chaos0xomega wrote:3d printers of that caliber are still at least a decade away... then there is the fact that the software costs thousands of dollars (and thats something that hasn't changed at all over the years, if anything the software is getting more expensive) and the materials for said printers are only really available in large bulk quantities (and is thus getting more expensive) and yeah... I dont think GW is going to be screwed...

The printers are getting better all the time. The software will get cheaper when the product sees mass adoption, or it will be made available for free the same as any industry grade software like autocad is. The materials are also going to be cheap enough that a knock off company can start cranking out whatever they please and undercutting GW's prices. Then you get to the point where smaller amounts can be found in an office depot as the tech keeps getting better and better.

Pointless thread is pointless.

Carrying on a conversation from a locked thread is pointless now?

Well, none of the things you have proposed have occurred yet, and I have my doubts that they will occur in the near future, especially in regards to the software which is becoming increasingly expensive as their possible applications increase. These products will never see mass adoption while the average person has no idea how to use the software, and considering the learning curve inherent to said software, I dont think it will happen.

The thread is not pointless, as it raises an interesting point. If 3D printing of counterfeit models became readily available (say, as readily available as pirated codices), would that impact GW's bottom line? Undoubtedly, and probably more severely than books (which are a miniscule fraction of their revenue). Already many people exclusively obtain their models from second-hand markets, such as bartertown or ebay.

I doubt it would drive them out of business entirely, but one would hope it would drive them to open an Economics 101 textbook and realize that their policies are driving them into the gutter. Hell, it may not even take 3D printing to do that. They managed to stay in the black by trimming the fat from their retail operations, but short of closing the stores down entirely, there isn't much fat left to trim. Despite their internal memos and pep-talks claiming that they have a price-resistant demand for their products, the actual numbers from their quarterly reports show that the volume of sales is slipping at a precipitous rate.

And the cost of software is the smallest impediment to this. Anyone considering pirating models wouldn't balk at pirating software.

chaos0xomega wrote:Well, none of the things you have proposed have occurred yet, and I have my doubts that they will occur in the near future, especially in regards to the software which is becoming increasingly expensive as their possible applications increase. These products will never see mass adoption while the average person has no idea how to use the software, and considering the learning curve inherent to said software, I dont think it will happen.

Just like people will never print high quality photographs at home right? Small business are using this tech already, it's getting cheaper and the software can be as easy to use as it wants to be. A product that allows people to order a design and print it at home would sell well, it would also be prefect for pirates.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Omegus wrote:The thread is not pointless, as it raises an interesting point. If 3D printing of counterfeit models became readily available (say, as readily available as pirated codices), would that impact GW's bottom line? Undoubtedly, and probably more severely than books (which are a miniscule fraction of their revenue). Already many people exclusively obtain their models from second-hand markets, such as bartertown or ebay.

I doubt it would drive them out of business entirely, but one would hope it would drive them to open an Economics 101 textbook and realize that their policies are driving them into the gutter. Hell, it may not even take 3D printing to do that. They managed to stay in the black by trimming the fat from their retail operations, but short of closing the stores down entirely, there isn't much fat left to trim. Despite their internal memos and pep-talks claiming that they have a price-resistant demand for their products, the actual numbers from their quarterly reports show that the volume of sales is slipping at a precipitous rate.

And the cost of software is the smallest impediment to this. Anyone considering pirating models wouldn't balk at pirating software.

Yup, or they buy one army and proxy it, or they play via Vassal for free. With a codex that can be found for free and GW never sees a red cent.

Haha, GW staying afloat. They have nice enough models, but other companies are charging less and catching up fast. Their rules are hohum at best, their customer support couldn't hold up a house of cards, and their prices are forcing people away. Internal memos also show they encourage guilting school aged kids into buying armies to beat the store army. Pressure them to keep playing, and generally try to milk them for as much money as they can before leaving them out in the cold and squeezing blood from the next stone to cross their path.

So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

Canadian 5th wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:3d printers of that caliber are still at least a decade away... then there is the fact that the software costs thousands of dollars (and thats something that hasn't changed at all over the years, if anything the software is getting more expensive) and the materials for said printers are only really available in large bulk quantities (and is thus getting more expensive) and yeah... I dont think GW is going to be screwed...

The printers are getting better all the time. The software will get cheaper when the product sees mass adoption, or it will be made available for free the same as any industry grade software like autocad is. The materials are also going to be cheap enough that a knock off company can start cranking out whatever they please and undercutting GW's prices. Then you get to the point where smaller amounts can be found in an office depot as the tech keeps getting better and better.

Oh, and lock happy mods should prove their assertions.

Awesome I wanted to say something on the subject but the other thread was locked. 3d printer are getting more affordable running around 3000 to 5000 dollars. Im sure they will be affordable within 10 years. If anything I would think this would help GW and other companies in the sense that it could reduce their costs. 3d printers would virtually eliminate mistakes from casting. It would also open new possibilities as models could be designed in a computer, speeding up development time and opening up the market to more people who may want to make their own game systems or custom models.

It is possible that people will use the tech to make counterfiet goods but I think 3d printers that can handle the intricate detail a firgure would take will take longer to get into homes than more basic ones. However when they do it opens up new possibilities to players for custom weapons and such and it also means that GW could start selling Blueprints to bits online (possibly with a limited number of runs) that can be printed at home or at kinkos or soemthing. I think if it does start happening it shouldnt be a problem. Most people who pirate cd's and movies wouldnt buy the stuff if they couldnt pirate it. As long as the company provides their product at a fair price and make it accesable most people have no problem spending money to support them


Anyway What im looking forward to is a good cd chocolate printer liek this one http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/08/3d-chocolate-printer_n_893381.html

Wouldnt it be great to have a chocolate copy of your army for a brthday party or something ^_^

Clearly you've never used a 3d printer...

Those 3000-5000 dollar printers will never give you a good enough print to actually have a nice 28mm model. If you tried using a mini printed on one of those machines in a game, chances are someone could call you out on it from 10 feet away.

Mistake wise, the only printers that would 'eliminate' mistakes from casting are those that require no post processing because they are so accurate/precise that there is no noticeable stair-stepping. These printers cost 6 figures minimum. The printer that the average american could afford to own in 10 years time will require significant amounts of sanding/polishing following printing in order to get a clean/usable/paintable appearance. Not only that, but a print takes hours. Noone is going to be printing entire armies on that. We're still going to be using traditional molding and casting methods to mass produce figs.

Printing tech is already being used by people that want to start their own game systems etc. myself included. But you don't need your own printer to do that.

mmmmmmm my own chocolate army would be great.

chaos0xomega wrote:Clearly you've never used a 3d printer...

Those 3000-5000 dollar printers will never give you a good enough print to actually have a nice 28mm model. If you tried using a mini printed on one of those machines in a game, chances are someone could call you out on it from 10 feet away.

Mistake wise, the only printers that would 'eliminate' mistakes from casting are those that require no post processing because they are so accurate/precise that there is no noticeable stair-stepping. These printers cost 6 figures minimum. The printer that the average american could afford to own in 10 years time will require significant amounts of sanding/polishing following printing in order to get a clean/usable/paintable appearance. Not only that, but a print takes hours. Noone is going to be printing entire armies on that. We're still going to be using traditional molding and casting methods to mass produce figs.

Printing tech is already being used by people that want to start their own game systems etc. myself included. But you don't need your own printer to do that.

I didnt say you could use a current gen 3d printer to print figs I just said they are becoming more affordable and in the future as tech progresses they could replace the casting process

Commisar Wolfie wrote:mmmmmmm my own chocolate army would be great.

Now that is one miniature material you can guarantee will melt in a hot car.

Canadian 5th wrote:
I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

I don't know enough about 3D printing technology to really comment on that, however I DO have a comment to make about this.

You think it's 'ok' to just do this? You don't think that it's wrong to just take the intellectual property of someone else? Do you think your somehow ENTITLED to free entertainment?

Maybe it's just cause I'm an aspiring author, but people like that--the people who think that they deserve the fruit of others labor without any cost to themselves--disgust me. I'd implore you to have empathy. How would you feel if you pore your heart and soul into a piece of work and then people come up and just take it from you without even compensating you for it? And then they have the GALL to tell you that they somehow deserve access to your work for free.

Disgusting.

ChrisWWII wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:
I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

I don't know enough about 3D printing technology to really comment on that, however I DO have a comment to make about this.

You think it's 'ok' to just do this? You don't think that it's wrong to just take the intellectual property of someone else? Do you think your somehow ENTITLED to free entertainment?

Maybe it's just cause I'm an aspiring author, but people like that--the people who think that they deserve the fruit of others labor without any cost to themselves--disgust me. I'd implore you to have empathy. How would you feel if you pore your heart and soul into a piece of work and then people come up and just take it from you without even compensating you for it? And then they have the GALL to tell you that they somehow deserve access to your work for free.

Disgusting.

Sorry if I don't think that people who make movies deserve to make millions because they can act. I've seen plenty of good stuff for free on youtube and other sites. Same with fiction, people will write it for free. Same with music. Same with game systems and rules. If people can't adapt to the internet, they will fail.

Canadian 5th wrote:Sorry if I don't think that people who make movies deserve to make millions because they can act.

They're selling a product, just like everyone else. They make millions from it because enough people want that product. If you don't want to pay for that product, that's up to you... you certainly don't need it.

I've seen plenty of good stuff for free on youtube and other sites. Same with fiction, people will write it for free. Same with music. Same with game systems and rules. If people can't adapt to the internet, they will fail.

The fact that some people choose to create these things for free doesn't mean that you should be entitled to take whatever you want for free, though. It's their choice whether to sell what they create or give it away.

Canadian 5th wrote:

Sorry if I don't think that people who make movies deserve to make millions because they can act. I've seen plenty of good stuff for free on youtube and other sites. Same with fiction, people will write it for free. Same with music. Same with game systems and rules. If people can't adapt to the internet, they will fail.

They may be overpaid, but don't you think they deserve to be paid? Surely I can apply your logic to anything. "Oh, we don't nee dto give money to mechanics, plumbers and electricians! They only know how to keep our homes and cars working."

People deserve compesnsation for their work. You have no right to say that they don't deserve money for their work.

If I pour my heart and soul into a piece of fiction, I will be PISSED if I see someone steal it. I worked hard, and I deserve payment for my work. You have no right to come up to me, steal my work and then tell me that you don't need to pay me for it.

Having talked to fanfic authors everywhere, lots of them WANT to make it big. They want to get a big book deal. Same with musicians, they're paying that they get 'discvoered' and get paid. People want compensation. It's the same reason why communism doesn't work.

Let me also echo what Insaniak said. Movies and entertainment aren't required services. If you don't want to pay the prices the markets given then suck it up and deal with it. If you want a car, but don't want to pay you don't go and steal it. What's the difference between that and stealing someone's intellectual property?

insaniak wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:Sorry if I don't think that people who make movies deserve to make millions because they can act.

They're selling a product, just like everyone else. They make millions from it because enough people want that product. If you don't want to pay for that product, that's up to you... you certainly don't need it.

Great, they don't get my money, I get their product. We all win!

I've seen plenty of good stuff for free on youtube and other sites. Same with fiction, people will write it for free. Same with music. Same with game systems and rules. If people can't adapt to the internet, they will fail.

The fact that some people choose to create these things for free doesn't mean that you should be entitled to take whatever you want for free, though. It's their choice whether to sell what they create or give it away.

If they had a choice piracy wouldn't be an issue would it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ChrisWWII wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Sorry if I don't think that people who make movies deserve to make millions because they can act. I've seen plenty of good stuff for free on youtube and other sites. Same with fiction, people will write it for free. Same with music. Same with game systems and rules. If people can't adapt to the internet, they will fail.

They may be overpaid, but don't you think they deserve to be paid? Surely I can apply your logic to anything. "Oh, we don't nee dto give money to mechanics, plumbers and electricians! They only know how to keep our homes and cars working."

Essential service versus entertainment. False dilemma much?

People deserve compesnsation for their work. You have no right to say that they don't deserve money for their work.

If I pour my heart and soul into a piece of fiction, I will be PISSED if I see someone steal it. I worked hard, and I deserve payment for my work. You have no right to come up to me, steal my work and then tell me that you don't need to pay me for it.

I guess I do actually. Unless you think you can stop piracy from growing?

Having talked to fanfic authors everywhere, lots of them WANT to make it big. They want to get a big book deal. Same with musicians, they're paying that they get 'discvoered' and get paid. People want compensation. It's the same reason why communism doesn't work.

Oh, another anticommunism rant... Communism failed because central planning, when run poorly, has issues compared to the free market. Also, it has really only been tried in weak economies thus far.

Let me also echo what Insaniak said. Movies and entertainment aren't required services. If you don't want to pay the prices the markets given then suck it up and deal with it. If you want a car, but don't want to pay you don't go and steal it. What's the difference between that and stealing someone's intellectual property?

If I take your book you still have the manuscript and can still make money off the rubes who think it's worth paying for. If I steal your car, you don't have a car.

ChrisWWII wrote:

If I pour my heart and soul into a piece of fiction, I will be PISSED if I see someone steal it. I worked hard, and I deserve payment for my work. You have no right to come up to me, steal my work and then tell me that you don't need to pay me for it.

Do you write a piece of fiction to make money from it, or just expecting to make money from it?

Canadian 5th wrote:
Great, they don't get my money, I get their product. We all win!

Now, some one loses out because you've just stolen their product. You've won at their expense.

If they had a choice piracy wouldn't be an issue would it?

They have a choice, and lots choose to get money instead of just giving away their product for free. It's the same reason why communism doesn't work--people want money and compensation for their work.

Explain why you have the right to steal from other hard working people. And then explain why it only applies to intellectual property. If you think it's 'alright' for you to get someones product with no compensation, explain why it's not moral for me to go to your house and steal your stuff? I want it. ANd I'm not willing to pay you for it. So I should just be entitled to your stuff no?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nerivant wrote:Do you write a piece of fiction to make money from it, or just expecting to make money from it?

I love writing, and I want to make money off of it if possible.

Canadian 5th wrote:
Essential service versus entertainment. False dilemma much?

So? It's all a service someone is providing, and you seem to believe that you're allowed to steal someones service without paying them for it.

I guess I do actually. Unless you think you can stop piracy from growing?

Who knows if I can stop it or not? I can however stand here and say how immoral you are, and tell you how disgusting I find your beliefs.

Oh, another anticommunism rant... Communism failed because central planning, when run poorly, has issues compared to the free market. Also, it has really only been tried in weak economies thus far.

The point remains. COmmunism failed horribly, and if you look at the Soviet economy you will see that the Soviet people were clamoring to get their hands on black market ANYTHING.

If I take your book you still have the manuscript and can still make money off the rubes who think it's worth paying for. If I steal your car, you don't have a car.

But I didn't get money from you. And if everyone did it then I don't get money from anyone. Piracy is as its always been, parasitic. Leeching off the success of others. It's fundamentally unsupporting.

Besides, a car isn't required. I can live withour a car, just as I can live without my book. It's just immoral for you to steal either.

Canadian 5th wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:Sorry if I don't think that people who make movies deserve to make millions because they can act.

They're selling a product, just like everyone else. They make millions from it because enough people want that product. If you don't want to pay for that product, that's up to you... you certainly don't need it.

Great, they don't get my money, I get their product. We all win!

Until they go under and stop producing product... Sure in this example you can keep printing off new product, but you'll have to say goodbye to new rules, new minis, etc. Have fun playing 7th edition 40k for the rest of your life when about 1/3 of the armies are still using 6th edition codecies and about 1/4 are using 5th edition codecies...

I believe piracy is alright in moderation, I.E. I pay for something when I feel it is worth paying for. I have pirated over 10000 songs, in large part because I am OCD and want entire discography collections even if I only really want 1 or 2 songs... but I have also purchased about 1000 songs legally, because I thought the albums in question were worth purchasing or that I listened to the songs in question enough to warrant it. I usually end up torrenting every rulebook, including for games I don't play, because I otherwise would not pay for them. If I start a game system or a new army, i buy the books relevant to that system because I will be using them. The money I saved by not purchasing those rulebooks is used to purchase models for said rulesets, more often than not at full retail price at my FLGS. With the exception of Imperial Armour 3 (and the upcoming Imperial Armour 11) I never purchase Forgeworld books, because I do not feel they are worth paying for (not at those prices at least), and I generally don't purchase FW models, because I generally do not feel the minis are worth paying for.

Canadian 5th wrote:

They may be overpaid, but don't you think they deserve to be paid? Surely I can apply your logic to anything. "Oh, we don't nee dto give money to mechanics, plumbers and electricians! They only know how to keep our homes and cars working."

Essential service versus entertainment. False dilemma much?

But that's exactly the point. You're sitting there proudly proclaiming that you think it's perfectly acceptable for you to steal somethign that you don't want to pay for... when it's something that you don't even need.

If it was something essential that you were stealing, because you legitimately couldn't afford it, then at least you have some sort of justification beyond 'I wants it, so I should be allowed to have it...'

Canadian 5th wrote:Essential service versus entertainment. False dilemma much?

So, if I stole your TV you'd be fine with it?

Or how about if I skim your credit cards? Same result (you losing money); I'm just cutting out the middle man.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:mmmmmmm my own chocolate army would be great.

You can eat the models as they are killed! Of course, diabetes rates would skyrocket even further and our teeth would get as bad as the Brits'.

General Seric wrote:Now that is one miniature material you can guarantee will melt in a hot car.

Yet still more durable than Finecast?

ChrisWWII wrote:You think it's 'ok' to just do this? You don't think that it's wrong to just take the intellectual property of someone else? Do you think your somehow ENTITLED to free entertainment?

To be honest, I haven't believed in the concept of intellectual property since they extended copyright laws just so Disney could keep making money off of Mickey Mouse.

chaos0xomega wrote:Until they go under and stop producing product... Sure in this example you can keep printing off new product, but you'll have to say goodbye to new rules, new minis, etc. Have fun playing 7th edition 40k for the rest of your life when about 1/3 of the armies are still using 6th edition codecies and about 1/4 are using 5th edition codecies...

