I'm curious what everyone thinks about buying models from non-GW, non-hobby store sources? I've seen differing opinions on a lot of these, but I'm having trouble discerning the important difference. Either way, neither GW nor your local hobby stores are making money, and you're getting the models for cheaper but with a higher risk of quality problems. Ebay gets you official models, but used and with a good chance of damage or missing pieces. Recasts also get you official models, but it's a crapshoot for whether or not they'll have casting problems. Third Party Models, meanwhile, are usually not going to have model defects, but the actual quality of the original model rarely compares to Games Workshop and/or Forge World.
I won't name any of these sources, for obvious reasons, I'm just curious what people think about buying from these sources. And I'm curious why people feel these ways!
(Note: I'm not talking about third party casters who make unique models that you can't otherwise get, like the Chapterhouse Studios' Mycetic Spore, for example.)
Swastakowey wrote: All of the above for me, No game stores nearby and no want to support GW. So its as much 3rd party as possible.
Coincidentally, about five minutes after posting this I saw the ad for Anvil Industries in the top right corner of this website. And they've got some damned cool stuff...
Waaaghpower wrote: I've seen differing opinions on a lot of these, but I'm having trouble discerning the important difference.
The important difference is that ebay and third-party models are legal, while recasting isn't. It's the difference between getting some cheap clothes from walmart because you can't afford the expensive big-name stuff, and going to the high-end store and stealing some clothes off the shelf.
There are some amazing models out there that other people make/remake. On the flip side there are some terrible ones too. If it comes from Russia or China then you have a 50/50 of getting what you want. In particular I like NotFailCast or Kromlech. Takes awhile and its hard to get ahold of them but good stuff so far.
Waaaghpower wrote: I've seen differing opinions on a lot of these, but I'm having trouble discerning the important difference.
The important difference is that ebay and third-party models are legal, while recasting isn't. It's the difference between getting some cheap clothes from walmart because you can't afford the expensive big-name stuff, and going to the high-end store and stealing some clothes off the shelf.
You still pay, its like buying stolen goods is a better example. Except they only stole the idea not the product.
I'll happily grab 3rd Party when possible, many of the alternative suppliers (Anvil, Mantic, WGF) either rival GW or are cheap enough to justify the slight difference in quality.
Similarly with Ebay, if the deal's good there's no point not going for it. Perfectly legal, the only reason you'd avoid it is if you wanted to support a local stockist.
Waaaghpower wrote: I've seen differing opinions on a lot of these, but I'm having trouble discerning the important difference.
The important difference is that ebay and third-party models are legal, while recasting isn't. It's the difference between getting some cheap clothes from walmart because you can't afford the expensive big-name stuff, and going to the high-end store and stealing some clothes off the shelf.
You still pay, its like buying stolen goods is a better example. Except they only stole the idea not the product.
I'd say it's more like buying bootleg copies from flea markets. (Like 'Gussi' handbags or 'Nicke' sneakers.) Unlike 'Stolen property,' nobody is losing money or inventory, just business. As far as GW profits are concerned, recasts and ebay are no different.
I think I never bought anything besides a couple of paint pots in a GW store.
GW models are strictly ebay ware for me.
As for third parties - If I ever see something I'd love to have, I'd buy. So far there were only a couple of comparatively expensive Kromlech cybork legs that caught my eye, but if I see something I love - why not.
Recasts - don't know how much you are allowed to touch this point without catching one with the banhammer. Let's just say that there are some interesting tutorials around on youtube for the interested person.
Waaaghpower wrote: I've seen differing opinions on a lot of these, but I'm having trouble discerning the important difference.
The important difference is that ebay and third-party models are legal, while recasting isn't. It's the difference between getting some cheap clothes from walmart because you can't afford the expensive big-name stuff, and going to the high-end store and stealing some clothes off the shelf.
You still pay, its like buying stolen goods is a better example. Except they only stole the idea not the product.
I'd say it's more like buying bootleg copies from flea markets. (Like 'Gussi' handbags or 'Nicke' sneakers.) Unlike 'Stolen property,' nobody is losing money or inventory, just business. As far as GW profits are concerned, recasts and ebay are no different.
Exactly, counterfeit is the best and only way to describe it.
No, that isn't true at all. Third-party "we swear these aren't space marine melta guns" and similar things use the basic idea, but are still their own design. Recasts, on the other hand, are a literal copy of the existing model. It's the difference between making your own music that is very similar to a band you love, and selling copies of your favorite band's latest album.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Waaaghpower wrote: As far as GW profits are concerned, recasts and ebay are no different.
No, it's very different. A model on ebay was bought legitimately from GW at one point. A recast was not.
No, that isn't true at all. Third-party "we swear these aren't space marine melta guns" and similar things use the basic idea, but are still their own design. Recasts, on the other hand, are a literal copy of the existing model. It's the difference between making your own music that is very similar to a band you love, and selling copies of your favorite band's latest album.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Waaaghpower wrote: As far as GW profits are concerned, recasts and ebay are no different.
No, it's very different. A model on ebay was bought legitimately from GW at one point. A recast was not.
No recasts stole the idea.
The "not bolter bolters" are inspiration not stolen ideas. difference.
No, that isn't true at all. Third-party "we swear these aren't space marine melta guns" and similar things use the basic idea, but are still their own design. Recasts, on the other hand, are a literal copy of the existing model. It's the difference between making your own music that is very similar to a band you love, and selling copies of your favorite band's latest album.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Waaaghpower wrote: As far as GW profits are concerned, recasts and ebay are no different.
No, it's very different. A model on ebay was bought legitimately from GW at one point. A recast was not.
Thing is, no matter whether someone buys from Ebay, third party or recasts, no new money falls in GWs pockets.
Of course, I think discussing recasts is not legal. So... Lock thread?
No, they stole the exact model. Recasters don't look at a model and make their own that's as close a match as possible, they get the real model, make molds from it, and start producing their own copies. That's not just stealing some abstract "idea" for a product, it's making literal copies of it.
No, that isn't true at all. Third-party "we swear these aren't space marine melta guns" and similar things use the basic idea, but are still their own design. Recasts, on the other hand, are a literal copy of the existing model. It's the difference between making your own music that is very similar to a band you love, and selling copies of your favorite band's latest album.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Waaaghpower wrote: As far as GW profits are concerned, recasts and ebay are no different.
No, it's very different. A model on ebay was bought legitimately from GW at one point. A recast was not.
How is that important? A model bought on Ebay makes no more money for GW than a recast. GW wants all purchases to sit in your basement forever when not in use.
Regardless of source, any instance where someone aquires models but does not give GW money is exactly the same.
As for your music comparison, it's closer to selling copies of the band's CD and selling your own cover of the songs. It's the same song, just performed by someone else.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: Thing is, no matter whether someone buys from Ebay, third party or recasts, no new money falls in GWs pockets.
Again, no, it is not the same. An ebay sale might not directly put money in GW's pockets, but that ebay sale only happens because someone did buy it from GW in the past. And the ebay market creates new sales for GW, since people are more willing to buy new models if they know there's good re-sale value on ebay if they don't want them anymore. Neither of those things are true for recasts, which just take sales away from GW without offering anything in return.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: Thing is, no matter whether someone buys from Ebay, third party or recasts, no new money falls in GWs pockets.
Again, no, it is not the same. An ebay sale might not directly put money in GW's pockets, but that ebay sale only happens because someone did buy it from GW in the past. And the ebay market creates new sales for GW, since people are more willing to buy new models if they know there's good re-sale value on ebay if they don't want them anymore. Neither of those things are true for recasts, which just take sales away from GW without offering anything in return.
But you can sell recasts on ebay as well, you know.
That point is sorta moot.
Supposedly, in the case of FW stuff, the quality is sometimes indiscernable... And often superior in finecast matters! Apparently.
I've never ordered from GW directly, but I usually try and buy things from my FLGS as much as I reasonably can. It's worth it for me to pay a little bit more on something that's already expensive if it means that I can keep my gaming store open.
I've purchased from eBay a few times, especially for things I can't get (or can't get easily) in a store, like bitz. The reason I don't use eBay that much is because of eBay. It's great for sifting through a massive pile of krill for several weeks looking for a fish, but it's not very good for "I want this, so I'd like to buy it now" kinds of situations.
I've never purchased recasts from an ethics standpoint, nor do I intend to do so. I don't want to be the kind of person who contributes to driving up prices and closing down stores for everyone else. I'd much rather the content creators get compensated than a base forger who is only capable of copying what others have already created.
As for third party models, I've never bothered, myself. Honestly, the biggest problem I have with non-GW models is that they're just not as good. Those rare people who can do things of the same quality or better are also absurdly more expensive. I have GS skills, but fixing a big pile of crappy models (especially if the scale isn't quite right) to make them look good enough isn't worth my time, and buying nicer models when I could buy the regular ones and spruce them up a bit isn't worth my money.
Waaaghpower wrote:nobody is losing money or inventory, just business
Umm... what do you think business is?
Last I checked, the definition of business was trading money for inventory. Not getting money and not giving inventory is the opposite of business. As such, losing business IS losing money and inventory, just like losing money and inventory IS losing business.
The difference between Ebay and Recasting is that if you're selling something on Ebay, somewhere along the line that product has been sold by GW in some capacity, so they have profited from it. Whatever you're selling, GW has already gained from it.
Recasters buy one copy of the model to cast, but then anything produced by them is never seen by GW and they don't make any money from it. Hence, it's theft.
Waaaghpower wrote: Regardless of source, any instance where someone aquires models but does not give GW money is exactly the same.
Sigh. Why is this so hard to understand? Sales of used models still involve models that were legally purchased from GW. Sales of recasts do not. The ebay sales of legal models generate new sales directly from GW because people are more likely to buy new stuff directly from GW if they know it's a low-risk purchase because ebay exists. Recasts, on the other hand, will never under any circumstances produce profit for GW at any point.
It's the same song, just performed by someone else.
No, because a cover is still not the same. It might have a lot of the same elements, but it's still a different song. With recasts the only difference is whether you're buying a legal product, or supporting IP theft and slave labor.
Ailaros, please don't intentionally misunderstand what I'm saying. Obviously, losing business is bad. I never said it wasn't. However, which is worse:
Losing inventory, money, AND business,
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm sure you can go to dozens of forums and find pages upon pages of arguing whether or not copyright infringement is theft, lol.
It's definitely theft, but it's not as severe as directly taking the product from its owner.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm sure you can go to dozens of forums and find pages upon pages of arguing whether or not copyright infringement is theft, lol.
Well yeah, there's always an endless horde of sociopaths who want to turn their desire to get games/movies/whatever without paying for them into some kind of moral high ground. That doesn't make them right.
Peregrine wrote: No, because a cover is still not the same. It might have a lot of the same elements, but it's still a different song. With recasts the only difference is whether you're buying a legal product, or supporting IP theft and slave labor.
But a lot of covers aim to be the same and the differences come from how badly they failed. Kind of like recasting something and introducing flaws?
Waaaghpower wrote: Regardless of source, any instance where someone aquires models but does not give GW money is exactly the same.
Sigh. Why is this so hard to understand? Sales of used models still involve models that were legally purchased from GW. Sales of recasts do not. The ebay sales of legal models generate new sales directly from GW because people are more likely to buy new stuff directly from GW if they know it's a low-risk purchase because ebay exists. Recasts, on the other hand, will never under any circumstances produce profit for GW at any point.
Well, I guess a legitimate copy has to be purchased from GW at some point, or what else to the recasters use to make their recast?
AllSeeingSkink wrote: But a lot of covers aim to be the same and the differences come from how badly they failed. Kind of like recasting something and introducing flaws?
No, not at all the same. Recasting and introducing flaws would be more like burning pirated cds of the new album and accidentally scratching them.
Waaaghpower wrote: Regardless of source, any instance where someone aquires models but does not give GW money is exactly the same.
Sigh. Why is this so hard to understand? Sales of used models still involve models that were legally purchased from GW. Sales of recasts do not. The ebay sales of legal models generate new sales directly from GW because people are more likely to buy new stuff directly from GW if they know it's a low-risk purchase because ebay exists. Recasts, on the other hand, will never under any circumstances produce profit for GW at any point.
Well, I guess a legitimate copy has to be purchased from GW at some point, or what else to the recasters use to make their recast?
Yes, they make one purchase of the original to copy, GW gets money once, as opposed to multiple times that a copy would sell in the stead of their actual models
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm sure you can go to dozens of forums and find pages upon pages of arguing whether or not copyright infringement is theft, lol.
It's definitely theft, but it's not as severe as directly taking the product from its owner.
Actually, legally it's not theft. It's still bad and I still don't condone it, but legally, theft is something else. If copyright infringement were theft, it wouldn't be called copyright infringement.
So legally, no, it's not theft. Now whether you still want to call it theft simply becomes a matter of semantics. The better thing to argue is whether it's wrong or not, as soon as you mention the word "theft" it becomes a matter of semantics rather than morality.
As long as no one directs people to recasters, or links directly to recasters, or shows anyone how to recast someone's work - then this thread can continue to live.
azreal13 wrote: Well, I guess a legitimate copy has to be purchased from GW at some point, or what else to the recasters use to make their recast?
