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.
Ketara wrote:Really Luna? Okay. List of threads to do with recasting and whatnot coming up. This subject has been utterly done to death. I remember personally discussing it with you at least thrice, and reading about it and not bothering to join in at least once.
Is that a problem? Most threads have been done to death, and often they do not end on an agreement. Are we no longer allowed to post threads that have been posted before?
ph34r's Forgeworld Phobos blog, current WIP: Iron Warriors and Skaven Tau +From Iron Cometh Strength+ +From Strength Cometh Will+ +From Will Cometh Faith+ +From Faith Cometh Honor+ +From Honor Cometh Iron+
The Polito form is dead, insect. Are you afraid? What is it you fear? The end of your trivial existence?
When the history of my glory is written, your species shall only be a footnote to my magnificence.
Kid_Kyoto wrote:Sculpting your own heat rays and arming vets with them is the only legal option.
Under GW's Legal Section, it states:
- Make any direct copies and/or scans of Games Workshop publications, images, or other materials. This includes any Out-o- Production materials, web site materials, and White Dwarf articles. We would however suggest that you produce your own materials (as long as you follow the other requirements of this policy).
- Use our trademarks in respect of your domain name.
- Use our intellectual property in relation to any third party products or third party intellectual property.
- Alter our trademarks in any way.
- Use any of our IP without appropriately crediting the IP and using the appropriate disclaimers in accordance with this policy (see below).
- Create, distribute, or use any material that is not consistent with the functionality, atmosphere, and parameters of the Warhammer universe as created and owned by Games Workshop
- State that anything that you create using Games Workshop's intellectual property is "official."
- Create, distribute, or use any material that is derogatory, obscene, or offensive.
- Create, distribute, or use any material that devalues any Games Workshop product in any way.
Nothing in there does it say you can't copy GW stuff, just as long as you say it's GW's stuff.
Every Normal Man Must Be Tempted At Times To Spit On His Hands, Hoist That Black Flag, And Begin Slitting Throats.
Ketara wrote:Really Luna? Okay. List of threads to do with recasting and whatnot coming up. This subject has been utterly done to death. I remember personally discussing it with you at least thrice, and reading about it and not bothering to join in at least once.
Is that a problem? Most threads have been done to death, and often they do not end on an agreement. Are we no longer allowed to post threads that have been posted before?
I think this is more of a matter of context.
This is spillover from another thread.
Drink deeply and lustily from the foamy draught of evil.
W: 1.756 Quadrillion L: 0 D: 2
Haters gon' hate.
The_Stormrider wrote:The greater question is by marketing and selling Dreadfleet is GW endorsing piracy?
This is a far more important question.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
LunaHound wrote:Hence one of the curious question i had.
Is it "ok" because no one can tell the difference so no one knows?
Or is it "ok" because its an exception and condoned.
You keep forgetting the other option.
It's not okay.
DR:70+S+G-MB-I+Pwmhd05#+D++A+++/aWD100R++T(S)DM+++ Get your own Dakka Code!
"...he could never understand the sense of a contest in which the two adversaries agreed upon the rules." Gabriel Garcia Marquez, One Hundred Years of Solitude
OP - I believe your entire list is examples of copyright infringement, though as others have noted #3 may only be that to varying degrees depending on the opinion of the artist, the type of copyright they may have and your country and state/province's views on OP laws. All would be illegal (to varying degrees) in most of the 1st and 2nd world, though possibly not in various parts of the third world and possibly some countries in Eastern Europe (I don't know for sure there)
As others have noted, these are not piracy by the maritime law definition (hopefully obviously) nor the definition that gets Lars Ulrich's panties in a knot every year or so.
The story of Chorus Lucia, a founding off of the Guardians of the Covenant (DA Codex), as well as the building of the army, ideas and babbling about the game: http://choruslucia.blogspot.com
4360 points largest playable list without Apoc and growing ~6600 points painted
High Elves - 510 points unpainted
Would it be wrong to build a 'nids army and call it Hive Fleet Giger? The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad. - Salvador Dali
Blood for the blood god? Does that include slicing multiple fingers while working on one conversion?
