@kinaluwen: of course, I agree, that's actually what I meant; if such files were on that site, by all means, remove those. The reason I am upset is because the rest of a fount of LEGAL in some cases ENDORSED BY GAMES WORKSHOP THEMSELVES material got removed also.

My main beef is that it is so indiscriminate and in many cases not justified, as in: it does not compare at all to music/movie piracy.

In a lot of situations, the creator of the fan material can be likened to a Cover Band or some one who writes a new song inspired by another already commercially available work.

ultimately what people need to do is start using Russian hosting services for this kind of stuff.

Kanluwen wrote:
Let's go through the list:
Eternal Champion? Licensed to GW, for quite awhile actually. A parody/homage isn't the same as infringement.
JRR Tolkien? Same deal, even back in the day.
Dune, Aliens, The Lost World and Terminator fall under the parody/homage bit also. Maybe back in the 80s when GW was getting off the ground you'd have a case for arguing that, but the background has evolved since.

And you're absolutely right, that ONCE AGAIN, back in that timeframe of the 80s/early 90s.
GW did exactly what Hasslefree is doing now.

And man, if I was getting paid to "spam", as you put it MGS--you can bet your life I wouldn't be actually explaining my position/reasoning.

I'd just be posting tripe like yourself.

And what kind of communication do you want?
The "polite and respectful way" is sitting at the bottom of their site, under the "Legal" link. You start a website and don't follow their instructions?

Too fething bad for you.

Too bad for the hobby actually. Too bad for the community that a leading light corporation can't act with vision and enlightened business acumen and instead acts like it's being steered by gordon gekko. To bad that GW couldn't have worked on a package to enable instead of disable.

Far too bad that the only people they can get to explain what they're doing are sycophants with no actual rational for the decision other than 'well they can and business is a tough thing and that's why they did it'.

And most laughable is your entirely feeble defence of the difference between a 'parody/homage' and a 'ripoff factory'. That really takes the prize for 'tripe' mate.

Hawkins wrote: i didnt know hasslefree got hit too. wheres that coming from? linky?

I don't think the Hasslfree thing was part of the recent wave of C&D's. Kev White mentioned on Frothers that he had received two C&Ds from GW a while back, but wasn't saying which minis they were for.

Ex GW employees are a sore spot for them. They know that the employees were once the ones that actually came out with the material and if any person on earth that might take GW to task on this C and D foolishness, it would be the ex employees.

Like I said before, show me where the basement jacks were making money off of GW's stuff on a fan site?
When specialist games went tits up, thats when GW opened the floodgate to go ahead and encourage the back door gaming.

The gaming is open season if people want to play it. NOW GW decided out of the blue to MOTE the eye? Like I said before, laughable at best seeing as to the beginnings of this company.

The executions of the C and D were against fan sites. Show again where they were making profits off of the material that fans were playing OP games with that they wanted to play.

Your train of thought runs the gambit of "Oh, GW has the IP they have the right to do this to fans and why is everyone excited, to GW was the victim here."

Seriously, the games were OP. Out of Production. What exactly do you expect fans to do to play these games?
How much did those rules cost to someone who wnated to start playing? Nothing. What is needed to play the games? GW minis for a team, then after the thought I might want to go to Fee Bay and get some rules or other books to play some more.

All the while you downplay the so called Nerdrage, but are losing site of the company being a gaming company. Games being the operative word here.

Show me where the fan sites made money, I say sure, not a problem, Show me where GW is overhanded seeing as you can get these games and materials to play them off of the net and that they encourage you to "Die roll off " for disagreements for the games, and I throw the B.S. Flag on the play.

"Hobby game" means that the game is a hobby related product. They have as much legal right to shutting fans down as packing sand for being d bags.



Guess that will show you for playing thier game and liking it. Too bad it was OP, now you don't get the same right to play as if it was Lord of the Rings- the frodo edition.

Grot 6 wrote:Guess that will show you for playing thier game and liking it. Too bad it was OP, now you don't get the same right to play as if it was Lord of the Rings- the frodo edition.

How does it being out of production stop you from playing the game? If you already have it, and like it, you can go on playing it.

If you don't already have it, and don't know anyone who does, it's not the end of the world if you can't download it from the internet. There are plenty of other games out there.

Because OOP automatically means "Hey, Public Domain baby!"...despite the product still being registered trademarks/copyright material I guess.


@ MGS. I can see that this is a sore spot for you. Let me put it simply:

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. I'm in the camp that feels that they're not doing this out of malice, but acting upon the advice of their team of Legal Ninja Experts(however thoroughly and ridiculously terrible at public relations those Experts may be).


Can we agree on that bit at least?

On the notion of the "ripoff factory", I couched my statement badly.

Hasslefree is doing exactly what GW did back in the day(finding itself a niche, filling it, and clinging on for dear life). I have heard NOTHING of Hasslefree being sent a C&D with this newest wave. So that point is irrelevant either way.

insaniak wrote:

Grot 6 wrote:Guess that will show you for playing thier game and liking it. Too bad it was OP, now you don't get the same right to play as if it was Lord of the Rings- the frodo edition.

How does it being out of production stop you from playing the game? If you already have it, and like it, you can go on playing it.

If you don't already have it, and don't know anyone who does, it's not the end of the world if you can't download it from the internet. There are plenty of other games out there.

???


Little Johnny goes to FeeBay and buys a copy of Warhammer Quest for 5 bucks from Sid666 and it is missing a rulebook. Johnny has heard of how fun said game was from

Grognard-Joe over on DakkaDakka (TM ) makes every effort to get the rulebook. He gets it from BGG and plays a hell of a game with three of his little pals that as

well had a hell of a time, there by each going thier seperate ways with game, fresh in thier mind. They in turn tell a couple of thier pals, who get a copy of the rules from Little

Johnny, get a copy from BGG, and make every effort to get them from a second or third hand fan sites, from other fans of GW's game Warhammer Quest.

2 kids go down to thier LGS and get a couple of boxes and blisters of GW figs to play the game which, by the way, Little Johhny made up a new scenario based on fighting a

hordeof Skaven, Undead, and Chaos warriors. ( Of course there are no models for Warhammer Quest, so Johnny buys a couple of boxes of the said enemies) has an even

grander time playing his neat scenario, which he posts on his blog.

His little warhammer club, which he has named Knights of Say What?!?!? and gains a couple more players. Because of this OOP game, we now have about four or five new

players. They get more and more product and ect.ect.ect. Until, they get a C and D letter in the mail, based on the Black and White documentation provided by GW's family

friendly Legal team.

Now we have about ten or so players with the egg on the face look, and a bad taste in thier mouth with the very same company that they had a heck of a time with, cutting them off at the knees for playing a game with GW stuff. ( Do you really think that these guys and thier pals that they tell thier tale to are going to want anything to do with GW ever again?) What about when they come back over to Dakka Dakka and tell thier tale ?

In Business, One guy might tell his friend about a good experience with a company. In The case of a crappy experience, he will tell EVERYONE.

Now, if this isn't how the Scenario for the gamer that wants to play an OOP game plays out, it is going to be similar.

I could see if the game was a outright rip off, but it is OOP. How else do these people expect players to play?

Want a couple of examples of how GW has mislead intent by Encouraging people to play the games?


[/url] http://www.sg.tacticalwargames.net/fanatic/[url]

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?community=&catId=cat1290025&categoryId=1100014&aId=5300012

http://hexalon.wordpress.com/2006/10/22/specialist-games-magazine-goes-monthly/

And THIS is just off the top of my head.

If they are making money off of the product, sure.. Whatever.

But these are all fan sites and the gamers in question could as easily be Dakka Dakka gamers, ( Such as the Necromunda spin off game here) to an outright game of Battlefleet Gothic, being played in a P and P game of Rogue Trader.

Kanluwen wrote:..I'm in the camp that feels that they're not doing this out of malice, but acting upon the advice of their team of Legal Ninja Experts(however thoroughly and ridiculously terrible at public relations those Experts may be). Can we agree on that bit at least?

I've been with MSG on this. I don't understand most of your arguments. Here you're saying we have different opinions, then you ask to agree on this one little piece of information which hasn't been the theme of the thread (at least as I've read it). This paradigm which you propose is not in question. It's about the intelligence of their (GW's) decisions in relation to the hobby community.

That's the point of contention, as I've been understanding it, between the "Apologists" and those crazy "Anti-GW Jihadis".