Yes, one copy, unless they buy it from another recaster. But then that one model is used to produce an endless number of copies. Selling real models on ebay, on the other hand, requires one sale from GW for every model in the pool of available models to buy from.
Waaaghpower wrote: Regardless of source, any instance where someone aquires models but does not give GW money is exactly the same.
Sigh. Why is this so hard to understand? Sales of used models still involve models that were legally purchased from GW. Sales of recasts do not. The ebay sales of legal models generate new sales directly from GW because people are more likely to buy new stuff directly from GW if they know it's a low-risk purchase because ebay exists. Recasts, on the other hand, will never under any circumstances produce profit for GW at any point.
It's the same song, just performed by someone else.
No, because a cover is still not the same. It might have a lot of the same elements, but it's still a different song. With recasts the only difference is whether you're buying a legal product, or supporting IP theft and slave labor.
If you make your own casts of models, like third party developers, then you aren't makimg the same product. That was my point. Covers of a song are like third party models. Pirated downloads are like recasts.
As for sales of used models: It's true that the models did, at one point, profit GW. But, THE SALE on Ebay doesn't profit them in any way, just likehow THE SALE of a recast doesn't profit them. Saying that a used model's sale increases GW's business is just silly.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: But a lot of covers aim to be the same and the differences come from how badly they failed. Kind of like recasting something and introducing flaws?
No, not at all the same. Recasting and introducing flaws would be more like burning pirated cds of the new album and accidentally scratching them.
My (admittedly cryptic) point was analogies are stupid
Why do we have to say buying an illegally copied model is like blah blah blah when we can just say buying an illegally copied model is kind of like buying an illegally copied model?
I wonder where people's opinions of scratch-builds fall. Like someone who builds a plasticard thunderhawk or plasticard warhound. I wish that was a poll choice, I'm curious.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: But a lot of covers aim to be the same and the differences come from how badly they failed. Kind of like recasting something and introducing flaws?
No, not at all the same. Recasting and introducing flaws would be more like burning pirated cds of the new album and accidentally scratching them.
My (admittedly cryptic) point was analogies are stupid
Why do we have to say buying an illegally copied model is like blah blah blah when we can just say buying an illegally copied model is kind of like buying an illegally copied model?
This belongs in the Tautology section, where it should go.
While recasters may be generally unethical, I would buy from them if it was actually convenient, lol. But I usually buy directly from my FLGS because I would rather support local game stores and can afford to do so. Also I hate waiting.
However, I think it's important to consider that there are some people who would not play 40k if they couldn't buy cheap recasts, because they can't afford legit models. GW is not losing business in this case because they never had it in the first place.
My point here is that buying from recasters doesn't *always* mean GW lost business. They only lose business if somebody who usually buys their products decides to start buying from recasters. And I doubt there are many people who buy solely from recasters compared to people who have at least bought a few things from GW. While I don't have any numbers on this, I suspect recasters are hurting GW a lot less than the Intellectual Property Internet Defense Force would have you believe.
ZultanQ wrote: While recasters may be generally unethical, I would buy from them if it was actually convenient, lol. But I usually buy directly from my FLGS because I would rather support local game stores and can afford to do so. Also I hate waiting.
However, I think it's important to consider that there are some people who would not play 40k if they couldn't buy cheap recasts, because they can't afford legit models. GW is not losing business in this case because they never had it in the first place.
My point here is that buying from recasters doesn't *always* mean GW lost business. They only lose business if somebody who usually buys their products decides to start buying from recasters. And I doubt there are many people who buy solely from recasters compared to people who have at least bought a few things from GW. While I don't have any numbers on this, I suspect recasters are hurting GW a lot less than the Intellectual Property Internet Defense Force would have you believe.
Thats because most people are scared of them lol.
As to third party models I find many to be superior in quality and so forth, they just lack lots of options sometimes. But thats what converting is for.
1) It is illegal. But not all illegal things are wrong.
2) I think it is wrong if GW are producing and selling the miniatures to buy them from a recaster, as IMO the creator of content (be it a model maker, a musician, a movie/game studio, etc) has the right to place limitations on what they have created. I know not all people agree with me, but that's my personal feeling.
3) If GW are no longer producing the model, IMO I don't think recasting is wrong. It is still illegal, yes, but as I said, not all illegal things are "wrong". If GW have abandoned their design so they are no longer profiting from it, then IMO it should be fair game for recasters.
I know not everyone agrees with me on that, people who think OOP models should be left to become collectible may disagree with me on point 3, and I know some people who think you are free to copy and share what you like will disagree with me on point 2.
But that's my personal opinion on recasts. I will also say I currently own 0 recasts that I'm aware of in my many thousands of dollars worth of models. I do buy stuff 2nd hand though so there might be some things I'm unaware of that are recasts. I would, however, be very happy to buy recast Aeronautica Imperialis, recast Epic or recast BFG as GW no longer makes them.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'll add to what I just said and say I have no problem with ebay and 3rd party miniatures as long as the 3rd party miniatures are not close to direct copies of GW models.
The price the thing is through FW, say $500. At that price FW wont give my business, and they dont discount anything, pretty much ever
The recaster sells it for $300, they'd get my business for that price.
Is the original seller losing my business, if I wouldnt give them my business at the prices they have in the first place?
No, they aren't. But IMO that still doesn't make it right to buy it from a recaster.
The price set by FW (should) be representative of the time it took (thus money paid) for modellers to create the model and them to create high quality moulds and then produce a high quality model. A recaster does not have the same costs, so IMO it's wrong to buy from a recaster even if you weren't going to buy it anyway. The recaster is not competing with GW, the recaster is taking a GW model to save them the expense of creating it themselves and then riding on the coat tails of GW's name in order to drum up business. It's entirely possible (not saying it's the case, but it's possible) for a recaster to sell a model for less than GW/FW, sell the same number as models GW/FW did, but actually make more money off it because they didn't have the associated costs of creating the master model and master mould or the advertising to get the model in to the lime light.
The price the thing is through FW, say $500. At that price FW wont give my business, and they dont discount anything, pretty much ever
The recaster sells it for $300, they'd get my business for that price.
Is the original seller losing my business, if I wouldnt give them my business at the prices they have in the first place?
No, they aren't. But IMO that still doesn't make it right to buy it from a recaster.
The price set by FW (should) be representative of the time it took (thus money paid) for modellers to create the model and them to create high quality moulds and then produce a high quality model. A recaster does not have the same costs, so IMO it's wrong to buy from a recaster even if you weren't going to buy it anyway. The recaster is not competing with GW, the recaster is taking a GW model to save them the expense of creating it themselves and then riding on the coat tails of GW's name in order to drum up business.
Perhaps, FW has the right to set the price at whatever they want. Doesnt mean everyone will pay at that price if there are other options.
Morally wrong perhaps, but in regards to the sale, its just business. Personally, the choice between paying full price and feeling good and fluffy or saving a couple of hundred bucks and feeling slightly guilty; I'll honestly take the second choice. But thats just me.
Is it morally wrong to overcharge for an item because you know you can because you're the only one that makes it?
The price the thing is through FW, say $500. At that price FW wont give my business, and they dont discount anything, pretty much ever
The recaster sells it for $300, they'd get my business for that price.
Is the original seller losing my business, if I wouldnt give them my business at the prices they have in the first place?
No, they aren't. But IMO that still doesn't make it right to buy it from a recaster.
The price set by FW (should) be representative of the time it took (thus money paid) for modellers to create the model and them to create high quality moulds and then produce a high quality model. A recaster does not have the same costs, so IMO it's wrong to buy from a recaster even if you weren't going to buy it anyway. The recaster is not competing with GW, the recaster is taking a GW model to save them the expense of creating it themselves and then riding on the coat tails of GW's name in order to drum up business.
Perhaps, FW has the right to set the price at whatever they want. Doesnt mean everyone will pay at that price if there are other options.
Morally wrong perhaps, but in regards to the sale, its just business. Personally, the choice between paying full price and feeling good and fluffy or saving a couple of hundred bucks and feeling slightly guilty; I'll honestly take the second choice. But thats just me.
Is it morally wrong to overcharge for an item because you know you can because you're the only one that makes it?
After I pay 100 NZD for the next Imperial Guard Codex I will no longer feel guilty at all. Especially since my last one cost 40NZD, or the rule book costing 230NZD etc, books are all i buy from them because I cant justify the kind of money they are asking. I will never by recasts of a non GW product though, but like everybody else, its a choice to make.
I'll buy Ebay if I can get it for less than 50% of retail. Higher than that and I will choose to support my local game store.
I will absolutely buy third party models. I have no financial loyalty to Games Workshop. They have enough of my money. When buying 3rd party, I ask my local proprietor if he can get it. If so, I buy through him. If not, I buy online.
I will totally buy recasts, but only of Forgeworld models. As of yet, I have never found a recast of the models I want, but I'd still be willing to take the risk to get some of those bad boys on the cheap. There's no conflict of loyalty here because, again, I have no particular loyalty to GW (financially) and Forgeworld won't deal through local shops, so I'm not picking the pocket of the Mom-n-Pop store owner either.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Perhaps, FW has the right to set the price at whatever they want. Doesnt mean everyone will pay at that price if there are other options.
But if those options are recasters, IMO those options are not genuine options.
Morally wrong perhaps, but in regards to the sale, its just business. Personally, the choice between paying full price and feeling good and fluffy or saving a couple of hundred bucks and feeling slightly guilty; I'll honestly take the second choice. But thats just me.
But it's not "just business". The recasting company isn't actually competing with GW, they are illegally (and IMO, wrongly) selling something they themselves didn't do the work to create.
Whether you feel guilty or not is a matter of what our society thinks is right and wrong (or some inherent belief of what right or wrong is depending on who you ask). Whether you can live with the guilt you feel is up to you. The reason I don't buy recasts has nothing to do with guilt, at least not for me.
No, it's not the same as walking in to a shop and physically stealing something. No, legally speaking it's not theft. But it's still illegal and IMO it's still wrong.
Is it morally wrong to overcharge for an item because you know you can because you're the only one that makes it?
IMO, no, it's not. Not for luxury items anyway. If we were talking about essential items like food, water, housing, then yes, IMO it is wrong. But with a luxury item like miniatures, IMO you should be able to charge whatever you think you can get. If you price it to high and genuine competitors (like Mantic, Perry, Privateer Press) come along and steal your business, that's your fault for pricing too high. If someone comes along and undercuts you by taking your creation and copying it without any of the associated expenses you had to initially create it, that IMO is wrong and it's the reason we have copyright law in the first place (though, I will also say, IMO copyright law is quite flawed, but it's still there for good reason).
As a gamer, I want to see COMPETITION encouraged, which does NOT mean recasters, it means other companies coming along and producing quality models of their own for lower prices than GW.
Jimsolo wrote: I'll buy Ebay if I can get it for less than 50% of retail. Higher than that and I will choose to support my local game store.
I will absolutely buy third party models. I have no financial loyalty to Games Workshop. They have enough of my money. When buying 3rd party, I ask my local proprietor if he can get it. If so, I buy through him. If not, I buy online.
I will totally buy recasts, but only of Forgeworld models. As of yet, I have never found a recast of the models I want, but I'd still be willing to take the risk to get some of those bad boys on the cheap. There's no conflict of loyalty here because, again, I have no particular loyalty to GW (financially) and Forgeworld won't deal through local shops, so I'm not picking the pocket of the Mom-n-Pop store owner either.
check ebay, there is a Russian & Chinese seller that has (recast?) FW... I bought Chaos Dwarves from each (and FW direct too), and I think they are the real deal from FW that those Russian & Chinese guys sell. If they are not, they are at least 99.9% close. I saved 33% off FW prices....
Ok, to try and widen the focus back a bit, my current 40K army project is Daemons, with the self stated aim of using third party, alternate minis wherever possible.
Consequently, when shopping for a GUO, I purchased this....
Because this...
Is a piece of tiny, overpriced crap.
However, I have subsequently obtained this fella (paint job is mine, still WIP)
Now, I don't know this is a recast, but given the price I paid, I suspect it probably is. As it came to me through personal channels rather than over the net, I can't be sure that I just didn't get one for a good price. Regardless, it arrived in the same sort of condition that anything I've personally ordered from FW.
Either way, I would never have purchased the GW model because I don't like it, and I could never have spent £120 (incl shipping) on the FW, even though I love the sculpt, so GW would never have seen a penny from me for this purchase.
I have bought GW models for this army where they represent value (most of the plastic troop boxes, except I've been slowly accumulating Diaznnettes, as, again, current ones are gak) or I genuinely think the models are ace (Bloodcrushers - thanks new codex for meaning they are now dust collectors ) but I think by breaking out of the mindset of what you're 'allowed' to use, or thinking that somehow GW are the hobby, people will find more value and greater diversity, and hence more joy, in their armies.
I really wish GW would take some of the awesomeness of FW and start putting it in to the mainstream game. If DKoK had a plastic kit instead of Cadians and Catachans, they'd sell like hot cakes. If the GW daemons looked like the FW daemons, I'd have a daemon army by now.
