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.

So in a effort to keep people from high jacking Chapterhousestudios.com forums I thought that I would make a post to keep people in compliance with Rule #4





At the moment I am going through Chapterhouses posts to grab some quotes from both sides.

Im not sure GW has a legal right to tell people they cant sculpt new miniatures that look like their stuff. Ive consulted with 2 lawyers, and they have told me that if we have proof that the sculpts are new and not GW minis with GS on them, our figure is just another sci-fi super soldier.

Granted, we may not be able to list him as a chaplain or space marine on the site, but there is nothing wrong with calling him a special character - dragon cult leader.

Ive tried to do as much research as possible, and what gives me credence is sites like www.americanmuscle.com. They sell Mustang custom aftermarket parts, and use Mustang all over thier website. Ford is a much bigger company then GW, so if that website can use "Mustang" to describe thier car parts, I think we are ok with "Space Marine".

Anyways, thanks for your concern, we already have a hefty legal fund waiting if needed.

Sincerely,
Nick
ChapterhouseStudios.com
sales@chapterhouse.com

So, we're going to have a legal discussion amongst a group of people with ( a few exceptions aside) no legal expertise and no access to the relevant facts.

If anybody is curious, I'm going to start a roundtable discussion on Thoracic Surgery in a little bit, as soon as I finish my debate on Byzantine Art...

Polo, please troll somewhere else.

I'm actually pretty comfy right here....

I mean, I think you're intentions are good, I just think there needs to be a pretty major caveat on any discussion that takes place, namely, that nobody really knows what they're talking about.

If it makes people feel better, than god speed, but there's a more limited utility than you may think to this.

Polonius wrote:So, we're going to have a legal discussion amongst a group of people with ( a few exceptions aside) no legal expertise and no access to the relevant facts.

This is the internet isn't it? But it's a fair question.

Clthomps wrote:Polo, please troll somewhere else.

I see no trolling here.

I cant help but think he has a point.

Most of us have no legal idea of how real IP law works.

Far too many read the GW legal POLICY and interpret that as law.

Too bad there is no IP Law forum (that I know of) to help us out with this. The only way you will get facts is from a pricey lawyer.

Polonius wrote:So, we're going to have a legal discussion amongst a group of people with ( a few exceptions aside) no legal expertise and no access to the relevant facts.

If anybody is curious, I'm going to start a roundtable discussion on Thoracic Surgery in a little bit, as soon as I finish my debate on Byzantine Art...

I know the intentions were good but I'm with Polonius, this matter has been beaten into the dirt.

So +1 to his idea.

Personally I do not care much about whether what they are doing is legal or not and as far as I am concerned they can do whatever

Funniest thing about this is that I very much deliberately included the above little part in my post in the other thread to prevent nerdrage caused by incorrect interpretations of my intentions. Unfortunately the attempt has turned out to be in vain.

The sole purpose of my comment was to establish that it is not clear cut what the exact legal position is, regardless of what Chapterhouse and their presumed lawyers claim. A definitive "yes" or "no" claim is wrong either way.

Other than that I wish them the very best, and I hope GW leaves them alone. I am not quite sure why anyone thinks otherwise. I did after all not pass judgment on their business.

The original intention was to give people a place to voice their opinions, and to stop people from highjacking Chapterhouses threads every time they post a new product.

EDITED FOR FLAMING. PLEASE KEEP IT POLITE, FOLKS. -THE MGMT.

TBD wrote:
The sole purpose of my comment was to establish that it is not clear cut what the exact legal position is, regardless of what Chapterhouse and their presumed lawyers claim.

That is the part I take offense with. No matter what you may think, that makes it sound like we are full of hot air and our claims to have hired an attorney are lies and probably not true. Do we "presume" GW has lawyers, no, just because we are a smaller company doesn't mean we are any less correct or legal.

Clthomps,

IMO I look at the sketches and the greens that are up in the news section thread and I don't think 'Space Elf' I think 'Eldar'. I'm sure other users think so. Now if I had that IP and I saw Chaperhouses work I would be concerned.

This is my opinion.

edited

Trolling is defined by PC Mag as "(2) Posting derogatory messages about sensitive subjects on newsgroups and chat rooms to bait users into responding."

My post was snarky, but it was on topic, relevant, and raised a key issue. Considering that the responses to my post have been positive, aside from you, that's further evidence that the post was not trolling.

And to be fair, I didn't hijack your thread. I made fun of it for being pointless. To me, it sounds like you're just cranky that people tend to agree with me.

