Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi all,

As you are all aware GW recently held a gun to its own ruleset by threatening to "drastically cull" the ruleset if people in the BB community tried to make money out of selling figures that GW have made no effort to supply for consumers.

As a recent development, Galak Starscraper has apparently been ordered by GW to remove all information on forum posts pertaining to LRB6 and isn't allowed further comment.

Read about the goings on here:
http://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=29228&start=225

This is scary stuff for those of us who were looking forward to the LRB6 release early next year, and given GW's track record of late my expectations for their business choices is at an all time low.

BeefyG wrote:Hi all,

As you are all aware GW recently held a gun to its own ruleset by threatening to "drastically cull" the ruleset if people in the BB community tried to make money out of selling figures that GW have made no effort to supply for consumers.

As a recent development, Galak Starscraper has apparently been ordered by GW to remove all information on forum posts pertaining to LRB6 and isn't allowed further comment.

Read about the goings on here:
http://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=29228&start=225

This is scary stuff for those of us who were looking forward to the LRB6 release early next year, and given GW's track record of late my expectations for their business choices is at an all time low.

Whistles past the graveyard....

intresting, but its what ive come to exspect from the Frackers at GW.

Boycott still alive and well. at least for my part. are you doing yours?

I think its a horrible shame, basically from a lack of clear communication stand point.

I think the community can take the already published 2008 rules review document plus the small list of changes already published in several places and do their own 'House Rules' that will basically be LRB 6 regardless of what Grandma Wendy decides to do.

I am I've been buying my stuff from alternate suppliers and will continue to do so.

I find it morally problematic that several posters are suggesting releasing the LRB6 as a torrent or otherwise flouting GW Legal. Like it or not, BB is still GW's game to do with as they wish, and if the fans cannot keep it alive with legal and above-board means, it doesn't deserve to survive.

BB players should simply switch to alternatives. Elfball seems a comprehensive choice.

Or let the LRB Committee (minus Jervis) take a copy of the v6 rules and reword it to avoid using GW copyright material, then release it as "Gore Cup".

Kilkrazy wrote:Or let the LRB Committee (minus Jervis) take a copy of the v6 rules and reword it to avoid using GW copyright material, then release it as "Gore Cup".

Gore Cup... ahem... WWwwwwwwwwwwwAAAAAAHHHH Bodyform! Bodyform for YOUUUUUUU!!!!!!!!!

Agamemnon2 wrote:I find it morally problematic that several posters are suggesting releasing the LRB6 as a torrent or otherwise flouting GW Legal. Like it or not, BB is still GW's game to do with as they wish, and if the fans cannot keep it alive with legal and above-board means, it doesn't deserve to survive.

Morally and legally I'd challenge that. Apart from registered trademarks, there is the legal case to answer that much of the authorship of LRB6 was at the hands of the unpaid fans. GW have not paid for that authorship, nor for the editorship of Galak, therefore they (may) have no legal write to control it, much as they might assert otherwise. No consideration: no contract. No contract: no control.

In any case, as has been said multiple times elsewhere, you cannot copyright an idea. Shearing LRB6 of its trademarks and rephrasing it (as a decent editor could do relatively easily) will make any fan publication legally bulletproof, whatever GW choose to do about it.

Personally I think it stinks that "fans" of a game are "afraid" that GW will pull nefarious tricks in supposed "revenge" for such an entirely legal move. It speaks v olumes about the utter contempt GW management deserve for letting their PR credit get so low with their customers. If I was on the board of GW I'd be looking for some PR-related (and legal-related) heads to roll right about now.

On the other hand, I personally think that the motivation for any potential restriction of LRB6 lies with a desire to maintain a parallel between the published table rules and the computer game (which is based on LRB5). If GW publish LRB6 then they will fear that fans will want the computer game rules updated to reflect the new ruleset, which I would imagine would seriously irritate Catalyst and cause friction in the Catalyst/GW relationship. In otherwords the tabletop gamers are being hamstrung by the moneymen who want Catalyst's game to get as decent a run as possible. Makes the most sense to me anyhow. Even if it is somewhat of a douche move.

Well, "douche move" is probably going too far of me. Perhaps it is more just showing how far the misalignment goes between commercial and hobby interests. And explains why I think that crass commercialism is always ultimately a bad thing for any hobby, even if it does produce shinier toys in the short run.

