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.

I was going to post this in the purge thread but thought it deserved it's own.

I've been researching the stuff at the U.S. Copyright website.

Couple things that are good to know from the start;

U.S. Copyright Office wrote:What Is Not Protected by Copyright
Ideas, methods, or systems are not subject to copyright protection. Copyright
protection, therefore, is not available for ideas or procedures for doing, making,
or building things; scientific or technical methods or discoveries; business
operations or procedures; mathematical principles; formulas, algorithms; or
any other concept, process, or method of operation.
Section 102 of the copyright law, title 17, United States Code, clearly expresses
this principle: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation,
concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described,
explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”

And...

U.S. Copyright wrote:Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for
playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material
involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public,
nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar
principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary,
artistic, or musical form.

Now concerning the C&D's from GW's legal department. Everybody has been saying that they need to protect their copyrighted works. And others have been saying that it's bullying. I cannot find a GW copyright for Blood Bowl (which started the recent issues). Below is listed all of GW's copyrighted work that I can find.

As best as I can tell, GW has two copyright holding companies; Games Workshop, Ltd. And Games Workshop Limited. It seems they did this to separate WHFB and 40K. Games Workshop Group PLC-I could not find any records for.

Games Workshop, Ltd.
TSR Fiend Folio : tome of creatures malevolent and benign / edited by Don Turnbull ; ill. by Chris Baker, Jeff Dee, Emmanuel ... [et al.] ; cover by Emmanuel. 1981
Fiend folio; ms. & artwork. 1984
Chaos warrior : no. 2. 1985
Imperial Space Marine : no. 2. 1985
Space Marine medic. 1987
Bike ; Driver 1988
Blue Horror of Zeench. 1988
Eldar harlequin : no. 1. 1988
Pink Horror of Zeench. 1988
Skaven : no. 1. 1988
Skaven : no. 2. 1988
Space Marine. 1988
Tyranid-Termigant. 1988
Terminator with stormbolter & powerfist. 1989
Warlord titan. 1989
Adeptus Titanicus, epic battles between gigantic robots. 1989
Genestealer. 1989
[Imperial sentinal (sic)] 1989
Ork. 1989
[Space Ork : no. 2 : Ork boss with bolta and power fist] 1989
Terminator. 1989
Terminator. 1989
Terminator Lightening Claw. 1989
Eldar dreadnought. 1990
Eldar harlequin : no. 2. 1990
[Ork wartrak] 1990
Power claw. 1990
Eldar avatar. 1991
Eldar avenger exarch. 1991
Eldar dark reaper. 1991
Eldar dire avenger. 1991
Eldar fire dragon. 1991
Eldar guardian. 1991
Eldar howling banchee [sic] 1991
Eldar stricking [sic] scorpion. 1991
Eldar swooping hawk. 1991
Goblin fanatic : no. 1. 1992
Goblin on squig : no. 2. 1992
Skwig. 1992
Space marine wolf guard. 1992
Chaos dwarf centaur : no. 1. 1993
Chaos dwarf centaur : no. 2. 1993
Chaos dwarf : no. 1. 1993
Chaos dwarf : no. 2. 1993
Eldar war lock. 1993
Imperial dreadnought. 1993
[Buzz saw arm : no. 2] 1994
[Cannon : Assault cannon] 1994
Eldar war walker. 1994
Imperator titan. 1994
[Multi-melta : Melta gun] 1994
Ork dreadnought. 1994
High elf repeating bolt thrower. 1995
Imperial volley gun (hellblaster) 1995
Lieutenant. 1995
Marneus Galgar, imperial space marine commander.
Ork war buggy : no. 2. 1995
[Ork warbike] 1995
Space marine Apothecary : no. 1. 1995
Space marine Vetran : no. 1. 1995
Space marine Vetran : no. 2. 1995
Space marine vetran sgt. : no. 3. 1995
Tallarn, desert raider, lieutenant. 1995
Tyranid Termagant with spine rifle. 1995
Tyranid Termagat with web strangler. 1995
Tyraniol gargoyle. 1995
Bad moon. 1995
Cadian shock trooper with lasgun. 1995
[Buzz saw arm : no. 1] 1996
Ork war buggy : no. 1. 1996
Space marine bike. 1996
Buzz saw arm 2. By Games Workshop, Ltd. 1997
Cannon. By Games Workshop, Ltd. 1997
Multi-melta. By Games Workshop, Ltd. 1997
Space Ork 2. By Games Workshop, Ltd. 1997
Dark elf army--warhammer game. 2001
[Trio of warriors] 2001
Orge Kingdom Army-warhammer game. 2005
Wood elf army : warhammer game. 2005
Games workshop catalog : 2007-07. 2006
Orge Kingdom Army - warhammer game / by Games Workshop, Ltd. 2007

