GWS Share price is flat today. A quick msearch revealed no mention of the judgement but we will see if this gets picked up on tomorrow when London wakes up. That said GWS is a fairly low traded share so there might not be the interest in it.
Well see over the next few days whether the BBC or some other other outlet picks up the Story.
Do their shareholders even know about this? If they have to make a statement it will be something saying that they defended their fortress walls as evidenced by the fact they were awarded damages. They're not going to shout from the rooftops to advertise the number of points which CHS, and now all manufacturers, are allowed to use freely, and the disparity between the $25,000 damages and whatever silly amount they threw at the case.
With this hopefully more 3rd party companies producing accessories and other items can spread without fear of the GW legal threats, the more open competition may actually push better policies and models from GW.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Do their shareholders even know about this? If they have to make a statement it will be something saying that they defended their fortress walls as evidenced by the fact they were awarded damages. They're not going to shout from the rooftops to advertise the number of points which CHS, and now all manufacturers, are allowed to use freely, and the disparity between the $25,000 damages and whatever silly amount they threw at the case.
They do know and they do a lot more research than just GW management feeds and AGM's.
czakk wrote: Well, it is a press release ... so grain of salt and all that.
I doubt a respectable law firm would lie in a press release about a case.
Obviously they left out the details of what GW won, but what they have said CHS won must be correct.
I'm not saying they'd lie. But they will put the most positive aspects of the story first and paint their client in the best light possible while remaining in the realm of truthfulness.
czakk wrote: Well, it is a press release ... so grain of salt and all that.
I doubt a respectable law firm would lie in a press release about a case.
Obviously they left out the details of what GW won, but what they have said CHS won must be correct.
I'm not saying they'd lie. But they will put the most positive aspects of the story first and paint their client in the best light possible while remaining in the realm of truthfulness.
I agree, there is definitely some spin on this as they're painting CHS as a completely innocent saint who was being oppressed by an evil corporation, when in truth they weren't completely clean of all wrong doing either.
EDIT: I'd like to note that the press release claims GW dropped it's demands for damages to $25k, not that the Jury had awarded GW that much in damages. Selective truth perhaps, or a detail we didn't know before?
czakk wrote: Well, it is a press release ... so grain of salt and all that.
I doubt a respectable law firm would lie in a press release about a case.
Obviously they left out the details of what GW won, but what they have said CHS won must be correct.
I'm not saying they'd lie. But they will put the most positive aspects of the story first and paint their client in the best light possible while remaining in the realm of truthfulness.
Yes, they are lawyers, what is your point?. On the other hand if you ask GW this is "Grate news".
GW went after any sort of hinting as to where the accessories where supposed to go on and they got slapped across the face, they really could not care less about CHS them selves, it was the principle behind it and they righteously failed. So yeah it is a win CHS and they have to pay a 25k tax for it.
What is the likelihood of the verdict being subverted by the judge?.
Both sides will attempt to spin this in their favor and there isn't anything wrong with that. The GW press release or investor report will likely focus on the few models that CHS had to stop selling completely and the terms they're not allowed to use without any mention of the majority of items from the initial claim that were settled or outright lost.
I also don't know how much this release (or the case) would necessarily affect GW stock price. I can't imagine that anyone with the wherewithal to invest in GW did so thinking that their rich trove of IP such as "pointed arrows" and "repurposed historical symbols" was something that gave the company any value.
Stockholders own GW for one reason: they are very, very good at pushing cheap plastic with a high markup into the hands of children whose parents have lots of disposable income. Neither the results of this case nor the ability of CHS to continue selling parts is going to affect that in any way at all.
The case is an excellent for real hobbyists (modelers, painters and wargamers alike) because it lets us have our options remain open, but the bulk of GW's sales are to customers who don't know and/or don't care about anything at all related to the case.
The only thing that might have an effect on GW's share price is if they develop a habit of spending a million dollars a pop to file lawsuits that they end up losing (by virtually every measure). I suspect that those will probably happen MUCH less frequently in the future.
while this is a blow to the GW legal machine, I cant help but think this is also a bit of a "win" for GW from a moving product standpoint, if a ton of companies spring up over night making space marine compatible parts then maybe it will get people to buy MOAR space marines....then again I'm sure GW would never see it that way
czakk wrote: Well, it is a press release ... so grain of salt and all that.
I doubt a respectable law firm would lie in a press release about a case.
Obviously they left out the details of what GW won, but what they have said CHS won must be correct.
I'm not saying they'd lie. But they will put the most positive aspects of the story first and paint their client in the best light possible while remaining in the realm of truthfulness.
I agree, there is definitely some spin on this as they're painting CHS as a completely innocent saint who was being oppressed by an evil corporation, when in truth they weren't completely clean of all wrong doing either.
EDIT: I'd like to note that the press release claims GW dropped it's demands for damages to $25k, not that the Jury had awarded GW that much in damages. Selective truth perhaps, or a detail we didn't know before?
I'm waiting for GW's reply personally. I want to see what kind of spin or lack there of is going to post up somewhere.
What's the typical wait time between the delivery of a verdict and the final judgement being given?
It sounds like a lot of work, writing about each and every facet of the jury's verdict, justifying any departure from it and explaining why it's legal and proper. So I'd totally understand if it took a long time.
Just a quick question for those following the trial all the way through, was Moskin ever sanctioned for his actions in relation to hiding evidence (letters to the copyright office)? I have read before that he was sanctioned for some things, but I'm just wondering what happened with all of that, or if we don't know exactly.
ironicsilence wrote: while this is a blow to the GW legal machine, I cant help but think this is also a bit of a "win" for GW from a moving product standpoint, if a ton of companies spring up over night making space marine compatible parts then maybe it will get people to buy MOAR space marines....then again I'm sure GW would never see it that way
I think they're worried about companies making "not space marines" and losing sales on Space Marines TM but heck it probably more than evens out when there are decent shoulder pads. You can look at this overall outcome in various ways:
GW has to protect their IP to keep it. Wins on that front in that they actually made an effort.
GW wins because people will probably buy more space marines to use CH products on
GW loses cause it cost 1 million dollars
GW loses cause they have opened the flood gates to others with their utterly baffling all or nothing strategy which completely backfired.
Gamers ultimately did the best, we will have more choice now that GW may have shot themselves in the foot in several places. CHS has a major victory that costs a paltry 25,000. GW may well fire the legal counsel which has been sending paranoid C&Ds for the last five years and suing like an american.
I really hope to see the line items in short order to see where the wins and losses specifically were.
Simple solution for GW in this case. Develop a subsection of games Workshop dedicated to making Bitz and/or obscure options and models GW currently is unable or unwilling to produce... Um kinda like FW but instead of thinking bigger they need to think of options people are requesting, the kinda of stuff companies like Chapterhouse are capitalizing on. Though GW still has to tackle the elephant in the room, which is price. Many of these companies are capitalizing on GW's price structure with more affordable alternatives. If GW can't rein in their pricing structure, 3rd party producers will compete on this. Lastly, GW has to reinvent the competitive gaming support. They need to either run GW sponsored events where third party models are not permitted(with an incentive for players to actually attend) or they need to support events like Adepticon in such a way that they demand the tournaments ban 3rd party models, or at least discourage them. GW needs only to flex its muscles and seize initiative from this otherwise major defeat.
Why I cannot find surprising that with their usual head-in-sand policy GW has not put a minimal press release on their corporate webpage yet?
If you want to spin the facts you have to do it faster than the other guy can spin them their way of investors will start wondering who is lying (both ofc ) It's not that hard to point out that they won some damages and defended this or that "key" trademark and that an apelation to win the case is forthcoming becuase everybody knows that evil CPH deceived those poor deluded juries...
But no sir. GW does not give explanations they only pontificate.
GW don't want their customers to know about the rest of the hobby, especially 3rd parties that convert their models, so they're not going to advertise them by airing their dirty lining publicly.
NecronLord3 wrote:Simple solution for GW in this case. Develop a subsection of games Workshop dedicated to making Bitz and/or obscure options and models GW currently is unable or unwilling to produce...
This division could have some kind of catchy wargaming name like "Citadel"...
Howard A Treesong wrote: GW don't want their customers to know about the rest of the hobby, especially 3rd parties that convert their models, so they're not going to advertise them by airing their dirty lining publicly.
Ofc, that's why I said Corporate, you don't want those stooopid mor... excuse me beloved clients learning about 3rd parties but surely you want your shareholders to know that you have a backup plan before they start asking pointed questions like why the company spent 1+ million dollars fighting a suit that has ended up questioning the ownership of many trademarks that IIRC in the last shareholder report the CEO said they were safer that insede Fort Knox vaults.
The plebs on the other hand better continue visiting the main site and dropping money in exchange of stuff that can be bought cheaper someplace else or else
Ofc, that's why I said Corporate, you don't want those stooopid mor... excuse me beloved clients learning about 3rd parties but surely you want your shareholders to know that you have a backup plan before they start asking pointed questions like why the company spent 1+ million dollars fighting a suit that has ended up questioning the ownership of many trademarks that IIRC in the last shareholder report the CEO said they were safer that insede Fort Knox vaults.
I think people are reading bit too much into "GW lost those and those trademarks and dropped damage claims from $400k to 25k etc." Just because you lose from your initial position does not mean a catastrophe. A standard negotiating tactics is to set your claims at preposterous level, so then later you can "compromise" towards the level you realistically hoped to achieve. I suspect GW applied much the same principle to its trademark claims. They probably figured that the best way to get as broad trademarks as possible was to trademark absolutely *everything* and hope for the best: I doubt they ever realistically even expected to be able to hold on all of that. This is hardly unique way of trademark policy, many other companies practice same. (For example, Facebook attempting to trademark word "book").
Howard A Treesong wrote: Do their shareholders even know about this? If they have to make a statement it will be something saying that they defended their fortress walls as evidenced by the fact they were awarded damages. They're not going to shout from the rooftops to advertise the number of points which CHS, and now all manufacturers, are allowed to use freely, and the disparity between the $25,000 damages and whatever silly amount they threw at the case.
It'll probably read something like:
"And the court case we mentioned in our last report has come to a close. We were awarded $25,000 in damages. This is great news!"
Ofc, that's why I said Corporate, you don't want those stooopid mor... excuse me beloved clients learning about 3rd parties but surely you want your shareholders to know that you have a backup plan before they start asking pointed questions like why the company spent 1+ million dollars fighting a suit that has ended up questioning the ownership of many trademarks that IIRC in the last shareholder report the CEO said they were safer that insede Fort Knox vaults.
I think people are reading bit too much into "GW lost those and those trademarks and dropped damage claims from $400k to 25k etc." Just because you lose from your initial position does not mean a catastrophe. A standard negotiating tactics is to set your claims at preposterous level, so then later you can "compromise" towards the level you realistically hoped to achieve. I suspect GW applied much the same principle to its trademark claims. They probably figured that the best way to get as broad trademarks as possible was to trademark absolutely *everything* and hope for the best: I doubt they ever realistically even expected to be able to hold on all of that. This is hardly unique way of trademark policy, many other companies practice same. (For example, Facebook attempting to trademark word "book").
That's possible, however I think it is far more likely GW were aiming to have CH shut down entirely and send a very clear message to all 3rd party bitz sellers. And if that was their intention then it is a catastrophe since instead they gave those people clearly defined guidelines as to what they can and can't do.
Let's face it, this is not a company who have a lot going for them when it comes to wanting the benefit of the doubt.
The Chapterhouse web store has had an update. You can make some educated guesses about what GW won on from what's missing. AFAIKT Tru scale marines, Tyranids wings, some of the chapter specific shoulder pads are missing in addition to things like the torturess that we have already known about.
I've been following this for quite some time. The annoying part is, to me, that £1m could have been invested in the design and production of another line of miniatures to sell. What about making a boat load of shoulder pads that improve the space marine line itself?
Most GW customers wouldn't even know about CH until this lawsuit. So most customers would, if wanting different shoulder pads etc, purchase from GW. Thus, Increasing their profit margin. Yes, 3rd party bit producers will make bits for that model line, but first, consumers would be purchasing those models. Only then to buy said shoulderpads, weapons, heads etc.
If they directly copied something GW were already making. Example being a full space marine line. Or a full kit of tau battle suits... THAT would be cause to chase up... because people would be buying a directly copied product. I just wish GW would stop trying to compete by choking other companies. Why not just make more miniatures at more competetive prices?
If there is no competition... GW can charge whatever they want and those of us who want to continue to collect 40k or WHFB we will be forced to pay whatever GW charges.
Rant over. Bottom line:
I'm glad other companies are out there creating competition.
I wish GW would concentrate more on their own line of models. £1m might not be alot of money to GW. But it is still a lot of money.
If CH does indeed fold now, another company will spring up in it's place somewhere anyway.
But Mike, GW doesn't want to make those products. It doesn't want to sell them. There's too many to make; too many product codes to worry about; too few customers interested in buying them.
This is why these 3rd party companies can even exist in the first place. They meet a demand that, by and large, GW does not meet and has no inclination to meet. Hence, these companies are both good for end customers and good for GW.
It might be better for GW if the company had some influence over what these companies produce, the quality of their products, etc. But for that, all GW has to do is license them, or create a reasonable set of suggested guidelines/standards.
Right now, GW's position is "It is wrong, detrimental to GW, and it MUST STOP NOW!"
All that position does is harm GW, harm fans, harm customers, and harm 3rd party accessory companies.
ascended_mike wrote: I've been following this for quite some time. The annoying part is, to me, that £1m could have been invested in the design and production of another line of miniatures to sell. What about making a boat load of shoulder pads that improve the space marine line itself?
Right. It's already been mentioned, but GW could have prevented this whole ordeal simply by producing in-demand models and, secondarily, offering them at a reasonable price.
The only reason the niche aftermarket exists in what is already a niche hobby is because of GW's complacency in not producing the stuff that people wanted, and their [incredibly arrogant] assumption that nobody else would, and/or nobody would buy from those that would.
GW can still put the screws to CH just by downloading their entire catalog, and then producing all of those models and bits at same/cheaper prices. That would be a market-centric way to go after a competitor that would probably work.
GW can still put the screws to CH just by downloading their entire catalog, and then producing all of those models and bits at cheaper prices. That would be a market-centric way to go after a competitor that would probably work.
Judedoug.. you placed an order before the verdict and or trial.. Chapterhouse has made an agreement with you (which I presume you have already paid for) to supply certain goods, Chapterhouse would be in breach of contract with you the customer if they failed to supply the agreed goods..
So whilst I understand that these products may not be available anymore I commend Chapterhouse for for filling their contractual obligations to their customers.
If GW doesn't want to make the products, what harm does it do to GW at all?
I haven't followed this case at all nor read this thread, so at the risk of being completely wrong, I'd assume it has to do with trademark protection. If GW doesn't go after breachers of their trademarks, they risk losing them, which would indeed be very bad for GW. It's the same reason you see Disney go after daycare centers painting Mickey Mouse on the walls in the playroom or Lego occasionally insisting that you can't talk about building blocks as legos, but rather LEGO blocks - it dilutes their trademark, and they will lose it. Silly outcome, but not really the company's fault.
So whilst I understand that these products may not be available anymore I commend Chapterhouse for for filling their contractual obligations to their customers.
They are still available on their website. I was merely expressing that Chapterhouse is back to business as usual.
tgjensen: This is probably the basis for most of the case claims. It is interesting to note that this case is creating a very specific legal precedent for what 3rd party companies can and cannot do.
sourclams wrote: Including continued use of GW's 9 registered trademarks, which seems like an especially important nugget.
- That seems like the most important bit of news here. Most of the 3rd party manufacturers get by telling us that they're making "Cosmic Knight parts" or some such. It seems like it shouldn't be illegal to say "Hey, our bits will fit onto your Space Marine minis."
Now, it is definitively legal to do so.
-On another subject: 25k sounds like the sort of amount that a larger company would absorb without any consideration (it is way less than most legal fees would have been in any case).
Is Chapterhouse large enough that they can simply absorb this amount? I honestly don't know. I know they've been growing for quite some time, and I wonder if this case, and all of the publicity that goes with it has expanded their business such that they can. I suppose that they must, since they're talking like they aren't going under.
So whilst I understand that these products may not be available anymore I commend Chapterhouse for for filling their contractual obligations to their customers.
They are still available on their website. I was merely expressing that Chapterhouse is back to business as usual.
Sorry.. just checked, the Doomseer and Tormentor are gone.. empty pages.
EDIT.. Sorry, just saw you ordered FARseer and warlock jetbikes.. not the complete figs..
After a quick check, I see all relevant nice kits still available, like Eldar and SM jetbikes, Ymgarl heads, Stormraven conversion kit, Rhino and Drop Pod conversion kits. Personally wasn't a fan of the Eldar and Dark Eldar miniature. Tervigon conversion kit is gone, but its peak time has gone with the GW release anyway.
The CHS narrative has been that it really has no negative impact on GW's business... In keeping with that view even though GW lost the majority of the law suit CHS' position isn't likely to spontaneously start to effect GW. Add to that GW never had much hope of recouping anywhere near the cost of this suit. To that end no one should expect an impact on GW's stock prices.
To all those stating that GW would have better spent the money elsewhere, I don't think they were expecting a garage-show business to get a big pro-bono law firm to defend them for two years. I think they were expecting them to just step down and comply like so many have for the past decade.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Fun fact. I don't recall these being there before, but CHS' website now also directly uses terms that refer to GW products now, such as Blood Ravens, Games Workshop Space Marine Razorback/Storm Raven turret, Terminator Shoulder Pads, etc.
Enigwolf wrote: To all those stating that GW would have better spent the money elsewhere, I don't think they were expecting a garage-show business to get a big pro-bono law firm to defend them for two years. I think they were expecting them to just step down and comply like so many have for the past decade.
CHS got that pro-bono representation very early on, though. GW could have opted to try and settle out of court once it was apparent that the one-sided beatdown was about to turn into a much more even thing, but they decided to continue with their scorched earth strategy.
Enigwolf wrote: To all those stating that GW would have better spent the money elsewhere, I don't think they were expecting a garage-show business to get a big pro-bono law firm to defend them for two years. I think they were expecting them to just step down and comply like so many have for the past decade.
Doesn't change the fact they could of got basically the same out come if they would of settled out of court. Without the millions spent and keep it private so other 3rd party business would have legal precedent, when GW go after them.
Yes, the disadvantage of the settlement in court is that it creates precedents.
Once, however, the pro bono firm that came in for CHS, saw the weakness of the GW's case, they would have wanted to bring it to a conclusion in course. GW were trapped.