The BB Rules Committee has also stated that LRB6.0 won't become official until GW produces minis for the currently unsupported team (slanns). I doubt those will ever be done, so I am quite skeptical about the LRB6.0 release.

Hasdrubal wrote:The BB Rules Committee has also stated that LRB6.0 won't become official until GW produces minis for the currently unsupported team (slanns). I doubt those will ever be done, so I am quite skeptical about the LRB6.0 release.

Well we know that they will send a C&D to anyone else who tried to make frogs in football gear. GW should be able to handle their product and fanbase better than this, we're always being told they are a professional company that has been operating for 30+ years. In Bloodbowl they have a game that they have allowed updated rulesets to be released but they don't release miniatures to complement the game they are giving the go ahead for release. Then over the years other companies eventually do these figures and they make a fuss. "Wah, you're making figures we weren't going to make, not fair!" Then they say "Wah, if you're making these figures we'll suppress the rules that use them! Ha, that'll sort you!".

Meanwhile the fans just want to play a GW game and where ever possible use GW miniatures only going elsewhere when given no option. GW could try and manage their customer base to make money and create good PR, rather than continually gak on them.

What is GW's long term motive here? The terms of their star player embargo were so vague that it appears to be an excuse to release v6 minus the star players and blame the fans for their inevitable omission.

There's already a Slann team isn't there? Do you mean an actual (old school) Slann team, with man-sized frogs and human slaves, as opposed to the current Lizardman / Slann concept?

Modquisition note:

As Filbert is new here and didn't catch that the statement "slowed" is not appropriate, we'll edit this post for him.

What Filbert meant to say was Frazzled is an awesome Mod. In fact Frazzled Mod is Bestest Mod!

Agamemnon2 wrote:...If the fans cannot keep it alive with legal and above-board means, it doesn't deserve to survive.

That's a bit harsh! I think I understand GW's point of view, and agree with ther solution more, just remove the main reason for non GW bloodbowl minis; the starplayers.

Osbad wrote:
Morally and legally I'd challenge that. Apart from registered trademarks, there is the legal case to answer that much of the authorship of LRB6 was at the hands of the unpaid fans. GW have not paid for that authorship, nor for the editorship of Galak, therefore they (may) have no legal write to control it, much as they might assert otherwise. No consideration: no contract. No contract: no control.

The rule book text, and the game itself is GW'sintellectual property, regardless of how many fans submit their own improvements.

Osbad wrote:... you cannot copyright an idea...

the Patents office would disagree?

Osbad wrote:Personally I think it stinks that "fans" of a game are "afraid" that GW will pull nefarious tricks in supposed "revenge" for such an entirely legal move. It speaks v olumes about the utter contempt GW management deserve for letting their PR credit get so low with their customers. If I was on the board of GW I'd be looking for some PR-related (and legal-related) heads to roll right about now.

Basically you'd be pissed off that your legal team is protecting your IP?This has nothing to do with PR people.
What's happening is a large volume of a small fanbase (compared to 40k) are actively endorsing non GW mini's, if you go on the bloodbowl boards you'll see alot of people showing off their entirely nonGW teams and starplayers. GW has already made minis for all current teams. Remember GW provide these rules for free.

Osbad wrote:
On the other hand, I personally think that the motivation for any potential restriction of LRB6 lies with a desire to maintain a parallel between the published table rules and the computer game (which is based on LRB5). If GW publish LRB6 then they will fear that fans will want the computer game rules updated to reflect the new ruleset, which I would imagine would seriously irritate Catalyst and cause friction in the Catalyst/GW relationship. In otherwords the tabletop gamers are being hamstrung by the moneymen who want Catalyst's game to get as decent a run as possible. Makes the most sense to me anyhow. Even if it is somewhat of a douche move.

If you read the early LRB6 you'll see that there is very little red text (changes) in the actual rules section.

Hasdrubal wrote:The BB Rules Committee has also stated that LRB6.0 won't become official until GW produces minis for the currently unsupported team (slanns). I doubt those will ever be done, so I am quite skeptical about the LRB6.0 release.

This is probabily the most acuarate reason for the rumours/delay. the biggest change in BB in years is the introduction of the new frog team, leap,leap,leap.