The main reason I tend to not buy 3rd party models all that much is I like an army to have a cohesive feel to it, and while some 3rd party models look awesome compared to GW models, they often lack the necessary range to completely create a whole army from them and they don't look cohesive next to GW models or other 3rd party models.
Well they're trying to with Escalation, but they're doing it in a pretty shady way by not at least making one Forgeworld/superheavy option through Normal GW for every faction.
If they at least one plastic option through normal GW option for a superheavy for everyone instead of throwing some armies a bone and the rest are with left with terrible FW prices, it woulndt be as bad
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I really wish GW would take some of the awesomeness of FW and start putting it in to the mainstream game. If DKoK had a plastic kit instead of Cadians and Catachans, they'd sell like hot cakes. If the GW daemons looked like the FW daemons, I'd have a daemon army by now.
The main reason I tend to not buy 3rd party models all that much is I like an army to have a cohesive feel to it, and while some 3rd party models look awesome compared to GW models, they often lack the necessary range to completely create a whole army from them and they don't look cohesive next to GW models or other 3rd party models.
With a bit of work, it can work. My blog is in my sig and its (so Far besides vehicles) all Victoria Minis, I have some Perry miniatures im doing up now for them too. It looks great for what i was trying to acheive (although someone else painted them). It can work just gotta plan it out, something you dont have to do with GW.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Well they're trying to with Escalation, but they're doing it in a pretty shady way by not at least making one Forgeworld/superheavy option through Normal GW for every faction.
If they at least one plastic option through normal GW option for a superheavy for everyone instead of throwing some armies a bone and the rest are with left with terrible FW prices, it woulndt be as bad
The fabled plastic Thunderhawk comes to mind...
I didn't necessarily just mean the scale of FW, I more meant the quality and the aesthetic. The 30k Marines look so much cooler than the 40k Marines, DKoK look so much cooler than Cadians and Catachan. The FW greater daemons aren't just bigger than GW greater daemons, they actually have a much more appealing aesthetic. Look through all the Fantasy monsters on the FW page and they aren't just bigger, they look a million times better.
It's like the aesthetic designers at FW are much better than those who do the GW models.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I really wish GW would take some of the awesomeness of FW and start putting it in to the mainstream game. If DKoK had a plastic kit instead of Cadians and Catachans, they'd sell like hot cakes. If the GW daemons looked like the FW daemons, I'd have a daemon army by now.
The main reason I tend to not buy 3rd party models all that much is I like an army to have a cohesive feel to it, and while some 3rd party models look awesome compared to GW models, they often lack the necessary range to completely create a whole army from them and they don't look cohesive next to GW models or other 3rd party models.
With a bit of work, it can work. My blog is in my sig and its (so Far besides vehicles) all Victoria Minis, I have some Perry miniatures im doing up now for them too. It looks great for what i was trying to acheive (although someone else painted them). It can work just gotta plan it out, something you dont have to do with GW.
Yeah, Imperial Guard are one of the few armies where it can work because there's so much selection. Bretonnians are another one that can work because there's enough historic models that you can pretty much do an entire army with all non-GW models. I find most other armies are lacking though.
Unfortunately the 2 armies where I think it works well, IG and Brets, I already have a large Bret army from when they came out in 5th edition so I don't really have any motivation to go a historic theme Bret army, and my favourite IG models are DKoK and Cadians (I wish Cadians weren't bobble headed, but I really like the Starship Troopers aesthetic).
When buying eBay be careful though. I bought a dreadnought drop pod advertised as forge world. When it arrived it was a soap bar green colored resin. Warped worse then forge world stuff I've had before. Obvious recast. They're out there.
Johnnytorrance wrote: When buying eBay be careful though. I bought a dreadnought drop pod advertised as forge world. When it arrived it was a soap bar green colored resin. Warped worse then forge world stuff I've had before. Obvious recast. They're out there.
Unfortunately, neither colour of resin (albeit green would be unusual) nor poor casting quality necessarily mean it was fake.
I like EBay, just won 2 auctions for the 2012 Games Day Blood Angel Captain. I also use Amazon, why Amazon when I have a local shop that sells GW you ask? Well it's because I work nights and sometimes when I'm tired I browse, put stuff in my shopping cart, walk away, then go back and buy it when I'm half asleep. When Brown Santa comes ringing the doorbell at the house it's like someone sent me a present. kind of...
Johnnytorrance wrote: When buying eBay be careful though. I bought a dreadnought drop pod advertised as forge world. When it arrived it was a soap bar green colored resin. Warped worse then forge world stuff I've had before. Obvious recast. They're out there.
Unfortunately, neither colour of resin (albeit green would be unusual) nor poor casting quality necessarily mean it was fake.
Didnt want a fresh smelling Irish Spring drop pod? Freshness all the way through the atmosphere
Jimsolo wrote: and Forgeworld won't deal through local shops, so I'm not picking the pocket of the Mom-n-Pop store owner either.
I see, so stealing is ok as long as you're stealing from a big enough company?
WrentheFaceless wrote: Personally, the choice between paying full price and feeling good and fluffy or saving a couple of hundred bucks and feeling slightly guilty; I'll honestly take the second choice. But thats just me.
Or, here's an idea: don't buy it at all. You don't need to own a particular gaming model, either buy it legally or find something else to do with your money.
Is it morally wrong to overcharge for an item because you know you can because you're the only one that makes it?
No, because no concept of "overcharging" exists for a luxury item like gaming models. And no, your personal desire to pay less for a product doesn't mean that it's overpriced.
You could put some light on the situation and think that the GST isnt going to the US governnent, which is now not going to their "defense" budget, which is therefore not bombing civiliians... He is saving lives in his own way, let him be
Ah Peregrine, you really don't deal outside of black and white well do you?
While I couldn't, and won't, defend 'stealing' as anything other than wrong, it does tickle me how you only seem to deal in binary absolutes in any given discussion.
I wish I knew you better IRL, because I'm pretty sure there would be (as with anyone) plenty of instances where I could call you out for posting hypocritical bullgak on here when I suspect your online opinion doesn't really reflect your real life actions.
Kelly502 wrote: I like EBay, just won 2 auctions for the 2012 Games Day Blood Angel Captain. I also use Amazon, why Amazon when I have a local shop that sells GW you ask? Well it's because I work nights and sometimes when I'm tired I browse, put stuff in my shopping cart, walk away, then go back and buy it when I'm half asleep. When Brown Santa comes ringing the doorbell at the house it's like someone sent me a present. kind of...
You sir win the internet for being my long lost brother. I do the same kinds of things, sans night work.
On topic.
I'll buy casts, recasts, rerecasts....any kind of casts as long as I like the model and it's convenient.
Don't mind Peregrine, he just like to rile people up.
I'll say the following. If you buy unprimed unassembled models with no packaging from ebay. You are buying a recast usually. I would know. I sell them.
Jimsolo wrote: and Forgeworld won't deal through local shops, so I'm not picking the pocket of the Mom-n-Pop store owner either.
I see, so stealing is ok as long as you're stealing from a big enough company?
WrentheFaceless wrote: Personally, the choice between paying full price and feeling good and fluffy or saving a couple of hundred bucks and feeling slightly guilty; I'll honestly take the second choice. But thats just me.
Or, here's an idea: don't buy it at all. You don't need to own a particular gaming model, either buy it legally or find something else to do with your money.
Is it morally wrong to overcharge for an item because you know you can because you're the only one that makes it?
No, because no concept of "overcharging" exists for a luxury item like gaming models. And no, your personal desire to pay less for a product doesn't mean that it's overpriced.
Haven't ever bought a recast but might now out of spite of internet self-rightousness.
Being luxury item doesnt mean it can't be overpriced. If no one buys enough of it to make a profit, its by definition "overpriced" regardless of what it is. Its called pricing yourself out of a market.
yep to the above, i have supported GW for 25 years, i have spent THOUSANDS at least and they have actually priced me out too, now here is the kicker, if GW prices were reasonable in the first place people like me would not even consider going to recasters or 3rd party, look at what steam did in russia and they proved that sell it cheap to kill piracy can turn a profit
WrentheFaceless wrote: Being luxury item doesnt mean it can't be overpriced. If no one buys enough of it to make a profit, its by definition "overpriced" regardless of what it is. Its called pricing yourself out of a market.
Yes, there's such a thing as pricing yourself out of a sale, and it's often a bad business strategy. But that doesn't magically turn into some kind of moral issue where you're justified in stealing a product because the seller is wrong to sell it for so much. If you're priced out of GW's market then leave the market, don't steal the models just because you want them to be cheaper.
Formosa wrote: yep to the above, i have supported GW for 25 years, i have spent THOUSANDS at least and they have actually priced me out too, now here is the kicker, if GW prices were reasonable in the first place people like me would not even consider going to recasters or 3rd party, look at what steam did in russia and they proved that sell it cheap to kill piracy can turn a profit
And what you miss here is that GWcan't compete with recasters. All the recaster has to do is the actual casting work, they don't have to spend money to pay the artists to design the model, or the rule authors who make the game that you're buying the model for, or the customer service department to handle your problems and replace any defective parts, or the factory workers in a country with minimum wage laws and safe working conditions. Your attempt to provide yourself with some bizarre moral high ground here is just laughably wrong.
With so many options/alternatives available to fans - gw would be wise to offer some kind of incentive for customers to be loyal. its hard to shake the feeling of apathy, we get from gw. a lot of people that are teetering on the fence are just waiting for gw to throw them a bone.. or some sign that says 'hey we appreciate you guys remaining with us, even when its easier than ever to find cheaper products'.
yea I know people shouldn't be rewarded for simply obeying the law, but a little customer appreciation goes a long way.
WrentheFaceless wrote:Haven't ever bought a recast but might now out of spite of internet self-rightousness.
Being luxury item doesnt mean it can't be overpriced. If no one buys enough of it to make a profit, its by definition "overpriced" regardless of what it is. Its called pricing yourself out of a market.
You suggested it wasn't morale for a company to price it high. Yes, there is such a thing as overpriced, but unless it's something essential (food, water, housing, etc), I don't see it as being immoral. It is entirely up to the consumer to decide if the price is worth while or not, there is no morale issue here. If you were the lone supplier of food in a town and you priced it above the wages of the common folk when you didn't have to, that's when morality starts to come in to it.
Luxury items can be overpriced, but it's a stretch to suggest it's immoral
cvtuttle wrote:Amazing to me how people attempt to justify theft with the recasts. It's very black and white to me. *shrug*
Well, as has been pointed out, legally it's not theft. I made my opinion known previously (yes it's illegal, yes I think it's wrong if the company is still producing the model, no I don't think it's wrong if the model is OOP), but many people feel copyright in itself is wrong... I don't agree with those people (I agree the laws are flawed, but not that copyright itself is bad), but such people definitely exist.
sand.zzz wrote: With so many options/alternatives available to fans - gw would be wise to offer some kind of incentive for customers to be loyal. its hard to shake the feeling of apathy, we get from gw. a lot of people that are teetering on the fence are just waiting for gw to throw them a bone.. or some sign that says 'hey we appreciate you guys remaining with us, even when its easier than ever to find cheaper products'.
yea I know people shouldn't be rewarded for simply obeying the law, but a little customer appreciation goes a long way.
Like many on here, I know how to source recasts, but frankly, the only stuff I really want is so expensive that even the recast prices are beyond what I am willing/able to pay.
What I have noticed while browsing some of the sites, is it is almost impossible to find recast Warmachine, Infinity or anything else from the most popular non-GW systems, while it is eminently possible to fall over recast GW and FW stuff without even specifically looking for it. Now, some, probably the majority, of the drive behind that will purely be down to size of market, but if you are already set up to manufacture minis without any design or development required, surely the effort to acquire a box or blister of anything, so that you can at least cast it to order and offer it for sale, must be minimal?
So, is there another force at work? Some people probably have a romantic image of themselves "sticking it to the man" like some sort of Capt Jack by not buying legit product, some no doubt are motivated solely by price, but I do wonder if another aspect is down to the level of dissatisfaction in GW's customer base that isn't really found elsewhere in this hobby? I've certainly discussed this theory with some other gamer friends, and the general gist seems to be they are happy to buy official product from other companies because they like what they do and want to support them, but GW don't seem to inspire the same loyalty, and that might in turn feed into people's motivation to buy recast product while not feeling bad about it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cvtuttle wrote: Amazing to me how people attempt to justify theft with the recasts. It's very black and white to me. *shrug*
It is amazing to me how people appear to react to the idea of purchasing recast minis in the same way I might react to seeing someone club a nun to death with a puppy, but it happens.
cvtuttle wrote: Amazing to me how people attempt to justify theft with the recasts. It's very black and white to me. *shrug*
It amazes me how many people try to justify stealing from a customer base because they are loyal, well my loyalty has been burned, also i am not stealing anything, its the recasters that are the ones stealing, i am buying from them and while it may be morally wrong, so is treating your customers and fanbase like total crap.
Now if it were just me i can understand, but its not, its a whole lot of people who feel the same way, that tells me that there is something deeply wrong with the policies of GW.