Grot 6, here's another version of that story:


Little Johnny goes to FeeBay and buys a copy of Warhammer Quest for 5 bucks from Sid666 and it is missing a rulebook. Johnny has heard of how fun said game was from Grognard-Joe over on DakkaDakka (TM ), and so keeps an eye out for it, and eventually manages to nab a copy of the rules from ebay as well.

He plays a hell of a game with three of his little pals, who also had a hell of a time, there by each going thier seperate ways with game, fresh in thier mind. They in turn tell a couple of thier pals, who either find their own copies on ebay or other trading sites, or play in groups where at least one of them has the game.

2 kids go down to thier LGS and get a couple of boxes and blisters of GW figs to play the game which, by the way, Little Johhny made up a new scenario based on fighting a horde of Skaven, Undead, and Chaos warriors. ( Of course there are no models for Warhammer Quest, so Johnny buys a couple of boxes of the said enemies) has an even grander time playing his neat scenario, which he posts on his blog, being careful to include page references to the rulebook rather than copying anything directly from it.

Johnny and his friends have an OOP game that they can enjoy playing for as long as they want, other people playing the same game can download the scenario, and everybody wins.

I could see if the game was a outright rip off, but it is OOP. How else do these people expect players to play?

They don't. If they wanted you to play it, they would sell it.

They want you to play WHFB or LOTR instead.

YMMV.

The point being, Fan Sites.
which by the way that there are literally thousands and then some, depending on game of your choosing.
small example-

http://www.ask.com/web?qsrc=2417&o=13992&l=dis&q=Warhammer+Quest+fan+sites

http://www.ask.com/web?qsrc=2417&o=13992&l=dis&q=Warhammer+40K+fan+sites

http://www.ask.com/web?qsrc=2417&o=13992&l=dis&q=Necromunda+fan+sites

http://www.ask.com/web?qsrc=2417&o=13992&l=dis&q=Mordhiem+fan+sites

http://www.ask.com/web?l=dis&o=13992&qsrc=2873&q=youtube-40K

http://www.ask.com/web?qsrc=2417&o=13992&l=dis&q=FF+Rogue+Trader+P+and+P+game-+fan+sites

Now you have the two stories coming to an equal or at least similar direction, either getting the rules through one of a million ways, or waiting until Little Johnny turns into Grognard Johnny, where he can come on back to DakkaDakka(TM ) and rant about how he got shafted as a younster from playing any of a number of Specialist Games, Out of Production GW games, or anything else that falls into the catagory of basicly- an old game that is available on the internet that is going to get shafted because of Legal technicality.

Like I said. Fan sites- Non money making, but out there in web land for those who want to look to find

Basic no frills point- GW is cutting off its nose to spite its face on this issue.

Grot 6 wrote:Now you have the two stories coming to an equal or at least similar direction, either getting the rules through one of a million ways, or waiting until Little Johnny turns into Grognard Johnny, where he can come on back to DakkaDakka(TM ) and rant about how he got shafted as a younster from playing any of a number of Specialist Games, Out of Production GW games, or anything else that falls into the catagory of basicly- an old game that is available on the internet that is going to get shafted because of Legal technicality.

This isn't about a legal technicality, though. It's about GW, as the owners of a given property, choosing when and how that property will be made available to the public.

Don't get me wrong, I think it would be fantastic if all of GW's OOP games were made available for free download. But the choice to do so, as has been pointed out a couple of times in this thread, is GW's.

GW have (and have had since, like, forever) a list of things on their website that they do and don't want fansites to do. If you're setting up a fansite and don't go looking for that sort of document first, then you have only yourself to blame when GW come knocking.

If you see that document and choose to ignore it, again, you have only yourself to blame. And if you chose to ignore the document and did so because you feel it isn't actually legally relevant, then you also shouldn't feel that you have anything to worry about from the C&D letter you get as a result.


So, as I see it, fansites that receive C&D letters over their content really have two sensible options: They can accept that they weren't following the rules and capitulate, or they can choose to believe that the C&D letter has no legal backing and ignore it. Either way, frankly I'm not seeing a reason for all of the angst that's getting thrown around the internet over it.

insaniak wrote:So, as I see it, fansites that receive C&D letters over their content really have two sensible options: They can accept that they weren't following the rules and capitulate, or they can choose to believe that the C&D letter has no legal backing and ignore it. Either way, frankly I'm not seeing a reason for all of the angst that's getting thrown around the internet over it.

I agree, but don't you see the answer in your own puzzle? Angst flying is from people who wished or wanted the C&D recipients to choose the latter of your options-instead of the former.

Er no. His point is that if you're going to ignore the rules in the first place, you don't get to moan about it later.

Kind of like if you get arrested for drunk driving/talking on the phone/running a red light. It's your own damned fault, deal with it.

Kanluwen wrote:Er no. His point is that if you're going to ignore the rules in the first place, you don't get to moan about it later.

But the victims (C&D recipients) are not the ones moaning about it.

Actually, they were. BGG had a huge post about how it was "unfair" that he was asked to take down a bunch of OOP material or homemade rules that had questionable content(read: the actual rules) written in there.

Then we had the Blood Bowl site that was going to close down after 9-10 years because he had to change the domain name, etc.

Kanluwen wrote:Because OOP automatically means "Hey, Public Domain baby!"...despite the product still being registered trademarks/copyright material I guess.

Nothing becomes public domain because it is out of print.

That's the point, Mikhaila It's a misguided ideal that a lot of these smaller sites have clung to.

That's right Kanluwen. As GW wants, the sooner these fan sites realise that they should actually support those companies who *encourage* them, and remove all GW content (as far reaching as BGG) the better.

Because forcing them to remove out of production(with the potential for renewal through FFG) content is obviously a huge downside to the fans who already owned the stuff, rather than the slackjawed basement dwellers who whine when they have to hit up eBay or find a friend with a copy.

Kanluwen wrote:That's the point of contention, as I've been understanding it, between the "Apologists" and those crazy "Anti-GW Jihadis".

Id put it a diffenent way but im not intrested in a suspension.

As far as this has gone, your right on just one point, there are 2 basic camps.

Nothing youve come up with changes in my mind that GW Hasent earned a boycott for 'SOME' of its actions, an not just the IP related ones. at this point its stuborn chin time. i WILL be supporting MGS's boycott, have been supporting it, and will be extending it.
GW imo doesnt deserve my buisness this holiday season. i'll take it tp HF, PP, and PI instead. will it help? na i dont know, dont reallly care either as i dout GW will be swayed from their ivory tower..
But i will feel better for the doing. just as GW has chosen its method of attacks on fan sites, so do i choose not to support those attacks by way of boycott.


we can also agree to disagree

Nuff said from me. off to work now.

Precisely.

It is not about GW 'feeling the pinch' since, as we've been discussing, they are woefully out of touch with the community and if they are made aware of people voicing their dislike of GW's tactics at all, it is most likely they will be dismissed as the product of 'that internet thing where people hate us'.

It is all about your decision as a consumer. Your right to spend your money with a company and your choice to decide on a company that attacks it's own fanbase, bullies small indy companies and shows a staggering amount of arrogance to it's customers...or just take your money elsewhere, instead of holding off buying that GW product for a month, why not buy it second hand from Ebay or even better, pick up another product and support one of the smaller companies.

In light of what's happened to Ultraforge, I'd love to see a few folks here place their Christmas order with that husband and wife business.

Support the hobby, not the corporation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:
@ MGS. I can see that this is a sore spot for you. Let me put it simply:

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. I'm in the camp that feels that they're not doing this out of malice, but acting upon the advice of their team of Legal Ninja Experts(however thoroughly and ridiculously terrible at public relations those Experts may be).

We agree that they aren't doing it out of malice, but can we also agree that they chose a heavy handed and PR shoddy approach? Because that's what I've been arguing for these pages, the agreement that their actions were detrimental to the hobby and aggressive, often to the very community that has supported the company.

As I've said in several posts, a mutually complimentary agreement could have been reached if they had made the effort, a caveat statement, support from GW and fully open compliance from the site owners that what they are carrying belongs ultimately to GW.

The very act would show GW as magnanimous and the Site Owners as supporting the rightful ownership by GW, which would have proven excellent supporting evidence if they ever encounter a real live counterfeiter, since they really haven't so far with what's presented here in the C&Ds.

