34209
Post by: themadlbb
So...what is the consensus on playing with the webstore exclusive formations without owning the actual rules, but rather downloading scans of the datasheet etc.?
Since they can only be purchased in very limited quantities, will your FLGS/group allow you to play with the likes of the Exalted Court of House Terryn or the Skyhammer Annihilation Force if you didn't purchase it? What about tournaments and ITC and the like?
94103
Post by: Yarium
I would personally allow it. There's no way that I can tell in real life if the person with a scanned document is bringing a scan of their own documents, or bringing one that was obtained illegally.
Whether or not I enjoy the game is another matter entirely.
20275
Post by: DorianGray
What are these formations and are they pretty good?
96099
Post by: Rashbold
I wouldn't object to playing.
However, I will let my opponent know that if I lose they must present me a copy of the formation! If I win, they must sign a statement (provided by me at the time) swearing undying allegiance to my army's faction! Mua-ha-ha!
Yeh, so I won't mind playing...
Formations I know of so far...
Exalted Court of House Terryn
Cohort Mechanicus
Skyhammer Annihilation Force
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
90874
Post by: lustigjh
I don't really care because the rules are simply too expensive in general. As long as you have a copy of the actual rules for reference on hand I'll play. Of course, this excludes the noobhammer annihilation force for the sake of me wanting to actually play a game instead of just showing you my models.
34209
Post by: themadlbb
 Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
This applies to the webstore exclusive formations, meaning that they only sell a few hundred of them. At this point in time they are all sold out and supposedly won't be sold again, and they generally sell out within a few days of them being posted.
90374
Post by: Pain4Pleasure
Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
You're trolling right?
Play what you want dude, don't play guys like this
34209
Post by: themadlbb
Pain4Pleasure wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
You're trolling right?
Play what you want dude, don't play guys like this
I'm not sure if the guy is trolling or not. I'll say this though, I do get the general sentiment of "if you don't have the rules you can't use them". Unfortunately, that no longer applies with the webstore exclusive formations to a certain extent, because not only do you have to buy a super-expensive bundle of modles to get them, but they are limited edition so you can only get them for a few days. That makes them prohibitively difficult to use since very, very few people will actually have access to a "physical copy" of the rules.
89783
Post by: docdoom77
In this case? Of course you should be allowed to play. A formation shouldn't be exclusive to a few hundred people who bought a box with dev squads, assault squads, and drop pods. Ridiculous.
I'm sure it will be on battlescribe.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
In a friendly environment, as long as you've got the document in some form so I can check it is being played properly? Fine.
However, in a competitive environment I think it's a much more complicated conversation.
73144
Post by: Locrian
Don't think there's any uncertainty in a tournament situation either. There's nothing different between getting the PDF off the web or buying it. Anyone can get a digital copy of the rules online, there's nothing saying "this person bought this" and "this person just DL'd it".
80635
Post by: Jambles
Well, when it comes down to it - how would anybody be able to tell if it's a "legitimate" copy or not? As your opponent, I'm not really in a position to demand you produce some kind of proof of purchase just to use rules you very well could have obtained legitimately. So just in terms of actually using the exclusive formations, you absolutely could I think, regardless of the source.
For me, then it becomes a question of personal accountability and maybe a little morality. Are you the kind of person that doesn't feel like paying cash moneys for a slip of paper listing rules that you could just as easily get off of Google? Especially when that paper quickly becomes Out Of Print? I think there are sound arguments for and against it, but I'm almost certainly not smart enough to do either one justice 
87813
Post by: SharkoutofWata
Except there is no PDF version. There's the official version on a piece of laminated paper. Like Vrosh Tattersoul in the Dark Vengeance box. Anything else is a scan (from my understanding of it). So it's easy to tell it's not official, but who friggin cares. Rules should not be exclusive to folks with spare money to burn with a specific timeframe. Someone could come in with the rules scribbled on a toilet paper roll and as long as it checks out against my own downloaded version/online source, play it.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
I don't care where they obtain them or how, as long as they have a copy of the rules that I can actually review so I know what's going on.
That said, with the ridiculousness of things like the House Terryn and Skyhammer Annihilation force, I don't think I'd play against them regardless, but that's another topic.
Balance issues aside however, I honestly don't care what rules a person is using or how they obtained them, as long as they have them.
59054
Post by: Nevelon
I’d like to see a clear copy/dataslate. Rules just pulled from a rumor site, or a fuzzy leaked WD snapshot could have things missing/hidden. Programs like Battlescribe, while good for summaries, I’d not trust to give the whole picture. This goes for everything, not just the exclusive webstore stuff. If there is a rules issue, I want to be able to read the source.
But past that, I don’t care.
91502
Post by: Lammikkovalas
 Yarium wrote:I would personally allow it. There's no way that I can tell in real life if the person with a scanned document is bringing a scan of their own documents, or bringing one that was obtained illegally. Whether or not I enjoy the game is another matter entirely.
Exactly this. The burden of proof rests on whoever is making a claim that a set of rules has been obtained "illegally". And because you can't be expected to incriminate yourself had you been naughty you can just claim that your copy is a photocopied one from your original one that's safely back at home. It takes a whole few seconds to type "skyhammer annihilation force rules" into Google and clicking on an image result that comes up and everyone knows this.
80635
Post by: Jambles
 Lammikkovalas wrote: Yarium wrote:I would personally allow it. There's no way that I can tell in real life if the person with a scanned document is bringing a scan of their own documents, or bringing one that was obtained illegally.
Whether or not I enjoy the game is another matter entirely.
Exactly this. The burden of proof rests on whoever is making a claim that a set of rules has been obtained "illegally". And because you can't be expected to incriminate yourself had you been naughty you can just claim that your copy is a photocopied one from your original one that's safely back at home.
It takes a whole few seconds to type "skyhammer annihilation force rules" into Google and clicking on an image result that comes up and everyone knows this.
Precisely this. Also as has been said, it's kind of a dumb situation GW put us in to begin with!
34209
Post by: themadlbb
 Jambles wrote: Lammikkovalas wrote: Yarium wrote:I would personally allow it. There's no way that I can tell in real life if the person with a scanned document is bringing a scan of their own documents, or bringing one that was obtained illegally.
Whether or not I enjoy the game is another matter entirely.
Exactly this. The burden of proof rests on whoever is making a claim that a set of rules has been obtained "illegally". And because you can't be expected to incriminate yourself had you been naughty you can just claim that your copy is a photocopied one from your original one that's safely back at home.
It takes a whole few seconds to type "skyhammer annihilation force rules" into Google and clicking on an image result that comes up and everyone knows this.
Precisely this. Also as has been said, it's kind of a dumb situation GW put us in to begin with!
I 100% agree.
I'd love to hear what a few official tourney organizers say about it.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
I feel that if you're going to use them, you should own a legit copy. This applies to all rules, including big book and codices. The exception is for trialing something new, and using a group/club copy.
89783
Post by: docdoom77
You know that only 200 "legit" copies exist, right?
34209
Post by: themadlbb
 Blacksails wrote:I feel that if you're going to use them, you should own a legit copy. This applies to all rules, including big book and codices. The exception is for trialing something new, and using a group/club copy.