Well that is one major thing that pops up on your forums, To put it to rest once and for all why don't you post info about your lawyer. I am sure he has a name and certain qualifications that suit him for IP work.

Haven't we had this discussion multiple times before?
Allow me to summarise the next 5 pages of discussion quickly.

Poster 1: Chapterhouse can do what they like.
Poster 2: Nuh-uh! I just looked at GW's IP page, and they're clearly breaching it!
Poster 3: : Actually, GW's IP page isn't valid on this. They lie about a lot of stuff.
Poster 2: Yeah, but this is blatantly copyright!
Poster 1: Actually, GW copies a load of the their stuff *insert generic chaos star comment*
Poster 4: I don't care that stuff is awesome!
Poster 5: Then how come all the other companies get shut down? Why are they special?
Chapterhouse: Actually, we have a legal fund to set up so we don't have to fold if we get a C&D.
Poster 2: Yeah, but you guys are taking the bread out of the designers mouths! Make your own stuff!
Poster 5: I just read a generic law text that says they can get sued.
Poster 1: : How many times have we had this discussion before?
Poster 6: Too many.
Poster 3: Yeah, but I can point out a problem with that text by quoting a legal case I just looked up on Wikipedia!
Chapterhouse: We actually consulted a lawyer who said we can do this.
Poster 6 You guys do realise you guys are both wrong, right?
Poster 2: Nu-uh! Because this other wikipedia case proves that what they're doing is wrong.
Poster 5: lol, you guys gonna get shut down
Hired Gun 27: You guys are terrible people and are going to get sued by the almighty and righteous GW.
Poster 1: Who let the hired gun in?


And so on ad infinitum.

I vote to be Poster 1. Who wants to be Poster 6?

Mr. Burning wrote:Clthomps,

IMO I look at the sketches and the greens that are up in the news section thread and I don't think 'Space Elf' I think 'Eldar'. I'm sure other users think so. Now if I had that IP and I saw Chapterhouses work I would be concerned.

This is my opinion.

As far as I know you can't own IP on a style. Look at Avatar of Wars Dwarf Troll Slayer, GWs older Hormagaunts - Alien Mockups, GWs 4th Edition Tyrant - Alien Queen.. GW vs Blizzard Entertainment for the Starcraft Marine vs GW Space Marine.

The list goes on and on (not to mention some comic books out there that spoof each other, "Planetary" and DC Comics comes to mind (they used very similiar characters to Wonder woman, Superman and Green Lantern to represent alternate universe.).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Clthomps wrote:Well that is one major thing that pops up on your forums, To put it to rest once and for all why don't you post info about your lawyer. I am sure he has a name and certain qualifications that suit him for IP work.

Sure, I can put my money where my mouth is

Corby Bell
Garlitz Bell, LLP
Out of Dallas Texas.

He charged a lot for his time, so unless you want to be billed, I wouldn't bug him too much.

Ketara wrote:Haven't we had this discussion multiple times before?
Allow me to summarise the next 5 pages of discussion quickly.

Poster 1: Chapterhouse can do what they like.
Poster 2: Nuh-uh! I just looked at GW's IP page, and they're clearly breaching it!
Poster 3: : Actually, GW's IP page isn't valid on this. They lie about a lot of stuff.
Poster 2: Yeah, but this is blatantly copyright!
Poster 1: Actually, GW copies a load of the their stuff *insert generic chaos star comment*
Poster 4: I don't care that stuff is awesome!
Poster 5: Then how come all the other companies get shut down? Why are they special?
Chapterhouse: Actually, we have a legal fund to set up so we don't have to fold if we get a C&D.
Poster 2: Yeah, but you guys are taking the bread out of the designers mouths! Make your own stuff!
Poster 5: I just read a generic law text that says they can get sued.
Poster 1: : How many times have we had this discussion before?
Poster 6: Too many.
Poster 3: Yeah, but I can point out a problem with that text by quoting a legal case I just looked up on Wikipedia!
Chapterhouse: We actually consulted a lawyer who said we can do this.
Poster 6 You guys do realise you guys are both wrong, right?
Poster 2: Nu-uh! Because this other wikipedia case proves that what they're doing is wrong.
Poster 5: lol, you guys gonna get shut down
Hired Gun 27: You guys are terrible people and are going to get sued by the almighty and righteous GW.
Poster 1: Who let the hired gun in?


And so on ad infinitum.

I vote to be Poster 1. Who wants to be Poster 6?

YES! This has played out before ON THE WRONG FORUMS! This is an effort to condense it into one linkable forum so that chapterhouse can post new product without the threads getting flamed and locked.