GW has shown woeful lack of common sense and a wilful disregard for their own fans and customers.

jabbakahut wrote:But the victims (C&D recipients) are not the ones moaning about it.

Calling them victims is an insult. They're either fools or criminals. A victim is someone punished needlessly, these people have no pretensions of innocence.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:We agree that they aren't doing it out of malice, but can we also agree that they chose a heavy handed and PR shoddy approach? Because that's what I've been arguing for these pages, the agreement that their actions were detrimental to the hobby and aggressive, often to the very community that has supported the company.

Bad PR doesn't matter, because we're not GW's intended audience. That dubious honor is bestowed on the ankle-biters who think White Dwarf is an awesome magazine and who buy their miniatures with their parents' money. They'll most likely never hear of this "outrage", nor would they understand half of it even if they did. We, who do, do not matter.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:We agree that they aren't doing it out of malice, but can we also agree that they chose a heavy handed and PR shoddy approach? Because that's what I've been arguing for these pages, the agreement that their actions were detrimental to the hobby and aggressive, often to the very community that has supported the company.

Bad PR doesn't matter, because we're not GW's intended audience. That dubious honor is bestowed on the ankle-biters who think White Dwarf is an awesome magazine and who buy their miniatures with their parents' money. They'll most likely never hear of this "outrage", nor would they understand half of it even if they did. We, who do, do not matter.

Then, again, if they do not care for us, we should have the wherewithal to demonstrate that means they don't get our money. It is not about GW caring, because it is blatantly obvious they don't, it is about us caring about how we are treated.

Kanluwen wrote:Actually, they were. BGG had a huge post about how it was "unfair" that he was asked to take down a bunch of OOP material or homemade rules that had questionable content(read: the actual rules) written in there.

Which was a valid complaint. His point was that Board Game Geek should not have felt they had to take down all Headless Hollow's work because a large poprtion of it did not actually infringe copyright. This is because, much as GW might wish it was otherwise, you cannot copyright an actual rule, or instruction or idea. All you have is the copyright to the "artistic expression" of that rule. This is a fundamental principle of copyright law. In other words, copy and pasting text from a rulebook is illegal, but expressing it in a different, shorter, handier way is perfectly legal and there shouldn't be a damned thing GW could do about it. Yet Board Game Geel capitulated and blanket axed all that work simply at GW's bullying behest.

If GW had taken a little longer to check what actually was within their rights instead being bullying oafs caring more about protecting their "rights" rather than their reputation, then this gak storm may have been prevented.

No one wanted to harm GW. There may have been some naive assumption that because a game was out of print GW weren't interested in their legal rights over it. Sure that was naive and perhaps stupid. But that still doesn't excuse GW frightening BGG by their incorrect and overbearing assumptions over copyright into throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

And as a P.S. Hasslefree's comments about his C&D letter can be found here: http://www.frothersunite.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=23210

I tried reading that thread, Osbad...but it's full of so much retardation I only got to the 8th page.

So he had a Dwarf Troll Slayer model that was a pretty much exact copy of how GW does their Trollslayers? Is that what he was saying?

Is he really surprised they sent a C&D on it?

Yeah, I like the Hasslefree lot -- great products, great service -- but they really shouldn't be surprised they got hassled (sorry!) over the Troll Slayer. I mean -- any three of "mohawked, dwarf, two-handed axe, and 'troll slayer' name", and you might get away with it.

I doubt GW would have a leg to stand on if Hasslefree sold the same mini as "Punk Dwarf" or "Mohawked Dwarf".

Kanluwen wrote:I tried reading that thread, Osbad...but it's full of so much retardation I only got to the 8th page.

So he had a Dwarf Troll Slayer model that was a pretty much exact copy of how GW does their Trollslayers? Is that what he was saying?

Is he really surprised they sent a C&D on it?

GW own the IP on dwarves that slay trolls now do they? Well apparently not because Hasslefree are still selling them which would indicate BS on GW's part. Still, GW seem very good at claiming IP that isn't actually theirs.

Kanluwen wrote:Dune, Aliens, The Lost World and Terminator fall under the parody/homage bit also. Maybe back in the 80s when GW was getting off the ground you'd have a case for arguing that, but the background has evolved since.

And you're absolutely right, that ONCE AGAIN, back in that timeframe of the 80s/early 90s.
GW did exactly what Hasslefree is doing now.

Hang on, so when Hasslefree do it it's a "rip off" but when GW do it it's a "homage". Or were they "ripping off" back in the 80s and it's ok now because they got away with it?

Kanluwen wrote:So he had a Dwarf Troll Slayer model that was a pretty much exact copy of how GW does their Trollslayers? Is that what he was saying?
Is he really surprised they sent a C&D on it?

Yeah, that's the issue. He had a model of a dwarf in "heroic 28mm" scale with a bare chest, mohican and big axe, and it was advertised as a "troll slayer", as I understand it. Now nowhere in any of GW's legal blurb is any of that copyright. Or trade marked. "troll" and "slayer" are not trademarked words. Sure its "close" to imagery of models produced by GW, but so what? That's not illegal. No where was there any reference to any GW trademarked or copyrighted product. A point that GW legal seem not to understand.

Now, it's not a big issue and I'm not crying big tears about one guy getting some grief from making a few quid in the GW counts-as market. Its always clear that GW would have an issue over this. But it just shows how ignorant GW legal seem to be about the law. Or about how little they care and how big the scatter-gun they used was.

Its a concrete example of their lack of thought and discretion. They appear to me like the greasy fat kid in the playground who jealously and selfishly guards his huge stash of sweeties at play time, unwilling to share. Ultimately he ends up as the subject of abuse and hatred for his meanness, when for a little generosity of spirit he could have shared a few sweeties and ultimately made a few friends, maybe. Instead his concern not to lose even one sweet to anyone else costs him any opportunity of friendship with his schoolmates and invites mockery and derision as a result of his lack of social skills.

Perhaps they see it as a win/win situation for them. Either HF takes the model down and therefore a few other potential counts-as modellers are deterred from doing the same, or the hoo-ha from doing the same or they don't. They seem to believe they have nothing to lose in that the only people that they see as being affected (those that would like a boutique dwarf model in a different pose/style from GW's offerings) they do not give a fig about. It's business that in its infinitisimal smallness is of no concern to them.

Fine. If that's their attitude they can shove it, is my personal response to such idiocy.

They are the ones who declared war on any of their fans who aren't total kool-aid sucking buy-ins. I don't *have* to buy their official product if they are that much in hatred of me and my ilk.

Don't get me wrong, I have been "off" GW for a few years (pretty much a downhill slide since 2004, my last year of fanboi-ism) and I am a year or two past the point where their shenanikins had persuaded me I was going to be happier avoiding their products altogether and seeking alternative sources of gaming fun. This is beyond the final straw that broke the camel's back.

My "beef" is simply to draw attention to their chicanery, and I am happy to let others draw their own conclusions given the full facts (at least as I see them). I am under no illusion that somehow a boycott can be generated that will be strong enough to really impact on GW. On the other hand I do think it is still worthwhile to enlighten those that otherwise would continue to be suckered into the morass that is GW's abusive business model (words like "addict" and "plastic crack", while used in jest do partly explain my concerns with their persuit of profit at the expense of teenagers and others who perhaps haven't yet got a reasonable grasp of the true value of money).

I'm not a campaigning jackass, but I do desire the truth to be known, and it does concern me that so many excuse GW's excesses, for whatever reason.

Sure they aren't the baddest guys in the world, and its only a hobby, but their practices leech so much of the "fun" out of the hobby that it does concern me. Many are turned off wargaming altogether when they ultimately experience "GW burn-out", and if only they had perhaps tried games from companies that were less abusive of their fans they may have maintained an interest in a hobby that can provide great personal and emotional rewards.

Howard A Treesong wrote:.......

Kanluwen wrote:Dune, Aliens, The Lost World and Terminator fall under the parody/homage bit also. Maybe back in the 80s when GW was getting off the ground you'd have a case for arguing that, but the background has evolved since.

And you're absolutely right, that ONCE AGAIN, back in that timeframe of the 80s/early 90s.
GW did exactly what Hasslefree is doing now.

Hang on, so when Hasslefree do it it's a "rip off" but when GW do it it's a "homage". Or were they "ripping off" back in the 80s and it's ok now because they got away with it?

