so, Panic posted something in a different thread that I thought might make for an interesting discussion; but would be OT in the one it was posted in. So, forking over to here:

Panic wrote:It also removes the need for third party ripoffs of things like Tervigons and Tomb blades. IMO these parasite companies are tarnishing the hobby, so I'm glad GW are taking steps to take the wind from their sails.

Panic...

I've seen other users post similar sentiments previously. So, what do you guys think - Stormraven extensions, Razorback tops, Carnifex-to-Tervigon kits - are the makers of these kits parasites, feeding off of GWS's successes?

Aye was following that discussion myself. I'd say no, as it says there its healthy competition, and choice of modeling. We dont JUST use GW products for GW games, same with any hobby with models and someone you know hosts a homebrew game of something (Cowboys Dinosaurs, Warbands, things like that). Plus even with the regular GW games, it helps if you dont like a certain model but you're not confident converting right off the bat. Dont like that tank turret? Use an alternative. Dont like this model range? use something else. As was said its not like GW is the only hobby company dealing with sci-fi and fantasy, and in business like this there is no such thing as plagerism, just careful hiding of sources and borrowing.

Of course they're parasites. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy their products.

While I may not like every third party kit or bit out there, I love that they exist. Customers in this hobby never suffer from having too many choices(except maybe that we don't always have money for every model we want).

Fantasy parts from third parties are a bit rarer, which is unfortunate.
But look at Chapterhouse. Stormraven kit? To me it is mandatory for the model as it completely improves the design and scale. I also love their Rhino chassis parts like the alternate front armor panels and armor kits. And now they are doing true scale pieces for those who are so inclined.

They are filling a gap in the market. There will never be too many choices when it comes to customizing an army.

For the record, I also consider Forgeworld a third party as they sell(for the most part) pieces that are meant to work alongside a specific plastic kit. Some FW models are stand alones. But I look at them and see that they are filling gaps in the market, and in some cases(DkoK and what not) they are creating new markets without stepping on the toes of the parent company.

We as consumers only benefit from a competitive market where the rule of cool reigns supreme.

Now if only Warhammer Forge released new models faster...

A parasite may feed off a host, but that host still needs to eat to sustain the parasite. GW makes money for every Storm Raven kit that CHS sells.

God damn Toyota, Nissan and Ferrari for parasitically leeching from Ford...

Consider some of the Forge World pieces, I know they're "offical" but they're still just add-on bits and extras. None of them are essential, they're alternatives.

I don't think these companies are parasites at all, they cater to the same market, whilst still standing slightly apart. They're add-on bits. GW is still getting their money from the kits they can be used with, some people just like their models to stand out, yet don't have the skill/time/patience to sculpt details on every shoulder pad, make the Storm Raven look less like a brick or make a Carnifex into a Tervigon. That's why these companies exist.

To use an example of my own Guard - I have backpacks and brass-etch from Secret Weapon, heads from West Wind, tank stowage from Tamiya and other companies, Forge World vehicles, weapons and brass-etch. Quite a mix, but I use the humble plastic Cadian as a base, bought from GW. I don't "need" any of those other bits, I could have a perfectly serviceable Guard army using the Cadians with no add-ons at all. But I want them to look different, and so I splashed out to all these other companies, got extra bits and made them "mine"

Parasitism is a valid survival strategy in a capitalist marketplace. And really, GW doesn't deserve our money or adoration by some divine mandate, they need to earn it. If someone making shoulder pads and !marines is what it takes, then by jingo, that's what needs to happen.

Well then, maybe the question should be have a codicil. If they are parasites, is this an undesirable thing?

Ouze wrote:so, Panic posted something in a different thread that I thought might make for an interesting discussion; but would be OT in the one it was posted in. So, forking over to here:

Panic wrote:It also removes the need for third party ripoffs of things like Tervigons and Tomb blades. IMO these parasite companies are tarnishing the hobby, so I'm glad GW are taking steps to take the wind from their sails.

Panic...

I've seen other users post similar sentiments previously. So, what do you guys think - Stormraven extensions, Razorback tops, Carnifex-to-Tervigon kits - are the makers of these kits parasites, feeding off of GWS's successes?

They aren't parasites, at most they are symbiotic organisms.

Sure they need GW to survive, but since their kits are "upgrades", they actually help GW sell more of their own products as well.

Charax wrote:God damn Toyota, Nissan and Ferrari for parasitically leeching from Ford...

Indeed.

How dare someone not use the official Toyota Genuine Parts when replacing their wiper blades.. the nerve of some people!

GW needs to learn to embrace the aftermarket parts and kits schtick. Model kit companies don't thrown a hissy bitch fit over other companies producing etched brass upgrades or resin replacement parts, some of them even encourage it.

FW is trying to fill this niche for GW, it wouldn't be such a big if their casts weren't so miss and hit all the time for the prices they're asking.

1.) Are we humans parasiting the success, sunlight using and oxygen producing plants have?
2.) Are second market products per se immoral?
3.) Is a higher diversity of products bad for gamers?
4.) Does GW have the copyright on anything mankind ever imagined?

Charax wrote:God damn Toyota, Nissan and Ferrari for parasitically leeching from Ford...

Actually, Henry Ford was parasiting Gottlieb Daimler

Strictly speaking, yes.
If GW didn't make the kits there would be nothing for them to make bits for.

Not necessarily a bad thing though.

PhantomViper wrote:They aren't parasites, at most they are symbiotic organisms.

You're stretching the definition of symbotic a bit, PhantomViper.

Yes. But there's nothing wrong with that.

In the most extreme technical sense, yes they are parasites. They need the host to make their products, but the host does not need them. It's not symbiosis.

Unfortunately, when someone calls Kromlech or Puppets War or ChapterHouse a parasite they don't do it to describe the methods they've they've chosen to do business. No, they do it as a form of pejorative with a heavy 'moral' bent to it. They're not a parasite because of their business model, they're a parasite because they're evil/wrong/thieves/etc..

Nope no problem here with 3rd party makers. Just never seem to find bitz/parts that I want to order ... and those I do I rarely have the money to ever afford them at the time.

Mainly shoulderpads ... I would love 10 of 1 design ... not 10 of 5 or 6 random designs.

I don't see how they could be considered parasites. These addon kits don't detract from GW profits, but could be considered to even encourage them. Since a parasite by definition "feeds" off it's host entity, they aren't parasites. Symbiotic, maybe.

H.B.M.C. wrote:In the most extreme technical sense, yes they are parasites. They need the host to make their products, but the host does not need them. It's not symbiosis.

Unfortunately, when someone calls Kromlech or Puppets War or ChapterHouse a parasite they don't do it to describe the methods they've they've chosen to do business. No, they do it as a form of pejorative with a heavy 'moral' bent to it. They're not a parasite because of their business model, they're a parasite because they're evil/wrong/thieves/etc..

I agree. With this statement

In fact I think a better term for this relationship is Commensalism (from biology)

Commensalism benefits one organism and the other organism is neither benefited nor harmed. It occurs when one organism takes benefits by interacting with another organism by which the host organism is not affected. A good example is a remora living with a shark. Remoras eat leftover food from the shark. The shark is not affected in the process as remoras eat only leftover food of the shark which doesn't deplete the shark's resources.

Bitz seller wise, they are benefiting from GW while in the grand scheme of things GW is not harmed nor better off

H.B.M.C. wrote:In the most extreme technical sense, yes they are parasites. They need the host to make their products, but the host does not need them. It's not symbiosis.

Is that always the case though? For example, someone might want to make a 'Pre-heresy' army, and need bits from a 3rd party supplier (for example, the Cataphract terminator shoulder pads from Maxmini). But to use those pieces it is essential to buy the official GW terminator set. What if the person would not want to buy any of it if the 3rd party component did not exist?

Similarly, several people have commented that they only bought the Storm Raven because of the Chapter House kit.

I had a project planned for some true-scale marines, but it has been put on hold because WarSmith miniatures was given a C&D order. So now, those tactical marines I would have had to buy to make the conversion will remain on the shelf.

I would argue that the 'host organism' (in this case GW) benefits from this relationship. Admittedly it will only be in a very small percentage of cases in the grand scheme of total sales, but I think the fact that most 3rd party bits producers design kits to work alongside a GW product, rather than as something standalone which directly competes with GWs product, makes it more symbiotic than parasitical.

Panic wrote:
It also removes the need for third party ripoffs of things like Tervigons and Tomb blades. IMO these parasite companies are tarnishing the hobby, so I'm glad GW are taking steps to take the wind from their sails.

I really, really can't understand this viewpoint. If anything, those Chapterhouse kits for the unreleased tyranids (again, which required a GW kit) prompted more people to start that army than might have done otherwise. Especially for those players who didn't want to convert their own, not knowing whether or not an official model was coming for one of the most evocative options in the army list might have been a major turn-off.

GW's legal team is trying to crush those companies because of copyright considerations, nothing more, or more accurately for that legal team to justify its existence and the costs it must incur.

I wouldn't say they are parasites. They don't really take anything away from a host. More like Barnacles. They just pop up because there is somewhere for them to live.

I think shows GW's success at creating a 'GW first, GW only' mindset in the people who play their games when 3rd party manufacturers can be 'parasites' and that their downfall can only be a good thing for the 'Hobby.' *hocchhh ptooey*

Pacific wrote:Similarly, several people have commented that they only bought the Storm Raven because of the Chapter House kit.

This means little when calling Chapterhouse the parasite due to the fact that conversion kit wouldn't have existed without the GW model. Since it's a conversion kit.

My only real issue is when they use the GW names, like chapterhouse did with the Tervigon, and planned to do with the Doom of Malantai. Call it an alien baby factory, call it a floating alien super brain. Call it a Tervigon conversion kit or a Doom of Malantai, and you're banking on it sounding like the official product and being misleading.

Talarn Blackshard wrote:Mainly shoulderpads ... I would love 10 of 1 design ... not 10 of 5 or 6 random designs.

This is, frankly, my biggest complaint with Games Workshop. It's nice that you get lots of options, but to give you lots of options they mix up the unit significantly.

I've been putting together a unit of Chaos Knights recently. I know they're Chaos, but why can't I have 5 similar shields to indicate a unit? Or why not 5 axes, swords, or maces? Why do I have to use 2 axes and 3 swords if I want bladed weapons? And if I want to have all of my horses to have the same style of barding I need to buy 5 boxes...and have 5 identically posed horses.

To the OP: No, the bits companies aren't parasites. They provide a valuable service separate from Games Workshop's products. They don't provide products at Games Workshop's expense, they provide products that enhance the value of Games Workshop's products.

Recasting companies are parasites because a sale from the recaster is a lost sale to GW.

I call it symbiotic as well.. take the carnifex to tervigon kit... people wanted tervigons... gw did NOT make a tervigon kit when the codex came in, so the bitz makers make a kit to convert one into the other... still requires a gw kit, so it is symbiotic in that they wouldn't have sold as many carnifex kits if the bit makers hadn't made the kit.

also look at warlock councel on jet bikes... only way to get them for my eldar was get some gw bikes and then get the bitz kits to convert ... i could i supposed try and snip bitz off a warlock but then the bike would look the same.

bit makers enhance models as long as they are making accessories and not actual models... though admitadly i'd love to buy full models from 3rd parties over gw if they were cheaper

Ouze wrote:so, Panic posted something in a different thread that I thought might make for an interesting discussion; but would be OT in the one it was posted in. So, forking over to here:

Panic wrote:It also removes the need for third party ripoffs of things like Tervigons and Tomb blades. IMO these parasite companies are tarnishing the hobby, so I'm glad GW are taking steps to take the wind from their sails.

Panic...

I've seen other users post similar sentiments previously. So, what do you guys think - Stormraven extensions, Razorback tops, Carnifex-to-Tervigon kits - are the makers of these kits parasites, feeding off of GWS's successes?

Thats nonsense. non EOM aftermarket products are a staple for other industries. Two specifically which are blow GW out of the water (oine literally) in terms of cost to play in are automobiles and firearms.

Automobiles are rife with aftermarket kits for performance enhancements, different seats and materials, and audio upgrades. Indeed. It wasn't until the mid 1980s that I ever saw a car that actually had the original own radio in it. On our Volvo 1800ES I had competition Weber carburetors, racing tires/wheels, and a badass Sony HIFI and speakers. I miss that car.
Bikes are the same. Frazzled Sr. one of the original road racers, drilled holes in the frame of his bike to lose weight on it and had mom sew special scuff pads on his trousers (they were just inventing the lean into it method of turning).

The US civilian pistol market is awash in aftermarket crap. There is an entire cottage industry for aftermarket parts and entire 1911 lines with the thought that you will acquire a base 1911 (.45 ACP for you girly men) frame and basically build it up from there with competition hammer, trigger, assembly, special super heavy competition guiderod, throated and polished (sperate process) competition barrel, competition grips, aftermarket springs tailored to your pistol/trigger pull/weight of the bullet you're throwing, competition sights of your personal flavor, maybe even work on the slide itself or some sort of specialized coating. Don't even get me started on handloading your own cartridges...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:In the most extreme technical sense, yes they are parasites. They need the host to make their products, but the host does not need them. It's not symbiosis.

Unfortunately, when someone calls Kromlech or Puppets War or ChapterHouse a parasite they don't do it to describe the methods they've they've chosen to do business. No, they do it as a form of pejorative with a heavy 'moral' bent to it. They're not a parasite because of their business model, they're a parasite because they're evil/wrong/thieves/etc..

You're an old fart too HBMC. Do you remember back when GW had its own bits service, if there were bits manufacturers at that time? I'd proffer GW created their own monster when they ended that service. It left a big void that needed filling.

lord_blackfang wrote:Of course they're parasites. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy their products.

Pretty much this. They are in fact benefiting because GW is big, but it doesn't mean that they aren't offering a nice product.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
You're an old fart too HBMC. Do you remember back when GW had its own bits service, if there were bits manufacturers at that time? I'd proffer GW created their own monster when they ended that service. It left a big void that needed filling.

GW used to have a bitz service? Why did they get rid of it?

I think a lot of these third party companies are making money from GW's hard work. GW develops a concept art and these guys put a spin on it.

But I also think GW is taking the wrong approach at viewing these guys as competition. GW is making only so many bits to go with each army. In a standard Orc army you have 100 models and a choice of maybe 12-15 heads to choose from. So what if independent companies are making more heads, it gives armies more variety and actually makes their (GW) product look better.

I think if GW took an approach that was more "open source" like a lot of the computer and gaming industry, they'd have less headaches, and not always look like the evil empire.

Who's to say GW can't look at an independent's product and put a spin on it too? Maybe they should use those independent companies to answer the question "Our product isnt selling, that product is. How do we fix that and make it better?"

Buttons wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:Of course they're parasites. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy their products.

Pretty much this. They are in fact benefiting because GW is big, but it doesn't mean that they aren't offering a nice product.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
You're an old fart too HBMC. Do you remember back when GW had its own bits service, if there were bits manufacturers at that time? I'd proffer GW created their own monster when they ended that service. It left a big void that needed filling.

GW used to have a bitz service? Why did they get rid of it?

If i remember they ditched the service because (paraphrasing my local store, i didnt know they stopped it till a few months back) "The cost of maufacturing the individual sprue bitz was losing more money than they made selling the specific parts people needed"

doc1234 wrote:

Buttons wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:Of course they're parasites. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy their products.

Pretty much this. They are in fact benefiting because GW is big, but it doesn't mean that they aren't offering a nice product.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
You're an old fart too HBMC. Do you remember back when GW had its own bits service, if there were bits manufacturers at that time? I'd proffer GW created their own monster when they ended that service. It left a big void that needed filling.

GW used to have a bitz service? Why did they get rid of it?

If i remember they ditched the service because (paraphrasing my local store, i didnt know they stopped it till a few months back) "The cost of maufacturing the individual sprue bitz was losing more money than they made selling the specific parts people needed"

Indeed they had a service. I bought a freight train of power weapons, plasma weapons etc. that way. I think they just got greedy, trying to get you to buy entire kits.

I love the bits/add-ons companies. I think its great having choices beyond the few that GW gives. I hvanet played 40k since 2nd Ed, and if 6th isnt a drastic improvement over the current version I wont be back to playing it. Ill keep using my GW minis with other systems.

I remember the days when GW would have liked them as well. The days when there were articles in White Dwarf about how to scratch build terrain, modify minis, etc. Now its just "buy our product and our product only". I miss the old GW....

They offer alternatives and variety to the HHHobby. I like them and will continue to use them. In most cases, they are more expensive than GW, so you're not saving money by using them. You're adding variety to the gaming table, which is important to me since I'm mainly a modeler/painter.

Ouze wrote:so, Panic posted something in a different thread that I thought might make for an interesting discussion; but would be OT in the one it was posted in. So, forking over to here:

Panic wrote:It also removes the need for third party ripoffs of things like Tervigons and Tomb blades. IMO these parasite companies are tarnishing the hobby, so I'm glad GW are taking steps to take the wind from their sails.

Panic...

I've seen other users post similar sentiments previously. So, what do you guys think - Stormraven extensions, Razorback tops, Carnifex-to-Tervigon kits - are the makers of these kits parasites, feeding off of GWS's successes?

No.

If GW wanted to fill the markets with the quality that they so proudly spout out about, they wouldn't have such stiff competition, along with the fact that they act like assclowns over some of the most ridiculous things- (Blood BoWEL, being one, gorkamorka, necromunda, and the rest of the specialist games line, being the other)

To GW, its more important to sue, then to shut down these so called "Parasites" with quality.


along with that- look at the "Parasites " in question. Are you seriously saying these third order products are not wanted? That the companies are just "infecting you"?

The markets has spoken. GW doesn't like it when they price people into submission, but then cries when others take the candy out of thier hand for being stupid?


Keep on playing....

Frazzled wrote:

doc1234 wrote:

Buttons wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:Of course they're parasites. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy their products.

Pretty much this. They are in fact benefiting because GW is big, but it doesn't mean that they aren't offering a nice product.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
You're an old fart too HBMC. Do you remember back when GW had its own bits service, if there were bits manufacturers at that time? I'd proffer GW created their own monster when they ended that service. It left a big void that needed filling.

GW used to have a bitz service? Why did they get rid of it?

If i remember they ditched the service because (paraphrasing my local store, i didnt know they stopped it till a few months back) "The cost of maufacturing the individual sprue bitz was losing more money than they made selling the specific parts people needed"

Indeed they had a service. I bought a freight train of power weapons, plasma weapons etc. that way. I think they just got greedy, trying to get you to buy entire kits.

It was awesome when you could flick through the Citadel Miniatures catalogue and order any mini or bits in it by giving the UK a ring. I remember getting my Genestealer Cultists and Patriarch this way There would certainly be a demand for this way of ordering nowadays. Surely they could make money from it by bringing it back?

They did a half-assed reboot of the bits order service by putting things in packs... Some of the packs even made sense! Like the Deathwatch one, where you get all the deathwatch bits you need for a squad rather than buying them individually. Some of the packs are a bit fail though, and a lot of the bits not in packs are just gone

First off I think the thread title is misleading. There is a difference between full kits and add-on bitz. I'm pretty sure this is Panic's issue as well.