On the other side of the fence however I buy Forge world full price from them, they are not gauging me for £30 for 10 hammerers that look worse than the avatars of war minis and they cost alot less!
azreal13 wrote: What I have noticed while browsing some of the sites, is it is almost impossible to find recast Warmachine, Infinity or anything else from the most popular non-GW systems, while it is eminently possible to fall over recast GW and FW stuff without even specifically looking for it. Now, some, probably the majority, of the drive behind that will purely be down to size of market, but if you are already set up to manufacture minis without any design or development required, surely the effort to acquire a box or blister of anything, so that you can at least cast it to order and offer it for sale, must be minimal?
So, is there another force at work? Some people probably have a romantic image of themselves "sticking it to the man" like some sort of Capt Jack by not buying legit product, some no doubt are motivated solely by price, but I do wonder if another aspect is down to the level of dissatisfaction in GW's customer base that isn't really found elsewhere in this hobby? I've certainly discussed this theory with some other gamer friends, and the general gist seems to be they are happy to buy official product from other companies because they like what they do and want to support them, but GW don't seem to inspire the same loyalty, and that might in turn feed into people's motivation to buy recast product while not feeling bad about it.
Well, you still have to be able to sell a decent amount even as a recaster. Casting supplies aren't THAT cheap and to justify the time it's going to take to do it, you need to be able to sell enough to make it worthwhile.
The miniature market is small. GW is still the biggest company in town and their revenue in a year isn't even as much as a single AAA video game would pull these days. So I liken not being able to find other manufacturer's miniatures as recasts similar to not being able to find a video game or movie that isn't overly popular or mainstream online to pirate.
So if you're going to pirate non-GW stuff, you'll move less stock because it's not popular and you probably won't make as much on each one either because other companies have less of a mark up than GW.
azreal13 wrote: What I have noticed while browsing some of the sites, is it is almost impossible to find recast Warmachine, Infinity or anything else from the most popular non-GW systems, while it is eminently possible to fall over recast GW and FW stuff without even specifically looking for it. Now, some, probably the majority, of the drive behind that will purely be down to size of market, but if you are already set up to manufacture minis without any design or development required, surely the effort to acquire a box or blister of anything, so that you can at least cast it to order and offer it for sale, must be minimal?
So, is there another force at work? Some people probably have a romantic image of themselves "sticking it to the man" like some sort of Capt Jack by not buying legit product, some no doubt are motivated solely by price, but I do wonder if another aspect is down to the level of dissatisfaction in GW's customer base that isn't really found elsewhere in this hobby? I've certainly discussed this theory with some other gamer friends, and the general gist seems to be they are happy to buy official product from other companies because they like what they do and want to support them, but GW don't seem to inspire the same loyalty, and that might in turn feed into people's motivation to buy recast product while not feeling bad about it.
Well, you still have to be able to sell a decent amount even as a recaster. Casting supplies aren't THAT cheap and to justify the time it's going to take to do it, you need to be able to sell enough to make it worthwhile.
The miniature market is small. GW is still the biggest company in town and their revenue in a year isn't even as much as a single AAA video game would pull these days. So I liken not being able to find other manufacturer's miniatures as recasts similar to not being able to find a video game or movie that isn't overly popular or mainstream online to pirate.
So if you're going to pirate non-GW stuff, you'll move less stock because it's not popular and you probably won't make as much on each one either because other companies have less of a mark up than GW.
I was talking to a recaster and he said GW models are a gold mine, so many people buy from him BECAUSE they simply are sick of GW and thats the main reason 99% of the time. The main attitude is why support a company that does what t does? Unlike the other companies whose fanbase is pretty happy, he said someone tried doing flames of war but nobody purchased it because they are happy with that company, he got heaps of hate mail for it. I can see why too. Unlike GW recasters who get nearly no hate mail at all.
So a huge part of it has to do with the attitude GW ex customers have against GW as a company. So coming from a near full time recaster guy who lives in some chinese place apparently it has to a lot with the attitude of disgruntled players.
But like everything else, everyone has their reasons.
Swastakowey wrote: But like everything else, everyone has their reasons.
Yep, at the end of the day I agree. But IMO the reasons still don't justify it. I'm not going to go around calling it theft or stealing, that's not what it is (legally). If you're disgruntled, it's massively self entitled to think going for recasts is ok. Copyright is there for a reason, and IMO buying a recast of a model that GW are still trying to sell is exactly the reason copyright laws exist. If you're unhappy with GW, stop buying their models, don't start buying from from recasters. Buy Mantic or Privateer or Perry.
If those companies don't make what you want, then I'm sorry but my opinion is "suck it up and live with it".
Buying from recasters does nothing but harm to the hobby regardless of the self entitled justification someone might have. You're giving money to someone who is not contributing to the hobby by creating their own ideas to expand the hobby, you're giving money to someone who is inhibiting the hobby by taking ideas from people who are actually expanding the hobby.
Regardless of whether you like GW, THEY are the ones creating the content. THEY are the ones putting in the time to create a model that YOU want. If you aren't willing to pay their price, too bad.
Swastakowey wrote: But like everything else, everyone has their reasons.
Yep, at the end of the day I agree. But IMO the reasons still don't justify it. I'm not going to go around calling it theft or stealing, that's not what it is (legally). If you're disgruntled, it's massively self entitled to think going for recasts is ok. Copyright is there for a reason, and IMO buying a recast of a model that GW are still trying to sell is exactly the reason copyright laws exist. If you're unhappy with GW, stop buying their models, don't start buying from from recasters. Buy Mantic or Privateer or Perry.
If those companies don't make what you want, then I'm sorry but my opinion is "suck it up and live with it".
Buying from recasters does nothing but harm to the hobby regardless of the self entitled justification someone might have. You're giving money to someone who is not contributing to the hobby by creating their own ideas to expand the hobby, you're giving money to someone who is inhibiting the hobby by taking ideas from people who are actually expanding the hobby.
Regardless of whether you like GW, THEY are the ones creating the content. THEY are the ones putting in the time to create a model that YOU want. If you aren't willing to pay their price, too bad.
I do, all my models are 3rd party except 1 vehicle. Admittedly I will by more vehicles but sorry if you feel im ruining your hobby, frankly if GW dies im happy to keep using what they have left and continue supporting other companies like I do now. Im not justifying anything either, I know its wrong, but its wrong every time I drink coke, or throw out my garbage weekly, or throw out food and the list goes on. We live in a western countries and in western countries we do a lot of wrong every day. I think buying recasts is hardly as bad as many things we do weekly. Where do most of our shoes come from? By in large some kid in a sweat shop probably made them. Its all about where you draw the line really but in my opinion if you are gonna worry about something, luxuries shouldn't be one of them.
Its wrong, but I am ok with that, just like i am ok with buying my shoes, fire works, clothes and who knows what else. Its just another wrong thing to add to the list and at the end of the day being ripped off in a western country is hardly as bad as being ripped off in some dump of a country, so personally I find it easier to buy a recast model than buy shoes, as shocking as it sounds.
Unfortunate really, but I am well aware it is wrong to purchase such an item. So just like the rest of the world, if GW doesnt like me buying recast models (and well any model not GW really) they can also "suck up and live with it", because they have enough of my money as it is.
Swastakowey wrote: So just like the rest of the world, if GW doesnt like me buying recast models (and well any model not GW really) they can also "suck up and live with it", because they have enough of my money as it is.
I'm glad to know that you're so ridiculously entitled that you think you should be allowed to steal something if it costs more than you want to pay for it. Ever think that maybe the right thing to do is just say " you GW", stop playing GW games, and spend your money on something else without stealing stuff?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Formosa wrote: also i am not stealing anything, its the recasters that are the ones stealing
So let me guess, you think that knowingly buying stolen property is fine and you won't deserve your jail time if you get caught?
i am buying from them and while it may be morally wrong, so is treating your customers and fanbase like total crap.
Lol, no. GW does a lot of things that are stupid and bad for their business, but hardly anything they've done could in any way be considered a moral issue (the only possible exception being their abusive legal department). Selling toys for more than you want to pay for them or publishing rules that you don't like doesn't even come close.
Swastakowey wrote: So just like the rest of the world, if GW doesnt like me buying recast models (and well any model not GW really) they can also "suck up and live with it", because they have enough of my money as it is.
I'm glad to know that you're so ridiculously entitled that you think you should be allowed to steal something if it costs more than you want to pay for it. Ever think that maybe the right thing to do is just say " you GW", stop playing GW games, and spend your money on something else without stealing stuff?
No sorry, not really. I dont think Im allowed, (because im not) but i have decided that I will do so every so often. I will buy something someone may or may not have stolen and I am ok with that. As wrong as it may be.
I just hope its not one of those crimes leads on to bigger things, I cant afford to buy smuggled Nukes off the black market
Swastakowey wrote: But like everything else, everyone has their reasons.
Yep, at the end of the day I agree. But IMO the reasons still don't justify it. I'm not going to go around calling it theft or stealing, that's not what it is (legally). If you're disgruntled, it's massively self entitled to think going for recasts is ok. Copyright is there for a reason, and IMO buying a recast of a model that GW are still trying to sell is exactly the reason copyright laws exist. If you're unhappy with GW, stop buying their models, don't start buying from from recasters. Buy Mantic or Privateer or Perry.
If those companies don't make what you want, then I'm sorry but my opinion is "suck it up and live with it".
Buying from recasters does nothing but harm to the hobby regardless of the self entitled justification someone might have. You're giving money to someone who is not contributing to the hobby by creating their own ideas to expand the hobby, you're giving money to someone who is inhibiting the hobby by taking ideas from people who are actually expanding the hobby.
Regardless of whether you like GW, THEY are the ones creating the content. THEY are the ones putting in the time to create a model that YOU want. If you aren't willing to pay their price, too bad.
I do, all my models are 3rd party except 1 vehicle. Admittedly I will by more vehicles but sorry if you feel im ruining your hobby, frankly if GW dies im happy to keep using what they have left and continue supporting other companies like I do now. Im not justifying anything either, I know its wrong, but its wrong every time I drink coke, or throw out my garbage weekly, or throw out food and the list goes on. We live in a western countries and in western countries we do a lot of wrong every day. I think buying recasts is hardly as bad as many things we do weekly. Where do most of our shoes come from? By in large some kid in a sweat shop probably made them. Its all about where you draw the line really but in my opinion if you are gonna worry about something, luxuries shouldn't be one of them.
Its wrong, but I am ok with that, just like i am ok with buying my shoes, fire works, clothes and who knows what else. Its just another wrong thing to add to the list and at the end of the day being ripped off in a western country is hardly as bad as being ripped off in some dump of a country, so personally I find it easier to buy a recast model than buy shoes, as shocking as it sounds.
Unfortunate really, but I am well aware it is wrong to purchase such an item. So just like the rest of the world, if GW doesnt like me buying recast models (and well any model not GW really) they can also "suck up and live with it", because they have enough of my money as it is.
It's nice to know you're comfortable with how self entitled you are
Swastakowey wrote: So just like the rest of the world, if GW doesnt like me buying recast models (and well any model not GW really) they can also "suck up and live with it", because they have enough of my money as it is.
I'm glad to know that you're so ridiculously entitled that you think you should be allowed to steal something if it costs more than you want to pay for it. Ever think that maybe the right thing to do is just say " you GW", stop playing GW games, and spend your money on something else without stealing stuff?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Formosa wrote: also i am not stealing anything, its the recasters that are the ones stealing
So let me guess, you think that knowingly buying stolen property is fine and you won't deserve your jail time if you get caught?
i am buying from them and while it may be morally wrong, so is treating your customers and fanbase like total crap.
Lol, no. GW does a lot of things that are stupid and bad for their business, but hardly anything they've done could in any way be considered a moral issue (the only possible exception being their abusive legal department). Selling toys for more than you want to pay for them or publishing rules that you don't like doesn't even come close.
Swastakowey wrote: But like everything else, everyone has their reasons.
Yep, at the end of the day I agree. But IMO the reasons still don't justify it. I'm not going to go around calling it theft or stealing, that's not what it is (legally). If you're disgruntled, it's massively self entitled to think going for recasts is ok. Copyright is there for a reason, and IMO buying a recast of a model that GW are still trying to sell is exactly the reason copyright laws exist. If you're unhappy with GW, stop buying their models, don't start buying from from recasters. Buy Mantic or Privateer or Perry.
If those companies don't make what you want, then I'm sorry but my opinion is "suck it up and live with it".
Buying from recasters does nothing but harm to the hobby regardless of the self entitled justification someone might have. You're giving money to someone who is not contributing to the hobby by creating their own ideas to expand the hobby, you're giving money to someone who is inhibiting the hobby by taking ideas from people who are actually expanding the hobby.
Regardless of whether you like GW, THEY are the ones creating the content. THEY are the ones putting in the time to create a model that YOU want. If you aren't willing to pay their price, too bad.
I do, all my models are 3rd party except 1 vehicle. Admittedly I will by more vehicles but sorry if you feel im ruining your hobby, frankly if GW dies im happy to keep using what they have left and continue supporting other companies like I do now. Im not justifying anything either, I know its wrong, but its wrong every time I drink coke, or throw out my garbage weekly, or throw out food and the list goes on. We live in a western countries and in western countries we do a lot of wrong every day. I think buying recasts is hardly as bad as many things we do weekly. Where do most of our shoes come from? By in large some kid in a sweat shop probably made them. Its all about where you draw the line really but in my opinion if you are gonna worry about something, luxuries shouldn't be one of them.