In general I'd agree with you.
In this circumstance, don't you think it is prohibitively difficult to actually get the physical copy of the rules? Of all of the players of 40K in all the world, only a few hundred will end up owning a copy. This is not a matter of buying a rulebook, since if you are able to run the formation you have already paid the monetary requirements to play it (the actual rules are free with the purchase of the web bundle). Thus, we would be limiting it essentially to the people who had the money to buy a set of models within a very short period of time. If they sold the rules separately, I'd be behind you in saying that you need to buy them if you want to use them. In this case, I'd say that a verified scan would do just fine.
20983
Post by: Ratius
Pretty much what Vak said, couldnt care less as long as I get to review them/check them to ensure no "fast ones" get pulled.
And No, a crayon scrawl on an old newspaper dont count either.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
When the rules are getting so OTT, scarcity is the only balancing factor.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
I realize how limited it is.
Now, my morals are fairly loose when it comes to material like this, but I feel the best thing for all 40k players to do is just pretend like this formation doesn't exist. I don't think anyone should be rewarding GW for putting rules behind paywalls, and I don't think we should be playing with such a blatantly unbalanced rule sheet, especially one locked behind a pay wall. Its the very definition of pay to win, and its terrible for the game.
As such, I'm basically going to ignore it. I may let an excited opponent I otherwise like use it against me once, but I doubt any more than that.
Then again, I feel that someone who plays against me should have the rules in some form on them, though I obviously can't verify if they're legit or not, and I certainly wouldn't turn down a game if someone had ripped a PDF onto their tablet.
Personally, any rule I use in game I own a physical copy somewhere, but I'm also not opposed to having a copy in a different format (PDF) on a more portable device.
I think its a bit of a moot point though in practice, seeing as many non-tourney players will be reluctant to play against this regularly. Further, I feel that many tourneys will require some official, legitimate copy of all rules being used, but that's up to the TO.
93621
Post by: jokerkd
I'm waiting on an answer from a local non-gw TO
I cant imagine any GW tournaments banning this
25751
Post by: gmaleron
Its all over the internet at this point and just because someone does not have the physical copy of the rules does not be they should not be allowed to play with it, honestly it sounds more like your looking for any excuse to not let them use it. Instead of getting all uppity over a strong Formation by refusing to let people use it learn to play against it, you know think constructively otherwise it just looks like a cop out.
4183
Post by: Davor
Well besides the only 200 copies made, what is the difference from using scanned codices? There is no difference.
So if people are ok with using scanned PDF's then it's fine using the web exclusive bundle. If people are not find with using scanned PDF's then it's not fine using the web exclusive bundle.
Illegal is illegal. So it all depends on the person you are playing. For me, I play for fun and don't care. If this will cause you to have fun, I will try it out and play it.
93621
Post by: jokerkd
It is still available in AU
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
As long as they have a physical, accurate and clear copy of the formation rules I could not care less where it came from. I think making rules exclusive to those willing to drop $300+ on models at the drop of a hat is wrong.
58139
Post by: SilverDevilfish
Race2Pay2Win is pretty damn stupid. The level of damns I give about someone using a downloaded copy of these rules is so low I act as a black hole of damns and make other people near me give less of a damn.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Pain4Pleasure wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
You're trolling right?
Play what you want dude, don't play guys like this
I'm pretty laid back actually when it comes to allowing things.
However, I have no interest in playing some schmuck who comes in with a crummy scan of the "new hotness" and an entire army of Ultra Blood Wolves--which is what formations like Skyhammer encouraged.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
Kanluwen wrote:Pain4Pleasure wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
You're trolling right?
Play what you want dude, don't play guys like this
I'm pretty laid back actually when it comes to allowing things.
However, I have no interest in playing some schmuck who comes in with a crummy scan of the "new hotness" and an entire army of Ultra Blood Wolves--which is what formations like Skyhammer encouraged.
But it would be okay if the same schmuck with the same Ultra Blood Wolf army came with the same rules but had some sort of proof that he dropped $300+?
77886
Post by: TheNewBlood
I don't care how they obtained the rules, so long as they have a physical copy that I can review so I know it's legit.
People have had the models for the Skyhammer formation for a long time, so why should they suddenly have to go out and buy more just to use the models they already have in a formation?
722
Post by: Kanluwen
 TheCustomLime wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Pain4Pleasure wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
You're trolling right?
Play what you want dude, don't play guys like this
I'm pretty laid back actually when it comes to allowing things.
However, I have no interest in playing some schmuck who comes in with a crummy scan of the "new hotness" and an entire army of Ultra Blood Wolves--which is what formations like Skyhammer encouraged.
But it would be okay if the same schmuck with the same Ultra Blood Wolf army came with the same rules but had some sort of proof that he dropped $300+?
Yeah, because then I'll know he's someone who spent $300+ for an "edge" in a game. 
25751
Post by: gmaleron
I guess everything is overpowered to you that is strong isn't it? It seems like your using it as an excuse not to play it because either your scared to face or just don't like it, either way your definitely coming off with a negative attitude about the whole thing.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
 gmaleron wrote:I guess everything is overpowered to you that is strong isn't it? It seems like your using it as an excuse not to play it because either your scared to face or just don't like it, either way your definitely coming off with a negative attitude about the whole thing.
Should there be a positive attitude for a pay to win, overpowered formation?
89259
Post by: Talys
Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
But... they get sold out in like 4 days  Automatically Appended Next Post: gmaleron wrote:I guess everything is overpowered to you that is strong isn't it? It seems like your using it as an excuse not to play it because either your scared to face or just don't like it, either way your definitely coming off with a negative attitude about the whole thing.
It's much more reasonable to simply say, "I can't compete with the House of Teryn formation, so I'll pass if you don't have anything else to field. Kinda like, "I don't feel like playing 7 wave serpents... pass." Automatically Appended Next Post: Blacksails wrote:
Should there be a positive attitude for a pay to win, overpowered formation?
No need to buy the datasheet. Buy me a box of devastators, and I'll let you win 
Buy me an imperial knight, and I'll let you win and make it look like I tried really hard and lost in a crushing defeat!
5046
Post by: Orock
gmaleron wrote:I guess everything is overpowered to you that is strong isn't it? It seems like your using it as an excuse not to play it because either your scared to face or just don't like it, either way your definitely coming off with a negative attitude about the whole thing.
But it IS stupidly op. There's being irrationally wrong, then there is being mad because the dictator of north Korea is killing his people. Justifiable anger isn't wrong. Don't hold that in
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
In casual play, bring whatever you want as long as they are official rules. I don't care if it is a scanned codex or whatever.
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
 casvalremdeikun wrote:In casual play, bring whatever you want as long as they are official rules. I don't care if it is a scanned codex or whatever.
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
Why would it matter where it came from? Are only the rich and quick allowed to benefit from the new rules? Automatically Appended Next Post: Kanluwen wrote: TheCustomLime wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Pain4Pleasure wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
You're trolling right?
Play what you want dude, don't play guys like this
I'm pretty laid back actually when it comes to allowing things.