The jury also confirmed that Chapterhouse could continue to use most of Games Workshop’s asserted trademarks when selling compatible parts, including all nine of Games Workshop’s registered trademarks. Together with the summary judgment wins, the jury’s verdict confirmed Chapterhouse can continue to make and sell 111 products that Games Workshop hoped to block using copyright laws, and can continue to use 104 words and phrases that Games Workshop said were trademarked.
Wow. Dying to find out what the 9 trademarks, and 104 words and phrases were. I assume that will be disclosed with the final verdict?
All of the following are Registered Trademarks of Games Workshop Ltd:
Armageddon, Blood Bowl, Chivalry, Citadel, the Citadel logo, Dark Angels, Dark Future, Deathwing, Dungeonquest, 'Eavy Metal, Eldar, Eldar Attack, Epic, the Games Workshop logo, Games Workshop, the GW logo, The GW Flame logo, Genestealer, Slottabase, Space·Fleet, Space Hulk, Space Marine, Talisman, Tyranid, Warhammer and Warmaster. Marauder is a registered trademark of Marauder Miniatures Ltd (Used with permission by Games Workshop)
A fund raiser would not be needed. Since he owns a business, you could always just buy a few products.
Also note, he hasn't requested anyone to help him with his problems. I personally would be loathe to go around begging for a handout to pay off a debt.
A fund raiser would not be needed. Since he owns a business, you could always just buy a few products.
Also note, he hasn't requested anyone to help him with his problems. I personally would be loathe to go around begging for a handout to pay off a debt.
Wasn't there initially a thing where he was collecting donations to help with legal funds before he got the pro bono representation?
Why? Just buy stuff from them if you want to show your support. They're a business after all, not the Red Cross.
Already did, but the minis community making an effort to officially pay off CHS fine would be sending a very strong message to GW what their fan base is wiling to support, and what it is not.
A fund raiser would not be needed. Since he owns a business, you could always just buy a few products.
Also note, he hasn't requested anyone to help him with his problems. I personally would be loathe to go around begging for a handout to pay off a debt.
Wasn't there initially a thing where he was collecting donations to help with legal funds before he got the pro bono representation?
I believe there was, but raising funds for a multiyear lawsuit and a $25000 fine are two different things. Granted, he may not have known how much the lawsuit could cost him, but with a specific dollar amount you can plan for it. Also, I'm fairly sure he doesn't have to hand them 25k in one lump sum all at once.
First I want to say thank you for keeping up with the last 30 months. Ive personally read all your post and while I didnt say anything I did appreciate the well wishers.
Of note I want to say I did everything I could to reach a settlement with GW that was fair. I knew what the outcome regarding trademarks was going to be (its case law) but they did not see things that way and refused to move from their interpretation of the law.
Secondly, regarding the 25K. It is not an insignificant amount. 2 years ago the company would have been in better shape to handle that cost, but the last 30 months has drained CHS financially and pretty much distracted us from growth. To remedy this I will be releasing a number of products and attempting my first foray into a kickstarter. This will be the defense line terrain pieces and I hope this will help recoup the cost of the last 2.5 years as well as get us back into the competition to release exciting products.
I was fortunate to have such great attorneys and friends (those two are not mutually exclusive now) and without them the market place would still be stifled (not to mention I wouldn't have a company anymore). I can not say how amazing it was that I took part in a huge federal lawsuit, and experience unto itself, but when I was in the courtroom across from GWs 2 attorneys and 1 inhouse councel (Gill Stevenson) I had a team of at least 6 attorneys and 4 support staff around me the whole time. I made great friends and learned so much.
Saying that... well just thank you for all your support.
GW can still put the screws to CH just by downloading their entire catalog, and then producing all of those models and bits at cheaper prices. That would be a market-centric way to go after a competitor that would probably work.
As long as GW makes it prohibitively expensive to kit out units with basic options ie CML on DA termies (None in Dark Vengence WTF), psycannons on purifiers etc.
If I could only acquire them buy purchasing them from GW boxes I would be spending hundreds of dollars to acquire bits.
All I can say is within 3 years 3d printers will rip companies like GW apart if they don't start to build up customer loyalty, respond to our wishes and think like someone building a list when making box sets.
Think about it, buy one fig scan and print hundredssssss huge impact!!!!!!!!!!!!
First I want to say thank you for keeping up with the last 30 months. Ive personally read all your post and while I didnt say anything I did appreciate the well wishers.
Of note I want to say I did everything I could to reach a settlement with GW that was fair. I knew what the outcome regarding trademarks was going to be (its case law) but they did not see things that way and refused to move from their interpretation of the law.
Secondly, regarding the 25K. It is not an insignificant amount. 2 years ago the company would have been in better shape to handle that cost, but the last 30 months has drained CHS financially and pretty much distracted us from growth. To remedy this I will be releasing a number of products and attempting my first foray into a kickstarter. This will be the defense line terrain pieces and I hope this will help recoup the cost of the last 2.5 years as well as get us back into the competition to release exciting products.
I was fortunate to have such great attorneys and friends (those two are not mutually exclusive now) and without them the market place would still be stifled (not to mention I wouldn't have a company anymore). I can not say how amazing it was that I took part in a huge federal lawsuit, and experience unto itself, but when I was in the courtroom across from GWs 2 attorneys and 1 inhouse councel (Gill Stevenson) I had a team of at least 6 attorneys and 4 support staff around me the whole time. I made great friends and learned so much.
Saying that... well just thank you for all your support.
Nick Villacci
Chapterhouse Studios LLC
You're welcome, and welcome back.
Now get back to that fething desk and make some fething models!
First I want to say thank you for keeping up with the last 30 months. Ive personally read all your post and while I didnt say anything I did appreciate the well wishers.
Of note I want to say I did everything I could to reach a settlement with GW that was fair. I knew what the outcome regarding trademarks was going to be (its case law) but they did not see things that way and refused to move from their interpretation of the law.
Secondly, regarding the 25K. It is not an insignificant amount. 2 years ago the company would have been in better shape to handle that cost, but the last 30 months has drained CHS financially and pretty much distracted us from growth. To remedy this I will be releasing a number of products and attempting my first foray into a kickstarter. This will be the defense line terrain pieces and I hope this will help recoup the cost of the last 2.5 years as well as get us back into the competition to release exciting products.
I was fortunate to have such great attorneys and friends (those two are not mutually exclusive now) and without them the market place would still be stifled (not to mention I wouldn't have a company anymore). I can not say how amazing it was that I took part in a huge federal lawsuit, and experience unto itself, but when I was in the courtroom across from GWs 2 attorneys and 1 inhouse councel (Gill Stevenson) I had a team of at least 6 attorneys and 4 support staff around me the whole time. I made great friends and learned so much.
Saying that... well just thank you for all your support.
Nick Villacci
Chapterhouse Studios LLC
I wish you all the best Nick and will be watching your company's growth with admiration.
First I want to say thank you for keeping up with the last 30 months. Ive personally read all your post and while I didnt say anything I did appreciate the well wishers.
Of note I want to say I did everything I could to reach a settlement with GW that was fair. I knew what the outcome regarding trademarks was going to be (its case law) but they did not see things that way and refused to move from their interpretation of the law.
Secondly, regarding the 25K. It is not an insignificant amount. 2 years ago the company would have been in better shape to handle that cost, but the last 30 months has drained CHS financially and pretty much distracted us from growth. To remedy this I will be releasing a number of products and attempting my first foray into a kickstarter. This will be the defense line terrain pieces and I hope this will help recoup the cost of the last 2.5 years as well as get us back into the competition to release exciting products.
I was fortunate to have such great attorneys and friends (those two are not mutually exclusive now) and without them the market place would still be stifled (not to mention I wouldn't have a company anymore). I can not say how amazing it was that I took part in a huge federal lawsuit, and experience unto itself, but when I was in the courtroom across from GWs 2 attorneys and 1 inhouse councel (Gill Stevenson) I had a team of at least 6 attorneys and 4 support staff around me the whole time. I made great friends and learned so much.
Saying that... well just thank you for all your support.
Nick Villacci
Chapterhouse Studios LLC
As I have posted before. Help this guy out. Crowd sourcing is the way to go and in this case since he is kickstarting something lets all go in and buy something from him.
First I want to say thank you for keeping up with the last 30 months. Ive personally read all your post and while I didnt say anything I did appreciate the well wishers.
Of note I want to say I did everything I could to reach a settlement with GW that was fair. I knew what the outcome regarding trademarks was going to be (its case law) but they did not see things that way and refused to move from their interpretation of the law.
Secondly, regarding the 25K. It is not an insignificant amount. 2 years ago the company would have been in better shape to handle that cost, but the last 30 months has drained CHS financially and pretty much distracted us from growth. To remedy this I will be releasing a number of products and attempting my first foray into a kickstarter. This will be the defense line terrain pieces and I hope this will help recoup the cost of the last 2.5 years as well as get us back into the competition to release exciting products.
I was fortunate to have such great attorneys and friends (those two are not mutually exclusive now) and without them the market place would still be stifled (not to mention I wouldn't have a company anymore). I can not say how amazing it was that I took part in a huge federal lawsuit, and experience unto itself, but when I was in the courtroom across from GWs 2 attorneys and 1 inhouse councel (Gill Stevenson) I had a team of at least 6 attorneys and 4 support staff around me the whole time. I made great friends and learned so much.
Saying that... well just thank you for all your support.
Nick Villacci
Chapterhouse Studios LLC
As I have posted before. Help this guy out. Crowd sourcing is the way to go and in this case since he is kickstarting something lets all go in and buy something from him.
I know a few guys (including myself) who'd throw a few bucks at a CH kickstarter just to stick it to GW
canadianguy wrote: Think about it, buy one fig scan and print hundredssssss huge impact!!!!!!!!!!!!
3D scanning and 3D printing are fairly different technologies. How big is the market for high-detail consumer-grade 3D scanners? Printing off 3D models is much easier!
Wish all the best for CHS, it takes a lot for a small company to be stuck in legal proceedings for two and a half years and come out the other side.
I see some people can't accept that the case is now settled with some losses on both sides. Clearly the court didn't satisfy them so instead they now post wishes that CHS won't be able sell any new product. That's really sad, it's in our interests that more companies exist to offer more choice and enriched the hobby.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Wish all the best for CHS, it takes a lot for a small company to be stuck in legal proceedings for two and a half years and come out the other side.
I see some people can't accept that the case is now settled with some losses on both sides. Clearly the court didn't satisfy them so instead they now post wishes that CHS won't be able sell any new product. That's really sad, it's in our interests that more companies exist to offer more choice and enriched the hobby.
Who on earth is that stupid that they wouldn't want more choices in the hobby? How does allowing a company to make bits that GW refuses to even make hurt GW? Especially since if a customer wants to use said 3rd party bitz, they HAVE TO BUY GW MARINES.
This is a good thing. CHS did some things that were pretty clearly on the greyer side of what is permitted, but most of what they were doing was completely fine. Thankfully this case will set a precedent, which will hopefully allow 3rd party companies to be less intimidated by GW's rampant cease and desist letters. If I make a set of really cool guns, I shouldn't be getting slammed with takedown notices just because I said "hey, these should fit on GW Guardsmen as well as other sci fi miniatures".
GW got too full of themselves, and paid for it. I would hope they learn from this, but I won't be holding my breath.
Also, good on CHS for sticking this out. I'm glad you got the pro bono defense. Somebody needed to stand up to them and you just happened to be in the right place at the wrong time to do so If you ever make more IG stuff I'll have to check your site out again.
chapterhouse just posted this on TGN in reply to guy who worked for them and was bad mouthing them in the comments under the verdict news
chapterhouse wrote:
June 19, 2013 at 2:38 am
There will be an appeal, I am not sure what the outcome will be though I believe there are many points that favor an appeal by CHS. 25K will be rough, Ill admit that, but I am now able to concentrate on new products and components instead of the constant trial looming on the horizon. I have 2.5 years worth of effort to catch-up on. It would have been great if the other 3rd party companies out there would have helped, but thats not how business works. Regardless I am satisfied with the stance CHS took and am satisfied with most of the rulings. Time to get back to the project table now..
Log in to Reply
First I want to say thank you for keeping up with the last 30 months. Ive personally read all your post and while I didnt say anything I did appreciate the well wishers.
Of note I want to say I did everything I could to reach a settlement with GW that was fair. I knew what the outcome regarding trademarks was going to be (its case law) but they did not see things that way and refused to move from their interpretation of the law.
Secondly, regarding the 25K. It is not an insignificant amount. 2 years ago the company would have been in better shape to handle that cost, but the last 30 months has drained CHS financially and pretty much distracted us from growth. To remedy this I will be releasing a number of products and attempting my first foray into a kickstarter. This will be the defense line terrain pieces and I hope this will help recoup the cost of the last 2.5 years as well as get us back into the competition to release exciting products.
I was fortunate to have such great attorneys and friends (those two are not mutually exclusive now) and without them the market place would still be stifled (not to mention I wouldn't have a company anymore). I can not say how amazing it was that I took part in a huge federal lawsuit, and experience unto itself, but when I was in the courtroom across from GWs 2 attorneys and 1 inhouse councel (Gill Stevenson) I had a team of at least 6 attorneys and 4 support staff around me the whole time. I made great friends and learned so much.
Saying that... well just thank you for all your support.
Nick Villacci
Chapterhouse Studios LLC
There is nothing in this post i do not love. CHS getting right back into satisfying market demands GW ignores. GW's legal team vs CHS'. It's just all so beautiful.
Kilkrazy wrote: Yes, the disadvantage of the settlement in court is that it creates precedents.
Once, however, the pro bono firm that came in for CHS, saw the weakness of the GW's case, they would have wanted to bring it to a conclusion in course. GW were trapped.
Not really. They could have settled out of court with a gag order. That basically would mean that GW would have dropped the case for a minimal fee from CHS (or even paid CHS) but made them sign a contract never to disclose the terms.
That way, they could make it look like they won this to the public. Now, we have a court precedent that tells us exactly what 3rd party manufacturers are allowed to do, and what they aren't.
And what they are allowed to do includes advertising using the names of Games Workshop products that are compatible with their lines.
Very well put, Nick, mad respect and props for you and CHS. Once I get back Stateside I'm going to be making a decently-sized purchase to help you out.
Not really. They could have settled out of court with a gag order. That basically would mean that GW would have dropped the case for a minimal fee from CHS (or even paid CHS) but made them sign a contract never to disclose the terms.
From what I heard GW's attempt at settlement was to offer CHS money to go out of business. It just wasn't much.
Kilkrazy wrote: Yes, the disadvantage of the settlement in court is that it creates precedents.
Once, however, the pro bono firm that came in for CHS, saw the weakness of the GW's case, they would have wanted to bring it to a conclusion in course. GW were trapped.
Not really. They could have settled out of court with a gag order. That basically would mean that GW would have dropped the case for a minimal fee from CHS (or even paid CHS) but made them sign a contract never to disclose the terms.
That way, they could make it look like they won this to the public. Now, we have a court precedent that tells us exactly what 3rd party manufacturers are allowed to do, and what they aren't.
And what they are allowed to do includes advertising using the names of Games Workshop products that are compatible with their lines.
An out of court settlement usually involves one side "fixing" the other one so they won't release details of the agreement -- exactly as you describe above.
However, a defendant cannot be forced to settle out of court, you can always fight the case if you want to. If the defendant decides to fight, the plaintiff must then abide by the result of the case.
The other alternative is for the plaintiff to give up the case before the end, which is an automatic loss and probably will involve paying damages to the defendant.
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, June 19, 2013:
proceedings will be required regarding plaintiff's request for an injunction. (mk)MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Nunc pro tunc 6/17/2013: Jury deliberations concluded. Verdict returned in open court. A judgment will not be entered at this time pending further discussions regarding the form of the judgment given the complexity of the verdict form. The deadline for filing motions pursuant to Rules 50 and 59 relating to the jury's verdict is 7/15/2013. A status hearing is set for 6/20/2013 at 9:30 a.m. to address that point as well as what further
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, June 19, 2013:
MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Status hearing set for 6/20/2013 at 9:30 AM. (mk)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Nunc pro tunc is lawyer for "retroactively", now for then, or a clerical correction of a past judgment (fixing mistakes / typos).
June 17, 2013
Winston & Strawn Defeats Hundreds of Trademark and Copyright Infringement Claims on Behalf of Pro Bono Client
Cutting-Edge Decision Protects Industries from Litigation Blocking Add-On Products
CHICAGO, IL – In a classic David-versus-Goliath battle, Winston & Strawn LLP represented Chapterhouse Studios LLC on a pro bono basis in a cutting-edge federal trademark and copyright dispute in the Northern District of Illinois (Games Workshop Limited v. Chapterhouse Studios LLC 1:10-cv-8103). The verdict of this jury trial, held in June 2013 before Judge Matthew Kennelly, confirms that copyright and trademark law should not be used to block add-on products. Winston & Strawn has litigated the case since 2010, and co-counsel law firm Marshall Gerstein joined the matter in 2012.
“This was a classic case of trademark and copyright bullying by a much bigger Plaintiff,” said Jennifer Golinveaux, partner in Winston & Strawn’s San Francisco office. “I am proud of the investment made by the firm, and the many attorneys who devoted themselves to making sure the intellectual property laws were not misused to squash a much smaller player.”
Games Workshop manufactures Warhammer 40,000, a tabletop battle game that works with armies of miniature figures and vehicles, while Chapterhouse sells customized add-on parts for the figures and vehicles used in the game. The United Kingdom-based Games Workshop, a company with $200 million per year in revenues, alleged more than 200 claims of copyright and trademark infringement against Chapterhouse, a small business run out of an individual’s garage in Texas. Games Workshop argued that it was seeking a complete shutdown of Chapterhouse’s entire business and although Games Workshop initially sought over $400,000 in damages, by the end of the two-week jury trial, the plaintiff dropped its damages demand to only $25,000.
The jury deliberated for more than two days and found that Chapterhouse could continue to make and sell over a hundred products without fear of copyright infringement. The jury also confirmed that Chapterhouse could continue to use most of Games Workshop’s asserted trademarks when selling compatible parts, including all nine of Games Workshop’s registered trademarks. Together with the summary judgment wins, the jury’s verdict confirmed Chapterhouse can continue to make and sell 111 products that Games Workshop hoped to block using copyright laws, and can continue to use 104 words and phrases that Games Workshop said were trademarked.
Imron Aly, lead trial attorney and partner in Winston & Strawn’s Chicago office added, “It was a pleasure to represent a small entrepreneur like Nicholas Villacci of Chapterhouse, who has a passion for his work and wanted to see his business survive.”
Julianne Hartzell, partner at co-counsel law firm Marshall Gerstein added, “We are proud that we were able to help protect Chapterhouse against the overreaching claims made by Games Workshop in such a substantial trademark and copyright dispute.”