Games Workshop Limited
White Dwarf. 1987
Empire Militia. 2000
Empire Steam Tank. 2000
Luthor Huss Prophet of Sigmar. 2000
Skaven Clanrats Regiment. 2000
Warhammer rulebook 2000. 2000
Balthasar Gelt Supreme Patriarch. 2000
Empire Artillery. 2000
Empire Elector Counts. 2000
Empire Greatswords. 2000
Empire Greatswords Command. 2000
Empire Knightly Orders. 2000
Thorek Ironbrow's Anvil of Doom. 2001
Skaven Army - Warhammer Game. 2002
Karl Franz On Griffon. 2003
Stormvermin. 2003
Stormvermin Command Group. 2003
Tomb Kings Arrny - Warhammer Game. 2003
Warrior Priest of Ulric (Ft. Mtd) 2003
Beasts Of Chaos Army - Warhammer Game. 2003
Crom The Conqueror. 2003
Daemonettes On Mounts Of Slannesh. 2003
Dwarf Flame Cannon. 2003
Dwarf Gyrocopter. 2003
Empire Grandmasters. 2003
Be'Lakor, The Dark Master. 2004
Warriors Of Chaos Regiment. 2004
Clan Pestilens Plague Lord. 2005
Plague Censer Bearers. 2005
Skaven Battallion. 2005
Skaven Plague Monks. 2005
Skaven Rat Ogres and Giant Rats. 2005
Dwarfs Army - Warhammer Game. 2006
Warhammer rulebook 2006. 2006
Wood Elf Lord On Eagle. 2006
Wood Elf Lord With Bow. 2007
Mengil Manhide's Manflayers. 2007
Shadowblade Dark Elf Assassin. 2007
Spawn Of Chaos. 2007
Wood Elf Army Standard Bearer. 2007
Wood Elf Hero On Stag. 2007
Wood Elf Lord With 2 Hand Weapons. 2007
Dark Elf Black Guard Command. 2007
Dark Elf Corsairs. 2007
Dark Elf Witch Elves. 2007
Dwarf Miners. 2007
Empire Army - Warhammer Game. 2007
Imperial Aquila 2007. 2007
Chaos Star. 2008
Imperial Aquila 2008. 2008
Iron Warriors Star. 2008
Star Of Khorne. 2008
Word Bearers Star. 2008

If you noticed, Calgar's name is actually misspelled on the copyright!

But the best part of my search was that the only copyright holder of Blood Bowl is actually Emil Jesse Eisenhardt Registration Number: PAu003372278! He pulled the copyright in 2008. It's for a Dramatic Work (spec script maybe?)

Now, this to me makes things look quite suspect for GW. Are they actually bullying like people say with the Blood Bowl C&D's that actually have no legal basis?

Patents and Trademarks cover what a list of copyright would not (my basic assumption)

And a list of trademarks should show who owns 'Bloodbowl' amongst other items.

Copyright is only part of the argument - for and against.

Ug, more research...

What is not protected by copyright may be protected by patent - applied or pending - again not sure if that applies to anything gw have done unless abstraction in games rules counts !

This is a ramble Trademarks are the way to go


Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=5&aId=3900002&start=6

List of trademarks and copyrighted material disclaimer for users of GW's IP - Bloodbowl included.

Why is a discussion about Blood Bowl's copyright in 40k General?

Kanluwen wrote:Why is a discussion about Blood Bowl's copyright in 40k General?

If you read the subject line, and my first post, you may notice that it's about the legal claim of GW.

Still, then it should be in General Discussion.

It doesn't pertain to 40k. Get your shenanigans out of here!

*rabblerousing*

Like I said in the other thread, most of the time, when a group puts out a C&D letter, it means they have nothing. Nothing but a really scarry looking letter and the threat of a lawsuit which they would likely lose.

Heh, he said "shenanigans".

To the OP and others...

Patents are only good for a set amount of time and CANNOT be renewed. The period is between 17 and 20 years depending on when the patent was applied for (U.S. Law so you E.U. folks may have different laws).