Its wrong, but I am ok with that, just like i am ok with buying my shoes, fire works, clothes and who knows what else. Its just another wrong thing to add to the list and at the end of the day being ripped off in a western country is hardly as bad as being ripped off in some dump of a country, so personally I find it easier to buy a recast model than buy shoes, as shocking as it sounds.
Unfortunate really, but I am well aware it is wrong to purchase such an item. So just like the rest of the world, if GW doesnt like me buying recast models (and well any model not GW really) they can also "suck up and live with it", because they have enough of my money as it is.
It's nice to know you're comfortable with how self entitled you are
A lot of this discussion is cultural as well. In Western society we believe that company created goods belong to the company and so should the "spoils". For this reason we support large corporations and their abusive business practices with laws and are taught to toe the corporate line. Not every country/culture contains the same set of mores or holds them as dear. What is "theft" to us is a small business owner to them. Just as the people who post in this thread are unable to see what they do as anything but stealing, they are unable to see things from the same perspective. Sure there are international copyright laws like the DMCA but many countries who signed on to that were bullied into it by the Western powers who support corporate greed. Black and white perspectives are sourced from an agenda, an indoctrinated mindset or a jingoistic attitude that their set of principles are the only valuable ones and the world must be brought into line. Feth that. Life is diversity. Where is your righteous indignation when it comes to female circumcision? Roll in the tanks? Yeah, I'm sure you'll suddenly find something better to do.
Here's reality. Sales lost to recasters are lost sales to GW anyway, for whatever reason. The person that buys from a recaster wouldn't have bought from GW regardless. Its the same as if they bought Privateer Press or any other competitor's product. It's a lost sale. Now if it is so ubiquitous that it actually affects the company's bottom line, there's an indicator there of deeper issues than a shop in China making recasts. A savy company would stop and consider why so many people are choosing to purchase recasts over the legitimate product.
In any event, GW doesn't really need anyone to champion the internet for them. So the people in this thread who are vehemently doing so have their own motives, internet contrarians, ignorance of life/cultire in the majority of the world or they just like to share a feeling of Western smugness.
eBay and third party 100% definitely. Recasts I'm not sure about, not because I buy into this "it's theft" rubbish but because I'm not sure of the dubious quality of the recast. Maybe for something that was dirt cheap as a recast and very expensive from GW if I wasn't sure if it's worth buying, sort of as a trial.
If GW prices were reasonable, I'd buy from them. Since they aren't, I won't spend $50 on something that should cost maybe $30 because some suit somewhere said "Hey we can charge $50 for this and people will buy it".
While GW's prices have gotten to ridiculous levels, my FLGS has 30% off on all GW stuff for 'Club Members' which is actually cheaper than most online sellers that I've found. I do go to Ebay to buy bits like extra torsos/legs so that I can actually use all the bits in the boxes I buy.
I stay away from recasts just because I think the quality would be substandard.
I own three armies for 40k, and in the space of about 12 months all three were updated. However, I felt that the work done by GW for all three was so uninspired and lack-lustre that I spent very little money on their products.
I didn't spend a single penny on the DA release, not even on the new codex. I played a game or two with my existing models and a borrowed codex, but quickly got bored and that army hasn't been touched since this time last year.
Similarly, I skipped over the Eldar release in the summer. I felt the Wraithknight was a cheap attempt to shoe-horn an comically-sized Apoc unit into regular 40k, and the flyer kit was pretty dull. I was really looking forward to seeing new jetbikes or Aspect warriors, but these didn't materialise. I did end up buying the Ghost Warriors box at Xmas (selling the WK) as this was a reasonable deal and I do like the new Wraithguard, but I've only had a single game from this release, again using a borrowed codex.
I spent most of my hobby money and the majority of last year buying 2nd-hand Epic stuff from eBay. This is a product I am really interested in, but unfortunately GW decided not to sell it any more. Instead somebody else has been getting my money, and GW has missed an opportunity.
In the last couple of months I've started digging into the world of recasts. Mainly this is because I can get no-longer-produced Epic stuff (such as the awesome FW Thunderhawks) at surprisingly good quality, and very cheaply.
The Tyranid codex is also a factor here. As Nids are (unsurprisingly) my main army, I did buy their codex from GW. But I was so disappointed with the poor quality of this release that I refuse to spend any more on the models. There are so many arbitrary restrictions and pointless design decisions with these rules that I will not encourage GW by paying further for them.
Rather than join the competitive crowd in buying multiple Crones and Flyrants at £100+, I've decided instead to wildly experiment with this edition. So I ordered some recast Venomthropes, Lictors and Shrike wings at 20-25% of the normal RRP to mess around with. I'm working on the expectation that many of these units will only ever see a game or two, and as such I would never buy them at full price. But really it comes down to the codex. I will not encourage such a poor product by spending money to patch my army up. I don't see it as any different to GW using the issues in Finecase as an excuse to sell liquid green stuff - making money from their own poor quality.
Edit: and for anyone wondering, all the recasts I've had have all been really good quality. I know there are some poor ones out there, but I seem to have lucked out getting a good supplier first time. Once painted I literally can't tell the difference between official and not. They also offer bits - a market that GW has decided to not only stop catering to but to actively discourage from others.
agnosto wrote: A lot of this discussion is cultural as well. In Western society we believe that company created goods belong to the company and so should the "spoils". For this reason we support large corporations and their abusive business practices with laws and are taught to toe the corporate line. Not every country/culture contains the same set of mores or holds them as dear. What is "theft" to us is a small business owner to them. Just as the people who post in this thread are unable to see what they do as anything but stealing, they are unable to see things from the same perspective. Sure there are international copyright laws like the DMCA but many countries who signed on to that were bullied into it by the Western powers who support corporate greed. Black and white perspectives are sourced from an agenda, an indoctrinated mindset or a jingoistic attitude that their set of principles are the only valuable ones and the world must be brought into line. Feth that. Life is diversity.
Yes, it's cultural, but it's a culture we've adopted for a good reason. It encourages the creators of works to create more because they have rights to profit from them. It means creators can actually have it as their full time job. We live in a culture that supports artists because we see the value of it to society.
Where is your righteous indignation when it comes to female circumcision? Roll in the tanks? Yeah, I'm sure you'll suddenly find something better to do.
Oh I'm sorry, I must have missed the title of this thread "What are the opinions in eBay, Recasts, third party models and female circumcision?"
Perhaps you should start a new topic on it if you want to discuss it and see what people think about it. I'm against slavery, child prostitution, women having no rights, etc etc etc... all things that might be culturally acceptable in some places and all things WHICH ARE NOT THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD.
Here's reality. Sales lost to recasters are lost sales to GW anyway, for whatever reason. The person that buys from a recaster wouldn't have bought from GW regardless. Its the same as if they bought Privateer Press or any other competitor's product. It's a lost sale.
No. It's not the same. Privateer Press are actual contributing to the hobby by creating their own models and their own universe to house those models. The recaster is not. It's a lost sale either way, but it is not the same. One is supporting a company who is creating art (Privateer Press) the other is supporting someone who is copying art and making it harder for artists to profit from their work (recaster).
In any event, GW doesn't really need anyone to champion the internet for them
I'm not championing GW, I couldn't give a crap about GW. If you go and read my other posts on this forum you will see I disagree with a lot of what GW does and frankly I really dislike GW as a company. I would love to see more competition for 40k and Fantasy and would love to see people buying from other 3rd party manufacturers and putting genuine pressure on GW through GENUINE competition.
However I'm not biased in my opinion of recasts being wrong. Just because I don't like GW doesn't magically make me think recasts are ok for GW.
EDIT: And as I said earlier, I don't think it is black and white, if GW put something OOP, I think they rescind their right to be the sole profiteer of that product and it should then be open for anyone to recast.
You seem to have taken what I wrote personally for some reason. I recommend you take a step away from the keyboard. Nothing I posted named you specifically nor did I quote you.
Regarding culture: You live in such a culture but the majority of the world doesn't share that with you. I would posit that people were creating things long before copyright existed and will continue to do so regardless of whether it continues to or not.
On female circumcision: You seem to think that one crime is deserving of international policing while another isn't. That is a finely honed set of morals you possess.
On lost sales: You missed the point. A lost sale is a lost sale. People who buy recasts have no intention of buying the legitimate product so it in fact is effectively the same as if a potential client went to a competitor. The end is a net loss for GW. If the recaster didn't exist, the sale wouldn't have been made anyway.
For the record, until very recently I owned GW stock so I am far from a GW hater. I just have a broader perspective than most people on this topic due to a degree in history, a great deal of experience with law (not a lawyer) and having lived in several countries where such matters were perceived differently. That said, I know what current law is but I also know how impossible it is to enforce internationally when the cultures of other countries don't share the Wests love of corporate protectionism.
You seem to have taken what I wrote personally for some reason. I recommend you take a step away from the keyboard. Nothing I posted named you specifically nor did I quote you.
Nope, I'm not taking it personally at all. Don't assign emotion to my posts where there is none, I'm simply stating my opinion.
On female circumcision: You seem to think that one crime is deserving of international policing while another isn't. That is a finely honed set of morals you possess.
What? Where did I say that? No where did I say anything of the sort, don't put words in my mouth.
I simply stated this is not a thread about female circumcision, this is a thread about ebay, recasts and 3rd party models. If you want a thread about female circumcision, make your own. I'm not going to get drawn in to discussion about all the ills of the world in a thread about EBAY, RECASTS and 3RD PARTY MODELS.
Note: Caps added for emphasis, not emotion... coz for some reason you think I am taking things personally.
On lost sales: You missed the point. A lost sale is a lost sale. People who buy recasts have no intention of buying the legitimate product so it in fact is effectively the same as if a potential client went to a competitor. The end is a net loss for GW. If the recaster didn't exist, the sale wouldn't have been made anyway.
I really don't care about a net loss for GW or not, I'm talking about recasts in general. In general, I think they're wrong. I would like to think I have enough mental capacity to separate why I think something is wrong vs what is culturally ingrained.
I think the creator of art should have rights to profit from it and set terms for it's use. That's just the way I think it should be in order to best promote the arts. Culture may not agree with me, you may not agree with me, I just think that's the way it should be, hence I think recasters are doing something wrong.
Western culture is massively self entitled. Go and read a thread on music/game/movie piracy and 90% of the reasons for pirating are purely "self" driven.
I know it's the culture in other places not to care about profiting from someone elses work. I accept that. Doesn't mean I have to agree that it's the best way.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
agnosto wrote: For the record, until very recently I owned GW stock so I am far from a GW hater. I just have a broader perspective than most people on this topic due to a degree in history, a great deal of experience with law (not a lawyer) and having lived in several countries where such matters were perceived differently. That said, I know what current law is but I also know how impossible it is to enforce internationally when the cultures of other countries don't share the Wests love of corporate protectionism.
It doesn't help your argument when you feel the need to list off your credentials. Don't assume other people disagree with you because they're more ignorant than you.
I simply stated this is not a thread about female circumcision, this is a thread about ebay, recasts and 3rd party models. If you want a thread about female circumcision, make your own. I'm not going to get drawn in to discussion about all the ills of the world in a thread about EBAY, RECASTS and 3RD PARTY MODELS.
Note: Caps added for emphasis, not emotion... coz for some reason you think I am taking things personally.
The you possibly need some help with internet forum etiquette as using all capitals is generally accepted to mean that someone is screaming. Not usually the tone for someone carrying on a rational discussion. You are correct; however, my original statement was not geared towards you to begin with but towards those that scream "crime!" If we as a society are going to put so much money and effort into policing the intellectual property ownership of corporations, why do we seem to be unable to protect workers in Wal Mart plants in India or people in Darfour? It's misplaced morality. That's my point. Yes, breaking the law is wrong, but not all laws are worthy of being protected...like, I don't know a certain law that has come under fire in Russia recently. It's a farcical comparison, I'll grant you, but it just illustrates where we put importance in our world; money over people.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I really don't care about a net loss for GW or not, I'm talking about recasts in general. In general, I think they're wrong. I would like to think I have enough mental capacity to separate why I think something is wrong vs what is culturally ingrained.
I think the creator of art should have rights to profit from it and set terms for it's use. That's just the way I think it should be in order to best promote the arts. Culture may not agree with me, you may not agree with me, I just think that's the way it should be, hence I think recasters are doing something wrong.
Western culture is massively self entitled. Go and read a thread on music/game/movie piracy and 90% of the reasons for pirating are purely "self" driven.
I know it's the culture in other places not to care about profiting from someone elses work. I accept that. Doesn't mean I have to agree that it's the best way.
Umm, ok, so you can disagree with the majority of the population on the planet. It doesn't make what I've written any less true. Look, I'm not trying to say that one thing is "ok" or another is not; I'm just trying to say that the current perception of "ownership" in Western culture does not jive with the rest of the planet....there're a lot of people out there and they don't all agree with the way we're brought up to think. I'm not challenging your mental capacity, I'm challenging an ingrained jingoist tendency that causes you and others to perceive the world a certain way. You don't have to agree with me, life goes on; we can electronically shake hands and walk away.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: It doesn't help your argument when you feel the need to list off your credentials. Don't assume other people disagree with you because they're more ignorant than you.
