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.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
The only reason GW haven't trounced Chapterhouse is because the US courts are more interested in protecting US business than upholding the law.

The analysis of the case made by several people that are more or less familiar with legal matters right here on Dakka seems to prove the exact opposite of what you are saying...

Care to enlighten us on how the "US courts are protecting US business instead of upholding the law", since that is quite a heavy accusation to throw against a democratic nation?

Chapterhouse made a kit specifically stated to be a Tyranid Tervigon, without permission or licence by GW. The Tyranids and the Tervigon are GW's intellectual property. Chapterhouse blatantly used another company's IP without permission. Common sense dictates they should have been taken down. Therefore the only thing protecting Chapterhouse is the US and their obsession with protecting their businesses, regardless of what they are doing.

GW undercutting someone? Really? Are you saying we might actually see a price lowering in our lifetime?

I understand the point you're trying to make, about GW's plastic production being unmatchable by other companies. But still, most people won't care that their things are in a resin instead.

 Kanluwen wrote:

12thRonin wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's not "in the interest of the public good" that the firm representing Chapterhouse is doing it pro bono. Stop acting like Chapterhouse is clearly in the right here and that GW is the "Big Bad Corporation" keeping them down.

I guess you could also be told to stop acting like GW is clearly in the right when it's been shown they don't even own the rights for some of what they are suing over.

I'm sorry, where in this thread have I suggested that GW is clearly in the right or that they own every thing they're suing over?

Oh right. I haven't. So please get a grip on yourself before you start in with the "fanboy" accusations that folks here so love to throw around.

Let me requote this for you...

Fanluwen wrote:
Stop acting like Chapterhouse is clearly in the right here and that GW is the "Big Bad Corporation" keeping them down.

This is obviously your opinion. Why else would you be instructing others in their behavior?

Firms being involved in precedent setting cases is a Very Big Deal and part of the reason why they usually do so pro bono.

It's also been stated that firms also do pro-bono work for reasons of training and it's considered part of the ethical standards by the ABA to do pro bono work.

The firm representing Chapterhouse has devoted all kinds of resources which rule out that this was done for "reasons of training" and the ABA standards can be overruled by the state BAR association recommending less hours.

 Buzzsaw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's not "in the interest of the public good" that the firm representing Chapterhouse is doing it pro bono. Stop acting like Chapterhouse is clearly in the right here and that GW is the "Big Bad Corporation" keeping them down.

The firm representing Chapterhouse has been mentioned as specializing in IP law and they very likely have a paying client with a case that they can apply the outcome of this one to as precedent.

Firms being involved in precedent setting cases is a Very Big Deal and part of the reason why they usually do so pro bono.

I'll leave the pointing out of the ignorance contained above to other posters, and merely add this;

I have no problem pointing out that you clearly did not actually read my reply to you and are relying upon the usual suspects who haunt any of the legal threads and jump upon anyone saying anything which isn't "BURN GW!".

Nowhere did I say that "Pro Bono Publico" is not Latin for "for the public good".
I said that it's very clearly a case of the firm representing Chapterhouse is getting something out of this and it is not being done "in the interest of the public good". It's "in the interest" of the firm representing Chapterhouse.

Upon observation and inference, it is my academic* opinion that Games Workshop has improperly asserted rights under the relevant statutes and regulations. That they have done so in bad faith and without basis in law. That they have systematically used the threat of financial ruin coincident with suit as a means to improperly limit competition and unlawfully exert control over competitors.

Now of course one is free to disagree with my opinion, as no doubt many do, in good faith. I do not point out my credentials to insulate my opinion or as an argument ad hominem, but to point out that my opinion is not frivolous, nor based on a facile understanding of the law.

I don't think you are trying to play the "I'm a lawyer and you're wrong!" card, but it makes the next part all the more amusing.

My opinion is based on the facts as I know them and my understanding of the relevant law. I am open to arguments favorable to GW (though they should be presented in the relevant thread here), but it will take something a bit more sophisticated then "US courts are more interested in protecting US business than upholding the law".

Why in the world are you posting this and replying to me?