Selling kits to make units that aren't out yet but are in GW books is bad. Hence the Tervigon and Tomb Blade reference. I'm all for 3rd party bitz. Additional items to spruce up regular models.

Now in the Tervigons case I was only against the use of the name, not the kit itself since it requires a GW kit to build.

However, I'm against creating full on units like PuppetofWar does in the tomb blades, wraiths, spyders. This, to me, is leeching off another's work. It isn't a kit that needs a GW kit to use. It's a full independent kit of a GW branded item. These are sales out of GW's pocket entirely. To me that part is wrong.

So in conclusion add-on bitz are great. Full kits that don't require GW kits to build are over the line. Fantasy is one thing as that IP is pretty heavily diluted. But for me 40k is a different beast.

I'll probably catch grief for my opinion but there it is. It's why I'm glad their going back to full release with a codex honestly.

There is no one catch all answer. I have no problem with 3rd party parts as such but the way they are marketed can get my back up (irrational as that may be). For example, Chapterhouse using GW terms directly. I found that annoying and a step too far. Of course, the legality of that is to be decided. In addition, if they are not feeding off GW's IP, why are their new Empress warriors Tru Scale? Tru Scale compared to what? Another company's not really 8 foot tall scaled 28mm figures! They should have the confidence to market them as Empress Warriors or whatever. On the other hand, my current favourite 3rd party Victoria Lamb. Do her figures rip off GW Praetorians or do they fill a gap in the Victorian Sci Fi market while also being a way to add variety to my GW Praetorians? I look at it as being the latter and accept those models cannot be used in a GW store.

I don't see how it harms consumers that GW has made a game popular enough for other companies to be able to sell products that fit into it.

There's some kind of moral anger about the idea that someone else can legally make these add-ons and extra kits, and that is what leads people to call such companies "parasites".

I don't see it like that. It's not as if the official GW Stuff is really original in itself. Even the 40K is a reworking of long-standing images and tropes.

Anyway, where do you draw the line at "full kits"? My entire IG army is going to be non-GW models. Does that mean that Tamiya, Italeri, Hasslefree and Copplestone Castings are parasites?

Hulksmash wrote:However, I'm against creating full on units like PuppetofWar does in the tomb blades, wraiths, spyders. This, to me, is leeching off another's work. It isn't a kit that needs a GW kit to use. It's a full independent kit of a GW branded item.

Puppetswar don't make Tomb Blades, they make Cyber Bikes
They don't make Canoptek Wraiths, they make Cyber Arthropods
They don't make Canoptek Tomb Spyders, they make Cyber Giant Beetles

no GW branding is being used - in fact using GW branding is pretty much off the table for most 3rd party manufacturers.

You can argue for overall design, or concept, or idea being used, but GW branding is one of the things that these manufacturers are categorically not using, especially puppetswar (Chapterhouse started off doing so, but stopped fairly sharply)

@Charax

Split hairs how you like but it is taking money out of the pocket of the company they are relying on to stay afloat. This isn't a thread about legality, it's about opinion. Can you tell me they would have produced those models without the Necron Codex?

3rd party add-ons are fine. Full kits of gw units are not. Again, it's not a legality thing, it's a personal opinion.

Those damn buggers are robbing GW of its deserved money, so GW has to increase their prices again and again just to make that little money to survive.

I hope the OP was a troll.
you need a living host to be a parasite, leeeching off a dying one is not parasitic

Hulksmash wrote:Again, it's not a legality thing, it's a personal opinion.

Yep, and it's my personal opinion that if you don't know what the word branding entails you shouldn't be using it, especially when making accusations against others.

Same with any other word, really.

I agree with HulkSmash. I'm cool with modding kits. I ride a Harley, I'm used to modding kits. If a kit requires you to buy the original, and then mod it, that's a pretty reasonable test that it's okay. I like Chapterhouse's Stormraven extension kit, for example, but it's useless without a Stormraven. It's not taking money out of the original IP owner's pocket, as they get their cut cause you buy the original kit.

I'm cool with models that -could be- something else. Puppet's War just released an orc airplane. Coincidence or not, it released around the same time as GW's planes. But, it isn't derived from anything in a GW codex, nor does it look like the GW model. It's its own design, and while it could represent a GW model in a game, it also stands alone as its own thing. Avatars of War is a good example of these. Clearly, their line is heavily influenced by GW aesthetics, and any of their models could be used as a Hero/Lord in WHFB, but, they've got their own game going too, and fantasy creatures are generic enough that they've made the effort to be seen as doing their own thing.

I'm not cool with blatant ripoffs of someone else's creative work. Chapterhouse's "female farseer", for example, is a ripoff of GW IP, maybe not legally, but definitely ethically. They made no effort to represent it as anything except a GW replacement. It's not a mod to an existing GW kit. That, for me, is over the line. They didn't even make the effort to call it female space elf wizard. I guess they've renamed her a "Doomseer" now, but still...

@Charax

I get it. You can't refute the concept and so choose to insult and belittle. It's cool man. But as a heads up branding can include images and concepts. Check the definition. It's not just names friend.

One should know the FULL definition before assuming a position of mental superiority

Hulksmash wrote:@Charax

Split hairs how you like but it is taking money out of the pocket of the company they are relying on to stay afloat. This isn't a thread about legality, it's about opinion. Can you tell me they would have produced those models without the Necron Codex?

It's not splitting hairs though. It boils down to competition. Sure, you can rage all you like about the cheaper, "generic" kits that ape the GW kits, but calling them parasitic is dishonest at best. A sale lost to a competitor is just that. This process isn't new, it's pretty much a defining characteristic of capitalism. You see it all the time. Essentially, as long as the "generic" company doesn't use GW trademarks, they are pretty much good to go. Will the inspiration be obvious? Sure! Will some people avoid them because they want to stay "pure GW (or GW tournament legal)"? You bet! Will GW have to keep innovating to stay "on top"? Yes, and that's a good thing.

As far as bits companies, I'm not sure how you could call their relationship with GW anything other than symbiotic.

And to address the "money that GW deserves" comment from earlier in the thread, that's utter tripe. GW provides a luxury product. They don't deserve a damn thing. People either like their product and buy it, or they don't.

People really need to note that "Symbiosis" and "Mutualism" aren't synonyms and interchangeable.

Either way, I'm assuming "parasitism" here is being referred to in a business sense. In that case, I can't find ay definition online that fits the meaning.

At best, the relationship between 3rd party bits manufacturers and GW would be commencialism. 3rd Party companies benefit whereas GW is barely affected. Surely you have to buy a Stormraven to use your Chapterhouse Stormraven kit, but you were going to buy a Stormraven anyways, and those that buy just for the Chapterhouse kit are rare.

Redbeard wrote:I'm cool with models that -could be- something else. Puppet's War just released an orc airplane. Coincidence or not, it released around the same time as GW's planes. But, it isn't derived from anything in a GW codex, nor does it look like the GW model. It's its own design, and while it could represent a GW model in a game, it also stands alone as its own thing. Avatars of War is a good example of these. Clearly, their line is heavily influenced by GW aesthetics, and any of their models could be used as a Hero/Lord in WHFB, but, they've got their own game going too, and fantasy creatures are generic enough that they've made the effort to be seen as doing their own thing.

I'm not cool with blatant ripoffs of someone else's creative work. Chapterhouse's "female farseer", for example, is a ripoff of GW IP, maybe not legally, but definitely ethically. They made no effort to represent it as anything except a GW replacement. It's not a mod to an existing GW kit. That, for me, is over the line. They didn't even make the effort to call it female space elf wizard. I guess they've renamed her a "Doomseer" now, but still...

So the existence in a GW Codex is the only threshold?

Ork aircraft have existed in Forgeworld for quite some time now, and the PuppetsWar model looks different, but is essentially the same niche.
How is this any different than releasing a clearly female Farseer model that GW does not already make? People have been asking for a female Farseer for quite some time now.
What about the Tervigon models that had not been released by GW yet and had been provided by 3rdparties? This is "ethically" and especially intentionally meant to be a GW replacement/stand-in.

Plus, the Doomseer has always been labelled a "Doomseer" with some silly character name; it was never explicitly named a "Farseer", the colloquial name for the most common Farseer loadout.
Does the naming gimmick really matter that much to you?

After market parts manufactures have a place in many industries. They often increase the value and enjoyment of the purchaser and serve to individulize the product that would otherwise be "generic" to other purchases of an identical manner. It is no different for bitz makers. Every bit goes on a GW figure is not parasitic but an enhancement.

Speakers, key boards, docking stations, skins for your iPod/iPhone/iPad
Running boards and decorative rims for your Ford.
Ninja Orc heads for your Ork army.

These are all the same for me.

Parasite is a bad term to use for companies making additional bitz.. Making and selling a kit to personalize a model isn't a big deal. However buying a FW model, making a mold of it and selling the recast is a different story.

So long as GW is intent on pricing people out of the market, they create a demand for lower-cost options. Other companies move in to fill the market. Simple economics.

Are the Perry Brothers parasites for producing fantastic-looking Renaissance/Medieval minatures that can be used in place of GW Empire/Brettonian minis... for significantly less cost per model?

Is Mantic a parasite for producing a parallel game with parallel models that can be used in place of GW models... for a HECK OF A LOT less cost per model?

Of course not! They are taking advantage of a niche in the market that GW has DELIBERATELY left unfilled. And if GW doesn't want them filling it... GW needs to fill it themselves.


(This, of course, does not apply to companies making DIRECT COPIES of copywritten GW material. That is covered under copyright infringement. Making something different but similar is NOT.)

IcyCool wrote:It's not splitting hairs though. It boils down to competition. Sure, you can rage all you like about the cheaper, "generic" kits that ape the GW kits, but calling them parasitic is dishonest at best.

I disagree. Would those kits have been produced without the Necron Codex? If the answer is no then they certainly meet the basic definition of a parasite according to Miriam-Webster:

3: something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate return

I bolded support since not all of what Puppet Wars does meets that definition but they are certainly dependent, at this time, on GW and in the case of the "Cybernetic" line not making a useful or adequate return for the parent organism.

Again I'm all for third party add-ons for any model range since I love making unique armies that require kits from the company they are for. I'm just against full kits from companies that don't produce their own games or their own IP. And I'd feel that way if it was WarmaHordes or Infinitey or any other major game system.

@Vulcan

I'd point out that Mantic and the Perry brothers produce their own games for use with the models they make. I don't in any way consider them parasites and it's probably why most others don't either.

As long as I don't get worms, Lyme disease or some freaky little fish up my urethra... as long as this doesn't happen, I don't care.

Hulksmash wrote:Again I'm all for third party add-ons for any model range since I love making unique armies that require kits from the company they are for. I'm just against full kits from companies that don't produce their own games or their own IP.

Except PuppetsWar does produce their own IP.

Look at their Orc airplane or the shoulderpads (seriously Puppetswar...release these soon). They're unique intellectual property that is distinct from what is available from GW.

@Bicat

What models are the shoulder pads meant to go on?

Hulksmash wrote:I bolded support since not all of what Puppet Wars does meets that definition but they are certainly dependent, at this time, on GW and in the case of the "Cybernetic" line not making a useful or adequate return for the parent organism.

I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree, but to address the above statement:

You appear to be making two assumptions:
1. Puppet'sWar would cease to exist or be doomed if GW ceased to exist.
2. Competition is not beneficial to GW.

Suffice to say, I disagree with both.

Giving me, as a consumer, more choice is excellent and I applaud it.

It is for GW to make 'the best model soldiers in the world' and for me to decide if I agree with that and pay them for it or decide I prefer another company's product and spend my money there.
GW has existed in a vacuum for a long time, competition should be healthier for it and even, heavens portent, put the issue of pricing on GW's agenda and consideration.

IP laws exist, GW have never been shy about sending letters employing the threat of legal action. If a company is breaking the law, the court will make that judgement, not GW nor it's more ardent supporters.

My take:

If you are making aftermarket products for a line of Citadel miniatures, utilizing 'fair use' guidelines, you are perfectly fine.

Cheap knock offs that aren't a direct copy of your product? Well, suck it up and make your product better than the competition. Would these products exist without GW? Probably not. But that's what GW has to deal with. It gets even worse for GW, now, with the explosion of OTHER miniatures rules out there, and the end of the Citadel-Model-Only tournament circuit. GW has lost the 'moral high ground', and anyone can use any miniatures with the rules, barring a handful of locations (GW property).

If you are making direct copy knock-offs? This has been going on since the dawn of time, and has nothing to do with GW, Citadel, Forgeworld or anyone else. Cheap near-duplicates are the bane of anyone's manufacturing industry (Prada handbags? Fake Rolex watches?). Good luck chasing down those Russian and Chinese recasters, as an example. Anyone who does this where GW can reach, legally, should expect to be shut down, deservedly so.

Where you get into trouble:

Using GW Intellectual Property without permission, in violation of the "Fair Use" laws of your country of origin.

Hello, Chapterhouse.

--B.

Bonus Tangent: The fact that people are 'discussing' this who aren't aware of GW's own Bits Service, and the history therein, gives weight to the "Defend GW at all costs" people being ill-educated/walking around with blinders on.

Hulksmash wrote:@Biccat

What models are the shoulder pads meant to go on?

Space Marines.

Doesn't mean they don't have unique IP.

@Icycool

I'm cool with competition. I'm all for Warmahordes, Mantic, The Perry's games, Dust Warfare and the like. I think that's the only way that GW will have competition and possibly readdress some of their business practices. But all of those are creating games and models to compete. They are creating their own worlds and identities. I'm totally cool with that.

As for my other "assumption" I don't think Puppet'sWar would cease to exist. I do think they might have existed at all without GW and that they'd be hammered hard if GW went away.

However I'll agree to disagree.

In fact I'll put out one last thought and then I'll bow out

I think that without GW the 3rd party bitz market might not exist at all if everything else in the market was the same. If GW, through the years, hadn't encouraged customability and converting inside of their massive universe then none of this would exist as it stands.

Think of Warmahordes (the closest thing GW currently has to a real competitor). How many people convert models for their armies? How many 3rd party bitz are made for Warmachine or Hordes? "Unique" armies don't really exist there from what I've seen at events and game nights.

How many 3rd party bitz are built for any game range out their outside of GW? I'm all for 3rd party bitz. I think they are part of the "GW Hobby" as much as anything else. Just ethically dislike straight stand-in kits for GW's, or anyone elses, games. Just my thoughts.

I think that the 3rd party manufacturers likely encourage sales to GW, as people will get more figures to use the extra bits. There are very few 3rd party things that can entirely replace GW models. Anyway, since when did your battlefield have to be GW pure?

The belief that anyone profiting on the fringes of GW's sucess is a parasite to be stamped out is an attitude that GW have fostered very well. Many model manufacturers are happy for their products to have aftermarket kits particular if their particular models are named as being suitable for the conversion. That way they sell several version of that model to feed hobbyists' needs to make every different version of a vehicle. GW on the other hand don't seem to agree that people buying more of their figures to make use of some 3rd party pieces as a good thing, and seek to destroy them when possible. So much for 'the hobby'. This is why they push their terrain kits more and more and seem to avoid discussing the home-made approach to making terrain. Once they prided themselves on giving advice on how to make terrain cheaply (as their hobby has always been expensive), but now terrain is just one more revenue stream to be exploited and increasingly tables in GW stores everywhere look very much the same as they push the product.

Hulksmash wrote:I'm cool with competition. I'm all for Warmahordes, Mantic, The Perry's games, Dust Warfare and the like. I think that's the only way that GW will have competition and possibly readdress some of their business practices. But all of those are creating games and models to compete. They are creating their own worlds and identities. I'm totally cool with that.

As for my other "assumption" I don't think Puppet'sWar would cease to exist. I do think they might have existed at all without GW and that they'd be hammered hard if GW went away.

If I was wrong about your assumptions, please correct me. I'm not allergic to admitting it when I'm wrong. I was simply stating why I don't think the term "parasite" is accurate here, and your post was fresh in my mind.

Hulksmash wrote:I think that without GW the 3rd party bitz market might not exist at all if everything else in the market was the same. If GW, through the years, hadn't encouraged customability and converting inside of their massive universe then none of this would exist as it stands.

Agreed. GW has done a number of good things for this hobby. I don't want to give the impression that I don't like GW. I'm clearly a big fan, or I wouldn't be here on Dakka. But being the best/biggest in the market doesn't give them some sort of free pass or immunity to capitalism. If the company does some good and then just rests on its laurels, it will stagnate and die very quickly. I'd rather not see that happen, so I happily embrace the 3rd party imitators and what they do. Partly because they keep the big movers and shakers moving and shaking, and partly because sometimes the 3rd party imitators do it better.

Hulksmash wrote:Think of Warmahordes (the closest thing GW currently has to a real competitor). How many people convert models for their armies? How many 3rd party bitz are made for Warmachine or Hordes? "Unique" armies don't really exist there from what I've seen at events and game nights.

I've seen a rare few conversions, but in all honesty I think this has more to do with market share. If the other companies were bigger in the industry, they'd draw their fair share of the 3rd party imitators.

Hulksmash wrote:Just ethically dislike straight stand-in kits for GW's, or anyone elses, games. Just my thoughts.

I can respect that. For me, at worst I'd consider potentially shady generic brands to be "in bad taste" rather than morally wrong, but that's a minor quibble. And, of course, a company that uses GW's trademarks and copyrighted material is still in the wrong.

I'm using GW minis and bitz for other games for some years now so... GW is a damn parasite

Are third party makers of anything parasites? Yes. Is it a legal and accepted business strategy? Yes.

So many markets for so many things depend on third party manufacturers... why not toys?

BladeWalker wrote:Are third party makers of anything parasites? Yes.

Not everything that lives off of something else is a parasite. Parasitic relationships are defined as one partner benefiting at the expense of the other. There are also symbiotic relationships, where each party is strengthened.

I would never have bought a Stormraven, without the Chapterhouse mod kit. I think it's ridiculous looking in its stock form. In this case, GW benefited from the Chapterhouse kit - they made a sale they would otherwise not have made, and Chapterhouse benefited as they sold the mod kit which they'd never have sold without the Stormraven being produced. Both sides (and me) win.

There are also parasitic examples, where Chapterhouse has produced a model (Doomseer) that costs GW a sale. That case is definitely parasitic. But I don't think the upgrade kits are.

That is a good distinction, I see your point. Parasite implies harm to the host, in most cases the third party bits aren't costing sales like you said they are making more of them.

GW don't make any female Farseer models.

Thus it isn't possible for the Chapter House model to reduce GW sales.

They are jazzercising GW's muscles.

Selling autoparts for a living I simply take it as a given that third party parts and accessories are a boon to the company that manufactures the original product. Anyone here who owned a Daewoo can tell you what a pain it is to have a car with third party parts not accessible.

I personally love all the new bits and parts companies springing up. I love making my armies unique and one of a kind. When FW started up I heavily invested in their models as this is what it gave me. Now, FW are a mainstream source of models and add ons.