Don't take this the wrong way but you're not good at dealing with people are you? When you are involved in a debate or discussion with someone on a matter where you do not agree, it is always beneficial to lay as much groundwork as possible so that you know where the other person is coming from. When I stated those personal things about myself, I am not doing so to try and create some sense that I have clout but to illustrate where my way of thinking originates from. I may be wrong but I believe (and I could very well be wrong here, my memory is faulty) that another poster, Peregrine, is a Lawyer, so his posts in this thread naturally discuss how recasts break the law; with the bit of information about him being a lawyer, it's easier to understand where his point of view originates from and for a common understanding to be obtained.
We do not have to agree with each other but we can at least understand each other's points of view; that my friend is one of the great things of human interaction.
My apologies if my use of caps was misleading. I know it's used as "yelling", hence why I used it for emphasis (increased volume). But really, you shouldn't try to infer emotion in an internet post.
I simply stated this is not a thread about female circumcision, this is a thread about ebay, recasts and 3rd party models. If you want a thread about female circumcision, make your own. I'm not going to get drawn in to discussion about all the ills of the world in a thread about EBAY, RECASTS and 3RD PARTY MODELS.
Note: Caps added for emphasis, not emotion... coz for some reason you think I am taking things personally.
The you possibly need some help with internet forum etiquette as using all capitals is generally accepted to mean that someone is screaming. Not usually the tone for someone carrying on a rational discussion. You are correct; however, my original statement was not geared towards you to begin with but towards those that scream "crime!" If we as a society are going to put so much money and effort into policing the intellectual property ownership of corporations, why do we seem to be unable to protect workers in Wal Mart plants in India or people in Darfour? It's misplaced morality. That's my point. Yes, breaking the law is wrong, but not all laws are worthy of being protected...like, I don't know a certain law that has come under fire in Russia recently. It's a farcical comparison, I'll grant you, but it just illustrates where we put importance in our world; money over people.
My point is simply this is a thread about recasts, ebay and 3rd party models. There's things I'd take to the street to defend, recasts aren't one of them... but we aren't discussing those other things.
If you think recasts are fine, just say you think recasts are fine, if you think they're wrong but it's no big deal so whatever, then say that. No need to bring female circumcision and Walmart workers in India in to the debate.
Umm, ok, so you can disagree with the majority of the population on the planet. It doesn't make what I've written any less true. Look, I'm not trying to say that one thing is "ok" or another is not; I'm just trying to say that the current perception of "ownership" in Western culture does not jive with the rest of the planet....there're a lot of people out there and they don't all agree with the way we're brought up to think. I'm not challenging your mental capacity, I'm challenging an ingrained jingoist tendency that causes you and others to perceive the world a certain way.
I'm not really in to the whole philosophical debate of perceptions of ownership. I think recasters are wrong because I feel that society benefits when artists can profit from their work and copiers are limited in their ability to profit from other peoples work. I'm not sure how this is some "ingrained jingoist tendancy". I never even talked about foreign policy or international law, I never suggested that we should have international law that goes against recasters. I never suggested the western way is right or that western law is right. These are things you are inferring.
You don't have to agree with me, life goes on; we can electronically shake hands and walk away.
Totally, and I never said you have to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.
Don't take this the wrong way but you're not good at dealing with people are you? When you are involved in a debate or discussion with someone on a matter where you do not agree, it is always beneficial to lay as much groundwork as possible so that you know where the other person is coming from. When I stated those personal things about myself, I am not doing so to try and create some sense that I have clout but to illustrate where my way of thinking originates from. I may be wrong but I believe (and I could very well be wrong here, my memory is faulty) that another poster, Peregrine, is a Lawyer, so his posts in this thread naturally discuss how recasts break the law; with the bit of information about him being a lawyer, it's easier to understand where his point of view originates from and for a common understanding to be obtained.
IMO stating ones credentials in a debate is only necessary when you're actually stating it as a professional opinion, even then it's rarely better to state credentials vs stating facts (which you should have because of your credentials).
You can state that it's culturally different and I'll agree with you, no problems there. To state you have a broader perspective than most makes you lose respect. Let other people determine if you have a broader perspective than most. In our western internet culture, it does not benefit your argument to put yourself on a pedestal.
FWIW, I'd be surprised if Peregrine is a lawyer based on the content of his posts in this thread... but then maybe he is and his posts are his personal opinion rather than his professional opinion and hence did not state his credentials.
Also, FWIW, it does not help saying you have a degree in history, implying you are well read and are capable of seeing meaning and context in writing, while simultaneously incorrectly inferring (and by inferring I mean pulling out of your backside): "On female circumcision: You seem to think that one crime is deserving of international policing while another isn't."
This is why I don't state my education and credentials, because when I do something silly like that, it doesn't cast aspersions on my education and credentials
We do not have to agree with each other but we can at least understand each other's points of view; that my friend is one of the great things of human interaction.
I'm pretty sure I do understand your point of view, though perhaps I don't because my attempt to expand on them failed. Who knows. In any case, this thread has wasted too much of my time today.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Sorry, the formatting of that post got a bit messed up, took a few edits to correct.
EDIT: I'll add to that and say I hope I haven't come across as trying to personally offend you, lol.
Umm, ok, so you can disagree with the majority of the population on the planet. It doesn't make what I've written any less true. Look, I'm not trying to say that one thing is "ok" or another is not; I'm just trying to say that the current perception of "ownership" in Western culture does not jive with the rest of the planet....there're a lot of people out there and they don't all agree with the way we're brought up to think. I'm not challenging your mental capacity, I'm challenging an ingrained jingoist tendency that causes you and others to perceive the world a certain way.
I'm not really in to the whole philosophical debate of perceptions of ownership. I think recasters are wrong because I feel that society benefits when artists can profit from their work and copiers are limited in their ability to profit from other peoples work. I'm not sure how this is some "ingrained jingoist tendancy". I never even talked about foreign policy or international law, I never suggested that we should have international law that goes against recasters. I never suggested the western way is right or that western law is right. These are things you are inferring.
Just to address this specifically within the limits of this thread. GW's have their artists on salary, so they earn no more or less whether whatever they are told to make sells in the bucketload or not at all - they profit from their work in exactly the same way. So in this very specific instance, recasts do not have any impact on the artists own profitability. How do you reconcile that?
Also, if Peregrine is a lawyer, I'll eat my Internet hat!
No, Peregrine is not a lawyer, and is not arguing based on any kind of professional knowledge of IP law. In fact, Peregrine's position is that recasting and purchasing recasts is morally wrong even if you can find some kind of legal loophole that allows it.
azreal13 wrote: Just to address this specifically within the limits of this thread. GW's have their artists on salary, so they earn no more or less whether whatever they are told to make sells in the bucketload or not at all - they profit from their work in exactly the same way. So in this very specific instance, recasts do not have any impact on the artists own profitability. How do you reconcile that?
Well I'll preface it by saying I don't really care if GW completely goes out of business and/or all their artists quit, lol.
IMO, if an artist wants to give away the rights to their work for a salary, that still doesn't mean those rights go to the wind. Even if they are getting paid a salary, if recasters are allowed to roam free, the value of their work is diminished.
FWIW, I don't think it's a big deal that there's russian and chinese recasters or that there's online piracy or whatever while it is limited as such. It really doesn't make a lot of difference IMO if there's a few people here and there buying recasts, I don't LIKE that it happens because I think if you enjoy the miniatures and enjoy the universe GW has created you should either accept their price and give the money to the people who actually earned it. Not for GW's benefit but for the benefit of the hobby. If you don't think what GW is selling is worth the price, that's awesome! Don't buy it, give your money to Privateer or Mantic or Perry and lets have some real competition in the market.
EDIT: I'll also add that if you recast, I don't feel like you're a terrible person and I don't feel like the artist is hard done by... whether or not you yourself feel happy with what you do is up to you, whether or not it's wrong and/or illegal should be based on whether society feels it's wrong or not in the best interests of the society as a whole.
P.S. I'll try to swap to underlining to avoid people thinking I'm getting overly emotional.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: My apologies if my use of caps was misleading. I know it's used as "yelling", hence why I used it for emphasis (increased volume). But really, you shouldn't try to infer emotion in an internet post.
So yelling for you doesn't denote emotion? Interesting.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: My point is simply this is a thread about recasts, ebay and 3rd party models. There's things I'd take to the street to defend, recasts aren't one of them... but we aren't discussing those other things. If you think recasts are fine, just say you think recasts are fine, if you think they're wrong but it's no big deal so whatever, then say that. No need to bring female circumcision and Walmart workers in India in to the debate.
I'm actually ambivalent about the whole thing. For me the interest in discussing the topic is in the finer points of morality. In the earlier pages of this thread some posters were vehemently decrying recasting as thievery. Going back, I see that you correctly pointed out that it's technically not. My interest is in how Western morality has shaped international agreements/laws and forced less powerful countries into accepting cultural norms that are not their own....kind of like the UN attempting to stop female circumcision. That was what was alluded to in my first post.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I never even talked about foreign policy or international law, I never suggested that we should have international law that goes against recasters. I never suggested the western way is right or that western law is right. These are things you are inferring.
You're quite right, you didn't, I did. We're having two separate conversations. I stated an opinion based upon my areas of interest, you responded, I then assumed that I was not clear enough as you appeared to not understand my point so I responded. If my assumption was incorrect, I apologize; I am simply attempting to establish mutual understanding. You never suggested the Western way is the right way, you said it, I don't need to infer it; you believe recasts are wrong because you believe that artists will not receive fair recompense if recasters exist. I don't believe that statement to be true because, as I said earlier, people were producing art and products long before there were government protections and international treaties to "protect the artists". My opinion is that it is not the artists who benefit from such protections, it's the corporations.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: IMO stating ones credentials in a debate is only necessary when you're actually stating it as a professional opinion, even then it's rarely better to state credentials vs stating facts (which you should have because of your credentials).
You can state that it's culturally different and I'll agree with you, no problems there. To state you have a broader perspective than most makes you lose respect. Let other people determine if you have a broader perspective than most. In our western internet culture, it does not benefit your argument to put yourself on a pedestal.
FWIW, I'd be surprised if Peregrine is a lawyer based on the content of his posts in this thread... but then maybe he is and his posts are his personal opinion rather than his professional opinion and hence did not state his credentials.
Also, FWIW, it does not help saying you have a degree in history, implying you are well read and are capable of seeing meaning and context in writing, while simultaneously incorrectly inferring (and by inferring I mean pulling out of your backside): "On female circumcision: You seem to think that one crime is deserving of international policing while another isn't."
This is why I don't state my education and credentials, because when I do something silly like that, it doesn't cast aspersions on my education and credentials
If you consider my degree in history as having "credentials", you're my new best friend. Having a degree in history usually means I can answer a few obscure questions in trivial pursuit games and that's about it. No, I've been trained to provide this type of information when having a debate in order to lay a basis for understanding. You could easily have responded by asking which countries I am referring to in which people do not hold to the Western ideals of corporate protectionism or any number of lines of inquiry that would allow you further insight into areas that I may not have adequately covered while attempting to explain myself. If your experience is different in such situations, so be it. As for owning GW stock, that was meant as a way of assuring that I have no ulterior motive in lusting after the downfall of the company (as many on Dakka actually do).
As for Peregrine, as I said; I may be wrong and most likely am after reading azreal's post but hey, I'll admit to and apologize to Peregrine about it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: No, Peregrine is not a lawyer, and is not arguing based on any kind of professional knowledge of IP law. In fact, Peregrine's position is that recasting and purchasing recasts is morally wrong even if you can find some kind of legal loophole that allows it.
Sorry for confusing you with someone else then. I meant not to cast aspersions upon your character!
Ebay is the only way that I can have an Eldar army that does not violate my "Absolutely not Finecast" rule. You can get OOP metal models of all the Aspects for less than the Finecast ones. That is hilarious to me.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Being luxury item doesnt mean it can't be overpriced. If no one buys enough of it to make a profit, its by definition "overpriced" regardless of what it is. Its called pricing yourself out of a market.
Yes, there's such a thing as pricing yourself out of a sale, and it's often a bad business strategy. But that doesn't magically turn into some kind of moral issue where you're justified in stealing a product because the seller is wrong to sell it for so much. If you're priced out of GW's market then leave the market, don't steal the models just because you want them to be cheaper.
Formosa wrote: yep to the above, i have supported GW for 25 years, i have spent THOUSANDS at least and they have actually priced me out too, now here is the kicker, if GW prices were reasonable in the first place people like me would not even consider going to recasters or 3rd party, look at what steam did in russia and they proved that sell it cheap to kill piracy can turn a profit
And what you miss here is that GWcan't compete with recasters. All the recaster has to do is the actual casting work, they don't have to spend money to pay the artists to design the model, or the rule authors who make the game that you're buying the model for, or the customer service department to handle your problems and replace any defective parts, or the factory workers in a country with minimum wage laws and safe working conditions. Your attempt to provide yourself with some bizarre moral high ground here is just laughably wrong.