Yes, that's so much worse than now. /sarcasm

GW deserves to go under. 40K would survive without them.

ChrisWWII wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:
Great, they don't get my money, I get their product. We all win!

Now, some one loses out because you've just stolen their product. You've won at their expense.

I still won didn't I?

They have a choice, and lots choose to get money instead of just giving away their product for free. It's the same reason why communism doesn't work--people want money and compensation for their work.

Explain why you have the right to steal from other hard working people. And then explain why it only applies to intellectual property. If you think it's 'alright' for you to get someones product with no compensation, explain why it's not moral for me to go to your house and steal your stuff? I want it. ANd I'm not willing to pay you for it. So I should just be entitled to your stuff no?

You get compensated for your work in communism. Just not in money.

If I copy your IP you still have it, if I steal a car you have no car. See the difference?

So? It's all a service someone is providing, and you seem to believe that you're allowed to steal someones service without paying them for it.

If I could pirate a car manual and do the repairs myself I would. If I could get a friend to help me with plumbing for less money than a pro I would.

Who knows if I can stop it or not? I can however stand here and say how immoral you are, and tell you how disgusting I find your beliefs.

Wow, your words pain me so much... Not.

The point remains. COmmunism failed horribly, and if you look at the Soviet economy you will see that the Soviet people were clamoring to get their hands on black market ANYTHING.

So dictatorship now = communism? The USSR was very repressive and that lead to its downfall. They also spent a massive part of their GDP on the military.

But I didn't get money from you. And if everyone did it then I don't get money from anyone. Piracy is as its always been, parasitic. Leeching off the success of others. It's fundamentally unsupporting.

Besides, a car isn't required. I can live withour a car, just as I can live without my book. It's just immoral for you to steal either.

I haven't stolen your book, you still have the book. The print run isn't missing anything. You just don't get money for something I wouldn't have paid for anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

They may be overpaid, but don't you think they deserve to be paid? Surely I can apply your logic to anything. "Oh, we don't nee dto give money to mechanics, plumbers and electricians! They only know how to keep our homes and cars working."

Essential service versus entertainment. False dilemma much?

But that's exactly the point. You're sitting there proudly proclaiming that you think it's perfectly acceptable for you to steal somethign that you don't want to pay for... when it's something that you don't even need.

If it was something essential that you were stealing, because you legitimately couldn't afford it, then at least you have some sort of justification beyond 'I wants it, so I should be allowed to have it...'

When you can stop me, then I'll stop.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheexsta wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:Essential service versus entertainment. False dilemma much?

So, if I stole your TV you'd be fine with it?

Or how about if I skim your credit cards? Same result (you losing money); I'm just cutting out the middle man.

Nope, that's a false dilemma. By pirating I get something for free, that something might not be something I would have bought anyway so you don't lose money on something I wouldn't have bought anyway.

Hells yeah! Fight the power! feth the Man!

No, it really wouldn't. GW goes under and the inflow of new players will decrease to virtually zero. A large chunk, near 100%, of the newer players at the time of GWs demise would cut their losses and jump ship immediately. All that will be left are the players who have been around for a couple years and the veterans. Within 2 years the couple year group will move on to games that are still being supported, as will the vets. The difference is that the vets will break the game out every once in a while at a convention for nostalgia purposes and the couple year group won't.

I have played several games over the years that have gone under, and this is the pattern that they have always followed. Don't let the seemingly large size of the GW hobby mislead you. If GW had a half way decent game system that was designed to last, this wouldn't be the case, but given its engineered obsolescence its not going to last, because it was never meant to last.

Canadian 5th wrote:...that something might not be something I would have bought anyway so you don't lose money on something I wouldn't have bought anyway.

By the same logic, you might not have used your TV, so you're not losing anything when he takes it...

chaos0xomega wrote:No, it really wouldn't. GW goes under and the inflow of new players will decrease to virtually zero. A large chunk, near 100%, of the newer players at the time of GWs demise would cut their losses and jump ship immediately. All that will be left are the players who have been around for a couple years and the veterans. Within 2 years the couple year group will move on to games that are still being supported, as will the vets. The difference is that the vets will break the game out every once in a while at a convention for nostalgia purposes and the couple year group won't.

I have played several games over the years that have gone under, and this is the pattern that they have always followed. Don't let the seemingly large size of the GW hobby mislead you. If GW had a half way decent game system that was designed to last, this wouldn't be the case, but given its engineered obsolescence its not going to last, because it was never meant to last.

I'm prepared for that eventuality. My armor is contempt, my sword is hatred, and the bitterness from which stem both is boundless.

chaos0xomega wrote:No, it really wouldn't. GW goes under and the inflow of new players will decrease to virtually zero. A large chunk, near 100%, of the newer players at the time of GWs demise would cut their losses and jump ship immediately. All that will be left are the players who have been around for a couple years and the veterans. Within 2 years the couple year group will move on to games that are still being supported, as will the vets. The difference is that the vets will break the game out every once in a while at a convention for nostalgia purposes and the couple year group won't.

I have played several games over the years that have gone under, and this is the pattern that they have always followed. Don't let the seemingly large size of the GW hobby mislead you. If GW had a half way decent game system that was designed to last, this wouldn't be the case, but given its engineered obsolescence its not going to last, because it was never meant to last.

Except that free to play games actually work better than pay to play games. Games like Warhammer online have made more money in free to play mode than elsewhere. GW could capture that market with special materials or even more detailed models that 3d printers can't match. They just need to make an even better product and stay a step ahead of what's free.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:...that something might not be something I would have bought anyway so you don't lose money on something I wouldn't have bought anyway.

By the same logic, you might not have used your TV, so you're not losing anything when he takes it...

No, you're missing the point. If I pay for a TV and you steal it I'm out a TV, if I download a movie that I never would have payed for you lose nothing.

Canadian 5th wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:No, it really wouldn't. GW goes under and the inflow of new players will decrease to virtually zero. A large chunk, near 100%, of the newer players at the time of GWs demise would cut their losses and jump ship immediately. All that will be left are the players who have been around for a couple years and the veterans. Within 2 years the couple year group will move on to games that are still being supported, as will the vets. The difference is that the vets will break the game out every once in a while at a convention for nostalgia purposes and the couple year group won't.

I have played several games over the years that have gone under, and this is the pattern that they have always followed. Don't let the seemingly large size of the GW hobby mislead you. If GW had a half way decent game system that was designed to last, this wouldn't be the case, but given its engineered obsolescence its not going to last, because it was never meant to last.

Except that free to play games actually work better than pay to play games. Games like Warhammer online have made more money in free to play mode than elsewhere. GW could capture that market with special materials or even more detailed models that 3d printers can't match. They just need to make an even better product and stay a step ahead of what's free.

Not quite. Free to play games work because there is either no continuing support, or money is made via in game advertisements/microtransactions in the case of video/computer games. In any case GW going under does not make 40k a free to play game, someone would still hold the license and they would have every right to continue the behavior that GW does now towards IP infringement.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:No, it really wouldn't. GW goes under and the inflow of new players will decrease to virtually zero. A large chunk, near 100%, of the newer players at the time of GWs demise would cut their losses and jump ship immediately. All that will be left are the players who have been around for a couple years and the veterans. Within 2 years the couple year group will move on to games that are still being supported, as will the vets. The difference is that the vets will break the game out every once in a while at a convention for nostalgia purposes and the couple year group won't.

I have played several games over the years that have gone under, and this is the pattern that they have always followed. Don't let the seemingly large size of the GW hobby mislead you. If GW had a half way decent game system that was designed to last, this wouldn't be the case, but given its engineered obsolescence its not going to last, because it was never meant to last.

Except that free to play games actually work better than pay to play games. Games like Warhammer online have made more money in free to play mode than elsewhere. GW could capture that market with special materials or even more detailed models that 3d printers can't match. They just need to make an even better product and stay a step ahead of what's free.

Not quite. Free to play games work because there is either no continuing support, or money is made via in game advertisements/microtransactions in the case of video/computer games. In any case GW going under does not make 40k a free to play game, someone would still hold the license and they would have every right to continue the behavior that GW does now towards IP infringement.

Except that I was talking about the scenario where GW goes under because of people pirating both models and rules. A company owning the IP would need to produce high quality models of better materials to give people a reason to buy even a small number of models.

So you see no problem with contributing to a company going out of business which means a lot of people lose jobs during a time when jobs are already scarce enough (at least it is this way in America)?

It's like was brought up in the other thread - it doesn't matter if they can get MP3s for $1, or DVDs for $5 - if they can get it free they will 'cause they're self-centered, selfish pricks who don't give a damn about anything so long as they get theirs.

It's the attitude that Canadian 5th has embodied throughout the thread.

Not really. If a company's policies drive people to resort to such extreme forms of piracy, then it's their own fault.

Canadian 5th wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:No, it really wouldn't. GW goes under and the inflow of new players will decrease to virtually zero. A large chunk, near 100%, of the newer players at the time of GWs demise would cut their losses and jump ship immediately. All that will be left are the players who have been around for a couple years and the veterans. Within 2 years the couple year group will move on to games that are still being supported, as will the vets. The difference is that the vets will break the game out every once in a while at a convention for nostalgia purposes and the couple year group won't.

I have played several games over the years that have gone under, and this is the pattern that they have always followed. Don't let the seemingly large size of the GW hobby mislead you. If GW had a half way decent game system that was designed to last, this wouldn't be the case, but given its engineered obsolescence its not going to last, because it was never meant to last.

Except that free to play games actually work better than pay to play games. Games like Warhammer online have made more money in free to play mode than elsewhere. GW could capture that market with special materials or even more detailed models that 3d printers can't match. They just need to make an even better product and stay a step ahead of what's free.

Not quite. Free to play games work because there is either no continuing support, or money is made via in game advertisements/microtransactions in the case of video/computer games. In any case GW going under does not make 40k a free to play game, someone would still hold the license and they would have every right to continue the behavior that GW does now towards IP infringement.

Except that I was talking about the scenario where GW goes under because of people pirating both models and rules. A company owning the IP would need to produce high quality models of better materials to give people a reason to buy even a small number of models.

I hate to brake this to you, but only a small portion of the populace uses torrents in that way, not nearly enough to support the hobby without continuing support from GW, and it is still illegal and it is still traceable and prosecutable. Unless you're using TOR, GW can still find and prosecute you for torrenting their crap, even after they've gone under, and really its not so difficult.

Omegus wrote:Not really. If a company's policies drive people to resort to such extreme forms of piracy, then it's their own fault.

'Drive people' to piracy?

It's not a company's business policys that does that. Not when you're talking about toy soldiers. It a sense of entitlement, or a complete lack of perspective that does that.

You don't need toy soldiers. If a company's business practices push those toy soldiers out of your reach, you'll survive just fine without them. There's no rationalising this away... the guy recasting his space marines, or downloading his codexes isn't the valiant underdog surviving against the evil practices of a coorporation out to bring him down. He's a guy who wants to play with toy soldiers without having to pay for them first.

TOR is all but useless, since your client of choice is usually sending out your IP anyway. Peerblock or Peerguardian are better defensive measures.

I'd link to the sources that explain this in greater detail, but that is against Dakka rules. Just search for "Bittorrent over Tor isn't a good idea".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

Omegus wrote:Not really. If a company's policies drive people to resort to such extreme forms of piracy, then it's their own fault.

'Drive people' to piracy?

It's not a company's business policys that does that. Not when you're talking about toy soldiers. It a sense of entitlement, or a complete lack of perspective that does that.

You don't need toy soldiers. If a company's business practices push those toy soldiers out of your reach, you'll survive just fine without them. There's no rationalising this away... the guy recasting his space marines, or downloading his codexes isn't the valiant underdog surviving against the evil practices of a coorporation out to bring him down. He's a guy who wants to play with toy soldiers without having to pay for them first.

I'm sure this is frequently the case, but not always.

I play several game systems beyond GW's crap. I purchase the books and models for all of them, frequently at full retail at my LGS.

But I make a particular point out of acquiring any and all GW products as cheaply as possible, whether it's buying probable recasts from Ebay and that Chinese site (about which two threads have been locked today), or reading their books on Scribd. It's not even their prices that "drives" me to do so (although they are ludicrous... how do you switch to a cheaper material and then increase prices?), but their staggering arrogance and continual attacks against their own customer base. In fact, just a few moments ago I acquired Imperial Armour X. I sure as hell am not going to pay $83 + surcharges and shipping for it, especially when all I want is the 4-5 pages of Exorcist fluff.

Omegus wrote:TOR is all but useless, since your client of choice is usually sending out your IP anyway. Peerblock or Peerguardian are better defensive measures.

I'd link to the sources that explain this in greater detail, but that is against Dakka rules. Just search for "Bittorrent over Tor isn't a good idea".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

Omegus wrote:Not really. If a company's policies drive people to resort to such extreme forms of piracy, then it's their own fault.

'Drive people' to piracy?

It's not a company's business policys that does that. Not when you're talking about toy soldiers. It a sense of entitlement, or a complete lack of perspective that does that.

You don't need toy soldiers. If a company's business practices push those toy soldiers out of your reach, you'll survive just fine without them. There's no rationalising this away... the guy recasting his space marines, or downloading his codexes isn't the valiant underdog surviving against the evil practices of a coorporation out to bring him down. He's a guy who wants to play with toy soldiers without having to pay for them first.

I'm sure this is frequently the case, but not always.

I play several game systems beyond GW's crap. I purchase the books and models for all of them, frequently at full retail at my LGS.

But I make a particular point out of acquiring any and all GW products as cheaply as possible, whether it's buying probable recasts from Ebay and that Chinese site (about which two threads have been locked today), or reading their books on Scribd. It's not even their prices that "drives" me to do so (although they are ludicrous... how do you switch to a cheaper material and then increase prices?), but their staggering arrogance and continual attacks against their own customer base. In fact, just a few moments ago I acquired Imperial Armour X. I sure as hell am not going to pay $83 + surcharges and shipping for it, especially when all I want is the 4-5 pages of Exorcist fluff.

If you honestly believe peerguardian and peerblock are effective measures to protect your identity, I feel sorry for you. Really, all that it ends up doing is blocking legitimate users and thus throttling your torrent download speed.

I could say the same about your preference for Tor. My download speeds are satisfactory, and although far from failproof, they offer better protection than Tor.

Canadian 5th wrote:

I still won didn't I?

Ahhh, so you only care about whether or not YOU win. You don't care about the people who get hurt. That explains alot. Like I said, piracy is parasitical.

You get compensated for your work in communism. Just not in money.

If I copy your IP you still have it, if I steal a car you have no car. See the difference?

You are still stealing something that belongs to me.

If I could pirate a car manual and do the repairs myself I would. If I could get a friend to help me with plumbing for less money than a pro I would.

You should get a car manual for owning a car, and if you know how to repair your own car. Good for you. If you have a friend who knows how to fix your plumbing, once again good for you. The thing is that your friend has chosen to provide his service to you for free, while a pro requires money.

If you want the pro's services you need to give him money. Similarly, you are free to enjoy youtubeuser123s free music online. However, when you go to someone who wants moeny in exchange for their music, then you need to give them their money in compensation.

Wow, your words pain me so much... Not.

I really don't care how my words make you feel. I'm just expressing my point.

Bu

I haven't stolen your book, you still have the book. The print run isn't missing anything. You just don't get money for something I wouldn't have paid for anyway.

And why do you get the right to have access my property without paying me?

When you can stop me, then I'll stop.

I wonder what happens if we apply this logic to other forms of crime....


Finally, I have to say, I echo everyones opinion. If you're doing some kind of Robin Hood thing then at least you have SOME justification for your actions. Getting basic necessities, etc. That has SOME justification.

Pirating music, movies, etc doesn't have that justification. You don't NEED those. They are luxuries. If you want luxuries, you pay for them. If you can't afford luxuries, then sucks to be you. You have no right to say "I want it...but I can't afford it. Guess I'll steal it."

Omegus wrote:But I make a particular point out of acquiring any and all GW products as cheaply as possible, whether it's buying probable recasts from Ebay and that Chinese site (about which two threads have been locked today), or reading their books on Scribd. It's not even their prices that "drives" me to do so (although they are ludicrous... how do you switch to a cheaper material and then increase prices?), but their staggering arrogance and continual attacks against their own customer base. In fact, just a few moments ago I acquired Imperial Armour X. I sure as hell am not going to pay $83 + surcharges and shipping for it, especially when all I want is the 4-5 pages of Exorcist fluff.

You realise that this does the exact opposite of refuting my point, right?

No, not really. It's not entitlement that's driving me, it's pure spite.

Omegus wrote:No, not really. It's not entitlement that's driving me, it's pure spite.

Meh. At least you're admitting it.

Omegus wrote:No, not really. It's not entitlement that's driving me, it's pure spite.

That's covered by the 'lack of perspective' part.

Hmm. At this stage, for me the 40K hobby is more about discussions of fluff and satisfying my inner compulsive collector of cool miniatures. I like the Inquisitor Hector Rex model, but not enough to shell out over $50 for it. Along comes some Chinese recaster, that offers me the same model for $19.99 with free shipping (and likely in better condition than I would get from FW), so I purchase it.

That seems a pretty clear example of their policies driving me to seek alternate, possibly illicit means to acquire the miniature in question. Them also being total dick-wads means I get to not feel bad about it. How is my perspective lacking again?

Omegus wrote:I could say the same about your preference for Tor. My download speeds are satisfactory, and although far from failproof, they offer better protection than Tor.

I dont use TOR, I was just making a point that it is the only truly safe way to torrent, and as you pointed out it sucks.

I'd say it isn't really you Omegus since you know your doing it out of spite to GW and that you don't have some kind of fool notion that your doing it for some good cause.

