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.

It's not a subject of lazy or effort.
This is simply a matter of copyright.


Or are we next going to argue that as GRRM hasn't finished the next Game of Thrones book that we should let other authors finish the book for him without his permission?

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
GW “abandoned” Craftworld Aeldari 20 years ago?

Apart from plastic jetbikes, farseer, wraithkinight, whatever that plane thing is called, wraithguard, an autarch, howling banshees and Jain Zar all released in the last 10 years.

I’m not suggesting there isn’t a long way to go or room for improvement, but abandoned?

Cwe have had 1 kit on average every 2 years for yhe past decade.

Marines have averaged 15 per year.

OK? And that means what exactly in the context of this discussion? Maybe Marines sell 30x as much as Eldar so they get 30 times the support?

The only reason Marines would sell better than other factions, is the fact other armies can barely dream of having anywhere close to the levels of support Marines get in literally every aspect, and thus the players of said armies slowly stop buying from Geedubs and move on to alternatives that actually give them new models.

As long as sales meet projected expectations GW couldn't give a monkeys who goes where. (simply speaking)

The fact remains that Eldar or Aeldari have a supported range. (Don't shoot the messenger, take a look, they are physically available on the GW webshop)

Any 'Pointy ears in Space' become a problem because not dealing with them becomes a legal problem for GW down the line re: their IP. (Thanks, copyright and IP laws!)

Even if GW release new minis for every faction and include new units to compete 1 to 1 with each new Primaris unit there will be 3rd party makers offering their own version because GW is still the biggest draw and sucking on that teet is a good way to draw interest and money.

 bullyboy wrote:
And what makes people think that several Aspects haven't already been redone, and are just waiting for the release schedule to catch up?

Occam's razor, for one.

Complete lack of evidence, for another.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
With sculptors as talented as these guys, why not create something unique themselves with a bit of background and perhaps a game to go with it?

The market for third-party wargames practically nonexistent. It's much more profitable to produce something 40k players can use.

Ketara, are you saying no one reasonable could believe these minis were GW minis if shown them without context?

Other than the helmets (which could easily be swapped by converters) every other part of each mini is sculpted in GW’s distinct Eldar style. The cuts of the armor plates look damn near identical—certainly close enough that I could easily have believed these bodies were the result of an updated GW kit. That’s why I feel like they cross the line from a Kromlech or Victoria type of mini and fall closer to “stl recasting”.

If someone digitally sculpted Darth Vader, with all his details including all his chest buttons and the grooves in his pants, but gave his cape a fur texture and kept his distinctive helmet but replaced the faceplate with a visor, would that qualify as IP infringement?

These people should leak their STL files.

Let the fans of eldar get some updates finally even if they have to do it themselves.

GW will never ever update the eldar line. We know it, they know it, and Blood of the Phoenix proved it by dumping the last of anything they had ready for eldar in one of the most insulting and blatant FU’s I’ve ever seen given to a fan base.

Leak the CADs leak the STL. It’s time someone did something for the eldar players besides crap on them.

Mr Church, generally speaking I believe they could legally do exactly tat as they're no longer profiting.

The legal argument (I'm not going to get into which parts I agree with as "right") is that they're using someone else's IP for profit, competing with the IP and mistakable for it.

 Ketara wrote:

MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

Except that it's true

It's no more parasitic than designing a phone case which fits iphone proportions, a keyboard that works with a certain type of motherboard, or a custom tyre that fits a car. That it is to say, not very. I've never understood this need some GW hobbyists have to imagine that the Warhams world is some special commercial snowflake that morally deserves to be immune to the same level of market competition as every other sector of business.

None of your analogies are even remotely appropriate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I’ve never understood why some people think that, just because GW owns is the biggest IP in wargaming, it’s okay for literally anybody to ripoff that IP.

I don't think you understand what parasitic means in this context. These models are not wholly reliant upon GW for inspiration. They are not carbon copy ripoffs. They could be used as representative of any number of other factions in any number of other wargames. Look at the 'Guardian' proxies. There are design elements similar to those used by GW's eldar, but nothing that would be protectable (smooth/rounded with embedded rocks does not equal a defendable concept). The helmets are completely different. The shoulder spikes are curved, not straight. The armour segments are laid out differently (look around the knees, for example). Even the Heavy Weapon platform is completely fresh/new and looks nothing like the GW one.

The models are sufficiently different that they are in no way a carbon copy. Kromlech's orks are closer than these.

An iphone compatible case may well fit an iphone. But it also fits any other phone or pocket device of those dimensions. Likewise, these models could be used any number of other wargames. They are therefore not parasitic in any sense. They are fully capable of standing and existing independently as a design concept. Even if they have been initially created with compatibility in mind.