Ah peregrine as per usual miss the point entirely, You see I dont care about GW anymore, I barely actually play the game infact and really only like the background and some of the models, I seek no moral high ground and dont really care about justifying myself to you or anyone else, i was simply explaining that yes i have used recasts and may continue to and then trying to explain why people do it, you may not like it but i and others dont care morality is subjective anyway and it isnt against my moral code nor it seems others and about all the factory workers and things? honestly i dont really care about that either, im not a very nice person i admit but i have earned the damn right to bend the rules here and there.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Even if they are getting paid a salary, if recasters are allowed to roam free, the value of their work is diminished.
I think Leonardo Da Vinci would disagree with that statement. Somehow, I don't think the endless copies and depictions of the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper throughout history have diminished the value of the originals.
Anyway, I'm a firm believer in 3rd party products and resale of original product via Ebay.
Yes, it's cultural, but it's a culture we've adopted for a good reason. It encourages the creators of works to create more because they have rights to profit from them. It means creators can actually have it as their full time job. We live in a culture that supports artists because we see the value of it to society.
I always though that copyright laws were put up as part of western countries trade wars in the XIX century and now they are just a method to keep firms in other markets out of turf which western companies see as their own . Anyway it is funny how first western sociaties build up their strenght on stealing land, resources , draining man power from other countries , doing it for centuries and now when others want to do the same , it is suddenly immoral .
It really doesn't make a lot of difference IMO if there's a few people here and there buying recasts, I don't LIKE that it happens because I think if you enjoy the miniatures and enjoy the universe GW has created you should either accept their price and give the money to the people who actually
Why , what rule says that if you play with a recast army and a printed codex , you will always feel worse then with the originals ? Maybe if toy soldiers were used as a show of status , then yeah , it would be like having a real LV bag is being better then having a fake one , although having a fake one is a lot better then having non . But toy soldiers are not part of the status giving things , in fact having more models bought for full has a higher chance at coloring you a fool , when the option to buy them cheaper is there . Why buy models at a local FLGS with a 10-20% discount , when you can pay 100% price at a GW , right ? More money to GW means they will make more content , in fact if we went that way not buying directly from GW is like recasting too. Your technicly stealing from them when you don't buy the models at full price . Even if you buy them at full price in a FLGS your stealing too , because GW did not sell the models to the store at 100% price .
I get most of my models from GW store or from ebay. I have bought a couple of third -party models in the past and have seen some excellent models from other manufacturers that would look great in my SM army.
I won't pay money for recasts however - recasts to me are just some lazy git making money on the back of someone else's work (same as pirated movies, cd's and games). I have no problem with people taking a GW model and re-sculpting/converting it to something unique and selling casts of that as they've put some time and effort into it, but straight re-cast copies are just someone tryng to make mney for very little effort and the pics I've seen previously show recasts to be of a poor standard.
That been said I do find it funny that nearly all third-party stockists of GW products I've come across sell them for at least 10% less than GW themselves do so I have no problem buying second hand from Ebay as I feel GW is a bit money-grabbing/over-priced at times.
As per original topic this is just my opinion - some will agree, some will disagree, but that's life.
Seriously, Ebay is god's gift to 40K players. I recently bought a 10-man squad of the 2nd edition metal Eldar Rangers for $25us with shipping. Not only do I love the 2nd edition vibe, but that's the equivalent of $66 retail for the new ones, and you would be stuck with salvaging bad Finecast molds.
AegisGrimm wrote: Seriously, Ebay is god's gift to 40K players. I recently bought a 10-man squad of the 2nd edition metal Eldar Rangers for $25us with shipping. Not only do I love the 2nd edition vibe, but that's the equivalent of $66 retail for the new ones, and you would be stuck with salvaging bad Finecast molds.
To add to that, the Swap Shop here and Bartertown are also great places for second hand products. Bought most of Guard from both sources for less than half of retail.
cvtuttle wrote: Amazing to me how people attempt to justify theft with the recasts. It's very black and white to me. *shrug*
It amazes me how many people try to justify stealing from a customer base because they are loyal, well my loyalty has been burned, also i am not stealing anything, its the recasters that are the ones stealing, i am buying from them and while it may be morally wrong, so is treating your customers and fanbase like total crap.
Now if it were just me i can understand, but its not, its a whole lot of people who feel the same way, that tells me that there is something deeply wrong with the policies of GW.
On the other side of the fence however I buy Forge world full price from them, they are not gauging me for £30 for 10 hammerers that look worse than the avatars of war minis and they cost alot less!
This is such an utterly ridiculous argument. I used to interview employees who stole from the company I worked at. There is literally a phase of the interview called "The Justification Phase". You basically just hit every point of that in this discussion. Theft has nothing to do with the points you made... This isn't food or shelter. You are talking about a luxury item. You are blaming the companies behavior and prices for your illicit actions.
Here are similar statements I used to hear...
"I deserved those items I stole because they don't pay me enough."
"Other people are doing it, so it's ok if I do it too."
"I bought all this other stuff, so it's ok that I took this one item."
Pretty much taken right from the training manual:
In employee theft cases, the guilty suspect may place blame for his behavior on such factors as inadequate income, poor security measures by the employer, or someone else who did not do his job (left the money out or left the money drawer unlocked). The suspect may even justify his behavior by pointing out that other employees are engaged in similar activities. In burglary cases, the suspect may justify his theft by blaming unusual family expenses, desperate circumstances (e.g., no job but a family to support), or a friend for suggesting the idea.
cvtuttle wrote: Amazing to me how people attempt to justify theft with the recasts. It's very black and white to me. *shrug*
It amazes me how many people try to justify stealing from a customer base because they are loyal, well my loyalty has been burned, also i am not stealing anything, its the recasters that are the ones stealing, i am buying from them and while it may be morally wrong, so is treating your customers and fanbase like total crap.
Now if it were just me i can understand, but its not, its a whole lot of people who feel the same way, that tells me that there is something deeply wrong with the policies of GW.
On the other side of the fence however I buy Forge world full price from them, they are not gauging me for £30 for 10 hammerers that look worse than the avatars of war minis and they cost alot less!
This is such an utterly ridiculous argument. I used to interview employees who stole from the company I worked at. There is literally a phase of the interview called "The Justification Phase". You basically just hit every point of that in this discussion. Theft has nothing to do with the points you made... This isn't food or shelter. You are talking about a luxury item. You are blaming the companies behavior and prices for your illicit actions.
Here are similar statements I used to hear...
"I deserved those items I stole because they don't pay me enough."
"Other people are doing it, so it's ok if I do it too."
"I bought all this other stuff, so it's ok that I took this one item."
Pretty much taken right from the training manual:
In employee theft cases, the guilty suspect may place blame for his behavior on such factors as inadequate income, poor security measures by the employer, or someone else who did not do his job (left the money out or left the money drawer unlocked). The suspect may even justify his behavior by pointing out that other employees are engaged in similar activities. In burglary cases, the suspect may justify his theft by blaming unusual family expenses, desperate circumstances (e.g., no job but a family to support), or a friend for suggesting the idea.
You know, it's pretty self-defeating to counter one ridiculous argument with another ridiculous argument.
Why are you comparing copyright violations to physical theft as if they're the same thing? When copyright is violated by illegal copies, the original copyright holder does not lose any physical items. At worst, they lose the potential for an additional sale. That is absolutely not the same as having their inventory stolen. When some dude in China is copying GW models, the equivalent stock does not just vanish from a warehouse in Lenton.
This is the same line of thinking that allows music and film distributors to sue infringers for obscene amounts of cash, based on the fallacy that every potential sale is a lost sale. Not everyone who acquires a bootleg copy of an item ever had the intention to purchase an original copy at full price. Formosa could have argued that he would have never have bought brand new products from GW, and only made purchases because the less-savoury alternative was available. In that case GW actually lost nothing, as there was never a potential sale. Obviously there's no way to prove this, but it does show the key difference between theft and copyright infringement.
I already posted earlier in the thread to say that I have purchased recasts specifically to acquire models that are no longer in production. How does this qualify as theft, if it's impossible to acquire these items as new?
The heart of the matter is that it's impossible to prove how much damage copyright infringement does. The owner may be losing out on 100% of those sales, it may as low as 1%. The truth is that no one can possibly know.
True theft is a purely selfish crime I don't think anyone can justify without serious mental gymnastics. Copyright infringement is a whole other area filled with unknowns, grey areas and lots of guesswork. Please don't fall into the trap of compromising your stance by making faulty comparisons or over-simplifying matters.
You are blaming the companies behavior and prices for your illicit actions.
But making copies for yourself is not illegal , also if you name it different it is no longer the same thing , so you can do copies of it too. The whole china industry works like that now and a large part of British economy .
"Owners of copyright in literary, dramatic and musical works have the exclusive right to:
• copy their work (for example, by photocopying it, copying it by hand, reciting it onto an
audio device or digital scanning);
• publish their work;
• in the case of computer programs, rent copies to the public in certain circumstances;"
"Owners of copyright in artistic works have the exclusive right in relation to the first three
activities listed above."
"There are no general exemptions from copyright laws for non-profit organisations or for
private or domestic use."
cvtuttle wrote: Amazing to me how people attempt to justify theft with the recasts. It's very black and white to me. *shrug*
It amazes me how many people try to justify stealing from a customer base because they are loyal, well my loyalty has been burned, also i am not stealing anything, its the recasters that are the ones stealing, i am buying from them and while it may be morally wrong, so is treating your customers and fanbase like total crap.
Now if it were just me i can understand, but its not, its a whole lot of people who feel the same way, that tells me that there is something deeply wrong with the policies of GW.
On the other side of the fence however I buy Forge world full price from them, they are not gauging me for £30 for 10 hammerers that look worse than the avatars of war minis and they cost alot less!
This is such an utterly ridiculous argument. I used to interview employees who stole from the company I worked at. There is literally a phase of the interview called "The Justification Phase". You basically just hit every point of that in this discussion. Theft has nothing to do with the points you made... This isn't food or shelter. You are talking about a luxury item. You are blaming the companies behavior and prices for your illicit actions.
Here are similar statements I used to hear...
"I deserved those items I stole because they don't pay me enough."
"Other people are doing it, so it's ok if I do it too."
"I bought all this other stuff, so it's ok that I took this one item."
Pretty much taken right from the training manual:
In employee theft cases, the guilty suspect may place blame for his behavior on such factors as inadequate income, poor security measures by the employer, or someone else who did not do his job (left the money out or left the money drawer unlocked). The suspect may even justify his behavior by pointing out that other employees are engaged in similar activities. In burglary cases, the suspect may justify his theft by blaming unusual family expenses, desperate circumstances (e.g., no job but a family to support), or a friend for suggesting the idea.
You know, it's pretty self-defeating to counter one ridiculous argument with another ridiculous argument.
Why are you comparing copyright violations to physical theft as if they're the same thing? When copyright is violated by illegal copies, the original copyright holder does not lose any physical items. At worst, they lose the potential for an additional sale. That is absolutely not the same as having their inventory stolen. When some dude in China is copying GW models, the equivalent stock does not just vanish from a warehouse in Lenton.
This is the same line of thinking that allows music and film distributors to sue infringers for obscene amounts of cash, based on the fallacy that every potential sale is a lost sale. Not everyone who acquires a bootleg copy of an item ever had the intention to purchase an original copy at full price. Formosa could have argued that he would have never have bought brand new products from GW, and only made purchases because the less-savoury alternative was available. In that case GW actually lost nothing, as there was never a potential sale. Obviously there's no way to prove this, but it does show the key difference between theft and copyright infringement.
I already posted earlier in the thread to say that I have purchased recasts specifically to acquire models that are no longer in production. How does this qualify as theft, if it's impossible to acquire these items as new?
The heart of the matter is that it's impossible to prove how much damage copyright infringement does. The owner may be losing out on 100% of those sales, it may as low as 1%. The truth is that no one can possibly know.
True theft is a purely selfish crime I don't think anyone can justify without serious mental gymnastics. Copyright infringement is a whole other area filled with unknowns, grey areas and lots of guesswork. Please don't fall into the trap of compromising your stance by making faulty comparisons or over-simplifying matters.
"Owners of copyright in literary, dramatic and musical works have the exclusive right to: • copy their work (for example, by photocopying it, copying it by hand, reciting it onto an audio device or digital scanning); • publish their work; • in the case of computer programs, rent copies to the public in certain circumstances;"
"Owners of copyright in artistic works have the exclusive right in relation to the first three activities listed above."
"There are no general exemptions from copyright laws for non-profit organisations or for private or domestic use."
In short its all to do with sales not owning. Thats why they had a huge thing about Internet piracy because people could pirate movies for themselves but not share it, but internet piracy laws have changed so you get three warnings if you pirate a movie or song etc then you get fined a bit etc. But its not really enforced.
Nowadays the vast majority of my miniature purchases seem to be divided roughly 50/50 between my FLGS and snagging Ebay deals. Occasionally someone I know will have something I'm interested up for selling/trading, too, and I'm fairly certain that this sort of thing (coupled with more vodka than should ever be put into anyone's drink) is how I went from owning 2 dreadnoughts to 8. Either that or they reproduced. But I don't want to think about that.