Wow...
Also, czakk- Could you explain what you just posted in the post above mine? I'm not sure what that means... does that mean we won't be seeing the "official" judgement right away "due to the complexities", or...?
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, June 19, 2013:
proceedings will be required regarding plaintiff's request for an injunction. (mk)MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Nunc pro tunc 6/17/2013: Jury deliberations concluded. Verdict returned in open court. A judgment will not be entered at this time pending further discussions regarding the form of the judgment given the complexity of the verdict form. The deadline for filing motions pursuant to Rules 50 and 59 relating to the jury's verdict is 7/15/2013. A status hearing is set for 6/20/2013 at 9:30 a.m. to address that point as well as what further
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, June 19, 2013:
MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Status hearing set for 6/20/2013 at 9:30 AM. (mk)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Nunc pro tunc is lawyer for "retroactively", now for then, or a clerical correction of a past judgment (fixing mistakes / typos).
Well between the mentioning of GW requesting an injunction, CHS talking about appeals and the final judgement being a ways off it looks like this adventure hasn't ended just yet. Weeee.
Would it be reasonable to think that GW would be going after an injunction to prevent the exact nature of what marks had been won and lost from going public? Thus preventing other 3rd party manufacturers knowing for certain where the line has been drawn?
azreal13 wrote: Would it be reasonable to think that GW would be going after an injunction to prevent the exact nature of what marks had been won and lost from going public? Thus preventing other 3rd party manufacturers knowing for certain where the line has been drawn?
Naw, an injunction is a court order that requires someone to do (or refrain from doing) a certain action in the future.
So, hypothetically, if the jury found that a model infringed GWs trademarks, GW is going to want damages (for the infringement in the past) and an injunction on selling the model in the future.
Also, czakk- Could you explain what you just posted in the post above mine? I'm not sure what that means... does that mean we won't be seeing the "official" judgement right away "due to the complexities", or...?
I'd be guessing - we don't do jury trials for civil actions much up here. Yeah, seems like we'll be waiting a bit.
First I want to say thank you for keeping up with the last 30 months. Ive personally read all your post and while I didnt say anything I did appreciate the well wishers.
Of note I want to say I did everything I could to reach a settlement with GW that was fair. I knew what the outcome regarding trademarks was going to be (its case law) but they did not see things that way and refused to move from their interpretation of the law.
Secondly, regarding the 25K. It is not an insignificant amount. 2 years ago the company would have been in better shape to handle that cost, but the last 30 months has drained CHS financially and pretty much distracted us from growth. To remedy this I will be releasing a number of products and attempting my first foray into a kickstarter. This will be the defense line terrain pieces and I hope this will help recoup the cost of the last 2.5 years as well as get us back into the competition to release exciting products.
I was fortunate to have such great attorneys and friends (those two are not mutually exclusive now) and without them the market place would still be stifled (not to mention I wouldn't have a company anymore). I can not say how amazing it was that I took part in a huge federal lawsuit, and experience unto itself, but when I was in the courtroom across from GWs 2 attorneys and 1 inhouse councel (Gill Stevenson) I had a team of at least 6 attorneys and 4 support staff around me the whole time. I made great friends and learned so much.
Saying that... well just thank you for all your support.
Nick Villacci
Chapterhouse Studios LLC
I would gladly support a kickstarter, and i'm sure most of the community would too.
The 9th Circuit appeals court has a video explaining the appeals process for folks who have a spare half hour. It's a bit dated and cheesy (90s fashion, no electronic filing) but... (oh and if the case gets appealed it won't be to the 9th it would be to the 7th I believe).
If the motions for Rule 50/59 aren't due until July 15, and we can expect the court to allow time to respond to the dueling motions, plus time for the court to rule....
I'd guess late August for the final outcome at the trial level, assuming the judge doesn't decide to hold a new trial on any aspects brought up in the motions.
I know a few guys (including myself) who'd throw a few bucks at a CH kickstarter just to stick it to GW
If Chapterhouse can tap into only a portion of the rage that many people have towards GW I reckon they will be able to retire off the back of a kickstarter.... you read it here first!
And everyone will be aware its going off.. remember what Max Clifford said?
azreal13 wrote: Would it be reasonable to think that GW would be going after an injunction to prevent the exact nature of what marks had been won and lost from going public? Thus preventing other 3rd party manufacturers knowing for certain where the line has been drawn?
Demanding an injunction to prevent the world to know what exactly is legal, sounds like something GW could do
mattyrm wrote: If Chapterhouse can tap into only a portion of the rage that many people have towards GW I reckon they will be able to retire off the back of a kickstarter.... you read it here first!
Never going to happen. Most of the GW rage comes from people described by William Shatner's song "Has Been". These are not the type of people who actually put up when the time comes to do so.
I don't have "rage" towards GW, but I've directed lots of funds to other companies. I'll consider chipping in towards CHS when the time comes, if the products are good... that last part is the most important, of course.
I was only okay with the quality of the parts I received from them before, but that said it was fantastic just to have a place offering those parts, which weren't available elsewhere at the time (pre-heresy style jump packs). But, it looks to me like they've gotten better over time with their sculpts... not sure if that's true of the casting, too, or not.
mattyrm wrote: If Chapterhouse can tap into only a portion of the rage that many people have towards GW I reckon they will be able to retire off the back of a kickstarter.... you read it here first!
Never going to happen. Most of the GW rage comes from people described by William Shatner's song "Has Been". These are not the type of people who actually put up when the time comes to do so.
Correction: Most of the GW rage comes from folks that enjoyed GW games, then gave up because GW has been getting greedier and greedier and stupider and stupider.
Not 'never done d*ck' to quote your song, but 'done been d*cked over'.
Most of the folks that I know who are angriest with GW have GW armies, and used to play GW games - most still play GW games, but the games are no longer supported by GW. (Necromunda, Mordheim (my game!), and Blood Bowl (can't stand it, but others like it).)
GW is why our Kings of War games are doing well. Folks do not like the current version of Warhammer, but still want to play their armies.
And I just bought two of the Chapterhouse 'Space Praetorian' jetbikes and DA shoulder pads - one will be used as a Ravenwing Chaplain, the other... don't know yet.
Why? Just buy stuff from them if you want to show your support. They're a business after all, not the Red Cross.
Already did, but the minis community making an effort to officially pay off CHS fine would be sending a very strong message to GW what their fan base is wiling to support, and what it is not.
Exactly this. The point would be to endorse the verdict, more than to help CHS. I don't know if something like that could be organized, or is even practical, but even if not, there are plenty of ways to let GW know that you support and agree with the jury verdict.
Why? Just buy stuff from them if you want to show your support. They're a business after all, not the Red Cross.
Already did, but the minis community making an effort to officially pay off CHS fine would be sending a very strong message to GW what their fan base is wiling to support, and what it is not.
Exactly this. The point would be to endorse the verdict, more than to help CHS. I don't know if something like that could be organized, or is even practical, but even if not, there are plenty of ways to let GW know that you support and agree with the jury verdict.
A letter writing campaign directed at Tom Kirby and the Board of Directors (and I mean actual, physical letters sent by post and on actual paper) would have more of an impact than spending money on CHS to get the point across. GW will only see that as salt in the wound and lost revenue, not an actual point being made.
Why letters? Because if you get enough people on it they will have to deal with the actual physical bulk of them. Emails can be deleted, phone calls ignored but physical messages are about as good as you can get without standing in their office until they'll actually deal with you.
Intent on how you spent your money is frankly almost impossible to gauge from an outside perspective. GW can't read your mind, nor can they know that you pitched in to CHS with the intent of showing support. For all they know you pitched in because CHS has something they don't, or something they do at a lower cost. If you want GW to get the message you'll basically need to force feed it to them.
I doubt CHS has any intention of selling items it lost on in the future, but a court order to do so wouldn't hurt I guess. I honestly think CHS has moved on and the loss of all 2 figures won't cripple their sales.
Is there any evidence of GW saddling up for appeals? Seems like they have to, given how badly they got spanked.
Aerethan wrote: Do we know what said injunction would be for?
I doubt CHS has any intention of selling items it lost on in the future, but a court order to do so wouldn't hurt I guess. I honestly think CHS has moved on and the loss of all 2 figures won't cripple their sales.
Is there any evidence of GW saddling up for appeals? Seems like they have to, given how badly they got spanked.
The request will probably be for a permanent injunction of sale and manufacture of items found to have been infringing.
Aerethan wrote: Do we know what said injunction would be for?
I doubt CHS has any intention of selling items it lost on in the future, but a court order to do so wouldn't hurt I guess. I honestly think CHS has moved on and the loss of all 2 figures won't cripple their sales.
Is there any evidence of GW saddling up for appeals? Seems like they have to, given how badly they got spanked.
The request will probably be for a permanent injunction of sale and manufacture of items found to have been infringing.
Doesn't seem like a huge loss, and also seems like something that should be included in the final verdict.
Aerethan wrote: Do we know what said injunction would be for?
I doubt CHS has any intention of selling items it lost on in the future, but a court order to do so wouldn't hurt I guess. I honestly think CHS has moved on and the loss of all 2 figures won't cripple their sales.
Its two figures plus a number of add on kits (have not done a complete list though), going by stuff that has been taken off the web site, although, as you say, it should not cripple their sales.
It should worry a lot of people thought. If the court felt that addional parts were okay, but full figures weren't then that affects all garage companies.
Now I know some people will say that this will not affect those companies working out of, eg Poland, but it does. If those companies want to do business in USA, they have to abide by USA laws, and that means.....?
Surely only the name could infringe from the figures. The actual sculpts don't look much like any elf GW does, the tru-scale is a bit closer to the mark but it's just a suit of armour.
If they change the names, there's nothing that makes them look like GW figures more than many other fantasy figures. That doesn't make sense they should be removed unless you're saying that while you can make add-ons GW have some exclusivity on futuristic fantasy figures.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Surely only the name could infringe from the figures. The actual sculpts don't look much like any elf GW does, the tru-scale is a bit closer to the mark but it's just a suit of armour.
If they change the names, there's nothing that makes them look like GW figures more than many other fantasy figures. That doesn't make sense they should be removed unless you're saying that while you can make add-ons GW have some exclusivity on futuristic fantasy figures.
What it boils down to are basically points of aesthetic similarity. The Knight-Praetorian or w/e it was called may be "a suit of armour", but it was stylistically nearly identical to SM armor outside of a few differences. Ditto for the Doomseer and Torturess; both were clearly derivative from earlier GW works. Thunderhammers appear to be gone from the site as well, etc.
To be honest, it's part of the reason I was kinda shocked that they didn't have to resculpt the riders on the jetbikes. The jetbikes I rather expected them to get away with, given that they model they based that one on has been out of circulation for twenty years, but the rider is again, functionally a Space Marine with a slightly different helmet.
On a similar note, I'm actually kinda shocked that they had to drop the Tyranid Warrior wings kit, given that that was just... wings. And a couple limbs, but still. I mean, the wings were ugly, and pricy, but they were just... wings.
GW for all its many manty faults have been reasonable with the costumer base over conversions. The main casualty will be that policy. There is a precedent:
Privateer Press does not allow models to be replaced at all, and no one complains. GW will allow you to convert an orc arrer boy into an orc shaman with some bitz, but PP will not allow you to convert a warjack into a special character of the same model warjack, you must have the correct bitz from the exact model for the model to be tourney legal, and it cant be used as a generic jack either, just the special character. If GW did this people would whine, but now they might have to.
In this GW is far more reasonable than PP, however with third party bitz everywhere GW will not be misbehaving if it turned around and said that models must be 100% GW and acceptable conversions for tourney play may well end up more restricted.
Also GW might continue the policy of being very specific with allowed wargear. So for example you might get to use the wargear for your character that is available in its boxset and nothing else. So for example the combi weapons for SM commanders might be restricted to the one actually on the sprue. This way they can channel miniatures along the lines of what is currently sold more closely.
GW will have to act to close the door on third party sales via the army books and tourney conversions policies, and we will all be poorer for it.
How do conversions factor in it? They are only an issue to some companies in official tournaments. GW and PP have no way to enforce any ban on them outside their stores/tournaments.
how can GW enforce the 100% GW mini rule in a tournament thats run by a club or indies store?
The only ones they can force that rule on, is the ones held at Warhammer world (i.e Throne of Skulls).
my local club run there own tourny Twice a year, they are happy with players useing conversions useing any bits out there, GW or otherwise.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Surely only the name could infringe from the figures. The actual sculpts don't look much like any elf GW does, the tru-scale is a bit closer to the mark but it's just a suit of armour.
If they change the names, there's nothing that makes them look like GW figures more than many other fantasy figures. That doesn't make sense they should be removed unless you're saying that while you can make add-ons GW have some exclusivity on futuristic fantasy figures.
What it boils down to are basically points of aesthetic similarity. The Knight-Praetorian or w/e it was called may be "a suit of armour", but it was stylistically nearly identical to SM armor outside of a few differences. Ditto for the Doomseer and Torturess; both were clearly derivative from earlier GW works. Thunderhammers appear to be gone from the site as well, etc.
To be honest, it's part of the reason I was kinda shocked that they didn't have to resculpt the riders on the jetbikes. The jetbikes I rather expected them to get away with, given that they model they based that one on has been out of circulation for twenty years, but the rider is again, functionally a Space Marine with a slightly different helmet.
On a similar note, I'm actually kinda shocked that they had to drop the Tyranid Warrior wings kit, given that that was just... wings. And a couple limbs, but still. I mean, the wings were ugly, and pricy, but they were just... wings.
It's a very mixed bag. The Torturess just looks generic to me, and doesn't look much like any particular figure. The jet bike seems safe, it bares no resemblance to the RT jet bike. The tyranid wings being removed is silly, what does GW own about them? I can see that there's a similarity issue with the tru-scale but it dies seem like the jury decided that they had to give a few wins and losses to each side, it doesn't seem logical.
As if the jury thought that a company as big as GW throwing as many accusations as they did, some of them must be right.
In my eyes, the Doomseer was a female humanoid in plate armour with robes and a tall helmet with horns on it. Every individual piece of it was different to all of the GW figures and so was the ensemble. It looked like a Farseer because all Farseer models are humanoids with plate armour, robes and a tall helmet with some kind of decorations on it.
GW now apparently own the copyright on the idea of a general style of model.
What would happen if Chapter House should make a Doomseer the same as the old one, but without a helmet?
Orlanth wrote: Privateer Press does not allow models to be replaced at all, and no one complains. GW will allow you to convert an orc arrer boy into an orc shaman with some bitz, but PP will not allow you to convert a warjack into a special character of the same model warjack, you must have the correct bitz from the exact model for the model to be tourney legal, and it cant be used as a generic jack either, just the special character. If GW did this people would whine, but now they might have to.
Your specific points here are largely wrong regarding the PP conversion policy. For example, Extremoth is a non-character warjack converted into a Behemoth. You do not need the correct bits from 'the exact model', but the bits do have to be very similar. The specific examples given are that a warjack with a sword has to be a warjack with a sword. You could not take a Hammersmith and give it a sword because then it may be confusing whether it's a Hammersmith or an Ironclad or a Gallant or a Stormclad.
Many people have converted models like the Avatar of Menoth (which is stunty and too-small on the tabletop) to have plastic generic Menoth legs and a much bigger sword from a different character jack.
PP's policies basically amount to a more rigorous explanation/enforcement of WYSIWYG. And it's very important that it be glaringly obvious what a model is to anybody looking at it because PP games are very structured, and tournaments have timed turns. In many games, you have only 7-10 minutes to resolve your entire turn.
He's not wrong in the Letter of the rule for PP's conversion policy. An Extremoth is an illegal conversion by their rules as they are written. Just as I've said before, the rules are never enforced that strongly. They're written such that a TO can DQ any conversions that are too confusing, ie wrong model base, wrong weapons, ect, but then given TO's explicit permission to ignore the rules, and in practice so long as its appropriately apparent what a model is supposed to represent, all TOs in my experience do just that. I break all the rules except correct base size and my stuff gets allowed all over the place and have only ever had two people complain about them to my face.
Whilst I appreciate the organic flow of conversation that has led us to this tangent, can we not dissect this particular issue here overmuch please. Do feel free to start a new thread if needs be.
AduroT wrote: He's not wrong in the Letter of the rule for PP's conversion policy. An Extremoth is an illegal conversion by their rules as they are written. Just as I've said before, the rules are never enforced that strongly. They're written such that a TO can DQ any conversions that are too confusing, ie wrong model base, wrong weapons, ect, but then given TO's explicit permission to ignore the rules, and in practice so long as its appropriately apparent what a model is supposed to represent, all TOs in my experience do just that. I break all the rules except correct base size and my stuff gets allowed all over the place and have only ever had two people complain about them to my face.
The conversion policy is more like... guidelines than actual rules.
As you say, it's explicitly up to the TO of any event to allow/disallow any conversion. The end result is that this is EXACTLY the same as in 40k, the only difference is that PP expresses a set of nominal standards for how to keep things recognizable, while 40k has endless debates over what is "modelling for advantage".
But we've been told to stop it with the conversion policy differences earlier, so I think this is a line of reasoning that's going nowhere and should probably end (though I do hate it when people think that PP is anti-conversions - they have regular conversion competitions in No Quarter magazine and encourage conversions for league models fer 'evens sake).
As of right now the Land Raider conversion kit is still there...and its about the only thing that would get me to buy a GWLR. Only reason I havent so far is I have no actual use for it beyond sitting there and looking cool.
So did we find 'true scale' stuff is infringing but add-on parts are not?
If GW succeeded in killing true-scale models, then that is a minor victory for them as those are models which are intended to be total replacements for GW models using GW's designs with scale alterations.
So if the court did find 'true-scale' to be infringing works, that is pretty noteworthy IMHO.
I'm also curious about the fact that several "whole models" were deemed infringing, but a larger number of the bits weren't.
Regarding conversions... to have any say on what can be used in events, GW would, you know, have to support/host/organize events which they no longer do in the US (where this is all most relevant).
In my eyes, the Doomseer was a female humanoid in plate armour with robes and a tall helmet with horns on it. Every individual piece of it was different to all of the GW figures and so was the ensemble. It looked like a Farseer because all Farseer models are humanoids with plate armour, robes and a tall helmet with some kind of decorations on it.
Nah. It was an obvious Eldar seer, designed as such and marketed as such.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RiTides wrote: I'm also curious about the fact that several "whole models" were deemed infringing, but a larger number of the bits weren't.
I think it follows the usual logic of aftermarket business.
I don't know about anyone else, but I seem to be getting the sensing that the rulings made by the jury were that "Add-on parts are okay", but "complete ripoffs, even generic ripoffs, are not okay". That's why things like shoulderpads, etc. were fine when things like trueseer and jetbikes weren't.