So I turn to Kromlech, Puppetwars, Maxmini, Armorcast, (the list could go on) to produce my parts that give my models a unique look. I want my stuff to stand out and be different. Check out my thread here on my Kommand Orks and you'll see what I mean.....

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/449804.page

If GW stubbornly doesn't provide essential (or demanded) parts for their own game (e.g. Tervigon for 2 years) and someone else provides those parts, does he harm the gamer or rather help him?

What is harming GW's revenue more:
1.) Chaperhouse selling extra shoulder pads and a Storm Raven conversion kit (all urging you to buy GW products) or
2.) GW's yearly price hikes, absence of introductory games, no advertising policy?

These companies are parasites. In that they require their host (free market money, not GW) to survive. I say that because if the market suddenly demanded aftermarket kits for Privateer or infinity thats where these companies would go. They dont NEED GW to survive, they NEED the free market. In the same vein "parasite" could be applied to GW itself. GW parasites my money like nobodies business not to mention them parasiting Tolkien and Heinlein and Comic Books. Everything they produce is derivative and thus "parasitic". Those barracking to get rid of the third party bits manufacturers should also be trying to remove GW.

(parasiting someone elses post here ) If on the free market you create a demand, and then do not supply that demand, someone else will. Simply ignoring or trying to sue the free market doesnt work. And with the advent of the internet it is easier than ever before for small companies to find an audience.

As far as i am concerned, i hope someone is able to challenge GW on their turf. Literally recreating every army they do JUST different enough to avoid a lawsuit to force GW to compete on price and quality or go bust. In fact i dont think Mantic has gone anywhere near far enough.

Ouze wrote:so, Panic posted something in a different thread that I thought might make for an interesting discussion; but would be OT in the one it was posted in. So, forking over to here:

Panic wrote:It also removes the need for third party ripoffs of things like Tervigons and Tomb blades. IMO these parasite companies are tarnishing the hobby, so I'm glad GW are taking steps to take the wind from their sails.

Panic...

I've seen other users post similar sentiments previously. So, what do you guys think - Stormraven extensions, Razorback tops, Carnifex-to-Tervigon kits - are the makers of these kits parasites, feeding off of GWS's successes?

Well if you assume none of them provide the "community" with anything of worth I suppose you could make the argument they are parasites. Not sure why people get so bent about third party add on kits and bits. If you think they are substandard just don't buy them

But it seems a lot of people do find they make things of worth that enhance their enjoyment of their hobby. Doesn't seem like a parasitic relationship to me.

Buttons wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
You're an old fart too HBMC. Do you remember back when GW had its own bits service, if there were bits manufacturers at that time? I'd proffer GW created their own monster when they ended that service. It left a big void that needed filling.

GW used to have a bitz service? Why did they get rid of it?

Kilkrazy wrote:GW don't make any female Farseer models.

Thus it isn't possible for the Chapter House model to reduce GW sales.

Not true at all. You're making two incorrect assumptions. A) that without the option for a female farseer, people wouldn't but a male one, and B) the aesthetics of the model significantly trumps its value in the game. I'm willing to bet that plenty of people probably bought the male farseer model, even if they secretly wanted a female one, and that plenty of people bought a farseer because they needed it for their army, even if it wasn't the sex they wanted. (And as an aside, all the GW farseers I've seen are wearing robes and masks, so for all I know, the GW ones are female, they just don't have DD tits.)

Now that Chapterhouse is producing a female one, those people won't buy the GW model, they'll buy the chapterhouse one. And maybe that serves GW right for not making more female models. But Chapterhouse, in that case, is acting as a parasite. They didn't work on the IP, or the design of the farseer, they simply made an alternative model in order to profit from GWs design work.

Redbeard wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:GW don't make any female Farseer models.

Thus it isn't possible for the Chapter House model to reduce GW sales.

Not true at all. You're making two incorrect assumptions. A) that without the option for a female farseer, people wouldn't but a male one, and B) the aesthetics of the model significantly trumps its value in the game. I'm willing to bet that plenty of people probably bought the male farseer model, even if they secretly wanted a female one, and that plenty of people bought a farseer because they needed it for their army, even if it wasn't the sex they wanted. (And as an aside, all the GW farseers I've seen are wearing robes and masks, so for all I know, the GW ones are female, they just don't have DD tits.)

Now that Chapterhouse is producing a female one, those people won't buy the GW model, they'll buy the chapterhouse one. And maybe that serves GW right for not making more female models. But Chapterhouse, in that case, is acting as a parasite. They didn't work on the IP, or the design of the farseer, they simply made an alternative model in order to profit from GWs design work.

Really, did you just really write this post? So I want a female farseer which people have been asking/bitching for since 2ne ed 40k, GW for what ever reason decides the demand isn't there (same with female guard) so decides not to make the model. A company fills the gap but you still say it's stealing a sale from GW?

Hi Welcome

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Hi%20Welcome

Are third party makers parasites? probably are as they are clear about what the product will most likely be used or substituted for.

Do I care? Not remotely, as I am not a GW shareholder.

I have bought numerous products (actually quite a lot) from Kromlech, Puppets War and Chapter House for the simple reason that their products are good.

If a company puts out something that I consider better or like the look of for my army I'm going to buy it. So simple really.

Its a free market and I spend my money on who put out the best ........ The winner get my money.

Its up to the Law to decide if it is right or wrong and then act on it.

Yeah, they're parasites, in the sense that their business feeds off GW's.

However, when GW cut the bitz service (DEAR SWEET MERCIFUL LORD, HOW I MISS THE BITZ SERVICE) the (potentially unforseen) consequence was the creation of companies like Chapterhouse, who fill a niche that GW simply does not offer anymore.

Honestly, a lot of GW's problems arise from their own decisions. Sales wouldn't be down if GW was more active on the internet and attempted to keep prices at a tolerable level, rather than sacrifice number of sales for profit per sale. Additionally, companies like Chapterhouse and others wouldn't have so much business if GW espoused more conversions (like they did in the old days) and offered a geniune bitz service, as compared to the horrid thing they have in place now.

FabricatorGeneralMike wrote:
Really, did you just really write this post? So I want a female farseer which people have been asking/bitching for since 2ne ed 40k, GW for what ever reason decides the demand isn't there (same with female guard) so decides not to make the model.

A very small, tiny minority of people have asked for a model since 2nd ed. That doesn't mean that there is sufficient demand to justify making the model for a large company. I can easily see that decision.

A company fills the gap but you still say it's stealing a sale from GW?

Yes, and if you actually spent the time to read my post instead of simply attempting to look witty by using outdated internet memes to respond, you'd understand why.

First, it's not their gap to fill. Second, GW is going to sell X many farseers. Doesn't matter if they're male or female or eunuch. There's some demand for farseers out there, and it's not substantially altered by whether they're male or female, the primary influence on demand is how good they are in the game. If some other company takes some of those farseer sales, then yes, they're essentially stealing from GW. They didn't develop the IP. They didn't design the distinctive farseer look, with the rune armour chestplate or the high eldar helmet. And whether GW made that specific sculpt that chapterhouse is selling is largely irrelevant.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Hi%20Welcome

I'm so proud of you, you figured out how to link a url all on your own. You must feel very clever.

Redbeard wrote:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Hi%20Welcome

I'm so proud of you, you figured out how to link a url all on your own. You must feel very clever.

Little victory's my friend, it is all about the little victory's. And again Hi Welcome.

no, not parasites. They are companies making their living off of providing stuff GW doesn't. That being said, they are making their living via the IP of GW....so I would call them all "Vanilla Ices". Not the original deal, but scratching out a living on the ideas of others.

On that note, FLGS are like record stores....going to a GW store is like buying merchandise at a concert. FLGS make their money by buying and reselling GW stuff, GW makes and creates it and you kind of consider shopping there like "supporting the band"...but they charge you a premium.

There are alot of people making a living off of GW, would be nice if they all showed some respect...like not selling things until a launch date, or in the case of Bitz guys...maybe paying a royalty...but I digress

Ouze, this thread needs a poll.

We can do without the digs and insults thanks.

warboss wrote:Ouze, this thread needs a poll.

What options? Presuming we're talking about how they interface with GWS -

1.) Yes, they steal sales from GWS
2.) No, they enhance them by requiring a base GWS kit.

I feel like there could be 3 or 4 more options there.

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:no, not parasites. They are companies making their living off of providing stuff GW doesn't. That being said, they are making their living via the IP of GW....so I would call them all "Vanilla Ices". Not the original deal, but scratching out a living on the ideas of others.

I was under the impression that Vanilla Ice was back with a brand new invention.

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:There are alot of people making a living off of GW, would be nice if they all showed some respect...like not selling things until a launch date, or in the case of Bitz guys...maybe paying a royalty...but I digress

I can't imagine why they should, or would. GW doesn't own the IP that these guys are selling. Ford can't control who makes windshield wipers or hubcaps, and I think that's a good thing.

Ouze wrote:

warboss wrote:Ouze, this thread needs a poll.

What options? Presuming we're talking about how they interface with GWS -

1.) Yes, they steal sales from GWS
2.) No, they enhance them by requiring a base GWS kit.

I feel like there could be 3 or 4 more options there.

I'm a fan of one very pro, one mildly pro, one neutral, one mildly con, and one very con choice in polls. 3P bits makers are good for the community and GW sales, 3P bits makers are good for the community but only occasionally benefit GW, 3P bits makers have no real effect on either the community or GW, 3P bits occasionally decrease GW sales depending on their type, 3P bits makers decrease the creativity of the community and negatively impact GW sales.

biccat wrote:

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:no, not parasites. They are companies making their living off of providing stuff GW doesn't. That being said, they are making their living via the IP of GW....so I would call them all "Vanilla Ices". Not the original deal, but scratching out a living on the ideas of others.

I was under the impression that Vanilla Ice was back with a brand new invention.

Why do I suddenly have the urge to model my land speeder with the rag top down so my Blood Angel's hair can blow?

They are in no way parasites. 3rd party makers of figures, accessories and especially conversion parts have been an accepted part of the modeling hobby for decades.

Folks were making "Garage Kit" models of established sci-fi subjects and resin mod kits for tank models for decades before 40k even existed, to name just a couple of examples.

Arguments such as "they're taking the hard work of GW and..." hold no water for me either, GW appropriated bits of Heinlinen, Geiger, Anime, Tolkein and a host of other entities in the same blatantly-derivative-but-not-copyright-infringing way and I don't hold it against them.

IcyCool wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:Think of Warmahordes (the closest thing GW currently has to a real competitor). How many people convert models for their armies? How many 3rd party bitz are made for Warmachine or Hordes? "Unique" armies don't really exist there from what I've seen at events and game nights.

I've seen a rare few conversions, but in all honesty I think this has more to do with market share. If the other companies were bigger in the industry, they'd draw their fair share of the 3rd party imitators.

I want to dispute a couple of things with this. First, I don't think it has anything to do with market share. I think there simply isn't a niche needing to be filled with Warmachine. When PP releases something, it doesn't come with a missing option you need to make yourself (I won't make a list of all the GW stuff you have to scratchbuild/kitbash, but the number is significant), it comes with ALL the options for that model. They also don't tend to let product lines sit with gaps/without support for years (support meaning attention that isn't a price jump). If something makes it into one of their books, you can almost bet you'll see a model of it within the next 12-18 months, usually more on the 12 side, 'cept Destors those were a long time coming I'm told. The third party market, if it can be considered some sort of problem for GW, is one entirely of their own making.

warboss wrote:[Why do I suddenly have the urge to model my land speeder with the rag top down so my Blood Angel's hair can blow?

Don't forget to add in some Necrons on standby, waiting just to say hi.

warboss wrote:Ouze, this thread needs a poll.

AND LO, IT IS SO

I used Tervigons as an example of when there was no GWS official model for a long time. I'm aware you can now buy a GWS Terivgon. They seemed like the best example though.

No option for "I buy mod kits, but not entire models".

Ok, I added that in 2 options.

Guys this thread is making me sick. I think of all the great stuff Chapter house and Krom is comming out with and newing companys like Anvil industries and I just can't associate their work with being "parasites". I never even thought of those companys like that, the only thoughts I had of those companys were "Hey that kit\bit is pretty darn cool and I think I'll take 5.".
So what is so wrong with makeing a great product?

lord_blackfang wrote:Of course they're parasites. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy their products.

You're confusing the terms "parasite" and "symbiote."

A parasite feeds off of its host to the host's detriment. Parasites usually cause illness and even death. An example would be heart worm in a dog.

A symbiote is something that lives with its host and provides a benefit to that host. The symbiote cannot live alone, but the host, in some fashion, benefits from the symbiote's presence, or at the very least, the host derives no negative from the presence of the symbiote. An example would be the bacteria that live in your intestines that aid in digestion.

Third party bits manufacturers are more like a symbiote. In the vast majority of cases, these third party manufacturers create items that require the purchase of a first party manufacturer product. Rather than taking sales away from the first party manufacturer, these third party bits inspire buyers to purchase items from the first party that the buyer might not have otherwise opted to purchase.

biccat wrote:

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:no, not parasites. They are companies making their living off of providing stuff GW doesn't. That being said, they are making their living via the IP of GW....so I would call them all "Vanilla Ices". Not the original deal, but scratching out a living on the ideas of others.

I was under the impression that Vanilla Ice was back with a brand new invention.

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:There are alot of people making a living off of GW, would be nice if they all showed some respect...like not selling things until a launch date, or in the case of Bitz guys...maybe paying a royalty...but I digress

I can't imagine why they should, or would. GW doesn't own the IP that these guys are selling. Ford can't control who makes windshield wipers or hubcaps, and I think that's a good thing.

I think Dakka needs a facepalm icon.....hahaha

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:

biccat wrote:

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:no, not parasites. They are companies making their living off of providing stuff GW doesn't. That being said, they are making their living via the IP of GW....so I would call them all "Vanilla Ices". Not the original deal, but scratching out a living on the ideas of others.

I was under the impression that Vanilla Ice was back with a brand new invention.

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:There are alot of people making a living off of GW, would be nice if they all showed some respect...like not selling things until a launch date, or in the case of Bitz guys...maybe paying a royalty...but I digress

I can't imagine why they should, or would. GW doesn't own the IP that these guys are selling. Ford can't control who makes windshield wipers or hubcaps, and I think that's a good thing.

I think Dakka needs a facepalm icon.....hahaha

They do...

derek wrote:I want to dispute a couple of things with this. First, I don't think it has anything to do with market share. I think there simply isn't a niche needing to be filled with Warmachine. When PP releases something, it doesn't come with a missing option you need to make yourself (I won't make a list of all the GW stuff you have to scratchbuild/kitbash, but the number is significant), it comes with ALL the options for that model. They also don't tend to let product lines sit with gaps/without support for years (support meaning attention that isn't a price jump). If something makes it into one of their books, you can almost bet you'll see a model of it within the next 12-18 months, usually more on the 12 side, 'cept Destors those were a long time coming I'm told. The third party market, if it can be considered some sort of problem for GW, is one entirely of their own making.

Destors were delayed due to a problem with being one of the first things cast in plastic along with the new warjacks. There were problems with the casting process overseas with the new plastics and (unlike other companies who shall remain nameless with a crappy new casting process and material) held them until the kinks were worked out. Same held for the MoW Bombardiers, the Firefly, and most of the other light warjacks that were supposed to come out in plastic to replace the metals.

Outside of that most units introduced in a book hit inside of a year of that book.

Privateer also has a very draconian conversion policy that does not really lend itself to extensive conversion and "counts as". They also aren't raking you over the coals to play the game so demand for replacement parts isn't there.

I hate GW, and I like the people who make bits because it saves money and offers something GW generally doesnt.

12thRonin wrote:Privateer also has a very draconian conversion policy that does not really lend itself to extensive conversion and "counts as".

It's not really draconian. Most conversions are OK, unless you change the weapons of the models. Which is virtually the same as GW's WYSIWYG policy.

Alfndrate wrote:

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote:I think Dakka needs a facepalm icon.....hahaha

They do...

Which is, oddly enough :facepalm:

I think that without GW the 3rd party bitz market might not exist at all if everything else in the market was the same. If GW, through the years, hadn't encouraged customability and converting inside of their massive universe then none of this would exist as it stands.

If GW offered bits for sale, or at least included every codex available option in their kits, and if GW wasn't producing 'the finest finecast minis in the world' then there would be little need for third party bits producers. Hell, GW even abandoned tournament support in the US, which was one of the few reasons to not game with bits or models from other companies. It just seems at times that GW is taking every possible step to distance themselves from their customer base, and as such, have encouraged the growth of many third party bits companies.

Hulksmash wrote:@Charax

Split hairs how you like but it is taking money out of the pocket of the company they are relying on to stay afloat. This isn't a thread about legality, it's about opinion. Can you tell me they would have produced those models without the Necron Codex?

3rd party add-ons are fine. Full kits of gw units are not. Again, it's not a legality thing, it's a personal opinion.

I have a bit of an issue with this opinion. Are you saying that because GW wrote the game and the fluff, that no one else should make models to use with the game? I don't think that is defensible. Once I buy the game, I can play it with whatever models I choose.

As long as the 3Pty maker doesn't use GW trademarks or IP or advertise it as an approved 40k model, than anyone can make any figure for any reason. It's irrelvaent whether GW makes a figure to represent a particular unit or not. GW has no inherent right to any money spent on non-GW figures that people with use with their games.

It's not money out of GW's pocket, rather it's the customers money, and their right to spend their money where they want. GW has no claim on my $ until they make a product that I want, at a price I am willing to pay, and even then, it's not their cash until I hand it over the counter to make a purchase.

Hulksmash wrote: Can you tell me they would have produced those models without the Necron Codex?

Would GW have the necron asthetic without Terminator, the Tyranids without Geiger and Aliens, Tau without various Anime, etc, etc...?

It's all derivative and as long as you don't tread on protected IP or copyright, it's all good.
Further, competition is good. It keeps GW from getting lax and keeps them constantly having to improve their products.

Eilif wrote:
As long as the 3Pty maker doesn't use GW trademarks or IP or advertise it as an approved 40k model, than anyone can make any figure for any reason.

That's the tricky part, isn't it. Someone has to design models. I remember going to a seminar with Jes Goodwin a few years back. One of the show-and-tell items he brought was a sketchbook of eldar designs, some that became models, some that didn't. Producing that sketchbook was work. The result of that work is design that isn't a salable product for customers to buy. That design is IP. For someone else to come along and blatantly copy the design in their own sculpt is theft of that design work and IP.

Would GW have the necron asthetic without Terminator, the Tyranids without Geiger and Aliens, Tau without various Anime, etc, etc...?

It's all derivative and as long as you don't tread on protected IP or copyright, it's all good.

But Tyranids, while derivative of both Aliens and other things (starship troopers?) are distinctly their own thing. Aliens and Bugs never had symbiotic weapon constructs, as an example. Necrons owe as much to the Egyptians as they do to Terminator (with the possible exception that no one has found hieroglyphs that read "I'll Be Back"). Again, they're not a copy, they're influenced by, and that is (as you state) okay.

It's the companies that aren't doing their own design work that I take offense to. It's okay to derive your models from existing sources, but it's not okay to simply take someone else's designs.