I have not, to my knowledge, purchased a recast of anything. Speaking of...
Peregrine wrote: Well yeah, there's always an endless horde of sociopaths who want to turn their desire to get games/movies/whatever without paying for them into some kind of moral high ground. That doesn't make them right.
Peregrine wrote: No, Peregrine is not a lawyer, and is not arguing based on any kind of professional knowledge of IP law. In fact, Peregrine's position is that recasting and purchasing recasts is morally wrong even if you can find some kind of legal loophole that allows it.
I'm pretty much in agreement with Peregrine's thoughts on the moral aspect here, though I... might not be the best person to ask in the first place. GW is well within its legal right to price items too high for a lot of--if not the majority of--people. At least as far as things go in the U.S. people are likewise well within their legal and moral right to vote with their wallets and collectively refuse to buy enough of X item for GW to make a profit from it (thus forcing their hand in a different direction). That's not where the majority of the economic votes have gone, apparently (and despite what looking at the internet might make one infer), and GW feels no need to make their products more affordable. And there's no law that I am aware of that will force them to do so. Furthermore, they're selling toy soldiers, not food or water. Nobody is dying because of GW prices barring the occurrence of some sort of bizarre scenario out of a B-movie comedy. So my guess would be that while their high pricing is certainly not morally 'right,' it's not really 'wrong,' either. Love of toy soldiers is not like the biological need for water--as much as I hate to admit it.
That being said if I came across a top-quality source of recasts and if I was 100% sure I could get away with buying them I would do it in a heartbeat. And there are worse things yet I would do in a heartbeat if I was so sure that no form of retribution would come my way, damned be the injured parties. But my destructive entitlement is not morally 'right' in any way, nor is anyone else's (quite the contrary--even I understand that).
Come to think of it, is this not why we need laws in the first place?
"Owners of copyright in literary, dramatic and musical works have the exclusive right to:
• copy their work (for example, by photocopying it, copying it by hand, reciting it onto an
audio device or digital scanning);
• publish their work;
• in the case of computer programs, rent copies to the public in certain circumstances;"
"Owners of copyright in artistic works have the exclusive right in relation to the first three
activities listed above."
"There are no general exemptions from copyright laws for non-profit organisations or for
private or domestic use."
In short its all to do with sales not owning. Thats why they had a huge thing about Internet piracy because people could pirate movies for themselves but not share it, but internet piracy laws have changed so you get three warnings if you pirate a movie or song etc then you get fined a bit etc. But its not really enforced.
1. You just did a bait-n-switch on me.
We are not discussing the issue of buying or owning counterfeit goods.
We are discussing the act of making copies of a copyrighted item, and whether the relevant law allows such a copying if it is done for personal non-profit use. Look up to recap.
2. I don't think that article says what you think it says.
Could you please quote the relevant part that states that; "For counterfeit goods its only illegal to manifacture or sell them not own them"?
Could you also quote the part that addresses the existing copy-right laws, and isn't about the new additions concerning changes to the powers given to various authorities?
"Owners of copyright in literary, dramatic and musical works have the exclusive right to:
• copy their work (for example, by photocopying it, copying it by hand, reciting it onto an
audio device or digital scanning);
• publish their work;
• in the case of computer programs, rent copies to the public in certain circumstances;"
"Owners of copyright in artistic works have the exclusive right in relation to the first three
activities listed above."
"There are no general exemptions from copyright laws for non-profit organisations or for
private or domestic use."
In short its all to do with sales not owning. Thats why they had a huge thing about Internet piracy because people could pirate movies for themselves but not share it, but internet piracy laws have changed so you get three warnings if you pirate a movie or song etc then you get fined a bit etc. But its not really enforced.
1. You just did a bait-n-switch on me.
We are not discussing the issue of buying or owning counterfeit goods.
We are discussing the act of making copies of a copyrighted item, and whether the relevant law allows such a copying if it is done for personal non-profit use. Look up to recap.
2. I don't think that article says what you think it says.
Could you please quote the relevant part that states that; "For counterfeit goods its only illegal to manifacture or sell them not own them"?
Could you also quote the part that addresses the existing copy-right laws, and isn't about the new additions concerning changes to the powers given to various authorities?
No, law is a pain to go through, but its not illegal to have them here, only to sell or reproduce. This is the case in most of the world.
It covers world not just NZ. But yea buying and owning them is not illegal. Im not searching for hours to prove to a random the laws of the country I live in.
It covers world not just NZ. But yea buying and owning them is not illegal. Im not searching for hours to prove to a random the laws of the country I live in.
Again, you are persisting in barking up the wrong tree.
You have already been made aware that you are addressing a separate and different issue than the one being discussed.
I can only assume you are doing so because you realize that your position concerning the relevant issue under discussion is completely untenable, and that you have a problem admitting this fact.
It covers world not just NZ. But yea buying and owning them is not illegal. Im not searching for hours to prove to a random the laws of the country I live in.
Again, you are persisting in barking up the wrong tree.
You have already been made aware that you are addressing a separate and different issue than the one being discussed.
I can only assume you are doing so because you realize that your position concerning the relevant issue under discussion is completely untenable, and that you have a problem admitting this fact.
This exchange is over.
But im right, If i have a dvd i purchased legitimately, I can copy it 50 times and store it on my computer. Its a crime once I share those files for profit or non profit. Thats the law here. The law is I cannot distribute copyrighted goods illigetimately. I can however keep them for myself. I can photo copy a book I purchased for myself a million times and its only illegal when I give it away or sell it. Same with anything copyrighted. Same with recasts, it comes under the same law.
cvtuttle wrote: Amazing to me how people attempt to justify theft with the recasts. It's very black and white to me. *shrug*
It amazes me how many people try to justify stealing from a customer base because they are loyal, well my loyalty has been burned, also i am not stealing anything, its the recasters that are the ones stealing, i am buying from them and while it may be morally wrong, so is treating your customers and fanbase like total crap.
Now if it were just me i can understand, but its not, its a whole lot of people who feel the same way, that tells me that there is something deeply wrong with the policies of GW.
On the other side of the fence however I buy Forge world full price from them, they are not gauging me for £30 for 10 hammerers that look worse than the avatars of war minis and they cost alot less!
This is such an utterly ridiculous argument. I used to interview employees who stole from the company I worked at. There is literally a phase of the interview called "The Justification Phase". You basically just hit every point of that in this discussion. Theft has nothing to do with the points you made... This isn't food or shelter. You are talking about a luxury item. You are blaming the companies behavior and prices for your illicit actions.
Here are similar statements I used to hear...
"I deserved those items I stole because they don't pay me enough."
"Other people are doing it, so it's ok if I do it too."
"I bought all this other stuff, so it's ok that I took this one item."
Pretty much taken right from the training manual:
In employee theft cases, the guilty suspect may place blame for his behavior on such factors as inadequate income, poor security measures by the employer, or someone else who did not do his job (left the money out or left the money drawer unlocked). The suspect may even justify his behavior by pointing out that other employees are engaged in similar activities. In burglary cases, the suspect may justify his theft by blaming unusual family expenses, desperate circumstances (e.g., no job but a family to support), or a friend for suggesting the idea.
You know, it's pretty self-defeating to counter one ridiculous argument with another ridiculous argument.
Why are you comparing copyright violations to physical theft as if they're the same thing? When copyright is violated by illegal copies, the original copyright holder does not lose any physical items. At worst, they lose the potential for an additional sale. That is absolutely not the same as having their inventory stolen. When some dude in China is copying GW models, the equivalent stock does not just vanish from a warehouse in Lenton.
This is the same line of thinking that allows music and film distributors to sue infringers for obscene amounts of cash, based on the fallacy that every potential sale is a lost sale. Not everyone who acquires a bootleg copy of an item ever had the intention to purchase an original copy at full price. Formosa could have argued that he would have never have bought brand new products from GW, and only made purchases because the less-savoury alternative was available. In that case GW actually lost nothing, as there was never a potential sale. Obviously there's no way to prove this, but it does show the key difference between theft and copyright infringement.
I already posted earlier in the thread to say that I have purchased recasts specifically to acquire models that are no longer in production. How does this qualify as theft, if it's impossible to acquire these items as new?
The heart of the matter is that it's impossible to prove how much damage copyright infringement does. The owner may be losing out on 100% of those sales, it may as low as 1%. The truth is that no one can possibly know.
True theft is a purely selfish crime I don't think anyone can justify without serious mental gymnastics. Copyright infringement is a whole other area filled with unknowns, grey areas and lots of guesswork. Please don't fall into the trap of compromising your stance by making faulty comparisons or over-simplifying matters.
"As low as 1%"
So there is a loss....
"I already posted earlier in the thread to say that I have purchased recasts specifically to acquire models that are no longer in production. How does this qualify as theft, if it's impossible to acquire these items as new? "
This is actually the one area I will agree with you on. There is NO WAY for you to acquire the item - hence zero loss to the company since they do not sell it. *shrug*. Not sure I would argue against that.
Why are we quoting an entire thread to reply? Come on. I, for one, think it was stupid of G'dub to pull out of tourney support. They were the main deterant to third party models. Now that's gone.
I have no problem buying off of ebay. At some point the people selling on ebay bought their models either directly from GW, or in some instances from a LGS and are selling models they no longer use, or decided not to assemble/use on ebay.
Third party models, often there are options that GW does not supply for models, and third party sources tend to notice this and make conversion"pieces that "might be usable" as that item. Some third party sites make models that might look like something from 40k / fantasy lore that has no rules or models. Some third party sites make things that could be used in place of models that are produced and have rules by GW.
I have no issue buying third party models, when I purchase them they are often bitz that GW doesn't make for a kit GW does make, which I have bought and want the bits to add onto the GW kit. I was going to scratch build some bit for that GW model/kit anyways, and If I see a third party vendor that has made that thing I was going to attempt to make I would rather spend the $ for it, then the time making it from scratch usually.
Recasts. Interesting, for many people in the gaming community one of the things you may not know is GW used to not always make new sculpts for models and would recast their old models, cut them up, and resculpt only part of the new model combined with parts of old recasts to make new models. This was very prevalent in the first 3 editions of models, starting when fantasy/40k models were made by either citadel, games workshop, or there was a third party I want to say marauder. From 2nd edition on all the models were solely made by games/workshop which I believe bought out citadel and marauder, and joined them all together under their company. Anyways thats off topic so lets go back.
GW used to recast its own models to make "new" models to sell at full price. Consider that when you are hating on recasters and talking about people not getting their due pay etc.
That said GW no longer does this and hasn't been doing it for a few editions, I do not like buying recasts. I think recasts are wrong to use, and are a detriment to the hobby. Many recasters sell only recasts, so they are taking money from the people that are moving the game forward. I include the parent company of GW, FW, and actually 3rd party vendors as all the people moving the game forward. Even 3rd party vendors who are supplying models/bits that are outside of what GW supplies in their model line are affecting the future of these games, as they become known and GW is aware of them and moves to either make these models themselves, something that they very well may not have done.
Its also worth reminding GWs development, and probably FW too is based on Models then rules. So if a third party is supplying interesting models, and GW takes notice, and they consider revamping or updating their model range, they will also be looking at revamping or updating rules for things that have been touched on in the future.
I admit to skipping a few pages of back and forth so if this has already been said sorry.
Since the almighty GW has decided that they don't want tournament play to be a thing and it's just a beer and pretzel game there isn't any real reason to buy strictly GW products. I bought officail models to satisfy tournament rules, but now I am looking to other companies for cheaper options.
The only recast stuff I would be even remotely ok with buying would be OOP models, and they would have to be fairly cheap/I wouldn't know they were recasts when buying. I dont go looking for them but if I got some cheap models and found a few were recasts I wouldnt be too upset other than false advertising. If they were selling at full price and claiming they were legitimate I would be reporting them however legal way is necessary though. The way I see it, if GW doesn't sell the models that I bought anymore, its not like they lost a sale. If they wanted that sale, they should have put the model back in production. Definitely would not buy a current kit that had been recast though.
As for used, I can't see how anyone would have issues with that morally. GW doesn't own the model after you buy it. You can build it, glue it to your door, drop it into your car's gas tank, give it to the dog as a chew toy, sell it, melt it for metal, whatever. Its yours to keep, something video game companies seem to have a hard time grasping. I can understand people wanting to assemble kits themselves though, that makes perfect sense.
As for 3rd party, I have no issue. They usually make better products than GW, sell for a better price, or both. Since I'm pretty much done with 40k gamewise, I don't really care if I buy official GW models or not. I'm just going to paint them and hope that the rules get better someday, so its not like I'm worried about not being able to play in official GW events or anything.
) but I think by breaking out of the mindset of what you're 'allowed' to use, or thinking that somehow 
you 
Having a degree in history usually means I can answer a few obscure questions in trivial pursuit games and that's about it. No, I've been trained to provide this type of information when having a debate in order to lay a basis for understanding. You could easily have responded by asking which countries I am referring to in which people do not hold to the Western ideals of corporate protectionism or any number of lines of inquiry that would allow you further insight into areas that I may not have adequately covered while attempting to explain myself. If your experience is different in such situations, so be it. As for owning 
