Actually they weren't good points at all since nothing what he said has to do with the content of the post he responded to.

And actually I like BoW's site, but that has nothing to do with the issue.

Does it matter?
Either way the product has been sold. If it is such a hassle for GW to sell via third party stores they should shut the do-dah up and just sell their stuff themselves.
Better still let people who know about selling and marketing do it for them and concentrate on making which to be fair, they generally do well.

TBD I suggest that you C&D now mate
If no one is convinced by your argument after several pages, even if you do prove to be correct, it seems unlikely that they will come around to your way of thinking now.

proditorcappela wrote:TBD: Here is where your entire argument falls apart.

GW doesn't have to sell their merchandise through other distributors, that was their own choice.

At that point, any rationalization over discounters, alternate sites, spoilers, other retailers, etc. etc. it all becomes rubbish. GW made a business decision to sell their product through other means than their own distribution methods.

There are pluses and minuses to doing this.

If you are trying to tell me that because GW makes a product and allows others to resell this product, I am somehow beholden to NOT get the best deal for my money, that I must turn myself away from the nefarious and ill-tempered retailers who would dare to sell it to me at a discount (After already paying GW for the privelege of doing so I should add), well, franklly, Feth off.

That isn't my argument, and never has been, so nothing falls apart.

My argument is that GW, or any other company for that matter, gets to decide when & how to reveal their own work, and not somebody else.

These days they might not be doing it in a way we like, but it still is their decision to make.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Does it matter?
Either way the product has been sold. If it is such a hassle for GW to sell via third party stores they should shut the do-dah up and just sell their stuff themselves.
Better still let people who know about selling and marketing do it for them and concentrate on making which to be fair, they generally do well.

TBD I suggest that you C&D now mate
If no one is convinced by your argument after several pages, even if you do prove to be correct, it seems unlikely that they will come around to your way of thinking now.

It isn't really a matter of convincing anybody. If I say A and people respond acting like I said B, resulting in a snowball-effect of upset citizens, then what am I supposed to do? That has been the problem throughout this thread, and it isn't my fault.

Anyway, looking at everything that has been transpiring lately I am convinced that GW would rather shut the do-dah, like you say, but they probably can't get away with it (yet) business-wise. It would be very interesting to see what happens if suddenly they decide to stop selling through third party stores.

TBD wrote:Actually they weren't good points at all since nothing what he said has to do with the content of the post he responded to.

And actually I like BoW's site, but that has nothing to do with the issue.

What? You're not for real are you?

I specifically argumented against that BoW can be seen as a "commercial venture" instead of a journalistic one by telling you that it applies to almost every other journalistic endeavour. In which case NY Times or de Volksrant should be more closely monitored or perhaps not at all be considered journalistic endeavours? Or is it OK for them since they print on paper?

Leaked photos, for politicial, news or commercial stuff, is and should be governed under laws concerning news media / journalism and freedom of press. If you seriously try to argue that it shouldnt be you're (not you in person, you in general) starting to thread on very thin ice.

Yes, this is how I've always assumed it works in the first place.

Except for all the bits where you insisted, without actually checking what the law was by yourself, that it attached to "jounalists"

It took me about 2 seconds to get that bit of code, by dropping "Fair Use" into google... Why didn't you do it yourself?

where it was claimed that all you need is a camera and a platform without much further requirements

However this doesn't matter at -all- in this case... The only place where the definition of a journalist really matters legally, are places where someone has to get a credntial of some sort, in order to obtain access (such as a press pool) or in terms of jounalisic "sheild" laws, where they can protect confidential sources, and or their raw material or notes, from police requests for it. But that's a whole diffrent kettle of worms...

So thanks for finally putting this to rest.

Well I thought I did... till you turned the reasoning ass over teakettle...

Numbered for clarity...

1 - Site has (link to) Youtube showing spoiler of company X's yet unrevealed work.
2 - Spoiler generates more traffic for site.
3 - Site has advertising for rivals of company X.
4 - Increased traffic = (potential) increased traffic & business for said rivals of company X.
5- Company X loses sales and/or $$$ as a direct result.
6- Site can be viewed as having commercial motives and is not very clearly a "journalistic endeavour".
7- Fair use does not apply.
8- People can kiss TBD's hiney (size changed to make Chiboggle happy)

1-4 Basically speak to the commercial, vs non commercial nature entire enterprize, which is ONE PART of the four part test, above, it's a commercial endeavor, fine... but then so are most newspapers, and televison stations.