Not exactly. In the 80's Citadel/GW became the first company to produce gaming miniatures based on this genre and as such became capable of claiming certain rights to it as original [within that field]. Where as by following on and producing their own troll slayer miniature/dune pastishe in the established Citadel/GW style, Hasslefree are making facsimilies/infringing on the previous miniature creation within that genre. A technicality but one that GW clearly recognises.

For my 2p [sorry I have read 11 pages and feel I have earn't the right to rehash, I meant comment!], I still don't agree that there is any heavy handedness in GW's actions, the C&D notices are fairly established method of reaching out and informing people of what GW would like them to address. If you are late paying you credit card bills you will receive more sternly worded warnings. I do agree that the amount of sites contacted seems allot but as others have posted there are good reasons for this. It is probably worth adding that allot of the Specialist Games/OPP games were released at about the same time so it could just be that the end of the rights period nears on a few titles.

As for GW producing a MGS's "using our IP pack", no need for GW to do this. If you are intending to work with or near GW IP the onus is on you check the status/legallity of doing so, not for GW. As you can see by the re-posting of GW's IP it really isn't hard to find what they are happy with, and as with most things insure that no one looks at the small print until it s too late! And while it is clear to those who are in the know that all of the things are not necessarily enforceable by law, it does provide a boundry as to what GW legal will be looking into.

insaniak wrote:

Hawkins wrote: i didnt know hasslefree got hit too. wheres that coming from? linky?

I don't think the Hasslfree thing was part of the recent wave of C&D's. Kev White mentioned on Frothers that he had received two C&Ds from GW a while back, but wasn't saying which minis they were for.

What!? didnt know this... the ranges are quite diferent! Yet Kev's models are much superior quality wise... maybe that was the content of the C&D... "stop this one man operation that is making us look bad"
Next wave will be to other miniature companies refering; stop making 28mm miniatures... and because they have the right to behave like a megalomaniac ass many will nod to that.

Is it true that GW have told Hasslfree to take this model off sale?

http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/pack.php?pack=784

Kilkrazy wrote:Is it true that GW have told Hasslfree to take this model off sale?

http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/pack.php?pack=784

I'm assuming so from this comment by Kev on the Frothers forum I linked to above:

Hasslefriesian wrote:

Mad McGobbo wrote:GW own the trademark on "Trollslayer" not Troll Slayer.....

Are you sure? Because if that's the case the legal team don't even know their own I.P, since the letter is claiming an infringement on the words "Troll Slayer". That and barechested Dwarves and Mohicans.

NAVARRO wrote:Next wave will be to other miniature companies refering; stop making 28mm miniatures... and because they have the right to behave like a megalomaniac ass many will nod to that.

From the Frothers Forum posted earlier in the thread, it certainly looks like it's the Troll Slayer mini that prompted the C&D letter.

Interestingly, it looks like Hasslefree are going to respond with a "feth off" letter. This can work. As others have pointed out, C&D letters are just starting points; I had a C&D letter from another multinational company whose income is pretty much entirely derived from its IP, regarding the website mentioned in my Dakka profile. I negotiated with them a little, which came to nothing, and I ended up telling them that as far as I could see, they didn't really have a case anyway. They stopped bothering me.

I have to confess I went to the Frothers thread and saw it was 24 pages long and I gave up on it.

GW might be able to build a case that Trollslayer and Troll Slayer are so close that a typical member of the wargaming 'community' might be confused by the similarity of the terms.

To be fair, I know I would.

Kilkrazy wrote:I have to confess I went to the Frothers thread and saw it was 24 pages long and I gave up on it.

Don't blame you. The Froth Pot is an acquired taste!

Kilkrazy wrote:GW might be able to build a case that Trollslayer and Troll Slayer are so close that a typical member of the wargaming 'community' might be confused by the similarity of the terms.

To be fair, I know I would.

Well GW may have a case. Anyone can try and make an argument out of anything. The issue is how strong do they think it is and how strong is the other guy's?

The law in this is all about "passing off" GW would have to try and prove that HF was deliberately trying to mislead their customers into thinking his wares were authentic GW product. Producing a model that "looks a bit like" authentic GW product is not illegal if you are not attempting to mislead the general public. As HF makes no mention of GW's wares he is just offering a model for sale that happens to look a bit like a GW product with a similar name but using no trademarked images or iconography.

Sounds to me like they were pitching for an easy win on a tenuous possibility based around the similarity of the words "Troll" and "Slayer" (both common enough words in the fantasy genre) and the word "Trollslayer". Whether they took it to court would depend on whether they really thought they had a case and were likely to recoup costs. Given the low level of potential infringement I can't see GW trying very hard.

The issue I am trying to highlight though is not how close to the wind HF sailed (which is undoubtedly closer than I would feel comfortable doing myself) but how stupid and arrogant GW were for trying to assert copyright over bare chested mohican-wearing dwarfs! It's absolute lunacy to try and claim copyright over a pose of a model and the way it looks unless it is a direct pressmoulded copy of a Citadel original. In fact now I think about it I remember John Blanche waxing lyrical about this very issue of the derivation of artistic inspiration in defence of some of his own artwork which clearly paid close homage to some works of artists like (IIRC) Durer.

I agree it would hardly be worth it to stop the sale of a single figure worth £3.50.

But the purpose of a C&D is to try and frighten the recipient into compliance without the sender needing to take expensive legal action.

At any rate, Hasslefree are still selling the figure in question. It will be interesting to see if GW sue them.

Kilkrazy wrote:I have to confess I went to the Frothers thread and saw it was 24 pages long and I gave up on it.

GW might be able to build a case that Trollslayer and Troll Slayer are so close that a typical member of the wargaming 'community' might be confused by the similarity of the terms.

To be fair, I know I would.

Well that's what happens when your IP is based on words in common usage/public domain. If they were infringing upon a unique special character name (eg. Zogwod the Unbrave) then there would be a clear case. But GW don't hold the rights on dwarves that "slay" things and the Hasslefree Dwarf is of all different proportions to GW ones. He's taller, thinner and has no beard. What GW dwarf has no beard?

I can't even find "Trollslayers" on the GW site, "Dwarf Slayers", "Daemon Slayers" and "Dragon Slayers" yes, no "Trollslayers". This is the closest match and looks nothing like Hasslefree's offering.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod780898

GW's really pushing it. Their lawyer must really have nothing to do.

Howard A Treesong wrote:I can't even find "Trollslayers" on the GW site, "Dwarf Slayers", "Daemon Slayers" and "Dragon Slayers" yes, no "Trollslayers". This is the closest match and looks nothing like Hasslefree's offering.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod780898

What, so they have Dragon Slayers, Daemon Slayers, and ... Dwarf Slayers? One of these is not like the others.

Looks alot like a Dwarf Berserker Hero by Avatars of War... or a Sworn Dwarf by Gamezone miniatures to me...

And the news has gone global. Its on Slashdot and Boing Boing now.

Way to ruin your reputation GW!

http://slashdot.org/palm/10/09/12/01/070232_1.shtml

What did the original C&D to BGG state had to be taken off their boards. The derivative fan stuff should be fine but anything copied, scanned should go?

Looking at how this has snowballed its getting a bit 'chinese whispers'. Thats how it feels to me anyway. What are the facts?

or is it naive to ask?

Silly idea, but there is one thing I'm really loving about all this GW legal 'tardness...
And that is the great publicity GW giving to competition... if some here, were not aware off hasslefree , they are now... Multiply that with huge influx of members searching and posting alternatives to GW stuff and you have a better dakka.

The way we constanly move as a comunity should not be ignored by anyone in business, bigger or smaller companies will perish and only the smart ones that have the capacity to decode our movements will endure.
Some may think we are irrelevant and easly ignored, we are not main target afterall... but in hobby oriented small business and companies, everyting does matter and these latest atitudes will dent direct and indirectly GW business.

Vets have the money to feed their children with GW, vets have the capacity to galvanize tons of potential fans, vets been providing GW with the propaganda tools for years at zero cost... and Vets can easly do the oposite of the above.

Again nice image Hellfury

Kilkrazy wrote:I agree it would hardly be worth it to stop the sale of a single figure worth £3.50.

But the purpose of a C&D is to try and frighten the recipient into compliance without the sender needing to take expensive legal action.

At any rate, Hasslefree are still selling the figure in question. It will be interesting to see if GW sue them.

Yeah, here in the states it's called a SLAPP lawsuit (strategic lawsuit against public participation).