However, I have no interest in playing some schmuck who comes in with a crummy scan of the "new hotness" and an entire army of Ultra Blood Wolves--which is what formations like Skyhammer encouraged.
But it would be okay if the same schmuck with the same Ultra Blood Wolf army came with the same rules but had some sort of proof that he dropped $300+?
Yeah, because then I'll know he's someone who spent $300+ for an "edge" in a game.
Fair enough.
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
TheCustomLime wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:In casual play, bring whatever you want as long as they are official rules. I don't care if it is a scanned codex or whatever.
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
Why would it matter where it came from? Are only the rich and quick allowed to benefit from the new rules?
For the same reason someone that pirated a video game shouldn't be able to play said game online. The limited nature of these rules has no bearing on whether or not pirated copies don't belong in tournaments. If you want to play a casual game with them, I don't care, but if I was organizing a tournament, it would be official rules only. This is especially important as it limits the ability for people to doctor or alter the rules.
199
Post by: Crimson Devil
TheCustomLime wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:In casual play, bring whatever you want as long as they are official rules. I don't care if it is a scanned codex or whatever.
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
Why would it matter where it came from? Are only the rich and quick allowed to benefit from the new rules?
I have no problem with that. Sure a Kardashian or a Hilton can afford the rules, but they can be counted on to be too stupid to use it well.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
casvalremdeikun wrote: TheCustomLime wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:In casual play, bring whatever you want as long as they are official rules. I don't care if it is a scanned codex or whatever.
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
Why would it matter where it came from? Are only the rich and quick allowed to benefit from the new rules?
For the same reason someone that pirated a video game shouldn't be able to play said game online. The limited nature of these rules has no bearing on whether or not pirated copies don't belong in tournaments. If you want to play a casual game with them, I don't care, but if I was organizing a tournament, it would be official rules only. This is especially important as it limits the ability for people to doctor or alter the rules.
I can doctor a legitimately obtained copy of the rules too especially if they were in a digital format. Moreover, in this new age of the internet it is easy to check whether the formation rules being presented by a player are on the up and up.
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
 Crimson Devil wrote: TheCustomLime wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:In casual play, bring whatever you want as long as they are official rules. I don't care if it is a scanned codex or whatever.
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
Why would it matter where it came from? Are only the rich and quick allowed to benefit from the new rules?
I have no problem with that. Sure a Kardashian or a Hilton can afford the rules, but they can be counted on to be too stupid to use it well.
Here is what I see could happen. People will freak out thinking that EVERYONE will be playing the Skyspear, since it isn't hard to get on the field. Then, EVERYONE will build their armies in a way that can best counter the Skyspear. What I am going to do is build my army to counter the people trying to counter the Skyspear.
91502
Post by: Lammikkovalas
casvalremdeikun wrote:
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
The person using their rules doesn't have to prove their innocence, you have to prove their guilt. Unless all the 200 copies have some secret verification method or you bought all the bundles yourself, good luck trying to prove that my copy isn't authentic. How do you reckon you'd be able to determine whether a high quality copy is not from the internet? Or if you have a really crappy photocopier and you can only take slightly blurry (but entirely readable) black and white copies of your precious original?
Automatically Appended Next Post: casvalremdeikun wrote:If you want to play a casual game with them, I don't care, but if I was organizing a tournament, it would be official rules only. This is especially important as it limits the ability for people to doctor or alter the rules.
This is really easy for you to state because in all likelihood you're not orgamizing any tournaments.Also, has there been a single instance of this policy actually being in effect? A tournament or event that requires you to bring your receipts with you?
81025
Post by: koooaei
Yarrr, wut's da problem 'ere, gitz?
89259
Post by: Talys
Lammikkovalas wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
The person using their rules doesn't have to prove their innocence, you have to prove their guilt. Unless all the 200 copies have some secret verification method or you bought all the bundles yourself, good luck trying to prove that my copy isn't authentic. How do you reckon you'd be able to determine whether a high quality copy is not from the internet? Or if you have a really crappy photocopier and you can only take slightly blurry (but entirely readable) black and white copies of your precious original?
In a friendly setting, you're just talking yourself out of a game, and in a competitive setting, the organizer is just putting up an annoying barrier to entry that is impractical to police.
Besides, you have to ask yourself: is it that you dislike 'piracy', that you're afraid of rules doctoring, that you don't like formations or that you don't like SOME formations?
If it's some kind of moral objection to photocopied data slates, I haven't ever seen an objection, even in a GW store (I guess the assumption is, you bought the models if nothing else), but at least you have some reasonable objection. The rest is pretty much bunk. The rules are really easy to verify online, and more to the point, if it's a formation you don't like, you probably already know what you don't like about it. If you don't like formations in general (and the fact that GW spits them out every month now faster than you can keep track) it's kinda too bad because that is just the nature of the game now, and a lot of people DO like them. If you don't like ONE formation, just don't play against it. No sense in dying 20 times in a row to a Decurion, right?
No matter how you cut it, Lammikkovalas' point is pretty valid. You can't assume that everyone with photocopies is a content pirate or cheater, and the burden of proof should not be upon the player with the copy. I play with one mini BRB, my own codex if it's new, and a binder with photocopies of everything else useful, such as formations and the reference pages out of the back of every codex (which I've purchased, not that it should matter). While some data slates come as single sheets, a lot come in campaign books and white dwarf issues. Either way, I'm not gonna 3-hole punch the originals.
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
 Talys wrote: Lammikkovalas wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:
But in a competitive environment, it better be the original copy, either GW-distributed PDF or hardcopy. No other sources, such as scans or photocopies will suffice.
The person using their rules doesn't have to prove their innocence, you have to prove their guilt. Unless all the 200 copies have some secret verification method or you bought all the bundles yourself, good luck trying to prove that my copy isn't authentic. How do you reckon you'd be able to determine whether a high quality copy is not from the internet? Or if you have a really crappy photocopier and you can only take slightly blurry (but entirely readable) black and white copies of your precious original?
In a friendly setting, you're just talking yourself out of a game, and in a competitive setting, the organizer is just putting up an annoying barrier to entry that is impractical to police.
Besides, you have to ask yourself: is it that you dislike 'piracy', that you're afraid of rules doctoring, that you don't like formations or that you don't like SOME formations?
If it's some kind of moral objection to photocopied data slates, I haven't ever seen an objection, even in a GW store (I guess the assumption is, you bought the models if nothing else), but at least you have some reasonable objection. The rest is pretty much bunk. The rules are really easy to verify online, and more to the point, if it's a formation you don't like, you probably already know what you don't like about it. If you don't like formations in general (and the fact that GW spits them out every month now faster than you can keep track) it's kinda too bad because that is just the nature of the game now, and a lot of people DO like them. If you don't like ONE formation, just don't play against it. No sense in dying 20 times in a row to a Decurion, right?
No matter how you cut it, Lammikkovalas' point is pretty valid. You can't assume that everyone with photocopies is a content pirate or cheater, and the burden of proof should not be upon the player with the copy. I play with one mini BRB, my own codex if it's new, and a binder with photocopies of everything else useful, such as formations and the reference pages out of the back of every codex (which I've purchased, not that it should matter). While some data slates come as single sheets, a lot come in campaign books and white dwarf issues. Either way, I'm not gonna 3-hole punch the originals.