Enigwolf wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but I seem to be getting the sensing that the rulings made by the jury were that "Add-on parts are okay", but "complete ripoffs, even generic ripoffs, are not okay". That's why things like shoulderpads, etc. were fine when things like trueseer and jetbikes weren't.
Except the Jetbikes are still for sale, so while I think you're broadly right, there's got to be more complexity to it (or just jury based arbitrary nonsense)
Enigwolf wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but I seem to be getting the sensing that the rulings made by the jury were that "Add-on parts are okay", but "complete ripoffs, even generic ripoffs, are not okay". That's why things like shoulderpads, etc. were fine when things like trueseer and jetbikes weren't.
Except the Jetbikes are still for sale, so while I think you're broadly right, there's got to be more complexity to it (or just jury based arbitrary nonsense)
Enigwolf wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but I seem to be getting the sensing that the rulings made by the jury were that "Add-on parts are okay", but "complete ripoffs, even generic ripoffs, are not okay". That's why things like shoulderpads, etc. were fine when things like trueseer and jetbikes weren't.
Except the Jetbikes are still for sale, so while I think you're broadly right, there's got to be more complexity to it (or just jury based arbitrary nonsense)
Yeah, sorry, got a little confused. I was just trying to point out another theme of categorization that's coming across to me as having taken place, as opposed to looking at them from a specific-infringement view.
Except the Jetbikes are still for sale, so while I think you're broadly right, there's got to be more complexity to it (or just jury based arbitrary nonsense)
In the case of the jetbikes, it was likely based on the totality of the model. While the rider is clearly a Marine, the bike looks nothing like the 30K jetbikes from FW, and probably not enough like Sammael to satisfy the jury.
The thing there is that the rider may be a Marine, but doesn't actually come with a torso/head. Arguably, it's an upgrade piece. The limbs are pretty obviously Marine limbs, but without shoulder pads, the arms are less distinctive, and while the legs are going to be obvious Marine legs no matter what you do to them, the jury likely just let that slide since it's a single bit, and not enough to prove infringement.
NecronLord3 wrote: I think that the Doomseer model sets a bad precedent for GW to now go after Scribor, Heresy Miniatures, Ultraforge etc...
Don't be so sure on that, as IIRC both of those are actually HQed outside the US, and there was recently a ruling by the SC about foreign nationals suing each other in US courts (rather than the appropriate national or international courts) so they'd have to drag it through the EU court for Scibor.
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, June 20, 2013:
MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly:Status hearing held and continued to 7/15/2013 at 9:30 a.m. Joint Status Report regarding Injunctive Relief is to be filed by 6/26/2013. Draft judgment to be submitted by 6/26/13. Hearing regarding the judgment set for 6/27/2013 at 09:30 AM. (or, )
NecronLord3 wrote: I think that the Doomseer model sets a bad precedent for GW to now go after Scribor, Heresy Miniatures, Ultraforge etc...
I don't think so. Remember, one of the major things which started this for CH was they released the models EXPLICITLY saying it was a 40k Farseer in the 40k universe using explicit 40k terms in the product description including direct references to fluff and such. Also there were pages upon pages of a corporate spokesperson clearly telling people his models were representations of GW universe models (and there was nothing GW could do about it).
Which they eventually removed and attempted to replace with a 'generic' description and fluff. The issue is the cat was out of the bag at that point and the lawsuit was on, and the Internet never forgets.
Almost everyone else is selling "steam knights", "Spartan Space Warriors", "apocalyptic/ww2 orcs" and "disease corrupted demon" to be generic or unique models even though they can clearly easily be used as 'counts as' GW units or themes. Because they haven't said they were or attempted to pass them off as such, it makes it a lot harder to show intent. The doomseer may have been ruled to be perfectly legal if they hadn't explicitly said it was a GW universe farseer.
But who knows what was in the Jury's minds or what they decided. I feel like if you had presented the same model to another Jury without the evidence of the product description using GW terms and fluff in it, you would see a different outcome. It does seem as if companies making complete model replacement of GW-imagery may find themselves next on the list while shoulderpad/gun makers may find themselves breathing a little easier.
Then again, apparently 'powerfists' are infringing too? so who knows? We may see some sorts of add-ons also targeted.
I would love to see a total inventory of every product which was challenged and see a outcome of each one. If it was settled out of court, dropped or ruled upon and what the result was (and if a reason why was given, then the reason) It would make a good Dakka article and would probably be top on my list if I was a mini maker and worried about my skin. If anything, GW winning 'something' means they could file focused suits against very specific pieces and just start making small stabs into 3rd parties by trying to kill specific products one by one with successful results on those types of models to drive them. If you can't shut them down, then wound them hoping it is deathblow, or at least increase costs due to legal fees.
At some point, when everything's done, I'm certain some gamer-turned-lawyer/law student is going to write a law journal article on this case. I look forward to reading it.
NecronLord3 wrote: I think that the Doomseer model sets a bad precedent for GW to now go after Scribor, Heresy Miniatures, Ultraforge etc...
Don't be so sure on that, as IIRC both of those are actually HQed outside the US, and there was recently a ruling by the SC about foreign nationals suing each other in US courts (rather than the appropriate national or international courts) so they'd have to drag it through the EU court for Scibor.
Doesn't matter where they are based though. From what I've seen on a personal level, alternative figures seem to be a more prominent feature on the USA scene than the Europe gaming scene. Now regardless of where these companies are based, if they want to market their products in the US then they have to abide by US legislation.
How does it help them if its legal to make them but illegal to sell them in their preferred market?
NecronLord3 wrote: I think that the Doomseer model sets a bad precedent for GW to now go after Scribor, Heresy Miniatures, Ultraforge etc...
Don't be so sure on that, as IIRC both of those are actually HQed outside the US, and there was recently a ruling by the SC about foreign nationals suing each other in US courts (rather than the appropriate national or international courts) so they'd have to drag it through the EU court for Scibor.
Doesn't matter where they are based though. From what I've seen on a personal level, alternative figures seem to be a more prominent feature on the USA scene than the Europe gaming scene. Now regardless of where these companies are based, if they want to market their products in the US then they have to abide by US legislation.
How does it help them if its legal to make them but illegal to sell them in their preferred market?
Cheers
Andrew
They're not operating in the US, they're posting stuff to the US, world of difference. If they start opening up US distribution offices or similar, then your point would apply.
They're not operating in the US, they're posting stuff to the US, world of difference. If they start opening up US distribution offices or similar, then your point would apply.
How do you figure that?
If a product is illegal in a country, then it is illegal in a country regardless of where it is made. And if they are selling product to an american market then they are operating in the US.
For example, and a poor one I admit, it's legal to purchase fake rolexes in China, but illegal to import them into the UK.
And from earlier comments (someone mentioned seeing them on racks) Scibor already has pre-packed figures imported to the US for retail sale.
They're not operating in the US, they're posting stuff to the US, world of difference. If they start opening up US distribution offices or similar, then your point would apply.
How do you figure that?
If a product is illegal in a country, then it is illegal in a country regardless of where it is made. And if they are selling product to an american market then they are operating in the US.
For example, and a poor one I admit, it's legal to purchase fake rolexes in China, but illegal to import them into the UK.
And from earlier comments (someone mentioned seeing them on racks) Scibor already has pre-packed figures imported to the US for retail sale.
Cheers
Andrew
there is a difference however between legislating something to protect a local industry. You can pass a bill making it illegal to import a product. That said, what are you going to do with miniatures? I'm sorry, but we are dealing with parts for toys here. I can't see that anyone would really truly be fined for importing $10 worth of imitation toys where the original might be worth $20-30 at most. More to the point, what are you going to do if there is a discount retailer in germany, who sells scibor's stuff? The only way to make import illegal, is to legislate it that way, and frankly, while the possibility exists, in the TTWG "industry", it's simply not a reality for the united states. The money we are talking about here would make it more expensive to run the customs office, and more to the point, it's the importer that pays the fines, not the company, and it's just not realistic to fine consumers several hundred dollars for importing $10 worth of parts from poland, because GW threw a hissy fit. GW wouldn't even get any of that fine money....
NecronLord3 wrote: I think that the Doomseer model sets a bad precedent for GW to now go after Scribor, Heresy Miniatures, Ultraforge etc...
I don't think so. Remember, one of the major things which started this for CH was they released the models EXPLICITLY saying it was a 40k Farseer in the 40k universe using explicit 40k terms in the product description including direct references to fluff and such. Also there were pages upon pages of a corporate spokesperson clearly telling people his models were representations of GW universe models (and there was nothing GW could do about it).
Which they eventually removed and attempted to replace with a 'generic' description and fluff. The issue is the cat was out of the bag at that point and the lawsuit was on, and the Internet never forgets.
Almost everyone else is selling "steam knights", "Spartan Space Warriors", "apocalyptic/ww2 orcs" and "disease corrupted demon" to be generic or unique models even though they can clearly easily be used as 'counts as' GW units or themes. Because they haven't said they were or attempted to pass them off as such, it makes it a lot harder to show intent. The doomseer may have been ruled to be perfectly legal if they hadn't explicitly said it was a GW universe farseer.
But who knows what was in the Jury's minds or what they decided. I feel like if you had presented the same model to another Jury without the evidence of the product description using GW terms and fluff in it, you would see a different outcome. It does seem as if companies making complete model replacement of GW-imagery may find themselves next on the list while shoulderpad/gun makers may find themselves breathing a little easier.
Then again, apparently 'powerfists' are infringing too? so who knows? We may see some sorts of add-ons also targeted.
I would love to see a total inventory of every product which was challenged and see a outcome of each one. If it was settled out of court, dropped or ruled upon and what the result was (and if a reason why was given, then the reason) It would make a good Dakka article and would probably be top on my list if I was a mini maker and worried about my skin. If anything, GW winning 'something' means they could file focused suits against very specific pieces and just start making small stabs into 3rd parties by trying to kill specific products one by one with successful results on those types of models to drive them. If you can't shut them down, then wound them hoping it is deathblow, or at least increase costs due to legal fees.
This is not at all over.
Looks to me like the jury gave free rein to do exactly that, call things x to represent GW's y term. They seem to have directly knocked down "alternative" versions of already established GW models. This also seems to be the case early on when the judge basically ruled that if GW doesn't produce a model for something at all, and chapterhouse did that Chapterhouse could sue GW on grounds of trademark infringement, if/when GW does get around to producing the model. Hence why you now see GW putting out models for everything vs. Tyranid-like codexes where a handful of options were not represented in the GW model line.
NecronLord3 wrote: This also seems to be the case early on when the judge basically ruled that if GW doesn't produce a model for something at all, and chapterhouse did that Chapterhouse could sue GW on grounds of trademark infringement, if/when GW does get around to producing the model.
AustonT wrote: If memory serves, and it may not, the doom seer came out after the CD letter.
Which C&D letter? I don't think we've seen any filed anywhere.
I'm not sure if it was ever posted, but it was a few years ago. You'd have to dig through the thread to find it- or it may even be in another . Note- pretty sure he's talking about the original C&D letter that started a lot of this.
AustonT wrote: If memory serves, and it may not, the doom seer came out after the CD letter.
Which C&D letter? I don't think we've seen any filed anywhere.
I'm not sure if it was ever posted, but it was a few years ago. You'd have to dig through the thread to find it- or it may even be in another . Note- pretty sure he's talking about the original C&D letter that started a lot of this.
If a product is illegal in a country, then it is illegal in a country regardless of where it is made. And if they are selling product to an american market then they are operating in the US.
For example, and a poor one I admit, it's legal to purchase fake rolexes in China, but illegal to import them into the UK.
And from earlier comments (someone mentioned seeing them on racks) Scibor already has pre-packed figures imported to the US for retail sale.
The problem is that the manufacture of such minis is only a criminal case if the minis are made in the US (or passed off as 'Genuine'),otherwise it's a civil one. Despite the Alien Tort Statute of 1789, the US Supreme Court, in a 9-0 ruling in April, ruled that Foreign Nationals could not bring suit against each other in US courts for events that took place outside the US.
Further the 'Mega Conspiracy' case is busy making a shambles of the idea that US law is the ruling law of the Internet...
Which is all very true, but ask yourself this, since the majority if customers are law abiding citizens of the USA, and the company is a law abiding company, will they deliberately set out to break US law?
So while the results of this case is not legally binding on all the affected companies, they will be bound by their personal ethics into not setting out to break US laws.
So, my comments are not about criminal or civil cases, but the cut off of the availability of the American markets to those companies.
Do I make better sense now, because I wasn't very clear earlier.
AustonT wrote: If memory serves, and it may not, the doom seer came out after the CD letter.
Which C&D letter? I don't think we've seen any filed anywhere.
How EXACTLY did you think this lawsuit started?
Well normally a lawsuit gets started by filing a 'complaint' or other originating process with a court. A C&D is just a nastygram.
I was wondering if any C&Ds got filed waaay back in the day when GW was seeking treble damages (as part of an effort to show wilfulness - eg defendant was put on notice, and continued to infringe).
Okay, but you are ignoring the difference between legislation and tort. The issue here is not about rape, a murder or an arson spree. These kinds of crimes are federally legislated. Torts have no sway about barring someone's business. Us courts are encouraged to look at other nations for case law where none exists, but are not required to do so. Not everything in a court is a criminal action. Torts, like this case, is the likeliest outcome, with criminal action being taken only possibly if an outright knockoff is sold, and not just the brand names used.
The fact is there is no cutoff. You look at the case law, the trade marks etc. and then sell based on that. Either. You have space kniggitz of the far grim dark future, or spice muhreenz, or space marines. Two will get you dirty looks, and the latter will. Ring law suit against you [I HATE THIS DAMN IPAD! IT'S A PIECE OF TRASH, CAN'T UNDERLINE ANYTHING] then if, and only if, you have a business address in the states can you have legal action brought against you in the states under tort law. The consumer has not violated laws, and since companies did not violate criminal laws, the Feds don't care. The only thing the companies violated are rights to trademarks... Otherwise, company a can float and sputter, and do nothing. It can do the American thing of suing everyone including known customers to demand some kind of restitution for buying knockoffs....but that won't work. And if company b has no employees or registered addresses in the US, then company a can have impotent rage over whats happening.
Honestly I'm not sure what you are getting at, because your questions all terminate in the example of either this case or nothing happens, or a smart victim documents everything...
Okay Poda, ask your self this question, if this case has said that parts are okay, and full figure replacements are not, would you buy a full replacement figure from Europe?
Okay Poda, ask your self this question, if this case has said that parts are okay, and full figure replacements are not, would you buy a full replacement figure from Europe?
Cheers
Andrew
Yes, and it would be for all practical purposes legal to do so. The issue here is copyrights and trademarks as interpreted by the US. This only effects US companies and manufacturers, SCOTUS just shot down GW suing Scibor in US courts for what Scibor does in (IIRC) France. Scibor could choose nto ot sell directly to the US, but resellers would make a mint in the process, as there's nothing to legally stop them from doing so as long as the minis in question are not direct knock offs. As to the legality of their import, IIRC there's no law on the books that says they cannot be imported into the US.
Unless you're asking if it's moral to do so, to which I say 'Sure'.
Okay Poda, ask your self this question, if this case has said that parts are okay, and full figure replacements are not, would you buy a full replacement figure from Europe?
Cheers
Andrew
after assessing the models, and having determined that they are more cost-effective for me, or i find them to be better looking, or for the simple fact of snubbing GW and giving someone else my money? As a consumer I have the right to choose who I buy from, and if I happen to think GW does bad business or their product is not up to par, then it's ridiculous to blame me for not buying their over-priced re-branded crap or what I have consistently maintained are sub-par models. If people DO want to hound me for the "gw has the best quality models" I will cough the word "Tamiya" and "dragon models" into my hands. I'll buy the odd model from GW since i still have outstanding projects... but...by and large? most of my recent purchases have been 3rd party bits or 3rd party models. GW does not produce 1000 sons terminators. So I'm not going to give them upwards of $200 just to get the parts required to convert a squad of 9 terminators.
as to the morality, does it really matter? If we want to play the morality trump card, then one has to ask why bother buying anything from GW at all.
AustonT wrote: If memory serves, and it may not, the doom seer came out after the CD letter.
Which C&D letter? I don't think we've seen any filed anywhere.
How EXACTLY did you think this lawsuit started?
Well normally a lawsuit gets started by filing a 'complaint' or other originating process with a court. A C&D is just a nastygram.
I was wondering if any C&Ds got filed waaay back in the day when GW was seeking treble damages (as part of an effort to show wilfulness - eg defendant was put on notice, and continued to infringe).
I don't know what treble damage is (sarcasm free statement) but yes it was in the string of CDs GW sent out to badger 3rd party companies into folding. Whole you may not NEED a CD to file a case; let's be real: GW sends them out like party favors.
I seem to recall shortly after hearing GW threatened CHS they produced the Doomseer. Like a hearty "feth you" bit I could be wrong.
Can GW request an injuction on every disputed point they lost pending the appeal?
And second question if the appeal is successful for CH could they claim damages against GW or that would be a different suit? (Or the other way around)
Miguelsan wrote: Can GW request an injuction on every disputed point they lost pending the appeal?
And second question if the appeal is successful for CH could they claim damages against GW or that would be a different suit? (Or the other way around)
M.
uhhhhh
nnnnnnot sure? I think we are still waiting for the documents to be available on pacer? As i understand it, CHS's damages were not part of the action, so, as I understand it a Judge might throw it in, because some are crazy like that, but no. The appeal only deals with points of law that either party feels were improperly adhered to.
Last few entries in PACER for those who are curious:
06/14/2013 396 MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Nunc pro tunc 6/14/2013: Jury deliberations concluded. Verdict returned in open court. A judgment will not be entered at this time pending further discussions regarding the form of the judgment given the complexity of the verdict form. The deadline for filing motions pursuant to Rules 50 and 59 relating to the jury's verdict is 7/15/2013. A status hearing is set for 6/20/2013 at 9:30 a.m. to address that point as well as what further proceedings will be required regarding plaintiff's request for an injunction. (mk) Modified on 6/19/2013 (or, ). (Entered: 06/19/2013)
06/14/2013 399 JURY Verdict entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant. (Mailed Notice) (RESTRICTED) (td, ) (Entered: 06/24/2013)
06/19/2013 397 MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Status hearing set for 6/20/2013 at 9:30 AM. (mk) (Entered: 06/19/2013)
06/20/2013 398 MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly:Status hearing held and continued to 7/15/2013 at 9:30 a.m. Joint Status Report regarding Injunctive Relief is to be filed by 6/26/2013. Draft judgment to be submitted by 6/26/13. Hearing regarding the judgment set for 6/27/2013 at 09:30 AM. (or, ) (Entered: 06/21/2013)
Because this thread is 176 pages and I unfortunately don't have the time to peruse it all, there was mention of this case revealing Forgeworlds relationship with the larger GW entity, any idea in what ways?
