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.

Sidstyler wrote:Anyway, is it even possible to start feeling sorry for GW at this point? Because I kinda do. They're losing a lot of money over this (...)

Better feel sorry for us who will have to pay the "bills of incompetence"™

Sidstyler wrote:Why are ponies in Space Marine armor?

Because the Emperor promised it to his little daughter

Kilkrazy wrote:
There is an adage that you should never ascribe to conspiracy what can be accounted for by incompetence.

But the people familiar with the US legal "metagame" have stated in this very thread that GWs legal representatives are a highly regarded and competent law firm in the US, how can they be running a case in this manner?

GW can't back down now because they would just prove to everyone that their IP protection policy is a joke, but surely they would by now, be trying to find a way out of this, an under the table deal with CHS or something like that, because to a laymen's eyes at least, if this case goes all the way, GW is going to lose BIG which will have the same effect but with allot more risk of CHS's counter suit taking hold as well...

Kroothawk wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:Anyway, is it even possible to start feeling sorry for GW at this point? Because I kinda do. They're losing a lot of money over this (...)

Better feel sorry for us who will have to pay the "bills of incompetence"™

I'm glad I've already acquired the bulk of my DE army so far, then. I imagine adding to it later will be hard since you're right, we'll probably be paying for GW's legal fees somehow.

PhantomViper wrote:But the people familiar with the US legal "metagame" have stated in this very thread that GWs legal representatives are a highly regarded and competent law firm in the US, how can they be running a case in this manner?

Hmm, is it possible that in their never-ending quest to cut costs and save money wherever possible (while not passing a dime of the savings onto us of course) that they kinda cheaped out on their legal representation, too? Maybe the lawyers are just doing the job appropriately for the level of pay they're receiving.

Yeah I know, it doesn't work that way. It's gotta be one of two things then: either this law firm isn't as good as they say and GW blew a lot of money on them for nothing (unlikely), or they're trying to do the best they can with moronic GW suits who think they own the world screaming and stomping their feet and making really stupid and unrealistic demands (most likely). Either that or ponies, I dunno.

notprop wrote: You should sued for bringing that to my attention.

If any of the lawyers that say they are on this thread actually are, I want a restraining order on the last poster preventing him/her/it from being within 50 meters of the Internet ever again on pain of waterboarding.

No one should have to see that gak!

I did put it in spoiler thingies. You had to click on it to show it and it did have the words "Ponies in space marine armour" immediately preceding it. I cannot be held responsible for your own curiosity

Also, what do you expect young Sisters of Battle to watch? Of course it's going to be My Little Pony Marine: Friendship is a Warm Boltgun.

And look at it this way, you could bombard Mat Ward with pictures of ponies in Ultramarine armour as revenge for him ruining your favourite armies fluff (if/when he gets round to it). It'd be a kind of "how do you like it?" statement.

Please, stop. The ponies are very much off topic.

A Town Called Malus wrote:pony stuff.....

Pleasing to see that irony is only lost on Sid.

Nonetheless you should still consider yourself a very naught pony Malus.

Still back on Topic, tsk that GW eh!

The inclusion of emails in a submission seems like a very good way to introduce the petty back and forth that wouldn't usually be tollerated in court?

Also are emails recognised with any great weight by the court or is that only contract law?

I don't see a situation where GW can quietly back out of this. Why on earth would CHS, who is getting free legal work, agree to a confidential settlement? Precedent needs to be set here, and it seems that CHS is determined to see that happen, whether it goes their way or not, which is a good thing.

Like I said before, GW won't gain anything positive(in their own perspective) from this lawsuit. CHS would be fools to settle when the case so far is quite on their side. And if GW settle, it means they admit they are wrong, and other companies will follow CHS's example and won't fear anything from GW.

So, GW can't really settle, CHS shouldn't settle, and GW won't likely win at trial with the case as it stands.

My two copper.

Aerethan wrote:
So, GW can't really settle, CHS shouldn't settle, and GW won't likely win at trial with the case as it stands.

So it should end, as any case that is meritless should end; the person who brought it to court loses.

aka_mythos wrote:

Aerethan wrote:
So, GW can't really settle, CHS shouldn't settle, and GW won't likely win at trial with the case as it stands.

So it should end, as any case that is meritless should end; the person who brought it to court loses.

GW took a bat to a hornets nest that they thought was empty and it wasn't; they will deal with the consequences of it.

And with how they behave in regards to this suit, GW makes it very difficult to be on their side about it. I wonder how Kanluwen manages...

I think for Kanluwen, he feels GW is ethically justified in its stance even if it isn't legally justified as they've presented their case.

aka_mythos wrote:I think for Kanluwen, he feels GW is ethically justified in its stance even if it isn't legally justified as they've presented their case.

