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.

Roughly that the royaly checque, where previously taken straight to income and margin in one chunk they will now be fed into the balance sheet over the life of the licenece and/or its performance.

In effect it evens things out and prevents spikes of income/turnover which, something accountand and MDS hate. Everyone like a nice even line/curve afterall.

This isn't really legalese, its a sub-dialect call accountspeek.

notprop wrote:Roughly that the royaly checque, where previously taken straight to income and margin in one chunk they will now be fed into the balance sheet over the life of the licenece and/or its performance.

In effect it evens things out and prevents spikes of income/turnover which, something accountand and MDS hate. Everyone like a nice even line/curve afterall.

This isn't really legalese, its a sub-dialect call accountspeek.

Thanks for that I do appriciate it. Accountspeek, Legalese, fine print, it's all the same crap to me, To-ma-to To-mat-o <--that was the only way I could think of writing it while hoping it made sence.

If you mean sense, then yes.

Fortunately I also understand Canuck.

notprop wrote:If you mean sense, then yes.

Fortunately I also understand Canuck.

'Tis a odd dialect offshoot of the 'Queens English', incorperating both slang american terms while still spelling Armour and Colour with a 'U'. And I can butcher it with the best of them.

Read that wrong lol

Sidenote, I've sent in an application to GW, the role? well it isnt one they have atm, but i've worked as an architect for 11 years and have studied and simultaneously worked as a PR guy, hired by both politicians and corporations that have had.. what we might call an image problem.
I took the liberty of submitting a Media intel. analysis along with a change management proposal with my cv

Aerethan wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:Imagine millions of third party shoulder pads forcing GW to sell millions of Space Marines. The horror!
GW will end as LEGO: Prospering and making millions of profit!

That's what kills me about this whole thing. GW is making money off of CHS's work hand over fist. Why would you want to shut down a company that is making you money?

Because GW has a very outdated mentality wherein they believe that a monopoly is the highest achievement possible in the business world. However, in doing so GW is isolating themselves from additional markets, as true monopolies cannot exist unless there is legal precedent preventing competition. Monsanto would be a good parallel for what GW seems to be striving towards. However, it is this very practice that can turn out to be GW's downfall, for as they strive to control their own market, they effectively push out their own customer base. And when that pushed-out subset becomes large enough to form its own market, then companies based out of countries that simply do not recognize GW's legal control over the product will begin to flourish, as that new sub-set market will now be large enough to become profitable for newer companies.

Long story short: five years from now, you're going to buy your Space Marines not from GW, but from a Chinese company, and those Space Marines will be indistinguishable from the official GW models. And if you think that GW can go to the mattresses to stop this, then you should use Google to determine how many Disneyland theme parks there are in the world.

Monopolies are outmoded... it requires exponential effort to build a walled garden, and there are an exponential number of new entrants trying to break it. It is like trying to stop the tide with your hands- defeat is inevitable.

I'm surprised that GW does not have a royalty / licensing arrangement with after-market parts manufacturers.

I'd just say, "sure you can make those, but

1) pay a reasonable royalty to us

2) you must put disclaimers saying you are not GW

3) we reserve the right to say "stop producing that model because your quality is terrible"

"
I think GW would make more money, and have more control, from a royalty arrangement.

You know what they'd do though? They'd charge way too much for the license, and probably try to shut everyone down by saying the quality is "terrible" even when it's not.

No one else can make "finely detailed" models like this, after all...

But yeah, I wish GW would just stop with that "fortress wall" bs and become more like a real fething company, one that I won't be ashamed to admit I give money to.

Another thought... GW have licensed stuff before, like Relic's Dawn of War series. Maybe they are upset at people taking them on in their core business- i.e. miniatures?

I would say licensing Relic is more dangerous than licensing Chapterhouse. Given that GW doesn't have the expertise to develop and deploy computer games, at the same time Relic's offering is a much more enticing substitute than Chapterhouse... how many people have bought Dawn of War and thought it a better experience than buying minis?

DoW would reach more people in more demographic than the mini's would have, but some mini players who would have otherwise bought an army... would rather buy a video game where they neither have to paint nor assemble it to play.


At the very least for CHS, you still have to buy the core army models to add the aftermarket parts to. I would say licensing them is smarter than licensing Relic.

azazel the cat wrote:Long story short: five years from now, you're going to buy your Space Marines not from GW, but from a Chinese company, and those Space Marines will be indistinguishable from the official GW models. And if you think that GW can go to the mattresses to stop this, then you should use Google to determine how many Disneyland theme parks there are in the world.