You've extrapolated a lot of bs from one line. I couldn't give two gaks about what rules-legal formations allow. I don't play competitive. But I do think that the burden IS on the player to show that they are on the up and up. This is a limited edition thing, and the people that actually pay for it should be the ones using it, just like the people who buy the codex should be the ones using it. Just because something pirated is widely available, doesn't make it legal or kosher or right to use. This is full-on internet douchebag "I AM ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING BECAUSE INTERNET" at its finest. You are not entitled to gak.
25580
Post by: Maelstrom808
Whatever encourages GW to end this exclusive bs is what i'm for. Personally, I don't care what the power level of the formation is, or if you have legit hard copy rules or not. I'm not playing against these formations, or in events that allow them.
89259
Post by: Talys
@casvalramdikum - then we simply have an uneeconcilable difference on the way rules work. In my thinking, a rule is a rule whether I or another player has purchased it or not. You believe that someone made a purchase to make it valid.
I'd argue that in the case of this one formation, you can read the formation off of GW 's website so it's irrelevant. But more generally speaking, you have lots of formations that are in magazines and supplements. Do you truly require all the people who play with you bring all their original magazines and supplements? That seems silly to me.
Also, I know plenty of people who play Flesh Tearers for the pods, who have not bought Shield of Baal. Would you have the, ejected from competitive play?
Anyhow, do what you want. Play with whom you wish. To me, it's not about 'entitlement'. I don't believe that the few hundred bundles that were sold of a web exclusive (which didn't charge for the formation, by the way) are the only ones allowed to play the formation. I don't even believe that GW thinks this, and I've never seen a rule that states it. Automatically Appended Next Post:  Maelstrom808 wrote:Whatever encourages GW to end this exclusive bs is what i'm for. Personally, I don't care what the power level of the formation is, or if you have legit hard copy rules or not. I'm not playing against these formations, or in events that allow them.
See, this is an opinion I can respect
Although I disagree with it, at least until we see how powerful it is. Because, it's not nearly as good as, for example a Necron Decurion.
25580
Post by: Maelstrom808
casvalremdeikun wrote:This is full-on internet douchebag "I AM ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING BECAUSE INTERNET" at its finest. You are not entitled to gak.
At the same time, you are saying that person A is entitled to it, when person B is not, simply because person A has more disposable income available to them at the time the formation becomes available. If they were not limited editions, I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it that I do, as someone could at least save up to buy it.
This is still a sense of entitlement, just a different flavor.
89259
Post by: Talys
@Maelstrom808 - any LE worth a crap is gone before preorder is over, so being on vacation or even being sick could cost ya in that respect LOL.
But seriously, I would like to see the Dataslate that reads, 'This formation is only valid when the original Dataslate is presented.'
Well, not really, because some ass will buy all the web bundles, then sell the data slates on eBay for $400.
25580
Post by: Maelstrom808
Like I said, if it wasn't LE, it'd be no big deal. Powerful or not, it's a despicable practice imo.
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
Maelstrom808 wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:This is full-on internet douchebag "I AM ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING BECAUSE INTERNET" at its finest. You are not entitled to gak.
At the same time, you are saying that person A is entitled to it, when person B is not, simply because person A has more disposable income available to them at the time the formation becomes available. If they were not limited editions, I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it that I do, as someone could at least save up to buy it.
This is still a sense of entitlement, just a different flavor.
Yes, in the same way I am saying Person A is entitled to their BMW because they have more disposable income whereas Person B who has not purchased a BMW is not. I will agree very much so that the fact there is even limited edition stuff that isn't available in another form (Codices are fine, since the LE stuff is just fun to have) is crap and should not exist. Automatically Appended Next Post: Talys wrote:@Maelstrom808 - any LE worth a crap is gone before preorder is over, so being on vacation or even being sick could cost ya in that respect LOL.
But seriously, I would like to see the Dataslate that reads, 'This formation is only valid when the original Dataslate is presented.'
Well, not really, because some ass will buy all the web bundles, then sell the data slates on eBay for $400.
Tell me about it, my other hobby is Transformers. Some donkey-cave bought up all of ONE of the limbs to one of the combiners, made it a pain to get him.
79992
Post by: Bishop F Gantry
themadlbb wrote: Blacksails wrote:I feel that if you're going to use them, you should own a legit copy. This applies to all rules, including big book and codices. The exception is for trialing something new, and using a group/club copy.
In general I'd agree with you.
In this circumstance, don't you think it is prohibitively difficult to actually get the physical copy of the rules? Of all of the players of 40K in all the world, only a few hundred will end up owning a copy. This is not a matter of buying a rulebook, since if you are able to run the formation you have already paid the monetary requirements to play it (the actual rules are free with the purchase of the web bundle). Thus, we would be limiting it essentially to the people who had the money to buy a set of models within a very short period of time. If they sold the rules separately, I'd be behind you in saying that you need to buy them if you want to use them. In this case, I'd say that a verified scan would do just fine.
Don't mind me just changing all attacks to Strenght D *hits print* runs rules trough a laminator. What? printing is fine so no one will mind some house ruling proxied as official rules aswell.
63973
Post by: Furyou Miko
I will admit that I am shocked - shocked! - at all the hypocrisy here from Americans who think they, the culture that[ i]defines[/i] itself as "only the financially adept and hard-working can have nice things" have any right whatsoever to get rules for free!
Of course, as a commie-socialist-hippie Brit, I have no compunction against the power being in the hands of the people.
(yes, this post is sarcastic as heck)
91502
Post by: Lammikkovalas
 Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Don't mind me just changing all attacks to Strenght D *hits print* runs rules trough a laminator. What? printing is fine so no one will mind some house ruling proxied as official rules aswell.
So THAT'S how official rules are made? Why didn't anyone tell me this beforehand? I've been playing a weak DA codex all the time I could have been printing and laminating my own datasheets :( This is so unfair!
Just to be sure, do you need a limited edition GW laminator or will any do??? Answer please, this is serious!
25580
Post by: Maelstrom808
casvalremdeikun wrote:Yes, in the same way I am saying Person A is entitled to their BMW because they have more disposable income whereas Person B who has not purchased a BMW is not. I will agree very much so that the fact there is even limited edition stuff that isn't available in another form (Codices are fine, since the LE stuff is just fun to have) is crap and should not exist.
Yes and you can say the same thing about homes or TVs or kitchen appliances, but that's not a competition (if someone thinks it is,well they have issues beyond the scope of this discussion.) When you start producing rules that are only available to the select few in a competative setting, that's a problem, and a pretty big one.
18698
Post by: kronk
If you have the rules with you, whether they are a pdf of a webstore exclusive ___ or your army's codex, I'll play.
If you show up without a codex or datasheet or print-out of your FW list/unit that you're using, I will not play you. Period. End of. Bring your fething rules.
As to should they be legal in tournaments? I can't say. That's a sticky wicket!