5 can possibly be -infered- but probably not proven, especially since they can make a reasonable claim that their spoiler -increased- sales of the product featured, but also is besides the point, since the market value test, doesn't have to do with people deciding where or weather they buy the "spoiled" product.. but weather they've created a product that "replaces" the original in the marketplace... i.e. a knockoff that in and of itself is an infringement of the IP, A spoiler on -video- of the contents of a 3d product, really doesn't.. any more than a bad review of a movie in a newspaper that drops plot points, doesn't infringe the copyright.

6 Really doesn't matter, see 1-4 above, especially as "journalistic endevour" isn't mentioned even in the non-exclusive "such as" list in the law...

7 Fair Use does apply... It may be a commercial venture, but it's use of the product is miniscule, the purpose of the use is clearly commentary on the original product, and they're not creating a replacement market..

8 Monkey Marine had better make up a long list of posteriors...

I love you guys anyway, just so you know

I guess we're just gonna have to love and tolerate the gak out of you right back...

TBD wrote:

proditorcappela wrote:TBD: Here is where your entire argument falls apart.

GW doesn't have to sell their merchandise through other distributors, that was their own choice.

At that point, any rationalization over discounters, alternate sites, spoilers, other retailers, etc. etc. it all becomes rubbish. GW made a business decision to sell their product through other means than their own distribution methods.

There are pluses and minuses to doing this.

If you are trying to tell me that because GW makes a product and allows others to resell this product, I am somehow beholden to NOT get the best deal for my money, that I must turn myself away from the nefarious and ill-tempered retailers who would dare to sell it to me at a discount (After already paying GW for the privelege of doing so I should add), well, franklly, Feth off.

That isn't my argument, and never has been, so nothing falls apart.

My argument is that GW, or any other company for that matter, gets to decide when & how to reveal their own work, and not somebody else.

These days they might not be doing it in a way we like, but it still is their decision to make.

Actually, you said...

Normal situation:

- Bubblecast Inc creates Evil Elf Spaceflyer.
- Bubblecast Inc reveals Evil Elf Spaceflyer @ GW site.
- Little Jimmy clicks on pre-order button @ GW site.
- Little Jimmy buys additional box of Evil Elfs.
- Bubblecast Inc cashes in 32,50 (euro) + 22,75 (euro).

Situation w Spoiler:

- Bubblecast Inc creates Evil Elf spaceflyer.
- Charlie takes picture at printers.
- Charlie emails picture to Cheetofingers.com (a site about miniatures).
- Cheetofingers.com spoils picture in video.
- Little jimmy goes to Cheetofingers.com to see spoiler.
- Little Jimmy clicks on advertisement for LayWandGames (an internet discounter) next to video, and buys box of Evil Elfs for 19,50 (euro).
- Little Jimmy returns to LayWandGames site later to buy Evil Elf spaceflyer for 27,50 (euro).
- Bubblecast Inc makes 8,25 (euro) less.

That pretty much makes the case that you think that GW has some mystic right to my money. Now if I want to buy their product, at some point, they have to get paid; absolutely. But the idea that just looking at a spoiler site is in some way killing their business...well, if it were finecast, sure I could see that as my new Leltih Hesperax (hopefully devoid of craters this time) is being shipped to my local store as we speak.

You made a pretty strong and linear argument that this is about GW losing money because Little Jimmy is seduced by evil advertising by a third party retailer on a spoiler site. Let me ask you a question: Can you provide even anecdotal evidence that the link between spoiler sites and advertised retailers is in some way greater than all of the other advertising that a retailer does as part of their normal business? To clarify: That the spoiler site advertising is responsible for a greater loss of business than word of mouth, recommendations on the web, etc.

Because again, if not, I'm not seeing how your argument holds up. I've been hitting discount retailers since before GW's internet policy, during it's inception and up to this very day. I didn't find a single one of those resellers via Little Jimmy's doom pages, but through word of mouth and asking on newsgroup and BBs. Heck, the one I used to use dropped GW and I've gone through a slow progression of others, and not a one recommened by a spoiler site.

So there's my anecdotal evidence. Trot out Little Jimmy, I'd like to chat with him.

TBD wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

NAVARRO wrote:Probably just me and my "lack of comprehensive reading skills" but you make no sense at all man ... the perspective is so skewed that has so few bridges with reality its pointless to make out any good out of it...