Except in this case it's more like copying the Iphone and tweaking a few of the design choices to make it seem slightly different rather then a design case creation. Everyone can tell what the design is from and for, the name itself is close to the name of the original "Iphone" in this case, and the product would only exist because of GW's gaming. These are clearly designed because of the outcry of "Please give us Eldar already!". To say otherwise is just disingenuous.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Mr Church, generally speaking I believe they could legally do exactly tat as they're no longer profiting.

The legal argument (I'm not going to get into which parts I agree with as "right") is that they're using someone else's IP for profit, competing with the IP and mistakable for it.

Bingo. I’d respect the heck out of them if they did.

But watch. Just because of this GW will crank out a single eldar update in a month or two (something simple, like a single Phoenix lord or 5 man aspect update) and scream “Oh we just loooove Aeldari! See we made one thing!”.

Mr.Church13 wrote:
These people should leak their STL files.

Let the fans of eldar get some updates finally even if they have to do it themselves.

GW will never ever update the eldar line. We know it, they know it, and Blood of the Phoenix proved it by dumping the last of anything they had ready for eldar in one of the most insulting and blatant FU’s I’ve ever seen given to a fan base.

Leak the CADs leak the STL. It’s time someone did something for the eldar players besides crap on them.

I am ever curious about this. What is so personally affronting about GW's approach to their mini ranges?

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Mr.Church13 wrote:
These people should leak their STL files.

Let the fans of eldar get some updates finally even if they have to do it themselves.

GW will never ever update the eldar line. We know it, they know it, and Blood of the Phoenix proved it by dumping the last of anything they had ready for eldar in one of the most insulting and blatant FU’s I’ve ever seen given to a fan base.

Leak the CADs leak the STL. It’s time someone did something for the eldar players besides crap on them.

I am ever curious about this. What is so personally affronting about GW's approach to their mini ranges?

That when they CHOOSE to not update a range for damn near 20 years, stick us with finecast, say they care, and then do this garbage when someone comes along and does the work they obviously don’t want to do for them. It’s a bit infuriating.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Mr.Church13 wrote:
These people should leak their STL files.

Let the fans of eldar get some updates finally even if they have to do it themselves.

GW will never ever update the eldar line. We know it, they know it, and Blood of the Phoenix proved it by dumping the last of anything they had ready for eldar in one of the most insulting and blatant FU’s I’ve ever seen given to a fan base.

Leak the CADs leak the STL. It’s time someone did something for the eldar players besides crap on them.

I am ever curious about this. What is so personally affronting about GW's approach to their mini ranges?

The fact most of them were designed while Reagan was president, are made of a material that literally gives you cancer and are barely recognisable as humanoids.

 Overread wrote:
It's not a subject of lazy or effort.
This is simply a matter of copyright.


Or are we next going to argue that as GRRM hasn't finished the next Game of Thrones book that we should let other authors finish the book for him without his permission?

Yeah they should just hand it over to some lazy hack screenwriters to feth up so epically the world collectively goes from hyped out of their mind to forgetting all about it in three seconds flat.

Grr martin is a fantastic argument to bring up in FAVOR of copyright, yes sir.

 Overread wrote:
It's not a subject of lazy or effort.
This is simply a matter of copyright.


Or are we next going to argue that as GRRM hasn't finished the next Game of Thrones book that we should let other authors finish the book for him without his permission?

It's called Fanfiction and there are entire sites dedicated to it

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

How is that remotely comparable? GW isn't even a person.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
And what makes people think that several Aspects haven't already been redone, and are just waiting for the release schedule to catch up?

Occam's razor, for one.

Complete lack of evidence, for another.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
With sculptors as talented as these guys, why not create something unique themselves with a bit of background and perhaps a game to go with it?

The market for third-party wargames practically nonexistent. It's much more profitable to produce something 40k players can use.

Due to how far in advance these projects are started (see prior Jes Goodwin interview), lack of visual evidence in the community has zero bearing whatsoever.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

How is that remotely comparable? GW isn't even a person.

Because you're saying they're asking for it and this was the most tactful, if least impactful, comparison to be made to point out you're victim blaming.
Saying they were asking for it is not a valid defense anymore.

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

How is that remotely comparable? GW isn't even a person.

Because you're saying they're asking for it and this was the most tactful, if least impactful, comparison to be made to point out you're victim blaming.
Saying they were asking for it is not a valid defense anymore.

...because, a company that makes an extremely popular tabletop game, and then refuses to provide quality miniatures for said tabletop game, is obviously in no way encouraging third party companies to produce said miniatures to fill the glaring niche they left?

Why are you acting like a multi-million company is some poor, helpless victim of a heinous crime that needs our sympathies?

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

How is that remotely comparable? GW isn't even a person.

Because you're saying they're asking for it and this was the most tactful, if least impactful, comparison to be made to point out you're victim blaming.
Saying they were asking for it is not a valid defense anymore.