94119
Post by: the Signless
 Furyou Miko wrote:I will admit that I am shocked - shocked! - at all the hypocrisy here from Americans who think they, the culture that[ i]defines[/i] itself as "only the financially adept and hard-working can have nice things" have any right whatsoever to get rules for free!
Of course, as a commie-socialist-hippie Brit, I have no compunction against the power being in the hands of the people.
(yes, this post is sarcastic as heck)
I can bring out little red flags if you want to wave them as the revolutionary tanks roll past.
MaoZeDong wan sui! Long live our glorious leaders!
94103
Post by: Yarium
casvalremdeikun wrote:At the same time, you are saying that person A is entitled to it, when person B is not, simply because person A has more disposable income available to them at the time the formation becomes available. If they were not limited editions, I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it that I do, as someone could at least save up to buy it.
So, are you saying that if I showed up with a copy of these rules, and I told you I purchased them but this is a copy I made because I don't want to damage the original, would you let me play with it? If your answer is no, then you're not abiding by what you just said. If your answer is yes, then how do you tell (not being a service provider with access to my data usage) if I'm lying or not?
To use the vehicle analogy. I own a car, but my friend owns a BMW. I have an important meeting to go to where appearances are important. I ask my friend if I can borrow their BMW and they say yes. Do I have access to a BMW? I don't own one, but it sure seems like I do. How can you (not being a policeman with access to the vehicle's ownership) tell if I own the vehicle or not?
34209
Post by: themadlbb
Bishop F Gantry wrote:themadlbb wrote: Blacksails wrote:I feel that if you're going to use them, you should own a legit copy. This applies to all rules, including big book and codices. The exception is for trialing something new, and using a group/club copy.
In general I'd agree with you.
In this circumstance, don't you think it is prohibitively difficult to actually get the physical copy of the rules? Of all of the players of 40K in all the world, only a few hundred will end up owning a copy. This is not a matter of buying a rulebook, since if you are able to run the formation you have already paid the monetary requirements to play it (the actual rules are free with the purchase of the web bundle). Thus, we would be limiting it essentially to the people who had the money to buy a set of models within a very short period of time. If they sold the rules separately, I'd be behind you in saying that you need to buy them if you want to use them. In this case, I'd say that a verified scan would do just fine.
Don't mind me just changing all attacks to Strenght D *hits print* runs rules trough a laminator. What? printing is fine so no one will mind some house ruling proxied as official rules aswell.
This argument against allowing scans seems particularly silly to me. Very easy to police, particularly in a competitive setting. I doubt that this would ever be much of an issue.
74952
Post by: nareik
If you look at the legal of GW's website I bet they say part of the terms of sale of their items is that you don't produce any copies of them whatsoever. I can't say for sure but It would be a fairly typical GW legal move .
94103
Post by: Yarium
nareik wrote:If you look at the legal of GW's website I bet they say part of the terms of sale of their items is that you don't produce any copies of them whatsoever. I can't say for sure but It would be a fairly typical GW legal move .
The law in Canada and the US (not sure about other countries) is that if you own something, you are allowed to do whatever you want with it (right of resale). You may make copies of things that are copyrighted so long as it is for your personal use only (the copies may not be resold, even if the original can be). As such, in the US and Canada you may make a copy of your rulebooks and codexes so long as it is for personal use only.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
But you have to own the original to make copies, correct?
94103
Post by: Yarium
That's correct. If I lent you the original, and you made a copy, that'd be illegal.
EDIT: The problem at a tournament is that you can't tell if the copy I have in front of me was made legally or illegally. Since you cannot prove that it was made illegally, you must assume it is legal. Whether or not you call the police on me to check it out is another matter
34243
Post by: Blacksails
Yarium wrote:
That's correct. If I lent you the original, and you made a copy, that'd be illegal.
Right, and if you make a copy, but give it to me, that's no longer for personal use as well, and therefore also illegal, correct?
94103
Post by: Yarium
Blacksails wrote: Yarium wrote:
That's correct. If I lent you the original, and you made a copy, that'd be illegal.
Right, and if you make a copy, but give it to me, that's no longer for personal use as well, and therefore also illegal, correct?
Incorrect. You are using my copy that I made for myself, and my right as an owner is to be able to lend it out. If you made a copy of that copy, that'd still be illegal.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
Interesting.
So then how does sharing it en masse work? Can I claim 1000+ people are my friend and I'm just giving them these copies of rules/books/whatever?
94103
Post by: Yarium
Blacksails wrote:Interesting.
So then how does sharing it en masse work? Can I claim 1000+ people are my friend and I'm just giving them these copies of rules/books/whatever?
Welcome to the whole reason why internet laws exist
It's also possible for me to upload my file to a secure system, then just give 1000 friends access to a read-only version of that system. This is why file-streaming sites are valid. The "owner" (which is dubious already) isn't letting you make a copy - you're just viewing it from them. It's the same thing as owning cable TV and inviting 1000 friends over to all watch it off my screen.
EDIT: I should point out that the main reason why file-streamers are shut down is not because they're letting you view their material, but because they don't own the material in the first place, and obtained a copy of it. This is different from Netflix, which receives licences to "own" the rights to the shows they "deliver" - but ultimately, Netflix is just a very friendly, affordable, file-streaming service.
80635
Post by: Jambles
casvalremdeikun wrote: Maelstrom808 wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:This is full-on internet douchebag "I AM ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING BECAUSE INTERNET" at its finest. You are not entitled to gak.
At the same time, you are saying that person A is entitled to it, when person B is not, simply because person A has more disposable income available to them at the time the formation becomes available. If they were not limited editions, I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it that I do, as someone could at least save up to buy it.
This is still a sense of entitlement, just a different flavor.
Yes, in the same way I am saying Person A is entitled to their BMW because they have more disposable income whereas Person B who has not purchased a BMW is not. I will agree very much so that the fact there is even limited edition stuff that isn't available in another form (Codices are fine, since the LE stuff is just fun to have) is crap and should not exist.
That's not quite a fair comparison. We're not pitting these cars against each other for sport.
Is it morally wrong to subvert a system that provides an advantage for having greater personal wealth?
But maybe you're right; richer people are more worthy, because they are richer. After all, they worked that much harder than the rest of us to be that much richer, right? It only follows that they should be able to use that wealth for personal gain in other areas, like competition.
71534
Post by: Bharring
Blacksails - I think it was Napster that tried that argument. IANAL, but claiming something that's "clearly" bogus, like all of the thousand people are your friends, where its clear you didn't care who those thousand people were, doesn't fly, legally speaking. "For all intents and purposes" style concepts actually do matter. Look to the Aero case for use of loopholes like that.
Yarium,
That might be the letter of the law, but the US DOJ managed to convince all the big names in that sector to either shut down, or give copyright interests their way in policing those files. Look at the news just after MEGA got hit - most similar sites capitulated or closed down.
Long story short, Copyright is a long discussion, and if you think you've found a useful loophole, you're probably wrong.
94103
Post by: Yarium
Bharring wrote:Blacksails - I think it was Napster that tried that argument. IANAL, but claiming something that's "clearly" bogus, like all of the thousand people are your friends, where its clear you didn't care who those thousand people were, doesn't fly, legally speaking. "For all intents and purposes" style concepts actually do matter. Look to the Aero case for use of loopholes like that.