Why five years?

Chinese companies have had lots of opportunity to copy GW stuff and (other than a few garage operations doing resin stuff) they haven't. The investment cost in the moulds is huge, even in China, and they would have to be extremely confident of big sales to make that investment. Given that GW can stop the stuff from being imported and there's not a huge wargames market in China it's a loser from the start.

Scott-S6 wrote:
Chinese companies have had lots of opportunity to copy GW stuff and (other than a few garage operations doing resin stuff) they haven't. The investment cost in the moulds is huge, even in China, and they would have to be extremely confident of big sales to make that investment. Given that GW can stop the stuff from being imported and there's not a huge wargames market in China it's a loser from the start.

The Chinese copy Gundam models (Bendi instead of Bandai) by using sand-cast molds, but the fit and detail is really crap... having put together a few of those kits, they're usually sold at 1/3 the price but are such a pain because the fit is so terrible. Fit wouldn't be a problem with GW models but the detail would definitely go down the crapper, in a similar way to a person recasting kits in a dodgy operation.

Perhaps those Gundam kits are copied because they are bigger in Asia and more mainstream... until GW set up a serious operation in Asia particularly in the China market, I don't think that's going to happen. Already there's a big market for MTG and Pokemon cards because, after Wizards moved in, there are so many fakes floating around. GW would also have to charge local asian prices for their product to be affordable, and then they'd have to deal with parallel importing from nearby markets such as Australia.

At that point CHS would be the least of their problems.

It's not like Gundam kits are very expensive anyway.

They are cheaper than GW kits and have more colours and details.

Have you paid Australian prices for a Gundam kit?? lol

I remember buying a MG Kampfer from Shibuya for $30AUD four years ago...

here to buy the same kit locally in Australia the same kit is $80... lol
be happy you don't have to pay the Australia tax :p




That being said, if the Gundam kits are less expensive, even more incentive for the Chinese to copy GW kits, bigger profit margin!

severedblue wrote:I'm surprised that GW does not have a royalty / licensing arrangement with after-market parts manufacturers.

I'd just say, "sure you can make those, but

1) pay a reasonable royalty to us

2) you must put disclaimers saying you are not GW

3) we reserve the right to say "stop producing that model because your quality is terrible"

I think GW would make more money, and have more control, from a royalty arrangement.

Because the after-market parts manufacturers have no obligation to share their profits with GW. Nor do they have any obligation to give GW a free pass to shut down their manufacturing.

severedblue wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:
Chinese companies have had lots of opportunity to copy GW stuff and (other than a few garage operations doing resin stuff) they haven't. The investment cost in the moulds is huge, even in China, and they would have to be extremely confident of big sales to make that investment. Given that GW can stop the stuff from being imported and there's not a huge wargames market in China it's a loser from the start.

The Chinese copy Gundam models (Bendi instead of Bandai) by using sand-cast molds, but the fit and detail is really crap... having put together a few of those kits, they're usually sold at 1/3 the price but are such a pain because the fit is so terrible. Fit wouldn't be a problem with GW models but the detail would definitely go down the crapper, in a similar way to a person recasting kits in a dodgy operation.

Sand casting big chunks of model is nothing at all like copying GW minis. You can't sandcast a whole space marine, for example. Maybe a whole Rhino.

If we were to get models from china that were identical to the normal ones (like azazel the cat has suggested) then they'd need to be multi-part injected models. Never going to happen. There are plenty of injection moulded toys and models that outsell GW (Gundam, Transformers, etc) and we're not seeing direct copies of those.

Well, there seem to be companies that reproduce FW products in China. And not even half bad.
That's, of course, resin, but nothing would stop them to recast plastics in resin.

Bumped into a story on NPR that discussed another product that might exist in a similar situation as far as copy right goes- http://www.rifftrax.com/

Its the guys from MST3K who now produce separate tracks of smart alek commentary to be played as you watch a movie (added on almost like shoulder pads on a marine ) - movies they haven't bought the rights for. No need to apparently, as they're selling a separate product.
They clearly have to blatantly state which tracks are meant to cover which movies, which again they never bought any rights to, and yet the very scary and very huge IP law departments of the major movie studios have never moved on them.

I don't think that comparable at all. Firstly, while discussing something, they don't reproduce any sounds or images from the original films.

Secondly it's easy to argue it's being done for review purposes, which does come under fair use.

