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.

GW doesn't think it's target audience would know how to pronounce codices.

Might be mistaken for fish lollies
(trns = popscicle)

The way that I see it, if I own an army, I will buy the codex to go along with them. But if I just want to poke through a book once in a while but not actually play the army, downloading doesn't seem so bad-especially if I could just look at it in my LGS anyway. But I absolutely agree about Scribed. I have a friend who uses it and swears that everything on it is perfect and has accused me of cheating when I used the rules from my rulebook-he told me Scribed was more updated and my rulebook was wrong. I'd love to say that I'm kidding...but I'm not. He even said that according to Scribed, you could now throw grenades again and they use the small blast template to hit. Scribed can go straight to Satan and I won't ever use it myself. Can't believe I missed this rant before, as I totally agree with it! (well, with the anti-Scribed part. Downloading I gave my 2cents on already)

The debate on morality amuses me. Morality by whose standard? What definition of morality?

But without getting into that, I won the codex for my army, as do my friends for theirs. We also have PDF copies of each codex on a common computer in the games room in case somebody isn't there with their codex. We have not denied GW any profit, short of owning multiple copies of the same codex for a regular gaming group.

The issue is not black and white as has already been pointed out. Greys exist, and rightfully so.

Blacksails wrote:The debate on morality amuses me. Morality by whose standard? What definition of morality?

But without getting into that, I won the codex for my army, as do my friends for theirs. We also have PDF copies of each codex on a common computer in the games room in case somebody isn't there with their codex. We have not denied GW any profit, short of owning multiple copies of the same codex for a regular gaming group.

The issue is not black and white as has already been pointed out. Greys exist, and rightfully so.

This. There is no universal 'good/bad' or 'right/wrong'. There is only a person's beliefs versus the tolerance of everyone else.

How is it we got to 5 pages and no one pointed out how silly moral relativism is? I'm ashamed Dakka Dakka, where are all the e-philosphers and other pretentious biscuit heads at?

Blacksails wrote:The debate on morality amuses me. Morality by whose standard? What definition of morality?
The issue is not black and white as has already been pointed out. Greys exist, and rightfully so.

This is one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard.
There's no shades of gray on morality here. It's black and white. Stealing is wrong, and you're absurd if you think that this instance is somehow special.

You're not stealing food to feed your family because you live on the street.
You're not engaged in an act of self-defense, or any situation where public opinion would clear you of wrongdoing.

You don't need a Codex if you can't afford it. You're no different than a shoplifter or a guy who steals a case of beer from a gas station.

But without getting into that, I own the codex for my army, as do my friends for theirs. We also have PDF copies of each codex on a common computer in the games room in case somebody isn't there with their codex. We have not denied GW any profit, short of owning multiple copies of the same codex for a regular gaming group.

Did you scan and do the PDFs yourself?
If you did: you're fine. If you didn't: You committed an illegal act by downloading copywritten material that is available without the owner's permission. It's irrelevant if you own it or not; it's the law that it's only acceptable when it's copied BY YOU for private use. Which brings us to the next part...
Have you or your friends made the PDF available to anyone outside of the group or posted it on a public filesharing site?
If you've done that: You've also broken the law, as it goes beyond private use.

The Dreadnote wrote:I think that people growing their own food are immoral. I work hard to get people their Big Macs, and these bastards are sat at home eating vegetables. I need to get my wages too, and if there's nobody in the restaurant, there's no need for me to work.

this is the stupidist thing you have said so far

someone growing their own food isn't stealing from you, if they want a big mac they buy it (you can't pirate a big mac).

the whole point is that you don't think you have to pay for something people have spent time and money making.

daedalus wrote:

Blacksails wrote:The debate on morality amuses me. Morality by whose standard? What definition of morality?

But without getting into that, I won the codex for my army, as do my friends for theirs. We also have PDF copies of each codex on a common computer in the games room in case somebody isn't there with their codex. We have not denied GW any profit, short of owning multiple copies of the same codex for a regular gaming group.

The issue is not black and white as has already been pointed out. Greys exist, and rightfully so.

This. There is no universal 'good/bad' or 'right/wrong'. There is only a person's beliefs versus the tolerance of everyone else.

Actually there is.
It's called "societal norms".
Stealing is bad is accepted across every society. The only time where it's acceptable is if you're starving and have no money from lack of work.
Killing someone is bad is accepted across every society. The only time where it's acceptable is if your own life is being threatened and there's no way to ratify the situation other than killing the other guy first.

