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.

Okay...maybe I missed something...but isn't this topic about two new Tyranid Datasheets and not FAQ's?

On topic....

The Datasheet for the Gargoyles is pretty fluffy, but an 80 garg min is a bit much methinks.

Damn you and that avatar.

Grr!!!!!!

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Schepp himself wrote:
Was it copyrighted? How do you define stealing when there was no intention of making money with it in the first place (by Gwar!) and none by GW afterwards?
Sure, basic manners would demand at least an honourable mention in my opinion, but to use the word stealing, especially in the context of something "published" on the internet, is exaggerated.

Greets
Schepp himself

I don't know UK law but in the US anything written is considered your copyright unless those rights are explicitly surrendered. Claiming copyright increases your protection, filing a copy with the Library of Congress does so even more. But even if I scribble something on a napkin no one has the right to reprint it without my permission.

The issue is that Gwar would have prove that GW copied his FAQ in the first place,and there are provisions in copyright law for seperate authors having similar works. Even if he could prove they copied it,GW could easily claim they copied it legally through the "fair use" doctrine. The four guidelines for that would be...

1.The purpose of it's use.
2.The nature of the work.
3.The amount of the work that was copied.
4.The effect on the market value of the work.

Since Gwar infringed on GW's trademarked and registered copyrighted material by writing the FAQ in the first place,and the fact that there is no effect on the market value of his work,if GW copied it,most any court would find it a case of fair use.

Ultimately,it seems like the dude is getting his 15 minutes of fame in the 40k community anyways,so I don't know how much difference it makes either way.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Damn you and that avatar.

Grr!!!!!!

Turn dat frown upside-down .

Schepp himself wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Schepp himself wrote: Stealing from the internet!

Thanks for that H.B.M.C.

Don't be intentionally dense. Anyone with half a brain knows exactly what I'm talking about, especially Gwar!, who's FAQ was virtually word for word what GW wrote... sorry, stole.

Was it copyrighted? How do you define stealing when there was no intention of making money with it in the first place (by Gwar!) and none by GW afterwards?
Sure, basic manners would demand at least an honourable mention in my opinion, but to use the word stealing, especially in the context of something "published" on the internet, is exaggerated.

Greets
Schepp himself

I did this thing called school where you got in real trouble if you copyapasta'd stuff.... what was it called again... plagarism?

Whatever1 wrote:The issue is that Gwar would have prove that GW copied his FAQ in the first place,and there are provisions in copyright law for seperate authors having similar works. Even if he could prove they copied it,GW could easily claim they copied it legally through the "fair use" doctrine. The four guidelines for that would #be.

None of that applies in the UK, the "Fair Use Doctrine" is entirely US law.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Whatever1 wrote:The issue is that Gwar would have prove that GW copied his FAQ in the first place,and there are provisions in copyright law for seperate authors having similar works. Even if he could prove they copied it,GW could easily claim they copied it legally through the "fair use" doctrine. The four guidelines for that would #be.

None of that applies in the UK, the "Fair Use Doctrine" is entirely US law.

There are similar provisions to Fair Use in UK copyright law,as well,but they are more restrictive.

Ultimately,none of it really makes a difference. Part of having something copyrighted is that it gives you exclusive rights to all derivative work based off that work. Gwar's FAQ is clearly a derivative work based on GW's Space Wolves codex,and is in violation of GW's copyrights and trademarks. Not saying that two wrongs make a right,but you can't ignore somebody else's copyrights and trademarks,but then turn around and expect them to respect yours. That's hypocritical.

In all seriousness,the whole complaint is ridiculously thin to begin with. What's next? Is somebody going to file a complaint at the next GT because they posted an army list in the forums here and somebody copied it without giving them credit? Or are people going to start saying,"You can't paint your army those colors because I've already painted my army those colors and I put pictures of them up on DakkaDakka,so that scheme is copyrighted. If you REALLY want to use my color scheme,then I insist you put my initials on the base of every single one of your models. You can't put them on the bottom,either. They have to visible."?

End threadjack.

Its Gwar were talking about after all. Is anybody really shocked that he is starting more drama?

Seriously guys, I don't mean to mini-mod, but I'm sure the OP finds it a bit annoying to have his thread be the host of some spam about FAQ's. Get on topic, people! It's part of basic forum courtesy!

How many people have enough Trygons already to run the datasheet in White Dwarf? I've built a Trygon Prime and a Mawloc and no "regular" Trygons yet.

*Sticks head above parapet* Urm...If I may comment on the datasheets?

I'm no 'nid player myself, but I'm liking the first more than the second. Three Trygons seem big and scary, but in Apocalypse I don't see them having the number's or armour, to protect against all the nastie's in the big battles, such as Volcano cannons and their ilk. The first one could cause problems for the opponent if used correctly if used right. But as you said Brass, it seems to me that people will be building Primes and Mawloc's before they build regular Trycycles. All in all, they're like the rest of the Libir Apocalyptica series; interesting idea's, but rarely used. In fact, the only one's I HAVE seen used are the Stompa ones-and that's because everyone loves Stompa's.

I'm going back behind my barricade now before the Mod's descend with thier mighty thunderbolt of locking and smite us all to the Dakka sinbin *crouches down as insuls and fists fly*.

i would havethought that you could use triangle primes with the triangle datasheet.

twistinthunder wrote:i would havethought that you could use triangle primes with the triangle datasheet.

True. Their reasoning is probably that it "Help's stop overpowering issues, by reducing the strength of the shots", obviously to stop us stupid, evil competative players from *Gasp* trying to win.
Ahem....Sorry, in a bad mood today . /Sarcasm and rant.

I wanna see a data sheet for that Mawloc conversion pictured in the book. Vthrope lash whips for tongues, fex shield on the front, and massive devourers.