Hey, now, venting my gallbladder of bile is a good cause!

ya ya it is for you but some people seem to have this idea that by undercutting GW they can make the game better for all. And that somehow GW is gonna notice their little actions and suddenly decide to change their business practices and everything is gonna be hunky dory

Well, enough people in Australia et. al flocked to online discounters and Ebay to make GW sit up and take notice. Of course, rather than learn their lesson and make their prices more reasonable (whatever excuses they use to charge 2x for models cannot possibly extend to ebooks as well?), they resorted to tactics of questionable legality to strangle the discounters entirely and labeled everyone that works for or shops from them as "freeloaders".

I never claimed they were above reproach, but two wrongs do not make a right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
they will get their money one way or another

coolyo294 wrote:Pointless thread is pointless.

I think over 1000 of your posts have been irrelevant spam like this.


Anyway, if I could afford to get a machine like this - http://www.dannychoo.com/post/en/26119/Human+Cloning+in+Japan.html

I would make myself, and all my mates into inquisitor scale figures. It would be brilliant.


And surely, if people are capable of detail like this from printing, than 28mm wouldn't be that far away.

Canadian....I cant believe you used a not joke....

Anyway piracy has been around since the beginning of time so its not going anywhere. Most people are more than happy to pay for a product as long as its in a form that's easy to get. Prime examples are e-books and Netflix. Netflix has had piracy of movies to go down. people want easy access to content in the median they are familiar with. Same with iTunes and with the new advent of the easy access and popularity of eBooks and readers (ie kindle/ipad)

I wish GW would offer ebooks formats for their products. Catalyst game labs has been doing this with their Battletech and other products and it has been very successful(edit : i checked and the pdf are over 50% cheaper than the print versions). They also have free products Including quick-start rules that are aimed at introducing people to the game which i think have gone a long way to reviving the IP which was struggling for a time. I aslo downloaded pdf copys of my rulebooks because I dont want to lug around those things.. On my kindle i can bring all my rulebooks everywhere I go and when Im playing I dont hav to have 3 or 4 books on the table and I can search a book instead of leafing through it trying to find a rule.


Anyway I don't think 3d printing will cause GW to go under if anything I think it will allow them to make the product MUCH more accessible to people which in turn will increase their profits. Yeh there will be people who pirate but the majority will support the ip
and i think it has all gone a long way
)

For the morallity point, too many parasites will kill off anything.

For printing, cheap homemade printers are already good enough to print scenery and rough tank-sized models.
We're a long way off armies of printed one-off models.
Making rubber (?) moulds and using resin or metal still seems the best way to freeload an army together.

But, as hobbyists improve the 3D machines to make better quality models, it'll go mainstream and pro-quality printing will be soon to follow. Look at most other hobby trends, such as the first personal computers, cars, etc.

here's a thought, what happens when 3d printers get small enough and cheap enough that they start entering housholds.... and people start scanning mini's? Think GW will start offering scans to print out?

gendoikari87 wrote:here's a thought, what happens when 3d printers get small enough and cheap enough that they start entering housholds.... and people start scanning mini's? Think GW will start offering scans to print out?

Though this is very far off, I think it would be logical for companies like GW to start selling blueprints to use in 3D printers whale also continuing to produce the normal models. They could offer the blue prints at similar prices to the minis, as you can print as many as you want of each. I think a lot of people would buy blueprints for the 3D printers if and when they are available, as most people will buy a product legitimately if it is not absurdly priced.

It is my firm belief that communism failed due to human nature, and that a market economy is more suited to a race where competitiveness and the need to achieve higher hierarchical status is natural would be more suited. Market economy also has it's drawbacks, as can be seen lately...

Cheexsta wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:Essential service versus entertainment. False dilemma much?

So, if I stole your TV you'd be fine with it?

Or how about if I skim your credit cards? Same result (you losing money); I'm just cutting out the middle man.

Please don't intermix the ideas of property and intellectual property. Intellectual property is a concept created around an aspiration to own an idea. You sell the idea, it gets around, but you wish to keep the idea yours with exclusivity. If I stole your TV AND you got to keep it, at the same time, would YOU be OK with that? I would as an exchange between two individuals I would love to share my property whenever it cost me nothing (neither resources nor time). What we have here, however, when it comes to intellectual property is a concept that is trying to emulate a relation to actual property, but with the important distinction that if you buy my TV, I still get to own it (continuing on that analogy) and also get to dictate roughly how you are allowed to use your TV (I might not like the idea of you watching Fox News). See the difference here?

Now, personally, I'm in a different camp than either the "free piracy for all" and the copyright owners. I just think it ridiculous that one can claim ownership over an idea for such a long time, and consider that an idea would be equal more to a patent, and those are heavily time limited.

More importantly, from a community point of view; giving people the right to earn money from ideas and improvements, both practical and cultural, is important to promote the birth of such ideas, but not allowing the ideas to spread and thus give birth to more ideas is limiting and harming the society in equal measure as keeping the ideas perfectly free.

General Seric wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:mmmmmmm my own chocolate army would be great.

Now that is one miniature material you can guarantee will melt in a hot car.

The gw models sort of already do

Does anyone actually research anything before they post? I find so much misinformation dealing with technology more so than anything else. The fact is, 3D printers will totally change table top war gaming, but not the way you think. It will change the DIY "beer and pretzels" war gaming. You can already print out pretty decent looking models, and people upload the design files for free use. So it only costs you the printer + materials. Then people will start publishing their own rules.

Here is an example of what you can print right now, if you had a 3D printer. You don't need the top of the line model to do so either.




source: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2010/08/print-your-own-wargaming-minis.html

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So you see no problem with contributing to a company going out of business which means a lot of people lose jobs during a time when jobs are already scarce enough (at least it is this way in America)?

Not at all, if your company can't adapt it goes under.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bookwrack wrote:It's like was brought up in the other thread - it doesn't matter if they can get MP3s for $1, or DVDs for $5 - if they can get it free they will 'cause they're self-centered, selfish pricks who don't give a damn about anything so long as they get theirs.

It's the attitude that Canadian 5th has embodied throughout the thread.

Actually, even at such a low cost I would simply go without if they weren't free. I really don't watch many movies outside of theaters so they don't really lose my money. I also don't download music anymore now that Jango's around so they will basically never make money off me outside of doing a concert in my area or me buy band merch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:I hate to brake this to you, but only a small portion of the populace uses torrents in that way, not nearly enough to support the hobby without continuing support from GW, and it is still illegal and it is still traceable and prosecutable. Unless you're using TOR, GW can still find and prosecute you for torrenting their crap, even after they've gone under, and really its not so difficult.

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

And your one class of 30 is now a majority?

ChrisWWII wrote:Ahhh, so you only care about whether or not YOU win. You don't care about the people who get hurt. That explains alot. Like I said, piracy is parasitical.

Life has always been about doing the best for yourself. If I can help a few people along the way I might, but my won success comes first.

You are still stealing something that belongs to me.

No, I'm not. You still have your book, everybody who ever bought it still has it. You simply didn't get paid for my enjoyment of the book. However I could always read your book for free at a library so what's your point? Do you hate libraries now as well?

You should get a car manual for owning a car, and if you know how to repair your own car. Good for you. If you have a friend who knows how to fix your plumbing, once again good for you. The thing is that your friend has chosen to provide his service to you for free, while a pro requires money.

If you want the pro's services you need to give him money. Similarly, you are free to enjoy youtubeuser123s free music online. However, when you go to someone who wants moeny in exchange for their music, then you need to give them their money in compensation.

Or I can tune into the radio, to here another artist's work, or go on youtube and type their name in, or even download it. Artists make more money from a concert tour than they do from CD's and song sales so I like hurting the label and supporting the artist.

And why do you get the right to have access my property without paying me?

Because you can't stop me. The strong rule the weak. So keep writing and I'll enjoy it for free if I so desire.

I wonder what happens if we apply this logic to other forms of crime....

Well then you get gangs like the HA who do what they please, tend not to bother people outside of their group, and who rarely serve jail time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:And your one class of 30 is now a majority?

That was one who didn't pirate. So 29 of 30 is a vast majority.

You truly are a disturbed individual. If everyone actually went with that mind frame the world as we know it would end. Being that selfish is unbelievable. And if the strong always ruled the weak then your country would still be ruled over by another. Look through history and you will see plenty of cases where the weak underdog won.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
only in your class, a poll of 30 people is no where near enough to call a majority. try thousands then you can have a majority.

Crom wrote:Does anyone actually research anything before they post? I find so much misinformation dealing with technology more so than anything else. The fact is, 3D printers will totally change table top war gaming, but not the way you think. It will change the DIY "beer and pretzels" war gaming. You can already print out pretty decent looking models, and people upload the design files for free use. So it only costs you the printer + materials. Then people will start publishing their own rules.

Here is an example of what you can print right now, if you had a 3D printer. You don't need the top of the line model to do so either.




source: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2010/08/print-your-own-wargaming-minis.html

Thank you very much for being on topic. Those look great and I think in the future even more amazing things will be possible at more affordable prices.

In all honesty I do not see why GW doesn't get with the times. Imagine the following:

- iOS/Android apps for books, FAQs, rules, white dwarf articles, say $99 a year subscription rate...I'd buy it for your phone/tablet
- 3D printer models for those who want to print their own minis, they can license the plans, this again can also be subscription based
- actual web based and email support, they won't help you via email you have to call them - I WOULD RATHER EMAIL YOU!!!!
- army builder applications, with integrated rules, customization options, etc.
- desktop/laptop application bundles, ebooks, and so forth


If GW were to say for $99 a year you can have our library of books, I'd buy it. For digital copies only of course. They could have a license (DRM, which I hate but it would have it) and the license would have to be validated and then valid licenses get 1 full year of access to all books, updated rules, FAQs, and rules from White Dwarf. Then if you want the iOS/Android support you buy the app for it, another $30 a year there, you want the army builder application for your desktop/laptop another $30 there. Then they could bundle it for like $150 a year for everything or something.

I think it is a fair assumption that their books get pirated anyway. I know almost all books can be found on torrents from role playing, to war gaming, to fiction, comics, tech books, so on and so forth. So, the people who pirate aren't really a valid demographic for your product. They are going to pirate because they don't want to pay $30 a pop per an army book, for a subscription to white dwarf, nor do they want to pay whatever it is for the core rule set every edition.

So, you make a digital version, make it subscription based, and put it out on the web for all of us who are with the times to download. I think $99 a year is reasonable, and guess what, they would be making that off every customer every year, instead of only buying 1 to 2 army books every new release.

Enter 5 years form now when 3D printers are super cheap and work very well. It will happen, and people will use them to print GW models. In fact I can see it now, people publishing the drafting files for the models, and modifying them to make them look exactly how they want to. If GW was smart they would start making a business plan now, develop software and license their product to be 3D printed.

Canadian 5th wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

that is disgusting, i hope one day that the Gov't cracks down HARD on people that do things like this!

dajobe wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

that is disgusting, i hope one day that the Gov't cracks down HARD on people that do things like this!

Oh, so you want them to waste even more money. It would be like the war on drugs, only with less point and more cost. Have fun with those tax hikes.

No i would prefer that people not download things illegally. And so you think that just because it costs alot to fight, it instantly becomes ok? its interesting that you mention the drug war...personally, i think that many of them should be legalized, but as long as it is illegal i say "SEND EM TO THE BRIG!"

Oh, so you want them to waste even more money. It would be like the war on drugs, only with less point and more cost. Have fun with those tax hikes.

I don't think this quite parallels to GW. The war on drugs is a government policy and the law. We are forced to adhere to the law or pay the price for breaking the law. GW is a private company and you can choose to play their games and use their products or you can choose not to. No regulations or laws involved. Piracy is a whole different set of issues that have many different meanings and affect things differently across the board. When GW's prices get so high that it costs near $1,000 to build a decent army people will pirate, or choose not to play or play with their old minis instead. In fact I just got back into war gaming after a 15 year break. All my old minis work fine and I don't buy anything new (man the prices have tripled in 15 years!) and I also buy a ton of used stuff off of ebay.

That is why there needs to be a good competition, but no other company is really competing with them. All other table top war games are way more skirmish set (like 20 models or less) and lack a lot of options 40K and Fantasy give you. I really wish Warzone had taken off, because in my opinion the rules were much better than anything GW did, they were balanced, and the system was great and it made it a more tactical strategy game. However, they did not take off, and from what I heard their last edition the rule makers totally botched the system by reinventing it.

So, really what GW needs is some decent competition to keep them in a price check, and they should start looking at business models which support modern business practices - like ebooks, software applications, digital downloads, etc.

dajobe wrote:No i would prefer that people not download things illegally. And so you think that just because it costs alot to fight, it instantly becomes ok? its interesting that you mention the drug war...personally, i think that many of them should be legalized, but as long as it is illegal i say "SEND EM TO THE BRIG!"

Ah, so you support the privatization of prisons, the overcrowding and cruelty within. All, in some cases, over something as small as a few ounces of weed?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crom wrote:<snip>

Context fail. dajobe said that the US gov't should crack down on piracy of online materials. I said that it would be another waste like the war on drugs.

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

Indeed, did dubbing or radio kill music? Nope, not at all.

hmm must've misinterpreted that then. I will blame that on it being Monday. I agree that it would be as pointless as the war on drugs as far as efficiency versus pay off. I though you were paralleling GW to the war on drugs...

I need to drink more coffee on Mondays...

Crom wrote:Does anyone actually research anything before they post? I find so much misinformation dealing with technology more so than anything else. The fact is, 3D printers will totally change table top war gaming, but not the way you think. It will change the DIY "beer and pretzels" war gaming. You can already print out pretty decent looking models, and people upload the design files for free use. So it only costs you the printer + materials. Then people will start publishing their own rules.

Here is an example of what you can print right now, if you had a 3D printer. You don't need the top of the line model to do so either.




source: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2010/08/print-your-own-wargaming-minis.html

Yeah, you kinda do. Okay maybe not top of the line but something close to it. I guarantee you that those minis will not look anything at all like those models if you try printing them on a home build 3d printing kit, or even on a shapeways printer. Trust me, I use 3d printers all the time, and some guys in my local gaming group have actually purchased some of those minis before, they didn't come out too well/needed a bunch of post processing.

Canadian 5th wrote:

dajobe wrote:No i would prefer that people not download things illegally. And so you think that just because it costs alot to fight, it instantly becomes ok? its interesting that you mention the drug war...personally, i think that many of them should be legalized, but as long as it is illegal i say "SEND EM TO THE BRIG!"

Ah, so you support the privatization of prisons, the overcrowding and cruelty within. All, in some cases, over something as small as a few ounces of weed?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crom wrote:<snip>

Context fail. dajobe said that the US gov't should crack down on piracy of online materials. I said that it would be another waste like the war on drugs.

1: most people who have gone to prison over weed are dealers,i know MANY people at school who have been caught and were issued a ticket, its the dealers that usually go to prison, and that is different than just smoking. And privatization of prisons? i never said that, i realise prisons are becoming overcrowded, but as you said, many people are in for drug related crimes, and one major contributor of that is weed, which is one drug that i feel should be legalized! but breaking the law is breaking the law.

war on drugs is a waste? i will give you that i feel the weed portion is useless, but meth, heroin, speed, lsd, and many many more, are VERY harmful drugs that can make the user hurt not only themselves but others.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

This is why I think GW should change their business model on their books for digital downloads. Make it a reasonable yearly subscription rate of like $99 a year and you get all their rule books, army books, that can work in any laptop, desktop, tablet or ereader device and I bet a lot of those pirates may just cough up the $100 a year to access everything in digital format. I mean it is already in digital format before they print it anyway. There is way less over head when doing ebooks, and if done right you can get a yearly subscription off your customers, which in the long run would be a lot higher of profit.

I work in IT in academia and I can tell you the publishing companies are decades behind every other media company because they are scared. They are scared that new digital business models will destroy them and their profits, so they push their old and busted business model. Look at the music industry and video games. I don't think I've bought a retail PC game from a store in a long time. I just buy everything from Steam these days. iTunes Music Store has sold 100s of billions of songs. The digital business model works, and it can be very profitable.

Too bad most companies won't jump on it.

Canadian 5th wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:And your one class of 30 is now a majority?

That was one who didn't pirate. So 29 of 30 is a vast majority.

Sorry but a sample population of 30 is not a valid representative sample of a total population of 6 billion. Take a stats class.

I regularly deal with a group of about 30 people on a daily basis, since that is roughly the size of my circle of (actual) friends. I know a lot more than 1 person who doesn't torrent.

Enter 5 years form now when 3D printers are super cheap and work very well. It will happen, and people will use them to print GW models. In fact I can see it now, people publishing the drafting files for the models, and modifying them to make them look exactly how they want to. If GW was smart they would start making a business plan now, develop software and license their product to be 3D printed.

People said the same thing about 5 years ago, it still hasn't happened. 3d printing is not really a click and go endeavor btw, there is actually a bit of engineering that goes into it, more than what your average layperson/gamer will know to do. I'm sure one day the technology will be at that level, but its not going to be 10 years from now. The rate of advancement in printing technology has been pretty slow compared to other technologies, and the prices haven't come down all that much either.

Crom wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

This is why I think GW should change their business model on their books for digital downloads. Make it a reasonable yearly subscription rate of like $99 a year and you get all their rule books, army books, that can work in any laptop, desktop, tablet or ereader device and I bet a lot of those pirates may just cough up the $100 a year to access everything in digital format. I mean it is already in digital format before they print it anyway. There is way less over head when doing ebooks, and if done right you can get a yearly subscription off your customers, which in the long run would be a lot higher of profit.

I work in IT in academia and I can tell you the publishing companies are decades behind every other media company because they are scared. They are scared that new digital business models will destroy them and their profits, so they push their old and busted business model. Look at the music industry and video games. I don't think I've bought a retail PC game from a store in a long time. I just buy everything from Steam these days. iTunes Music Store has sold 100s of billions of songs. The digital business model works, and it can be very profitable.

Too bad most companies won't jump on it.