I could go on if you want, but there's a reason that "Do unto others as you would want them to do unto you" is called "The Golden Rule".

Hint: And it's not because people put it up on the wall in shiny gold lettering.

Wow that was fast

I own a paper copy of the codex I use (IG), but I also have seen torrents of all the codices. *cough*

If I'm going to play the army, I'm going to buy the codex. I'm not playing Daemonhunters, Chaos, or Tau, so I'm not going to buy the codex. They're nice to look at to gauge what I should plan against, or as a reference, but I have no real need to buy them.

asimo77 wrote:Wow that was fast

Well, moral relativism wasn't brought up until around page 3-4.

That's how we got to 5 pages without it ever really being surmised about.

"Copyright infringement is your best entertainment value." - Negativland

I enjoy reading my illegal pdfs at the same time as I'm watching pirated movies.

Boo Hoo Big Whoop

I don't feel like sifting through 5 pages of... well... this. How pissed would the OP be if he knew what vassal was?

Free models too? You don't have to give a penny to play warhammer 40k with all the rules and supplements? Heresy.

Scribd is the only reason I am an okay player, knowing the codices lets me catch shenanigans and know how to deal with things.

I wouldn't use a paper codex for about a thousand reasons, but people at my local stores do, I am fine with that.

I won't pretend I am better than someone just because I pay an extra $100 to a company.

I don't buy from e-bay either, more of a dedication to my local store for all they have given me.

Pointing a finger at us simply because you have silly illusions about a company going out of business from their codices not being purchased is just...

I have purchased 8 codices and 5 armies so far, with more to come. All of it from the local store (or one of its patrons) to boot.

Steeling is wrong and steeling intellectually copywritten material is wrong. With that said, the concept of intellectual property rights within the business sphere will have to adjust to the digital age. Chasing the vanishing shadows of an out of date business model that works contrary to human nature is not a successful strategy. The sooner companies like GW wrap their head around that, the better.

Argue all you want about rights and wrongs in regard to published material. You’ll go round in circles until your head spins off. “Can I lend my codex to a friend?” “Can I copy my codex then gift it to a friend?” “Can he do the same?” “Can I gift a codex to a stranger?”.

The bottom line is this. We live in an age where immaterial goods can be replicated and transferred between parties effortlessly. GW should start to look at their codexes and rules sets as “marketing material” for their models. They’ve said time and again that they are a “model company” not a “gaming company” and if that’s true, their business is built on models – not rules.

What would happen if all codexes were published by GW online free for everyone… or for a moderate website membership fee? Would the world of miniature wargaming as we know it implode? No, probably not. GW may not make as much money off of publishing, but they would certainly not lose money from publishing either. Anyone’s hobby shop still have the last Dark Eldar codex sitting around somewhere? Probably on a discount rack? Yeah… someone had to pay to have that book printed and now its garbage.

What if the codexes existed purely in digital form on GW’s website? There are a huge number of questions the community needs FAQ’d. How much time and effort would it take to answer those questions and post Codex XXX version 1.1 on the web and issue a press release saying latest updates have arrived? more importantly, how much COST would be involved?

Suppose there’s a gross imbalance in the game somewhere. Tournaments are dominated by one or two armies because of either a rules exploit or poor external balancing? How much effort would it take for GW to tweak individual units within a codex (point cost, special rules, etc.)?

Suppose GW wants to add a completely new unit to a codex. How much time and effort does it take to add a new entry to a codex that exists purely in digital form? Suddenly GW has a medium through which it can represent ANY model they develop instantly and they don’t have to rely on White Dwarf or the next codex edition.

Free codexes in digital form certainly have their drawbacks but they also have their advantages and successful publishing companies must (read MUST, not SHOULD) adapt to human nature in the digital age if they want to survive.

I don’t support piracy, but I don’t look down on it either. The world of print media is dying and anyone who says differently is either biased or possessing an unrealistic concept of the future. Feel free to argue whether it’s right or wrong when people pirate published material but it really doesn’t matter. You may as well argue whether it’s right or wrong that it’s snowing outside or whether it’s right or wrong that birds can fly. Pirate away as far as I’m concerned. I’ll buy my codex but I’ll also be first in line to pay a membership fee to GW.com if their codexes ever go digital because the pirate community has made GW’s physical publishing business obsolete… or should I say WHEN the pirate community makes GW’s physical publishing business obsolete.