12thRonin wrote:
Destors were delayed due to a problem with being one of the first things cast in plastic along with the new warjacks. There were problems with the casting process overseas with the new plastics and (unlike other companies who shall remain nameless with a crappy new casting process and material) held them until the kinks were worked out. Same held for the MoW Bombardiers, the Firefly, and most of the other light warjacks that were supposed to come out in plastic to replace the metals.

Outside of that most units introduced in a book hit inside of a year of that book.

Privateer also has a very draconian conversion policy that does not really lend itself to extensive conversion and "counts as". They also aren't raking you over the coals to play the game so demand for replacement parts isn't there.

While I don't think you necessarily took it as such, I just want to say that I was in no way using Destors as a negative against Privateer, simply as the one example I can think of where there was definitely more than a 12 month gap from book to model on the shelf. I only wish GW was that efficient (Like putting the Drop Pod in the 4th edition codex but not making a model til 5th).

biccat wrote:

12thRonin wrote:Privateer also has a very draconian conversion policy that does not really lend itself to extensive conversion and "counts as".

It's not really draconian. Most conversions are OK, unless you change the weapons of the models. Which is virtually the same as GW's WYSIWYG policy.

Except it's not.

Privateer Press Conversion Policy wrote:A converted model must contain a majority of parts from the WARMACHINE or HORDES model for which the rules were written. For example, a Testament of Menoth conversion must be composed mostly of parts from the Testament of Menoth model.

So since I hate the Black 13th models with a passion, I can't substitute IK models that look far better that have been either converted or GS'ed to look like them or to represent their undercover operations.

Redbeard wrote:

Eilif wrote:
As long as the 3Pty maker doesn't use GW trademarks or IP or advertise it as an approved 40k model, than anyone can make any figure for any reason.

That's the tricky part, isn't it. Someone has to design models. I remember going to a seminar with Jes Goodwin a few years back. One of the show-and-tell items he brought was a sketchbook of eldar designs, some that became models, some that didn't. Producing that sketchbook was work. The result of that work is design that isn't a salable product for customers to buy. That design is IP. For someone else to come along and blatantly copy the design in their own sculpt is theft of that design work and IP.

Would GW have the necron asthetic without Terminator, the Tyranids without Geiger and Aliens, Tau without various Anime, etc, etc...?

It's all derivative and as long as you don't tread on protected IP or copyright, it's all good.

But Tyranids, while derivative of both Aliens and other things (starship troopers?) are distinctly their own thing. Aliens and Bugs never had symbiotic weapon constructs, as an example. Necrons owe as much to the Egyptians as they do to Terminator (with the possible exception that no one has found hieroglyphs that read "I'll Be Back"). Again, they're not a copy, they're influenced by, and that is (as you state) okay.

It's the companies that aren't doing their own design work that I take offense to. It's okay to derive your models from existing sources, but it's not okay to simply take someone else's designs.

"That design is IP?" Copyright protects original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. You make it, it is protected. But only that specific work is protected, it is only protected to the extent that it is original, and your rights as a copyright owner essentially only extend to reporduction of that which is protectable in your expression.

If someone were to steal Jes Goodwin's notebook, photocopy the pages, and sell the copies on the internet, that would be copyright infringement.

With one breath you say that Jes Goodwin can claim ownership of another's artistic expression in the form of a sculptural work of art based on his expression of a concept sketch in a notebook to which no one can really be said to have had access to. With another breath you say that the Tyranids are derived from HR Geiger's unique artistic expressions (among others) and yet argue that they are nevertheless "distinctly their own thing."

What is the discernible difference between deriving an expression from an existing source and taking someone else's "designs?" I assume that by "taking someone else's designs" you do not mean direct copying as our only point of reference to that statement is your example of Jes Goodwin's concept art notebook full of inaccessible expressions all related to a similar idea that itself owes a vast amount of deference to 50+ years of science-fiction and fantasy cultural expression and evolution.

On the one had you say it is not right for someone to take the idea of an Eldar and create a unique artistic expression, but it is right for Games Workshop to take ideas from HR Geiger and create unique Tyranid expressions.

Flip the argument around, if you would, and see how it goes down. Imagine that Jes Goodwin is HR Geiger and the Carnifex model was created by a 3rd party company. Oh how you would be spouting about how the Carnifex model is clearly a copy of Mr. Goodwin's designs. Just look at the exoskeleton. It is clearly copied from Mr. Goodwin's aliens. Heck, the thing even is an alien, and where is the back story. The thing is just called a "Carnifex" which means butcher, and of course Geiger aliens are butchers.

The plain fact is that you have a bias towards Games Workshop that you are either incapable or unwilling to account for to the point of clumsily trying to thread a needle through contradictory arguments. I encourage you to broaden your perspective a bit and really consider the implications of your arguments for all authors and artists, including those employed by Games Workshop.

When you scrape away the clutter, all you are really talking about are ideas. Ideas for space elves in pointy helmets, ideas for chitinous exoskeletons with bony ridges, ideas about unstoppable aliens devouring the universe, ideas, ideas, ideas. And ideas are not protected by copyright. Black and white, plain and simple, unambiguously, never, ever, ever are ideas protected by copyright. And why? Because an idea is bigger than an expression. An idea encompasses a wide diversity of possible artistic expression, including, inexorably, that which has already been done before and copyright only ever protects that which is original. Were copyright to extend to ideas, rather than expressions, we would all be infringing someone's copyright and there would be no free artistic expression, which is what copyright laws are designed to promote.

Redbeard wrote:

Eilif wrote:
As long as the 3Pty maker doesn't use GW trademarks or IP or advertise it as an approved 40k model, than anyone can make any figure for any reason.

That's the tricky part, isn't it. Someone has to design models... That design is IP. For someone else to come along and blatantly copy the design in their own sculpt is theft of that design work and IP...

But Tyranids, while derivative of both Aliens and other things (starship troopers?) are distinctly their own thing. Aliens and Bugs never had symbiotic weapon constructs, as an example. Necrons owe as much to the Egyptians as they do to Terminator (with the possible exception that no one has found hieroglyphs that read "I'll Be Back"). Again, they're not a copy, they're influenced by, and that is (as you state) okay.

It's the companies that aren't doing their own design work that I take offense to. It's okay to derive your models from existing sources, but it's not okay to simply take someone else's designs.

Well said,
It all comes down to whether the derivitive aritst is legaly "taking someone elses designs" or not. And that's where folks will probably disagree most.

The trouble with calling a GW design "original IP" is that it's so derivative to begin with. Take a commissar for example, a figure for which there seem to be a number of non-GW versions available). How much of the GW design can they really call IP? Russo/Nazi uniform, long cape, peaked cap? It's all so drawn for other sources that the only original IP involved ends up being the imperial Logos and certain notably unique GW weapon designs.

GW will send out alot of C&D's, but they're sent with the weight of $ and lawyers, not the law. By selling a product that does such a great job (I happen to really like GW asthetic) of pulling so many notable Sci-Fi tropes into one game, they've left the field wide open for folks to make GW-ish products, largely with impunity. All folks have to do is lose some logos and change some design features and they're in the clear.

Also, I think that the Necrons (Especially the early versions) and Tryranids owe far more to the source material I named than you do but that's a whole other issue. For a more blatant example see "Sly Marbo" for another example of GW originality at it's best.

12thRonin wrote:

biccat wrote:

12thRonin wrote:Privateer also has a very draconian conversion policy that does not really lend itself to extensive conversion and "counts as".

It's not really draconian. Most conversions are OK, unless you change the weapons of the models. Which is virtually the same as GW's WYSIWYG policy.

Except it's not.

Privateer Press Conversion Policy wrote:A converted model must contain a majority of parts from the WARMACHINE or HORDES model for which the rules were written. For example, a Testament of Menoth conversion must be composed mostly of parts from the Testament of Menoth model.

So since I hate the Black 13th models with a passion, I can't substitute IK models that look far better that have been either converted or GS'ed to look like them or to represent their undercover operations.

That's not true. You can play with whatever proxies/stand-ins/conversions you and your gaming group want. You just can't do it at tournaments sanctioned by PP. GW used to do the same thing. And as their influence on the tournament scene got smaller and smaller, until today where they have no US presence, people now are free to play with what figures they choose.

weeble1000 wrote:The plain fact is that you have a bias towards Games Workshop that you are either incapable or unwilling to account for...

Hardly. I'm fairly critical of a lot of GWs practices. Why do you feel the need to make this personal?

"That design is IP?" Copyright protects original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression.

IP is not limited to copyrights.

With one breath you say that Jes Goodwin can claim ownership of another's artistic expression in the form of a sculptural work of art based on his expression of a concept sketch in a notebook to which no one can really be said to have had access to. With another breath you say that the Tyranids are derived from HR Geiger's unique artistic expressions (among others) and yet argue that they are nevertheless "distinctly their own thing."

I'm sure that you're so bent on your absolutist approach that you can't see the differences, so I'll point them out.

Giger's Aliens are bipedal. They're pretty well defined with two legs and two arms and a tail. I'm not an expert on the Alien's extended universe, but this was the case in all the movies I saw and at least the first few pages of GIS. Tyranids have six limbs. Giger's Aliens seem to have no ranged capabilities. Tyranids routinely make use of weapon symbiote creatures. I'm fairly sure that presented with a model of each, even a casual observer would be able to tell them apart. Yes, clearly GW was influenced by Giger's work, and also other work. However, they took those influences, put their own spin on it, and made it something sufficiently distinct that someone unfamiliar with either source could be told about these fundamental differences and correctly sort each.

On the other hand, we have Chapterhouse's Farseer. There's not one element on this model that distinguishes it from GWs design. It wears the same rune armour, same robes, a very similar helmet, even the hilt of the sword matches GW's designs.

To me, that's just not right. That's being a parasite. And, that's said as someone who has purchased other things, the Stormraven extension kit, from Chapterhouse. Because I don't think that mod kits are wrong in the least.

Flip the argument around, if you would, and see how it goes down. Imagine that Jes Goodwin is HR Geiger and the Carnifex model was created by a 3rd party company. Oh how you would be spouting about how the Carnifex model is clearly a copy of Mr. Goodwin's designs. Just look at the exoskeleton. It is clearly copied from Mr. Goodwin's aliens. Heck, the thing even is an alien, and where is the back story. The thing is just called a "Carnifex" which means butcher, and of course Geiger aliens are butchers.

Do you have some personal grudge against me? Have I slighted you in some way? Because, really, I can't see any other reason for this hostility, let alone you trying to strawman me. In fact, if you scroll back in this thread, I explicitly called out several companies, including Avatars of War, that have taken reasonable steps to make their own models distinct, even if they're compatible with GW's stuff, rather than just copying someone else's design. So, no, I wouldn't claim that Giger copied from GW, because there are clear and obvious differences between the two. And that's a position I've been consistent with through this whole thread.

Black and white, plain and simple, unambiguously, never, ever, ever are ideas protected by copyright.

Well, at least you're right about this. Ideas aren't covered by copyrights. But, I'll point out two things. One, this thread isn't about legal standing, it's about opinions. In my opinion, Chapterhouse's farseer crosses a line that I find offensive. That's my opinion. It's also my opinion that there are plenty of manufacturers out there who have created their own designs and that are doing it the right way, even if their work is compatible with GW models, and I support those companies.

Secondly, there are other forms of IP protection that do cover ideas. "One-click checkout" is an idea that can be implemented in many different ways, but Amazon's got that idea patented and so no one else can do it. It's not all about copyrights.

Obviously the Poll shows how we feel.

Redbeard wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:With one breath you say that Jes Goodwin can claim ownership of another's artistic expression in the form of a sculptural work of art based on his expression of a concept sketch in a notebook to which no one can really be said to have had access to. With another breath you say that the Tyranids are derived from HR Geiger's unique artistic expressions (among others) and yet argue that they are nevertheless "distinctly their own thing."

I'm sure that you're so bent on your absolutist approach that you can't see the differences, so I'll point them out.

Giger's Aliens are bipedal. They're pretty well defined with two legs and two arms and a tail.

Someone has forgotten the Alien that hatched from the dog in the 3rd movie, that was definitely a quadruped, and seemed significantly smaller than the 'humanoid' Aliens in the first two movies. So it's quite likely that Aliens hatched from other species pick up aspects of that species in their development.

I'm not an expert on the Alien's extended universe, but this was the case in all the movies I saw and at least the first few pages of GIS. Tyranids have six limbs. Giger's Aliens seem to have no ranged capabilities. Tyranids routinely make use of weapon symbiote creatures. I'm fairly sure that presented with a model of each, even a casual observer would be able to tell them apart. Yes, clearly GW was influenced by Giger's work, and also other work. However, they took those influences, put their own spin on it, and made it something sufficiently distinct that someone unfamiliar with either source could be told about these fundamental differences and correctly sort each.

Of course, had GW made the Tyranids much more like Gegier's critters, they WOULD have been sued.

On the other hand, we have Chapterhouse's Farseer. There's not one element on this model that distinguishes it from GWs design. It wears the same rune armour, same robes, a very similar helmet, even the hilt of the sword matches GW's designs.

To me, that's just not right. That's being a parasite.

I'll give you that one.

I'll ask a follow-up question. What about Mantic? Do their miniatures cross that line in your opinon, and why (or why not)?

Douglaspocock wrote:Obviously the Poll shows how we feel.

Sure does.

And so far 5 people really love their HHHobby!

Here's the thing; third party minis manufacturers would not survive if there wasn't a demand for what they make. They make options, alternates, bits, all sorts of stuff that people are looking for. If people didn't want them, then they wouldn't be able to sell their wares. But they can, and they do. So there's clearly a portion of the marketplace that GW is not satisfying.

If GW produced everything that people wanted, then there would be no room for third parties. But, say, Skibor Minis makes a fantastic Egyptian-themed Armored Space Warrior piece, and there is nothing comparable in the GW range. Should I limit my vision of my the Pharaoh's Guard Chapter because GW doesn't make a suitable model?

Vulcan wrote:I'll ask a follow-up question. What about Mantic? Do their miniatures cross that line in your opinon, and why (or why not)?

From what I've seen of Mantic, they seem to be just fine. They wrote their own game, so they've clearly got their own ideas going on. Their fantasy stuff, like most of GWs fantasy stuff, is based in the very generic elf/dwarf/undead concepts, and their sci-fi line just seems to extend the same into space. There's some common ancestor stuff going on, but the actual model designs seem distinct.

Hulksmash wrote:

However, I'm against creating full on units like PuppetofWar does in the tomb blades, wraiths, spyders. This, to me, is leeching off another's work. It isn't a kit that needs a GW kit to use. It's a full independent kit of a GW branded item. These are sales out of GW's pocket entirely. To me that part is wrong.

However, this is a common thing in the automotive industry. If I get in a crash and need a new bumper for my car I can buy a new one from the original manufacturer (OEM-Original Equipment Manufacturer) , or one from any number of aftermarket companies that make exact copies of the original part, not something fairly close (like Puppetswar does) but EXACTLY the same, right down to the corporate logos. Now, you dont see the OEMs crying about it.

Now IM not advocating other companies making exact copies of GW (or any other) models, but I see no problem with them making things that are very close, since as a customer I benefit from the variety of choice. How can GW (or others) protect thier sales in a competitive environment such as this?...simple...make the nicest models at the best price. GW doesnt like competition as it forces them to offer a better product at a better (for the customer) price. They want to be able to put out whatever they feel like at whatever they choose to charge and make people buy it since its the only choice.

Redbeard wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:The plain fact is that you have a bias towards Games Workshop that you are either incapable or unwilling to account for...

Hardly. I'm fairly critical of a lot of GWs practices. Why do you feel the need to make this personal?

I'm not trying to make a personal attack. You have made arguments that are objectively contradictory. You have applied a double standard in favor of Games Workshop. To me, that is indicative of a bias that you have not accounted for.

Redbeard wrote:IP is not limited to copyrights.

You are correct, but in your arguments you were really only referring to copyright. IP laws do not "mix." Whether or not you intended to make an argument that there is something wrong with some sort of mixture between copyright and trademark use, no such theory is tenable when it comes to the law. And, I do not think that your arguments indicated in any way that you intended such an argument. One cannot really trademark an aesthetic, and certainly not in the way you might have meant. Were it possible, for example, the Tyranid aesthetic would clearly infringe a trademark owned by Geiger.

That's just not the way things work, and there are extremely good reasons for it.

Redbeard wrote:I'm sure that you're so bent on your absolutist approach that you can't see the differences, so I'll point them out.

Giger's Aliens are bipedal. They're pretty well defined with two legs and two arms and a tail. I'm not an expert on the Alien's extended universe, but this was the case in all the movies I saw and at least the first few pages of GIS. Tyranids have six limbs. Giger's Aliens seem to have no ranged capabilities. Tyranids routinely make use of weapon symbiote creatures. I'm fairly sure that presented with a model of each, even a casual observer would be able to tell them apart. Yes, clearly GW was influenced by Giger's work, and also other work. However, they took those influences, put their own spin on it, and made it something sufficiently distinct that someone unfamiliar with either source could be told about these fundamental differences and correctly sort each.

On the other hand, we have Chapterhouse's Farseer. There's not one element on this model that distinguishes it from GWs design. It wears the same rune armour, same robes, a very similar helmet, even the hilt of the sword matches GW's designs.

To me, that's just not right. That's being a parasite. And, that's said as someone who has purchased other things, the Stormraven extension kit, from Chapterhouse. Because I don't think that mod kits are wrong in the least.

As I said in my previous post, flip that argument around. Have you really looked at the Doomsee model? It is inspired by an aesthetic used by Games Workshop, which is itself bereft of much originality. This is not a criticism of Mr. Goodwin's work, which I think is interesting, creative, and unique. But when you say that the "Doomseer" wears the "same" rune armor, robes, etc. you are not actually referring to those elements being a copy of a particular expression. Thus, what you are pointing out is indeed an aesthetic. An aesthetic of a humanoid figure clad in robes, plated armor with a runic symbol, and a tall helmet.

If one applies a similar argument to the Tyranid works with reference to HR Geiger's works, one would arrive at the same conclusion. All you have pointed out is that the Tyranids have 6 limbs, ranged weapons, etc. First, pointing out differences is not actually legally appropriate when determining if one work is a copy of another, but we can shelve that for now. Geiger's "design" as you would call it, is as referenced in the Tyranid works as the Eldar "design" is referenced in the Doomseer. And one can make a pretty solid argument that the similarities between Tyranids and Geiger's works concern unique protectable elements to a much greater degree than those between the Doomseer model and Eldar works.

The human form is indispensable from the idea, the form of the robes and plated armor is largely dictated by how those articles relate to the human form. Those elements are grossly rooted in the freely accessible library of the public domain. Do you see where this is going?

In contrast, Geiger's "style" is arguably quite distinct to Geiger. But even so, that "style" or "design" or "aesthetic" or whatever you want to call it simply is not protectable intellectual property; not as a copyright, not as a trademark, and not as a patent. And that is a good thing. That means artists, like those employed by Games Workshop, can participate in an ongoing cultural dialogue of artistic expression. The works of others can serve as inspiration for future works of artistic expression, and everyone can still maintain control over the work that they actually create.

