resembles 'Bloodbowl' and run with that instead. (I'm not saying that is the case, just that it is possible under this decision).
21370
Post by: DagobahDave
Ironically, TalkFantasyFootball.org might make some non-Blood Bowlers aware of GW's games and actually increase business for them. Nah, probably not.
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
More likely the other way round. Go GW!
3757
Post by: TyranidTony
Frazzled wrote:Modquisition on:
Rule #1 remains in effect. lets tone it down. That includes calling people GW apologists, saying people are full of themselves, etc.
This is an official warning. I will hand out suspensions like Halloween candy. I kid not.
HAhahahahahah oooooooooh nooooooo....
18045
Post by: Snord
DagobahDave wrote:agnosto wrote:Meh, whatever; I have rarely seen a company shoot themselves in the foot to this extent.
I think that most of GW's fans simply don't know or don't care about this, and of those few who do care enough about it to be upset, very few of them will quit buying GW products in protest. Whatever we may think about GW right now for going after seemingly harmless websites, it's probably doing the right thing by its shareholders in protecting its long-term interests as far as brand recognition and approved use of its material. It's a hobby to us, but it's a business to GW. The reason so many of us are fans of GW in the first place is because it acts like a business and keeps up some high standards of quality and artwork, and doesn't allow just anybody to use their IP. You don't have to like their attitude toward fan-sites, and I honestly don't like it, either. But I understand that it's the business model that successful companies are using and if GW quits acting like a big heartless corporation at times, then its fans are going to lose out on some really neat toy soldiers.
So I'm saying "hate the game, don't hate the player". Comparing GW to smaller hobby-game companies doesn't work because they're in different leagues.
I'll certainly be interested to see how GW fares if this sort of thing ever makes it to trial. I have a feeling that "ownership is nine-tenths of the law" will favor GW in cases of IP infringement, however.
Well put. Although good luck getting more than a handful of the people posting in this thread to consider the perspective you've offered. Evidently, despite having benefitted from capitalism for their whole lives, a large proportion of the people who've posted here think that companies which behave like businesses are, like, y'know, evil, and that anyone who sets up a fan site is by definition a good guy (even if that site infringes a company's IP rights). The fact is that few of the people posting outraged comments here have the slightest idea of how IP law works in the real world or how much IP infringement costs busines. And precisely none of us know the factual context for GW's actions. I'm not saying it's good PR, or even that GW's actions are justified, but in my experience companies like GW which are faced with the need to take legal action often have to balance reputational issues against the need to take legal action to protect their business (or to be seen to be taking action - the perception is often more important than any result). Of course, none of that matters here - all that's important is to be part of yet another infantile contest to see who can post the angriest comment about evil/incompetent/insensitive GW is.
You also have to remember that there is a tendency for people who post a lot on websites like this to think that their opinions are very important. In many cases they have to think this, because otherwise they might question why they spend so much time here posting about something that they profess to despise. The reality is that, as you say, few of GW's customers really care about GW sending cease and desist letters to a bunch of fan sites (I bet noone who's posted here actually stops buying their products as a result). A number of them probably think it's not a bad thing if GW seeks to protect the IP rights that it asserts, because at the end of the day if enough shareholders decide that GW isn't doing enough then they'll bail, GW will fold and we won't get any more nice new toys every month. You'd hope that that would be seen as a bad thing, but from the amount of anti- GW posturing and empty vitriol that gets posted here you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise.
Apologies to Frazzled if that runs counter to the warning.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Funny post
Your silly stab at all that post on a freaking miniatures forum for the fun of it is hilarious... how about reading what you just posted and look a bit in the mirror?
THis is not a pissing contest, people are being civil about all this mess and having a relaxed converstation about it... but dont worry your opinion is VERY important to me.
8742
Post by: MeanGreenStompa
Tailgunner wrote:
Well put. Although good luck getting more than a handful of the people posting in this thread to consider the perspective you've offered. Evidently, despite having benefitted from capitalism for their whole lives, a large proportion of the people who've posted here think that companies which behave like businesses are, like, y'know, evil, and that anyone who sets up a fan site is by definition a good guy (even if that site infringes a company's IP rights). The fact is that few of the people posting outraged comments here have the slightest idea of how IP law works in the real world or how much IP infringement costs busines. And precisely none of us know the factual context for GW's actions. I'm not saying it's good PR, or even that GW's actions are justified, but in my experience companies like GW which are faced with the need to take legal action often have to balance reputational issues against the need to take legal action to protect their business (or to be seen to be taking action - the perception is often more important than any result). Of course, none of that matters here - all that's important is to be part of yet another infantile contest to see who can post the angriest comment about evil/incompetent/insensitive GW is.
You also have to remember that there is a tendency for people who post a lot on websites like this to think that their opinions are very important. In many cases they have to think this, because otherwise they might question why they spend so much time here posting about something that they profess to despise. The reality is that, as you say, few of GW's customers really care about GW sending cease and desist letters to a bunch of fan sites (I bet noone who's posted here actually stops buying their products as a result). A number of them probably think it's not a bad thing if GW seeks to protect the IP rights that it asserts, because at the end of the day if enough shareholders decide that GW isn't doing enough then they'll bail, GW will fold and we won't get any more nice new toys every month. You'd hope that that would be seen as a bad thing, but from the amount of anti-GW posturing and empty vitriol that gets posted here you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise.
Apologies to Frazzled if that runs counter to the warning.
Speaking of vitriol...
A wide ranging attack at a number of people on the thread is still an attack and your particularly charming references to anyone in this thread who isn't down with the way GW conducted this make me wonder if you've ever tried out for the team. Still, cute soundbite, it may be long but it's tragically devoid of any reason or stance.