They won only 1/3 of their disputes that went before the jury. If GW won only a single dispute the phrasing would be the same. It'd also be phrased that way, if GW won on any dispute but awarded nothing.
Aerethan wrote: So the final judgement should be out by the end of the week.
I doubt it. Sometimes, the judge asks the prevailing party (or occasionally both parties) to submit a written judgment order, which the other party/judge amend until the judge is happy with it. I suspect that's what the "draft" judgment order is in this case.
Aerethan wrote: So the final judgement should be out by the end of the week.
I doubt it. Sometimes, the judge asks the prevailing party (or occasionally both parties) to submit a written judgment order, which the other party/judge amend until the judge is happy with it. I suspect that's what the "draft" judgment order is in this case.
I see. So that draft is due 6/27/13, then it's a haggle fest until a resolution at a date set by the court I assume?
Never knew that cases aren't actually over when a verdict is declared(other than the appeals process). How drawn out. Not in ANY way a waste of time, money, energy on everyone's part, including taxpayers.
I suppose the silver lining is that while this case is 2.5 years old, it only actually took up 2 weeks of full court time.
somewheresomehow wrote: That was a pretty quick appeals process, or did I miss the part where a party waived their right to appeal?
I'm pretty sure they need the final judgement from the original trial before launching an appeal, dude.
True, but with the way people are reacting, you would think the appeal process was over, and we won't have another year or more of this whole situation continuing.
Aerethan wrote: So the final judgement should be out by the end of the week.
I doubt it. Sometimes, the judge asks the prevailing party (or occasionally both parties) to submit a written judgment order, which the other party/judge amend until the judge is happy with it. I suspect that's what the "draft" judgment order is in this case.
I see. So that draft is due 6/27/13, then it's a haggle fest until a resolution at a date set by the court I assume?
Never knew that cases aren't actually over when a verdict is declared(other than the appeals process). How drawn out. Not in ANY way a waste of time, money, energy on everyone's part, including taxpayers.
I suppose the silver lining is that while this case is 2.5 years old, it only actually took up 2 weeks of full court time.
Frankly, given the number of individual claims involved, it's actually moved along pretty quickly.
Vaktathi wrote: Because this thread is 176 pages and I unfortunately don't have the time to peruse it all, there was mention of this case revealing Forgeworlds relationship with the larger GW entity, any idea in what ways?
That's a very silly question. GW owns FW. FW is just a brand that has it's own dev team. Why do you need court documents to explain this?
Vaktathi wrote: Because this thread is 176 pages and I unfortunately don't have the time to peruse it all, there was mention of this case revealing Forgeworlds relationship with the larger GW entity, any idea in what ways?
That's a very silly question. GW owns FW. FW is just a brand that has it's own dev team. Why do you need court documents to explain this?
There was a mention in the "Do we need FW in tournament play?" thread that there was something revealed about GW's distance to FW. Having been following this thread closely, I saw no mention of such. It's off-topic anyway.
06/14/2013 399 JURY Verdict entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant. (Mailed Notice) (RESTRICTED) (td, ) (Entered: 06/24/2013)
This makes it look like GW won
I think we should all agree, the supporters of either party can claim the verdict went their way. There's no reason to suspect that either party won't declare it as a victory.
GW will certainly claim that they won the case, using the words above, and the fact there was a setllement in their favor.
And Chapterhouse can justifiably claim a David vs Goliath victory, even though David took a few punches and Goliath is still standing.
06/14/2013 399 JURY Verdict entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant. (Mailed Notice) (RESTRICTED) (td, ) (Entered: 06/24/2013)
This makes it look like GW won
Well, you can win a case and still not really win a case.
For example, just last week there was a student who "won" a First Amendment violation suit against his teacher and school system because the teacher kicked the student out of the class during a discussion about socio-politics where the student put forward a differing view than that of the teacher.
The court awarded the student the "victory" in the suit, but then only awarded $1.00 in damages.
So, "winning" a suit doesn't mean the winner actually got what they wanted.
Hmm.. I hope this isn't going to turn into a 'they won!'* like the Forces of Order in the Eye of Terror campaign back in the early 2000's, in the way that any impartial observer can view as simply not being the case
Pacific wrote: Hmm.. I hope this isn't going to turn into a 'they won!'* like the Forces of Order in the Eye of Terror campaign back in the early 2000's, in the way that any impartial observer can view as simply not being the case
* Although in that case 'they drew!'
How about you just stick to the facts:
"Together with the summary judgment wins, the jury’s verdict confirmed Chapterhouse can continue to make and sell 111 products that Games Workshop hoped to block using copyright laws, and can continue to use 104 words and phrases that Games Workshop said were trademarked."
I mean, that looks to me like Chapterhouse Studios quite literally won on 111 copyright claims and 104 trademark claims. That of course does not include the Court finding that none of GW's marks are famous.
For its part, GW won something like 50 copyright claims and 50 trademark claims, according to the BOLS post.
Now, you could say that GW "won" because it won something, but GW's goal was not to win something. GW's goal was to obliterate Chapterhouse Studios.
These comments by Magistrate Judge Gilbert, waaaay back on September 1st, 2011 are very, very enlightening:
THE COURT: And so let's say for the sake of argument and only for the sake of argument and not as any finding or anything else that for at least some of your items you're going to be able to show they're substantially similar and you're going to be able to put together whatever circumstantial or even direct evidence in terms of the types of things you're asking for from the defendant of copying, okay? And for others it's going to be a little bit dicier. You're not going to be able to show that they're that similar and you're not going to be able to -- and maybe the defendant is going to be able to articulate from whatever diaries he has or whatever that he came up with the Shakespeare sonnet pretty much on his own and it's going to be a bit of a reach. But let say you're going to win on some of this stuff after you go through all your discovery. What then? If Games Workshop Limited's goal is to put Chapterhouse Studios out of business, a death knell, cease and desist, go away, die, and pay us whatever you can of our attorneys' fees, then you're right, there is no basis to sit down and settle this case. However, if you would like to work out some agreement with Chapterhouse Studios, and I haven't yet heard whether Chapterhouse is willing to do that, short of "We'll go away roll up and die," but that allows both of you to go on and attempt to continue to operate in the areas, the space that you're operating in in some way without one or the other having to give up, in the world I live that's called a settlement, right?
And further down on page 115
- and I'll add in also I would bet with 97 or however many works we are talking about here that defendant is going to win some too. So defendant is going to get some ruling someplace from Judge Kennelly if this goes all the way through that you don't have any protectable interest in certain of your works. You know, there may be some figures, there may be some other things if you get into a battle on this, that lo and behold Chapterhouse, which has a profitable business on this, there is going to be a ruling on the record public in federal district court in Chicago that you don't have rights to certain things that you're now asserting rights in. So let's assume that all that goes down. But with respect to the things that you win on, what do you want? Do you want Chapterhouse to cease and desist production of those items, period? Would you be satisfied if Chapterhouse owned by a fan paid you a royalty of some, or your client a royalty of some amount in order to do that or some other type of relief that you could negotiate with them now? Or is the only way [Games Workshop] is satisfied here is it proves its case, it wins, and it puts Chapterhouse out of business.
And on page 128:
I think it would be a shame for both sides here, one side is paying their lawyers, one side is doing it for free, but it seems to me both sides have risk in the litigation and it can be an extremely expensive litigation...
I mean, I will tell you I had a trademark case last, a couple weeks ago, maybe a month ago now, that was very -- it was also a zero sum game, it was very hotly fought. The principals came in, the settlement discussion for hours was very hot, but in sitting with both parties I learned that the principals really had a lot of animosity against each other because of some prelitigation telephone calls that were had and things that were said on those calls. And one of the principals took it upon himself to say to the other principal, "I'm sorry. I'm sorry about how I reacted when we had a phone call. I'm sorry for saying that I was going to bury you, that I was going to put you out of business, that this was going to cost you too much and you could not fight us. And I have respect for your business, your plan, your model and I would like to try and resolve this." The case got resolved.
I think it is fair to say that looking at where this case is now, Judge Gilbert would say, "I told you so."
Games Workshop's aim was to put Chapterhouse out of business, period. Games Workshop was not willing to say, 'You are a fan, I respect your business, I'm sorry for being an a-hole, let's find a reasonable way to work this out'.
Now, as a result, well warned by Judge Gilbert, Games Workshop walked right into "a ruling on the record public in federal district court in Chicago that you don't have rights to certain things that you're now asserting rights in."
You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.
Sorry that wasn't very clear on my part - I was referring to some players of the Forces of Order of the EoT campaign saying that they won, not that Games Workshop can be described by any reasonably measure as winning this legal case!
Bad use of an asterisk on my part, at least your post made interesting reading regardless...
MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Minute order of 6/20/2013 is amended to reflect the correct due date for joint status report regarding injunctive relief as 7/11/2013. Balance of minute order to stand. (or, ) (Entered: 06/25/2013)
I have been following the thread but need someone with a more legal mindset. I know that CHS won 100+ copyright and trademark claims. Does this mean that GW actually LOST those, or is it that CHS was not in violation of GW copyright / trademark. There is a big difference there in my opinion.
The first is CHS could be allowed to make because they are different enough.
The other is GW does not have that CR/TM.. Then it opens it up to anyone making knockoffs of that part.
Morpheus wrote: I have been following the thread but need someone with a more legal mindset. I know that CHS won 100+ copyright and trademark claims. Does this mean that GW actually LOST those, or is it that CHS was not in violation of GW copyright / trademark. There is a big difference there in my opinion.
The first is CHS could be allowed to make because they are different enough.
The other is GW does not have that CR/TM.. Then it opens it up to anyone making knockoffs of that part.
Not in violation of, IIRC. GW never had a bunch of those so-called "trademarked" items.
Kroothawk wrote: But I think, GW has "lost" the trademark on grenade launchers
...I always found that one silly...
well, at least the result of this is that I now own the copy right for "High Pressure Long Range Expolisve Canister Dispenser"..... any word on when we can expect to hear from the judge et al on this? I'm surprised at how long it's taking to actually wind down.
Morpheus wrote: I have been following the thread but need someone with a more legal mindset. I know that CHS won 100+ copyright and trademark claims. Does this mean that GW actually LOST those, or is it that CHS was not in violation of GW copyright / trademark. There is a big difference there in my opinion.
The first is CHS could be allowed to make because they are different enough.
The other is GW does not have that CR/TM.. Then it opens it up to anyone making knockoffs of that part.
GW was found not to own some Trademarks it claimed, such as "Jetbike". Some others, CHS was found not to be in violation of (fair use). The full list of which trade marks went which way has not been released yet, so anything outside of the few bits that have been reported widely already is speculation.
Morpheus wrote: I have been following the thread but need someone with a more legal mindset. I know that CHS won 100+ copyright and trademark claims. Does this mean that GW actually LOST those, or is it that CHS was not in violation of GW copyright / trademark. There is a big difference there in my opinion.
The first is CHS could be allowed to make because they are different enough.
The other is GW does not have that CR/TM.. Then it opens it up to anyone making knockoffs of that part.
GW was found not to own some Trademarks it claimed, such as "Jetbike". Some others, CHS was found not to be in violation of (fair use). The full list of which trade marks went which way has not been released yet, so anything outside of the few bits that have been reported widely already is speculation.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHH. So GW could rear up and sue the little guy every single time. There may be a precedent, but it doesn't mean that GW won't hunt down the next guy because of alleged misuse of the trademark.... I seeeeeeeee.... Interesting.
Morpheus wrote: I have been following the thread but need someone with a more legal mindset. I know that CHS won 100+ copyright and trademark claims. Does this mean that GW actually LOST those, or is it that CHS was not in violation of GW copyright / trademark. There is a big difference there in my opinion.
The first is CHS could be allowed to make because they are different enough.
The other is GW does not have that CR/TM.. Then it opens it up to anyone making knockoffs of that part.
GW was found not to own some Trademarks it claimed, such as "Jetbike". Some others, CHS was found not to be in violation of (fair use). The full list of which trade marks went which way has not been released yet, so anything outside of the few bits that have been reported widely already is speculation.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHH. So GW could rear up and sue the little guy every single time. There may be a precedent, but it doesn't mean that GW won't hunt down the next guy because of alleged misuse of the trademark.... I seeeeeeeee.... Interesting.
Not quite sure I follow you here. GW could sue every time, but if it's something that's been ruled as not a trademark or used in a way that has been ruled fair use in this trial, it would be thrown out by a judge pretty quickly, I would think. They could well sue for other claimed copyrights/trademarks not covered by this ruling, of course.
I'd like to point out that any precedents set by this case will be limited to US soil. Other countries approach IP law differently and GW may more successfully smack other companies down in those countries.
Yes, other countries can reference this case, but it doesn't mean that they will. Most countries basically do their own thing in that respect.
ClockworkZion wrote: I'd like to point out that any precedents set by this case will be limited to US soil. Other countries approach IP law differently and GW may more successfully smack other companies down in those countries.
Yes, other countries can reference this case, but it doesn't mean that they will. Most countries basically do their own thing in that respect.
If countries were to look at a GW copyright case, they'd not only have this case to look at, where the US decided that many items were either not infringed or that GW had no copyright on them, and then add to that UK design right law which ALL GW models fall under as toys and have mostly expired.
The US was the strongest front GW could have fought on, and they lost severely on important issues on that front.
ClockworkZion wrote: I'd like to point out that any precedents set by this case will be limited to US soil. Other countries approach IP law differently and GW may more successfully smack other companies down in those countries.
Yes, other countries can reference this case, but it doesn't mean that they will. Most countries basically do their own thing in that respect.
If countries were to look at a GW copyright case, they'd not only have this case to look at, where the US decided that many items were either not infringed or that GW had no copyright on them, and then add to that UK design right law which ALL GW models fall under as toys and have mostly expired.
The US was the strongest front GW could have fought on, and they lost severely on important issues on that front.
Again, US trademark/IP law doesn't extend to all countries and how those countries choose to handle it may be different. Calling this the decisive case for all future GW IP cases is a bit premature and requires us to make some rather large assumptions on where GW will handle this next and how those courts will rule instead. IP law is a lot of murky waters with it being regulated by trade agreements between countries, if at all.
I couldn't get the UK design database to cooperate to actually look into GW's designs and see if anything was being properly listed but frankly that's only a protected right in the UK as we've seen. The US has basically said the design of something isn't really protectable from what I've seen. I could be wrong on that point though.
Either way, we'll really know for sure if GW ends up in court again. I have a feeling that if they do though their next target won't be in the US.
ClockworkZion wrote: I'd like to point out that any precedents set by this case will be limited to US soil. Other countries approach IP law differently and GW may more successfully smack other companies down in those countries.
Yes, other countries can reference this case, but it doesn't mean that they will. Most countries basically do their own thing in that respect.
If countries were to look at a GW copyright case, they'd not only have this case to look at, where the US decided that many items were either not infringed or that GW had no copyright on them, and then add to that UK design right law which ALL GW models fall under as toys and have mostly expired.
The US was the strongest front GW could have fought on, and they lost severely on important issues on that front.
Again, US trademark/IP law doesn't extend to all countries and how those countries choose to handle it may be different. Calling this the decisive case for all future GW IP cases is a bit premature and requires us to make some rather large assumptions on where GW will handle this next and how those courts will rule instead. IP law is a lot of murky waters with it being regulated by trade agreements between countries, if at all.
I couldn't get the UK design database to cooperate to actually look into GW's designs and see if anything was being properly listed but frankly that's only a protected right in the UK as we've seen. The US has basically said the design of something isn't really protectable from what I've seen. I could be wrong on that point though.
Either way, we'll really know for sure if GW ends up in court again. I have a feeling that if they do though their next target won't be in the US.
There will not be a next target just the usual stream of bullying c&d's, there not going to pick a fight in the uk as they would pretty much lose all of there 40k canon and most especially space marines just imagine being able to buy packs of 10 resin beakies for less then half the price of a tac squad for example. There never going to risk that happen8ng given that they survive on marine sales. I doubt they would pick a fight in europe anrisk setting an eu wide precedent if they "won" like they did in the us. Basicly there going to go back to bullying and hollow threats oh and they might start correctly registering stuff as well.
There will not be a next target just the usual stream of bullying c&d's...just imagine being able to buy packs of 10 resin beakies for less then half the price of a tac squad for example. go back to bullying and hollow threats oh and they might start correctly registering stuff as well.
Sad, I can understand a lot of the hatred for GW, but that people see being ablet to buy cheap knockoffs of someone's IP, just so they can save a few quid, as some kind of golden vision... it's hardly utopia.
My point was that the US has the strongest laws concerning IP and copyright, and GW lost here. Many other countries care far less about it than the US, or as with the UK they have laws designed specifically for this i.e. Design Right laws which are not nearly as favorable to GW as US copyright law would be.
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: Sad, I can understand a lot of the hatred for GW, but that people see being ablet to buy cheap knockoffs of someone's IP, just so they can save a few quid, as some kind of golden vision... it's hardly utopia.
It's actually pretty much exactly how a marketplace is intended to work. Chapterhouse is not simply recasting GW sprues and selling them as GW sprues for 25% of GW prices on eBay. They are making bits that GW itself largely does not/will not produce for which they have found customer demand for.
You cannot decide that something looks like something that you might produce someday (that you have no legal ownership of) and somehow lay claim to that, forever. Especially in a tropes-laden environment like the GW design space.
If GW doesn't like it, then they can produce those models and bits themselves in easily accessible/individually purchaseable ways like what CHS offers. That would actually be the big boy approach to the apparent dispute between GW and all 3rd party producers.
There will not be a next target just the usual stream of bullying c&d's...just imagine being able to buy packs of 10 resin beakies for less then half the price of a tac squad for example. go back to bullying and hollow threats oh and they might start correctly registering stuff as well.
Sad, I can understand a lot of the hatred for GW, but that people see being ablet to buy cheap knockoffs of someone's IP, just so they can save a few quid, as some kind of golden vision... it's hardly utopia.
*Shrug*
If GW weren't acting like bullies and trying to scam as much money from their fans as the can... then maybe there would be more sympathy for them.
If GW has sole control of what they claim as their IP... hardly Utopia.
But the fact is that much of what they claim as their IP is not, in fact, their IP.... Add that to a lack of a sympathetic moral character.... They are become overreaching unsympathetic, grasping, bullies.
For me, at the least, it is not just about saving 'a few quid' - it is about seeing behavior that I feel damages the industry as a whole being disciplined.