What you apparently do not like is that the Doomseer model is an expression largely based on an idea conceived of by Games Workshop. That is an undeniable fact. Now, is that idea very original? Is the Doomseer a creative twist on that idea? Neither of those questions really matter at all when you start talking about pretectable intellectual property.

I am not trying to strawman you. You brought up intellectual property rights, and that is what I am responding to. The point I am trying to make is that there are good reasons for why intellectual property laws have been designed in the way that they have. Copyright laws are intended to protect and encourage artistic expression.

Your opinions about this "intangible line" are fine, but I think everyone should give serious thought to what such opinions mean when you broaden your scope from the miniatures market to include all artists the world over. As soon as you start referencing intellectual property rights, your opinions begin to have a such a far reaching impact because such laws are applied to all artists, inventors, and indeed to the entire market. This is serious stuff.

If you want to say that you don't like the Doomseer model, and that you think 3rd party companies should be creating their own games, story lines, etc., that's perfectly fine. If you want to say that you wouldn't purchase the Doomseer model because it is a blatant ripoff of GW's Eldar and you don't think that is right, that's perfectly fine. But as soon as you start to argue that someone's intellectual property rights have been violated, you should expect to have a serious discussion, because you aren't talking about something confined to a discrete relationship between two individuals. You are talking about my rights, and your rights, and everyone else's rights. You are talking about an issue that has a serious, tangible impact on peoples lives and livelihoods. And you are talking about something that has potentially broad implications for the evolution of culture.

From another thread:

weeble1000 wrote:
. I am not an attorney, nor do I hold degrees in any field related to the study of law. The views that I have expressed are not legal opinions, nor should they be taken as legal counsel or advice of any kind. The views that I have expressed are merely the way I prefer to interpret the law to the extent that I am aware of it. I think I have a pretty good handle on a few things, but that is just what I personally think and these views carry no authority of any kind.

My views have been consistent throughout this thread, and I've not brought up, nor do I particularly care about the legal distinctions here. I don't care if there's no legal difference between the amount of difference between Giger and a Tyranid and those between the Chapterhouse doomseer and the GW farseers. To me, the doomseer is offensive, it's not different enough. Whereas the Mantic models are, and the Avatars of War models are, and the Ultraforge models are, and the tyranids are.

So, you go ahead and keep pretending to be an IP lawyer. I'll continue to shop with my conscience.

So, a select few think they are parasites, eh?

Are they upset by these 'Parasites' actions? It appears overwhelming not.

It seems irrational to myself that anoyone would be so strongly against 3rd party actions as to prevent them from buying one to fill a needed space in their army.

Redbeard wrote: To me, the doomseer is offensive, it's not different enough. Whereas the Mantic models are, and the Avatars of War models are, and the Ultraforge models are, and the tyranids are.

So, you go ahead and keep pretending to be an IP lawyer. I'll continue to shop with my conscience.

Your discernment of "enough" difference is a purely subjective thing and then you want to place yourself in a morally superior position based on that subjective assessment implying that the rest of us lack a conscience. I think the Ultraforge greater daemons are practically clones of the GW ones. As I recall, one of them was withdrawn from the market and reworked because it had the actual nurgle symbol on it.

So let's say we're playing a game and I put a Doomseer model on the table. What do you do? Do you say anything? Do you refuse the game? It is after all a matter of conscience....

Arschbombe wrote:Your discernment of "enough" difference is a purely subjective thing

Yes, yes it is.

and then you want to place yourself in a morally superior position based on that subjective assessment implying that the rest of us lack a conscience.

I have not implied anything, nor claimed to be morally superior. I have shared my position. If you feel guilt because of yours, that's on you.

So let's say we're playing a game and I put a Doomseer model on the table. What do you do? Do you say anything? Do you refuse the game? It is after all a matter of conscience....

It may be a surprise to some, but not all of us feel the need to push our own values on other people. I don't play with unpainted models, but I do play against people who don't share that value. It's not my job to police my opponent's choice of models.

Here we go again, CHS vs GW thread all over again.

In response to OP, that statement was laced with the ignorance of someone who lives in a cubicle. Out hobby is a big one, and if 3rd party manufacturers of parts or alternatives are parasites, then so too are each and every person who converts the original model in question, on account of the fact that they are not giving money to the company for the official model, and shortcuts are being made to make a passable copy. example? Creating say, a space marine captain, tech marine or hero or whatever can easily be done from a regular line marine and parts in your bitz box. Effectively, you will spend about $7 on a model which, from GW, could cost up to $20+ (CDN $$$). I mean, sure, you are a parasite because you are leaching GW by not buying the official model and converting it instead.

Out hobby is a centered on fun, either in play or in painting or in the building. Then there's the fact that with popularity of certain armies, I want something that looks visibly different, and I'm going to need to buy parts from third parties if I can't sculpt or lack imagination. Similariy, if I happen to think GW's guardsmen are ugly hideous disgusting things, and my FLGS has no problems with me fielding non-GW models, then I will go over to Defiance Games and buy their marines because I feel they look better. If GW feels ripped that I won't buy their models, they can blame third parties all they like; the fact is I hate their models because they look ugly, are overpriced, or don't match my aesthetic concept. Technically speaking FW is a third party manufacturer, approved by GW. It is NOT however GW, and each time someone buys a DKOK army, GW is technically losing out because its not the one closing the deal, so FW would technically be a parasite. Add all of that brass etch stuff and all the other custom parts....

EDIT:
The same thing goes for anyone who buys a 1/35 scale model or other scale, and uses parts there from or the entire model and brings it into 40k, replacing the weapons and adding icons to 40k-ify it. I can buy REALLY good quality tanks at $20, finish them with some plasticard, and slap on some autocannon and heavy bolter and stubbers from my bitz box, and voila, I have a rhino/chimera APC. Is Tamiya or Dragon Models now a parasite? Am I now a parasite? No, the comment in OP is simply an ignorant remark of someone who as yet does not know the concept of budgeting or the hobby at large.

Redbeard wrote:I have not implied anything, nor claimed to be morally superior.

Yes, you have. In this thread you have consistently come at the subject from a moralistic, not legal perspective. You've taken all the concrete legal discussion and tossed it aside saying, in effect, that you know wrong when you see it and that your conscience is a better barometer of what is right than the applicable law.

If you feel guilt because of yours, that's on you.

While I do have a Doomseer, I feel no guilt. I have 3 GW farseers.

It may be a surprise to some, but not all of us feel the need to push our own values on other people. I don't play with unpainted models, but I do play against people who don't share that value. It's not my job to police my opponent's choice of models.

Ok. But do unpainted models offend you? You've said repeatedly that the Doomseer offends you.

They have to still make a product that looks good. Also if GW wants to sit on their hands/ spend millions to sew these companies, rather than MAKE FETHING MODLES, more companies should make addons. It dosnet hurt GW sales any they dont fething make the fething thing in the first place, and you still have to buy the fething base modle to put the "parasite addon" onto in the first place.

Redbeard wrote:
My views have been consistent throughout this thread, and I've not brought up, nor do I particularly care about the legal distinctions here. I don't care if there's no legal difference between the amount of difference between Giger and a Tyranid and those between the Chapterhouse doomseer and the GW farseers. To me, the doomseer is offensive, it's not different enough. Whereas the Mantic models are, and the Avatars of War models are, and the Ultraforge models are, and the tyranids are.

So, you go ahead and keep pretending to be an IP lawyer. I'll continue to shop with my conscience.

I think you should shop with your conscience, which is essentially what I said in my previous response. Your opinions are all fine and well, but you brought up intellectual property rights. If you bring up the law, you should be prepared to discuss the law. And the takeaway from my response was that you can feel however you feel, and shop with your conscience however you like, but once you start to talk about intellectual property rights you step into a world quite beyond your own choices as a consumer.

Maybe you should care about the legal distinctions, because they affect you. I would also hope that by making an attempt to properly understand the legal distinctions, you would develop an appreciation for the purposes of such laws. You might find that your opinions about what is right or wrong in the world of artistic expression begin to change.

And I have never pretended to be an IP attorney. If you think my interpretation or understanding of the law is flawed, we can have a discussion about that. I think discussing these issues is a good thing. There's nothing wrong with trying to understand something better, especially when it is something that has a tangible impact on your life. I respect that you have essentially washed your hands of the topic, and I'll leave it alone going forward. But I heartily encourage you to take an interest in these issues.

Arschbombe wrote:
Yes, you have. In this thread you have consistently come at the subject from a moralistic, not legal perspective.

Yes, I have. Does the thread topic say "Are third party bitz makers doing something illegal?" No. Why are you so interested in making this a legal discussion.

You've taken all the concrete legal discussion and tossed it aside saying, in effect, that you know wrong when you see it and that your conscience is a better barometer of what is right than the applicable law.

Yup. In 1850, it was legal to own slaves. In 1950, it was legal to refuse to serve blacks. In 2000, it was legal to deny consenting adults the right to get married. So what? This is a discussion board, not a legal discussion board. I don't have to agree with every law, nor believe that every law is correct. I'm a consumer, and I've a right to vote with my dollar, based on what I believe is right, not what someone else says is the law. I've a right to boycott businesses that support things I don't believe in, even if those things are legal.

Smoking pot is illegal. People still do it. I don't, but I don't think people who do should be punished. I don't think anti-marijuana laws are right, even though I've no interest myself. I think the current patent system is seriously messed up. The existence of patent trolls, companies that exist simply to stifle innovation and hold it hostage is proof, to me at least, that IP laws, in general, are broken in this country.

The law is not the end-all of discussions.

weeble1000 wrote:
I think you should shop with your conscience, which is essentially what I said in my previous response. Your opinions are all fine and well, but you brought up intellectual property rights. If you bring up the law, you should be prepared to discuss the law.

Rights != The Law. We've done this one before. Laws actually can restrict rights. You brought up the law, I did not.

Maybe you should care about the legal distinctions, because they affect you. I would also hope that by making an attempt to properly understand the legal distinctions, you would develop an appreciation for the purposes of such laws.

Maybe if you made an attempt to understand the state of IP law in this country, you wouldn't be so fast to defend it. America's IP laws are ludicrous and horribly outdated in a digital world. So why should I want to discuss whether something is legal in a broken legal system?

Redbeard wrote:

Arschbombe wrote:
Yes, you have. In this thread you have consistently come at the subject from a moralistic, not legal perspective.

Yes, I have. Does the thread topic say "Are third party bitz makers doing something illegal?" No. Why are you so interested in making this a legal discussion.

You've taken all the concrete legal discussion and tossed it aside saying, in effect, that you know wrong when you see it and that your conscience is a better barometer of what is right than the applicable law.

Yup. In 1850, it was legal to own slaves. In 1950, it was legal to refuse to serve blacks. In 2000, it was legal to deny consenting adults the right to get married. So what? This is a discussion board, not a legal discussion board. I don't have to agree with every law, nor believe that every law is correct. I'm a consumer, and I've a right to vote with my dollar, based on what I believe is right, not what someone else says is the law. I've a right to boycott businesses that support things I don't believe in, even if those things are legal.

Smoking pot is illegal. People still do it. I don't, but I don't think people who do should be punished. I don't think anti-marijuana laws are right, even though I've no interest myself. I think the current patent system is seriously messed up. The existence of patent trolls, companies that exist simply to stifle innovation and hold it hostage is proof, to me at least, that IP laws, in general, are broken in this country.

The law is not the end-all of discussions.

weeble1000 wrote:
I think you should shop with your conscience, which is essentially what I said in my previous response. Your opinions are all fine and well, but you brought up intellectual property rights. If you bring up the law, you should be prepared to discuss the law.

Rights != The Law. We've done this one before. Laws actually can restrict rights. You brought up the law, I did not.

Maybe you should care about the legal distinctions, because they affect you. I would also hope that by making an attempt to properly understand the legal distinctions, you would develop an appreciation for the purposes of such laws.

Maybe if you made an attempt to understand the state of IP law in this country, you wouldn't be so fast to defend it. America's IP laws are ludicrous and horribly outdated in a digital world. So why should I want to discuss whether something is legal in a broken legal system?

Broken or not the law is still the law. Dakka has a policy about making sure discussion of illegal activities is not allowed. You can not care all you want but ignoring the illegality of the topic you're discussing is usually frowned upon on dakka.

I like the third party bits makers but whether or not it is legal is undecided atm in the US.

The reason why the doomseer is the focal point is because it is the most advanced example of 3rd parties making a "GW model" vs "a model compatible with GW rules". Here is what the original TXT was:

Doomseer Iyanar-Duanna is cursed with the ability to forsee the slow death of her race. She shares the ability of all farseers to see the paths of her race, but is only able to see the deaths of her people and nothing else. She was psychically scarred when she witnessed the death of the people of Malantai, she is now doomed to spend every moment of her life tracking down the creature responsible

They quickly generalized it which shows they knew they had pushed too far. And while they may be legal, the intent turned many customers off. Some people dislike it. They want to support people who make their own original stuff.

There is a worlds difference between a "a gorilla psychic energy sword master of plaptoine the desert planet" and "Jedi Wookie light saber master of tatooine." the model may look similar and customers can connect the dots, but connecting the dots and pretending to be official Star wars universe will get you nuked, as it should.

Redbeard my friend, IMO and since you have been debating something that I cherish and even studied I'm addressing H.R. Giger legacy here...The Tyranids that you speak are not a question of opinion but in fact they are derivative and in some cases copies of Giger Aliens... I will not populate this thread with images because your old enough to know better... But for those less veterans amough us... check old nid hormagaunts extended heads and how GW ride that wave for many years maybe one decade or two?... check the FW Hive tyrants etc etc compare with aliens queens, concept fluff etc...
Besides Alien queens xenomorphs do have 6 limbs just google it. Do I have a problem with it? No. Its just a case that your perspective on this seems bent.... and now I'm going to be a total snob.. but comparing Giger to Jes goodwin is like comparing the sahara with a grain of sand.

OverwatchCNC wrote:
Broken or not the law is still the law. Dakka has a policy about making sure discussion of illegal activities is not allowed. You can not care all you want but ignoring the illegality of the topic you're discussing is usually frowned upon on dakka.

I like the third party bits makers but whether or not it is legal is undecided atm in the US.

I didn't think we were discussing illegal activities. As far as I'm aware, it's still legal to boycott a business whose practices you don't like.

Redbeard wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:
I think you should shop with your conscience, which is essentially what I said in my previous response. Your opinions are all fine and well, but you brought up intellectual property rights. If you bring up the law, you should be prepared to discuss the law.

Rights != The Law. We've done this one before. Laws actually can restrict rights. You brought up the law, I did not.

Actually, intellectual property rights are the law. Intellectual property rights in the United States derive from statutory authority, they are not natural, fundamental, or Constitutional rights.

biccat wrote:
Actually, intellectual property rights are the law. Intellectual property rights in the United States derive from statutory authority, they are not natural, fundamental, or Constitutional rights.

Which explains how they differ from country to country. Something that's legal on one side of a border may be illegal on the other side. The US Intellectual Property Rights system is a real mess right now. It's hard to take something as indicative of what should be fair when they issue patents on making stuff in your email clickable or the ability to make a purchase within an app.

Redbeard wrote:

OverwatchCNC wrote:
Broken or not the law is still the law. Dakka has a policy about making sure discussion of illegal activities is not allowed. You can not care all you want but ignoring the illegality of the topic you're discussing is usually frowned upon on dakka.

I like the third party bits makers but whether or not it is legal is undecided atm in the US.

I didn't think we were discussing illegal activities. As far as I'm aware, it's still legal to boycott a business whose practices you don't like.

Are you talking about GW because makes no sense to have double standard with companies that do or did the same damn thing... mind it's your prerogative, just don't say your attitude is not biased and has some kind of moral grounds.

Redbeard wrote:Which explains how they differ from country to country. Something that's legal on one side of a border may be illegal on the other side.

I'm not sure how this matters.

You and weeble are both US posters.

Redbeard wrote:The US Intellectual Property Rights system is a real mess right now. It's hard to take something as indicative of what should be fair when they issue patents on making stuff in your email clickable or the ability to make a purchase within an app.

Not really.

But this thread is about copyrights, not patent law. They're entirely separate areas.

biccat wrote:I'm not sure how this matters.

You and weeble are both US posters.

No, I'm not. I'm just here now.

But this thread is about copyrights, not patent law. They're entirely separate areas.

No, this thread is not about copyrights. This thread is about people's opinions. It's not a legal discussion thread. It's not a copyright thread. It's about what people think is right or wrong.

Once upon a time, people would discuss what they thought was appropriate, what was ideal, and strive to make the laws reflect that. (Or maybe I'm being idealistic here). But you (and some other posters) seem to insist on turning it around, making it about "this is the law, so this must be right". That's horrible logic, and history has shown, time and again, that just because something is a law does not make it either fair or just.

Laws change. Sometimes, laws from one country prove to be superior, and are adopted in other countries - which is why the comment about borders does matter. Because just because something is currently US law, doesn't mean it will still be US law in five, or ten, or fifty years. US laws on all sorts of IP issues have been gradually bent to accommodate private interests. Why is Mickey Mouse still protected? He should have been public domain years ago. You cannot point to the US IP system and say that it's not horribly flawed. So why do you want to discuss what it says, rather than what's reasonable?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NAVARRO wrote:
Are you talking about GW because makes no sense to have double standard with companies that do or did the same damn thing... mind it's your prerogative, just don't say your attitude is not biased and has some kind of moral grounds.

It has nothing to do with bias, it has to do with reasonable differentiation. I'm more than happy to acknowledge that GW is heavily influenced by other designs and creators, but they always do something to make their stuff look like their stuff, rather than like what they're influenced by. I don't think you could show me a single tyranid model, from any era, and have me think that it's something Giger did. They made them different. Chapterhouse's Farseer fails that test. If I handed one to someone without the depth of knowledge of GWs range, they'd probably think it was a GW model. That's not a bias in favour of GW, it's simply the standard I choose to go by.

Redbeard wrote:No, this thread is not about copyrights.

Well, I just posted to point out where you were wrong. If you want to have a discussion of legal theory and IP rights, I'd be happy to do so elsewhere.

Redbeard wrote:
Once upon a time, people would discuss what they thought was appropriate, what was ideal, and strive to make the laws reflect that. (Or maybe I'm being idealistic here). But you (and some other posters) seem to insist on turning it around, making it about "this is the law, so this must be right". That's horrible logic, and history has shown, time and again, that just because something is a law does not make it either fair or just.

I've been in agreement with the majority of what you've posted. I really think you've nailed it with that statement.

Although I should clarify that my agreement is just my opinion, and not meant to be a representation of either IP or copyright law...

I like your tiptoe on calling some Heavly influenced and others morally wrong BOYCOTT Banana hormas, both minis and the concept art... FW Tyrants... just because you stick a weapon to a creature the creature remains the same... main attributes are exactly the same detailing... concepts the same... but yes you don't see them as GIGER work because all the brains at GW over these 35 years could not match 1% of the design genius Giger was.. they tried though and glad they did because what you fail to see is that if they did not tried we in our little corners of this world would NOT have these toys...
Heck they even tried dalek Live and let live the worst thing it can happen to this ridiculous small hobby is closed mentality, both in companies and communities.

