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.
oni wrote: Sources are gak. No one truly cares. We're just looking for a reason to get triggered. Round and round we go.
Yep.
Round and round we go.
Where's the mod? Nobody knows!
Of course, they'll swoop right in if someone calls someone a mean name. But in the meantime, gakpost away, folks! The more repetitively the better, and hopefully from the same usual suspects! Yay!
Reposting, as my comment was hidden in a pastewar.
This is bad optics for GW, but until I see what a 'normal' NDA looks like I will not comment as to whether this is unusual.
Internet folks all got law degrees I see.
However, can I believe the GW would put something dodgy in an NDA. Yes I can.
Is it wrong to have 'bad vibes' at anything legal GW does? No it isn't. GW has a reputation of being heavy handed and litigious, I would go as far as to say they wanted one. I remember a full page IP warning ad GW placed in Military Modeller in the 1990's. Do they, or at least did they want a rep of being people you don't want to feth with. Yes I think that. Has that rep soured into a general negative reputation. Arguably so, to the point that part of the 'benefit' of the chapterhouse lawsuit was bringing down GW a peg or two.
The long and the short is, I have no comment to make as to whether an NDA from GW is dodgy. However if the general public chooses not to trust GW or it's NDA policy then GW can only blame itself for those optics. Trust is not a matter of burden of proof, and as GW has arguably lost trust and its legal actions are held in open suspicion then that in itself is fair comment.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Orlanth wrote: Trust is not a matter of burden of proof, and as GW has arguably lost trust and its legal actions are held in open suspicion then that in itself is fair comment.
A portion of GW's lost trust is due to gak posting, fearmongering, and insinuations.
I work in the automotive industry. That industry earned the reputation it got from practices in the 80s and 90s. We turned the company around from 3.0 to 4.5 average on google reviews, but you'll still get people posting how we're here to screw over women or that we're robbing people. Our shops are more expensive than they used to be, because that's what it takes to get good quality staff and give them benefits.
I see a lot of that dynamic in the history of GW with Chapterhouse and the transitions they've made with that history dogging them and people making claims that are potentially unfounded.
I have definitely seen sites that get sent free stuff give it less than stellar reviews. The Tabletop Minions review of the new Kill Team comes to mind as a recent example but there are plenty of others.
So either:
this is very new
this is just what GW try on but anyone with any journalistic ethics refuses it
it's not actually a contract sent to reviewers
it's totally made up.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility - I'm certain all the fashion and make-up Instagram "sponsored influencers" probably have contracts like this. Maybe it is a new road GW is going down - pay for people's hobby in exchange for them making positive videos.
I'm very doubtful it's being sent to everyone who gets even the occasional review copy though.
I, for one, will certainly be giving GW the benefit of the doubt here. James Workshop has earned it, and I know that his every move is good because he is my friend.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
I know it‘s shocking, but I see stuff like that fairly often in real legal documents. Imho just shows that stuff is done too quickly.
And these types of documents develop a life of their own once the template has been released by Legal. Nobody then bothers to go through the text again and again to clean it up.
I just corrected 15 documents today at work that did similar things, caused by someone converting an autofill PDF to other formats.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/24 15:56:11
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Point of order - this being proven to be fake would not also disprove claims that you're a shill...
I like to think I balance my views quite well and if people look through my post history they will see that what I'm actually against is hyperbole and fear mongering. I never have and never will (unless I get paid a pile of cash *cough*cough*) shill for GW.
Point of order - this being proven to be fake would not also disprove claims that you're a shill...
I like to think I balance my views quite well and if people look through my post history they will see that what I'm actually against is hyperbole and fear mongering. I never have and never will (unless I get paid a pile of cash *cough*cough*) shill for GW.
You appear to classify anything negative towards GW as the said fear mongering and hyperbole. That suggests a bias.
Lotta thoughts in this thread. I don't know much about NDAs or non-competes, but there's a lot here that I find suspect. For starters, the formatting is just garbage. Secondly, the document repeatedly used the term "GW" without defining it, which is really odd for a contract. Finally, there are just straight up typos, like the wrong words.
Lawyers can be sloppy, and lawyers make mistakes. I've seen obvious formatting errors in writing samples, submitted by people applying for lawyer jobs. Still, for something like this, a sentence like "The indemnity is this clause 6 shall..." is pretty bad.
Polonius wrote: Lotta thoughts in this thread. I don't know much about NDAs or non-competes, but there's a lot here that I find suspect. For starters, the formatting is just garbage. Secondly, the document repeatedly used the term "GW" without defining it, which is really odd for a contract. Finally, there are just straight up typos, like the wrong words.
Lawyers can be sloppy, and lawyers make mistakes. I've seen obvious formatting errors in writing samples, submitted by people applying for lawyer jobs. Still, for something like this, a sentence like "The indemnity is this clause 6 shall..." is pretty bad.
I thought the same thing about the use of "GW". They do own that as a trademark, but the start of the document uses "Games Workshop" and then just switches to "GW" without defining the term, which seems a little odd. Their website terms of use mentions what is meant by it before its used to refer to them in the terms themselves ("This site is operated by Games Workshop Limited (we or our or us or GW)") but an NDA doesn't?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/24 18:58:09
Polonius wrote: Lotta thoughts in this thread. I don't know much about NDAs or non-competes, but there's a lot here that I find suspect. For starters, the formatting is just garbage. Secondly, the document repeatedly used the term "GW" without defining it, which is really odd for a contract. Finally, there are just straight up typos, like the wrong words.