Yarium,
That might be the letter of the law, but the US DOJ managed to convince all the big names in that sector to either shut down, or give copyright interests their way in policing those files. Look at the news just after MEGA got hit - most similar sites capitulated or closed down.
Long story short, Copyright is a long discussion, and if you think you've found a useful loophole, you're probably wrong.
Well, Mega didn't own the material that was being uploaded. Their argument was that others uploaded it, and they shouldn't be held accountable for what others do with their service. It was legally questionable. Also, note that in Canada there's currently an issue with Canadians using IP-altering services to access American Netflix instead of Canadian Netflix. Since Netflix needs to own the rights to shows for each country they're in, and the two aren't always the same (Netflix US usually has more and isn't bound by the same laws), there's a drive for people to do this. Netflix is also claiming that it is not their fault that Canadians are figuring out ways around their systems, but ultimately the laws are the same - Netflix is inadvertendly giving people access to material that they don't own.
As for loopholes, I'm not trying to show loopholes - this example was merely to demonstrate how you can't assume that a copy brought by someone to a tournament is illegal. There are a plethora of ways and reasons that it could be legal. I myself make it a point to own every source for every model or formation I put down on the table.
EDIT: And yes, that means carrying as many books as I need to for tournaments. Thankfully, my forces are pretty simple, often just CAD.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
So with regards to this particular topic, grabbing the rules off BoLS or whatever would be illegal?
Thanks by the way, very informative. My legalese is non-existant for stuff like this.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
I would assume it'd be akin to downloading music off of file sharing sites.
71534
Post by: Bharring
The points I'd suggest taking are:
-Individuals can't tell if a printed copy is legal. So don't tell people their printed copies aren't.
-Many ways to get said copies actually are illegal. Doesn't matter to most, though.
-Copyright is a complex topic. If you want to understand it, this thread alone isn't enough. Most loopholes people come up with aren't actually legal.
In summary,
-The copy is probably illegal, but you can't know. So you can't call people on it.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Kanluwen wrote:Nope; you didn't buy it and it's still available?
You don't get to play it. After it's No Longer Available--fine, whatever.
Why the feth would you care...were talking about a 1 page data slate. Even tournament organizers don't care if it's a digital copy.
67872
Post by: ALEXisAWESOME
I don't care how they get it, if it's the actual dataslate or just a picture of it, I would only allow it if i could see the rules. Too many times have people just brought formations from one of the many supplements or campaigns and not owned the actual rules, trusting me to take his word that it gives all these ridiculously effect rules for free.
Of course, most of the time it's true, Leviathan did let him take 3 Flyrants, but the fact he didn't have it to show me made me feel salty throughout the entire game. In a similar instance, someone took like 5 Dreadnoughts, telling me the formation gave them Rampage and D3 HOW for free. He also didn't have the rules, but on later inspection i found this formation was Apocalyse only and he just pulled it on me and since he didn't have the rules, he just expected me to believe him.
Play what you like, but if you don't have the actual, physical rules don't expect me to believe you when you tell me your assault marines can charge first turn, because Games Workshop went through a lot of trouble to make sure nothing else could. It would be very silly if they did something to counteract all that work...
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Yarium wrote:nareik wrote:If you look at the legal of GW's website I bet they say part of the terms of sale of their items is that you don't produce any copies of them whatsoever. I can't say for sure but It would be a fairly typical GW legal move .
The law in Canada and the US (not sure about other countries) is that if you own something, you are allowed to do whatever you want with it (right of resale). You may make copies of things that are copyrighted so long as it is for your personal use only (the copies may not be resold, even if the original can be). As such, in the US and Canada you may make a copy of your rulebooks and codexes so long as it is for personal use only.
pretty sure if you aren't selling anything - you are breaking 0 laws.
89259
Post by: Talys
Yarium wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:At the same time, you are saying that person A is entitled to it, when person B is not, simply because person A has more disposable income available to them at the time the formation becomes available. If they were not limited editions, I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it that I do, as someone could at least save up to buy it.
So, are you saying that if I showed up with a copy of these rules, and I told you I purchased them but this is a copy I made because I don't want to damage the original, would you let me play with it? If your answer is no, then you're not abiding by what you just said. If your answer is yes, then how do you tell (not being a service provider with access to my data usage) if I'm lying or not?
To use the vehicle analogy. I own a car, but my friend owns a BMW. I have an important meeting to go to where appearances are important. I ask my friend if I can borrow their BMW and they say yes. Do I have access to a BMW? I don't own one, but it sure seems like I do. How can you (not being a policeman with access to the vehicle's ownership) tell if I own the vehicle or not?
Pfft. Either show me that Black card and show the receipt for the BMW or GTFO.
Wait, but we can rent BMWs. Can we Rent datacards? Hmmm... How about... "Rent Friendship" so that we can "Borrow Datacard copy"! Aha. "Buy Friendship & Datacard copy!" Friendship for life, send PayPal here!
Bwahaha who knew ebay could be so lucrative.
94103
Post by: Yarium
Xenomancers wrote:pretty sure if you aren't selling anything - you are breaking 0 laws.
I don't believe that's correct, as copy-right law works a bit differently. If I make a copy of a movie and give it to you, then the company that produced the movie has theoretically lost some portion of its earned revenue, as you now own a movie you might otherwise have purchased. This law is so stingy that there are mall stores that have been known to get in trouble for playing music they don't own - hence why numerous stores now either have strictly defined music (possibly controlled by an off-site location), don't allow employees to play their own music, and/or just play the radio. The lawyers say that you are otherwise broadcasting a song you don't own, and any customer walking by the store is potentially lost revenue. It's stupid, but that's the laws as they currently stand. Blacksails wrote:So with regards to this particular topic, grabbing the rules off BoLS or whatever would be illegal?
Thanks by the way, very informative. My legalese is non-existant for stuff like this.
This is where it gets extra murky, so really be careful with what I'm saying - but I'm sure some part of what I'm saying will be wrong in some way. Often BoLS posts pictures that are actually just links to images hosted by someone else. For example, today they've posted up the "Dark Angel Decurion" , and an image from a book that is copyrighted. However, BoLS isn't hosting the file, and they're not the ones that uploaded the file. In effect, they're just pointing out to other people where the file is. The image is actually hosted by SpikeyBits, which clears BoLS of any wrongdoing. Even SpikeyBits may be cleared of any wrongdoing, as they are just getting the file image from whomever took the image in the first place and are protected as journalists. Even the person that took the picture may be protected as a journalist (as silly as this may be), since they are taking the photo in order to better convey the news of the image, and the image is from White Dwarf (which is itself a news-item, and so I don't think is copy-rightable) and this information is now deemed Public, and is subject to Public Usage laws. In other words, using images from BoLS is often safe, and even if it weren't, it'd likely be BoLS that'd get in trouble rather than you.
14152
Post by: CT GAMER
 Azreal13 wrote:In a friendly environment, as long as you've got the document in some form so I can check it is being played properly? Fine.
However, in a competitive environment I think it's a much more complicated conversation.