The hole is of GW's own making. They can still dig themselves out of it, and are actually in a better place to save fans 'a few quid' than most of their competition. They own their own plastics manufactory, they are making their models for less than nearly any other company, but yet are charging more.
Chapterhouse is not simply recasting GW sprues and selling them as GW sprues for 25% of GW prices on eBay. They are making bits that GW itself largely does not/will not produce for which they have found customer demand for..
Perfectly reasonable point. But my post referred to those who want beakie knockoffs for a tenner.
What about "non-beakie knockoffs"? There are starting to be some figures on the market that will do quite nicely as actual Space Marines in replacement of the official kits. Especially when you look at the value for money.
GW have a simple defence, which is to ban non-GW models from official competitions.
What they can't do is to stop anyone from producing rival models.
There will not be a next target just the usual stream of bullying c&d's...just imagine being able to buy packs of 10 resin beakies for less then half the price of a tac squad for example. go back to bullying and hollow threats oh and they might start correctly registering stuff as well.
Sad, I can understand a lot of the hatred for GW, but that people see being ablet to buy cheap knockoffs of someone's IP, just so they can save a few quid, as some kind of golden vision... it's hardly utopia.
*Shrug*
If GW weren't acting like bullies and trying to scam as much money from their fans as the can... then maybe there would be more sympathy for them.
If GW has sole control of what they claim as their IP... hardly Utopia.
But the fact is that much of what they claim as their IP is not, in fact, their IP.... Add that to a lack of a sympathetic moral character.... They are become overreaching unsympathetic, grasping, bullies.
For me, at the least, it is not just about saving 'a few quid' - it is about seeing behavior that I feel damages the industry as a whole being disciplined.
The hole is of GW's own making. They can still dig themselves out of it, and are actually in a better place to save fans 'a few quid' than most of their competition. They own their own plastics manufactory, they are making their models for less than nearly any other company, but yet are charging more.
The Auld Grump
This. Hell, GW has the size, capabilities, and free cash on hand to be able to operate below profits to drive all their competition out of business cutthroat style if they wanted to.
This. Hell, GW has the size, capabilities, and free cash on hand to be able to operate below profits to drive all their competition out of business cutthroat style if they wanted to.
I disagree. Having read GW's financials they have a signifigant amount of capital sunk into their company as is and in the end barely come out ahead. Maybe 6th edition has changed that but they aren't making so much money that they have room to just cut costs without increasing the number of sales to compensate. And even assuming GW could increase the number of sales they lack the ability at this time to ramp up their production to meet an increased demand, especially after closing the Memphis casting line, something that could have been handling things like casting vehicles and/or older models that don't need the new machines.
GW right now doesn't have the capital, the production ability or the number of employees on hand to try and undersell anyone at this time. Maybe if they start working towards it now they could do it in 5-10 years, but not right now.
This. Hell, GW has the size, capabilities, and free cash on hand to be able to operate below profits to drive all their competition out of business cutthroat style if they wanted to.
I disagree. Having read GW's financials they have a signifigant amount of capital sunk into their company as is and in the end barely come out ahead. Maybe 6th edition has changed that but they aren't making so much money that they have room to just cut costs without increasing the number of sales to compensate. And even assuming GW could increase the number of sales they lack the ability at this time to ramp up their production to meet an increased demand, especially after closing the Memphis casting line, something that could have been handling things like casting vehicles and/or older models that don't need the new machines.
GW right now doesn't have the capital, the production ability or the number of employees on hand to try and undersell anyone at this time. Maybe if they start working towards it now they could do it in 5-10 years, but not right now.
I didn't say that they would be in the green, nor would it be sustainable for long, but that they would probably be able to do it better than their competitors.
This. Hell, GW has the size, capabilities, and free cash on hand to be able to operate below profits to drive all their competition out of business cutthroat style if they wanted to.
I disagree. Having read GW's financials they have a signifigant amount of capital sunk into their company as is and in the end barely come out ahead. Maybe 6th edition has changed that but they aren't making so much money that they have room to just cut costs without increasing the number of sales to compensate. And even assuming GW could increase the number of sales they lack the ability at this time to ramp up their production to meet an increased demand, especially after closing the Memphis casting line, something that could have been handling things like casting vehicles and/or older models that don't need the new machines.
GW right now doesn't have the capital, the production ability or the number of employees on hand to try and undersell anyone at this time. Maybe if they start working towards it now they could do it in 5-10 years, but not right now.
I didn't say that they would be in the green, nor would it be sustainable for long, but that they would probably be able to do it better than their competitors.
The point I was trying to make was that it would essentially be suicide for the company and they have no good reason to kill themselves.
This. Hell, GW has the size, capabilities, and free cash on hand to be able to operate below profits to drive all their competition out of business cutthroat style if they wanted to.
I disagree. Having read GW's financials they have a signifigant amount of capital sunk into their company as is and in the end barely come out ahead. Maybe 6th edition has changed that but they aren't making so much money that they have room to just cut costs without increasing the number of sales to compensate. And even assuming GW could increase the number of sales they lack the ability at this time to ramp up their production to meet an increased demand, especially after closing the Memphis casting line, something that could have been handling things like casting vehicles and/or older models that don't need the new machines.
GW right now doesn't have the capital, the production ability or the number of employees on hand to try and undersell anyone at this time. Maybe if they start working towards it now they could do it in 5-10 years, but not right now.
I didn't say that they would be in the green, nor would it be sustainable for long, but that they would probably be able to do it better than their competitors.
The point I was trying to make was that it would essentially be suicide for the company and they have no good reason to kill themselves.
And on this I disagree - they are defending a proportionally shrinking market rather than trying to grow either their share of the market or of the market itself.
To put it bluntly - do think that it costs ChapterHouse less to make their miniatures than it does GW?
Do you think that ChapterHouse isn't making a profit? Despite each miniature costing more to make than a GW miniature?
If GW's finances are that fragile... then it is because GW is mishandling their finances.
They are losing share in a market that they helped create, and are doing so in a manner that is destroying their public image.
But we have known that for a while.... The company would rather spend a million defending IP that they do not own than spend that same money advertising.
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: Sad, I can understand a lot of the hatred for GW, but that people see being ablet to buy cheap knockoffs of someone's IP, just so they can save a few quid, as some kind of golden vision... it's hardly utopia.
It's actually pretty much exactly how a marketplace is intended to work. Chapterhouse is not simply recasting GW sprues and selling them as GW sprues for 25% of GW prices on eBay. They are making bits that GW itself largely does not/will not produce for which they have found customer demand for.
You cannot decide that something looks like something that you might produce someday (that you have no legal ownership of) and somehow lay claim to that, forever. Especially in a tropes-laden environment like the GW design space.
If GW doesn't like it, then they can produce those models and bits themselves in easily accessible/individually purchaseable ways like what CHS offers. That would actually be the big boy approach to the apparent dispute between GW and all 3rd party producers.
And to add to this, copyright is and was always intended to be of limited duration. Special interests in this country have effectively eliminated this limited scope and duration, but copyright was originally intended, much like patents, to last for 20 years. This gives authors plenty of time to monetize a work of art, but also encourages the growth of new artwork, both because an author cannot ride on a single work for his/her entire life, and because once the protection expires, others are able to use that work freely in their own artistic expressions.
Disney, for example, made a killing off of using non-copyrighted works, such as The Little Mermaid. GW also very much uses the work of other authors quite freely. Is that wrong, no, nor should it be. It becomes hypocrisy when you turn around and attempt to 'protect' a business built on borrowing, using, interpreting, reinventing, and stealing the work of other artists by denying someone else's right to build a business on that very same basis.
Can anyone refresh my memory on what the trial revealed about the closeness of the relationship and interaction between GW and FW? I've seen it mentioned in passing but I must have missed it in my checks of the thread.
warboss wrote: Can anyone refresh my memory on what the trial revealed about the closeness of the relationship and interaction between GW and FW? I've seen it mentioned in passing but I must have missed it in my checks of the thread.
Vaktathi wrote: Because this thread is 176 pages and I unfortunately don't have the time to peruse it all, there was mention of this case revealing Forgeworlds relationship with the larger GW entity, any idea in what ways?
That's a very silly question. GW owns FW. FW is just a brand that has it's own dev team. Why do you need court documents to explain this?
warboss wrote: Can anyone refresh my memory on what the trial revealed about the closeness of the relationship and interaction between GW and FW? I've seen it mentioned in passing but I must have missed it in my checks of the thread.
Vaktathi wrote: Because this thread is 176 pages and I unfortunately don't have the time to peruse it all, there was mention of this case revealing Forgeworlds relationship with the larger GW entity, any idea in what ways?
That's a very silly question. GW owns FW. FW is just a brand that has it's own dev team. Why do you need court documents to explain this?
See that part where I said it was "mentioned in passing"? That's what I was referring to. I was hoping someone had an answer with less snark and more actual information.
warboss wrote: Can anyone refresh my memory on what the trial revealed about the closeness of the relationship and interaction between GW and FW? I've seen it mentioned in passing but I must have missed it in my checks of the thread.
Vaktathi wrote: Because this thread is 176 pages and I unfortunately don't have the time to peruse it all, there was mention of this case revealing Forgeworlds relationship with the larger GW entity, any idea in what ways?
That's a very silly question. GW owns FW. FW is just a brand that has it's own dev team. Why do you need court documents to explain this?
See that part where I said it was "mentioned in passing"? That's what I was referring to. I was hoping someone had an answer with less snark and more actual information.
There wasn't one. I've been keeping up with this thread fairly regularly. Blackmoor, I believe, made an offhand remark in the "Do we need FW in tourneys" thread about something that never arose here.
Chapterhouse is not simply recasting GW sprues and selling them as GW sprues for 25% of GW prices on eBay. They are making bits that GW itself largely does not/will not produce for which they have found customer demand for..
Perfectly reasonable point. But my post referred to those who want beakie knockoffs for a tenner.
My point is not that I want beakie knock offs as you put but that simply that under english design law they are no longer protected and that anyone can make beakie styled miniatures or pretty much anything older than 25 years
weeble1000 wrote: You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
New filings, still reading them. Draft judgments from both sides.
The parties respectfully submit the following joint status report in connection with the
Court’s request that the parties settle a judgment herein to reflect the jury verdict – prior to entry of
final judgment with injunctive relief. Games Workshop submits that the Court should enter the
judgment attached as Exhibit A. Chapterhouse submits that the Court should enter the judgment
attached as Exhibit B.
Now we have a list of copyrights / trademarks that were infringed and what was fair use.
First thing I noticed, there is going to be a fight over costs..
weeble1000 wrote: You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
It's not a binary decision, where simply "won" or "lost" covers all the legal complexities; there are a couple hundred individual decisions in there, some of which went against CHS, and each of which can be appealed. Should CHS pursue an appeal, it's because a) they believe the rulings on one or more points is incorrect as a matter of law; or b) they believe the trial court erred procedurally.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
First thing I noticed, there is going to be a fight over costs..
Yup, and that'll be messy.
Nice to have the definitive list of what the jury decided, though. I'm curious if there are still post-verdict motions pending before the judge.
I find it interesting that Games Workshop asserts that they requested $25,000 in damages. It's what they assume was CH's profits were from the sales of those miniatures.
Although Chapterhouse agrees that costs may be awarded under Rule 54(d) to the prevailing party, Chapterhouse disputes that Games Workshop is the “prevailing party” in this case or that Games Workshop obtained more “substantial relief” than Chapterhouse. Games Workshop brought 160 copyright claims against Chapterhouse and alleged trademark infringement of 125 alleged trademarks. After extensive litigation, Chapterhouse had prevailed on many of Games Workshop’s claims even before trial began. Under Rule 54(d), “[w]here there is a dismissal of an action, even where such dismissal is voluntary and without prejudice, the defendant is the prevailing party.” First Commodity Traders, Inc. v. Heinold Comoddities, Inc., 766 F.2d 1007, 1015 (7th Cir. 1985) quoting 6 J. Moore, W. Taggart & J. Wicker, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 54.70[4] (2d ed. 1985). At trial, Chapterhouse won on the majority of claims. And although the jury awarded $25,000 to Games Workshop, that was a tiny fraction of the hundreds of thousands of dollars Games Workshop had initially sought. Far from showing it prevailed, the fact that Games Workshop was forced to make a demand for that small amount after years of litigation confirms it did not prevail. If it were otherwise, any plaintiff could simply change its damages request to an arbitrary small amount at trial just to call themselves a prevailing party.
So, basically CHS is saying that because it won on most of the claims, it is the prevailling party, while GW is arguing that because it won on some claims it is the prevailing party.
From CHS proposed judgement (because it includes the claims dropped by GW or ruled on in summary judgement, making it more complete).
3. Chapterhouse has been found to infringe Games Workshop’s copyrights with respect to the following forty-nine products (product numbers refer to numbering in Plaintiff’s Trial Exhibits 1020 and 1021):
Selected Shoulder pads: “Terminator pad for Exorcist Space Marine,”
“Power Armour Pad for Exorcist,”
one of the “Sawblade Shoulder Pad & Jewel” pads,
“Shoulder Pad for Serpent or Iron Snakes – Terminator,”
“Shoulder Pad for Serpent or Iron Snakes – Tactical,”
“Shoulder Pad w/ skull and flames - tactical”,
“Shoulder Pad w/ Studs and Skull for 28mm marine - Tactical”,
“Shoulder Pads for Chalice or Soul Drinker – Tactical,”
“Shoulder Pads for Chalice or Soul Drinker – Terminator,”
“Hammer of Dorn Power Armor Pad,”
“Hammer of Dorn Terminator Pad,”
“Power Armor Shoulder Pad for Scythes of the Emperor,”
“Scythes of the Emperor Terminator Shoulder Pad” (Products 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 149, 150, 153, 154);
Assault Shoulder pad with number VII and VIII, Devastator marine shoulder pad with IX and X, Tactical shoulder pad with I, II, III, IV, IV, and VI (Products 46, 47, 51, 52, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62);
Crested shoulder pad (Product 49);
“Generic Power Armour Shoulder Pad” and “Smooth Shoulder Pad for 28mm tactical – marine” (Products 54, 55);
“Banded Tech Pad” and “Banded Armor Pad” compatible with power armor and terminator armor (Products 68, 73, 74);
Studded rimmed shoulder pad MKV, MK I Heresy Era for 28 mm Marines “Thunder Armor” shoulder pad,
studded power armor pad for MK 5 (Products 75, 78, 80); Tervigon conversion kit (Product 37);
Skull or Chaplain Head or Bit for Power Armor (product 3);
Heresy Era Jump Pack (Product 76);
Spikey heresy heads (Product 79);
Wolf Rhino Conversion Kit #1 and Wolf Rhino Conversion Kit #2 (Products 82, 104);
Iron Snake conversion kit for Rhino (Product 106);
Doomseer Iyanar Duanna (Product 108);
Gun Halberd (Product 112);
Conversion Beamer Servo Harness (Product 113);
Armana'serq Scorpion Warrior Princess (Product 123);
Open- Fisted power claws and Closed-Fisted power claws (Products 132, 133);
TRU Scale Knights Praetorius “Order of the Empress’s Tears” Conversion Kit and TRU-Scale Knight Praetorius Conversion Kit (Products 142, 143);
“Shrike Conversion Kit” (Product 159); Dark Elf Arch Torturess (Product 160).
4. Chapterhouse has been found to infringe the following thirty-eight trademarks of Games Workshop:
(i) Adeptus Mechanicus
(ii) Flesh Tearers
(iii) Genestealer
(iv) Howling Griffons
(v) Imperial Guard
(vi) Iron Hands
(vii) Land Raider
(viii) Predator
(ix) Rhino
(x) Salamander
(xi) Soul Drinker
(xii) Stormraven
(xiii) Storm Shield
(xiv) Techmarine
(xv) Thousand Sons
(xvi) Thunder Hammer
(xvii) Tyrant
(xviii) Tyranid
(xix) Flesh Tearer Icon
(xx) Imperial Fist Icon
(xxi) Legion of the Damned Icon
(xxii) Space Marine Tactical Squad Icon
(xxiii) Space Marine Devastator Squad Icon
(xxiv) Space Marine Assault Squad Icon
(xxv) Iron Hands Icon (xxvi) Space Wolves Icon
(xxvii) Salamanders Icon (xxviii) Blood Ravens
(xxix) Exorcist
(xxx) Jump Pack
(xxxi) Mycetic Spore
(xxxii) Tervigon
(xxxiii) Ymgarl
(xxxiv) Exorcist Icon
(xxxv) Iron Snakes Icon
(xxxvi) Soul Drinkers Icon
(xxxvii) Scythes of the Emperor Icon
(xxxviii) Hammer of Dorn Icon.
5. Chapterhouse has been found not to infringe Games Workshop’s copyrights with respect to the following forty-three products (product numbers refer to numbering in Plaintiff’s Trial Exhibits 1020 and 1021):
Eagle Thunder Hammer (product 1),
Shoulder pad with shield and studs (product 2),
Shoulder pads for blood eagle (products 4-5),
Shoulder pads for celestial lions (products 6- 7),
Terminator Shoulder pad for flesh tearers (product 13),
Shoulder pad star fox or wolf (products 21-22),
Dragon or salamander power fist (product 27),
Dragon or salamander thunder hammer (product 31),
Combi-weapons magnetic kit (product 34),
Conversion kit for farseer jetbike rider (product 35),
Conversion kit for warlock jetbike rider (product 36),
Ymgarl model heads (product 43),
Super Heavy Assault Walker (product 45),
Salamanders or Dragon drop pod door (product 63),
Salamander Dragon skull shoulder pads (products 64-65),
Salamander or Dragon head bit (product 67),
Storm combat space tech shield for wolves (product 83),
“Heresy” armoured drop pod door (product 87),
Armored door and kit for rhino tank (product 90),
mycetic spore (product 95),
Shoulder pads for blood ravens (products 101-102),
Tru-scale conversion kit for rhino (product 111),
Death angel doors for land raider (product 114),
SCAR lasguns (product 117),
Javelin imperial jetbike (product 121),
Hotshot lasgun pack (product 128),
Iconoclast conversion kit for land raider (product 129),
Magnetic turret kit for storm raven (product 130),
Pilum imperial attack jetbike (product 134),
Alternative heads for Tau (products 135-136),
Heresy-era shoulder pads (products 140-141),
Lizard-ogre characters (products 144-145),
Iron Hand Nut shoulder pads (products 146-147),
Hotshot lasgun pack (product 158).