GW will adjust – they’d certainly like you to think that they won’t be able to adjust, but they will. If they can’t than they are far too stupid to survive as a business in the information age anyway.

Sanguinis wrote:So I've decided to start this thread both in defense of Games Workshop and because I'm getting sick of hearing about this Scribe or Scribed or whatever the Feth its called.

Is GW's prices a little crazy. YES! No doubt about it. However, we must all pay the price in order to play the game. Lets face it, if EVERY Warhammer player in the world stopped buying codex's and models, and used Scribe and Ebay to buy their models, GW would go out of business and then guess what? No more Warhammer.

I have several friends who insist on using Scribe and do not want to pay the price for codex's, Imperial Armor, etc. Also I have just recently seen a thread in YMDC in which a person was quoting an Eldar Codex they got off Scribe and the Codex was WRONG.

There is a reason why Scribe is not allowed in tournaments. The reason is because not only is it illegal, as it is stealing, but also because anybody could take that information and alter it. I could say Eldrad can use as many Psychic powers a turn as he wants, or I could say Swarmlord has a 3+ invulnerable always. To someone who is starting out and is not familiar with Warhammer but wants to "avoid" the price of a codex they wouldn't know and would be in for a rude awakening when they go to their first tournament and find out that their army doesn't work the way they thought.

I get angry at my friends who use Scribe for, probably the most important reason, I and other players at our FLGS pay the prices for Codex's, Imperial Armor, etc, why shouldn't you? What makes you so special?

Anyway I needed to vent my anger after hearing about this Fething Scribe website and reading that latest thread. I hope other Dakkites can agree with me that although GW's prices may be a bit on the expensive side, their Codex's are written very well (most of them) and we don't want to cheat other people and the economy by using illegally downloaded Codex's.

Dude, scribd rules.

Kanluwen wrote:You're not stealing food to feed your family because you live on the street.
You're not engaged in an act of self-defense, or any situation where public opinion would clear you of wrongdoing.

I'm reminded of an interview with a burglar that I saw.

He felt that he was justified into breaking into peoples' houses because he deserved to be able to have nice clothes and go out clubbing & drinking.
Besides, the insurance companies paid for the stuff he took so what's problem?

BluntmanDC wrote:the whole point is that you don't think you have to pay for something people have spent time and money making.

That's about the long and the short of it, yeah. Does this make me a thief? Am I now going to go out and take people's possessions?

Why should you be given money simply because you spent time and money making something? The labour theory of value is communist clap-trap.

Nurglitch wrote:Why should you be given money simply because you spent time and money making something? The labour theory of value is communist clap-trap.

Why should you get the benefit of something I've made without paying me?

Public opinion is one thing
private actions another.

While you claim on behalf of western society that everyone is against piracy, a good many are doing something to contradict that.

Kanluwen wrote:

daedalus wrote:

Blacksails wrote:The debate on morality amuses me. Morality by whose standard? What definition of morality?

But without getting into that, I won the codex for my army, as do my friends for theirs. We also have PDF copies of each codex on a common computer in the games room in case somebody isn't there with their codex. We have not denied GW any profit, short of owning multiple copies of the same codex for a regular gaming group.

The issue is not black and white as has already been pointed out. Greys exist, and rightfully so.

This. There is no universal 'good/bad' or 'right/wrong'. There is only a person's beliefs versus the tolerance of everyone else.

Actually there is.
It's called "societal norms".
Stealing is bad is accepted across every society. The only time where it's acceptable is if you're starving and have no money from lack of work.
Killing someone is bad is accepted across every society. The only time where it's acceptable is if your own life is being threatened and there's no way to ratify the situation other than killing the other guy first.

I could go on if you want, but there's a reason that "Do unto others as you would want them to do unto you" is called "The Golden Rule".

Hint: And it's not because people put it up on the wall in shiny gold lettering.

Who's "societal norms"? Societal norms change from society to society, true there are some that many people consider Universal, but the grey area he was suggesting is if you have a copy isnt it your right to do with that copy as you like? for example put it on your computer for easy viewing? This is accepted as legal aslong as you are not sharing it.

The grey area is if you have to codex but get the electronic version from another source. To say its illegal for you to have it is not true unless you look at the means in which it was obtained, in which case if its legal for yourself to copy why is it wrong to get a copy of a book you own without copying it yourself? Thats the grey area.

Haha....

I'm sure none of you Holy Rollers have ever d/led a song from Napster back in the day or DL'ed a torrent.