I did not say anything of the kind. Squigsquasher, right above me, is the one who made that statement.
Oh, and posting in the Chapterhouse suit thread at this point?
It's pointless. The thread should have been locked at this point and only allowed for individuals who have access to the documents to post. Every other day it's filled with more and more mindless drivel, from both sides. You'll notice that I haven't posted in there for over two months because inevitably it keeps going in circles.

I should also add that as a lawyer, you have access to some information which I might not and potentially can check into something that I've been hearing rumblings of in sources such as "Fine Scale Modeler" starting as early as 2008 about a lot of model companies now having to license what was previously publicly available things such as military vehicle designs.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
The only reason GW haven't trounced Chapterhouse is because the US courts are more interested in protecting US business than upholding the law.

The analysis of the case made by several people that are more or less familiar with legal matters right here on Dakka seems to prove the exact opposite of what you are saying...

Care to enlighten us on how the "US courts are protecting US business instead of upholding the law", since that is quite a heavy accusation to throw against a democratic nation?

Chapterhouse made a kit specifically stated to be a Tyranid Tervigon, without permission or licence by GW. The Tyranids and the Tervigon are GW's intellectual property. Chapterhouse blatantly used another company's IP without permission. Common sense dictates they should have been taken down. Therefore the only thing protecting Chapterhouse is the US and their obsession with protecting their businesses, regardless of what they are doing.

Actually what Chapterhouse does is a "Tervigon Conversion Kit for Carnifex Model". Tervigons and Tyranids apparently aren't GW's intelectual property because:

a) When Chapterhouse released their conversion kit there was no such thing as a Tervigon model made by GW and they can't hold rights to stuff that they haven't even made yet;
b) GW while talking a bit talk, apparently can't prove that they own the rights to most of the miniatures that they HAVE produced. Having even reached the point of desperation of trying to convince artists that worked for them in the past to retroactively sign of those rights;

For these and other nuggets on the workings of the GW IP team, please feel free to educate yourself by reading the 90+ pages of the relevant thread.

In summation: No, the court isn't protecting a US business. The court is actually upholding the law because apparently GW doesn't own the rights to their own miniatures and you can't just claim to own something, you :GASP: actually have to prove that you do...

If you actually read the "90+ pages of the relevant thread", you would know that there has been no definitive ruling as to GW "not holding the rights" for the Tervigon.
In fact: the Tervigon is one of the bigger parts of the case.
The concept and name was clearly in existence before the model was made, and was present within the Tyranid Codex. There was even artwork of the Tervigon in said Codex.

The only result which will come from that claim being altered is that GW (and likely other model companies as well which are worrying about the same thing) will clamp down on artwork and the like before the models are ready.

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you actually read the "90+ pages of the relevant thread", you would know that there has been no definitive ruling as to GW "not holding the rights" for the Tervigon.
In fact: the Tervigon is one of the bigger parts of the case.
The concept and name was clearly in existence before the model was made, and was present within the Tyranid Codex. There was even artwork of the Tervigon in said Codex.

The only result which will come from that claim being altered is that GW (and likely other model companies as well which are worrying about the same thing) will clamp down on artwork and the like before the models are ready.

There hasn't been a definite ruling in anything since the case is still ongoing, but thanks for clarifying that.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
The only reason GW haven't trounced Chapterhouse is because the US courts are more interested in protecting US business than upholding the law.

The analysis of the case made by several people that are more or less familiar with legal matters right here on Dakka seems to prove the exact opposite of what you are saying...

Care to enlighten us on how the "US courts are protecting US business instead of upholding the law", since that is quite a heavy accusation to throw against a democratic nation?

Chapterhouse made a kit specifically stated to be a Tyranid Tervigon, without permission or licence by GW. The Tyranids and the Tervigon are GW's intellectual property. Chapterhouse blatantly used another company's IP without permission. Common sense dictates they should have been taken down. Therefore the only thing protecting Chapterhouse is the US and their obsession with protecting their businesses, regardless of what they are doing.

1. The case is on-going.
2. Common sense is subjective. Don't throw that term around so much.
3. 3rd party manufacturers have made parts for existing products for years. Google After Market Automotive Parts for a great example.
4. There is a 90 page thread on this subject that you can peruse and learn a lot about.
5. The US government doesn't give a flying crap about Chapterhouse so long as they pay their taxes. If they went belly-up, the USG wouldn't care.
6. "Therefore the only thing protecting Chapterhouse is the US and their obsession with protecting their businesses" This is the silliest thing I've read in a long time, and i have lots of elderly aunts and uncles that post craziness on Facebook.
7. Stay in school, kid.