QFT Crom, very astute

That actually is a good idea.
However Canadian 5th is still going to pirate because, well thats just what he does. Might makes right and if he wants it he's gonna take it. Who cares about laws or anything like that. Although right along with that comes rape and murder. So where do you draw the line?

he will probably just claim that people that commit those crimes are filling up the jails, and that it is ok to rape and murder as long as no one is hurt by it...oh wait...

dajobe wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

dajobe wrote:No i would prefer that people not download things illegally. And so you think that just because it costs alot to fight, it instantly becomes ok? its interesting that you mention the drug war...personally, i think that many of them should be legalized, but as long as it is illegal i say "SEND EM TO THE BRIG!"

Ah, so you support the privatization of prisons, the overcrowding and cruelty within. All, in some cases, over something as small as a few ounces of weed?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crom wrote:<snip>

Context fail. dajobe said that the US gov't should crack down on piracy of online materials. I said that it would be another waste like the war on drugs.

1: most people who have gone to prison over weed are dealers,i know MANY people at school who have been caught and were issued a ticket, its the dealers that usually go to prison, and that is different than just smoking. And privatization of prisons? i never said that, i realise prisons are becoming overcrowded, but as you said, many people are in for drug related crimes, and one major contributor of that is weed, which is one drug that i feel should be legalized! but breaking the law is breaking the law.

war on drugs is a waste? i will give you that i feel the weed portion is useless, but meth, heroin, speed, lsd, and many many more, are VERY harmful drugs that can make the user hurt not only themselves but others.

Over 50% of our prison population is drug related. Not all of them are dealers, and the word dealer is subjective. Since the amount of drugs considered to be "intent to sell" differs from state to state. Several states have the three strikes your out law and you go to prison. Some are big time dealers, or dealt enough to get a prison sentence, but a lot of them aren't. They are just repeat drug offenders that get caught up in the system.

I hate comparing the US to other countries because it is not applicable, but look at other countries that totally decriminalized drug usage, and legalized a lot of drugs. Their usage and crime related to drugs is exponentially lower than ours.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:And your one class of 30 is now a majority?

That was one who didn't pirate. So 29 of 30 is a vast majority.

Sorry but a sample population of 30 is not a valid representative sample of a total population of 6 billion. Take a stats class.

I regularly deal with a group of about 30 people on a daily basis, since that is roughly the size of my circle of (actual) friends. I know a lot more than 1 person who doesn't torrent.

Not it isn't, but it is telling and I'd be willing to bet that piracy is common among youth in nations with common access to computers and torrent sites.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Enter 5 years form now when 3D printers are super cheap and work very well. It will happen, and people will use them to print GW models. In fact I can see it now, people publishing the drafting files for the models, and modifying them to make them look exactly how they want to. If GW was smart they would start making a business plan now, develop software and license their product to be 3D printed.

People said the same thing about 5 years ago, it still hasn't happened. 3d printing is not really a click and go endeavor btw, there is actually a bit of engineering that goes into it, more than what your average layperson/gamer will know to do. I'm sure one day the technology will be at that level, but its not going to be 10 years from now. The rate of advancement in printing technology has been pretty slow compared to other technologies, and the prices haven't come down all that much either.

if you look at the link I posted people are selling their design files and some are uploading them for free in an open source sort of community. You won't have to design anything as an end user, you will be able to purchase or use other's designs.

The prices have come down a ton. you can get one for under $1,000 now. You can build DIY 3D printers for $500. The 3D printers we had at my last job, 5 years ago were 25k a piece (it was a huge autoCAD and Inventor lab, and they printed their designs), and that same printer is less than half the price now. It was a pretty high end one too.

Also on that link I posted earlier, if you look at the parent company that does the 3D printing you will see someone already designed bolt pistols and are selling them on there. Legalities aside (I am not a lawyer) I don't think you will have to design that much. Plus once you get a 3D model in place it doesn't take much to manipulate it, the hardest part is designing it to scale, and designing it properly.

Who knows though, technology is a very trend centric market, so you may be right in the sense they cannot set a trend for it. However, if they are able to market 3D printers like they do iOS devices, Android devices, GPS, Playstations, and every other consumer electronic we must have. It would be interesting to see how they market it once they become affordable. They could fail to market it properly or you could even see a technology war of different types of 3D printing, say like bluray versus HD DVD. We will just have to wait.

Wow, just wow, just looked at a 3D printer video on youtube... wow, never really heard of these before, that is amazing

dajobe wrote:Wow, just wow, just looked at a 3D printer video on youtube... wow, never really heard of these before, that is amazing

Yeah even 5 years ago the things the students were doing in that inventor lab were pretty cool. They were designing and printing out Halo dudes and Halo vehicles for a to scale diorama. The models didn't look too shabby either.

I think it will just come down to how they market them to consumers and if the trend sets. In the medical field they are looking into technologies to print organs and other forms of living tissue using 3D printers. Think about replacing a liver with a bio-printed one! Talk about space marines, but instead of growing them we will just print them!

if its legal, i'd do it, and considering you can print pretty much anything, might be able to, but companies might put a little barcode or something else that makes it so that the printers cant read the models or something along those lines

dajobe wrote:if its legal, i'd do it, and considering you can print pretty much anything, might be able to, but companies might put a little barcode or something else that makes it so that the printers cant read the models or something along those lines

That would be easy to defeat with paint and better imaging systems.

there is no business model yet, but I would assume some companies would sell you the design files, and then you would print them. How it will be licensed exactly would be a guess. However, I highly doubt miniature manufacturers will sell their designs. As far as copy right goes, as long as it is altered in some way shape or form it is legal, but that is a gray area and you should consult a lawyer, and even then the lawyer may not know.

no i meant like a certain material that would not register with the copiers or a little device that feths up your printer if you try to put it inside, because i doubt if many companies who produce physical products like toys and models want their products being copied for free and would probably put in alot of research and technology to find a way to make it impossible

no that is really not possible. There is no way for the computer or the printer to know if you are infringing on copyrighted materials or not. I mean, what would it do, check your printed job to a data base of copyrighted materials?

As far as materials go, I would assume you are locked in to using a certain set of plastics to print with, but I don't know those specifics all that well. I never really used them before but had to install a couple once and then make a few computers print to them. They take FOREVER too. They were pretty neat though.

I'm sure corporations would try and come up with some way to try and stop people from making illegal copies of their products. Wether or not it would be very effective is anyone's guess. But i doubt they would just throw up their hands in defeat.

i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

Canadian 5th wrote:Life has always been about doing the best for yourself. If I can help a few people along the way I might, but my won success comes first.

Ah, so your selfish basically. Got it.

No, I'm not. You still have your book, everybody who ever bought it still has it. You simply didn't get paid for my enjoyment of the book. However I could always read your book for free at a library so what's your point? Do you hate libraries now as well?

Yes, but you still stole that one copy of my book.

No, because either: a) I CHOSE to give the library a copy of my book or b) the library bought it. If someone asks me for a free copy of a book, I'd consider it! When I have a problem is when someone deciddes that they are entitled to my book without either contacting me to see if it's ok, or to just pay the price.

Books and everything are luxuries. If you don't want to pay, then you do without. You have no 'right' to entertainment.

Or I can tune into the radio, to here another artist's work, or go on youtube and type their name in, or even download it. Artists make more money from a concert tour than they do from CD's and song sales so I like hurting the label and supporting the artist.

Fair enough, so go watch their concerts. Just don't steal from them. You do know that the radio PAYS for the right to play for the song, yes?

Because you can't stop me. The strong rule the weak. So keep writing and I'll enjoy it for free if I so desire.

So you're an immoral . =Shakes head= I have nothing to say to that. You have made your own immorality quite clear to everyone here, and I think that speaks for itself. I honestly don't know how to deal with someone who has such a skewed view of morality.

Once again, I want to apply your logic to other forms of crime. To be honest, I'm a Hobbesian, and people like you only reinforce my belief that the masses of humanity need a strong government to smash them into submission.

That was one who didn't pirate. So 29 of 30 is a vast majority.

But what if we make it 29/x ? I sincerely hope that the majority of people on this planet aren't as immoral as you.

dajobe wrote:no i meant like a certain material that would not register with the copiers or a little device that feths up your printer if you try to put it inside, because i doubt if many companies who produce physical products like toys and models want their products being copied for free and would probably put in alot of research and technology to find a way to make it impossible

How can it mess up your scanning device? You have a scanner that can be as simple as a turntable and some cameras at the low end, how do you break that with a model? How does the printing get broken by the scan> A bad quality printer or scanner will have lots of noise and flash, but again nothing broken.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

Not possible, try logic next time.

Crom wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

This is why I think GW should change their business model on their books for digital downloads. Make it a reasonable yearly subscription rate of like $99 a year and you get all their rule books, army books, that can work in any laptop, desktop, tablet or ereader device and I bet a lot of those pirates may just cough up the $100 a year to access everything in digital format. I mean it is already in digital format before they print it anyway. There is way less over head when doing ebooks, and if done right you can get a yearly subscription off your customers, which in the long run would be a lot higher of profit.

I work in IT in academia and I can tell you the publishing companies are decades behind every other media company because they are scared. They are scared that new digital business models will destroy them and their profits, so they push their old and busted business model. Look at the music industry and video games. I don't think I've bought a retail PC game from a store in a long time. I just buy everything from Steam these days. iTunes Music Store has sold 100s of billions of songs. The digital business model works, and it can be very profitable.

Too bad most companies won't jump on it.

Personally I believe digital copying will destroy the music industry as we know it.

It's built on two concepts.

1. The editorial function of discovering and developing new talent.
2. The difficulty and expense of physically copying music. (C90 cassettes used to cost £1 each, in the days when £1 actually was worth something.)

Arguably the music publishers have abandoned their responsibility for editorial in favour of sending out derivative crap.

The Internet offers bands the chance to build a following by themselves by word of mouth. Live music can't be copied by definition.

There is already a massive back catalogue of awesome music available.

I see the future as real enthusiasts going to paid-for gigs, while most people download stuff for free or a modest monthly subscription.

ChrisWWII wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:Life has always been about doing the best for yourself. If I can help a few people along the way I might, but my won success comes first.

Ah, so your selfish basically. Got it.

You want your book to outsell other books right? You're selfish too.

Yes, but you still stole that one copy of my book.

No, because either: a) I CHOSE to give the library a copy of my book or b) the library bought it. If someone asks me for a free copy of a book, I'd consider it! When I have a problem is when someone deciddes that they are entitled to my book without either contacting me to see if it's ok, or to just pay the price.

Books and everything are luxuries. If you don't want to pay, then you do without. You have no 'right' to entertainment.

So the library buys a copy and everybody can read it. Would you call it illegal if I read the book, returned it, and due to a good memory wrote down a copy later?

Fair enough, so go watch their concerts. Just don't steal from them. You do know that the radio PAYS for the right to play for the song, yes?

Actually you're wrong on that. The radio station doesn't pay for the rights to a song, they pay the licensing body for the right to broadcast. The licensing body hammers out buying rights to songs.

So you're an immoral . =Shakes head= I have nothing to say to that. You have made your own immorality quite clear to everyone here, and I think that speaks for itself. I honestly don't know how to deal with someone who has such a skewed view of morality.

Once again, I want to apply your logic to other forms of crime. To be honest, I'm a Hobbesian, and people like you only reinforce my belief that the masses of humanity need a strong government to smash them into submission.

Your a crackpot who welcomes a dictatorship then. You would have loved Germany in the 1930's.

But what if we make it 29/x ? I sincerely hope that the majority of people on this planet aren't as immoral as you.

Even at say 29/29 in the real world, that's still 50%. Hell, my parents pirate music and movies, not to the extent I do, but they do it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Personally I believe digital copying will destroy the music industry as we know it.

It's built on two concepts.

1. The editorial function of discovering and developing new talent.
2. The difficulty and expense of physically copying music. (C90 cassettes used to cost £1 each, in the days when £1 actually was worth something.)

Arguably the music publishers have abandoned their responsibility for editorial in favour of sending out derivative crap.

The Internet offers bands the chance to build a following by themselves by word of mouth. Live music can't be copied by definition.

There is already a massive back catalogue of awesome music available.

I see the future as real enthusiasts going to paid-for gigs, while most people download stuff for free or a modest monthly subscription.

Yeah, I think you have the model about right. Free downloads and onsite ads would also work for some bands.

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

The only way for this to work is if GW developed a completely 100% clear plastic... the fix to this would be to paint it...

Chris WWII: cant believe im defending canadian, but i do agree that every person in this world is out for what they think is best for themselves. other than that, spot on.

Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Killkrazy: no clue where music industry is goin, lol

canadian the whole point of that 29/x was the fact that you need a much larger group then just 30 people in order to actually make a realistic stat for what you are trying to claim.

dajobe wrote:Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Waving your hands and saying somehow isn't a solid argument. Besides, how well does DRM work today... Cracked before launch, oh bother.

Canadian 5th wrote:
You want your book to outsell other books right? You're selfish too.

The difference being I want my book to outsell other books by being BETTER than them. I would be selfish if I tried to cheat the system like you are.

So the library buys a copy and everybody can read it. Would you call it illegal if I read the book, returned it, and due to a good memory wrote down a copy later?

If you're able to do that then fine. Go apply for a job at the CIA, they'd love someone with that kind of memory.

Actually you're wrong on that. The radio station doesn't pay for the rights to a song, they pay the licensing body for the right to broadcast. The licensing body hammers out buying rights to songs.

The point being at some time along the line the radio station got an agreement to play the song legally.

You never did.

Your a crackpot who welcomes a dictatorship then. You would have loved Germany in the 1930's.

I hereby award you the award of being the first person to fulfill Godwin's Law in this thread.

To be perfectly honest, yes. If we can get a WORKING benevolent dictatorship I'd be all for it. The problem is that we can't get a working benevolent dictatorship because humans as a rule are greedy sons of . Democracy is an idiotic form of government that only works because every other form of government is worse.

Nazi Germany was NOT a benevolent dictatorship. Maybe they'd have a shot if it weren't for that whole 'kill anyone who's not our race' thing.

Even at say 29/29 in the real world, that's still 50%. Hell, my parents pirate music and movies, not to the extent I do, but they do it.

I know lots of people who pirate. I don't care about them. People who pirate because they're cheap, or they want to try something out...fine.

it's people like you who think that they are entitled to free everything, and that they will break any law they want to as long as they don't get caught that destroy my faith in humanity.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:canadian the whole point of that 29/x was the fact that you need a much larger group then just 30 people in order to actually make a realistic stat for what you are trying to claim.

No duh, I suppose I could check site traffic for a place like TPB though. Which shows that they get 3,715,515 unique visitors monthly the other top ten sites also get near or over 1 million views per month. Now that does show what would seem to be a small number. But you have to consider that sites like youtube and hulu mean that you can find music and TV shows, which are what people mostly want, easy enough for free.

well if you already new that then why try and pass off your little 1/29 ratio as being an actual vast majority stat like you were?

ChrisWWII wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:
You want your book to outsell other books right? You're selfish too.

The difference being I want my book to outsell other books by being BETTER than them. I would be selfish if I tried to cheat the system like you are.

I'll get your book for free by being smarter than you then.

If you're able to do that then fine. Go apply for a job at the CIA, they'd love someone with that kind of memory.

Not an American... Besides, you just said that copying your book is fine.

The point being at some time along the line the radio station got an agreement to play the song legally.

You never did.

Actually I can play whatever I like so long as it's not for profit and I get a license. Woops!

I hereby award you the award of being the first person to fulfill Godwin's Law in this thread.

To be perfectly honest, yes. If we can get a WORKING benevolent dictatorship I'd be all for it. The problem is that we can't get a working benevolent dictatorship because humans as a rule are greedy sons of . Democracy is an idiotic form of government that only works because every other form of government is worse.

Nazi Germany was NOT a benevolent dictatorship. Maybe they'd have a shot if it weren't for that whole 'kill anyone who's not our race' thing.

Yawn, a Godwin's law reference... How original.

I know lots of people who pirate. I don't care about them. People who pirate because they're cheap, or they want to try something out...fine.

it's people like you who think that they are entitled to free everything, and that they will break any law they want to as long as they don't get caught that destroy my faith in humanity.

Well I have broken a few laws in my day, though there are some I won't break. Murder and rape are certainly lines not worth crossing for moral reasons, as is kidnapping, torture, and the like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:well if you already new that then why try and pass off your little 1/29 ratio as being an actual vast majority stat like you were?

It is a vast majority of a small sample group from a certain demographic. While not significant on the whole it does cover a significant number of people in the course and in the college as a whole.

Canadian 5th wrote:

dajobe wrote:Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Waving your hands and saying somehow isn't a solid argument. Besides, how well does DRM work today... Cracked before launch, oh bother.

i never said it was an arguement, i said that I PREDICT that companies will try to do something to fight people from copying their product.
Digital Rights Management? dont know that much about the tech industry, i know that DRM is a contoversial topic and that it currently has some problems...does that mean that they will never be fixed...maybe, or maybe not. one thing that i do know is that your logic makes me , and everytime i say something civil, you come back with some unnecessarily snotty remark, and you are sort of coming across as a bag IMHO.

That still doesn't explain why try and pass it off as something much more then what it was. yes that ratio is good for that class and a small group but unless your college is really small a sample group of only 30 people is not enough.

dajobe wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

dajobe wrote:Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Waving your hands and saying somehow isn't a solid argument. Besides, how well does DRM work today... Cracked before launch, oh bother.

i never said it was an arguement, i said that I PREDICT that companies will try to do something to fight people from copying their product.
Digital Rights Management? dont know that much about the tech industry, i know that DRM is a contoversial topic and that it currently has some problems...does that mean that they will never be fixed...maybe, or maybe not. one thing that i do know is that your logic makes me , and everytime i say something civil, you come back with some unnecessarily snotty remark, and you are sort of coming across as a bag IMHO.