Personally, if I owned one of these sites, I would contact Stanford University's "Fair Use Project" in regards to fighting off any frivolous SLAPP.

Something that many of the posters here are forgetting is that to bring a successful lawsuit, the plaintiff (GW) must present sufficient evidence that they are being financially affected by the defendant and have suffered damages as a result of said defendant's actions. The defendant may then choose a number of defense options one of which could be "fair use" (depending on the situation).

In some situations even a 1:1 copy of a copyrighted work may be construed as fair use under the law; such was the case in Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation where a judge ruled that the 1:1 copy of the work in question even increased public exposure to the copyrighted work thus causing the opposite of harm and remanded the case to a lower court for arbitration.

Another case of note in 2008, as some here may recall, involved a mom posting a video of her baby dancing to Prince's "Let's go crazy" on you-tube. Universal Music served a C&D to you-tube and the video was removed under the DMCA. The mom didn't take it lying down and fought the removal. Finally, a federal judge ordered that a company must first evaluate fair use before issuing a C&D or pursuing a lawsuit. Of interesting note is a clause in the DMCA that states any individual that wins against a take-down attempt may seek damages (read punitive damages $$$$$).

It would be interesting to see what would happen if a GW C&D recipient were to choose to fight as there is sufficient legal precedence for a stout defence of basic infringement through a fair use defence. Note that this would not exempt anyone from outright copyright violations, there is a difference after all.

Just some musings.

edit: Really, I know how to spell; I promise.

agnosto. Thanks for posting that. I remember that "dancing baby" issue boinding around the interwebs now you mention it. It would be delicious irony if GW's bullying and aggro actually really cost them cold hard cash!

The proof of commercial damage is required in the USA but not under UK law, unless I am mistaken.

GW can loose the IP if they don't protect it by sending C&D's, how is that even possible? If it is possible-let me know, I'll do whatever it takes if I can steal their IP rights.

Trademarks can be lost if not defended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark

Hey so.. kinda unrelated but is anyone else a video game geek like me?

I ask this because one of my favourite Blizzard Games products (Starcraft) is entirely identical to 40K!

Zerg - Tyranids with hive mind the whole shebang..
Terran Marines - self explanatory

Did they ever pull any of this tomfoolery on Blizzard does anyone know?

mattyrm wrote:Hey so.. kinda unrelated but is anyone else a video game geek like me?

I ask this because one of my favourite Blizzard Games products (Starcraft) is entirely identical to 40K!

Zerg - Tyranids with hive mind the whole shebang..
Terran Marines - self explanatory

Did they ever pull any of this tomfoolery on Blizzard does anyone know?

They wouldn't have a leg to stand on because the visuals and "fluff" are very different.

'Cept for the fact that Blizzard had originally approached GW back in the day to do Warhammer/40k games.

GW backed out, and Blizzard altered it to create their own universe if I remember it right. Been awhile since I bothered to look.

Yes. I once had someone point this out to me, and it's worth looking at:


Tyranids Pre-Starcraft:


Along came a Hydralisk:


Tyranids Post-Starcraft:

jabbakahut wrote:GW can loose the IP if they don't protect it by sending C&D's,

You know ive been hearing nothing but this: 'GW need to protect its IP' from the pro Gee Doubleyas (not you Jabba) . does any one else know of a mini company that is actively trying to protect its IP as viciously??
Come to think of that, what companies are most ripped off by mini makers. the movies right? how many IP C&D's have been sent out by universal? fox? paramount? against mini companies. specificaly... aliens? maybe starwars cause they licene out to mini makers? Star trek, we all know they are heavey handed with IP. ?? fact is i only see GW feeling the need.
You never see a swarm of C&Ds go out from the movie makers, heck most of the time they rip each other off as a sort of fair play deal (think of bugs life and Antz).
Will they really loose IP if a fan site puts up pics of their stuff? come on. with all the fan sites for everything out there, not one has ever lost anything, especialy IP.
It all comes down to GW crying wolf, GW IP is in as much danger of being lost as Benidict is of being bent over the Popemobile and bailer poled.
Its just the iron fist when it comes down to it, GW obviously thinks theirs isnt tight enough.
And thats sad cause i dont know of another mini company that is as strong. their like the microsoft of the mini world. what really do they have to fear?

mattyrm wrote:Hey so.. kinda unrelated but is anyone else a video game geek like me?

I ask this because one of my favourite Blizzard Games products (Starcraft) is entirely identical to 40K!

Zerg - Tyranids with hive mind the whole shebang..
Terran Marines - self explanatory

Did they ever pull any of this tomfoolery on Blizzard does anyone know?

This is where things get ugly, really. From what I understand, it can come down to a judge listening to a debate about specific points of infringement between the two designs. The concept of a horde of aliens with a hive mind is not particularly unique. GW and Blizzard's implementations are.

For example, Jeep tried to protect the 'seven slot grille' as a key design element, but lost to, IIRC, Hummer.

I think if someone wanted to build a case between WH40k Space Marines and Starcraft Terran Marines, you'd need to really quatify specific design elements that were ripped off from each other. SC's Marines, for example, don't really have the whole 'warrior monk' background aspect, and the bling that comes with it. The designs have very different helmets and backpacks, too. basically, they're 'Marines' in heavy powered armor, but the comparison stops there for the most part.

notprop wrote:Not exactly. In the 80's Citadel/GW became the first company to produce gaming miniatures based on this genre...

How did this slip under the radar? No they were not. There were dozens of fantasy manufacturers before GW consumed the market.

Did that 'White Wolf (who's very name is stolen from a Michael Moorcock book) goes easy on the fans' thing happen around the same time that they got their arses handed to them in court by Sony for making up ownership of other peoples works? Coincidence? I think not.

I used to have a lot of time for White Wolf and their White Wolf/Inphobia magazine but somewhere along the line they lost track...

I actually do remember hearing about GW litigation over the Terran Marines. They tried to sue Blizzard and lost.
It's funny, it used to irritate me that Blizzard took so many ideas from GW. But Blizzard has proven to be much more open to its fans as far as hearing suggestions, comments and criticism. GW is looking more and more like a stubborn old dinosaur that will die because of its refusal to adapt.

hmmmmmm, on another thread i found this:
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/28/games-workshop-decla.html

which lead to this:´
'Interesting. Maybe the folks at GW should look at what happened to White Wolf Games. They essentially went to war with THEIR OWN FANCLUB for years over petty nonsense, including the fact people liked playing an older edition of the World of Darkness games. Lots of bad blood and lost customers later, White Wolf is in full repair mode.A great press release from White Wolf:

http://www.white-wolf.com/index.php?line=news&articleid=1172


Id forgotten how WW went up against its fans oh so long ago.

but this here is the line that most gives me hope:
'A drastic easing of Fansite Rules under the Dark Pack. We’re taking a step back from overseeing what you, as the fans, want to celebrate on your own websites. Of course, we’ve still got to protect our brand identity as creators, but you’ll find the new fansite rules to be more open, accepting and helpful.'

Now if only Gee Doubleya would get of its hinny and fallow a good example.

Archonate wrote:I actually do remember hearing about GW litigation over the Terran Marines. They tried to sue Blizzard and lost.
It's funny, it used to irritate me that Blizzard took so many ideas from GW. But Blizzard has proven to be much more open to its fans as far as hearing suggestions, comments and criticism. GW is looking more and more like a stubborn old dinosaur that will die because of its refusal to adapt.

Different mediums are different?

Blizzard can't get away with not interacting, especially with WoW. Look at how bad it gets if one of the dev team don't explain why suchandsuch talent is being altered.

And just like with GW, when they do explain it--you get one camp hooting and hollering it's completely unfair and ridiculous, the other stating that it's amazingly balanced.

Different mediums are different?

Blizzard can't get away with not interacting, especially with WoW. Look at how bad it gets if one of the dev team don't explain why suchandsuch talent is being altered.

And just like with GW, when they do explain it--you get one camp hooting and hollering it's completely unfair and ridiculous, the other stating that it's amazingly balanced.

At least Blizzard gives people the opportunity to be heard by other fans as well as the devs. Blizzard isn't afraid to have forums full of angry people. GW got rid of their official forums because there were a few angry people on them. Blizzard isn't trying to shut down its own fans' websites. Blizzard isn't threatening to sue people over incidental similarities in IP.

Trust me, back when I played WoW I despised Blizzard. Absolutely hated them, that's why I quit. But looking around at other companies, especially GW, has given me an appreciation for the effort Blizzard makes to be open to their fan base.