6. Chapterhouse’s use of Games Workshop’s copyrights with respect to the following twenty-four products was found to be a fair use and therefore not infringing (product numbers refer to numbering in Plaintiff’s Trial Exhibits 1020 and 1021):
Howling Griffon style Shoulder Pad (product 14),
Assault Shoulder pad plain (product 48),
Devastator shoulder pad (product 50),
First squad or I Shoulder pad (product 53),
Tactical shoulder pad (product 56),
Salamander dragon hammer (product 66),
Cog shoulder pad (product 69),
Dragon or Salamander kit for rhino (product 94),
Scarab shoulder pad (product 97),
Starburst shoulder pad (product 98),
Shoulder pad for mantis warriors (products 99-100),
Dragon door kit for rhino (product 103),
Magnetic turret kit for razorback (product 131),
Heresy-era shoulder pads (products 137-139),
Winged skull power armor pad (product 148),
V Power shoulder pads (products 151-152),
Scaled shoulder pads (products 155-157),
Heraldic knight shoulder pads (product 163).
7. Chapterhouse has been found not to infringe the following twenty-eight trademarks of Games Workshop:
(i) Warhammer logo,
(ii) Games Workshop logo
(Aquila or Two-Headed Eagle),
(iii) Alpha Legion,
(iv) Carnifex,
(v) Chaos Space Marines,
(vi) Chimera,
vii) Death Watch,
(viii) Devastator Space Marine,
(ix) Dreadnought,
(x) Eldar Farseer,
(xi) Eldar Jet Bike,
(xii) Eldar Warlock,
(xiii) Heresy Armour,
(xiv) High Elf,
(xv) Horus Heresy,
(xvi) Land Speeder,
(xvii) Mk V Armour,
(xviii) Striking Scorpion,
(xix) Termagants,
(xx) Blood Angels Icon,
(xxi) Tau Empire Icon,
(xxii) Assault Cannon,
(xxiii) Iconoclast,
(xxiv) Power Claw,
(xxv) Jetbike,
(xxvi) Tyranid Bonesword,
(xxvii) Tyranid Laswhip, and
(xxviii) Howling Griffons Icon.
8. Chapterhouse’s use of Games Workshop’s trademarks with respect to the following twenty-six trademarks was found to be a fair use and therefore not infringing:
(i) Warhammer,
(ii) 40k,
(iii) 40,000,
(iv) Eldar,
(v) Dark Angels,
(vi) Space Marine,
(vii) Tau,
(viii) Assault Space Marine,
(ix) Black Templars,
(x) Blood Angels,
(xi) Crimson Fists,
(xii) Drop Pod,
(xiii) Gaunt,
(xiv) Heavy Bolter,
(xv) Hive Tyrant,
(xvi) Imperial Fists,
(xvii) Inquisition,
(xviii) Legion of the Damned,
(xix) Librarian,
(xx) Space Wolves,
(xxi) Tactical Space Marine,
(xxii) Terminator,
(xxiii) Tyranid Warrior,
(xxiv) Heavy Flamer,
(xxv) Lascannon,
(xxvi) Lightning Claw.
9. The Court previously found that Chapterhouse did not infringe Games Workshop copyrights in connection with the following thirty-four products:
Shoulder Pads for Deathwatch or Dark Angels – Tactical (Product 8);
Shoulder Pads for Imperial Fist (Tactical and Terminator) (Products 15–16);
Dragon or Salamander Shoulder Pad (Tactical and Terminator) (Products 25–26);
Dragon or Salamander Storm Shield (Diamond Scales, Smooth No Skull and Smooth w/Skull) (Products 28–30);
Salamander, Alpha Legion or Dragon Conversion Kit for Land Raider (Product 32);
Vehicle Icon for Flesh Tearers (Product 33);
Lashwhips (Tyrant Size and Warrior Size) (Products 39-39);
Bonesword Arms for Tryanids (Tyrant and Warrior) (Products 40-41);
Xenomorph 28mm Head Bits for Tyranid (Product 42);
Female Heads Imperial Guard 28mm (Product 44);
Shield for Iron Hands (Product 70);
Shoulder Pad for Iron Hands (Power Armor and Terminator) (Products 71-72);
Celtic Wolf Shield for Space Wolves (Product 81);
Celtic Storm or Combat Shield (Product 84);
Generic Hammer 2 (Product 85);
Imperial or Eagle Storm Shield (Product 86);
Armoured Predator Armour Kit (Side and Center) (Products 88–89);
Brazier (Dragon/Serpent [2 pieces] and Eagle [2 pieces]) (Products 91-92);
Mark I Rhino Conversion Kit (Product 93);
Pre-Heresy Scarab Shoulder Pads – Thousand Sons – Terminator (Product 96),
Shoulder Pad for Mantis Warriors Marines (Power Armor and Terminator) (Products 99-100);
Tactical Rhino Doors with Skulls Kit (Product 105);
28 mm Spartan Heads (Product 107);
Rapid Response Wheeled Kit for Chimera (aka Imperial Guards Chimera APC Kit) (Product 109).
10. Consent judgment was entered against Games Workshop in this matter and Chapterhouse was found to not infringe Games Workshop copyrights with respect to the following eight products:
SCAR and sniper rifle (product 115),
SCAR drum magazine (product 116),
Death angel storm shield (product 122),
Abbithian Banshees guardswoman 28mm (product 124),
Thunderstrike missile rack (product 161),
Large ammo belts for heavy weapons (product 162).
11. Consent judgment was entered against Games Workshop in this matter and Chapterhouse was found to not infringe Games Workshop trademarks with respect to the following twenty-three marks:
(i) Adeptus Mechanicus Cog Icon,
(ii) Black Templars Icon,
(iii) Blood Ravens Icon,
(iv) Celestial Lions Icon,
(v) Chaos Space Marines Eight-Pointed Star Icon,
(vi) Chaplain,
(vii) Dark Angels Winged Sword Icon,
(viii) Dark Elf,
(ix) Empire,
(x) Heavy Weapon,
(xi) Hellhound,
(xii) Howling Banshee,
(xiii) Mantis Warrior Icon,
(xiv) Plasma Cannon,
(xv) Thousand Sons Icon,
(xvi) Ultramarine Icon,
(xvii) Cadian,
(xviii) Eldar Seer Council,
(xix) Games Workshop,
(xx) GW,
(xxi) Melta,
(xxii) MK II Armour,
(xxiii) Plasma,
Is the post judgment interest rate 0.14% or 14% per annum? Both drafts have .14% as the rate which seems low to me (14% would be awfully high though - it's around 3% up here).
If it is 0.14% that should make repayment less of an issue.
GW apparently own shoulder pads with studs and skulls, or flames and skulls, huh? Anyone else get the impression the jury took a bit of a dartboard approach to sorting these 160 claims?
Howard A Treesong wrote: Does this mean GW actually own 'Imperial Guard'? Isn't that a bit of a generic and historical term?
The first Google page's results only pull up 40k except for this Wikipedia entry. But I think these days it's distinctive enough that mentioning "Imperial Guard" is a clear reference to 40k.
Edit: Then again, you are right in the sense that Imperial Guard does have some very historical roots, as evidenced by this Wikipedia page too.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Does this mean GW actually own 'Imperial Guard'? Isn't that a bit of a generic and historical term?
As has been pointed out, you can trademark a generic item, if it's in a specific context. Which is why you can have an Apple as the trademark of both a computer copany and a record company.
However, as has also been pointed out, the judgement isn't particularly logical. CHS have infringed GW's copyright and trademark for Shrikes - meaning, presumably, the wings are copies of the copyrighted codex. But, as far as the Tervigon, they've only infringed the trademark - when the model was clearly derivative of the codex art.
Yes, the judgement was logical in respect of the fact that GW were claiming a ridiculous number of generic terms, like Chaplain and Heavy Weapon.
The logical inconsistencies increase even more when you realise that CHS have dropped the Tervigon model, which infringed trademark, but have retained the Ymgarl heads and Mycetic Spore, which also infringed trademarks.
The logical inconsistencies increase even more when you realise that CHS have dropped the Tervigon model, which infringed trademark, but have retained the Ymgarl heads and Mycetic Spore, which also infringed trademarks.
There was a pretty good portion of the actual testimony in the trial that did a nice job explaining that Trademarks identify a product (ie: it's what you put on the package to identify the product) so it's pretty hard to have a trademark for a product if you don't produce that product.
So you can trademark "Codex: Tyranids" and "Warhammer 40,000" and "Games Workshop", which are all trademarks on the book that contains stories and pictures of a Mycetic Spore.
But you cannot trademark "Mycetic Spore" if you don't make a product called "Mycetic Spore".
Good info, thanks. But CHS were found to have infringed the trademarks for Mycetic Spore, according to clause 4, as above.
Anyway, I'm a bit depressed by this whole business. All this lawsuit makes it way mroe likely that the next GW 'Nids release will be a Mycetic Spore - which makes the hours of work making our own redundant. Sigh.
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: All this lawsuit makes it way mroe likely that the next GW 'Nids release will be a Mycetic Spore - which makes the hours of work making our own redundant. Sigh.
Well... On the bright side yours will look a lot different? Maybe it's just me, but I as a converter I don't see what's there to be upset about.
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: All this lawsuit makes it way mroe likely that the next GW 'Nids release will be a Mycetic Spore - which makes the hours of work making our own redundant. Sigh.
Well... On the bright side yours will look a lot different? I don't see what's there to be upset about.
There is always the chance that GW's model will look like crap!
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: All this lawsuit makes it way mroe likely that the next GW 'Nids release will be a Mycetic Spore - which makes the hours of work making our own redundant. Sigh.
Well... On the bright side yours will look a lot different? I don't see what's there to be upset about.
There is always the chance that GW's model will look like crap!
Yeah, I mean, look at the Khornedozer and the Babycarrier...
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: All this lawsuit makes it way mroe likely that the next GW 'Nids release will be a Mycetic Spore - which makes the hours of work making our own redundant. Sigh.
Well... On the bright side yours will look a lot different? Maybe it's just me, but I as a converter I don't see what's there to be upset about.
Personally, I liked there were these wild cards, that people have to work on themselves, especially items like the Prime, Spore etc in the Tyranid 'dex. It's a shame that, due to the intransigence of bothGW and CHS (feel free to disagree), that this will probably end.
Anyways, it looks like there is a Mycetic Spore coming, probably as a result of this, even the local GW staff are quite open about it, they're already saying we're ok using our present ones. But wouldn't surprise me if some of the more officious stores will be funny about it.
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: Good info, thanks. But CHS were found to have infringed the trademarks for Mycetic Spore, according to clause 4, as above.
Anyway, I'm a bit depressed by this whole business. All this lawsuit makes it way mroe likely that the next GW 'Nids release will be a Mycetic Spore - which makes the hours of work making our own redundant. Sigh.
On the other hand it might create some other kind of work. Presuming GW made a Spore Pod they damn well better not make it look like the one I have produced and sold in the past.
It would be some sweet sweet irony to send a C&D letter to GW.
Woah, wait a minute. They actually upheld GW's claim to the generic geometric shapes representing devastator and assault squad shoulder icons?
I guess I don't get some of these decisions. CHS infringed on 'Rhino' but not 'Black Templar'. They infringed on 'Flesh Tearer' but no 'Blood Angel'....
What I am amazed is that they found a copyright infringment on the super heavy walker...GW doesn't make one of those and there isn't even a concept of one of those from GW...(I'm assuming that we're talking about the Tau one here).
Howard A Treesong wrote: Does this mean GW actually own 'Imperial Guard'? Isn't that a bit of a generic and historical term?
The first Google page's results only pull up 40k except for this Wikipedia entry. But I think these days it's distinctive enough that mentioning "Imperial Guard" is a clear reference to 40k.
Edit: Then again, you are right in the sense that Imperial Guard does have some very historical roots, as evidenced by this Wikipedia page too.
Google's search algorithms take into account your usual search parameters when they are presenting you with query results.
So you being interested in miniature games and generally making searches related with miniature games will get results that match your previous searches displayed further up the list, while someone more inclined to search for historical matters, for example, would get more hits regarding the historical use of the "Imperial Guard" term.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Does this mean GW actually own 'Imperial Guard'? Isn't that a bit of a generic and historical term?
The first Google page's results only pull up 40k except for this Wikipedia entry. But I think these days it's distinctive enough that mentioning "Imperial Guard" is a clear reference to 40k.
Edit: Then again, you are right in the sense that Imperial Guard does have some very historical roots, as evidenced by this Wikipedia page too.
I would wager that there are significantly less people in the world that associate Imperial Guard with 40k (yet alone know what it is) than the number of people with a modicum of knowledge of European history that associate the term with Napoleon's Imperial Guard.
Will be interesting to see if some of the other items get challenged later on. It seems that the judge and jury both saw this case as an instance of two children fighting and tried to make a decision that gave concessions to both sides. I suspect that under appeal with a judge who actually cares, some of the GW wins maybe turned over. I think some of the GW wins boil down to the GW product and CHS product looking enough similar that the jury just said, award it to GW. It would be like a Motorcraft being awarded because a Fram oil filter is the same fundamental shape, even though they may have differences.
skyth wrote: What I am amazed is that they found a copyright infringment on the super heavy walker...GW doesn't make one of those and there isn't even a concept of one of those from GW...(I'm assuming that we're talking about the Tau one here).
Eh? The super heavy walker is listed under things which did not infringe, and I cant see any other reference to it. Am I missing something?
There are a few places where things are written down twice. Under the "4." above, it says that they infringed upon the trademark of the Mycetic Spore, BUT in the "5." right below it, CHS was found to not infringe upon the copyright of Mycetic Spore... But the Super Heavy Assault Walker does not seem to be one of these things.
Alfndrate wrote: There are a few places where things are written down twice. Under the "4." above, it says that they infringed upon the trademark of the Mycetic Spore, BUT in the "5." right below it, CHS was found to not infringe upon the copyright of Mycetic Spore... But the Super Heavy Assault Walker does not seem to be one of these things.
The "Mycetic spore" thing is in two places because it was dealing with two issues. Firstly the trademark name "Mycetic Spore", which CHS was found to be infringing upon. The second I assume was the actual product, that is the model, the Mycetic spore, which was found not to infringe.
judgedoug wrote: I would wager that there are significantly less people in the world that associate Imperial Guard with 40k (yet alone know what it is) than the number of people with a modicum of knowledge of European history that associate the term with Napoleon's Imperial Guard.
What I think of first for Imperial Guard is this (though upon further review, "Imperial Guard" is like its tertiary name, which makes me a bad Star Wars geek):
weeble1000 wrote: You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? ..
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?
More helpful than this analogy might be the simple observation that CHS have to pay GW $25k. That ain't a slap on the wrist.
weeble1000 wrote: You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?
And wait four years for the ruling? No. That is a poor comparison. The point I'm trying to make, it took four years to reach this point. Just observing appeals in other cases, it can be a couple more years before the appeal is completed. As you are saying, GW was going for full shut down of CHS and didn't get it. Is it worth going back into court and risk GW getting their act together and pulling more items back into their camp? Are the losses from a couple figs and bits worth keeping the company running a half-speed because time and resources will have to be directed at the appeal? Even with continued pro-bono representation?
*edit* @HVO Pointed out they will likely have the money for the fine paid for with the KS they are currently running. CHS has made clear they intend to use some of the funds from it to pay the fine.
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? ..
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?
More helpful than this analogy might be the simple observation that CHS have to pay GW $25k. That ain't a slap on the wrist.
For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.
weeble1000 wrote: You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?
And wait four years for the ruling? No. That is a poor comparison. The point I'm trying to make, it took four years to reach this point. Just observing appeals in other cases, it can be a couple more years before the appeal is completed. As you are saying, GW was going for full shut down of CHS and didn't get it. Is it worth going back into court and risk GW getting their act together and pulling more items back into their camp? Are the losses from a couple figs and bits worth keeping the company running a half-speed because time and resources will have to be directed at the appeal? Even with continued pro-bono representation?
*edit* @HVO Pointed out they will likely have the money for the fine paid for with the KS they are currently running. CHS has made clear they intend to use some of the funds from it to pay the fine.
They've said that profits will go towards the fine, which is 100% what you'd expect a responsible company to do.
I don't blame them for appealing. They feel certain things were ruled incorrectly.
For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.
According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.
Well if CH appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) and GW appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) then you do get a re-run
but most likely some stuff will not be appealed by each side (where they realise their case is weak), and the court may not allow appeals for some of it either
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: Well if CH appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) and GW appeals the stuff it lost on (and is allowed to do so) then you do get a re-run
but most likely some stuff will not be appealed by each side (where they realise their case is weak), and the court may not allow appeals for some of it either
so you get a rerun at a smaller size
That's not quite correct. The appeals process allows you to argue that mistakes of law were made, e.g., that the judge improperly allowed/excluded some piece of evidence, not re-do the entire trial.
Unless the Appellate court decides that mistakes were made that warrant a re-do of the trial, in which case it gets sent back down for a new trial.
weeble1000 wrote: You can make up your own minds about who won this lawsuit. But never forget that for Games Workshop this was always a "zero sum game" that Games Workshop walked into with eyes wide open.
Only question I would have on this whole "CHS won" view. Why is Nick of CHS going around then saying how they are going to appeal the ruling? They have a much clearer area of what they can and can't do and I wouldn't think the 25K fine is worth spending more time in court. Heck, I suspect he will have the funds for the fine paid for in several days with his KS.
There is something in that ruling CHS and their lawyers don't like and are willing to go back into court on and we're not seeing.
If you were in a tournament, and were winning your game, but a rules issue came up towards the end that would mean the difference between getting two thirds of your victory points and getting all of them, would you refrain from getting an official ruling from the TO just because you would be winning the game anyway?
And wait four years for the ruling? No. That is a poor comparison. The point I'm trying to make, it took four years to reach this point. Just observing appeals in other cases, it can be a couple more years before the appeal is completed. As you are saying, GW was going for full shut down of CHS and didn't get it. Is it worth going back into court and risk GW getting their act together and pulling more items back into their camp? Are the losses from a couple figs and bits worth keeping the company running a half-speed because time and resources will have to be directed at the appeal? Even with continued pro-bono representation?
*edit* @HVO Pointed out they will likely have the money for the fine paid for with the KS they are currently running. CHS has made clear they intend to use some of the funds from it to pay the fine.
Appeals are comparatively very quick and very inexpensive, that's just a fact. And you are being unreasonably critical of the analogy in any case. This case took 2.5 years to get to trial. A game of 40K takes 2.5 hours to play. If you want to extend the analogy, an appeal might take 12 months, maybe less. That's like waiting an hour for the TO to come back with a final rules call.
If it meant the difference between winning the tournament and not winning the tournament, yea, I'd wait an hour, especially because it would be an hour in which I could go get a beer and hang out. Appeals are lawyer work. No depositions, no affidavits, nothing that the client really has to do.