DRM is always going to be crackable because the codes to crack it are, by necessity, located within the product being sold. Again something research would cover.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Crom wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

This is why I think GW should change their business model on their books for digital downloads. Make it a reasonable yearly subscription rate of like $99 a year and you get all their rule books, army books, that can work in any laptop, desktop, tablet or ereader device and I bet a lot of those pirates may just cough up the $100 a year to access everything in digital format. I mean it is already in digital format before they print it anyway. There is way less over head when doing ebooks, and if done right you can get a yearly subscription off your customers, which in the long run would be a lot higher of profit.

I work in IT in academia and I can tell you the publishing companies are decades behind every other media company because they are scared. They are scared that new digital business models will destroy them and their profits, so they push their old and busted business model. Look at the music industry and video games. I don't think I've bought a retail PC game from a store in a long time. I just buy everything from Steam these days. iTunes Music Store has sold 100s of billions of songs. The digital business model works, and it can be very profitable.

Too bad most companies won't jump on it.

Personally I believe digital copying will destroy the music industry as we know it.

It's built on two concepts.

1. The editorial function of discovering and developing new talent.
2. The difficulty and expense of physically copying music. (C90 cassettes used to cost £1 each, in the days when £1 actually was worth something.)

Arguably the music publishers have abandoned their responsibility for editorial in favour of sending out derivative crap.

The Internet offers bands the chance to build a following by themselves by word of mouth. Live music can't be copied by definition.

There is already a massive back catalogue of awesome music available.

I see the future as real enthusiasts going to paid-for gigs, while most people download stuff for free or a modest monthly subscription.

I don't disagree with a statement you have made, but I would like to add a few things. I collect records, as in vinyl records. Have done so since I was a kid, and my parents bought me Michael Jackson's Thriller on viynl. I thought the concept of an album was just awesome as a kid. You get the cover, liner notes, lyric sheets, cool art that doesn't come with a CD, etc. In fact the last album I bought was last year, and it was Them Crooked Vultures on 2x 180gram cherry red vinyl records. The record was $17 (sort of pricey for brand new vinyl) but came with a free digital download of their album. So, I got the record and I got a code to redeem my free online digital download. SOLD!

However, I am definitely a try before I buy music fan these days. I will download tracks of an album before I buy (there are a few artists I buy their albums regardless if I like it or not,I am a completest with some music acts and I want their whole catalog) and if I can I will buy it on vinyl keeping the digital copies I already downloaded.

Then there are the artists that I may stream on say grooveshark.com and not really be that in to them at all, but I might go see them live. Buy a T-Shirt or something, maybe a sticker, so they are getting ticket sales and merch sales from me.

Basically in this day and age it allows for the bands to be more business savvy and start their own label, put out their own album and manage their own business instead of letting a bunch of lawyers and business dudes handle it. Which I think that is a good thing for the artist. Also, when I go to a live show, they are getting paid for that, and the record company gets no cut of it, same thing when I buy merch directly from the artist.

As far as the big 4 record companies go, let them burn for all I care. I just want good music and I would much rather pay the artist than the label.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:That still doesn't explain why try and pass it off as something much more then what it was. yes that ratio is good for that class and a small group but unless your college is really small a sample group of only 30 people is not enough.

Actually for a school of say 1,000 a sample size of 30 gives a confidence interval of 17 which means +/- 17% so that means that I can say with 95% certainty that between 0.1% and 20% of people at my school wouldn't download music.

chaos0xomega wrote:

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

The only way for this to work is if GW developed a completely 100% clear plastic... the fix to this would be to paint it...

I was going to say that anything un-scanable can be remedied by painting it a solid color. Though most 3D print jobs come from some sort of 3D rendering and not really a scan, at least the ones I am familiar with.

Ok yes for a school that size then yes that sample level does work. The point I was making that you seemed to have trouble grasping was the whole issue of sample size verse what size group you are trying to represent. The way you presented it seemd to implay that you meant for that 1/29 ratio to be accurate for say the entire country. Thank you for finally actualy answering the question.

everything is crackable, the issue is how crackable it is, and i am sure that there are ways to make it more difficult to access the codes for people who do not just wish to just use whatever the product is. Maybe a failsafe that wipes the program if it senses it is being accessed in an undesirable way. I dont know, im not into tech. What I do know is that there are very smart people who will be paid alot of money to figure such things out. Whether they will or not remains to be determined, I am just argueing that copyright is wrong and that companies will always strive to protect what is their property from thiefs, and that I believe if the government catches someone pirating, that the person should be imprisoned.

and that was a little bit less rude response. we are making progress!

Crom wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

The only way for this to work is if GW developed a completely 100% clear plastic... the fix to this would be to paint it...

I was going to say that anything un-scanable can be remedied by painting it a solid color. Though most 3D print jobs come from some sort of 3D rendering and not really a scan, at least the ones I am familiar with.

Thats the truth. I've seen shops/individuals running scanning tech before, but from what I've seen its usually used to conduct computational analysis of a real world object that wasn't designed via a digital process rather than to create something for printing.

dajobe wrote:no i meant like a certain material that would not register with the copiers or a little device that feths up your printer if you try to put it inside, because i doubt if many companies who produce physical products like toys and models want their products being copied for free and would probably put in alot of research and technology to find a way to make it impossible

If that was even possible, you'd end up with a situation at hand that boggles the mind of any company lawyer (in most countries). Not only would the person whose printer got destroyed be able to sue the company which designed or owns the copyright of the print since they knowingly destroyed someone else's property, but the person whose printer was destroyed would also be able to claim warranty from the company which made the printer, or at the very least the retailer where it was bought. All the while not actually committing a crime since the actual 3D print (and thus infringement on the copyrighted material) was never printed, and since it's intellectual property it's not a crime to have access to it. In fact, in certain countries reproducing the 3D print would be in the grey zone if it was for your own personal use.

Now, what would be interesting to know is if you purchased, for example, an assembled GW model and used a 3D printer to get both an image of it and then recreate it for personal use - in how many countries this would even be illegal. Keep in mind that we're talking about making an image of an object that you own.

Edit: added assembled for clarity.

Canadian 5th wrote:
Actually for a school of say 1,000 a sample size of 30 gives a confidence interval of 17 which means +/- 17% so that means that I can say with 95% certainty that between 0.1% and 20% of people at my school wouldn't download music.

Even though I hate studying statistics, I know enough to say that between .1% to 20% is an unacceptably wide interval. Sure you can say that the majority of people download music, but the percentage can vary from 'almost everyone' to 'a significant majority'.

Besides, I'm more interested in WHY. Do they download it because they just don't want to pay? Or do they download because they want to sample with the intention of buying later? Or are they like you and think that their entitled to free entertainment.

I'll get your book for free by being smarter than you then.

By breaking the law and cheating the system. I could ensure my book succeeds by breaking the law and screwing up the competitors, but I don't because if I'm going to win I'm going to compete and win fairly.

Not an American... Besides, you just said that copying your book is fine.

By acknowledging that the situation you proposed was so ridiculously unlikely that someone with that kind of ability would have much better things to do than steal some guys book.

If someone took my book, copied it onto his ocmputer and started posting it online then I'd be pissed. You know why? Because now I'm being hurt. People are getting access to a service I'm providing for free, when I don't want them to have it for free. I'm taking a loss. Or someone is.

Actually I can play whatever I like so long as it's not for profit and I get a license. Woops!

Stop playing semantics. You know what I mean. The radio station got a license to play the music legally. if you can get the same license, then bully for you.

However I doubt that.

Well I have broken a few laws in my day, though there are some I won't break. Murder and rape are certainly lines not worth crossing for moral reasons, as is kidnapping, torture, and the like.

You yourself have said that the only way you'd stop pirating (breaking the law) is when they can stop you. I'm only applying your logic to other forms of crime.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:Ok yes for a school that size then yes that sample level does work. The point I was making that you seemed to have trouble grasping was the whole issue of sample size verse what size group you are trying to represent. The way you presented it seemd to implay that you meant for that 1/29 ratio to be accurate for say the entire country. Thank you for finally actualy answering the question.

When did I ever say country? I said it was a sample from a class.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dajobe wrote:everything is crackable, the issue is how crackable it is, and i am sure that there are ways to make it more difficult to access the codes for people who do not just wish to just use whatever the product is. Maybe a failsafe that wipes the program if it senses it is being accessed in an undesirable way. I dont know, im not into tech. What I do know is that there are very smart people who will be paid alot of money to figure such things out. Whether they will or not remains to be determined, I am just argueing that copyright is wrong and that companies will always strive to protect what is their property from thiefs, and that I believe if the government catches someone pirating, that the person should be imprisoned.

and that was a little bit less rude response. we are making progress!

So you don't know a lick of what you're talking about when it comes to DRM. Why do you keep babbling then?

Commisar Wolfie wrote:Ok yes for a school that size then yes that sample level does work. The point I was making that you seemed to have trouble grasping was the whole issue of sample size verse what size group you are trying to represent. The way you presented it seemd to implay that you meant for that 1/29 ratio to be accurate for say the entire country. Thank you for finally actualy answering the question.

He also polled a demographic of students, which are assuming to be young and perhaps naive with how the world works. Though I am willing to be more people in the USA download music than say smoke pot, and many polls have shown that over 50% of Americans at one time or still do, smoke pot. I am not sure if he was making the point that if everyone does it, make it legal, or what, but nothing will ever stop digital piracy. Everyone on the Internet is guilty of downloading something pirated at one time or another.

I don't think anyone should face jail time, especially if they are also buying items as well. I also think that companies that claim to lose revenue over digital piracy are lying out their butts. They claim to lose 100s of thousands of dollars to one person, like that person every had 100+K to waste on music. How about that single mom that her 10 year old downloaded 2 albums and they tried to sue her for 300,000 dollars....for 2 albums? If anything you should owe the current retail value of what you downloaded and be sentenced to community service. Let's at least be reasonable here, no one has money to buy every DVD or album they want, so there will always be downloading, but many people who pirate also go out and buy stuff.

and you passed it off trying to make it seem like you meant it for something larger then just that class. Which I stated several times earlier. Try reading full posts.

ChrisWWII wrote:Even though I hate studying statistics, I know enough to say that between .1% to 20% is an unacceptably wide interval. Sure you can say that the majority of people download music, but the percentage can vary from 'almost everyone' to 'a significant majority'.

Besides, I'm more interested in WHY. Do they download it because they just don't want to pay? Or do they download because they want to sample with the intention of buying later? Or are they like you and think that their entitled to free entertainment.

It's a wide interval to be sure, I would also say that 80% of students of college age in my area is still close to everybody. Also, the majority said they did it for reasons of cost, with some saying the might buy something they enjoyed after downloading it.

By acknowledging that the situation you proposed was so ridiculously unlikely that someone with that kind of ability would have much better things to do than steal some guys book.

If someone took my book, copied it onto his ocmputer and started posting it online then I'd be pissed. You know why? Because now I'm being hurt. People are getting access to a service I'm providing for free, when I don't want them to have it for free. I'm taking a loss. Or someone is.

Then make a book worth paying full price for.

Stop playing semantics. You know what I mean. The radio station got a license to play the music legally. if you can get the same license, then bully for you.

However I doubt that.

Not that hard to get a small broadcasting station and a license to use it.

You yourself have said that the only way you'd stop pirating (breaking the law) is when they can stop you. I'm only applying your logic to other forms of crime.

Indeed.

Toastedandy wrote:Anyway, if I could afford to get a machine like this - http://www.dannychoo.com/post/en/26119/Human+Cloning+in+Japan.html

I would make myself, and all my mates into inquisitor scale figures. It would be brilliant.

What kind of donkey-cave wears a wool hat indoors? feth that guy, seriously.

Crom wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:Ok yes for a school that size then yes that sample level does work. The point I was making that you seemed to have trouble grasping was the whole issue of sample size verse what size group you are trying to represent. The way you presented it seemd to implay that you meant for that 1/29 ratio to be accurate for say the entire country. Thank you for finally actualy answering the question.

He also polled a demographic of students, which are assuming to be young and perhaps naive with how the world works. Though I am willing to be more people in the USA download music than say smoke pot, and many polls have shown that over 50% of Americans at one time or still do, smoke pot. I am not sure if he was making the point that if everyone does it, make it legal, or what, but nothing will ever stop digital piracy. Everyone on the Internet is guilty of downloading something pirated at one time or another.

I don't think anyone should face jail time, especially if they are also buying items as well. I also think that companies that claim to lose revenue over digital piracy are lying out their butts. They claim to lose 100s of thousands of dollars to one person, like that person every had 100+K to waste on music. How about that single mom that her 10 year old downloaded 2 albums and they tried to sue her for 300,000 dollars....for 2 albums? If anything you should owe the current retail value of what you downloaded and be sentenced to community service. Let's at least be reasonable here, no one has money to buy every DVD or album they want, so there will always be downloading, but many people who pirate also go out and buy stuff.

I agree with you on that. Chances are downloading stuff online without paying for it is never going to go away. In fact I would be surprised if it did. My issue with Canadian's little ratio was that 30 people polled are not enough to reach a viable consensus on the issue.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:and you passed it off trying to make it seem like you meant it for something larger then just that class. Which I stated several times earlier. Try reading full posts.

Uh what? I never passed anything off, and mostly talked about business models for online distribution of digital goods.

not you that was directed to Canadian.

ah gotcha oh well I am gonna go play some Starcraft II

dajobe wrote:1: most people who have gone to prison over weed are dealers,i know MANY people at school who have been caught and were issued a ticket, its the dealers that usually go to prison, and that is different than just smoking. And privatization of prisons? i never said that, i realise prisons are becoming overcrowded, but as you said, many people are in for drug related crimes, and one major contributor of that is weed, which is one drug that i feel should be legalized! but breaking the law is breaking the law.

Although the intent of a 'War on Drugs' may have been to target drug smugglers and 'King Pins,' over half (51.6%) of the 1,663,582 total 2009 arrests for drug abuse violations were for marijuana -- a calculated total of 858,408. Of those, an estimated 758,593 people (45.6%) were arrested for marijuana possession alone. By contrast in 2000, a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 were for possession alone.

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Marijuana#Data

Keep drinking the coolaid.


As for music piracy, that mainly hurts the labels, who honestly probably deserve it for their long and sordid histories of manipulating/using artists and turning out mass-marketed tripe. Bands such as Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead are embracing the internet and file-sharing, and are adopting to the new dynamic, and they are far from the only ones.

Canadian 5th wrote:It's a wide interval to be sure, I would also say that 80% of students of college age in my area is still close to everybody. Also, the majority said they did it for reasons of cost, with some saying the might buy something they enjoyed after downloading it.

Cost--while I still don't agree with--is something I can understand.

Same with a trial. That's why I support people giving out free demos, etc. Give people a free sample so they don't get pissed when they buy a bad game, movie, etc. Torrent it, try it for a bit then pay for it.

Then make a book worth paying full price for.

You are aware taht there is a reason we have standardized prices. Everyone thinks that something is wort different amounts of money. I think my models are worth the price I pay for them, others don't. Similarly, my mom sees a $3k handbag as 'worth it'. I don't.

Everyone's idea of a 'fair price' is going to be different. If you think that a luxury item isn't worth paying full price for, you know what? Don't buy it. You don't ave a right to say 'it's more expensive than I'm willing to pay, so I'll just steal it for free.'

Not that hard to get a small broadcasting station and a license to use it.

Which is different from stealing music.

Yeh I think its been proven that the key to companies success is to keep up with technology and how they provide content to the customer. Something GW hasnt done. People WANT their products in digital format and i think mostly would gladly pay a subscription service to have access to all the available materials.

I think another nice thing would be a computer simulation of their game systems liek MegaMek. Catalyst supports the creators of megamek which is a computer version of Classic battletech that can be used to play with peopel all over the world. GW on the other hand is quick to snuff out ANY type of similar product(i know Ive looked). Saying that it will hurt thair sales(i believe it has soimething to do with the agreement they have with relic so they are obligated to do it but they should try and work something out). On the contray such a thing sparks interest in 40k and a computer simulation will never replace playing an actual game with actual figures that youve painted yourself. It also gives friends who have moved apart an oppurtunity to still play together and allows people from all over the world to connect letting players play more games with more people.

keisukekun wrote:Yeh I think its been proven that the key to companies success is to keep up with technology and how they provide content to the customer. Something GW hasnt done. People WANT their products in digital format and i think mostly would gladly pay a subscription service to have access to all the available materials.

I think another nice thing would be a computer simulation of their game systems liek MegaMek. Catalyst supports the creators of megamek which is a computer version of Classic battletech that can be used to play with peopel all over the world. GW on the other hand is quick to snuff out ANY type of similar product(i know Ive looked). Saying that it will hurt thair sales(i believe it has soimething to do with the agreement they have with relic so they are obligated to do it but they should try and work something out). On the contray such a thing sparks interest in 40k and a computer simulation will never replace playing an actual game with actual figures that youve painted yourself. It also gives friends who have moved apart an oppurtunity to still play together and allows people from all over the world to connect letting players play more games with more people.

This is a separate app they could market, a sort of build your own battle report application with over head views, terrain, units, and so forth, where you could whip up the battle report and then post it online! This would not be hard to make and it could be intuitive and use on an iPad or Android tablet. Apps on the app store vary from free, to several hundred dollars, and they sell. I think marvel comics does a subscription app which allows you access to some of their content for a monthly price.

I think a lot of us would pay $99 a year to have all the books in digital format where we could toss them on our smart phones, laptops, tablets, and so forth. I mean just having a search function to look up rules would be awesome. You gotta look up rules for disembarking an open top vehicle, search for it, bam you pull up the page instantly.

Come on GW read this thread and give us digital apps!!!!!!!

Crom wrote:

keisukekun wrote:Yeh I think its been proven that the key to companies success is to keep up with technology and how they provide content to the customer. Something GW hasnt done. People WANT their products in digital format and i think mostly would gladly pay a subscription service to have access to all the available materials.