1) Recasting products ( eg recasting figures, recasting bits like melta gun and missile launchers, or even whole arms + weapons and whole torsos? )
2) Illegal DL of MP3 or perhaps catching mp3 off youtube videos
3) Using pictures without artist's consent ( Avatars, Siggy, Wallpaper )
4) Illegal DL of books in pdf
It depends on the country. If you really need to know, ask a lawyer. Expecting good legal advice on a wargaming discussion forum is like expecting good Chinese food at Taco Bell.
There are 2 things wrong with you guy's theories.
Grinding axe doesn't work when Im the one that shouldn't have suggested free download. Albeit no links were posted, i can see its still wrong.
Double checking for whats allowed or not allowed is wanting to learn.
2nd part that is very weird is the green part i highlighted.
Saying the mass wouldn't know is like saying the law isn't clear, or wasn't made clear. Or general populace doesn't know whats legal.
Because i don't know. yet I assume its common knowledge people would be aware of, i asked, its logical.
In other words, There are No Axes to Grind, It was my bad to suggest Free Download. I have made no complaints, made no contests against the edit, Nothing.
A a question is a question, it really sucks to receive such an accusation.
People *may* know, but for legal issues, i wouldn't trust info I found on a forum.
Ask someone who studies law (or copyright law) you know personally, because an error in interpretation or a misunderstanding can cause you lots of problems down the road.
LunaHound wrote:Hence one of the curious question i had.
Is it "ok" because no one can tell the difference so no one knows?
Or is it "ok" because its an exception and condoned.
I don't understand what you're saying here.
So far as the original question, my answer would be all but 3, at least in the US. It varies wildly by context and locality. A sculpture class in the US, as I understand it, would be legally allowed to recast a model for the purposes of teaching molding and casting. But for most contexts you're going to encounter on Dakka Dakka, all but 3.
I'm not a lawyer, but avatars, signatures, and such would seem to me to fall under a De minimis fair use defense in the US. Who the hell knows how it works up in that barren, maple syrup drenched frozen wasteland you call home, though.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Chowderhead wrote:Under GW's Legal Section, it states:
Yes, well GW apparently doesn't know what the heck they're talking about. Hopefully no one takes this page seriously.
LunaHound wrote:are these all piracy?
1) Recasting products ( eg recasting figures, recasting bits like melta gun and missile launchers, or even whole arms + weapons and whole torsos? )
2) Illegal DL of MP3 or perhaps catching mp3 off youtube videos
3) Using pictures without artist's consent ( Avatars, Siggy, Wallpaper )
4) Illegal DL of books in pdf
Piracy is bad, but price hikes of 300% is fine. LMAO
Gotta love internet lawlers.
At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money.
Piracy is bad, but price hikes of 300% is fine. LMAO
Who said that?
Who said What. How said That.
At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money.
lindsay40k wrote:Depends on the law, OP. You live in Canada, I don't know Canadian law.
I know that in the UK, (1) is not illegal piracy when done for private study and no recasts find their way into the possession of anyone else.
I would seriously doubt that using in gaming would count as 'private study'. Also 'private study' or otherwise called fair dealing does not include multiple copies which basically means the entirety of how people recast for wargaming is not protected.
An exercise in learning how casting works is private study. An exercise in finding out how many casts a GS press mould can make before the mould is broken is private study. This is all protected under fair dealing in UK law.
Things UK law forbids you to do with duplicates of IP produced in the course of private study:
- Allow the copies to be divided up and possessed by more than one person.
- Any and all commercial activity.
So if a GS mould is made of a piece of IP, the castings made from that mould must all remain within the possession of a single person at any one moment in time, and if they should change hands it must only be as a set and as a private personal gift. After the set changes hands, no more castings may be made from the same mould.
Things UK law does not forbid you to do with duplicates of IP produced in the course of private study:
- Playing a game with the duplicates, in a public, private or commercial venue.
Of course, all of the above can be trumped by license agreements; for instance, installing OSX onto a generic PC for private study, whilst not breaching copyright, breaches contract.
Similarly, a gaming centre is free to operate under a policy of only allowing models manufactured by the store's sister manufacturing companies to be used in the centre; somebody proven to be using models commercially produced by rivals, or privately produced in a private experiment in casting, would not have a legitimate defence against being asked to remove the models from public view or from the store (or even, centre rules permitting, receive a lifetime ban from the centre and other related).
lindsay40k wrote:Things UK law does not forbid you to do with duplicates of IP produced in the course of private study:
- Playing a game with the duplicates, in a public, private or commercial venue.