In a "competitive environment" EVERYTHING is a more complicated conversation.
serious business...
81652
Post by: Johnnytorrance
I don't care but don't get mad at me if I want to tailor my list to your shenanigans list
87732
Post by: Konrax
This formation should have been in the codex.
Producing a web exclusive bundle to sell a rule for a codex that literally just came out is blatant gouging and extremely poor business practice.
So as a disgruntled consumer I would say make photo copies and throw them out your window
19704
Post by: Runic
I don't know anyone who would care about you playing. There might be a few special snowflakes who would in the entire country.
80635
Post by: Jambles
 Konrax wrote:This formation should have been in the codex.
Producing a web exclusive bundle to sell a rule for a codex that literally just came out is blatant gouging and extremely poor business practice.
So as a disgruntled consumer I would say make photo copies and throw them out your window
Hear hear.
Might be a bit of my Brit side showing but boy howdy do I hate abuse of authority and scummy business practices like this. Let's head down to Nottingham and go Clash style on 'em, feth the Queen and such.
87732
Post by: Konrax
Jambles wrote: Konrax wrote:This formation should have been in the codex.
Producing a web exclusive bundle to sell a rule for a codex that literally just came out is blatant gouging and extremely poor business practice.
So as a disgruntled consumer I would say make photo copies and throw them out your window
Hear hear.
Might be a bit of my Brit side showing but boy howdy do I hate abuse of authority and scummy business practices like this. Let's head down to Nottingham and go Clash style on 'em, feth the Queen and such.
I would be careful, I believe the emperors character is loosely based on the queen.
She hears and sees all.
I am Alpharius
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Yarium wrote:Xenomancers wrote:pretty sure if you aren't selling anything - you are breaking 0 laws.
I don't believe that's correct, as copy-right law works a bit differently. If I make a copy of a movie and give it to you, then the company that produced the movie has theoretically lost some portion of its earned revenue, as you now own a movie you might otherwise have purchased. This law is so stingy that there are mall stores that have been known to get in trouble for playing music they don't own - hence why numerous stores now either have strictly defined music (possibly controlled by an off-site location), don't allow employees to play their own music, and/or just play the radio. The lawyers say that you are otherwise broadcasting a song you don't own, and any customer walking by the store is potentially lost revenue. It's stupid, but that's the laws as they currently stand.
Blacksails wrote:So with regards to this particular topic, grabbing the rules off BoLS or whatever would be illegal?
Thanks by the way, very informative. My legalese is non-existant for stuff like this.
This is where it gets extra murky, so really be careful with what I'm saying - but I'm sure some part of what I'm saying will be wrong in some way.
Often BoLS posts pictures that are actually just links to images hosted by someone else. For example, today they've posted up the "Dark Angel Decurion" , and an image from a book that is copyrighted. However, BoLS isn't hosting the file, and they're not the ones that uploaded the file. In effect, they're just pointing out to other people where the file is. The image is actually hosted by SpikeyBits, which clears BoLS of any wrongdoing. Even SpikeyBits may be cleared of any wrongdoing, as they are just getting the file image from whomever took the image in the first place and are protected as journalists. Even the person that took the picture may be protected as a journalist (as silly as this may be), since they are taking the photo in order to better convey the news of the image, and the image is from White Dwarf (which is itself a news-item, and so I don't think is copy-rightable) and this information is now deemed Public, and is subject to Public Usage laws.
In other words, using images from BoLS is often safe, and even if it weren't, it'd likely be BoLS that'd get in trouble rather than you.
Alright - I'm not disagreeing with you but consider this. I can buy the original - make copies and then sell the original. GW lost profits but I broke no laws. How could anyone ethically not let me play with this digital copy?
87732
Post by: Konrax
 Xenomancers wrote: Yarium wrote:Xenomancers wrote:pretty sure if you aren't selling anything - you are breaking 0 laws.
I don't believe that's correct, as copy-right law works a bit differently. If I make a copy of a movie and give it to you, then the company that produced the movie has theoretically lost some portion of its earned revenue, as you now own a movie you might otherwise have purchased. This law is so stingy that there are mall stores that have been known to get in trouble for playing music they don't own - hence why numerous stores now either have strictly defined music (possibly controlled by an off-site location), don't allow employees to play their own music, and/or just play the radio. The lawyers say that you are otherwise broadcasting a song you don't own, and any customer walking by the store is potentially lost revenue. It's stupid, but that's the laws as they currently stand.
Blacksails wrote:So with regards to this particular topic, grabbing the rules off BoLS or whatever would be illegal?
Thanks by the way, very informative. My legalese is non-existant for stuff like this.
This is where it gets extra murky, so really be careful with what I'm saying - but I'm sure some part of what I'm saying will be wrong in some way.
Often BoLS posts pictures that are actually just links to images hosted by someone else. For example, today they've posted up the "Dark Angel Decurion" , and an image from a book that is copyrighted. However, BoLS isn't hosting the file, and they're not the ones that uploaded the file. In effect, they're just pointing out to other people where the file is. The image is actually hosted by SpikeyBits, which clears BoLS of any wrongdoing. Even SpikeyBits may be cleared of any wrongdoing, as they are just getting the file image from whomever took the image in the first place and are protected as journalists. Even the person that took the picture may be protected as a journalist (as silly as this may be), since they are taking the photo in order to better convey the news of the image, and the image is from White Dwarf (which is itself a news-item, and so I don't think is copy-rightable) and this information is now deemed Public, and is subject to Public Usage laws.
In other words, using images from BoLS is often safe, and even if it weren't, it'd likely be BoLS that'd get in trouble rather than you.
Alright - I'm not disagreeing with you but consider this. I can buy the original - make copies and then sell the original. GW lost profits but I broke no laws. How could anyone ethically not let me play with this digital copy?
Please see my post about how this formation should be in the codex, and that this is a blatant abuse of business ethics, and therefore not subject to any discrimination from players who request the original copy of the rule.
At best expect a photocopy or printed version. If you request a receipt of purchase for using said formation I would show you the sm codex.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Yeah decurion was in the necron codex wasnt it.
94103
Post by: Yarium
Xenomancers wrote:Alright - I'm not disagreeing with you but consider this. I can buy the original - make copies and then sell the original. GW lost profits but I broke no laws. How could anyone ethically not let me play with this digital copy?
I'm not arguing that you can't use the copy - I'm not in that camp. I'm in the "you can use the copy" camp. That said, I'm sure that what you're listing here is still considered illegal, but that would require me to learn law  .
89259
Post by: Talys
Yarium wrote: Xenomancers wrote:Alright - I'm not disagreeing with you but consider this. I can buy the original - make copies and then sell the original. GW lost profits but I broke no laws. How could anyone ethically not let me play with this digital copy?
I'm not arguing that you can't use the copy - I'm not in that camp. I'm in the "you can use the copy" camp. That said, I'm sure that what you're listing here is still considered illegal, but that would require me to learn law .