Scott-S6 wrote:
If we were to get models from china that were identical to the normal ones (like azazel the cat has suggested) then they'd need to be multi-part injected models. Never going to happen. There are plenty of injection moulded toys and models that outsell GW (Gundam, Transformers, etc) and we're not seeing direct copies of those.

Just a technicality, but there's a fairly large Transformer knock-off market among collectors. You'll often see rare pieces that get resized to smaller or much larger scale in dollar stores. It's really pretty common.

I actually know people in the industry who consider the first chinese knockoff for your product a sort of badge of honor marking that you've truly arrived.

They basically start like clockwork when you hit a certain level of popularity.

You should see the UZAY Star Wars figures. Some of the most highly prized of knock offs among collectors.

http://theswca.com/images-speci/yglesias/uzay.html

My favourite is the Death Star Gunner playing on a pocket calculator.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:
If we were to get models from china that were identical to the normal ones (like azazel the cat has suggested) then they'd need to be multi-part injected models. Never going to happen. There are plenty of injection moulded toys and models that outsell GW (Gundam, Transformers, etc) and we're not seeing direct copies of those.

Just a technicality, but there's a fairly large Transformer knock-off market among collectors. You'll often see rare pieces that get resized to smaller or much larger scale in dollar stores. It's really pretty common.

There's also companies like CHMS which directly reproduce figures down to the packaging. No resizing, no mold alterations(apart from the copyright markings and even those are sometimes kept). They've gotten so good at it that the quality of CHMS' latest offerings match the quality of the original figure: my CHMS KO Henkei Screamer has the same plastic as my Hasbro Screamer, the only difference is the tightness of the leg joints and that's cause I've tightened my Hasbro Screamer's legs.

But for a more direct correlation between this lawsuit and the Transformers Fandom, look at companies like Perfect Effect, Renderform, Head Robots, Fansproject, and Maketoy which make add-on kits for HasTak's Transformers(many, such as City Commander and Protector requiring the exact measurements, dimensions, and angles of the HasTak figure to be created, just like CHS products with GW Figures). Some are even based in Japan alongside TakaraTomy, yet have never been taken to court despite knowledge that they exist. The stuff is even available to purchase at Botcon, the official Convention.

All this stuff about Chinese copies is interesting but it is OFF TOPIC!

Corvid, there's also probably a fair use argument in terms of satire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's a thought for everyone:

GW has settled with Paulson Games. There's a confidentiality agreement and all, but this is what Games Workshop has publicly stated about the settlement:

"Paulson Games and Games Workshop have agreed on the range of products Paulson Games is permitted to sell without violating Games Workshop’s claimed rights in its Warhammer 40,000 characters..."

Presumably, then, Games Workshop agrees that everything currently for sale on Paulson's website (www.paulsongames.com) does not violate GW's claimed rights. There could of course be some type of license agreement, but I personally doubt that.

The question this raises is: What was for sale on Paulson's website prior to the settlement that is not currently offered for sale on the website, if anything? Admittedly, I haven't been scrutinizing Paulson's website. Is anybody able to provide some insight about that?

Weeble: I'm not 100% certain but I think Paulson was included in the suit because of the "Heavy Walker" that is for sale on the CH website. I think someone mentioned early on that GW was under the impression that Paulson had something to do with its design.

agnosto wrote:Weeble: I'm not 100% certain but I think Paulson was included in the suit because of the "Heavy Walker" that is for sale on the CH website. I think someone mentioned early on that GW was under the impression that Paulson had something to do with its design.

There is no doubt that weeble1000 is well aware of that.....and that wasn't what his post was about at all.

weeble1000 wrote:The question this raises is: What was for sale on Paulson's website prior to the settlement that is not currently offered for sale on the website, if anything? Admittedly, I haven't been scrutinizing Paulson's website. Is anybody able to provide some insight about that?

The only thing I can see (because it's the only thing I look at) is the bio-tendrils (lash whips) but he has a blog post saying they'll be gone for a re-design/recast.

weeble1000 wrote:There's a confidentiality agreement and all...

Blast, I was hoping that we could see details in the exhibits.

Cheers

Andrew

rigeld2 wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:The question this raises is: What was for sale on Paulson's website prior to the settlement that is not currently offered for sale on the website, if anything? Admittedly, I haven't been scrutinizing Paulson's website. Is anybody able to provide some insight about that?

The only thing I can see (because it's the only thing I look at) is the bio-tendrils (lash whips) but he has a blog post saying they'll be gone for a re-design/recast.

It would be incredible if someone had a cached copy of the site's pages from before now so we could see a side by side comparison. I'm really interested to see what, if anything, that Paulson was forced to remove.