I would imagine that playing a game with the duplicates might rise to the level of commercial activity. The purpose of the so-called "private study" here isn't to study the works in any manner, it's to avoid buying models.
I'm not a UK lawyer, but I imagine calling duplicating playing pieces to flesh out your army "private study" would be a tough case to make.
LunaHound wrote:What exactly is piracy? are there varying degrees of piracy?
are these all piracy?
1) Recasting products ( eg recasting figures, recasting bits like melta gun and missile launchers, or even whole arms + weapons and whole torsos? )
2) Illegal DL of MP3 or perhaps catching mp3 off youtube videos
3) Using pictures without artist's consent ( Avatars, Siggy, Wallpaper )
4) Illegal DL of books in pdf
Piracy has become a catch-all term for a subset of IP infringement generally related to making copies of digital files of material. It is a vague term for an uneven and unclear set of laws that can vary widely by country. it is near-impossible to really stop as copying digital files is a very easy process. Discussing it in general terms is difficult as definitions may vary widely across jurisdictions. I'm not a lawyer, so my layman's approach is to try and avoid fscking with anyone else's copyrights, trademarks, etc. because I don't have the time and moeny to fight legal battles, and I am in favor of creators even if I may not like specific creations.
Working on someting you'll either love or hate. Hopefully to be revealed by November.
Play the games that make you happy.
Ketara wrote:Really Luna? Okay. List of threads to do with recasting and whatnot coming up. This subject has been utterly done to death. I remember personally discussing it with you at least thrice, and reading about it and not bothering to join in at least once.
Is that a problem? Most threads have been done to death, and often they do not end on an agreement. Are we no longer allowed to post threads that have been posted before?
Point is if you are involved in all those threads, mods frown upon you starting the same thread over and over again.
lindsay40k wrote:Things UK law does not forbid you to do with duplicates of IP produced in the course of private study:
- Playing a game with the duplicates, in a public, private or commercial venue.
I would imagine that playing a game with the duplicates might rise to the level of commercial activity.
Is there a sale or trade going on? Nope? Not commercial.
The purpose of the so-called "private study" here isn't to study the works in any manner, it's to avoid buying models.
Merely a fortunate by-product of the study, and furthermore not buying models is not a crime in UK law.
In the US, the law is a lot more skewed in the favour of corporations in this regard.
Other examples of UK fair use:
- print Batman and Superman stencils and cover your private minivan with them.
- photocopy a splash panel from a comic at 9000% and paste it on your house.
- rip a CD noto your computer, copy it onto your iPod, and share your headphones with your partner on a bus.
- dismantle a Transformer, make clones of a part notorious for breaking, and let your friends mess around with the rebuilt toy.
As long as you're not generating revenue by your cloning of IP or distributing it, it's pretty much fine.
Chowderhead wrote:
Under GW's Legal Section, it states:
- Make any direct copies and/or scans of Games Workshop publications, images, or other materials. This includes any Out-o- Production materials, web site materials, and White Dwarf articles. We would however suggest that you produce your own materials (as long as you follow the other requirements of this policy).
- Use any of our IP without appropriately crediting the IP and using the appropriate disclaimers in accordance with this policy (see below).
I wonder if GW has noticed that these 2 points contradict each other. Are they saying we cannot copy their stuff, or are they saying we cannot copy their stuff without crediting it?
In any case their first point is dead wrong under US law. It is legal to copy someone else's work, giving credit for such fair uses as review, commentary or parody.
I regularly scan and post images for my retro review series and I have no doubts that my actions are legal.
THis of course is different from scanning and copying books. Only a small portion is posted, and value i added through the posters comments.
Anyway this is neither here nor there. For Dakka modding purposes I take the postion that piracy or advocating piracy is against site rules if it hurts the commerical value of our sponsors (who y'know, pay the bills) such as downloading books for sale or recasting bits or if it will create legal problems for this site.