A "few" angry people on them?

You never visited those forums, did you?

They were as bad, if not worse, than the Blizzard forums whenever a dev posts.

Threads went from being fluff--and then badam, someone's crying that Space Marines are overrepresented in Codex releases--from there, we had someone hooting and hollering that Orks needed a new Codex or he'd firebomb GW's HQ.

Hawkins wrote:You never see a swarm of C&Ds go out from the movie makers,

That doesn't mean that they don't send them. Just that we don't see them. Not everyone feels the need to post the fact that they have been sent a C&D letter on the internet. I would suspect that the vast majority of the time it's sorted out quietly behind the scenes.

To counter, it doesnt mean they send em if we dont see them either.... Im fairly sure wed see it though if it hit a fan site.

Hawkins wrote:hmmmmmm, on another thread i found this:
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/28/games-workshop-decla.html

which lead to this:´
'Interesting. Maybe the folks at GW should look at what happened to White Wolf Games. They essentially went to war with THEIR OWN FANCLUB for years over petty nonsense, including the fact people liked playing an older edition of the World of Darkness games. Lots of bad blood and lost customers later, White Wolf is in full repair mode.A great press release from White Wolf:

Scarier was this item from an ex-member of staff linked to on that page.

http://www.notsounwashed.com/2009/11/very-dangerous-remove-immediately/

I think despite whether you agree with GW's actions or not, this has been a huge PR blunder for them.

There are so many ways they could have gone about this and not pissed off their fans. It seems just as people found little to hate on GW for (except for prices), they go ahead and give a gift wrapped hate basket to Internet discussion boards.

Howard A Treesong wrote:

Hawkins wrote:hmmmmmm, on another thread i found this:
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/28/games-workshop-decla.html

which lead to this:´
'Interesting. Maybe the folks at GW should look at what happened to White Wolf Games. They essentially went to war with THEIR OWN FANCLUB for years over petty nonsense, including the fact people liked playing an older edition of the World of Darkness games. Lots of bad blood and lost customers later, White Wolf is in full repair mode.A great press release from White Wolf:

Scarier was this item from an ex-member of staff linked to on that page.

http://www.notsounwashed.com/2009/11/very-dangerous-remove-immediately/

LMAO!!!!

I guess it was only a matter of time before this story would rear its wacky skull again.

LOL This is one of the pitfalls of working for the EE. This guy should have remembered the first rule of fight club.

Kanluwen wrote:You never visited those forums, did you?

They were as bad, if not worse, than the Blizzard forums whenever a dev posts.

Have you convinced yourself that I didn't post in the GW forums, contrary to what I just said? How odd. How do you explain my visiting of the forums if I... never visited the forums? Seriously, think before you post.
GW forums were just a lot of armylisting, wishlisting, suggestions for improving codices and questions for the devs. Yeah they could be pretty negative, but at no point were they ever as bad as the Wow forums: A constant stream of vitriolic bile, hatred and disagreement with the occasional poor sap making a target of himself by saying "I actually like the Wow mechanics."
Which forum is worse is irrelevant anyway. My point is that GW deliberately turned a blind eye to the voice of its fans by shutting down their own official forums... Who does that?!

A company that does a horrible job integrating into this Brave New World called the Internet?

Seriously.
You really have rose tinted glasses if you're remembering armylisting, wishlisting, suggestions, etc.

Kanluwen wrote:Seriously.
You really have rose tinted glasses if you're remembering armylisting, wishlisting, suggestions, etc.

I think your own memory might be placing more emphasis on the negative.

Yes, there was a lot of it. Sheer volume will ensure that. There was also a lot of good, though. The human tendency though is to remember the bad... it tends to stand out more.

Having said that, by comparison to a lot of the other 'bigger' GW forums, the signal to noise ratio was pretty high, and the (I suspect... I don't have actual figures to back it up) lower average poster age and spotty moderation made the forums pretty unpleasant as often as not.

Not saying younger posters are necessarily a bad thing... but it does change the tone of tactics and armylist discussions somewhat when there's a lot of them fixated on their favorite units rather than basing their discussions on actual tactical knowledge.

And the tendency for longer or hotter topics to devolve into all out warfare was that much more pronounced than on most of the other forums I've visited over the years.

Eh. Maybe.

I just remember the first real post I had there was discussing the proper usage of Prince Tyrion and Teclis in a High Elf army...and getting shouted down for it being "unfluffy".

Then I discovered Dakka, and the world changed for so much better

Kanluwen wrote:I just remember the first real post I had there was discussing the proper usage of Prince Tyrion and Teclis in a High Elf army...and getting shouted down for it being "unfluffy".

So, basically, Warseer. Right?

Hawkins wrote:

jabbakahut wrote:GW can loose the IP if they don't protect it by sending C&D's,

You know ive been hearing nothing but this: 'GW need to protect its IP' from the pro Gee Doubleyas (not you Jabba) . does any one else know of a mini company that is actively trying to protect its IP as viciously??
Come to think of that, what companies are most ripped off by mini makers. the movies right? how many IP C&D's have been sent out by universal? fox? paramount? against mini companies. specificaly... aliens? maybe starwars cause they licene out to mini makers? Star trek, we all know they are heavey handed with IP. ?? fact is i only see GW feeling the need.
You never see a swarm of C&Ds go out from the movie makers, heck most of the time they rip each other off as a sort of fair play deal (think of bugs life and Antz).
Will they really loose IP if a fan site puts up pics of their stuff? come on. with all the fan sites for everything out there, not one has ever lost anything, especialy IP.
It all comes down to GW crying wolf, GW IP is in as much danger of being lost as Benidict is of being bent over the Popemobile and bailer poled.
Its just the iron fist when it comes down to it, GW obviously thinks theirs isnt tight enough.
And thats sad cause i dont know of another mini company that is as strong. their like the microsoft of the mini world. what really do they have to fear?

Whoa dog, you know we agree right?

Osbad wrote:...much as GW might wish it was otherwise, you cannot copyright an actual rule, or instruction or idea. All you have is the copyright to the "artistic expression" of that rule. This is a fundamental principle of copyright law. In other words, copy and pasting text from a rulebook is illegal, but expressing it in a different, shorter, handier way is perfectly legal and there shouldn't be a damned thing GW could do about it.

Is this true? Anybody know where I can find out? If I can verify that my next project will be Jabba's guide to 40K.

If things are reaching BoingBoing I say we are on the right track to make GW change their policies. Once the genie is out of the fan bottle and reaching more mainstream sites sooner or later somebody in the finance world might echo this fracas as a lesson on how not to treat your clients and then GW´s shareholders will start asking nasty questions that the board will have a difficult time answering like how are you going to franchise additional stuff (and give us more money) if fans are foaming at the mouth against anything that has the brand GW attached to?.

M.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I just remember the first real post I had there was discussing the proper usage of Prince Tyrion and Teclis in a High Elf army...and getting shouted down for it being "unfluffy".

So, basically, Warseer. Right?

Hrm.

Other than I think I got banned from Warseer for shooting down somebody who kept postulating that: despite the fact that Imperial forces completely control the spacelanes surrounding Cadia, constantly landing reinforcements on the ground and beginning to gather forces for a full on Crusade...the planet is somehow lost.

insaniak wrote:
Having said that, by comparison to a lot of the other 'bigger' GW forums, the signal to noise ratio was pretty high, and the (I suspect... I don't have actual figures to back it up) lower average poster age and spotty moderation made the forums pretty unpleasant as often as not.

Can you imagine what kind of job that was over there?

I've love to have a chat with one of the old 'Eye of Terror' Moderators... Can you imagine the stories?

And not just about the posters, but, I imagine, the Imperial Directives From On High?

Kilkrazy wrote:Trademarks can be lost if not defended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark

I still don't buy it. GW is trying to avoid genericide because Blood Bowl is going to become as ubiquitious as Kleenex, Velcro, Xerox, Aspirin, Zipper, Lego, Google, etc? And even working with that logic, how bad is it if any miniture figure football style game becomes generically Blood Bowl? I still don't understand how any company can loose money on this. Companies loose money because of their quality, price or service.

Sarigar wrote:Wow, I feel I've had my head buried in the sand for so long.

According to the GW site, you can't even get a tattoo depicting their IP? Really. Would they really stoop so low as to sue someone for having a tattoo? Or, you can't start a gaming club and call it the 'Warhammer Club'. Really? Did they just hire a bunch of overzealous young attorneys trying to flex their knowledge?