I think another nice thing would be a computer simulation of their game systems liek MegaMek. Catalyst supports the creators of megamek which is a computer version of Classic battletech that can be used to play with peopel all over the world. GW on the other hand is quick to snuff out ANY type of similar product(i know Ive looked). Saying that it will hurt thair sales(i believe it has soimething to do with the agreement they have with relic so they are obligated to do it but they should try and work something out). On the contray such a thing sparks interest in 40k and a computer simulation will never replace playing an actual game with actual figures that youve painted yourself. It also gives friends who have moved apart an oppurtunity to still play together and allows people from all over the world to connect letting players play more games with more people.

This is a separate app they could market, a sort of build your own battle report application with over head views, terrain, units, and so forth, where you could whip up the battle report and then post it online! This would not be hard to make and it could be intuitive and use on an iPad or Android tablet. Apps on the app store vary from free, to several hundred dollars, and they sell. I think marvel comics does a subscription app which allows you access to some of their content for a monthly price.

I think a lot of us would pay $99 a year to have all the books in digital format where we could toss them on our smart phones, laptops, tablets, and so forth. I mean just having a search function to look up rules would be awesome. You gotta look up rules for disembarking an open top vehicle, search for it, bam you pull up the page instantly.

Come on GW read this thread and give us digital apps!!!!!!!

That sounds like a disscription of Vassal40k: http://www.vassal40k.info/, it has overhead views and is said to be for making battle reports, thogh people use it to play games, too.

Canadian 5th wrote:Would you call it illegal if I read the book, returned it, and due to a good memory wrote down a copy later?

As a matter of fact, yes, in most western countries that would be illegal. Whether you reproduce the book by photocopying it, scanning it, writing it down, or building a printing press out of match-sticks and chewing gum, you're reproducing a copyrighted work.

There are some exceptions in some countries (here in Oz, it's still illegal to just copy the whole book on paper, but legal to scan it onto your ebook reader, for example... although you still have to own the original as well)... but by and large, books are still covered by the old 'no reproducey the bookey' statement that is usually printed somewhere just inside the front or back cover.

General Seric wrote:

Crom wrote:

keisukekun wrote:Yeh I think its been proven that the key to companies success is to keep up with technology and how they provide content to the customer. Something GW hasnt done. People WANT their products in digital format and i think mostly would gladly pay a subscription service to have access to all the available materials.

I think another nice thing would be a computer simulation of their game systems liek MegaMek. Catalyst supports the creators of megamek which is a computer version of Classic battletech that can be used to play with peopel all over the world. GW on the other hand is quick to snuff out ANY type of similar product(i know Ive looked). Saying that it will hurt thair sales(i believe it has soimething to do with the agreement they have with relic so they are obligated to do it but they should try and work something out). On the contray such a thing sparks interest in 40k and a computer simulation will never replace playing an actual game with actual figures that youve painted yourself. It also gives friends who have moved apart an oppurtunity to still play together and allows people from all over the world to connect letting players play more games with more people.

This is a separate app they could market, a sort of build your own battle report application with over head views, terrain, units, and so forth, where you could whip up the battle report and then post it online! This would not be hard to make and it could be intuitive and use on an iPad or Android tablet. Apps on the app store vary from free, to several hundred dollars, and they sell. I think marvel comics does a subscription app which allows you access to some of their content for a monthly price.

I think a lot of us would pay $99 a year to have all the books in digital format where we could toss them on our smart phones, laptops, tablets, and so forth. I mean just having a search function to look up rules would be awesome. You gotta look up rules for disembarking an open top vehicle, search for it, bam you pull up the page instantly.

Come on GW read this thread and give us digital apps!!!!!!!

That sounds like a disscription of Vassal40k: http://www.vassal40k.info/, it has overhead views and is said to be for making battle reports, thogh people use it to play games, too.

Yeh Ive heard of vassal 40k and they have had problems with gw trying to shut them down on and off

@omegus: interesting fact, had not been my experience, those people must have really pissed off the cops, because at school i knew about 20 people who were caught and issued tickets by the local pd, and one dude i was talking to said that a couple of years ago, his dealer had been arrested.

@canadian:arent the best at hypothetical discussions or thinking are you...

This has been an interesting thread. I feel like the only two views here are "anything I want to do is okay" and "copyright infringement is immoral because it's illegal". I'm not sure I can agree with either. Here's going to be my overall feeling: Some piracy is okay sometimes.

"Wait, not a black and white answer? Are you mad? Where do you get off?" I know. Crazy, right? Here's what I'm thinking: I'm thinking that content is the box they're burying consumer rights in. Case in point: The Witcher. It was a game released in 2007. I bought it for PC because I enjoyed playing it at a friend's house. It was a pretty good game, all things considered. It also won't work in Windows 7 because the rootkit they used to protect the game from it's users won't install properly in that OS. Some of these rootkits interfere with legitimate software, CD/DVD image mounting software, virus scanners, and the like. I actually had to download a pirated copy of it that had the hooks for said rootkit hacked out of it so that I could actually play it again. That's right: The pirated (free) copy is a superior product to the licensed (paid) copy. I'll allow you to think about that for a while.

The other situation where I see piracy as justifiable, or perhaps even "morally acceptable", is with regard to music. I'm a huge music buff, but I'm no friend of it *IAA. I've made that quite clear in more than one rant in OT. I think artists should be paid what they're due, which is why I find piracy acceptable in this situation. Shady accounting means you can sell a million albums and end up owing the labels money because of it. If there was some way to actually get my money to the artists, I would do it. If I could mail them a check for the album, I would. Problem is I can't. You probably ask, "Why would anyone sign up then if there's no way to succeed?" I wondered too. It's desperation. Music is a monopoly. The music cartel controls access to recording studios and venues. Clear Channel owns the vast majority of radio stations throughout the US, and they're in bed with the labels. That means that unless you sign the seven record deal, you will have a hard time finding recording anywhere fancier than your garage and playing live anywhere bigger than a bar. All of this is probably moot however, because no matter what a virtuoso you might be, you're not getting on any of the radio stations, so no one's heard of you anyway. As a result, I want to see the labels brought down. Having all of this been said, I pay for indie music when I find music that I like. I go see indie bands when they play around here. I do my part.

Back to topic: Pirating GW doesn't seem justifiable in my mind. They don't really hurt anyone else but themselves with their 'business' decisions, the pirated product will forever be inferior to the product they provide, and they're not contractually screwing over the creative force that is the reason they exist. (Not sure about that last one, but I will presume innocence until proven otherwise.) Do I have pdfs of the codexes? Sure. Do I have the books themselves? At least one of each. I have two space marine codexes, two IG codexes, and three rulebooks. Do I agree with paying $30 for a box with one melta in it when that's all I want? Hell no! However, that has encouraged me to pursue creative ways of creating meltaguns, allowing for more than one pose, that don't require me to steal their design.

I don't see it as stealing if I cast 5 meltaguns. Simple fact is, if I didn't recast them, I wouldn't of bought them. GW lose no business at all.

I see it more akin to fan art than piracy. What would be the difference between drawing a space marine and casting a space marine. GW stood to make no money in the first place, hence I am not stealing from them. It could be seen as piracy, but then wouldn't fan art/fiction be piracy?

Toastedandy wrote:I don't see it as stealing if I cast 5 meltaguns. Simple fact is, if I didn't recast them, I wouldn't of bought them. GW lose no business at all.

I see it more akin to fan art than piracy. What would be the difference between drawing a space marine and casting a space marine. GW stood to make no money in the first place, hence I am not stealing from them. It could be seen as piracy, but then wouldn't fan art/fiction be piracy?

yes it is, if you wouldnt have bought them then thats fine, but once those are recast or downloaded or whatever product the person is pirating, that is a trademarked product that was not paid for, and that is money that GW or whatever company should have recieved for those melta guns/producta(even though this is in more of a gray area in my opinion). I bet that fan art could be argued to be piracy if the person tries to sell their art or fiction for profit without recieving GW's approval, but I dont think just fan fiction would be piracy.

That's one of Canadian 5ths main lines of reasoning. He wouldn't have bought it if it weren't free. So it's ok for someone you haven't been arguing with to do it but not Canadian?

dajobe wrote:

yes it is, if you wouldnt have bought them then thats fine, but once those are recast or downloaded or whatever product the person is pirating, that is a trademarked product that was not paid for, and that is money that GW or whatever company should have recieved for those melta guns/producta(even though this is in more of a gray area in my opinion). I bet that fan art could be argued to be piracy if the person tries to sell their art or fiction for profit without recieving GW's approval, but I dont think just fan fiction would be piracy.

Actually, interestingly enough, most piracy numbers prefer to consider that one pirated unit directly equals one lost sale. That's why the numbers you always see from "studies" that interested parties release seem to indicate that the amount of lost revenue is in the ballpark of the GDP of small countries.

But why would it be piracy if they sell art, but not piracy if they keep it?

Its the same principle.

iproxtaco wrote:That's one of Canadian 5ths main lines of reasoning. He wouldn't have bought it if it weren't free. So it's ok for someone you haven't been arguing with to do it but not Canadian?

and i said it was stealing, i just said the melta guns was a little more of a gray area, but still stealing

Toastedandy wrote:I don't see it as stealing if I cast 5 meltaguns. Simple fact is, if I didn't recast them, I wouldn't of bought them. GW lose no business at all.

I see it more akin to fan art than piracy. What would be the difference between drawing a space marine and casting a space marine. GW stood to make no money in the first place, hence I am not stealing from them. It could be seen as piracy, but then wouldn't fan art/fiction be piracy?

I think the difference is that you're using it in the manner directly competing with their product. Then again, so is any greenstuff analogue. It's an odd grey area, I suppose. Why is a direct cast 'worse' than sculpting a reasonable facsimile? Or even drawing a reasonable facsimile? Or even closing your eyes and imagining one?

Toastedandy wrote:But why would it be piracy if they sell art, but not piracy if they keep it?

Its the same principle.

when you say keep it, you mean just paint some picture of Spees Mareens or something? Because if someone wrote a 40k book and sold it at borders, and didnt apply to use the liscense, so GW makes no money off of what was their intellectual property. As for writing a book and just reading it yourself, no clue, could ask my dad, he took some copyright classes in law school?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

daedalus wrote:

dajobe wrote:

yes it is, if you wouldnt have bought them then thats fine, but once those are recast or downloaded or whatever product the person is pirating, that is a trademarked product that was not paid for, and that is money that GW or whatever company should have recieved for those melta guns/producta(even though this is in more of a gray area in my opinion). I bet that fan art could be argued to be piracy if the person tries to sell their art or fiction for profit without recieving GW's approval, but I dont think just fan fiction would be piracy.

Actually, interestingly enough, most piracy numbers prefer to consider that one pirated unit directly equals one lost sale. That's why the numbers you always see from "studies" that interested parties release seem to indicate that the amount of lost revenue is in the ballpark of the GDP of small countries.

most companies are complete bags, but they have to be in order to stay viable, and yes, i'd be willing to bet that some studies are "influenced" by what the company wants shown

dajobe wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:But why would it be piracy if they sell art, but not piracy if they keep it?

Its the same principle.

when you say keep it, you mean just paint some picture of Spees Mareens or something? Because if someone wrote a 40k book and sold it at borders, and didnt apply to use the liscense, so GW makes no money off of what was their intellectual property. As for writing a book and just reading it yourself, no clue, could ask my dad, he took some copyright classes in law school?

Nah man, the point I am making is, what is the difference between drawing a space marine, sculpting a space marine, and casting a space marine.

No selling involved, just for personal use. Wouldn't it all be piracy? Wouldn't it be piracy if I think of a space marine?

i dont really know for sure, ill ask my dad about that, im curious now, any lawyers in the forum that know copyright laws? I would say less likely if you are not selling the products though.

piracy if think of space marine? i dont think any company in the world has a copyright to stop someone from thinking about something, that was a little bit extreme.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
i need to go make an IG list because i dont really have one good for sieze and control missions...ill check back on this in like an hour!

When 3D printing becomes larger, whats to stop people just making their own games? their own minis? Companies like GW or PP would go have to up their game massively. The scope of 3d printing is astonishing. Anything you could possible imagine, turned into plastic, with little to no skill involved at all.

But saying that, artists who devoted their lives to their chosen medium will become obsolete with this. But people probably said the same thing about painting and cameras.

i think these 3D printers will have many companies that produce physical products running scared, and that thing about the cameras is probably true as well

dajobe wrote:i dont really know for sure, ill ask my dad about that, im curious now, any lawyers in the forum that know copyright laws? I would say less likely if you are not selling the products though.

piracy if think of space marine? i dont think any company in the world has a copyright to stop someone from thinking about something, that was a little bit extreme.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
i need to go make an IG list because i dont really have one good for sieze and control missions...ill check back on this in like an hour!

There is also the fact that it is rather hard for them to prove you were thinking of Space Marines.

Toastedandy wrote:When 3D printing becomes larger, whats to stop people just making their own games? their own minis? Companies like GW or PP would go have to up their game massively. The scope of 3d printing is astonishing. Anything you could possible imagine, turned into plastic, with little to no skill involved at all.

But saying that, artists who devoted their lives to their chosen medium will become obsolete with this. But people probably said the same thing about painting and cameras.

They definitley would need to up their game to compete with the general populace. if you think about it if roughtly 10% of thsi forum dedicated itself together to make a fun game system for all of us to play tahst roughly 4000 people working together to make somethign they wnat exactly hwo they want it. How many people does GW have working on tehir system? maybe 20 or 30? I think 3D printing in the future will make the tabletop genre MUCH better than it is now both in the fan-made market and will cause companies liek GW to up their game to provide with a truly superior product.

As far as piracy goes I look at it liek free advertising. You are NOT going to stop pirates. Ever. Short of a totalitarian regime that terrorizes the populace (which is lookign more liekly every day). If people DL your product for free and like it and they are upstanding citizens tehy will go out and buy it. On the other hand people liek canadian that believe everythign should be free will never buy your product no matter what so they shouldnt even be in the equation. I DL stuff for free and if I liek it I will go buy it.

Liek i said before, Netflix has caused a large decrease in the pirating of movies (and itunes of music, amazon ebooks of books, Steam for PC games) because corporation responded to what the customers wanted. We want to be able to access our content anywhere and everywhere. 5-10 years ago if I dled a movie for free its not because I didnt want to pay for it or rent it its because I didnt want to go to the stupid video store and get and and have to deal with their stupid rules. I didnt buy that many PC games before because most stores have crap selection anyway and now with steam I buy games all the time because I can get it whenever I want. The few games I have DLed for free are older games they havent put on steam that are hard to find but If they ever o put tehm on steam I will gladly buy them. I also buy more books now since I got a kindle cause its easy to find what I want and take it anywhere (plus I can put my pdf's of my rulebooks on it which is cool)

keisukekun wrote:

Toastedandy wrote:When 3D printing becomes larger, whats to stop people just making their own games? their own minis? Companies like GW or PP would go have to up their game massively. The scope of 3d printing is astonishing. Anything you could possible imagine, turned into plastic, with little to no skill involved at all.

But saying that, artists who devoted their lives to their chosen medium will become obsolete with this. But people probably said the same thing about painting and cameras.

They definitley would need to up their game to compete with the general populace. if you think about it if roughtly 10% of thsi forum dedicated itself together to make a fun game system for all of us to play tahst roughly 4000 people working together to make somethign they wnat exactly hwo they want it. How many people does GW have working on tehir system? maybe 20 or 30? I think 3D printing in the future will make the tabletop genre MUCH better than it is now both in the fan-made market and will cause companies liek GW to up their game to provide with a truly superior product.

As far as piracy goes I look at it liek free advertising. You are NOT going to stop pirates. Ever. Short of a totalitarian regime that terrorizes the populace (which is lookign more liekly every day). If people DL your product for free and like it and they are upstanding citizens tehy will go out and buy it. On the other hand people liek canadian that believe everythign should be free will never buy your product no matter what so they shouldnt even be in the equation. I DL stuff for free and if I liek it I will go buy it.

Liek i said before, Netflix has caused a large decrease in the pirating of movies (and itunes of music, amazon ebooks of books, Steam for PC games) because corporation responded to what the customers wanted. We want to be able to access our content anywhere and everywhere. 5-10 years ago if I dled a movie for free its not because I didnt want to pay for it or rent it its because I didnt want to go to the stupid video store and get and and have to deal with their stupid rules. I didnt buy that many PC games before because most stores have crap selection anyway and now with steam I buy games all the time because I can get it whenever I want. The few games I have DLed for free are older games they havent put on steam that are hard to find but If they ever o put tehm on steam I will gladly buy them. I also buy more books now since I got a kindle cause its easy to find what I want and take it anywhere (plus I can put my pdf's of my rulebooks on it which is cool)

Yeah I could very well see an open source gaming system. Where people constantly play out the rules, test the, balance them, someone uploads tons of free design files of 3D rendered models, then you print out your models, print out the rules, and essentially create your own gaming system.

I think GWs rules in 40K need an entire rework, but I think Fantasy is decently well rounded.

yeah, i agree, netflix is sweet

Crom wrote:Does anyone actually research anything before they post? I find so much misinformation dealing with technology more so than anything else. The fact is, 3D printers will totally change table top war gaming, but not the way you think. It will change the DIY "beer and pretzels" war gaming. You can already print out pretty decent looking models, and people upload the design files for free use. So it only costs you the printer + materials. Then people will start publishing their own rules.

Here is an example of what you can print right now, if you had a 3D printer. You don't need the top of the line model to do so either.




source: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2010/08/print-your-own-wargaming-minis.html

Lol, conversions would be so bitching when these become cheap too.

chaos0xomega wrote:No, it really wouldn't. GW goes under and the inflow of new players will decrease to virtually zero. A large chunk, near 100%, of the newer players at the time of GWs demise would cut their losses and jump ship immediately. All that will be left are the players who have been around for a couple years and the veterans. Within 2 years the couple year group will move on to games that are still being supported, as will the vets. The difference is that the vets will break the game out every once in a while at a convention for nostalgia purposes and the couple year group won't.