Oh yeah, by the by, printed matter is unable to be patented unless it is a series of technical instructions to assemble a machine for example. SOOOOO GW written material, except for trademarks which is a different issue entirely, will never fall under U.S. patent law.

Here's a link to a nice attorney's FAQ:
http://www.bpmlegal.com/patqa.html#2

jabbakahut wrote:But the best part of my search was that the only copyright holder of Blood Bowl is actually Emil Jesse Eisenhardt Registration Number: PAu003372278! He pulled the copyright in 2008. It's for a Dramatic Work (spec script maybe?)

That may be the only registration of a Blood Bowl copyright you can find. That doesn't mean that GW don't own the copyright. In the UK and Oz copyright isn't registered... it's automatically yours as the creator of the work. Fairly sure the same applies in Europe. And in the US, while registration may make things easier if something goes to court, as far as I understand it it's not actually required... it used to be, but changed a while back.

First off, Copyright in the US is automatic to the author upon publication for any written work or production of any sculpture. And as most GW books have an ISBN number, I suspect that will suffice as proof of Copyright.

The long list of items quoted above is for Trademark & Design, hence the inclusion of the specific Imperial Aquila design(s) and other models.

Basically, GW is registering the specific "look" of various physical models so that others cannot copy the look or design.

These design registration marks are not patents, nor copyrights. They are things that GW can probably hold in perpetuity, and thus immensely valuable.

See the entries for "Adepticus Titanicus, 1989 & Warlord Titan, 1989"? That's what GW used to quash those guys trying to sell the big Imperator-style Titan.

That big wall of GW-developed IP is what prevents anybody else from selling models with certain "looks" and styles, and is why GW enjoys a lot of the margins that they do.

If you want to do a sci-fi game with space knights and space elves, you need to steer clear of the various designs GW has made.

Also Games Workshop isn't even a US company.

Who is to say they are doing anything by US copyright law.

They could be using UK Copyright law

GW has a US arm, and they must enforce their copyright within the US for US users.

GW is definitely operating under US copyright law within the US - they have no other choice. The fact that Disney has made US copyright law *extremely* favorable to the IP owner has only emboldened GW.

GW operates under UK (c) law within the UK and European law within Europe. That's how the law works!

insaniak wrote:

jabbakahut wrote:But the best part of my search was that the only copyright holder of Blood Bowl is actually Emil Jesse Eisenhardt Registration Number: PAu003372278! He pulled the copyright in 2008. It's for a Dramatic Work (spec script maybe?)

That may be the only registration of a Blood Bowl copyright you can find. That doesn't mean that GW don't own the copyright. In the UK and Oz copyright isn't registered... it's automatically yours as the creator of the work. Fairly sure the same applies in Europe. And in the US, while registration may make things easier if something goes to court, as far as I understand it it's not actually required... it used to be, but changed a while back.

If you want to protect your property, you damned well better copyright it or you don't have anything that will stand up in a court of law to prove you are the author. Heck, I could fabricate a million things that shows I was the first person to ever even think about a fantasy football game names blood bowl and if I was moronic enough to sue GW and they whip out a copyright, the judge would just look at me and say, "sorry son, it's first come first serve". You know that whole, "possession is 9/10ths of the law" thing? It's true to a great extent. Posssessors of copyrights win 90% of court cases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JohnHwangDD wrote:GW has a US arm, and they must enforce their copyright within the US for US users.

GW is definitely operating under US copyright law within the US - they have no other choice. The fact that Disney has made US copyright law *extremely* favorable to the IP owner has only emboldened GW.

GW operates under UK (c) law within the UK and European law within Europe. That's how the law works!

QFT

And, if you want to take another country's citizen to court, you have to follow the law of the land. Prime example is the whole Pirate Bay thing; the MPAA and various other bloodsuckers took an eternity to actually prove to the swedish courts that the Pirate Bay folks were breaking swedish law (well over 3 years).

agnosto wrote:If you want to protect your property, you damned well better copyright it or you don't have anything that will stand up in a court of law to prove you are the author.

I wasn't addressing whether or not it was a good idea. Just pointing out that it isn't required, and so the lack of such registration proves nothing.

insaniak wrote:

agnosto wrote:If you want to protect your property, you damned well better copyright it or you don't have anything that will stand up in a court of law to prove you are the author.

I wasn't addressing whether or not it was a good idea. Just pointing out that it isn't required, and so the lack of such registration proves nothing.

Indeed and I was just stressing what a good idea it actually is.