This really makes me a sad person.

lol..what are they going to do if someone has a WH tat?

SuperCow wrote:

Sarigar wrote:Wow, I feel I've had my head buried in the sand for so long.

According to the GW site, you can't even get a tattoo depicting their IP? Really. Would they really stoop so low as to sue someone for having a tattoo? Or, you can't start a gaming club and call it the 'Warhammer Club'. Really? Did they just hire a bunch of overzealous young attorneys trying to flex their knowledge?

This really makes me a sad person.

lol..what are they going to do if someone has a WH tat?

...
As stated earlier...
It's not something they really enforce. If they were going to go after anyone, they'd go after the tattoo artist.

Alpharius wrote:

insaniak wrote:
Having said that, by comparison to a lot of the other 'bigger' GW forums, the signal to noise ratio was pretty high, and the (I suspect... I don't have actual figures to back it up) lower average poster age and spotty moderation made the forums pretty unpleasant as often as not.

Can you imagine what kind of job that was over there?

I try not to...

And I should point out, the 'spotty moderation' thing wasn't a dig at them personally. They were volunteers, just like we are (although people tended to assume that they were GW employees) and I'm sure they were doing their best. Just obviously weren't enough of them to actually keep things under control, and the dodgy, built-in-house forum software probably made things more difficult than they needed to be...

insaniak wrote:

Alpharius wrote:

insaniak wrote:
Having said that, by comparison to a lot of the other 'bigger' GW forums, the signal to noise ratio was pretty high, and the (I suspect... I don't have actual figures to back it up) lower average poster age and spotty moderation made the forums pretty unpleasant as often as not.

Can you imagine what kind of job that was over there?

I try not to...

And I should point out, the 'spotty moderation' thing wasn't a dig at them personally. They were volunteers, just like we are (although people tended to assume that they were GW employees) and I'm sure they were doing their best. Just obviously weren't enough of them to actually keep things under control, and the dodgy, built-in-house forum software probably made things more difficult than they needed to be...

I didn't think it was a dig - just like you spelled out, I always figured they were volunteers, or, at least GW employees who 'volunteered' to do it in their spare time.

For fun.

Because, you know, Moderating is fun!

Yeargh!

Alpharius wrote:
I didn't think it was a dig - just like you spelled out, I always figured they were volunteers, or, at least GW employees who 'volunteered' to do it in their spare time.

For fun.

Because, you know, Moderating is fun!

Yeargh!

Yeah, who wouldn't want to walk around all day smacking people with a giant ban-hammer?

Kanluwen wrote:Other than I think I got banned from Warseer for shooting down somebody who kept postulating that: despite the fact that Imperial forces completely control the spacelanes surrounding Cadia, constantly landing reinforcements on the ground and beginning to gather forces for a full on Crusade...the planet is somehow lost.

I saw a multi-page thread about painting styles for an army.

This was in the tactics forum.

I guaranteed it got moved to the appropriate thread.

For ripping on Warseer they sure seem to feed you lot the new rumors. I've seen rumors copy/pasted on here from Warseer that had been on 'Seer for 3 days.

Different types of moderation.

Fateweaver wrote:
For ripping on Warseer they sure seem to feed you lot the new rumors.

Just because we get some of our rumors from there doesn't mean that it's good.

Personally I don't think that Warseer is as bad as people say it is, like most things it has its good sides and bad sides.

Fateweaver wrote:I guaranteed it got moved to the appropriate thread.

For ripping on Warseer they sure seem to feed you lot the new rumors. I've seen rumors copy/pasted on here from Warseer that had been on 'Seer for 3 days.

Different types of moderation.

The painting thread, sure.

But man. Considering the lout that started arguing about Cadia? Bahahaha. He had himself a nice lil' posse too.

I've for sure not seen favorites of the mods as much as I have here.

Dakka has its ups and downs. Mostly downs though. I like dakka for the OT forum as it seems a little livelier than 'Seers non-40k forum but for rumors, tactics advice, painting and batrep reading I go to 'Seer.

No different K than the little posse's that band together here. Hah, just read the 6 different anti-gw C&D threads to see that to about 8-10 users on dakka who somehow think they represent ALL of the 40k fanbase GW can do nothing right.

Don't you worry, I know what ya mean

jabbakahut wrote:

Hawkins wrote:

jabbakahut wrote:GW can loose the IP if they don't protect it by sending C&D's,

You know ive been hearing nothing but this: 'GW need to protect its IP' from the pro Gee Doubleyas (not you Jabba) . does any one else know of a mini company that is actively trying to protect its IP as viciously??
Come to think of that, what companies are most ripped off by mini makers. the movies right? how many IP C&D's have been sent out by universal? fox? paramount? against mini companies. specificaly... aliens? maybe starwars cause they licene out to mini makers? Star trek, we all know they are heavey handed with IP. ?? fact is i only see GW feeling the need.
You never see a swarm of C&Ds go out from the movie makers, heck most of the time they rip each other off as a sort of fair play deal (think of bugs life and Antz).
Will they really loose IP if a fan site puts up pics of their stuff? come on. with all the fan sites for everything out there, not one has ever lost anything, especialy IP.
It all comes down to GW crying wolf, GW IP is in as much danger of being lost as Benidict is of being bent over the Popemobile and bailer poled.
Its just the iron fist when it comes down to it, GW obviously thinks theirs isnt tight enough.
And thats sad cause i dont know of another mini company that is as strong. their like the microsoft of the mini world. what really do they have to fear?

Whoa dog, you know we agree right?

Osbad wrote:...much as GW might wish it was otherwise, you cannot copyright an actual rule, or instruction or idea. All you have is the copyright to the "artistic expression" of that rule. This is a fundamental principle of copyright law. In other words, copy and pasting text from a rulebook is illegal, but expressing it in a different, shorter, handier way is perfectly legal and there shouldn't be a damned thing GW could do about it.

Is this true? Anybody know where I can find out? If I can verify that my next project will be Jabba's guide to 40K.

You can find out by reading the government copyright and web pages of the USA and UK. There's a sticky thread about copyright at the top of this forum to get you started.

Kilkrazy wrote:You can find out by reading the government copyright and web pages of the USA and UK. There's a sticky thread about copyright at the top of this forum to get you started.

Wow, sorry, thanks!

Actually, that 10 myths doesn't address my question. Currently searching through the US Copyright site for an answer.

The 10 Copyright Myths is a basic starter. You need to do a lot of reading into copyright and patent law -- it's all there online.

I think I found what is applicable?

U.S. Copyright Office wrote:What Is Not Protected by Copyright
Ideas, methods, or systems are not subject to copyright protection. Copyright
protection, therefore, is not available for ideas or procedures for doing, making,
or building things; scientific or technical methods or discoveries; business
operations or procedures; mathematical principles; formulas, algorithms; or
any other concept, process, or method of operation.
Section 102 of the copyright law, title 17, United States Code, clearly expresses
this principle: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation,
concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described,
explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Scarier was this item from an ex-member of staff linked to on that page.

http://www.notsounwashed.com/2009/11/very-dangerous-remove-immediately/

This is pure gold. Seriously 'free thinkers' represent a 'threat' to GW and should be removed immediately? Kirby wrote a 'little red book'? W.T.F... Does this explain the immobile and foaming mouthed stance of anyone who defends them here and is then identified as an employee? Because they fit into the 'ideal' category of enthusiastic without free thinking?

Can anyone provide the current C&D funstuff to somethingawful.com and 4chan? Lets spread the viral backlash. Let's have GW learn the lesson when the entire interwebs is saturated with vitriol about them and their thick-headed bullying.

There you go -- nice work!

Some of those things can be protected by patent, which is a different area of IP law.

Even better...

U.S. Copyright wrote:Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for
playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material
involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public,
nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar
principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary,
artistic, or musical form.

That seems really interesting. Can someone else interrupt that? I don't believe my interpretation.

jabbakahut wrote:Is this true? Anybody know where I can find out? If I can verify that my next project will be Jabba's guide to 40K.

As far as I know it's true. It worked for the OSRIC project (a rewriting of the OOP 1st edition AD&D rules for the internet so they could be used with the WotC OGL: http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/osric/. Its certainly a fundamental given in the computer games industry.