And this isn't a GW forum, it is a Wargaming Forum and you're posting in it's News and Rumours section. Learn about your surroundings before you leap in guns blazing.
Yet again someone chimes in with the 'if you don't like it, don't comment/purchase/look at it' bs. We are allowed to voice our disquiet about something conducted, as far as all evidence is currently pointing, in a poor and overly hostile manner to the fanbase.
I'd just counter with a 'if you don't like it, don't let us stop you going elsewhere and finding a forum where opposing views are not tolerated'.
1941
Post by: Wolfstan
Tailgunner wrote:DagobahDave wrote:agnosto wrote:Meh, whatever; I have rarely seen a company shoot themselves in the foot to this extent.
I think that most of GW's fans simply don't know or don't care about this, and of those few who do care enough about it to be upset, very few of them will quit buying GW products in protest. Whatever we may think about GW right now for going after seemingly harmless websites, it's probably doing the right thing by its shareholders in protecting its long-term interests as far as brand recognition and approved use of its material. It's a hobby to us, but it's a business to GW. The reason so many of us are fans of GW in the first place is because it acts like a business and keeps up some high standards of quality and artwork, and doesn't allow just anybody to use their IP. You don't have to like their attitude toward fan-sites, and I honestly don't like it, either. But I understand that it's the business model that successful companies are using and if GW quits acting like a big heartless corporation at times, then its fans are going to lose out on some really neat toy soldiers.
So I'm saying "hate the game, don't hate the player". Comparing GW to smaller hobby-game companies doesn't work because they're in different leagues.
I'll certainly be interested to see how GW fares if this sort of thing ever makes it to trial. I have a feeling that "ownership is nine-tenths of the law" will favor GW in cases of IP infringement, however.
Well put. Although good luck getting more than a handful of the people posting in this thread to consider the perspective you've offered. Evidently, despite having benefitted from capitalism for their whole lives, a large proportion of the people who've posted here think that companies which behave like businesses are, like, y'know, evil, and that anyone who sets up a fan site is by definition a good guy (even if that site infringes a company's IP rights). The fact is that few of the people posting outraged comments here have the slightest idea of how IP law works in the real world or how much IP infringement costs busines. And precisely none of us know the factual context for GW's actions. I'm not saying it's good PR, or even that GW's actions are justified, but in my experience companies like GW which are faced with the need to take legal action often have to balance reputational issues against the need to take legal action to protect their business (or to be seen to be taking action - the perception is often more important than any result). Of course, none of that matters here - all that's important is to be part of yet another infantile contest to see who can post the angriest comment about evil/incompetent/insensitive GW is.
You also have to remember that there is a tendency for people who post a lot on websites like this to think that their opinions are very important. In many cases they have to think this, because otherwise they might question why they spend so much time here posting about something that they profess to despise. The reality is that, as you say, few of GW's customers really care about GW sending cease and desist letters to a bunch of fan sites (I bet noone who's posted here actually stops buying their products as a result). A number of them probably think it's not a bad thing if GW seeks to protect the IP rights that it asserts, because at the end of the day if enough shareholders decide that GW isn't doing enough then they'll bail, GW will fold and we won't get any more nice new toys every month. You'd hope that that would be seen as a bad thing, but from the amount of anti- GW posturing and empty vitriol that gets posted here you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise.
Apologies to Frazzled if that runs counter to the warning.
In reply this is my input from the other post that is covering this story:
Am I the only one to think that some DakkaDakka members are missing the point of some the posts in this debate? From what I've read, nobody is saying that GW are in the wrong for wanting to protect their Trademarks or IP.
The anger and confusion is about how they've gone about it and what they want done to fix it. If MGS is correct, and my feeling is he is due to other legal comments made, then a simple disclaimer provided by GW would of covered the whole IP mess. If the affected websites had been given this chance and not taken it, then a C&D order is a valid follow up. Bandwidth stealing is a seperate issue.
It would seem to me that either GW's legal team is 100% right over the IP issue (various comments make me think that they might not be), they don't really know and are being paranoid / over the top, it could be that they are getting ear ache from 3rd parties who are being paranoid / feel threatened or it simply could be GW having a control freak moment (is that really likely, given it's a handful of sites?)
I would now like to add something else to this to counter the GW fanboyz having a pop at us for moaning:
In the 80's I was introduced to the red box D&D and thus at the age of 14 my interest in gaming was started. Over the years I moved on to games such as Paranoia, Judge Dredd, Traveller, Space Crusade, then on to Space Marine, Titan Legions, 40k, Necromunda, BFG, Bloodbowl. This is a path that most gamers of my age probably followed.
We were there in the days that GW was two different company's, GDW & Citadel. We grew with them through the various systems that they brought out. Before vehicle kits, we used deodorant containers As time went by we introduced our mates to the hobby and our family members. When we grew up and had kids, we passed that interest on to them and some of us passed that interest onto our grandkids. GW was built on us and our passion.
In the late 90's and the new century GW decided that we weren't needed any more, they were big enough to stand on their own. Someone, somewhere decided that targetting the kids gave them a bigger hit money wise. They failed to understand that without our 20 years of support that they wouldn't be in this position. If starting today GW would have the same problem as all the other gaming company's out there.
So GW fanboy, let me clarify this to you. We understand they have to protect their IP / Copyright, we don't begrudge GW making money and we fully understand that they are a business not a charity. However given the support & money we have given them over the years, we feel entitled to moan about things we aren't happy with.
5394
Post by: reds8n
Well..it had a good run.
Locking due to flaming from..from..aahh...take your pick.
|
|