Well, hang on a sec. It's legal almost everywhere that matters to make a photocopy of an original to for personal use whether the original belongs to you or not. For example, going to a library, and photocopying a pages out of a periodical or book or textbook is perfectly legal, even though the library owns the textbook. It's not legal to resell those copies without permission from the copyright owner. If you are the owner of the original, there is nothing stopping you from selling the original. There is also nothing stopping you from gifting photocopies of the original to your friends, whomever that may be. Take it out of the context if wargaming, and people do it all the time -- for example, with newspaper clippings. Won an award? Grab a couple of local newspapers, make a bunch of copies for all your family. No copyright violation. Like a health article from an magazine? Photocopy and give it to your aunt, no problem. There isn't even a perceived ethical issue. I do not believe that there is any such protection or fair use for scanning originals (for personal use), not that I can imagine any sort of injunctive relief. However, in the age of digital photocopiers, I'm not sure anyone could tell the difference one way or the other anyhow once you printed it back out.
81927
Post by: Farseer Anath'lan
@Talys Books, in Australia at least, have specific exceptions, allowing you to copy 10% OR a chapter, with various restrictions in regards to usage, one of which is none profit, and I believe for personal or research use.
We just had a seminar on this, but I won't look up my notes at this time.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Pick up friendly games? whats friendly about this formation again?
At a Tournament? Im pretty sure they have rules against bringing copied items over the real deal book.
Practicing for a Tournament? ok.
94103
Post by: Yarium
Talys wrote:If you are the owner of the original, there is nothing stopping you from selling the original. There is also nothing stopping you from gifting photocopies of the original to your friends, whomever that may be. Take it out of the context if wargaming, and people do it all the time -- for example, with newspaper clippings. Won an award? Grab a couple of local newspapers, make a bunch of copies for all your family. No copyright violation. Like a health article from an magazine? Photocopy and give it to your aunt, no problem. There isn't even a perceived ethical issue.
I do not believe that there is any such protection or fair use for scanning originals (for personal use), not that I can imagine any sort of injunctive relief. However, in the age of digital photocopiers, I'm not sure anyone could tell the difference one way or the other anyhow once you printed it back out.
Well, like I said, I'm not sure (not in law), so I can't tell if those examples are legal or not. They might even be illegal and just so mundane and difficult to stop that effectively no one cares. As said by Stewart Brand;
"On the one hand information wants to be expensive, because it's so valuable. The right information in the right place just changes your life. On the other hand, information wants to be free, because the cost of getting it out is getting lower and lower all the time. So you have these two fighting against each other."
That's the situation that Games Workshop finds itself in right now. Its product is effectively information-based, and now that 3d printers are gaining more and more common, you're seeing that their models are not products, but are also information. They're information about how a model looks, and that information (properly handled) can be easily replicated. But physical objects aren't copyright-able, hence they can't stop it until the laws catch up.
Anyways... getting off topic...
90380
Post by: SocksOfDeath
I hope all the "no copies allowed" whiners all have a real void shield generator with the box it came in.
61618
Post by: Desubot
SocksOfDeath wrote:I hope all the "no copies allowed" whiners all have a real void shield generator with the box it came in.
I hope so too. but Auto calling anyone with a problem a whiner is a bit childish is it not?
94675
Post by: General Kroll
 SharkoutofWata wrote:Except there is no PDF version. There's the official version on a piece of laminated paper. Like Vrosh Tattersoul in the Dark Vengeance box. Anything else is a scan (from my understanding of it). So it's easy to tell it's not official, but who friggin cares. Rules should not be exclusive to folks with spare money to burn with a specific timeframe. Someone could come in with the rules scribbled on a toilet paper roll and as long as it checks out against my own downloaded version/online source, play it.
This. I don't care if you've bought the formation, or you've made it from your own existing models, or whatever. The rules should still apply.
61618
Post by: Desubot
 General Kroll wrote: SharkoutofWata wrote:Except there is no PDF version. There's the official version on a piece of laminated paper. Like Vrosh Tattersoul in the Dark Vengeance box. Anything else is a scan (from my understanding of it). So it's easy to tell it's not official, but who friggin cares. Rules should not be exclusive to folks with spare money to burn with a specific timeframe. Someone could come in with the rules scribbled on a toilet paper roll and as long as it checks out against my own downloaded version/online source, play it.
This. I don't care if you've bought the formation, or you've made it from your own existing models, or whatever. The rules should still apply.
Purchasing the rules/rights to use the rules DOES make it exclusive to the folks that spent the money..... Or are we going into some strange all information should be free because reasons kinda thing.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
 Desubot wrote:SocksOfDeath wrote:I hope all the "no copies allowed" whiners all have a real void shield generator with the box it came in.
I hope so too.
but Auto calling anyone with a problem a whiner is a bit childish is it not?
It's par the course on the internet to call any dissenters that.
86740
Post by: Cytharai
In the era of people possibly needing 4-5 rules sources to play a game, if they want to bring in a "copy" of the specific rules for the formation/unit/model that they want to play, have at it. I have to haul around 4 books to play a normal game with Nids, and a few of those books I use exactly one page of. Also rules being behind a model purchase paywall is just silly.
61618
Post by: Desubot
 Cytharai wrote:In the era of people possibly needing 4-5 rules sources to play a game, if they want to bring in a "copy" of the specific rules for the formation/unit/model that they want to play, have at it. I have to haul around 4 books to play a normal game with Nids, and a few of those books I use exactly one page of. Also rules being behind a model purchase paywall is just silly.
Diffrence between having and pirating. I have no issues with some one using a copy if i knew he had the real deal. But if some random guy i dont know whats to use the thing and unless he can prove to me he owns it. id probably not play it. with the primary reason that its not a very fun formation to fight.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
SocksOfDeath wrote:I hope all the "no copies allowed" whiners all have a real void shield generator with the box it came in.
You understand the difference between models and rules, right?
There is a significant difference between someone who's playing with a downloaded scan of rules, obtained in a legally gray way, and someone who has converted up their own version of a model that was in limited production. So long as the dimensions of the VSG match the official model, there is no real issue.
86740
Post by: Cytharai
If the primary reason I dont want to play something is because it isn't fun to play against, then having the rules or not doesn't matter (for example, I wouldn't play horde nids vs adlance because it's just futile). If GW has the foresight of making their "webstore exclusive" rules displayed in a perfectly readable picture, which is hosted on their own website, yeah... I'm not going to make someone buy a limited release just to say "I can now play with these rules that were effectively free anyways".
94675
Post by: General Kroll
Desubot wrote: General Kroll wrote: SharkoutofWata wrote:Except there is no PDF version. There's the official version on a piece of laminated paper. Like Vrosh Tattersoul in the Dark Vengeance box. Anything else is a scan (from my understanding of it). So it's easy to tell it's not official, but who friggin cares. Rules should not be exclusive to folks with spare money to burn with a specific timeframe. Someone could come in with the rules scribbled on a toilet paper roll and as long as it checks out against my own downloaded version/online source, play it.
This. I don't care if you've bought the formation, or you've made it from your own existing models, or whatever. The rules should still apply.
Purchasing the rules/rights to use the rules DOES make it exclusive to the folks that spent the money.....
Or are we going into some strange all information should be free because reasons kinda thing.
Except the information is freely available...from a certain point of view.
|
|