You know the concept of publicity right???? For every little Jimmy that does that there's 100 new little Jimmy's that now got in contact with that product on you tube... any smart company knows that and hence why the accident leaks sometimes are not a accident to begin with... or do you believe the mantic scifi thing was just a accident?

You don't believe in free journalism and neither in publicity or at least dont understand much about it

Well I am afraid that it indeed does have to do with reading.

The perspective here is not necessarily my perspective, but the perspective of the company who owns the rights to the work. I don't have to care, but obviously GW does, and that is all that matters because it is their work and they should be the one to reveal it.

I believe that you are a sculptor yourself, if I remember correctly? Now suppose you sell those sculpts from your home and also to third party stores who sell it a little bit cheaper than you do when someone buys from you directly.

What if you spent months working on an item, and your neighbour takes a picture through the open window, sends it to his cousin who advertises for one of those third party stores, resulting in people buying from that store instead of from you directly.

I am sure you would have liked to decide when and how your work gets revealed and/or intentionally leaked. Also, the most ideal situation for you is still when all the little Jimmy's buy from you directly since it makes you the most $$$ that way.

I keep telling you that you seem not to understand how, today in the age of internet not even a institutional classic publicity can keep up with the speed of free information... Today major brands have to think worlwide and that regional only publicity will be outdated and pass frontiers in less than 24H... so you see as much as major companies want to Control something its not on their hands the total control on how the markets and information moves, specially when your products are much desired.
This is the basics mate and if cant understand that and think companies have the monopoly of the information just because they have produced something you are out of touch with the reality... I will not go in details about the deep and complex symbiosis between product/publicity/news because you first have to understand the basics.
I speak to you as someone that has been running a publicity company for a decade now and please dont think Im patronizing you ok?

Back to your example assuming Im just a sculptor... If I accept to sell my product to third parties at ussual 45% off or more than I have to accept that they will do their best to sell their goods and that they can be better than me at it... You cant have only the good without the bad.
If some spy gets some snaps from my stuff and I dont want it to be leaked I either sue/close that client account or keep my windows shut if I'm on a bad mood or I just concentrate on my work and sculpt better and faster and let the market decide what and who to buy... Its not in my nature to be a controll freak and today more than ever the more you want to control something the less you do a good job at it.

BOW they only put on the plate what people want to see and so far only what companies want to show... so instead of blaming them for anything you should blame the companies and people... so you in fact are against of how the market in general moves and its games of influences with journalism/publicity.

TBD wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:I mean, how is this any different to me walking to four different music stores in the same mall to find the one that's selling a CD I want for the lowest price? How does one site reporting news and rumours in any way impact the price or how much money a company makes?

It's a completely different situation because none of these music stores also produce the music they sell.

You are familiar with Virgin Records? Or the WB stores(if they're still in biz), or the Disney Store...

Over here the judge would probably laugh the case out of court, if not sanction the person who brought it, unless the place they bought it from was selling bootlegs..

My argument is that GW, or any other company for that matter, gets to decide when & how to reveal their own work, and not somebody else.

Except they don't... unless they have a NDA, or the work was phyiscally -stolen- or the spoiler is selling bootlegs...

Well personally I have had enough of the semantic gymnastics.

I like BoW too and I still am yet to see which GW leaks have been shown and what harm it does anyway.

Again GW have only themselves to blame for their incessant paranoia. Show the stuff themselves and there would be no need for leaks.

JEESH !!!!

I keep checking this thread to see if there is ANY current info that actually pertains to the BOW Videos being taken down and, instead, keep being met with the SAME ARGUEMENT that has gone on for PAGES.

MOD, how about we move this to "Discussions" where it now belongs ??

TBD's "Argument" changed about three times to the wind in as many days.

I do not understand what the conversation is about when you change the goal post every other posting.

What is the point that you are trying to make, now? Stop changing gears in the conversation and trying to be a smart guy when every other post is loaded with logical fallacy and double talk.

I am totally with you Myrthe. This has gone on long enough.

Not been any more news on BoW afaik

This does indeed seem fairly pointless, not least as there's no actual news with regards to the whys. whatfores and their ilk with regards to the removal of the original videos.

I'm sure that as/when/if the fine fellows from Beasts of War have something to say with regards to this that a thread can and will be started up.