Thankfully for the rest of us, that isn't how the system works!

Thankfully for the rest of us, that isn't how the system works!

Its a shame theres nothing ethical about the legal system.

aka_mythos wrote:I think for Kanluwen, he feels GW is ethically justified in its stance even if it isn't legally justified as they've presented their case.

That's certainly part of it.
Another part is simply that (in my opinion, specifically) case law in regards to this kind of issue does not exist. The closest is FASA and Harmony Gold/Playmates and the allegations against FASA--which really boils down to licensing shenanigans and "unlawfully benefiting from the use of copywritten subjects".

Mr Hyena wrote:

Thankfully for the rest of us, that isn't how the system works!

Its a shame theres nothing ethical about the legal system.

Hello hyperbole!

I was leaning more towards the system should be without personal bias, but, whatever!

So my argument for the excuse of GW charging so much is now getting overly complicated.

I've always said, that its not just the model you're paying for, but the license to build and paint it as YOU see fit for YOUR gaming pleasures. Now I see they've been givin' it to us even harder in the rear.

GW is not "selling" models; they're "leasing" them. See they still OWN it, you just get to do all the work.

Could you imagine if George Lucas or Gene Roddenberry tried pulling this with fan-art? I am seriously curious now exactly HOW much stuff GW has released has been fan based in its origins. Ie. things over heard from fans by staff ((would likely have to be UK)) and then made it to print.

Kanluwen wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I think for Kanluwen, he feels GW is ethically justified in its stance even if it isn't legally justified as they've presented their case.

That's certainly part of it.
Another part is simply that (in my opinion, specifically) case law in regards to this kind of issue does not exist. The closest is FASA and Harmony Gold/Playmates and the allegations against FASA--which really boils down to licensing shenanigans and "unlawfully benefiting from the use of copywritten subjects".

With the Harmony Gold case it was very black and white plagiarism though. Where the waters got muddy for some is in how Harmony Gold got into contact with other companies that had their IP stolen as well and brought them in on the case ((HG had the resources where these smaller companies did not)). HG did this because it created an even stronger case for them, but some saw it as an attempt by HG to steal IP from others. What I still find ridiculously funny; is the Battletech fans that still claim HG stole said mech designs yet FASA released BT in '84 when Robotech was produced/released in Japan '82. The North American release was '85, but the difference between Japan-American release was mostly dubbing.

Anyway, the HG/FASA case is entirely different from this one. In this one GW is claiming infringement by saying "Your product works WITH ours for you to make coin." With the HG/FASA case it was "Hey, you stole our drawing, we want it back." And it really was a theft of line for line exact copy. The only way Chapterhouse could have done this was to cast and sell exact duplicates of Marines.

PhantomViper wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:
There is an adage that you should never ascribe to conspiracy what can be accounted for by incompetence.

But the people familiar with the US legal "metagame" have stated in this very thread that GWs legal representatives are a highly regarded and competent law firm in the US, how can they be running a case in this manner?

I'm not saying the lawyers are at fault. It's more likely that GW management just don't have the info required to close the case.

Dracheous wrote:
With the Harmony Gold case it was very black and white plagiarism though.

-- No. It wasn't. Like, at all. According to the Battletech Line Developer they voluntarily stopped using their licensed images (and yes, they were licensed), partly because Studio Nue (the guys who actually created Macross) badly mangled licensing rights - which in retrospect was a good thing as even the Japanese courts did not clear up who owned what distribution rights until 2002. Almost everything people "know" about the Unseen situation is entirely invented by fans.

Where the waters got muddy for some is in how Harmony Gold got into contact with other companies that had their IP stolen as well and brought them in on the case ((HG had the resources where these smaller companies did not)). HG did this because it created an even stronger case for them, but some saw it as an attempt by HG to steal IP from others. What I still find ridiculously funny; is the Battletech fans that still claim HG stole said mech designs yet FASA released BT in '84 when Robotech was produced/released in Japan '82. The North American release was '85, but the difference between Japan-American release was mostly dubbing.

-- Provide a cite or stop repeating this garbage. The "inside story" was told by Randall Bills in 2007 when the big hullabaloo about the "return of the Unseen Mechs" stuff was going on. Harmony Gold didn't create a thing, they were just a licensee.

basically the Japanese company that owned the designs did a poor job of licensing out their rights in the US. FASA acted in good faith and believed they had the rights to the designs, but the people who gave them the rights turned out to not have them to give. So FASA withdrew their products based on their designs.

Yup.

Now rumours are spinning that GW may use one of the same designs for a new Tau model.

Ugh.