Ketara wrote:Haven't we had this discussion multiple times before?
Allow me to summarise the next 5 pages of discussion quickly.

Poster 1: Chapterhouse can do what they like.
Poster 2: Nuh-uh! I just looked at GW's IP page, and they're clearly breaching it!
Poster 3: : Actually, GW's IP page isn't valid on this. They lie about a lot of stuff.
Poster 2: Yeah, but this is blatantly copyright!
Poster 1: Actually, GW copies a load of the their stuff *insert generic chaos star comment*
Poster 4: I don't care that stuff is awesome!
Poster 5: Then how come all the other companies get shut down? Why are they special?
Chapterhouse: Actually, we have a legal fund to set up so we don't have to fold if we get a C&D.
Poster 2: Yeah, but you guys are taking the bread out of the designers mouths! Make your own stuff!
Poster 5: I just read a generic law text that says they can get sued.
Poster 1: : How many times have we had this discussion before?
Poster 6: Too many.
Poster 3: Yeah, but I can point out a problem with that text by quoting a legal case I just looked up on Wikipedia!
Chapterhouse: We actually consulted a lawyer who said we can do this.
Poster 6 You guys do realise you guys are both wrong, right?
Poster 2: Nu-uh! Because this other wikipedia case proves that what they're doing is wrong.
Poster 5: lol, you guys gonna get shut down
Hired Gun 27: You guys are terrible people and are going to get sued by the almighty and righteous GW.
Poster 1: Who let the hired gun in?


And so on ad infinitum.

I vote to be Poster 1. Who wants to be Poster 6?

Love it!

Chapterhouse wrote:

TBD wrote:
The sole purpose of my comment was to establish that it is not clear cut what the exact legal position is, regardless of what Chapterhouse and their presumed lawyers claim.

That is the part I take offense with. No matter what you may think, that makes it sound like we are full of hot air and our claims to have hired an attorney are lies and probably not true. Do we "presume" GW has lawyers, no, just because we are a smaller company doesn't mean we are any less correct or legal.

It does not mean anyone thinks you are lying at all, but nobody here can confirm who these lawyers are, so until that happens I think "presumed" is the correct term to be used.

The great thing is, I could attach usernames to each of those posters, as each of the previous threads has been so similar!

Actually, I fancy a change of role this time. I've got too much post count for the hired gun, so maybe Poster 5...

haha nice pic.

Ketara wrote:The great thing is, I could attach usernames to each of those posters, as each of the previous threads has been so similar!

Actually, I fancy a change of role this time. I've got too much post count for the hired gun, so maybe Poster 5...

It is almost spot on, but I do miss the (semi) GW-hater poster who has trouble with comprehensive reading and calls everybody fanboys just as a precaution.

TBD wrote:

Chapterhouse wrote:

TBD wrote:
The sole purpose of my comment was to establish that it is not clear cut what the exact legal position is, regardless of what Chapterhouse and their presumed lawyers claim.

That is the part I take offense with. No matter what you may think, that makes it sound like we are full of hot air and our claims to have hired an attorney are lies and probably not true. Do we "presume" GW has lawyers, no, just because we are a smaller company doesn't mean we are any less correct or legal.

It does not mean anyone thinks you are lying at all, but nobody here can confirm who these lawyers are, so until that happens I think "presumed" is the correct term to be used.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Clthomps wrote:
Well that is one major thing that pops up on your forums, To put it to rest once and for all why don't you post info about your lawyer. I am sure he has a name and certain qualifications that suit him for IP work.


Sure, I can put my money where my mouth is

Corby Bell
Garlitz Bell, LLP
Out of Dallas Texas.

He charged a lot for his time, so unless you want to be billed, I wouldn't bug him too much.

TBD I would say that it is now unfair to presume they don't have a lawyer.


Thanks Nick.

I personally don't get why anyone would think that they don't have a lawyer, and what it matters to them anyways. If any issue arose it would be between GW and Chapterhouse. Not some random person on the internet. If they said they had a lawyer and didn't they would most likely be in a spot of trouble. If they do then they would most likely be covered unless their lawyer was junk and missed something. However since they haven't been shut down yet I think he did a good job covering their bases or GW hasn't heard of them yet, which is unlikely. This is a very popular site from what I understand and CH posts their new stuff here regularly.

In any case, I like CH sculpts, they are great and add a nice bit of customization to whatever force you wish to use them with... GW or not

Polonius wrote:I'm actually pretty comfy right here....