...because, a company that makes an extremely popular tabletop game, and then refuses to provide quality miniatures for said tabletop game, is obviously in no way encouraging third party companies to produce said miniatures to fill the glaring niche they left?

Why are you acting like a multi-million company is some poor, helpless victim of a heinous crime that needs our sympathies?

It's still an entity with legal rights. Why are you advocating violating those rights?

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

How is that remotely comparable? GW isn't even a person.

Because you're saying they're asking for it and this was the most tactful, if least impactful, comparison to be made to point out you're victim blaming.
Saying they were asking for it is not a valid defense anymore.

...because, a company that makes an extremely popular tabletop game, and then refuses to provide quality miniatures for said tabletop game, is obviously in no way encouraging third party companies to produce said miniatures to fill the glaring niche they left?

Why are you acting like a multi-million company is some poor, helpless victim of a heinous crime that needs our sympathies?

It's still an entity with legal rights. Why are you advocating violating those rights?

Because it's a multi-million company, that refuses to give quality product there's demand for to such an extent that there are several companies entirely dedicated to doing it for them. They couldn't be asking for it any harder without repeating the entire Chapterhouse situation.

Why are you defending a corporation that doesn't even register your existence, never will, and couldn't care less about your opinion?

BobtheInquisitor wrote:Ketara, are you saying no one reasonable could believe these minis were GW minis if shown them without context?

Other than the helmets (which could easily be swapped by converters) every other part of each mini is sculpted in GW’s distinct Eldar style.

'Style' is not a legally acceptable or valid term. And that's my point here. Copyright, like any area of law, is precise to the point of opacity. What you, me, or anyone else thinks is 'fair game' or 'parasitism' or anything in between is completely and utterly irrelevant. Here are the facts.

Games Workshop does not hold a trademark on the word 'Aeterni'. Whatever it may sound like, whatever associations it may conjure up in your mind, this title is available for any product in wargaming to use. No Games Workshop trademark or terminology is being used in the written marketing of this product.

Games Workshop does not hold a patent on the process used to create, invent, or design these models or their function. 'Imagination' and 'wargaming' are freely available to all.

That leaves us with the area of copyright. As things stand, these Aeterni models are not carbon copies. Whatever associations they may conjure up in your mind personally do not matter. Only certain design aspects are copyrightable and they must meet strict legal criteria. These aspects cannot be basic geometric shapes - so in this case, the smooth flowing armour forms or gemstones are explicitly excluded. An 'idea' is also very explicitly NOT copyrightable.

All that can be copyrighted is expression of an idea in a fixed form. Games Workshop's fixed forms in this case are their models. In order to generate a new copyright, all our Aeterni need to do is meet the threshold of originality separating their models from Games Workshop's ones, a surprisingly low bar. Observe.



The GW model has a gem in the centre of their chest. The Aeterni one is on the breast at the side.
The GW has six abdominal muscle like markings on the stomach. The Aeterni one has two in a circular and different fashion.
The GW shoulder mounted vents are square. The Aeterni ones are curved.
The GW and Aeterni helmets are completely different, as are the guns.
The GW shoulder pads cut towards the head. The Aeterni ones do not.
The GW back spikes are completely different shape to the Aeterni ones.

I could list another dozen points. These are very explicitly two different models in every way that legally matters. Because what legally matters, is that the Aeterni models meets the 'Threshold of Originality' - not whether they have a similar aesthetic or idea behind them. The Aeterni models very very clearly do not infringe upon Games Workshop's fixed expression of an idea. The idea itself is not copyrightable and is not owned by Games Workshop, whatever they may choose to assert.

This coincidentally, was the point which Chapterhouse's lawyers honed in on as making Games Workshop's claims likely to collapse in the second round of their case. The jury in the initial trial made most of their rulings for Games Workshop based upon a gut feeling that 'this looked like that and therefore probably infringed', when in reality, international copyright law very explicitly does not permit for that interpretation. Appeal courts are controlled by Judges rather than Juries, who apply the law as closely as possible to how it is written with several legal advisors. To have permitted the existing ruling to stand would have overturned the entire basis of existing international copyright law. Which was never going to happen.

I reiterate, it doesn't matter what you, me, or anyone else thinks something 'looks a bit like'. What matters is the law.

If this particular case went to court, Games Workshop might manage to blag another initial jury win if they were convincing enough. But the minute it went in front of a panel of a higher court who understands the law, it would be thrown out without a second thought. Games Workshop's entire legal strategy is based upon people not calling their bluff for long enough for it to ever get there. It's that simple.

The picture you posted literally has one of the soulstones on the side of the chest for the GW artillery crew?

Also:


Some are centered, some aren't.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Some are centered, some aren't.