The OP made a point that using artwork in avatars and sigs without permission could be a copyright issue. The difference there is that most artists & companies that hold those rights do not make it an issue. Copyright enforcement is left up to the rights holders so, as long as they don't cae we don't. If someone in GW went insane one day and decided to go after folks for having (say) an Ultramarine mark in their sig, well we'd have to come up with a solution.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/10/10 17:47:11
lindsay40k wrote:Is there a sale or trade going on? Nope? Not commercial.
The same argument can be made for a lot of cases, particularly online piracy where games are distributed for free. There's no sale or exchange of goods/services, simply one person passing off a copyrighted good to another.
That's why the US will not only consider whether the infringement involves a commercial sale but the effect that the infringement will have on the market.
Maybe UK law doesn't care about this.
lindsay40k wrote:Merely a fortunate by-product of the study, and furthermore not buying models is not a crime in UK law.
I would imagine that the "fortunate by-product" is, in many caes, the intent of the "study." I'm not suggesting that not buying models is a crime, I am suggesting that making your own replicas of GW products in order to avoid purchasing their products could be a crime.
lindsay40k wrote:In the US, the law is a lot more skewed in the favour of corporations in this regard.
It's skewed in favor of artists, not corporations.
lindsay40k wrote:As long as you're not generating revenue by your cloning of IP or distributing it, it's pretty much fine.
If GW copyright law really is so lax as to allow people to copy fungible copyrighted goods with the intent of avoiding purchasing the products, then that is, in my opinion, a problem.
Just to be clear then...I could buy 1 Space Marine sprue, make a bunch of copies of the sprue ("for study") and then assemble my army from the recast materials? If so, that should make many armies - especially Fantasy - quite affordable.
biccat wrote:The same argument can be made for a lot of cases, particularly online piracy where games are distributed for free. There's no sale or exchange of goods/services, simply one person passing off a copyrighted good to another.
No, because in that case the duplicate ends up in the possession of another party; you cross the 'distribution' line when a copy is made on a storage device that doesn't belong to you (site server or peer's computer). And there's almost certainly a breach of licensing agreement as well; under UK law, it's double illegal.
biccat wrote:the US will not only consider whether the infringement involves a commercial sale but the effect that the infringement will have on the market.
Maybe UK law doesn't care about this.
Indeed, this is a noteable difference between the two.
biccat wrote:I'm not suggesting that not buying models is a crime, I am suggesting that making your own replicas of GW products in order to avoid purchasing their products could be a crime.
Could be, yes. Not in the UK. There's no law stating that you're only allowed to own a Tyranid™ army if every single model is either manufactured by the trademark owner or licensee, or adapted from another product, or sculpted from scratch.
biccat wrote:If GW copyright law really is so lax as to allow people to copy fungible copyrighted goods with the intent of avoiding purchasing the products, then that is, in my opinion, a problem.
Well, that's the law in the UK. My iPod is full of tracks I copied from CDs I legitimately bought, that I copied with the intent of avoiding purchasing tracks from iTunes. My room used to have posters I made by photocopying splash panels.
biccat wrote:Just to be clear then...I could buy 1 Space Marine sprue, make a bunch of copies of the sprue ("for study") and then assemble my army from the recast materials? If so, that should make many armies - especially Fantasy - quite affordable.
In the UK, there'd be no legal barrier. The second you gave or sold someone a single recast part, you'd be crossing the line. And with their 'Citadel, Forgeworld and scratchbuilt parts only' policy, GW Retail would be within their rights to ban you from every one of their stores for life if they clocked your recasts instore. They may even try to deter others by taking you to court on charges of piracy, and the court may even find in their favour. But on paper, nothing can legitimately stop a UK resident from having an entire Chapter of recasts in their garage for personal private use.
Piracy is wrong and hurts everybody and funds terrorism, don't do it ever.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/10/10 19:25:37
At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money.
What's the point of this question? Because it sounds like you're testing the limits of what you can get away with, which may not be your intention, but that's the feeling I get.
EDITED to get back On-topic.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2011/10/10 22:07:57
I may disagree with Luna on whether this thread should be hashed out again, but its seriously disrespectful to purposefully drag someone's topic off thread making the same joke for the fifth time this thread. The first time someone made the reference, I smiled. The second time, I skimmed it.The third time, I'm getting bored of reading it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/10/10 22:02:30
4360 points largest playable list without Apoc and growing ~6600 points painted