I mean, I think you're intentions are good, I just think there needs to be a pretty major caveat on any discussion that takes place, namely, that nobody really knows what they're talking about.

If it makes people feel better, than god speed, but there's a more limited utility than you may think to this.

I've said similar things in other posts and been called a troll as well. These kinds of threads just get a lot of people upset, and more firmly entrenched in whatever position they started in rather than having any salient points of law discussed/learned.

Deleted pointless posts of fighting or commentary thereon from three posters.

Let's keep it civil, folks.

I really hope Chapterhouse is able to flourish and not fall prey to a C+D letter. They are playing in the margins of GW's world, and this is dicey territory.

If any of you read Tabletopgamingnews.com , there's been a ton of C+D letters to fan sites lately. An unusual spree of them over the last two months, in fact. Mostly they are regarding imagery on websites and domain names, but some hackles were raised when a GW official threatened deleting Star Players from a Bloodbowl rulebook update. Biiiiig lame right there, and probably the liveliest comments TTGN ever saw.

http://www.tabletopgamingnews.com/2009/11/17/31483

From this particular example, GW gets huffy when a company specifically says, "use this stuff with WH40k", etc. If Chapterhouse manages to fly in this grey zone of just being a minis manufacturer, they could avoid the legal banhammer. Lots of other companies survive while navigating these choppy waters, so I hope Chapterhouse has such good fortune.

An editorial on IP from the above site:
http://www.tabletopgamingnews.com/2009/11/19/31523

The C&D letters have been discussed ad nauseum on here already. You don't have to look too far to find multiple threads on the topic... Let's not go down that road again, as all it does is get people riled.

Polonius wrote:....as I finish my debate on Byzantine Art...

If it's encrusted with gold mossaics then it must be Byzantine art! Basilica of San Vitale FTW! Go Emperor Justinian!

Putting the period of 329-1453AD asside, I look at the topic this way.

You can do motifs and be fine. All the scally armor for the rhinos is a great example- it's the IDEA of the Salamanders that was involked, but there was nothing specific. Same with the SW shield- Norse iconography + high tech = fits fine. If the used the actual SW's iconic wolfs head, that's something else.

Which brings me to the greens of the Eldar helmets. That is very distinctively GW right there, and a little too much so to be safe. If Chapterhouse made a bunch of stuff you could stick ONTO the Eldar helm (clusters of spirit stones, cool visors or mag-goggles, etc) then that would be fine. But to basically rescuplt a very distinctive helmet in roughly the same style is probably trouble- you've moved from the IDEA of Eldar (which is safe for derivitive work) to actual IP Eldar.

TBD wrote:

Chapterhouse wrote:

TBD wrote:
The sole purpose of my comment was to establish that it is not clear cut what the exact legal position is, regardless of what Chapterhouse and their presumed lawyers claim.

That is the part I take offense with. No matter what you may think, that makes it sound like we are full of hot air and our claims to have hired an attorney are lies and probably not true. Do we "presume" GW has lawyers, no, just because we are a smaller company doesn't mean we are any less correct or legal.

It does not mean anyone thinks you are lying at all, but nobody here can confirm who these lawyers are, so until that happens I think "presumed" is the correct term to be used.

The use of words like 'presumed' and 'alleged' are used every day, all over the news. It should in no way be taken as some slight or insult. No need to be so touchy about things. Oops, I mean 'allegedly touchy'.

Moopy wrote:

Polonius wrote:....as I finish my debate on Byzantine Art...

If it's encrusted with gold mossaics then it must be Byzantine art! Basilica of San Vitale FTW! Go Emperor Justinian!

Putting the period of 329-1453AD asside, I look at the topic this way.

You can do motifs and be fine. All the scally armor for the rhinos is a great example- it's the IDEA of the Salamanders that was involked, but there was nothing specific. Same with the SW shield- Norse iconography + high tech = fits fine. If the used the actual SW's iconic wolfs head, that's something else.

Which brings me to the greens of the Eldar helmets. That is very distinctively GW right there, and a little too much so to be safe. If Chapterhouse made a bunch of stuff you could stick ONTO the Eldar helm (clusters of spirit stones, cool visors or mag-goggles, etc) then that would be fine. But to basically rescuplt a very distinctive helmet in roughly the same style is probably trouble- you've moved from the IDEA of Eldar (which is safe for derivitive work) to actual IP Eldar.

Well keep in mind those are the very beginnings of the helms, they will have a ton of other stuff added to them. Does GW have the claim to a smooth mask with slanted eyes on it? I sure hope not or we are not the only company in trouble.