I have played several games over the years that have gone under, and this is the pattern that they have always followed. Don't let the seemingly large size of the GW hobby mislead you. If GW had a half way decent game system that was designed to last, this wouldn't be the case, but given its engineered obsolescence its not going to last, because it was never meant to last.

NO

If GW goes under then someone WILL buy 40k and very likely fantasy. Then they will support it and try not to screw up the same ways GW did.

AND HOLY CRAP THAT 3D PRINTER STUFF IS COOL!

Here's hoping that Section 7 or whatever that Privateer Press announced is actually a hostile takeover of GW.

Toastedandy wrote:When 3D printing becomes larger, whats to stop people just making their own games? their own minis? Companies like GW or PP would go have to up their game massively. The scope of 3d printing is astonishing. Anything you could possible imagine, turned into plastic, with little to no skill involved at all.

You're kidding right? Little to no skill at all? Its not that easy, thats why people who know how to do that kind of stuff get paid big bucks by Hollywood, video game publishers, etc.

In any case, I don't see what 3d printing has to do with people making their own games with their own minis. People do that now already. Just because PP is a company doesn't mean it was always that way, they had to start from somewhere about 8 years ago, right? 3d printing is never (at least not in the near future) going to replace the old methods of molding and casting, all what 3d printing will do is offer an alternative to conventional miniature sculpting using greenstuff/clay, etc. People with access to 3d printers are going to have the same issues that sculptors do now, in that they will still need to find someone to mass produce their stuff for them.

They definitley would need to up their game to compete with the general populace. if you think about it if roughtly 10% of thsi forum dedicated itself together to make a fun game system for all of us to play tahst roughly 4000 people working together to make somethign they wnat exactly hwo they want it. How many people does GW have working on tehir system? maybe 20 or 30? I think 3D printing in the future will make the tabletop genre MUCH better than it is now both in the fan-made market and will cause companies liek GW to up their game to provide with a truly superior product.

Personally, I'd rather play the game made by 20 to 30 people tops over the game made by over 4000 people. I'm thinking most people would agree, including yourself, you just don't realize it. Design by committee doesn't work. Its a wonderful concept, lets all band together and make a game exactly how we want it, and have fun with it. The problem is that each and every person wants something different, and nobody is going to make a compromise, because they were told that they could have it exactly how they wanted. If and when you do get the end result of your project, and it is exactly how each and every person wants it, then you end up with a steaming pile of gak that isn't worth anyones time. Kinda like the wargames factory greatcoat minis.

Yeah I could very well see an open source gaming system. Where people constantly play out the rules, test the, balance them, someone uploads tons of free design files of 3D rendered models, then you print out your models, print out the rules, and essentially create your own gaming system.

The chances of that occurring are again, slim to none. Very few people I know are willing to upload 3d design files for free. 3d models are as good as digital gold, only a small group of very selfless (or maybe its very naive) people are willing to do that.

NO

If GW goes under then someone WILL buy 40k and very likely fantasy. Then they will support it and try not to screw up the same ways GW did.

AND HOLY CRAP THAT 3D PRINTER STUFF IS COOL!

You assume that GW would allow the licenses for 40k and fantasy to be sold. That is likely, but not necessarily the case. Also, GW has done a pretty damn fine job, especially considering Hasbro/Wizkids have been trying for the license for years. If what you want is a 40k clix game, then more power to you. I prefer my wargames without prepainted minis and hex grids.

The open source market is a 500 million dollar a year industry. People could donate their designs for free, and if you look at any other design field (3D models, textures, photos, pixel art, web site themes, etc) there are always a plethora of free open source options. People do not code for free, yet you look at any open source solution (Perl, Python, PHP, Ruby, etc.) there are tons and tons of free open source code modules, libraries and APIs you can use for ZERO dollars.

Some people would donate their time as a hobby, some people would donate their time and charge a few dollars to buy their design, others will be free but you can donate if you want. I wouldn't write off there not being free designs at all. In fact I can see tons of design students doing them as class work projects then releasing them online or adding them to their portfolio. If you have a free design for a 3D printer that has been downloaded 100 million times, that looks very impressive on a resumé.

I contribute to open source code all the time and I don't make any money off of it, but I do sharpen my skills, broaden my skill set and network with all sorts of people from all other the world in doing so.

chaos0xomega wrote:You assume that GW would allow the licenses for 40k and fantasy to be sold. That is likely, but not necessarily the case. Also, GW has done a pretty damn fine job, especially considering Hasbro/Wizkids have been trying for the license for years. If what you want is a 40k clix game, then more power to you. I prefer my wargames without prepainted minis and hex grids.

Hex grids would remove a lot of sketchy measurement cheating (something they tried to squelch with pre-measuring in WFB), but fair enough. Pre-painted minis would mean we would actually get to face painted models instead of shambling hordes of partially assembled bare plastic/metal models.

I know exactly what you mean Crom, however, what works well with software does not necessarily work well with a rules system. Part of the frailty of the open source philosophy is that it's difficult to establish standards. In Debian, I have to leap through hoops to get rid of Iceweasel and install Firefox. CentOS has the tendency to install a different default package set when contrasted against the same version of RHEL. Slackware always seems to be about 2 versions behind everyone else. Sure you can execute workarounds/go out and get those packages/manually update everything, but at the end of the day, my objective is a usable computer, not making the computer usable.

And I say this running a custom rom on my Android phone, with Debian on my laptop, and spending all day, every day, supporting software running on RHEL.

You run into similar situations with gaming. How do you have tournaments? I can't go to Adepticon and play four team games that play cover the same way, and that's for an established game they've been playing for years. Consider when people begin making their own slightly different versions of games, and tweaking the versions others make. One of the nice things about 40k is that all the sizes and shapes of vehicles are standard. What happens when there's no standard model of a particular unit with which to base your construction from? All of a sudden we have 3"x2"x2" land raiders and guardsmen about a half inch tall. It just doesn't work.

Also, do you have any actual models of the renders you posted above? I'd be interested to see the actual pieces post-production.

I myself don't own any prints of those renders, but I have seen them in person before (a friend/acquaintance owns some). They don't look bad, but there is somewhat significant stairstepping (a result of the printing process) on some of the prints and significantly obscured details (partially as a result, but also because some of the details are so tiny the printers used by shapeways just doesn't have the 'resolution' to print them).

daedalus wrote:I know exactly what you mean Crom, however, what works well with software does not necessarily work well with a rules system. Part of the frailty of the open source philosophy is that it's difficult to establish standards. In Debian, I have to leap through hoops to get rid of Iceweasel and install Firefox. CentOS has the tendency to install a different default package set when contrasted against the same version of RHEL. Slackware always seems to be about 2 versions behind everyone else. Sure you can execute workarounds/go out and get those packages/manually update everything, but at the end of the day, my objective is a usable computer, not making the computer usable.

And I say this running a custom rom on my Android phone, with Debian on my laptop, and spending all day, every day, supporting software running on RHEL.

You run into similar situations with gaming. How do you have tournaments? I can't go to Adepticon and play four team games that play cover the same way, and that's for an established game they've been playing for years. Consider when people begin making their own slightly different versions of games, and tweaking the versions others make. One of the nice things about 40k is that all the sizes and shapes of vehicles are standard. What happens when there's no standard model of a particular unit with which to base your construction from? All of a sudden we have 3"x2"x2" land raiders and guardsmen about a half inch tall. It just doesn't work.

Also, do you have any actual models of the renders you posted above? I'd be interested to see the actual pieces post-production.

Yeah I know what you mean, I am a Systems Administrator by trade and since I am the only guy the knows Unix I get to admin all the Linux/Unix and OS X boxes at work. We have 15,000 Mac clients too, so I am very familiar with the Mac platform. Debian is really solid if you use your own package deployment tools to push out standardized updates amongst your servers. I know that with open source you often have to roll your own so to speak and get dirty and write your own shell/python/perl/ruby stuff and you are sort of going away from a standard that was set by third party but instead creating your own standards.

Open source gaming would be done in the same manner as say GPL licensing. One person would actually own the license, and distribute the official rules. Then people would have their own sets of house rules or modified rules but they would never be published under the "parent set." Then when a really good modified or new rule surfaces in the community it can be integrated into the official rules.

I have been working on a science fiction gaming system for a while now that I will publish online for free. I already wrote the disclaimer though that the rules may be freely distributed but changes made to the rules are not done so under any official capacity. Then just put md5 of SHA1 dumps with the files so you can verify you have the proper version. You can even have 3 sets of rules. 1) the official rule set, 2) rules in testing and 3) proposed rules and ideas.

Any official play would fall under the official rule set. Just because it is open to the community and free doesn't mean one or a few people cannot regulate it and make the official rules the game goes by.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:I myself don't own any prints of those renders, but I have seen them in person before (a friend/acquaintance owns some). They don't look bad, but there is somewhat significant stairstepping (a result of the printing process) on some of the prints and significantly obscured details (partially as a result, but also because some of the details are so tiny the printers used by shapeways just doesn't have the 'resolution' to print them).

I would assume if this 3D printer thing did take off, people would not print whole models, but rather parts and use them to build their own kits. That way you can have some of the detail, and they can be assembled dynamically. Wouldn't that be the case you think? I have very little actual experience with 3D printers other than my last job had one.

###EDIT

and no I do not have any of the actual design files. However I do have several good friends that work in architecture and drafting and they also do 3D work. I bet they could design some awesome stuff. If I ever get a 3D printer I would commission them to design some stuff and pay them in beer, and possibly a few bucks.

Those kits came in parts, it really doesn't change much in terms of printability.

chaos0xomega wrote:I myself don't own any prints of those renders, but I have seen them in person before (a friend/acquaintance owns some). They don't look bad, but there is somewhat significant stairstepping (a result of the printing process) on some of the prints and significantly obscured details (partially as a result, but also because some of the details are so tiny the printers used by shapeways just doesn't have the 'resolution' to print them).

Thanks. That's concurrent with most of the observations I've had up until this point with Shapeways and other similar services.

If you want high quality prints, you go to a service like Moddler. It costs tons more, but the prints are amazing.

Toastedandy wrote:I don't see it as stealing if I cast 5 meltaguns. Simple fact is, if I didn't recast them, I wouldn't of bought them. GW lose no business at all.

That's a fairly common 'justification' for it. The thing is, for all those who say that they wouldn't have bought it anyway, if they didn't have the option of getting it for free, a lot of them would have.

You can't definitively say you wouldn't have bought it anyway because you're not presenting yourself with 'buy it or not' as your two options. If you consider recasting a valid and acceptable way of getting what you want, you're instead presenting yourself with 'buy it, or get it cheaper' ... so of course you're going to say that you wouldn't buy it.

For everyone who says 'I would never pay 'x' amount for the new shiny', there's always a certain number of them who ultimately decide to do so after all...

insaniak wrote:
You can't definitively say you wouldn't have bought it anyway because you're not presenting yourself with 'buy it or not' as your two options.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440339a&prodId=prod1400031

They do sell meltaguns, in packs of 5. I'm still not going to buy them.

I suspect that you rather missed my point... The issue isn't whether or not GW sell them. It's whether or not you see another available way of obtaining them.

insaniak wrote:I suspect that you rather missed my point... The issue isn't whether or not GW sell them. It's whether or not you see another available way of obtaining them.

Errr.....what? I do see another way of obtaining them, casting them.


I think I still have no idea what your point is.

Are you trying to say I'm only choosing to cast them because its cheaper?

I haven't slept at all well.

Toastedandy wrote:Errr.....what? I do see another way of obtaining them, casting them.

That was the point, yes. Your claim that you wouldn't buy them anyway is skewed by the fact that you see another way of obtaining them without buying them. If you didn't have that alternative option, nearly 20 years of observing gamers in their natural habitat tells me that regardless of how much you protest about the prices, there's a good chance that you would wind up buying them anyway,

Whether someone casts a weapons or scratch builds one technically GW still lost money. If I am in a tourny and took my squad of 5 marines and wanted 5 melta's I could A. Buy them legit no problems. B Cast them for use in the tourney, GW loses money and I Risk getting caught. C. I can just put a barrel extension on a bolter and modify a bit to resemble a Melta. Technically I did not violate the copyright law but I still get to use Melta guns in the tourny which I didnt pay GW or anyone for so technically they are losing money.

Just throwing that out there

There is a fairly large difference between modifying something and reproducing something.

Not least because GW allows (and even encourages) conversions. Aside from the odd slip up, like that Black Gobbo GS-moulding article years ago, they tend to take a dimmer view of recasting.

Yeh I understand their is a big difference in their eyes but all else aside they are still "losing" money from it.

Yes and no. They may lose a little in that specific situation, but encouraging conversions has it's advantages, sales-wise, particularly when it leads to people buying multiple kits in order to kitbash stuff.

I would like to point out that I don't view ALL illegal downloading as morally reprehensible.

I view Canadian 5th's view of illegal downloading as morally reprehensible. The idea that you have a right to luxury goods, and you should take them if you can't afford them is what is reprehensible to me.

I can think of plenty situations when I would consider illegal downloading morally justified.

1) You bought a game/movie/music/book, but somehow said copy of it got lost/stolen. I would consider it morally (if not legally) justifiable to download a game in that sense.
2) The example listed earlier of a game that no longer worked on a later system due to anti-piracy software. This is the company's own fault, and you should not have to buy a game twice.
3) Downloading a game/movie/book as a sample, and then buying if you believe it's a good buy. While I view this as less justifiable than the others, I can see the point. You don't want to waste money on a crappy game, so you do the equivalent of borrowing it from a friend to try it out. If it's good, you buy it, if it's not you give it back to your friend.

I would of course recommend renting a copy as a sampling method, but I don't view it as completely reprehensible.

I hope this has illustrated my point better. I don't think piracy = evil because it's not legal; I think that certain mindsets behind piracy are morally reprehensible, but that there are some situations when I'd consider piracy 'alright' if not perfect.

ChrisWWII wrote:I would like to point out that I don't view ALL illegal downloading as morally reprehensible.

I view Canadian 5th's view of illegal downloading as morally reprehensible. The idea that you have a right to luxury goods, and you should take them if you can't afford them is what is reprehensible to me.

I can think of plenty situations when I would consider illegal downloading morally justified.

1) You bought a game/movie/music/book, but somehow said copy of it got lost/stolen. I would consider it morally (if not legally) justifiable to download a game in that sense.
2) The example listed earlier of a game that no longer worked on a later system due to anti-piracy software. This is the company's own fault, and you should not have to buy a game twice.
3) Downloading a game/movie/book as a sample, and then buying if you believe it's a good buy. While I view this as less justifiable than the others, I can see the point. You don't want to waste money on a crappy game, so you do the equivalent of borrowing it from a friend to try it out. If it's good, you buy it, if it's not you give it back to your friend.

I would of course recommend renting a copy as a sampling method, but I don't view it as completely reprehensible.

I hope this has illustrated my point better. I don't think piracy = evil because it's not legal; I think that certain mindsets behind piracy are morally reprehensible, but that there are some situations when I'd consider piracy 'alright' if not perfect.

You could also see if there is a free demo of the game to try it out, as many games have these if you look for them.
I feel similar to you about semi-justifiable examples of piracy, as I have had similar happen to me as the first. I had lost my CD key code printed on a piece of paper for my copy of SimCity 3000 Unlimited, and I got a new computer so I had to re-install it but could not without the key.
I feel that Canadian 5th's opinion that he has a right to entertainment for free and that he is somehow superior because he steals is very immoral.

The problem with the whole arguement of justifing pirating for demo purposes makes no sense.

1. Most games have free demos available with a little looking, also you could always rent games from gamefly or such to try them out.
2. You can sample music by using any of the free internet radio sites
3. You can watch previews and bits of movies on many sites ike youtube and such.
4. Books you can just go to any bookstore and read a chapter or two, or go to a library where they don't charge you for checking out any book. Many books will also have sample chapters available on-line.
So really any need for sample or demo purposes can be found legally online with just a little searching.
Piracy is piracy no matter how you try and pretty it up.

Canadian 5th wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

Really? I understand a few thing maybe but surely there are some things you think are worth supporting buy buying them...

purplefood wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

Really? I understand a few thing maybe but surely there are some things you think are worth supporting buy buying them...

He has already stated that he feels entitled to free entertainment and only cares about himself.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:The problem with the whole arguement of justifing pirating for demo purposes makes no sense.

*snip*

I agree with you that piracy is piracy, but I feel that there are justifiable reasons for piracy.

While the demo reason is the LEAST justifiable reason I listed given how many other ways there are to access said demos, I still see it as a semi-justifiable reason, espescially if the person then buys the game/book/whatever.

I dunno maybe i am a little up tight about it all having been raised by a cop but Im pretty much of the stand point that the law is the law and you can't change that. What is illegal is illegal for everyone regardless of the reasons. Even with the most nobal of intentions if you commit a crime you still commited a crime and should accept the penalty for it.

General Seric wrote:

purplefood wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

Really? I understand a few thing maybe but surely there are some things you think are worth supporting buy buying them...

He has already stated that he feels entitled to free entertainment and only cares about himself.

You know i very rarely feel like i have a moral highground but right now i totally do...
Incidentally http://xkcd.com/924/

purplefood wrote:

General Seric wrote:

purplefood wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:So let's go ahead and support re-casting and violating copyrites. there is a great idea.

I already do support it. I haven't payed for movies, most PC games, cable, or PPV sporting events in years. If I could recast things on the cheap I would do so and if I had a hand scanner a few books I own would be easier to torrent by now.

Really? I understand a few thing maybe but surely there are some things you think are worth supporting buy buying them...

He has already stated that he feels entitled to free entertainment and only cares about himself.

You know i very rarely feel like i have a moral highground but right now i totally do...
Incidentally http://xkcd.com/924/

LOL thats hilarious

Commisar Wolfie wrote:The problem with the whole arguement of justifing pirating for demo purposes makes no sense.