 Kanluwen wrote:
...
I have no problem pointing out that you clearly did not actually read my reply to you and are relying upon the usual suspects who haunt any of the legal threads and jump upon anyone saying anything which isn't "BURN GW!".

Nowhere did I say that "Pro Bono Publico" is not Latin for "for the public good".
I said that it's very clearly a case of the firm representing Chapterhouse is getting something out of this and it is not being done "in the interest of the public good". It's "in the interest" of the firm representing Chapterhouse.

To reply quickly, all that this statement evinces is that you have a profoundly clouded understanding not only of the relevant law, but of the facts at issue and the basics of the practice of law. There are so many errors packed up here that they need a thread to address them... coincidentally found here.

Breifly though, it would seem you would require a kind of monastic purity of those that would claim the mantle of "public good", a standard that is, to belabor the obvious, touchingly naive. The fascinating irony is that if you truly believe your condemnation above, you betray your greater point about the possibility that GW is not in the wrong. After all, if it is a purely mercenary action, that can only be possible with a great expectation of success, which is to say that GW's case is transparently merit-less, such that there is no risk in taking them up on it.

Of course, even then it does not cease to be in the public good. After all, a business that expends capital and resources with the expectation of showing a malfeasance to be nothing more then a paper tiger has still, in defeating said malfeasance and showing their threats to be empty, served the public good.

It is no indictment of a man that he shoot a rabid dog, to point out that he shares those streets he has thus secured.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Upon observation and inference, it is my academic* opinion that Games Workshop has improperly asserted rights under the relevant statutes and regulations. That they have done so in bad faith and without basis in law. That they have systematically used the threat of financial ruin coincident with suit as a means to improperly limit competition and unlawfully exert control over competitors.

Now of course one is free to disagree with my opinion, as no doubt many do, in good faith. I do not point out my credentials to insulate my opinion or as an argument ad hominem, but to point out that my opinion is not frivolous, nor based on a facile understanding of the law.

I don't think you are trying to play the "I'm a lawyer and you're wrong!" card, but it makes the next part all the more amusing.

My opinion is based on the facts as I know them and my understanding of the relevant law. I am open to arguments favorable to GW (though they should be presented in the relevant thread here), but it will take something a bit more sophisticated then "US courts are more interested in protecting US business than upholding the law".

Why in the world are you posting this and replying to me?

I did not say anything of the kind. Squigsquasher, right above me, is the one who made that statement.
Oh, and posting in the Chapterhouse suit thread at this point?
It's pointless. The thread should have been locked at this point and only allowed for individuals who have access to the documents to post. Every other day it's filled with more and more mindless drivel, from both sides. You'll notice that I haven't posted in there for over two months because inevitably it keeps going in circles.

I'm well aware that a different individual posted that phrase. What I should have made more clear was that the the statement quoted was equivalent in sophistication to your own argument. That is, profoundly ignorant of both the law and the relevant facts.

As for the futility of posting in the appropriate thread, if you are possessed of some argument that will bring illumination to the besotted masses that have been blind to the true disposition of the case, I can only assure you that I, at least, shall be glad if you will no longer hide your light beneath a bushel.

If there is some line of reasoning you are maintaining in reserve, some obscure citation or principle archaic, do share it there, that we may all be illuminated by the sharing.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I should also add that as a lawyer, you have access to some information which I might not and potentially can check into something that I've been hearing rumblings of in sources such as "Fine Scale Modeler" starting as early as 2008 about a lot of model companies now having to license what was previously publicly available things such as military vehicle designs.

I have no idea what you are talking about specifically, and even less about what it has to do with this discussion. It very well may have something to do with this discussion, but a great deal more specificity is required.

I can appreciate that you feel... however it is that you feel. But you must appreciate that the place for discussion of the law is here, and this thread is expressly for a different purpose. To that end I apologize for participating in this increasingly distracted tangent. I'll restrain myself to responses that are responsive, heh.