Priceless

Kanluwen wrote:
Actually there is.
It's called "societal norms".
Stealing is bad is accepted across every society. The only time where it's acceptable is if you're starving and have no money from lack of work.
Killing someone is bad is accepted across every society. The only time where it's acceptable is if your own life is being threatened and there's no way to ratify the situation other than killing the other guy first.

I could go on if you want, but there's a reason that "Do unto others as you would want them to do unto you" is called "The Golden Rule".

Hint: And it's not because people put it up on the wall in shiny gold lettering.

Yup, societal norms CERTAINLY exist. Something I would otherwise describe as actions/beliefs operating within the "tolerance of everyone else".

Are they universal? Not really. There's places in the world still where cannibalism is accepted practice. There's places where you can murder, steal, or otherwise hurt people depending sometimes on just who they are. Not everyone is equal and not everywhere is just. While not wishing to derail the thread, Sharia does well to illustrate the many things that one would consider "Universal Morality" to be far from it.

Really, the fact that there are so many people here who feel justified in download codices/books/what-have-you and the fact that such actions are so prevalent online should be the surest evidence that it's not universally considered wrong. Or are that many people just misguided sociopaths?

Kanluwen wrote:Stealing is bad is accepted across every society. The only time where it's acceptable is if you're starving and have no money from lack of work.

This line in particular. So there's a condition for stealing to be an acceptable act. Grey area, by your definition. In an individualist society like ours (North America, Europe), individual gains and private property are paramount, giving way to copyright laws, theft, and other aspects of our judicial systems. In a collectivist society, theft could be easily defined as something else entirely. Though every culture these days has become a mirror of Western values, Buddhists do not own anything, rather everything is communal. What is theft in such a context?

The point is, morality and ethics, laws, and societel norms vary. Universalism is a valid argument, but a plethora of other equally valid counter-arguments exist. In our society, it may be argued that theft is ALWAYS wrong, because the act itself is immoral regardless of the intention. Some will state the intention is the deciding factor (stealing medicine to cure your ill mother because you can't afford it, as an example). At the end of the day, the only facts are that we have laws that state what is right and wrong in our society. Are the laws moral?

Well thats another beast by itself.

I own every album on my computer because I support the artists I listen to, and I will continue to purchase GW material. But I personally feel there's nothing wrong with downloading music to see if the album is any good, or previewing a codex.

@ daedalus

Accepted practice doesn't make it right, these socities where you can murder, steal, and so on are simply put bad socities and are wrong.

Also just because everyone does it has no bearing on whether it is right or wrong.

Slavery was acceptable in the past, is it true slavery is wrong? If yes, then it was still wrong back then as well.

asimo77 wrote:@ daedalus

Accepted practice doesn't make it right, these socities where you can murder, steal, and so on are simply put bad socities and are wrong.

Also just because evryone does has no bearing on whether it is right or wrong.

Slavery was acceptable in the past, is it true slavery is wrong? If yes, then it was still wrong back then as well.

There are societies where people wear clothes! how barbaric! dont they know that they shouldent cover up the body god gave them

The point is Right and Wrong are subjective, there is no universal definition on this. Slavery was considered perfectly acceptable then yes, is it condsidered right? not to me, to them yes.

Since when was downloading a pdf equal to slavery?

This is the whole problem with these interminbale discussions.
Everything gets rolled up into one giant ball of snot.

It was stated that "the public" have an opinion that such activity is wrong so any aspect of downloading copyrighted material is wholly and uncategorically wrong.

The public opinion of the illegality of this is one thing. But the public is made up of individuals who are constamtly breaking that stricture in one way or another.
Hands up all those who think downloading is immoral but post other peoples' pictures on the internet, watch videos of dubious legality on Youtube etc.

The fact that everyone doing it has every bearing on the discussion because if everyone is doing it, public opinion about the matter means nothing since everyone is the public.
Please distinguish between people saying what they think is the right thing to say, and the actions of that public in contradiction of their own beliefs out of individual gratification.

@asimo77:

But doesn't accepted practice make it right, unless you can concretely define right and wrong. I know what I consider right and wrong, and you know what you consider right and wrong, but they don't necessarily overlap 100%. It's like if you tried to explain the difference between art and porn or tried to classify and define vulgarity in a concrete and well thought-out series of terms.

Hell, you can't even find five people to unanimously agree on what makes a 40k list cheesy.

Edit: Speaking of right and wrong, is it wrong I want to try this sometime?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_brains_%28cuisine%29