1. Most games have free demos available with a little looking, also you could always rent games from gamefly or such to try them out.
2. You can sample music by using any of the free internet radio sites
3. You can watch previews and bits of movies on many sites ike youtube and such.
4. Books you can just go to any bookstore and read a chapter or two, or go to a library where they don't charge you for checking out any book. Many books will also have sample chapters available on-line.
So really any need for sample or demo purposes can be found legally online with just a little searching.

1. Not enough of them, sadly. The way of shareware has kind of gone out the window, and you can't rent computer games. There's still a few game developers who do this, but I doubt you're going to find demos for Bethesda, EA, or Blizzard games. Also, this doesn't cover the "I paid money for a product inferior to the free version of it" scenario I presented earlier. Also, "activation codes" kill First Sale Doctrine, hampering the used game market and further eroding consumer rights.

2. Sampling music is valid, but my rationalization for pirating music is more out of 'corporate disobedience' and less in the interest of actually sampling music. I have a paid Pandora account. It's how I find out about indie bands that I want to buy the music of. I just actively WANT the labels to fail.

3. Indeed, however, I have a hard time wanting to support an industry that forces HDCP on it's customers. This is one of the reasons I won't buy a blu-ray player. Seriously, read about it.

4. Until they find a way to kill First Sale Doctrine, I agree with you here.

Piracy is piracy no matter how you try and pretty it up.

Who's prettying things up? The things I'm talking about are quite horrible, really. I WANT for there to be no reason to pirate things, but if that's what it takes to acquire a product that's not defective by design, why not?

1.I'd argue that there are often demos (for pc) , available via steam and other clients.

and services like onlive you can actually watch somebody play the game via arena (for free), or spend a few bucks to try the game for a few hours in the full vertion.

2. i mostly just listen to pandora on my free account. i listen to the ads and they get thier money that way. but it still isn't pirating

3. movies and blueray... meh netflix is pretty cheap if you want that option. presonally i just mostly watch what is on tv if it wasn't for my roomate having net flix and watchign it on my ps3 I'd probably not have it.

4. books unless they are hardback are cheap, digital copies even more so. I'll buy books after reading a chapter or two if it is good

I agree with wolfe, also think that the "im entitled to luxury goods, and i can take what i want" thing is wrong. There are very few things in this world that people are entitled to on this earth, primarily being life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. You have to EARN things, taking things illegally hurts other peoples pursuit of their goals and is unfair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In economics we learned about stealing...its not good for the economy. Nothing is gained overall, you gain X dollars worth, the other person loses X dollars worth of whatever is stolen, leading to 0 net gain. Whereas in a sale, the company gains the x dollars of profit and you gain the x dollars worth of the enjoyment above the cost that the product brought to you.

daedalus wrote:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:The problem with the whole arguement of justifing pirating for demo purposes makes no sense.

1. Most games have free demos available with a little looking, also you could always rent games from gamefly or such to try them out.
2. You can sample music by using any of the free internet radio sites
3. You can watch previews and bits of movies on many sites ike youtube and such.
4. Books you can just go to any bookstore and read a chapter or two, or go to a library where they don't charge you for checking out any book. Many books will also have sample chapters available on-line.
So really any need for sample or demo purposes can be found legally online with just a little searching.

1. Not enough of them, sadly. The way of shareware has kind of gone out the window, and you can't rent computer games. There's still a few game developers who do this, but I doubt you're going to find demos for Bethesda, EA, or Blizzard games. Also, this doesn't cover the "I paid money for a product inferior to the free version of it" scenario I presented earlier. Also, "activation codes" kill First Sale Doctrine, hampering the used game market and further eroding consumer rights.

2. Sampling music is valid, but my rationalization for pirating music is more out of 'corporate disobedience' and less in the interest of actually sampling music. I have a paid Pandora account. It's how I find out about indie bands that I want to buy the music of. I just actively WANT the labels to fail.

3. Indeed, however, I have a hard time wanting to support an industry that forces HDCP on it's customers. This is one of the reasons I won't buy a blu-ray player. Seriously, read about it.

4. Until they find a way to kill First Sale Doctrine, I agree with you here.

Piracy is piracy no matter how you try and pretty it up.

Who's prettying things up? The things I'm talking about are quite horrible, really. I WANT for there to be no reason to pirate things, but if that's what it takes to acquire a product that's not defective by design, why not?

I agree with some points here, but would like to add my 2 cents...

On game Demos-
1) They are hardly a representation of the game, usually filled with fluff
2) Many components are missing, like multiplayer, full level design, full test of AI, etc
3) Demos are often times beta versions, some things don't make it into the game
4) Demos are not always available
5) You cannot return PC software usually for a refund, at best store credit

Music:
1) I have tons of records, CDs, and purchased digital songs. it is not like I don't buy them
2) I always buy from Independent record labels direct
3) If signed to a major label and I don't like the band all that much I'll download the few songs I do like, perhaps see them live
4) Musicians make more money off of touring than they do record sales, and that money goes to them. I will pay to see them live, buy a shirt, perhaps a CD/Record at the show
5) Over the years I have had several out of print CDs stolen from my car, work desk, home, etc. I cannot buy them, the only way to get them is to pirate them online. Many rare records are only available via downloading them illegally

Software:
1) Pirate Microsoft and Adobe all you want, I really dislike both companies. They lack competition, their developers are lazy, they don't follow any standards (well MS does, but Adobe sure as hell doesn't), and they will never change until they have to if decent competition shows up
2) Pay for your OS. I have one Windows machine at home, and I paid for the OS. My work gives me tons of Macs for free since I am a Unix/OS X admin by trade, and all my other PCs run Linux, because I refuse to pay for an OS to stream media to my HDTV. However, I also refuse to pirate an OS. I think everyone should buy their OS
3) If you pirate software to learn it, that is OK in my book. Since I am a System Administrator I often at times have had to support Autodesk, Final Cut, Adobe, and so forth. I am not a professional designer, I am not a video editor and I definitely don't do any CAD work. However, I do need to understand the basics of these apps to deploy them and support them to my users. If we are looking at testing something out and the developers don't offer us a free trial version (full blown trial, not limited version trial) I will pirate it because I am not going to pay $1000s of dollars to play with software I just need to learn the basics on and never use.
4) If your software is so heavy in DRM that you legally purchased it makes it a pain in the ass to use, download the cracked version and shelf your legit version. No one will ever sue you if you legally paid form something and you have the pirated version. I can think of several times in the past when we purchased a software product that required really stupid license activations (or you had to build your own in-house license server) and even though you paid a crap ton for the software you really couldn't use it, unless you spent more money building a license server. So, you download the crack that disables the license.

Now, I want to state that I do feel pirating in general is morally wrong, but I also do feel that there is a lot of gray area. In the age of technology the whole free market place doesn't mean we are getting the best products because of the free market. In fact it is quite opposite. With super large software companies like Autodesk, Microsoft, Symantec, and tech companies like Google, Apple, IBM, etc, they often buy up the competition before it can affect the market. So your free market doesn't mean anything. Some years ago we were looking at a wireless solution at work and my boss called in sales reps and contractors from every major networking hardware company. I cannot recall this companies name but they had the best performance by far, and when we tried to purchase their product 5 months later, Cisco had bought them out and shelved their product. So we weren't even given a choice. Also the most successful technology companies do not create the best products, they just did business smarter and were able to buy out the competition before it became competition.

So, when companies make a bad product and there is no alternative the consumer/enterprise really doesn't have a choice. Maybe it is the teenage punk rock against all authority personality in me from back in the day when I was a kid, but I feel that pirating some products sticks it to the man. However, I fully support the products I use and their companies. However, with GW stuff I usually buy used and I get killer deals on ebay. Never been burned yet and I always save 20 to sometimes 50% off of retail cost. I am not supporting GW first hand because they aren't getting my money but at the same time I am not pirating their products.

so, here is the tl;dr list
1) Pirating is OK if it is movies and music you don't like that much and would not really buy anyway, plus it opens you up to many new artists
2) Pirating software is bad, but not the worst thing in the world - buy your products, write developers when they suck, if you are too poor and need to learn it for a job, pirate it
3) Always support what you love, buy their products and support their industry. So, if your favorite band has a new album buy it

2. Sampling music is valid, but my rationalization for pirating music is more out of 'corporate disobedience' and less in the interest of actually sampling music. I have a paid Pandora account. It's how I find out about indie bands that I want to buy the music of. I just actively WANT the labels to fail.

Amen, gaks gotten so bloated in the music industry any job blow that gets selected by one doesn't have to be THAT good to make more money than god when the rest of us bust our hump and have to pray to make the bills by due date. Of course after that all the usual tenants of capitalism apply, although in the music industry, often without the benefits.

3) If you pirate software to learn it, that is OK in my book. Since I am a System Administrator I often at times have had to support Autodesk, Final Cut, Adobe, and so forth. I am not a professional designer, I am not a video editor and I definitely don't do any CAD work. However, I do need to understand the basics of these apps to deploy them and support them to my users. If we are looking at testing something out and the developers don't offer us a free trial version (full blown trial, not limited version trial) I will pirate it because I am not going to pay $1000s of dollars to play with software I just need to learn the basics on and never use.

if I could find a pirated copy of autocad I'd use it. $3k is criminal and it's a program i need and don't have access to otherwise. so feth them for trying to extort it out of me i'll get it for free if i can.

autocad through a learning institute is $90 bucks, i bought it in 2010 from a friend in school, he used his school id and BAM cheap autocad, if you have any firends in college get it that way. full disks and all, adobe does the same thing, you can get full photoshop/ premiere for cheap through universities and community colleges

G00fySmiley wrote:autocad through a learning institute is $90 bucks, i bought it in 2010 from a friend in school, he used his school id and BAM cheap autocad, if you have any firends in college get it that way. full disks and all, adobe does the same thing, you can get full photoshop/ premiere for cheap through universities and community colleges

This actually highly depends on the school's license agreement with said software company. They pay for that ability to sell it that cheap and not all schools offer it. I work in IT in academia actually and I know first hand how it works. We don't pay Microsoft for a very hefty site license and MSDN account therefore the school system I work for does not allow employees to buy (or students for that matter) cheap copies of Windows. Where as some school systems allow students buy any MS product for $15.

When server 2008 came out I downloaded it, cracked it, loaded it into a VM, and played with the updated active directory stuff, then once I saw the changes I promptly deleted it. I am not going to pay $1,000 for the cheapest license to learn a product I may or may not have to support at my work. My work isn't about to drop $1,000 to just test it either.

as for photoshop and autoCAD there are actually alternatives to these applications but of course Autodesk and Adobe are pretty much industry standards.

G00fySmiley wrote:autocad through a learning institute is $90 bucks, i bought it in 2010 from a friend in school, he used his school id and BAM cheap autocad, if you have any firends in college get it that way. full disks and all, adobe does the same thing, you can get full photoshop/ premiere for cheap through universities and community colleges

The licenses are different. Developing for commercial gain on those licenses is criminal more often than not. Also, owning a license from an educational institution when you are not part of the same institution is not entirely legal, either.

dajobe wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
In economics we learned about stealing...its not good for the economy. Nothing is gained overall, you gain X dollars worth, the other person loses X dollars worth of whatever is stolen, leading to 0 net gain. Whereas in a sale, the company gains the x dollars of profit and you gain the x dollars worth of the enjoyment above the cost that the product brought to you.

That's actually not entirely true when it comes to intellectual property. "Stealing" intellectual property (note that you can't legally steal intellectual property) the thief gains the equivalent of X dollars of entertainment while the company loses nothing at all. In fact, secondhand sales over e-bay and what have you is exactly analogous to someone infringing for personal use, at least as far as the company who owns the rights to the intellectual property is concerned.

Distributing intellectual property or items manufactured from intellectual property that is not your own is an entirely different matter.

Mahtamori wrote:

G00fySmiley wrote:autocad through a learning institute is $90 bucks, i bought it in 2010 from a friend in school, he used his school id and BAM cheap autocad, if you have any firends in college get it that way. full disks and all, adobe does the same thing, you can get full photoshop/ premiere for cheap through universities and community colleges

The licenses are different. Developing for commercial gain on those licenses is criminal more often than not. Also, owning a license from an educational institution when you are not part of the same institution is not entirely legal, either.

he installed it on his hard drive... i bought his hard drive which he didn't wipe i also did this with windows technically i bought the parts made a computer for him and he sold it back to me with windows for a buck. it gets transfered to the new owner but you're right i can't use it commercially legally

coolyo294 wrote:Pointless thread is pointless.

agreed

Mahtamori wrote:

G00fySmiley wrote:autocad through a learning institute is $90 bucks, i bought it in 2010 from a friend in school, he used his school id and BAM cheap autocad, if you have any firends in college get it that way. full disks and all, adobe does the same thing, you can get full photoshop/ premiere for cheap through universities and community colleges

The licenses are different. Developing for commercial gain on those licenses is criminal more often than not. Also, owning a license from an educational institution when you are not part of the same institution is not entirely legal, either.

dajobe wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
In economics we learned about stealing...its not good for the economy. Nothing is gained overall, you gain X dollars worth, the other person loses X dollars worth of whatever is stolen, leading to 0 net gain. Whereas in a sale, the company gains the x dollars of profit and you gain the x dollars worth of the enjoyment above the cost that the product brought to you.

That's actually not entirely true when it comes to intellectual property. "Stealing" intellectual property (note that you can't legally steal intellectual property) the thief gains the equivalent of X dollars of entertainment while the company loses nothing at all. In fact, secondhand sales over e-bay and what have you is exactly analogous to someone infringing for personal use, at least as far as the company who owns the rights to the intellectual property is concerned.

Distributing intellectual property or items manufactured from intellectual property that is not your own is an entirely different matter.

k, i was just talking about regular property, i dont know the economics of intellectual property theft, so ill believe you

Technically when you buy a piece of software or a digital media file you actually aren't purchasing a file or a game. You are leasing a license, yes that is right, lease. You technically do not own it, and you must agree to the EULA to use it. Now EULAs have not really ever held up in court, and you can buy and sell video games second hand, which the developers and publishers don't see a single cent for. that is why EA is trying to put DRM on their games so if you buy it used you must activate it online for a minimal fee to unlock the game's full content.

When you buy things used you aren't benefiting any record label, consumer product company, technology company and when you guy GW stuff used they don't see any money at all for it. I buy over 50% of my GW stuff used these days because I can get it for up to half price. So, I guess technically I am not supporting their company since I rarely buy new boxed sets. When I do buy new boxed sets I do it on ebay a lot. Hell, I bought a 3,000 point Ogre army online used for about $300, which would have cost me about $600-700 retail from GW.

Crom - technically that is not true, not in the UK at least. UK UCTA makes EULAs unenforceable, as they are not actual contracts and are by their nature unfair (there is no meeting of minds and no consideration)

This holds true for boxed items anyway - not digital downloads.

It is true but it doesn't hold up in court really at all. Admittedly I am not all that familiar with the EU regulations in Europe though. I just know there have been cases in the US where the EULA didn't hold any water in court. Like if someone rips their retail music CD they purchased to their iPod they are technically breaching EULA since you are not allowed to transfer medias with out consent or repurchase, but no judge would ever sentence a fine on anyone who actually purchased the CD. Same thing goes with recording TV with your VHS.

as for photoshop and autoCAD there are actually alternatives to these applications but of course Autodesk and Adobe are pretty much industry standards.as for photoshop and autoCAD there are actually alternatives to these applications but of course Autodesk and Adobe are pretty much industry standards.

They are industry standards for a reason. The one I currently use isn't quite as good, but it works, and it's freeware. So I still can't see paying the 3k for it when theres something ALMOST as good for FREE

gendoikari87 wrote:

as for photoshop and autoCAD there are actually alternatives to these applications but of course Autodesk and Adobe are pretty much industry standards.as for photoshop and autoCAD there are actually alternatives to these applications but of course Autodesk and Adobe are pretty much industry standards.

They are industry standards for a reason. The one I currently use isn't quite as good, but it works, and it's freeware. So I still can't see paying the 3k for it when theres something ALMOST as good for FREE

Yes but in my world (IT - sys admin) we loathe autodesk and adobe products. We loathe them because they are a super huge pain in the ass to support, maintain, deploy, etc. I am sure they are awesome to the actual end user. I really wish there was a better competing product out there that didn't make using their product in a professional nightmare a total pain in the ass. Then again if it was really simple maybe there wouldn't be a need for IT people then....oh well.

well for basic autocad it's not that hard, it's MS paint with a command line. which is all I really need.

Crom wrote:It is true but it doesn't hold up in court really at all. Admittedly I am not all that familiar with the EU regulations in Europe though. I just know there have been cases in the US where the EULA didn't hold any water in court. Like if someone rips their retail music CD they purchased to their iPod they are technically breaching EULA since you are not allowed to transfer medias with out consent or repurchase, but no judge would ever sentence a fine on anyone who actually purchased the CD. Same thing goes with recording TV with your VHS.

No, in the UK it isnt true; a retail purchase with a shrink-wrap EULA makes the shrink wrap EULA unenforceable; it fulfils the Unfair Contract Terms Acts definition of an unfair contract in its entirety

The two cases above are fair use protected in the US. Something the UK has no concept of...yet. Sony vs Betamax is the tv on VHS court case, showing time shifting was legal. Which is why its a joke tyhat Sony is the only corporation to ever sue itself (Betamax was sony)

nosferatu1001 wrote: Sony vs Betamax is the tv on VHS court case, showing time shifting was legal. Which is why its a joke tyhat Sony is the only corporation to ever sue itself (Betamax was sony)

I think you've got that story confused. The court case was Sony against Universal... and it was Universal suing Sony for encouraging copyright infringement by selling videotapes.

Sony has sued a company that they owned a stake in, but that was over music downloads, not videotapes.

smeugal fan wrote:

coolyo294 wrote:Pointless thread is pointless.

agreed

Not pointless.....Just really offtopic