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.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:The double-headed eagle is not a good example, actually

Actually, it is.

The concept of a double-headed eagle isn't copyrightable.

The Imperial Eagle, in abstract triangular wing format is a copyrighted specific design.

The Black Templar (Maltese) Cross is a historical, non-copyrightable design.

I agree with your principle.

If someone wanted to challenge the TM of the GW eagle, they would need to research eagle designs and try to find examples similar enough to convince a court that the GW version lacked sufficient originality to be considered an copyright work.

I am trying to illustrate the difficulty of identifying a dividing line in some IP situations.

When the Space Wolf Wolf GUard shoulder pad was taken off sale, I asked the head of GW Direct if it was ok to cast them up, and he said it was fine as long as I did not try to sell them.

So based on that, feel free to cast away!

I didn't do a good job with the mold btw....Gonna wait till the new stuff comes out before I try again.

General Hobbs wrote:

When the Space Wolf Wolf GUard shoulder pad was taken off sale, I asked the head of GW Direct if it was ok to cast them up, and he said it was fine as long as I did not try to sell them.

So based on that, feel free to cast away!

I didn't do a good job with the mold btw....Gonna wait till the new stuff comes out before I try again.

The holder of a copyright may create exceptions to their basic copyright. Therefore GW could declare that recasting of OOP models is fine.

Flashman wrote:I'm of the opinion that if it's for your own use, as it clearly is in this example, you can do what you like.

this

Fleur de Le........

I have made numerous casts of Fleur de Le's for my sisters...good luck complaining about IP on that one! =)

Wrexasaur wrote:

grizgrin wrote:

Miguelsan wrote:
Quite a few GW´s IP have started as derivatives either from common folklore or other SciFi Works.

Good point. I'd forgotten how it is ok for GW to appropriate and derive from other peoples work, but woe betide the melon-fether who steals their gak. Which is just how big business runs, I guess.

...
So, while you may think that the GW sculpts are just pulled out of Gorka Morkas butt, I would have to inform you that you have been clearly misled by something.

Just because striking scorpions look a LOT like predators, does not really effect their coolness factor very much at all.

I could go deeply into this, but I have been typing too much about simple things like standing on soil and being on soil because of it...

What? The point I was trying to make was based on the assertion that much of GW's work is, in my opinion, based on the work of others from a creative standpoint. Whilst I can see certainly see that very little creative work these days does not carrie some attributtes of preceding works by others, in my opinion GW's derivatives have in some cases fallen very close to the tree. Too close for me to have any respect for the works in question, by far.

Also, you comment about the scorps is again, purely opinion.

I would pay good money for recast of those combimeltas that guy made in Painting and Modeling.


I made a few myself and they are just so awesome.

I wish I knew how to recast :(