Lawyers can be sloppy, and lawyers make mistakes. I've seen obvious formatting errors in writing samples, submitted by people applying for lawyer jobs. Still, for something like this, a sentence like "The indemnity is this clause 6 shall..." is pretty bad.
Mate. Nevermind Lawyers being sloppy. Legislators and Judges can been sloppy.
If they weren’t, and no law had wiggle room, we wouldn’t need lawyers. And one suspects the world would be better for it!
My experience? Applying my professional skills to show that a misplaced comma did in fact constitute a legitimate insurance claim, and now two friends are living mortgage free.
Even in my own professional correspondence, what I wanted to say and what I actually said are not necessarily the same things.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
caladancid wrote: You appear to classify anything negative towards GW as the said fear mongering and hyperbole. That suggests a bias.
Actually, you know what. I really don't care what you think so y'all keep being mad at a company that will never notice you and I'll find joy in painting toy soldiers. Peace out meatbags.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/24 19:09:42
Polonius wrote: Lotta thoughts in this thread. I don't know much about NDAs or non-competes, but there's a lot here that I find suspect. For starters, the formatting is just garbage. Secondly, the document repeatedly used the term "GW" without defining it, which is really odd for a contract. Finally, there are just straight up typos, like the wrong words.
Lawyers can be sloppy, and lawyers make mistakes. I've seen obvious formatting errors in writing samples, submitted by people applying for lawyer jobs. Still, for something like this, a sentence like "The indemnity is this clause 6 shall..." is pretty bad.
Mate. Nevermind Lawyers being sloppy. Legislators and Judges can been sloppy.
If they weren’t, and no law had wiggle room, we wouldn’t need lawyers. And one suspects the world would be better for it!
My experience? Applying my professional skills to show that a misplaced comma did in fact constitute a legitimate insurance claim, and now two friends are living mortgage free.
Even in my own professional correspondence, what I wanted to say and what I actually said are not necessarily the same things.
I got out of paying a penalty once because the contract writer never wrote in what the penalty would be in the first place. Never even went to court. They knew they messed up as soon as I showed them that very simple line.
Anyway, we have some people now saying that the document is fake, some saying the differences between UK and US law, some saying that parts of it aren't even enforceable in certain states...
At the end of the day, you'd take this to your lawyer and figure it out from there.
I'm glad I was able to act the village idiot for the entertainment of you all in last night's arguments.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't really see what all the wailing and gnashing of teeth is about, but at the same time "Ah-ha! The formatting is slightly off on this page!" doesn't seem like quite the dramatic 5th act reveal some are making it out to be.
Because, let's say you write reviews of products used to make minis, or even minis themselves. You want to get your review out in a timely manner, so you ask GW for a prerelease review copy. This is perfectly normal throughout the gaming industry. They want you to sign an NDA. Again, perfectly normal. Then THIS THING shows up at your door, giving you the option of either releasing reviews late, or being contractually obligated to GW for a positive review, and, in theory, to ONLY review GW products from there on out, unless you leave the industry entirely for at least three years.
Do you see where there might be some issues with this, given the state of gaming journalism already?
That may be, but Dakkadakka is well known amongst many of the 40k communities as a very negative forum.
My knee jerk reaction was to point you to Whineseer, but that joke is ready for a Venerable Dreadnought at this point. Instead I'll point you to the twitter 40k community.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/09/24 20:40:12
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Actually I'd say it's an indictment of DakkaDakka. no other online community I've been in has seen this kinda issues.
You must not be a member of many online communities, because this is pretty mild compared to some. Star Wars, for example.
That may be, but Dakkadakka is well known amongst many of the 40k communities as a very negative forum.
Indeed, I was specificly talking about 40k online communities. I mean "Ohh hey! the star wars fandom is even more toxic then us!" isn't much of a defence.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
If it is fake, that is a crazy amount of effort to go through. But then again, we had an entirely fake edition of 40K on here once, long ago, so I guess anything is possible. I do think that the "WHERE'S YOUR PROOF!" side of the conversation were generally more rude and obnoxious in this thread though.
Indeed, I was specificly talking about 40k online communities. I mean "Ohh hey! the star wars fandom is even more toxic then us!" isn't much of a defence.
Again, have you been to the other 40k forums? Or Twitter?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote: If it is fake, that is a crazy amount of effort to go through.
I'm inclined to believe it's real, because it's a weird thing to fake if you're looking generate outrage.
For those who want the opinions of an actual lawyer on this:
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/24 21:18:02
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
I'm inclined to believe it's real, because it's a weird thing to fake if you're looking generate outrage.
For those who want the opinions of an actual lawyer on this:
Very interesting watch, cheers!
So, the above YT guy shows the Reddit thread where it originated from. It came from Trent from Miscast. Trent is not the kind of guy that would make stuff up like this. He is an artist through and through and not the person that strikes me as someone with an axe to grind against GW. All of that points to genuine to me.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/24 21:49:10
Games Workshop Delenda Est.
Users on ignore- 53.
If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them.
I know your posting history. Don't let those unfounded accusation get to you, mate.
Eldar 
Imperial Guard 
Space Marines