Howard A Treesong wrote:

I see CHS and others as healthy for the hobby and good for hobbyists. Some say their work is mediocre,

Most of these secondary companies do produce mediocre work in comparison to GW but that's not the point of course. The point is that their work well exceeds the level that the average modeller can achieve (or wants to achieve) and provides a uniformity of form that meshes in well with the existing universe. Over time these companies will improve just like GW did. In the meantime they produce unique bits and units that keep people interested in the hobby.

....modellers will buy more of their kits to make every variant that is now available. And best of all, if Tamiya decide to make that variant themselves, the modeller will go out and buy it again because it's easier than working with resin! And that's why modeller's attics and cupboards are full of multiple copies of kits and conversion kits.

Definitely true, though perhaps GW is worried that their core market of newbies wont purchase their product if they are made aware of cheaper versions. The more I think about it the less it makes sense but I assume GW has its reasons for being so protective. Maybe it's a simple case of their bureaucratic staff being tossers or maybe this is a good chance to firm out what secondary producers can and can't do.

Jefffar wrote:Yup.

Now rumours are spinning that GW may use one of the same designs for a new Tau model.

Ugh.

Well, not exactly - I think the rumor was that there was going to be an 'extra large battlesuit resembling a Battlemech that has a weapon for it's name'.

I swear, if it's a Warhammer-ripoff, there's going to be hell to pay.

Kilkrazy wrote:It's more likely that GW management just don't have the info required to close the case.

Actually, GW management doesn't have the info required to file the suit

Kroothawk wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:It's more likely that GW management just don't have the info required to close the case.

Actually, GW management doesn't have the info required to file the suit

The fact the suit was filed and is currently being heard by a judge says otherwise.

infinite_array wrote:

Jefffar wrote:Yup.

Now rumours are spinning that GW may use one of the same designs for a new Tau model.

Ugh.

Well, not exactly - I think the rumor was that there was going to be an 'extra large battlesuit resembling a Battlemech that has a weapon for it's name'.

I swear, if it's a Warhammer-ripoff, there's going to be hell to pay.

That's the one most commonly mentioned.

<back on topic, folks - GW's plans for Tau can be discussed elsewhere>

Kanluwen wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:It's more likely that GW management just don't have the info required to close the case.

Actually, GW management doesn't have the info required to file the suit

The fact the suit was filed and is currently being heard by a judge says otherwise.

GW still hasn't met the standard requirements for filing the suit (indicating copyright infringments, proving copyright), they were just given one year to complete this procedure.

Kroothawk wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:It's more likely that GW management just don't have the info required to close the case.

Actually, GW management doesn't have the info required to file the suit

The fact the suit was filed and is currently being heard by a judge says otherwise.

GW still hasn't met the standard requirements for filing the suit (indicating copyright infringments, proving copyright), they were just given one year to complete this procedure.

So what you're saying is that a judge feels that there's enough merit to the case to have given leeway to a company to have a year to get its act together.

Man. They clearly don't have enough evidence to do anything right!

PhantomViper wrote:But the people familiar with the US legal "metagame" have stated in this very thread that GWs legal representatives are a highly regarded and competent law firm in the US, how can they be running a case in this manner?

There's a number of reasons. Maybe the lawyer heading this up isn't doing his job very well. Maybe GW is pulling on the strings too hard. Maybe they're trying to make the best of a poor situation.

Mr Hyena wrote:Its a shame theres nothing ethical about the legal system.

The legal system is pretty ethical, all things considered. The amount of money my firm spends on keeping us on the straight and narrow is surprising.

Dracheous wrote:I've always said, that its not just the model you're paying for, but the license to build and paint it as YOU see fit for YOUR gaming pleasures. Now I see they've been givin' it to us even harder in the rear.

GW is not "selling" models; they're "leasing" them. See they still OWN it, you just get to do all the work.

You're buying the expression of the copyright (that is, the physical model), not the intellectual property.

In contrast, video games, movies, music, and all digital media include a license to use the software (sort of a lease). There are a number of reasons, for both legal and technical reasons, why they do so.

Dracheous wrote:Could you imagine if George Lucas or Gene Roddenberry tried pulling this with fan-art?

Star Trek and Star Wars are even more draconian, from my experience. They crack down pretty hard on third-parties who try to make money off of their intellectual party.

Lucas just happens to be a cheap date, IYKWIMAITYD.

Kanluwen wrote:Another part is simply that (in my opinion, specifically) case law in regards to this kind of issue does not exist.

Yes it does. We had a pretty good discussion of it early in the thread.

Please refer me to the cases of third party companies manufacturing shoulderpads for toy soldiers which actually are relevant to the case.

The nearest example we always get is car parts, which isn't really applicable since in many cases the company selling the cars did not manufacture it all "in house" like GW does with their model kits.

And it's just as applicable. Doesn't matter if it's all done in house or not.