George Spiggott wrote:What is GW's long term motive here? The terms of their star player embargo were so vague that it appears to be an excuse to release v6 minus the star players and blame the fans for their inevitable omission. There's already a Slann team isn't there? Do you mean an actual (old school) Slann team, with man-sized frogs and human slaves, as opposed to the current Lizardman / Slann concept?

I think the long term plan is to have Bloodbowl fans buying Bloodbowl minis. for too long GW has done nothing while the Bloodbowl community have been singing the praises of companies releaseing bunny girl football players etc.

I actually look forward to LRB6 with its bickering underworld teams and new frog guys... and I'll actually love it if they removed all StarPlayers, IMO they only unbalance the game.

Panic.

Panic wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:...If the fans cannot keep it alive with legal and above-board means, it doesn't deserve to survive.

That's a bit harsh! I think I understand GW's point of view, and agree with ther solution more, just remove the main reason for non GW bloodbowl minis; the starplayers.

The community would not be happy without the star players, they're a necessary part of the inducement system, or so I've been assured by Blood Bowl partisans.

Was looking forward to 6.0, and was waiting for it's release to start a league. Thanks again GW, for messing with my last GW game. Now I play none of your games.

>>the Patents office would disagree?

You can't patent an idea.

>>Remember GW provide these rules for free.

Or rather they don't because the issue at hand is GW's threat not to release them.

>>and I'll actually love it if they removed all StarPlayers, IMO they only unbalance the game.

Can't you just play the game without them?

Actually, thinking about it again, you can't play the game with them officially, because GW haven't released all the required figures.

Panic wrote:

Osbad wrote:... you cannot copyright an idea...

the Patents office would disagree?

I doubt that. They may say that you can Patent an idea, they're unlikely to say you can copyright one.

Panic wrote:I think the long term plan is to have Bloodbowl fans buying Bloodbowl minis.

That is somewhat reliant on GW having something to sell and GW thinking that the market is large enough to justify making something to sell. That hasn't been GW's plan for a while and I'm not seeing any evidence of change.

>>On the other hand, I personally think that the motivation for any potential restriction of LRB6 lies with a desire to maintain a parallel between the published table rules and the computer game (which is based on LRB5). If GW publish LRB6 then they will fear that fans will want the computer game rules updated to reflect the new ruleset, which I would imagine would seriously irritate Catalyst and cause friction in the Catalyst/GW relationship.

Computer game companies normally love doing updates on an established franchise.

George Spiggott wrote:

Panic wrote:

Osbad wrote:... you cannot copyright an idea...

the Patents office would disagree?

I doubt that. They may say that you can Patent an idea, they're unlikely to say you can copyright one.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't a patent specifically for a technical design or plan, say a clock movement for example and copyright is more for abstract property such as a thought, idea or strategy?

@ Filbert: No. Copyright covers the actual words, not the concepts held within those words.

http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p01_uk_copyright_law

"Copyright is an automatic right and arises whenever an individual or company creates a work. To qualify, a work should be regarded as original, and exhibits a degree of labour, skill or judgement.

Interpretation is related to the independent creation rather than the idea behind the creation. For example, your idea for a book would not itself be protected, but the actual content of a book you write would be. In other words, someone else is still entitled to write their own book around the same idea, provided they do not directly copy or adapt yours to do so.

Names, titles, short phrases and colours are not generally considered unique or substantial enough to be covered, but a creation, such as a logo, that combines these elements may be.

In short, work that expresses an idea may be protected, but not the idea behind it."

oh look. Internet Lawyers are fighting again.

Bottom Line: GW will do what it wants. Bloodbowl fans will do what they want, but all that seems to be is complain and throw their toys over what GW does in regards to a game that isn't really that good.

filbert wrote:

George Spiggott wrote:

Panic wrote:

Osbad wrote:... you cannot copyright an idea...

the Patents office would disagree?

I doubt that. They may say that you can Patent an idea, they're unlikely to say you can copyright one.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't a patent specifically for a technical design or plan, say a clock movement for example and copyright is more for abstract property such as a thought, idea or strategy?

Patents are designed to protect original ideas which have been properly thought out and embodied in designs, not just something that might pop up in your head.

Silly example -- I can have the idea that people should go for lunch between 2 and 5. It doesn't mean I can get a patent and charge everyone for doing it.

George Spiggott wrote:What is GW's long term motive here? The terms of their star player embargo were so vague that it appears to be an excuse to release v6 minus the star players and blame the fans for their inevitable omission.