So, yea, I think my analogy is pretty darn spot on.
For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.
According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.
The original complaint disagrees with you.
WHEREFORE
, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendants as follows:
1.
Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their agents, representatives,
employees, assigns, and suppliers, and all persons acting in concert or privity with them, from
infringing Plaintiff’s copyrighted works or using any of Plaintiff’s names or marks in a manner
that is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or from otherwise infringing, diluting, or
tarnishing Plaintiff’s trademarks, or from competing unfairly with Plaintiff;
2.
Directing the destruction of all infringing merchandise and molds and means of
producing the same;
3.
Awarding Plaintiff its damages and Defendants’ profits derived by reason of the
unlawful acts complained of herein and/or statutory damages as provided by law;
4.
Awarding Plaintiff treble damages as provided by law; and
5.
Awarding Plaintiff its reasonable attorney
fees, prejudgment interest, and costs of
this action as provided by law.
Appeals are comparatively very quick and very inexpensive, that's just a fact. And you are being unreasonably critical of the analogy in any case. This case took 2.5 years to get to trial. A game of 40K takes 2.5 hours to play. If you want to extend the analogy, an appeal might take 12 months, maybe less. That's like waiting an hour for the TO to come back with a final rules call.
If it meant the difference between winning the tournament and not winning the tournament, yea, I'd wait an hour, especially because it would be an hour in which I could go get a beer and hang out. Appeals are lawyer work. No depositions, no affidavits, nothing that the client really has to do.
So, yea, I think my analogy is pretty darn spot on.
And with a two day tournament, you would be willing to wait an extra 5 - 6 hours for a ruling? I have yet to hear of a tournament where players force the judges to sit for hours to review rule. That is why I see it as a poor analogy.
*edit* And I know enough tournament judges that wouldn't be happy having to dig for hours for a rule while you chug beer.
*edit* But this is getting way off topic. Maybe since CHS is getting free legal representation they see no problem in appealing till they win everything.
For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.
According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.
The original complaint disagrees with you.
WHEREFORE
, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendants as follows:
1.
Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their agents, representatives,
employees, assigns, and suppliers, and all persons acting in concert or privity with them, from
infringing Plaintiff’s copyrighted works or using any of Plaintiff’s names or marks in a manner
that is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or from otherwise infringing, diluting, or
tarnishing Plaintiff’s trademarks, or from competing unfairly with Plaintiff;
2.
Directing the destruction of all infringing merchandise and molds and means of
producing the same;
3.
Awarding Plaintiff its damages and Defendants’ profits derived by reason of the
unlawful acts complained of herein and/or statutory damages as provided by law;
4.
Awarding Plaintiff treble damages as provided by law; and
5.
Awarding Plaintiff its reasonable attorney
fees, prejudgment interest, and costs of
this action as provided by law.
So, that all considered, did GW ask for more than $25k? I know costs aren't decided.
I saw quotes earlier that GW demanded $400,000. True, or fantasy?
For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.
According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.
The original complaint disagrees with you.
WHEREFORE
, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendants as follows:
1.
Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their agents, representatives,
employees, assigns, and suppliers, and all persons acting in concert or privity with them, from
infringing Plaintiff’s copyrighted works or using any of Plaintiff’s names or marks in a manner
that is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or from otherwise infringing, diluting, or
tarnishing Plaintiff’s trademarks, or from competing unfairly with Plaintiff;
2.
Directing the destruction of all infringing merchandise and molds and means of
producing the same;
3. Awarding Plaintiff its damages and Defendants’ profits derived by reason of the
unlawful acts complained of herein and/or statutory damages as provided by law;
4. Awarding Plaintiff treble damages as provided by law; and
5.
Awarding Plaintiff its reasonable attorney
fees, prejudgment interest, and costs of
this action as provided by law.
I'm not sure I follow you. Defendant's profits came out to $25k. I see nothing that contradicts that.
Most recently we've got a statement to that effect in the joint status report:
And although the jury awarded $25,000 to
Games Workshop, that was a tiny fraction of the hundreds of thousands of dollars Games Workshop
had initially sought. Far from showing it prevailed, the fact that Games Workshop was forced to
make a demand for that small amount after years of litigation confirms it did not prevail.
The $25,000 "requested" by GW was a modification of the original demands of the suit that happened towards the end of the trial.
The original demands from GW were for CHS to be completely shut down, all their molds destroyed, all profits earned by CHS during the company's existance to be turned over to GW, and for CHS to pay for GW's legal expenses.
So, in comparison to what GW originally asked for, $25,000 is next to nothing.
Ah, understood. I also believe there's a reference to that in he 1st document above where GW states that their original request was 25k. On my phone atm, and it's hard for me to link to the actual page. That was my source of information.
Appeals are comparatively very quick and very inexpensive, that's just a fact. And you are being unreasonably critical of the analogy in any case. This case took 2.5 years to get to trial. A game of 40K takes 2.5 hours to play. If you want to extend the analogy, an appeal might take 12 months, maybe less. That's like waiting an hour for the TO to come back with a final rules call.
If it meant the difference between winning the tournament and not winning the tournament, yea, I'd wait an hour, especially because it would be an hour in which I could go get a beer and hang out. Appeals are lawyer work. No depositions, no affidavits, nothing that the client really has to do.
So, yea, I think my analogy is pretty darn spot on.
And with a two day tournament, you would be willing to wait an extra 5 - 6 hours for a ruling? I have yet to hear of a tournament where players force the judges to sit for hours to review rule. That is why I see it as a poor analogy.
*edit* And I know enough tournament judges that wouldn't be happy having to dig for hours for a rule while you chug beer.
*edit* But this is getting way off topic. Maybe since CHS is getting free legal representation they see no problem in appealing till they win everything.
If you could appeal until you won everything, why the hell should you not appeal? I guess I am completely failing to follow your logic on this. I can see saying that in a cost/benefit analysis, an appeal might cost X , have Y chance of succeeding, and only get you Z if you did succeed. I would get that. But you seem to be arguing that even with the ability to "win everything," it is better to just be a man and accept that you came out okay in the first place. That just doesn't compute with me.
Not that I am saying anything about either party's chances on appeal, mind, or even desire/ability to appeal. But as a general matter, if your cost to appeal is low, your risk of losing what you have already won is low, your potential benefit from succeeding is significant, and you are already opposing another party's appeal anyway, you might as well appeal almost regardless of your chances of success. And if you predict good chances of success, why in the world would you not?
You seem to be saying that CHS should not appeal because it just wouldn't be gentlemanly. You seem to be saying that you should take your licks and move on with your life. I think that is a fine enough sentiment, but the reason I used a gaming analogy in the first place was because appeals are just part of the process, like getting a rules call from a TO. This is not a friendly game. The parties are not going to be laughing and drinking beers after.
If it was friendly, it would have settled out a long, long, long time ago. Seriously, go have a look at what Judge Gilbert said back in September of 2011.
Ah Judge Gilbert, the Cassandra of this case; nobody listened to him.
That's an interesting list above and I agree it looks like the jury just threw bits of paper in he air and awarded based upon where they landed; I'm interested to see what happens next. July 15th, right?
Also, *gets out the popcorn and watches silent argue with someone that deals with law and courts everyday* wheeze.
SickSix wrote: Woah, wait a minute. They actually upheld GW's claim to the generic geometric shapes representing devastator and assault squad shoulder icons?
I guess I don't get some of these decisions. CHS infringed on 'Rhino' but not 'Black Templar'. They infringed on 'Flesh Tearer' but no 'Blood Angel'....
It just seems nonsensical to me.
I wouldn't normally quote myself but I think my post got lost at the bottom of the last page.
Would my confusion about some of the rulings be shared with Nick and his legal team and that is why they are appealing?
If you could appeal until you won everything, why the hell should you not appeal? I guess I am completely failing to follow your logic on this. I can see saying that in a cost/benefit analysis, an appeal might cost X , have Y chance of succeeding, and only get you Z if you did succeed. I would get that. But you seem to be arguing that even with the ability to "win everything," it is better to just be a man and accept that you came out okay in the first place. That just doesn't compute with me.
Not that I am saying anything about either party's chances on appeal, mind, or even desire/ability to appeal. But as a general matter, if your cost to appeal is low, your risk of losing what you have already won is low, your potential benefit from succeeding is significant, and you are already opposing another party's appeal anyway, you might as well appeal almost regardless of your chances of success. And if you predict good chances of success, why in the world would you not?
You seem to be saying that CHS should not appeal because it just wouldn't be gentlemanly. You seem to be saying that you should take your licks and move on with your life. I think that is a fine enough sentiment, but the reason I used a gaming analogy in the first place was because appeals are just part of the process, like getting a rules call from a TO. This is not a friendly game. The parties are not going to be laughing and drinking beers after.
If it was friendly, it would have settled out a long, long, long time ago. Seriously, go have a look at what Judge Gilbert said back in September of 2011.
You seem to have a relatively skewed view of what "low cost" is. Lawyers are never "low cost". Just from lawsuits friends and family had to deal with, if both sides are appealing different parts of a ruling, the same judge hears both appeals. If GW is having to go before the judge to defend, they may as well look into the rulings against them and look for "mistakes". Resources are being expended already and a judge is hearing the issue. Of course if GW was appealing, I would expect CHS do to the same back. I have no delusion that this friendly anymore and believe the only reason the law firm is continuing to support this is because they see it as a good way to polish their name. If this wasn't pro-bono work, CHS wouldn't be continuing this fight.
You seem to have a relatively skewed view of what "low cost" is. Lawyers are never "low cost". Just from lawsuits friends and family had to deal with, if both sides are appealing different parts of a ruling, the same judge hears both appeals. If GW is having to go before the judge to defend, they may as well look into the rulings against them and look for "mistakes". Resources are being expended already and a judge is hearing the issue. Of course if GW was appealing, I would expect CHS do to the same back. I have no delusion that this friendly anymore and believe the only reason the law firm is continuing to support this is because they see it as a good way to polish their name. If this wasn't pro-bono work, CHS wouldn't be continuing this fight.
Low cost is relative and is compared to a 2+ year suit. Much cheaper for CHS though...
I would think the CHS would not be appealing unless their lawyers thought it was a good idea. If Winston and Strawn thinks there is something to be gained (without too much downside) by appealing, odds seem pretty good that it will be worthwhile.
Low cost is relative and is compared to a 2+ year suit. Much cheaper for CHS though...
I would think the CHS would not be appealing unless their lawyers thought it was a good idea. If Winston and Strawn thinks there is something to be gained (without too much downside) by appealing, odds seem pretty good that it will be worthwhile.
T
One possible additional motivation for W&S - I believe that in copyright cases attorney's fees can be awarded to the prevailing party (the normal 'american rule' is displaced). We've already seen that costs / who is the prevailing party may be a bit contentious. Now costs vary down there, but up here, succeeding on appeal can entitle you to costs for the action in the court below. If W&S wants to get some of their pro bono time paid for by GW, this would give them another shot.
Of course the decision is up to the client, but this could be a factor in W&S being willing to do the appeal on the client's behalf.
skyth wrote: What I am amazed is that they found a copyright infringment on the super heavy walker...GW doesn't make one of those and there isn't even a concept of one of those from GW...(I'm assuming that we're talking about the Tau one here).
Eh? The super heavy walker is listed under things which did not infringe, and I cant see any other reference to it. Am I missing something?
Low cost is relative and is compared to a 2+ year suit. Much cheaper for CHS though...
I would think the CHS would not be appealing unless their lawyers thought it was a good idea. If Winston and Strawn thinks there is something to be gained (without too much downside) by appealing, odds seem pretty good that it will be worthwhile.
T
One possible additional motivation for W&S - I believe that in copyright cases attorney's fees can be awarded to the prevailing party (the normal 'american rule' is displaced). We've already seen that costs / who is the prevailing party may be a bit contentious. Now costs vary down there, but up here, succeeding on appeal can entitle you to costs for the action in the court below. If W&S wants to get some of their pro bono time paid for by GW, this would give them another shot.
Of course the decision is up to the client, but this could be a factor in W&S being willing to do the appeal on the client's behalf.
If that is the case, it definitely answers my original question. Thanks czakk!
*edit* And would be interesting to see how much W&S would claim to have spent on the case.
I would imagine that the "free" lawyers for CHS would not agree to represent this case in an appeal unless they thought that it could make them look even better than already winning the majority of the contested cases.
silent25 wrote: I have no delusion that this friendly anymore and believe the only reason the law firm is continuing to support this is because they see it as a good way to polish their name. If this wasn't pro-bono work, CHS wouldn't be continuing this fight.
The delusion was thinking that it ever WAS friendly. GW has not been friendly to the "aftermarket" market in any way, shape or form for many MANY years. That is not just businesses like CHS, but online stores, mom & pop operations and bits sellers alike.
If this was not pro-bono work, GW would have succeeded in shuttering a small business on ground that have been clearly shown to be more incorrect than correct. I honestly don't care -for the most part- what their reason is for representing CHS. They are stepping in to support someone unfairly bullied by GW, and for that they get a big fat KUDOS from me.
For the original damages that GW requested, yeah, it is. $25k may be a short term pain, but it's not back breakingly bad.
According to the documents, GW requested $25,000. The other numbers were CH's gross earnings over that period- 25k was their profit, and what GW requested.
Presumably the $25k is CHS profits for all items, and not for the ones they were found to be infringing on? In which case, should they be paying damages on what wasn't found to infringe and the damages should actually be about $8.3k (profits times the 1/3rd of claims they lost on)?
d-usa wrote: I would imagine that the "free" lawyers for CHS would not agree to represent this case in an appeal unless they thought that it could make them look even better than already winning the majority of the contested cases.
Even if for whatever reason they couldn't, I know for a fact there are several other firms that have said they would represent CHS pro-bono on appeal.
GW's legal position in court has been such an aberration that the legal community sees a GW victory as one where many industries lose and makes a mess of the consistency of the law by potentially establishing a very skewed precedent. This is why W&S represented CHS pro-bono and why many others are willing to as well.
odinsgrandson wrote: I hadn't realized that the legal community was taking interest in the plight of small companies being pushed around by Games Workshop.
I don't think that's the reason. It's not altruistic--or at least not entirely so. There is a real concern for professionals working under an established 'status quo' if something dramatic comes along and shakes up that status quo in a way that could result in greater expense for the industry.
I believe that's what this GW case represents, if GW had entirely gotten their way--suddenly much larger and more meaningful companies can just make whacky claims with at least some legal precedent.
odinsgrandson wrote: I hadn't realized that the legal community was taking interest in the plight of small companies being pushed around by Games Workshop.
I don't think that's the reason. It's not altruistic--or at least not entirely so. There is a real concern for professionals working under an established 'status quo' if something dramatic comes along and shakes up that status quo in a way that could result in greater expense for the industry.
I believe that's what this GW case represents, if GW had entirely gotten their way--suddenly much larger and more meaningful companies can just make whacky claims with at least some legal precedent.
Exactly, these firms represent a number of companies in a variety of industries and by protecting CHS they protect the interpretation of law under which these companies operate.
W&S took the lead in this case but CHS was represented by a second firm as part of its defense team.
Seriously, CHS deserve to be shot down for being stupid. Clearly infringing the IP using certain lines and not even having the where-with-all to leave enough doubt to be viable.
Look at others like Anvil Industries, they have been extremely careful not to leave themselves open because they know GW will be on them like "a pack of Zombies after the last human being on earth. "
Even CHS website states...
"ChapterHouse Studios specializes in the creation of high end resin and metal miniature kits and bits applicable for use with a variety of Warhammer and Warhammer 40k models and the games.Our mission is to help address public demand for unavailable parts and iconography with the highest standards possible. "
Iconography is the dodgy bit (equally referencing the IP you are ripping is a bad start too), you've got to be so careful. This whole thing could have been avoided if they had been a bit more clever. Granted GW are hammering them, but so would I if I owned something and someone was making money off my own coat-tails. I think there is some Anti-GW Jingo-ism meets pseudo understanding of Economics and IP law here, with a big dose of "Morale Soap-boxing".
Like them or Hate them GW does own alot of IP, and there an awful lot of organisations that own things like the Song "Happy Birthday" and have to pay royalties etc and cannot reproduce without permission.
Look at Apples Claims on Samsung...Which they won.
So IP law and all it's associated elements are complex as hell...Best solution, don't make your product similar to anything else and make sure your register it, for a TM, Patent or as Intellectual property.
Seriously, CHS deserve to be shot down for being stupid. Clearly infringing the IP using certain lines and not even having the where-with-all to leave enough doubt to be viable.
Look at others like Anvil Industries, they have been extremely careful not to leave themselves open because they know GW will be on them like "a pack of Zombies after the last human being on earth. "
Even CHS website states...
"Our mission is to help address public demand for unavailable parts and iconography with the highest standards possible. "
Iconography is the dodgy bit, you've got to be so careful. This whole thing could have been avoided if they had been a bit more clever. Granted GW are hammering them, but so would I if I owned something and someone was making money of my own coat-tails. I think there is some Anti-GW Jingo-ism meets pseudo understanding of Economics and IP law here, with a big dose of "Morale Soap-boxing".
Like them or Hate them GW does own alot of IP, and there an awful lot of organisations that own things like the Song "Happy Birthday" and have to pay royalties etc and cannot reproduce without permission.
Your rambling shows a complete misunderstanding of the case and is factually inaccurate. Please go back and read the thread.
You cannot claim to be filling in gaps in a Market with others IP.
I could claim the same, that Apple don't make a Wrist-watch so I will make one called the iWatch, design it to be compatible, white rounded corners etc.
Copy elements of design of the original iPod, then make a mission statement that says "I'm here to fill the gaps in Apple's Product Range" and then act surprised when Apple jumps on me?
Look at Flames of War, there is no IP claim on WW2, so there are lots of Companies producing the exact same Tanks in various or the same scales.
Then look at GW's Universe, something they created from nothing and own almost entirely, now other Companies cannot directly reference their material without permisson. Fantasy Flight Games and others have all worked with GW, companies like Codex Pictures or THQ, to produce in Universe IP items all above board and legally.
CHS might win, they might not, but it's very difficult to see how they will not end up in a protracted Legal War over the next 10 years if they continue to try to release things that get GW's attention.
GW's universe is 'created from nothing'? It's nothing but a collection of concepts and SF/Fantasy tropes mined from decades of published and filmed works.
... so grain of salt and all that.
) It's not that hard to point out that they won some damages and defended this or that "key" trademark and that an apelation to win the case is forthcoming becuase everybody knows that evil CPH deceived those poor deluded juries...
![[Disk]](/dakkaforum/templates/default/images/icon_disk.gif){kind=icon}