Fair enough. But as stated, geometric shapes are explicitly excluded from copyright. And I repeat, I could have gone on to list other differences, there are plenty of them! I'm sure you could too, if I was paying you £100 per difference spotted. And lawyers get paid a lot more than that!

But why would I want your funny money?!

Frankly, I think any of us discussing the matter are going to always come down on one side or the other--legalities be darned. This Kickstarter was probably doomed from the start when folks literally started posting it on GW's social for people asking about new Eldar releases though.

That all said:
No way would I think this to be a coincidental thing. They even seemed to use a bit of an actual Eldar kit, potentially scanned in, for the basis of the Soul whatever's launcher.

 Kanluwen wrote:
But why would I want your funny money?!

Frankly, I think any of us discussing the matter are going to always come down on one side or the other--legalities be darned. This Kickstarter was probably doomed from the start when folks literally started posting it on GW's social for people asking about new Eldar releases though.

This is the thing. I don't have a problem with someone saying 'I think aftermarket competition is unfair on original creators and rips off their sales'. I mean, sure. It's an opinion. Not one I have, but I won't claim mine is objectively right.

It does get up my nose slightly when people start parroting Games Workshop's dreadful legal arguments though.

 Ketara wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
But why would I want your funny money?!

Frankly, I think any of us discussing the matter are going to always come down on one side or the other--legalities be darned. This Kickstarter was probably doomed from the start when folks literally started posting it on GW's social for people asking about new Eldar releases though.

This is the thing. I don't have a problem with someone saying 'I think aftermarket competition is unfair on original creators and rips off their sales'. I mean, sure. It's an opinion.

Except usually people go for 3rd party alternatives because what GW offers is so dreadfull they'd never buy it anyway.

 Overread wrote:
It's not a subject of lazy or effort.
This is simply a matter of copyright.


Or are we next going to argue that as GRRM hasn't finished the next Game of Thrones book that we should let other authors finish the book for him without his permission?

If it means Sansa doesn't get auto-success with a double helping of smug and Tyrion doesnt eat stupid pills I would be up for it.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

How is that remotely comparable? GW isn't even a person.

Because you're saying they're asking for it and this was the most tactful, if least impactful, comparison to be made to point out you're victim blaming.
Saying they were asking for it is not a valid defense anymore.

...because, a company that makes an extremely popular tabletop game, and then refuses to provide quality miniatures for said tabletop game, is obviously in no way encouraging third party companies to produce said miniatures to fill the glaring niche they left?

Why are you acting like a multi-million company is some poor, helpless victim of a heinous crime that needs our sympathies?

It's still an entity with legal rights. Why are you advocating violating those rights?

Because it's a multi-million company, that refuses to give quality product there's demand for to such an extent that there are several companies entirely dedicated to doing it for them. They couldn't be asking for it any harder without repeating the entire Chapterhouse situation.

Why are you defending a corporation that doesn't even register your existence, never will, and couldn't care less about your opinion?

There’s an entire range of Eldar miniatures available for purchase right now. Whether they are “quality product” or not is a subjective opinion, but IP law isn’t determined by your opinion of whether something is good or not. Your entire argument boils down to you thinking you should be able to have something because you want it.

And his fanatical hate of anything GW officially made

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

No One Important wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
If GW doesn't want people to rip-off their IP, they shouldn't give them such easy and blatant opportunities to do so by their own inaction.

And I guess people who get mugged are asking for it too by walking down the wrong street?

How is that remotely comparable? GW isn't even a person.

Because you're saying they're asking for it and this was the most tactful, if least impactful, comparison to be made to point out you're victim blaming.
Saying they were asking for it is not a valid defense anymore.

...because, a company that makes an extremely popular tabletop game, and then refuses to provide quality miniatures for said tabletop game, is obviously in no way encouraging third party companies to produce said miniatures to fill the glaring niche they left?

Why are you acting like a multi-million company is some poor, helpless victim of a heinous crime that needs our sympathies?

It's still an entity with legal rights. Why are you advocating violating those rights?

Because it's a multi-million company, that refuses to give quality product there's demand for to such an extent that there are several companies entirely dedicated to doing it for them. They couldn't be asking for it any harder without repeating the entire Chapterhouse situation.

Why are you defending a corporation that doesn't even register your existence, never will, and couldn't care less about your opinion?

There’s an entire range of Eldar miniatures available for purchase right now. Whether they are “quality product” or not is a subjective opinion, but IP law isn’t determined by your opinion of whether something is good or not. Your entire argument boils down to you thinking you should be able to have something because you want it.

I don't play Eldar. I am most likely never gonna play Eldar. I am however working on a small scale IG army that's gonna be nearly entirely 3rd party. And my argument boils down to the good old "Piracy is a service problem"; if GW doesn't want people to buy 3rd party Eldar or Guard minis or print their own, they simply shouldn't literally offer one of the absolute shittiest ones in that category on the market.