Redbeard wrote: The existence of patent trolls, companies that exist simply to stifle innovation and hold it hostage is proof, to me at least, that IP laws, in general, are broken in this country.

Patent trolls boil my blood too, but the patents that they assert have to first be approved, and often re-approved. The first line of defense is the USPTO, which is sadly horridly overworked and underfunded. There's also the companies that are content to repeatedly pay the nuisance fees that fund the war chests that trolls use to continue litigation and patent prosecution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redbeard wrote:Rights != The Law. We've done this one before. Laws actually can restrict rights. You brought up the law, I did not.

Fair enough.

In my own defense I must add that laws and rights are often, though not always, closely related issues; and the acronym "IP" is quite often used within the context of discussing intellectual property laws, rather than the more abstract concept of rights. But of course if we continue this line of discussion we could end up derailing this thread into an argument about natural rights and theories of governance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redbeard wrote:Maybe if you made an attempt to understand the state of IP law in this country, you wouldn't be so fast to defend it. America's IP laws are ludicrous and horribly outdated in a digital world. So why should I want to discuss whether something is legal in a broken legal system?

In order to appreciate the intention behind the laws. No system is perfect, and things can indeed go awry, but on a fundamental level I believe that the purpose of intellectual property laws is to serve a very significant public good. The problem is that one must invest a measure of one's freedom in order to create a governing body. Without coercive authority, there is no government. At times, this can seem unfair, but the goal is to serve the interests of the group, though as I have said this can sometimes be at the expense of an individual.

Thus with patents you give an inventor a monopoly. That's serious business in a capitalist economy. The trade off is the "advancement of science and the useful arts" that occurs because inventors have an incentive to teach others how to make and use their inventions. I think that is a damn good thing. Now, there are problems with the patent system, but it is build on a solid bedrock of great ideas.

So too with copyright, as I have explained. It may not always seem fair, but the goal is to protect and encourage artistic expression. Thus the laws have to walk a razor's edge between protecting the work of one author and restricting the ability of other authors to express themselves. Ultimately, I think that copyright laws are more fair than you give them credit for, hence my continued efforts to encourage you and others to take an interest in these issues.

Redbeard... I'm afraid I just don't get your point.

It is awful and utterly unforgivable that a third party manufacturer made a miniature that was recognizably a female version of a GW Farseer; terrible to the point that you won't patronize their company.

And yet GW doing the same thing to Geiger's Aliens (and believe me, they did just that; the early Tyranids were clearly recognizable as Aliens) gets a shrug and a pass.

Is it bad when any party does it, or is it not bad when any party does it? If it's a matter of conscience there is no 'sometimes' about it.

If it is a matter of who is doing it that makes it good or bad it isn't a matter of conscience at all, but simply being judgemental without basis.

Vulcan wrote:Redbeard... I'm afraid I just don't get your point.

It is awful and utterly unforgivable that a third party manufacturer made a miniature that was recognizably a female version of a GW Farseer; terrible to the point that you won't patronize their company.

And yet GW doing the same thing to Geiger's Aliens (and believe me, they did just that; the early Tyranids were clearly recognizable as Aliens) gets a shrug and a pass.

Is it bad when any party does it, or is it not bad when any party does it? If it's a matter of conscience there is no 'sometimes' about it.

If it is a matter of who is doing it that makes it good or bad it isn't a matter of conscience at all, but simply being judgemental without basis.

I suppose readbeard (COMMUNIST! ITS RED! RED!!!! COMMIE!!!!) 's argument can be clarified. I'm not putting words into his mouth, but a player could still "conscietiously" purchase from GW by not buying anything tyranid related for the fact you pointed out.

Then of course if you DO go down this convoluted path, you have the problem that Dark Bucket (Darth vader) was ripped off to create the space marine helmets... then there's the fact that the chaos and the whole eight fold path was ripped off of that one author whose bloody name insists on eluding me.... then Tau are a ripoff of any number of asian transformer thingies. Imperial guard are by and large based off of real-world designs and hence not really protectable, and only GW's rendition of the two-headed eagle is really protected. I really only see orks as a caricaturization of what Tolkien already established, so there's not much there. What, egyptian skeletons and sphynx statues? Carrying on this path gets ridiculous because it gets too easy to a.) derail this thread into CHS vs GWS version 362 and b.) its all opinion anyway
.... Anyway, that leaves the question, what exactly can be bought conscientiously from GW? Back where we started, which is all just baseless opinion anyway.

I think if it wasn't for 3rd party companies then half the units in every codex would still be unavailable cause GW would have no motivation to actually release what players want. Theres a reason why monopolies suck. Competition drives everyone to improve their products which is good for us consumers.

I think even if GW provided all the models required for a codex, it would still be fine for other companies to produce alternatives.

Obviously it's easier to sell models for which an unsatisfied demand exists -- e.g. female Farseer, Spore Pod, etc.

poda_t wrote:then there's the fact that the chaos and the whole eight fold path was ripped off of that one author whose bloody name insists on eluding me....

Michael Moorcock.

This thread is about the aftermarket being parasites. AFAIK parasite is not a legal category, so all this legal discussion is off topic. BTW not even GW lawyers, after 1.5 years in a lawsuit, could provide as much as a formally correct charge of what Chapterhouse could have possibly done wrong, so GW's omnipotency claims couldn't stand their confrontation with the real world.

on the legal standpoint: It's legal, at least until a contrary precedent is set.

On the moral standpoint: they aren't directly lifting GW designs (they're not recasting) they're making designs inspired by GW artwork and based on GWs concepts. I'm perfectly ok with this, especially in light of GW blatantly doing the same thing (2nd edition hormagaunts, 3rd edition Hive Tyrant, Sentinel Powerlifter, Sly Marbo...)

NAVARRO wrote:
Heck they even tried dalek

The Daleks, Cybermen and all of the other Dr Who figures they did were ALL licenced products relating to the DR Who Role playing game they also published and they didn't pretend they were anything else. A slightly different matter. GW got to publish their own games after first publishing the works of others. They got publishing rights in the UK & Australia (and probably the ROW outisde US) for Dungeons and Dragons, Call of Cthulhu, and a bunch of other rpgs, then they got publishing rights to "local" products like Judge Dredd, Dr Who, and so on.

The old banana-head hormagaunts were very Giger, as was the head design of that metal Hive Tyrant. Not identical, but only the one-eyed* would fail to see where the inspiration was drawn from for it. The rippers are also rather inspired by chestbursters, imo.


* by one-eyed, I mean the fannishly blind to anything-but-GW people (none so blind as those who will not see). In the kingdom of the blind, that one eyed man is just as blind.

Facehuggers are closer to necromunda rippers, check it out

Facehuggers pre-date necromunda.

They can't be inspired by something that came AFTER them and used them for inspiration.

chromedog wrote:Facehuggers pre-date necromunda.

They can't be inspired by something that came AFTER them and used them for inspiration.

I knowz

Yes they are parasites but GW is a victim of its own success. Having a popular gaming system that 3rd party companies have to produce bits goodies for is self induced.

How hard would it be for no kidding GW to run a "Spiky bits concept" right off their website? In light of the automated codex... not hard. I'm sure the start up costs would be less than the endless legal proceedings.

Redbeard wrote:

biccat wrote:
Actually, intellectual property rights are the law. Intellectual property rights in the United States derive from statutory authority, they are not natural, fundamental, or Constitutional rights.

Which explains how they differ from country to country. Something that's legal on one side of a border may be illegal on the other side. The US Intellectual Property Rights system is a real mess right now. It's hard to take something as indicative of what should be fair when they issue patents on making stuff in your email clickable or the ability to make a purchase within an app.

Could you actually explain specifically what you feel is wrong with the current US IP system? You are throwing out a lot of generic stuff here.

All legal issues aside, I fully support third party manufactures. In the case of bits, GW created the monster of customizing models/armies by shoving the concept of THE HOBBY down everyone's throats, then removed 90% of the support for doing so unless you have huge cash reserves to buy GW kits just to suck bits from them or are good at scratch building, which most of us are not. In the case of conversion kits or full-blown knockoffs of GW units, it has pushed GW to be much more timely in the manner in which they release models, with rumors of them taking that concept even further in the future. The only drawback that I've seen is possibly the information blackout for releases, which could as be attributed to the deal they have for The Hobbit.

As GW keeps raising their prices, the demand for third-party stuff is only going to grow and I hope that at some point, GW realizes that business is adapt or die, not cease and desist.

Interestingly, I've noticed that a couple of 3rd party companies are making vehicles which are based off of other concepts, but are obviously designed with use for 40k in mind. Is this being done with a mind to protecting them from litigation from GW in the future?

For example, the forthcoming 'Gothic tank' from Maxmini, copied from the ugliest real-world tank ever made bar none:


And from Puppetswar.com, yes it is for Orcs but it is also copied from a 'real world' aircraft (perhaps some aircraft enthusiast will know the name?)


Funny that both of these models have come out in short order, are they aware of something that we are not, or are they just making their lives easier in the future?

Maelstrom808 wrote:
As GW keeps raising their prices, the demand for third-party stuff is only going to grow

Exactly, it really boils down to this, the markets in motion and thats not something GW can controll... Many people say they have a monopoly and I believe GW may also think a bit that way but the truth is they do not and wargaming interest is growing because of the net and other things GW refuses to be a part of... so in that sense I would describe the bitz makers and other companies as alternative viable options... On salutte, the biggest ever, you could see that our hobby is growing... yet GW sales are errrr not ...not because the other companies are parasites but because they are what the market needs and wants. I love GW past genious, not much the present and kind of indiferent of its future ( I think they are on a deadend, quality & concepts wise decreasing, they may even go prepainted bendy plastics from the looks of it).
More Important than quantity is the heart and love you see on a mini in all steps of the way from casting to sculpting and for years now at GW ( apart from space hulk release) its all a mesh of faceless minis with no charisma. People do need to have at least one special mini on their GW armies and thats why they resort to customizing with those special bitz from others but THEY PLAY AND COLLECT GW full ARMIES... so snifing at one mini or bitz from others its kind of a skewed prespective.

If peole want diversity and charisma and GW does not deliver then its a open door for a niche small biz to grow... many do evolve into big biz you have plenty of examples.

Pacific wrote:Interestingly, I've noticed that a couple of 3rd party companies are making vehicles which are based off of other concepts, but are obviously designed with use for 40k in mind. Is this being done with a mind to protecting them from litigation from GW in the future?

For example, the forthcoming 'Gothic tank' from Maxmini, copied from the ugliest real-world tank ever made bar none:

Spoiler:

And from Puppetswar.com, yes it is for Orcs but it is also copied from a 'real world' aircraft (perhaps some aircraft enthusiast will know the name?)

Spoiler:

Funny that both of these models have come out in short order, are they aware of something that we are not, or are they just making their lives easier in the future?

Especially interesting when you realize that in the case of the maximini example, they're harkening back to an actual Historical design (the KV-2 russian tank) that GW also referenced when they did a "ragnarok" pattern russ in WD (or was it a codex...).

As to the ork plane it could be a couple different planes. It kind of reminds me of some of the German WW2 bomebers.

The Ragnarok was in the Epic Stormwind book, as part of the Baran Siegemasters army list.

brettz123 wrote:Could you actually explain specifically what you feel is wrong with the current US IP system? You are throwing out a lot of generic stuff here.

I really don't think this thread is the right place for it. I've PMed you.

Vulcan wrote:Redbeard... I'm afraid I just don't get your point.

It is awful and utterly unforgivable that a third party manufacturer made a miniature that was recognizably a female version of a GW Farseer; terrible to the point that you won't patronize their company.

And yet GW doing the same thing to Geiger's Aliens (and believe me, they did just that; the early Tyranids were clearly recognizable as Aliens) gets a shrug and a pass.

The only early Tyranid that bared any resemblance to a xenomorph was the 3rd edition Hive Tyrant, and only because it was a tall, lithe alien with an exo skeleton and a large head crest. It didn't actually look like the alien queen, just had the same basic profile. Outside of that, I'm hard pressed to think of any Tyranids that looked like anything from Aliens.

His point was just that - GW may take 'inspiration' from other properties, but they make the final product their own.

Chapterhouse are just making things directly from GW's IP. The Warrior Preistess? It's a female aspect warrior. Not specifically a Scorpion, but it's immediately recogniseable to anyone who has seen GW models as an aspect warrior. Same with the Doomseer. If you've seen the Eldar range, you'll know it's a Farseer or Warlock model.

I find it hard to believe you don't think Chapterhouse are directly using GW IP, especially when many of their products use GW names in them. If you buy a Farseer jetbike conversion kit, you're not using it on some Warmachine model.

Thankfully, you cannot legally copyright style.

Copyright applies to *copying*, not imitating. GW does not make a model of that warrior priestess : thus, if CHS makes the model, they cannot possibly be copying.

There is nothing illegal about 'directly using someone's IP', because IP doesn't exist as a legal term. There are Trademarks, Copyrights and Patents.
I honestly don't see the difference between what CHS is doing and what someone making iPhone covers is doing... its obviously for an iPhone, they wouldn't exist without Apple's success, but its a unique piece of art.

They're not parasites. By giving hobbyists another avenue for customisation, they add value to GW rather than taking away. There are so many industries and companies that only exist because of the success of another, and CHS is no different and definitely not evil.

-Loki- wrote:

Vulcan wrote:Redbeard... I'm afraid I just don't get your point.

It is awful and utterly unforgivable that a third party manufacturer made a miniature that was recognizably a female version of a GW Farseer; terrible to the point that you won't patronize their company.

And yet GW doing the same thing to Geiger's Aliens (and believe me, they did just that; the early Tyranids were clearly recognizable as Aliens) gets a shrug and a pass.

The only early Tyranid that bared any resemblance to a xenomorph was the 3rd edition Hive Tyrant, and only because it was a tall, lithe alien with an exo skeleton and a large head crest. It didn't actually look like the alien queen, just had the same basic profile. Outside of that, I'm hard pressed to think of any Tyranids that looked like anything from Aliens.

His point was just that - GW may take 'inspiration' from other properties, but they make the final product their own.

Chapterhouse are just making things directly from GW's IP. The Warrior Preistess? It's a female aspect warrior. Not specifically a Scorpion, but it's immediately recogniseable to anyone who has seen GW models as an aspect warrior. Same with the Doomseer. If you've seen the Eldar range, you'll know it's a Farseer or Warlock model.

I find it hard to believe you don't think Chapterhouse are directly using GW IP, especially when many of their products use GW names in them. If you buy a Farseer jetbike conversion kit, you're not using it on some Warmachine model.

Just walk through this with me, if you would. I understand where you are coming from, and I respect your opinion, but I encourage you to think about the following:

The Eldar have normal human proportions. One can deviate from that in order to do something different. But is it fair to say that using normal human proportions should be something any artist can do? Is it fair to say that if the Eldar and something inspired by the Eldar both have normal human proportions that this fact, in and of itself, would not cause you to think the later was something other than the author's own unique work?

Okay. Continuing, some Eldar are depicted wearing robes. One can deviate from that in order to do something different. But is it fair to say that depicting a normally proportioned human wearing robes should be something that any artist can do? Is it fair to say that if the Eldar and something inspired by the Eldar are both depicted wearing robes that this fact, in and of itself, would not cause you to think the later was something other than the author's own unique work?

Many Eldar are depicted wearing plated body armor. One can deviate from that in order to do something different. But is it fair to say that depicting a normally proportioned human wearing plated body armor should be something that any artist can do? Is it fair to say that if the Eldar and something inspired by the Eldar are both depicted wearing plated body armor that this fact, in and of itself, would not cause you to think the later was something other than the author's own unique work?

Many Eldar are depicted wearing tall, peaked helmets. One can deviate from that in order to do something different. But is it fair to say that depicting a normally proportioned human wearing a tall peaked helmet should be something that any artist can do? Is it fair to say that if the Eldar and something inspired by the Eldar are both depicted wearing a tall peaked helmet that this fact, in and of itself, would not cause you to think the later was something other than the author's own unique work?

Many Eldar are armed with swords, halbards, pistols, rifles, etc. One can deviate from that in order to do something different. But is it fair to say that depicting a normally proportioned human armed with hand weapons and firearms should be something that any artist can do? Is it fair to say that if the Eldar and something inspired by the Eldar are both armed with hand weapons and firearms that this fact, in and of itself, would not cause you to think the later was something other than the author's own unique work?

Now, what if all of these elements were assembled together? One can deviate from that in order to do something different. But is it fair to say that depicting a normally proportioned human wearing robes, plated body armor, and a tall peaked helmet armed with hand weapons and firearms should be something that any artist can do? Is it fair to say that if the Eldar and something inspired by the Eldar are both depicted wearing robes, plated body armor, and a tall peaked helmet armed with hand weapons and firearms that this fact, in and of itself, would not cause you to think the later was something other than the author's own unique work?

Bear in mind that I would like you to keep these concepts as generic as I have described them: normal human proportions, robes, plated body armor, tall peaked helmet, and hand weapons and firearms (or projectile weapons of some kind). I hope that you will be willing to agree that this assemblage of elements dos not, in and of itself, inexorably lead to something that is not one's own work when compared to the Eldar.

Now, given this basis, please explain how works would be "taken directly from GW's IP," and then please explain how works would be a "final product all their own," in your personal opinion, in both cases with a specific reference to the Eldar of the Warhammer 40,000 fictional universe.

I am not trying to belittle you or mock you. I genuinely hope that you will make an honest effort to explain your opinion to me, which I hope will prompt further dialogue.

weeble1000 wrote:
Just walk through this with me, if you would....

It's not about wearing robes, it's about wearing robes in the exact same style. With an armless over-robe piece and a long flowing sleeve. It's not about wearing a pointed helmet, it's about wearing a pointed helmet with the exact same face cutout. It's not about wearing plated armour, it's about wearing a breastplate made of sculpted runes. It's not about having a sword, it's about having a sword with the exact same hilt and blade curvatures.

It's not about whether it's reasonable to have a humanoid figure in robes and plate armour with a high helmet and a sword. Because that's a very generic statement and applies to all sorts of models, the vast majority of which don't infringe on anyone else's designs. It's that this specific chapterhouse model has taken several very specific designs and copied them.

Are knockoff purses illegal? Knockoff watches? I really don't know. I know that Coach and Fendi and Rolex issue lawsuits against them, but I have no idea what the exact legal mechanics involved are. What makes it legal to sell decals of Calvin pissing on various things? Did Bill Waterson simply neglect to trademark Calvin, or are these decals being sold because he's just not going after them? What if it was Mickey Mouse peeing on a Ford logo? I'm pretty sure Disney would get involved then. How much different do you have to be from Mickey to avoid the Disney machine? And is Mickey protected because he's a named character? Could GW protect Eldrad in that way? I don't know.

I just think that the Chapterhouse Doomseer is too copied. Robes, Plates, a Sword and a Curved Helmet? Go for it. An Eldar helmet, Rune Armour and a Witchblade - that's a copy.