As the copyright law quote states - you cannot copy an idea - just the specific expression of that idea - so the knowledge of "how to play 40k" (or any other game) cannot be copyrighted, but if you photocopy the text and artwork of the rulebook it is still basically illegal (with certain caveats in the US for fair use, acedemic study etc.). So if you tell someone how to play 40k and write it down in your own words, using non-trademarked words/names, then there is (as I understand it) nothing at all GW can do to prevent it. Even if you then sold your own expression of the rules for real cash money, although you'd be advised to get a copyright lawyer double check your work, and a good proofreader to check you hadn't inadvertently regurgitated chunks of GW text. This is the same in the UK as in the US.

Patent law is an area that can cover the protection of ideas, but I am not aware of GW having filed any patents for game mechanics in the US or the UK. I'm not even sure patent law can cover purely intellectual rather than mechanical processes anyhow.

Patent law cannot cover intellectual ideas, only inventions and mechanical processes.

The US patent office has extended patent protection to some what are called business methods, for example, the idea of having a shopping trolley icon on your website to represent the bundle of items a customer has selected for purchase.

This and similar cases would not be permitted under Euro patent laws and they have started to cause some trouble because they are too broad.

It's actually pretty easy for a writer to rewrite game rules so they say the same thing but in different words. I've done it occasionally myself, in the OGL / d20 System licence days of D&D 3.0 / 3.5, when I used to work for Mongoose Publishing.

You'd want to alter the title, despite that clause about the title not being subject to copyright, because of course the title's a trademark. But theoretically there's nothing to stop someone releasing a "Space Empires Miniature Wargame", using the 40K rules in different words (hopefully clearer, less ambiguous, & more grammatically correct ones). You'd want to tweak some faction names a bit -- Imperial Marines rather than Space Marines, Heavy Power Armour rather than Terminator Armour, whatever.

jabbakahut wrote:Even better...

U.S. Copyright wrote:Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for
playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material
involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public,
nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar
principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary,
artistic, or musical form.

That seems really interesting. Can someone else interrupt that? I don't believe my interpretation.

You can't patent or copyright methods or systems of doing things, or mere 'ideas'. If GW decided there was the "GW way to glue figures together" they could not protect it because there's no material product there. Although to get a patents you also have to prove your idea is a novel solution to something, not an obvious one, and it cannot be already in the public domain which is why you mustn't publish a design for something you intend to patent. A pharmecutical company can protect a drug, or a specialised piece of equipment they have invented, but they can't protect a medical proceedure.

I don't see how this law helps anyone here, GW aren't telling people how to make their models and don't claim ownership of the concept of wargaming. They claim control over their rulesets but not over over the idea of futuristic games played with a ruler, dice and a table.

Howard A Treesong wrote:They claim control over their rulesets but not over over the idea of futuristic games played with a ruler, dice and a table.

They can't copyright their rulesets.

I was going to post it, but you can see it here. It's GW's 81 copyrights held in the US. I didn't actually notice anything Bloodbowl on there.

EDIT:
I don't think it works as a link, I'll edit it into a better format and post it.

The comments in this post have been removed at the request of Games Workshop ®

ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

NAVARRO wrote:ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

You're gonna get sued, buster. Consider this a 'cease and desist enjoying life' notice.

Hellfury wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

You're gonna get sued, buster. Consider this a 'cease and desist enjoying life' notice.

No worries I unleash - Kanluwen the Boom! Leman Russ Commander on GW... Hes in good graces on the top of the right corner in the GW secret red book... so he will, for sure, speak up in my behalf... or shoud I say scream in my behalf

Joking mate, argumentations are going back and forth and seem way to serious. Thank god for these funny images.

[Your creativity and loyalty are a threat to our IP - Do not post this again]

H.B.M.C. wrote:[Your creativity and loyalty are a threat to our IP - Do not post this again]

I was about to say how harsh that was for HBMC to say that but I have to say...

[if you continue to make such libelous statements, we will sue you ass into the dirt, to use the parlace posters as yourself seem to appreciate.]




This message was edited 1 time by Games Workshop Legal Department. Last update was at 02/Dec/2009 08:38:02 AM

I think this could be the start of a new internet meme. GW IP rules.

M.

Look, we shouldn't be scared of any [The Workshop is Mother, The Workshop is Father, you will be a constructive citizen. Only a Constructive Citizen may benefit from the Citizen's Reward, only those who seek The Citizen's Reward may enjoy The Product with 10% vouchers only redeemable with The Workshop. The Citizen's Reward is not a discount.]

This meme sucks.

[Games Workshop Legal would like to remind you that the contents of their legal documents
are owned by Games Workshop Legal. Therefore any messages posted on their behalf
misrepresenting themselves as coming from Games Workshop Legal itself would be subject to
legal action from Games Workshop Legal.

Including this one.

]

Forcing a meme is a crime, you know.

We didn't force this one. It spawned naturally (or unnaturally, depending on your point of view).

I'd have a problem if [OBEY. REPRODUCE. CONSUME.]

I was really thinking more [TRUST THE WORKSHOP, THE WORKSHOP IS YOUR FRIEND] if you see what I mean?

jabbakahut]

Hawkins wrote:

jabbakahut wrote:GW can loose the IP if they don't protect it by sending C&D's,
You know ive been hearing nothing but this: 'GW need to protect its IP' from the pro Gee Doubleyas (not you Jabba) .


Whoa dog, you know we agree right?



i ment to exclude you
sorry i wasn't clear jabba.

Reply by: Kanluwen - click to view full reply 

722

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 17:15:39

Post by: Kanluwen

NAVARRO wrote:

Hellfury wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

You're gonna get sued, buster. Consider this a 'cease and desist enjoying life' notice.

No worries I unleash - Kanluwen the Boom! Leman Russ Commander on GW... Hes in good graces on the top of the right corner in the GW secret red book... so he will, for sure, speak up in my behalf... or shoud I say scream in my behalf

Joking mate, argumentations are going back and forth and seem way to serious. Thank god for these funny images.

Pft. I wish I had some kind of upper level connections with GW. All I can claim is having met Abnett and getting him to sign my copy of "Xenos" in 02.

But yeah. I can't decide if this thread is destined for a slow death and people trying to force a 4chan meme...

Or if it just needs a sidehug to kill it quickly.

Reply by: TBD - click to view full reply 

18072

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 17:23:44

Post by: TBD

Kanluwen wrote:I can't decide if this thread is destined for a slow death and people trying to force a 4chan meme...

Or if it just needs a sidehug to kill it quickly.

The whiners will simply make a new thread or threadjack another one into GW-bashing. Lately they do not seem to have anything else to do with their time.

Reply by: Howard A Treesong - click to view full reply 

7361

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 17:25:13

Post by: Howard A Treesong

Kanluwen wrote:Or if it just needs a sidehug to kill it quickly.

Oh no, have you seen the "Gimmie dat christian side hug" rap video too?

Reply by: Kanluwen - click to view full reply 

722

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 17:26:55

Post by: Kanluwen

Seen it?

I'm the one who posted it in OT the other day

Reply by: Howard A Treesong - click to view full reply 

7361

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 17:29:31

Post by: Howard A Treesong

Kanluwen wrote:Seen it?

I'm the one who posted it in OT the other day

Ah right, I didn't know there was a thread here as I was sent it from elsewhere.

Reply by: Kanluwen - click to view full reply 

722

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 17:33:19

Post by: Kanluwen

Don't worry, it got hijacked into a straight edge thread.

I figured it's a great warning of when you take things like "straight edge" too far.

Reply by: jabbakahut - click to view full reply 

7416

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 17:40:24

Post by: jabbakahut

ha

Reply by: MeanGreenStompa - click to view full reply 

8742

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 18:43:22

Post by: MeanGreenStompa

TBD wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I can't decide if this thread is destined for a slow death and people trying to force a 4chan meme...

Or if it just needs a sidehug to kill it quickly.

The whiners will simply make a new thread or threadjack another one into GW-bashing. Lately they do not seem to have anything else to do with their time.

Hey there genius,

We don't gets ta call you apologists, according to the Mods, so you don't gets ta call us 'whiners'. Can you dig it sparky?

Or shall I come over and spell it out for you...

Reply by: Alpharius - click to view full reply 

123

The Great Games Workshop purge of '09 @ 2009/12/02 18:51:52

Post by: Alpharius

And with that, we've come to the end, I think...

◄ 1 2 Pg# Go to page...