Protect the video game most likely.

*shrug*

I can get all hot and bothered by the fans response, even if its released to torrets. GW all but abandoned blood bowl(and other specialist games) and the fans pretty much kept it alive for what, almost a decade? And now GW is getting all pissy over it.

Panic wrote:
What's happening is a large volume of a small fanbase (compared to 40k) are actively endorsing non GW mini's, if you go on the bloodbowl boards you'll see alot of people showing off their entirely nonGW teams and starplayers. GW has already made minis for all current teams. Remember GW provide these rules for free.

I'd just like to point out that on Dakka's forums, we have a lot of people showcasing non-GW miniatures in their armies, too, painted in non-GW paints, mounted on non-GW bases. The fans get to endorse whatever the fans want to, they're under no obligation to act as GW spokespeople, as you seem to think.

R.I.P.

The box game you can get from GW still has the cards and 2nd ed rulebook.

If a person buys the game from GW, they are basically paying for an obsolete rulebook, cards that haven't been used for the game in ten years, and two teams sculpted in 1994.

When we get new players into our league, they find the downloadable rules, and pick a team they want. whether they buy the box or GW teams or not is their call.
The trend among the players I know is to convert from WHFB minis. Going outside of GW is a secondary choice.

The rule changes for LRB5 to LRB6 have been known for probably 2-3 years. GW releasing them is a mere formality.
Most of the leagues and Tournaments I have played in have incorporated most of the changes already.

BloodBowl will still be played regardless of GW's decision with LRB6.
Unless GW comes and takes our dice, boards, and minis, we will still be playing it.
As long as we have tournaments that bring players back to a common ground, we do not need GW.
GW cannot forbid a LGS from having a BB tournament, nor can they stop a person from renting a hall to have one.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Panic wrote:
What's happening is a large volume of a small fanbase (compared to 40k) are actively endorsing non GW mini's, if you go on the bloodbowl boards you'll see alot of people showing off their entirely nonGW teams and starplayers. GW has already made minis for all current teams. Remember GW provide these rules for free.

I'd just like to point out that on Dakka's forums, we have a lot of people showcasing non-GW miniatures in their armies, too, painted in non-GW paints, mounted on non-GW bases. The fans get to endorse whatever the fans want to, they're under no obligation to act as GW spokespeople, as you seem to think.

But but... that is "watering down the percieved quality of the hobby as a whole"

Good to know GW is keeping up in the right path.

Gosh here we go with definitions again. From the U.S. Patent office, http://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/index.html#ptsc

"What Is a Patent?
A patent for an invention is the grant of a property right to the inventor, issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Generally, the term of a new patent is 20 years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States or, in special cases, from the date an earlier related application was filed, subject to the payment of maintenance fees. U.S. patent grants are effective only within the United States, U.S. territories, and U.S. possessions. Under certain circumstances, patent term extensions or adjustments may be available.

The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute and of the grant itself, “the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling” the invention in the United States or “importing” the invention into the United States. What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention. Once a patent is issued, the patentee must enforce the patent without aid of the USPTO.

There are three types of patents:

1) Utility patents may be granted to anyone who invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof;

2) Design patents may be granted to anyone who invents a new, original, and ornamental design for an article of manufacture; and

3) Plant patents may be granted to anyone who invents or discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of plant."

You'll kindly note that none of these apply to making a game.
Also, patents are not forever or even for the absurd amount of time that copyrights run; the maximum length of a patent is 20 years from the date of application and may not be lengthened or renewed.

Many people seem to be unable to differentiate the difference between a patent and a copyright. Here's a link to a nice lawyer that will explain it to you, http://www.lawmart.com/forms/difference.htm

Now, the interesting thing about copyrights is that you cannot copyright the rules to a game; it's interesting how the law specifically mentions you can't. Here, look at this, from the government: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html
Simply get the LRB, take out all mention to GW, any of it's trademarks and images and you can mass produce it all for free if you wanted to.

I like Kilkrazy's idea to call it gore cup (as Blood Bowl is protected as a trademark).

What confuses me most about this and GW sharpshooting layers is the fact that the Blood Bowl Videogame feels a lot like advertisment for the board game. Everytime I played it I thought "man, I wish could play the original right now".