By the way, check out the Avatars of War site for a view into how a company has made models that are easily used as heros for any of GW's fantasy armies, without using design elements that are blatantly GW. They've got Orcs and Goblins, Light&Dark elves, Daemons, Dwarfs, and so on. But, as an example, look at their daemon models. They've got one "Herald of War" - Pretty easy to use as a "Herald of Khorne" don't you think. But it doesn't say Khorne. It has no GW iconography on it. The sword, while daemonic, looks nothing like the Bloodletter swords GW makes. It has horns, but they're not similar to Bloodletter horns. You can't point to a single design element on that model and say, oh, that part is specifically from a bloodletter. They're clearly influenced from the same sources, but they're not outright copies.

Yes, they are a copy. They're a copy on purpose. Some people won't convert their models, either out of lack of skill or lack of effort. As has been stated previously - Games Workshop no longer sell Bitz. Want your Dark Eldar Scourges to all have bat wings? Tough, it's three feathered and two bat in the box; go buy some more boxes and only use the bat wings.

So, if one were to go to a third party - who make wings in the exact same style, and it's pretty obvious that they're DE Scourge bat wings - is this a bad thing? I say no. Moreover I say it is a good thing.

As for the Eldar; they have a very specific style. Even if they called them "Space Elves", as long as they were in Eldar style, the complaint would remain. But think about it from the perspective of an Eldar player. You want this to fit in to your army. You want it to be in the exact same style. You cannot get this from GW, because they do not make Warlocks on Jetbikes. The name "Eldar" doesn't even belong to GW, anyway - it belongs to Tolkien, as do modern fantasy elves in general. Nor does 'witchblade' - it's just 'witch' and 'blade' as one word (and also a comic series). It's like when Bethesda tried to sue Mojang for making a game called "Scrolls", which is a word that they have no monopoly on.

Speaking of Chapterhouse, their blatant Space Marine bodies are hiliarious, with all that nonsense about "The Empress". You can almost taste the satire.

EDIT: TOTALLY ORIGINAL PRAETORIUS KNIGHTS OF THE EMPRESS. I don't mind this. Actually, I like it. Imagine you put those in a Space Marine army: they'd look great. Now imagine they looked like this. They would not fit your army. They would stick out like a sore thumb, and it would be bad.

Frozen Ocean wrote:....- Games Workshop no longer sell Bitz. Want your Dark Eldar Scourges to all have bat wings? Tough, it's three feathered and two bat in the box; go buy some more boxes and only use the bat wings.....

this reminds me. GW's current policies have allowed retailers to strike out and build their own markets exclusively around the sale of specific bits. I can't recall if the box says its not for resale, but, say someone who breaks up a box and sells off the parts does this to add to their income. It's entirely plausible, given that you'd rather pay $15 for 3 wings than $60 or whatever the heck for an entire box, when you really just want the bat wings. It's equally possible that GW is trying to kill out this part of the market with price hikes, but with people hunting for one specific bit, coughing up for the entire box gets increasingly less attractive when the cost starts to climb.

With respect to statement contained in OP, bit dealers, even if they are exclusively GW bit dealers, are still taking money away from GW, because it's someone else earning the profit off of those parts...... so they would also be parasites. Except for the fact that they offer a vital service of me not having to waste $45 of $60 when I really only need one set of parts and the rest collects dust in a giant steaming pile.

Ah, but you see, these things are never in stock. Yes, I have personal experience with wanting Scourge wings (I paint and occasionally assemble for people I know), as well as a plethora of other such items - wrist-mounted Storm Bolters for my friend's Knights, as he lost one, for example. But those retailers rarely have anything useful in stock! Not their fault, obviously, but it makes them an incredibly unreliable source of bitz.

"Parasitism is a type of non mutual relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the other, the host."

I don't believe Bitz makers fulfil that description as typically their parts are not available in some form from GW (and therefore do not constitute a lost sale as GW never sold what the customer bought) and require you to have bought a GW kit to use them with.

So both parties benefit, therefore it cannot be called parasitism.

As a biology student, I can't agree with the terminology either. But I do get the spirit of the meaning.

I think the OP means something more along the lines of a scavenger.

Redbeard wrote:By the way, check out the Avatars of War site for a view into how a company has made models that are easily used as heros for any of GW's fantasy armies, without using design elements that are blatantly GW. They've got Orcs and Goblins, Light&Dark elves, Daemons, Dwarfs, and so on. But, as an example, look at their daemon models. They've got one "Herald of War" - Pretty easy to use as a "Herald of Khorne" don't you think. But it doesn't say Khorne. It has no GW iconography on it. The sword, while daemonic, looks nothing like the Bloodletter swords GW makes. It has horns, but they're not similar to Bloodletter horns. You can't point to a single design element on that model and say, oh, that part is specifically from a bloodletter. They're clearly influenced from the same sources, but they're not outright copies.

So their Dwarf Slayers... bare-chested dwarfs with owersized axes, mohawks and plaited beards are not reminiscent of GW designs?
Dark Elves with segmented, spiked armour plates, reptilian scale cloaks, half-naked sorceresses, is not like GW?
The vaguely mongoloid ogre with huge gut plate? The balding warrior monk in chainmail, robes and wielding dual hammers? The Light Elf with scalemail and plate decorated with gems, wings and a high plumed helm?
All are just as much copies of GW property as the Doomseer is.

Trasvi wrote:

Redbeard wrote:By the way, check out the Avatars of War site for a view into how a company has made models that are easily used as heros for any of GW's fantasy armies, without using design elements that are blatantly GW. They've got Orcs and Goblins, Light&Dark elves, Daemons, Dwarfs, and so on. But, as an example, look at their daemon models. They've got one "Herald of War" - Pretty easy to use as a "Herald of Khorne" don't you think. But it doesn't say Khorne. It has no GW iconography on it. The sword, while daemonic, looks nothing like the Bloodletter swords GW makes. It has horns, but they're not similar to Bloodletter horns. You can't point to a single design element on that model and say, oh, that part is specifically from a bloodletter. They're clearly influenced from the same sources, but they're not outright copies.

So their Dwarf Slayers... bare-chested dwarfs with owersized axes, mohawks and plaited beards are not reminiscent of GW designs?
Dark .Elves with segmented, spiked armour plates, reptilian scale cloaks, half-naked sorceresses, is not like GW?
The vaguely .mongoloid ogre with huge gut plate? The balding warrior monk in chainmail, robes and wielding dual hammers? The Light. Elf with scalemail and plate decorated with gems, wings and a high plumed helm?
All are just as much copies of GW property as the Doomseer is.

The thing is those aren't GW property, they have appeared in rpg and wargaming way before GW, so then is GW a parasite? Because their own models are inspired in others.

Trasvi wrote: half-naked sorceresses, is not like GW?

Okay, you got us here! Half-naked™ sorceresses™ were truely invented by GW

They're making the hobby more expensive. So purge them with fire!
GW wouldn't have to invest so much money in a crack legal team if people didn't constantly infringe their IP.
Two price increases on models that I always buy becauce (IMO) of third party companies and law suits.

Two price hike or some bits a small portion of hobbyist uses, I think I will stick with the lower price and not have these bits.

InquisitorVaron wrote:They're making the hobby more expensive. So purge them with fire!
GW wouldn't have to invest so much money in a crack legal team if people didn't constantly infringe their IP.
Two price increases on models that I always buy becauce (IMO) of third party companies and law suits.

Two price hike or some bits a small portion of hobbyist uses, I think I will stick with the lower price and not have these bits.

*Irony* Yeah, the poor guys at GW have to up the cost to pay for legal expenses, poor sods, I'm suuure they wouldn't have done it otherwise

Are you serious? GW price increases have very little to do with protecting their IP and all to do with profit. They have always been expensive and price increases have been a regular feature of their brand for many years. It's the way they are, and nothing to do with some little companies making a few heads to put on their figures.

How many expensive lawsuits have GW had to fight? Not many that I recall. They usually send out spurious C&Ds and wait for the little people to fold, Chapterhouse fighting back to this degree is a first. Oops, whose fault is it that GW can't mount a strong legal case?

In terms of individual parts made by 3rd parties as upgrades: To be honest, GW has brought this on themselves.
Things like the tervi/tyranno kit took far too long to release, so people had to find an alternative.

Now, if a 3rd party presents such an option, thats GW's loss.
They have the ability to release a full range from the dex when finished, but instead chose to use a wave method that left people waiting ages for what was in some cases, essential items.

While im not saying its directly GW's fault, this could have been avoided by either bringing out kits for the books sooner, or atleast giving us some indication that they are on the way.



Entire models made by a 3rd party: This one is tricky as it depends on the model.

Some things (mainly power armour) really do look like they fit straight into GW's line of models, which i dont really agree with, however, it is again a hole in the market that someone can capitalise on.

On a side note, things like the storm raven extention isnt such a bad idea, as ive known alot of people to buy both kits as they refuse to use the normal "chibihawk"
This in turn has earned GW revenue by supplimenting a kit that has been seen as "poor" by a player.


Other things like elves, orks etc are harder to judge though.
These have been around for far too long and have soo many different variations its hard not to copy another persons design when making them.
Granted that things like emblems and iconography dont help the case, but again, GW are a large company that want to make money, they are missing out on tons of revenue by not releasing certain things with books.

InquisitorVaron wrote:GW wouldn't have to invest so much money in a crack legal team if people didn't constantly infringe their IP.

You are aware that the "crack legal team"
1.) accused one person of things he obviously had absolutely no connection to (Paulson)
2.) even after 1.5 years is still unable to make a formally correct complaint about what Chapterhouse might have done wrong?
3.) GW makes a ca. 10% price hike every year, lawsuit or not.

jgehunter wrote:

Trasvi wrote:

Redbeard wrote:By the way, check out the Avatars of War site for a view into how a company has made models that are easily used as heros for any of GW's fantasy armies, without using design elements that are blatantly GW. They've got Orcs and Goblins, Light&Dark elves, Daemons, Dwarfs, and so on. But, as an example, look at their daemon models. They've got one "Herald of War" - Pretty easy to use as a "Herald of Khorne" don't you think. But it doesn't say Khorne. It has no GW iconography on it. The sword, while daemonic, looks nothing like the Bloodletter swords GW makes. It has horns, but they're not similar to Bloodletter horns. You can't point to a single design element on that model and say, oh, that part is specifically from a bloodletter. They're clearly influenced from the same sources, but they're not outright copies.

So their Dwarf Slayers... bare-chested dwarfs with owersized axes, mohawks and plaited beards are not reminiscent of GW designs?
Dark .Elves with segmented, spiked armour plates, reptilian scale cloaks, half-naked sorceresses, is not like GW?
The vaguely .mongoloid ogre with huge gut plate? The balding warrior monk in chainmail, robes and wielding dual hammers? The Light. Elf with scalemail and plate decorated with gems, wings and a high plumed helm?
All are just as much copies of GW property as the Doomseer is.

The thing is those aren't GW property, they have appeared in rpg and wargaming way before GW, so then is GW a parasite? Because their own models are inspired in others.

GW would not have existed were it not for Tolkien and DnD. If I recall correctly, GW was originally a DnD distributor. Fantasy was clearly strongly influenced by DnD and Lord of the Rings. GW white knights should be the last ones to complain about parasitic companies.

Other miniature companies are producing products that are satisfying consumer demand, for if they were not, then they would go out of business. Far from going under, these miniature companies are growing in size and stature.

spaceelf wrote:

jgehunter wrote:

Trasvi wrote:

Redbeard wrote:By the way, check out the Avatars of War site for a view into how a company has made models that are easily used as heros for any of GW's fantasy armies, without using design elements that are blatantly GW. They've got Orcs and Goblins, Light&Dark elves, Daemons, Dwarfs, and so on. But, as an example, look at their daemon models. They've got one "Herald of War" - Pretty easy to use as a "Herald of Khorne" don't you think. But it doesn't say Khorne. It has no GW iconography on it. The sword, while daemonic, looks nothing like the Bloodletter swords GW makes. It has horns, but they're not similar to Bloodletter horns. You can't point to a single design element on that model and say, oh, that part is specifically from a bloodletter. They're clearly influenced from the same sources, but they're not outright copies.

So their Dwarf Slayers... bare-chested dwarfs with owersized axes, mohawks and plaited beards are not reminiscent of GW designs?
Dark .Elves with segmented, spiked armour plates, reptilian scale cloaks, half-naked sorceresses, is not like GW?
The vaguely .mongoloid ogre with huge gut plate? The balding warrior monk in chainmail, robes and wielding dual hammers? The Light. Elf with scalemail and plate decorated with gems, wings and a high plumed helm?
All are just as much copies of GW property as the Doomseer is.

The thing is those aren't GW property, they have appeared in rpg and wargaming way before GW, so then is GW a parasite? Because their own models are inspired in others.

GW would not have existed were it not for Tolkien and DnD. If I recall correctly, GW was originally a DnD distributor. Fantasy was clearly strongly influenced by DnD and Lord of the Rings. GW white knights should be the last ones to complain about parasitic companies.

Other miniature companies are producing products that are satisfying consumer demand, for if they were not, then they would go out of business. Far from going under, these miniature companies are growing in size and stature.

I think my point wasn't communicated well/got lost a bit.
I don't believe that GW owns any of those particular styles. Nor do I believe they own the style of the Doomseer. Redbeard said that he thought Avatars of War was a good example of how to do it right; I was trying to point out that they are doing exactly the same thing as Chapterhouse are doing with their Doomseer. I believe both should be allowed (though I much prefer AoW sculpting). I believe there is a point when putting together enough generic concepts creates something unique and protectable; but some of GW's work, particularly their fantasy, is so generic that it doesn't contain any inherently coprightable elements. But, IANAL... so we wait for the chapterhouse case to figure this stuff out .

I will reply to Redbeard in due time. I'm building a Blood Bowl pitch today have little time to spare.

The poll is rather interesting. Over the past few days the numbers of voters have gone up, but the relative percentages have remained remarkably consistent. A sample size of over 200 respondents is actually pretty good from a research point of view, not that I am suggesting the results are necessarily representative. The poll is, of course, self selective as one has to be on DakkaDakka, have read the thread, etc. etc. The results are interesting nonetheless.

Redbeard wrote:


Giger's Aliens are bipedal. They're pretty well defined with two legs and two arms and a tail. I'm not an expert on the Alien's extended universe, but this was the case in all the movies I saw and at least the first few pages of GIS. Tyranids have six limbs. Giger's Aliens seem to have no ranged capabilities. Tyranids routinely make use of weapon symbiote creatures. I'm fairly sure that presented with a model of each, even a casual observer would be able to tell them apart. Yes, clearly GW was influenced by Giger's work, and also other work. However, they took those influences, put their own spin on it, and made it something sufficiently distinct that someone unfamiliar with either source could be told about these fundamental differences and correctly sort each.
my opinion that there are plenty of manufacturers out there who have created their own designs and that are doing it the right way, even if their work is compatible with GW models, and I support those companies.

If one applies a similar argument to the Tyranid works with reference to HR Geiger's works, one would arrive at the same conclusion. All you have pointed out is that the Tyranids have 6 limbs, ranged weapons, etc. First, pointing out differences is not actually legally appropriate when determining if one work is a copy of another

They also copied more then a bit- if you recall the second edition hormagaunts, the heads for them were dead on copies from alien heads. They were oblong dead ringers.....

carmachu wrote:

Redbeard wrote:


Giger's Aliens are bipedal. They're pretty well defined with two legs and two arms and a tail. I'm not an expert on the Alien's extended universe, but this was the case in all the movies I saw and at least the first few pages of GIS. Tyranids have six limbs. Giger's Aliens seem to have no ranged capabilities. Tyranids routinely make use of weapon symbiote creatures. I'm fairly sure that presented with a model of each, even a casual observer would be able to tell them apart. Yes, clearly GW was influenced by Giger's work, and also other work. However, they took those influences, put their own spin on it, and made it something sufficiently distinct that someone unfamiliar with either source could be told about these fundamental differences and correctly sort each.
my opinion that there are plenty of manufacturers out there who have created their own designs and that are doing it the right way, even if their work is compatible with GW models, and I support those companies.

If one applies a similar argument to the Tyranid works with reference to HR Geiger's works, one would arrive at the same conclusion. All you have pointed out is that the Tyranids have 6 limbs, ranged weapons, etc. First, pointing out differences is not actually legally appropriate when determining if one work is a copy of another

They also copied more then a bit- if you recall the second edition hormagaunts, the heads for them were dead on copies from alien heads. They were oblong dead ringers.....

The Alien Queen has 6 limbs, so that difference in limbs argument is gone. Also Aliens can spit acid, so they do have a range-typed attack.

The feel of the original genestealers was very Alien when Space Hulk was first released, but Tyranids in general went 'big bugs' after the Starship Troopers film was released.

Bang on: Genestealers. There is no question that Genestealers are heavily based upon the Xenomorph. Stealthy, ridiculously amazing in close combat (with dem claws), about the same size, and 'steal genes' in a different, but similar, way. The entire setting of Space Hulk is just so unquestionably Aliens, too.

But it's the same for everything. Most things are based on, or inspired by, the work of another artist/writer/etc. That's fine. Nobody is complaining about the similarity between Xenomorph and Genestealers. I love both of those things!

Also, the old Hive Tyrant (with the crest) was just a beefy Queen with eyes, nevermind the psychic dominion over all lesser creatures. Warriors = Praetorians. But that's okay. Many parallels could be drawn between the Tyranids and the Zerg. That's okay, too.

Howard A Treesong wrote:The feel of the original genestealers was very Alien when Space Hulk was first released, but Tyranids in general went 'big bugs' after the Starship Troopers film was released.

I remember looking at the 1st edition Space Hulk box and the chap in the shop describing at as 'Aliens the boardgame'. There was absolutely no pretence at it being anything else, although that is not necessarily a bad thing, and in fact the release of the game itself was timed so that the movie was still fresh in people's minds.

But, in the same way that I don't think anyone (except those who have limited knowledge of other fictions) would describe Nids as being completely original, what is really these days? It's a struggle to find anything (especially in the Science Fantasy area) which hasn't been done before.

They're a parasite, but they're a good parasite, like a woman with a baby.

They're undeveloped, but eventually they'll grow into their oedipus complex and kill the father (GW) and marry the mother (wargaming as a whole, I guess.)

here is a thought to process..........if you think that the third party companies are parasites...........technically so isnt anyone who trades or sells used stuff............in both cases it eats away at the profits of the company who makes the product

Scipio Africanus wrote:They're a parasite, but they're a good parasite, like a woman with a baby.

They're undeveloped, but eventually they'll grow into their oedipus complex and kill the father (GW) and marry the mother (wargaming as a whole, I guess.)

But Jocasta then ran off and killed herself. So... yeah.

As for the parasite argument - it doesn't work. By such a broad definition, everything is parasitic, as every organism on the planet requires something in order to survive, but there are definitions between, for example, predatory and parasitic behaviours.

EDIT: Any company is thus a parasite, even ones who make their own product. Those products need to be made from something, thus they are parasitically leeching from other companies who sell similar products, or who also require to deal with the same plastic supplier, or whatever.

And now we're up to 11 people cuddling up with their HHHobby blankets at night, making them feel nice and safe from the big bad world of parasitic 3rd party companies (including PP!).

InquisitorVaron wrote:GW wouldn't have to invest so much money in a crack legal team if people didn't constantly infringe their IP.

No come on really. You don't actually believe that do you?

Pacific wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:The feel of the original genestealers was very Alien when Space Hulk was first released, but Tyranids in general went 'big bugs' after the Starship Troopers film was released.

I remember looking at the 1st edition Space Hulk box and the chap in the shop describing at as 'Aliens the boardgame'. There was absolutely no pretence at it being anything else, although that is not necessarily a bad thing, and in fact the release of the game itself was timed so that the movie was still fresh in people's minds.

But, in the same way that I don't think anyone (except those who have limited knowledge of other fictions) would describe Nids as being completely original, what is really these days? It's a struggle to find anything (especially in the Science Fantasy area) which hasn't been done before.

And that is ULTIMATELY the point. There are people in this thread who are claiming that third party manufactures are parasites for copying GW... but either refuse to acknowledge the many places where GW has copied othes, or claimed that it GW is right to do so in spite of their position on third party manufacturers.

There is a word for it, and it's not a very nice one. Begins with an H, ends with ypocrisy....

LakotaWolf wrote:here is a thought to process..........if you think that the third party companies are parasites...........technically so isnt anyone who trades or sells used stuff............in both cases it eats away at the profits of the company who makes the product

I don't think you understand this topic.

"Third party companies" which are creating products to profit off of the IP of GW--whether or not it is a full product ala the Doomseer or a conversion kit ala the Stormraven extension kit--is what is being talked about here.
You cannot say that private individuals who are trading or selling their used products are in the same category as a company which has created itself specifically to subsist off the IP of others.

Pacific wrote:I remember looking at the 1st edition Space Hulk box and the chap in the shop describing at as 'Aliens the boardgame'. There was absolutely no pretence at it being anything else, although that is not necessarily a bad thing, and in fact the release of the game itself was timed so that the movie was still fresh in people's minds.

Did you ever think it was because of the fact that the overall feel of the game was supposed to evoke that same atmosphere?

If you're having to describe something to someone, you use concepts they're familiar with. If I were to describe a television show to you--I would use examples based upon things I know you would understand.

But, in the same way that I don't think anyone (except those who have limited knowledge of other fictions) would describe Nids as being completely original, what is really these days? It's a struggle to find anything (especially in the Science Fantasy area) which hasn't been done before.

I dunno. In terms of how the Tyranids are presented now, I'm having a bit of a blank on things which are similar enough to call the Tyranids "ripoffs".
People love to point at Heinlein's "Bugs" as an example, but if you have read "Starship Troopers" you'd know the only commonality is the fact that they have multiple legs and carry guns.

Kanluwen wrote:
I dunno. In terms of how the Tyranids are presented now, I'm having a bit of a blank on things which are similar enough to call the Tyranids "ripoffs".
People love to point at Heinlein's "Bugs" as an example, but if you have read "Starship Troopers" you'd know the only commonality is the fact that they have multiple legs and carry guns.

Starcraft

Redbeard wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:
Just walk through this with me, if you would....

It's not about wearing robes, it's about wearing robes in the exact same style. With an armless over-robe piece and a long flowing sleeve. It's not about wearing a pointed helmet, it's about wearing a pointed helmet with the exact same face cutout. It's not about wearing plated armour, it's about wearing a breastplate made of sculpted runes. It's not about having a sword, it's about having a sword with the exact same hilt and blade curvatures.

It's not about whether it's reasonable to have a humanoid figure in robes and plate armour with a high helmet and a sword. Because that's a very generic statement and applies to all sorts of models, the vast majority of which don't infringe on anyone else's designs. It's that this specific chapterhouse model has taken several very specific designs and copied them.

It is apparent that we agree about the basic principle that I described in my earlier post. It may interest you to know that this is a fundamental principle of copyright law. The elements that I described earlier (humanoid figure, robes, plated armor, peaked helmet, etc. etc.) could quite easily be said to be inseparable from the idea or concept. Thus, including those basic elements within the protection of any given expression would be tantamount to protecting the underlying idea or concept.

Now, regarding your point about the specific details of those elements, I will further encourage you to flip that argument around once again and, as I suggested earlier, apply it to the Tyranids in comparison to Geiger's works.

An alien monster with a chitinous exoskeleton is a generic concept, and I think we can agree on that. But just as you are keen to compare the specific details of the Doomseer's armor, robes, sword, helmet, etc. with what you consider to be an Eldar "design," do so with regard to the specific details of Geiger's works.

Is not the exoskeleton of any Tyranid creature ribbed in a very particular way? Do the limbs not have oval spaces filed with a ridged material? Are the hands of, say, the genestealers not shaped in a distinct manner? Are the heads of, say, warriors and other Tyranid creatures not decorated with a broad, detailed crest of of bony carapace?

What you seem intent on pointing out are very specific details that you feel are evocative of a "design." And yet where does your understanding of that design come from? You've drawn on a broad range of expressions to formulate, in your mind, the specific details that "belong" to the Eldar.

Certainly, one could point out that Geiger's drawings are not the same as the Alien Queen from Aliens, that the works were made by different authors and artists, and that no Tyranid creature is plainly evocative of all the elements of any one particular expression. And yet those expressions are bound together by a rich fictional universe that has spawned 7 feature films, comic books, scores of novels, video games, card games, and even figurines.

Similarly, I would argue that you cannot point to a single "Eldar" work that the Doomseer's "Eldar" design elements are taken from. You seem to feel that it is not right for the Doomseer model to use discrete elements inspired by a range of expressions because those expressions are bound together by a rich fictional universe that has spawned novels, video games, card games, an animated movie, etc. You seem to feel that the model is "wrong" because you can slap it on a table in a game of 40K and players will know roughly what it is supposed to represent. It is the fictional universe which provides that context along with the confines of the game that you are both knowingly participating in.

But is not the Aliens universe just as, or even much more, richly detailed that the Warhammer 40,000 fictional universe? If another publisher had produced an Aliens themed table-top wargame prior to the release of the genestealers, would that fact, in your opinion, have made it "wrong" for Games Workshop to have released the genestealer models? When you stand everything together, the only point of difference you are left with on any meaningful basis is this.

Now, I will pose a new question. Do you think it is fair for an assemblage of semi-related works to allow an author to severally control the various elements of those works? As in, should one type of design element, such as a round gem in a sword, be owned by anyone in particular?

Personally, it's a bit of a grey area. I think they fill a need in the hobby. GW's wave release bs and incomplete product line fuels the necessity for such things.

However, I despise Chapterhouse and hope they burn. Their attitude gives impression that they're a bunch of self righteous, pompous donkey-caves.

...Flame away Chapterhouse fan boys.

Illumini wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
I dunno. In terms of how the Tyranids are presented now, I'm having a bit of a blank on things which are similar enough to call the Tyranids "ripoffs".
People love to point at Heinlein's "Bugs" as an example, but if you have read "Starship Troopers" you'd know the only commonality is the fact that they have multiple legs and carry guns.

Starcraft

Your point?

I mean, you must not be aware of the history surrounding Blizzard and GW if you think that GW ripped off Blizzard.

All one needs to do is look at Tyranid Warriors pre- and post-Starcraft to see the sudden similarities.

And yes, I know the history of SC and 40K.

Kanluwen wrote:

Pacific wrote:I remember looking at the 1st edition Space Hulk box and the chap in the shop describing at as 'Aliens the boardgame'. There was absolutely no pretence at it being anything else, although that is not necessarily a bad thing, and in fact the release of the game itself was timed so that the movie was still fresh in people's minds.

Did you ever think it was because of the fact that the overall feel of the game was supposed to evoke that same atmosphere?

Yes, that stands to reason. I'm not sure what you are trying to argue there exactly?

I would say that the concept itself of nasty Insect-like-looking Aliens coming to Earth and eating our brains is one of the oldest tropes in Science Fiction, and the subject matter of many a (appalling but entertaining) B-movie.

I realise though that we are skirting round the issue here, which is that Chapterhouse's 'aliens' were quite obviously meant to be very specific examples of GW's own interpretation of that type of alien.

The first answer is correct.

Kanluwen wrote:

Illumini wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
I dunno. In terms of how the Tyranids are presented now, I'm having a bit of a blank on things which are similar enough to call the Tyranids "ripoffs".
People love to point at Heinlein's "Bugs" as an example, but if you have read "Starship Troopers" you'd know the only commonality is the fact that they have multiple legs and carry guns.

Starcraft

Your point?

I mean, you must not be aware of the history surrounding Blizzard and GW if you think that GW ripped off Blizzard.

What HBMC said.

I'm aware of their history. Current nids ripped of the starcraft zerg look.

oni wrote:Personally, it's a bit of a grey area. I think they fill a need in the hobby. GW's wave release bs and incomplete product line fuels the necessity for such things.

However, I despise Chapterhouse and hope they burn. Their attitude gives impression that they're a bunch of self righteous, pompous donkey-caves.

...Flame away Chapterhouse fan boys.

You can't be the same person that said this:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/352562.page#2542449

If I had the money I would be buying much more - in the air right now as it is about buying pre-heresy looking terminator shoulder pads...or getting the FW World Eater kit...

Hello,
I think of people using terms like parasite rather unnessarily to get a reaction, or to self immoliate thier post. they want you to see they are flaming another company, and that they are the bastion of what is right and wrong in free world economics. However, companies like this have always existed, and will continue to as they serve a need. Are they advertising wrongly? Perhaps, however the need for you to purchase the base companies IP property should make them think twice about the overall winner. The nids'... well their current look is not GW exclusive as we know, I have a book I need to find to show you the art of the new weapon sytles from the 90s to prove that artists do this all the time (Kryomech). In reality, I believe GW wants to win the Chapterhouse case to further thier "lock" on what ever idea they steal, after all look at the Raging Heros Lammasu, GW made nothing close to it, it is Bablyonian in nature yet they claim IP? They send the C and D orders because they can. many are afraid of of the giant, so when certain companies chose to stand against them, thier supporters will cry foul, and now apparently parasite.

Regards,
Carl

oni wrote:Personally, it's a bit of a grey area. I think they fill a need in the hobby. GW's wave release bs and incomplete product line fuels the necessity for such things.

However, I despise Chapterhouse and hope they burn. Their attitude gives impression that they're a bunch of self righteous, pompous donkey-caves.

...Flame away Chapterhouse fan boys.

I have purchased from them, I received a good product, delivered quickly, and Ill purchase from them again.

Just burns ya up doesnt it?...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

theQuanz wrote:If I had the money I would be buying much more - in the air right now as it is about buying pre-heresy looking terminator shoulder pads...or getting the FW World Eater kit...

I got some from Chapterhouse, clean casts, nice product. Im using heads from Puppetswar to go with them.

theQuanz wrote:If I had the money I would be buying much more - in the air right now as it is about buying pre-heresy looking terminator shoulder pads...or getting the FW World Eater kit...

Funny enough I know a guy who is selling a WE forgeworld army, if you are interested please send a tell (pm) and I will send you pics. This has been a shameless promotion from FGMike. =o]

Well.. I'd have no interest in buying them, but I sure would love to see them (in spoiler tags, so they don't derail the thread) if you have any links handy?

Are companies that sell screen protectors and stuff for cell phones parasites too? I use Creative speakers for my HP laptop. Is that Creative parasiting on HP?

Goodyear is parasiting on Daimler and Ford

Hehe, yeah exactly. My local health clinic is parasiting on my local Thai food place

oni wrote:Personally, it's a bit of a grey area. I think they fill a need in the hobby. GW's wave release bs and incomplete product line fuels the necessity for such things.

However, I despise Chapterhouse and hope they burn. Their attitude gives impression that they're a bunch of self righteous, pompous donkey-caves.

...Flame away Chapterhouse fan boys.

What attitude do you mean with this?

Is it the attitude that causes them to advertise that their product is for GW models or something else? I remember reading that the reason they advertise that their bits are for GW mini's is because a lawyer told them it was ok to do so.

I, personally, have more issue with the companies that hide behind barely concealed descriptions of their products intent and rely on others to show what the part is being used as. That is a cowardly way to do business. They are still doing the same thing Chapterhouse is. The only difference is Chapterhouse got legal counsel regarding their rights and the rest of the companies just hide and hope.

Regardless, if Chapterhouse goes down for some reason, in this lawsuit nonsense, you can bet that GW will be on the rest of the 3rd party "parasites" faster than you can blink. They will suffer just as much, which means that gamers will suffer as well.

Some if not most of the third party model vendors are rip offs or scams, well it seems so to me. I have bought a few bits from third party vendors but it was because all of the specific individual bits I wanted from GWS were not available unless the entire kit was bought. The sites that had the individual pieces I wanted were sold out or again you had to buy the whole kit so I found something to suit my needs. I don't like having to do that though and I would much rather buy from GWS they spawned the game and it's ideas they deserve they money made off anything related to their work

Again, it is interesting that in spite of ever rising responses to the poll, the relative percentages have remained remarkably consistent from virtually the first few minutes of the poll until now.

I think that the data is becoming increasingly compelling.

Ugh. I had to sign in because I've just finished reading all 7 pages of this squawble, and felt the need to put my two cents in. I don't play Eldar, but if I did, I would buy a Doomseer or whatever, because, it reminds me of the female farseer in Dawn of War. And about every Farseer in any Eldar related BL book I've read. GW doesn't sell one, so it doesn't hurt their sales. CHS hasn't copied anything, in the strictest sense of copying. Not like (a website in our local gaming group we call ForgeryWorld), who make cheap resin knock offs of GW parts. And while I may or may not have purchased various Ork glyphs and such for my extensive Ork conversions, they *are* a parasite. They blatently copy even plastic and metal kits, in *full* from GW's range. Their "bits" are resin copies of practically everything in the Blood Angels range... They sell a "bits kit" of the Tomb Kings warsphinx. This, is what GW should be going after, but apparently find hard to even shut down for long. Not Chapterhouse. I can't say that I've ever bought anything from them, since they cater to armies I don't play, but I like their jetbikes for the Spesh Marinesh, and if my Templars had jetbikes, I might get one for them. They simply provide *alternatives*. Now, in my Steel Legion/DKOK (as in Aus, FW guard armies are cheaper than the errr severely limited range of metal minis for my favorite chapter of 40k history, aka Armageddon) army, I use a completely random model I purchased from CMON, as Guardsman Marbo. I feel no real reason why we shouldn't be able to substitute as we see fit, to cusomize our armies, in a way we see fit. I know I could *never* manage to sculpt a female farseer, let alone one that looks as nice as the sculpting in the CHS model in question. So, if GW doesn't supply a model, what harm is there in buying a model that fits in with your army? (I must mention that the model I use for Marbo doesn't fit in with the whole gas mask, greatcoat wearing theme of Steel Legion, but I like it, and I would have liked it even more if it did fit the theme.) I feel that the CHS "Doomseer" in question is perfectly alright. Resin copies of actual GW models, not alright. If people feel they shouldn't be purchased, due to their morals being offended, couldn't you, if you liked the model, purchase the "official" GW male Farseer, and throw it in your bits box, to appease your morals? GW still gets a sale, and you support variety, and customizability... As far as say, AoW, Warpath/Kings of War, and uhhh Wargames Factory go, they aren't really any different CHS, Puppetswar, etc... They just slapped an "original" story onto their models, and (don't know about AoW, to be honest) made their ruleset later (Kings of War I believe), or in Wargames Factory's case, no rules at all, just generic greatcoat sci-fi human soldiers fighting under Alien Suns... (That being said, I appreciate these games, and minis, and I do not feel they are copies of GW's product either). Ok, I feel better now.

That site in particular, Sarge, is in China, so there's probably little GW can do to them.

Oh yes, H.B.M.C, I know that, and I know that they can't do very much to them at all. I just didn't want to help anyone out and be seen to be breaching the forum rules, I know it took me a lot of work to find the site for myself lol. But, I guess my point with them was, they are doing nothing to help the hobby, and if you get unlucky and think you are buying legitimate Forge World stuff on say, eBay, and someone say, is selling ForgeRY World stuff *as* Forge World, then that won't help the hobby out at all. People would think the castings and resin itself was subpar. (especially if you are new in the hobby, as I was when I started playing, heck I bought an epic Gargant because it was labeled as a Stompa and I thought it *was* a Stompa! Heh) I was trying to distinguish between legitimate threats to GW, and to Third Party Bitz Makers....

No you're completely right. GW seems to expend a massive amount of effort on stomping down on guys who are essentially casting bits from their garage, which are designed to work alongside GW bits for the most part, while meanwhile presumably concerted, well funded efforts in China and Russia continue to pump out re-casts of official models at a price lower than the RRP and then sell them on ebay. Which is going more damage to the company's sales?

As H.B.M.C. says it must just come down to location. At present Eastern Europe seems to be beyond the arm of the law, or perhaps Maxmini and the like have survived through careful naming and display of their products. AFAIK there isn't a single UK based supplier of 3rd party parts that has survived - not just Warsmith Miniatures, who had to stop making their true scale stuff (which pissed a LOT of people off), but a bunch of other small producers have also had to stop selling. Those that do survive do so by keeping their net presence to a minimum, and selling through a network of 'acquaintances' who will only pass on the purchasing information to others who know them, and so on. It's all very VC French Of course, that doesn't help someone who is new to wargaming, but with a little persistence and a few emails it is usually possible to find those producers.

Of course really the real issue here is a 'legal team' of expensive solicitors who have to justify their existence. Do you really think 99% of the GW staff give a damn about Fred Blogs making some mk1 shoulder pads in his basement? Of course not, and I'd put money on a bunch of the staff who actually play the game having those components in their armies - and in fact, having seen some of those armies in person I know this to be the case. It's just a typical example of what happens when a company becomes too large, and starts to collect detritus along with it which leads to a perversion of what that company was originally about.

You can only blame GW for the popularity of the Remoras of the table top community.

GW release 1/3 of a model range and expect players to sit and wait for months maybe years for a 2nd wave etc... why they cant produce the entire range at once is beyond me since while they are releasing the first wave they usually release other stuff as well.

The main issue that GW has always had ian inability to focus on one army or theme for more than 30 seconds. Its like they all have ADHD and run around the office trying to release as much as possible even if the game dosent need it.

I believe 3rd party designers benefit from GW's inability to finish the job and deserve to stick around and be supported by the fans.

366 responses to the poll and the relative percentages are still substantively the same as when the poll was first posted and there were fewer than 100 responses. This is very interesting data. It makes me curious to see what would happen if a similar question solicited a response on a 5 or 10 point scale such as: Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, Strongly Disagree. Nevertheless, the results are very interesting indeed.

Milisim wrote:You can only blame GW for the popularity of the Remoras of the table top community.

GW release 1/3 of a model range and expect players to sit and wait for months maybe years for a 2nd wave etc... why they cant produce the entire range at once is beyond me since while they are releasing the first wave they usually release other stuff as well.

They've changed their strategy to doing exactly what you suggest; they will no longer release models in waves, but all at one time.