Take exalts for both your posts Buzzsaw. Thank you for contributing.

On Topic: I would hope that the positive would outweigh the negative if CHS wins. Firstly, I hope it would mean that GW would actually have models for all the options in their codices when the release them, rather than several years later if ever. I hope it would mean that there would be an increase in third party developers that would result in more competition among them, eventually meaning better quality third party products.

Off Topic: For those who feel the need to debate the merits of this case, please take it to the relevant 95+ page thread on the subject here in the Discussions forum. Please read all 95+ pages if you are unfamiliar with the case. "Common sense" has, unfortunately, no place in legal proceedings. We luckily have been blessed with a few people who are actually practicing attorneys who are familiar with IP law that have helped to clarify what the law actually means during the course of that thread. Unfortunately, the opinions of what "should" be are pretty meaningless when the law differs. Oftentimes, people who have a feeling about what "should" be with regards to IP law have not had the chance to fully think out all of the ramifications of their opinion.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Take exalts for both your posts Buzzsaw. Thank you for contributing.

D'aaaaaw, shucks. Thanks.

Saldiven wrote:On Topic: I would hope that the positive would outweigh the negative if CHS wins. Firstly, I hope it would mean that GW would actually have models for all the options in their codices when the release them, rather than several years later if ever. I hope it would mean that there would be an increase in third party developers that would result in more competition among them, eventually meaning better quality third party products.

While I'm quite confident of positives, I'm not really sure there would be any negatives, except from the perspective of GW that is, of course.

Let's remember, trademark and copyright exist to protect artists and ideas, to grant very limited monopolies. If, as this thread supposes, GW loses their case in the main, it's because they have been squatting on public land, as it were.

In the largest sense, the case has been going on so long that the real threat to GW has materialized as this has made its way through the courts: Kickstarter. Companies like Dreamforge are breaking into the plastic miniature game (which is the real plum of the industry) through infusions of crowd-sourced cash.

GW's business model must change, they can't leave gaps in their product line lie fallow for months or years and expect no one to fill them.

That last bit we can certainly agree upon to an extent...

They have to change and gaps cannot be allowed to continue.
Whether or not someone else should be able to "fill" the gaps without a license though is up for debate.

 Kanluwen wrote:
You mean like practically every single person commenting in the Chapterhouse thread as though they're some kind of legal eagle?
.

That's pretty much my point. Too many people posted on the previous thread (and now this thread) about how they perceived things "should" be without having any understanding of the law. I'm sure you remember how some people even argued with attorneys who explained how the law actually works. I think a lot of the "should" work crowd would be incredibly unhappy if IP laws worked they way they believed; IP would be so incredibly powerful and all-encompassing that the development of "new" material would be stifled dramatically because it was similar to existing work. I've found the CHS lawsuit thread to be incredibly edifying.

I'm fairly sure there was a topic here somewhere....

Oh yeah - it's RIGHT IN THE TITLE OF THE THREAD.

If you're discussing the history of pro bono representation, or even the merits of the GW/CH lawsuit, you're off-topic. My tolerance is low right now; you've been warned.

Games Workshop was sued by the guy who came up with the sketchwork for the Alien movie. They LOST. GW was also sued by a group of retailers when they ( GW ) tried to say that if US retailers wanted to carry thier stock, they had to order directly from them. They LOST. GW likes to bully people with their team of lawyers. Try telling any one of the THOUSANDS of secondary auto parts manufacturers that they cant sell an aftermarket blower to a musclehead in Detroit!! He'd bash that lawyers teeth down his throat. What it really boils down to is CHOICE and the FREE MARKET. If GW had it their way it would be a TOTAL VERTICAL MONOPOLY. You cant do that in America unless you are selling GAS!!!!!

...

If I didn't know better I'd say this guy is angry.

And since when did H.R Giger try and sue GW?

I am reminded of a video I saw for TEDtalks. Yes it covers fashion, but it rings true for the GW/CH lawsuit.

http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html

When I originally watched this video I thought of this whole GW/CH lawsuit mess. If CH wins, could it mean a more relaxed approach on Copyright laws and miniature designs for third party designers? No one would own a design but everyone is trying to out design each other?

 Squigsquasher wrote:

And since when did H.R Giger try and sue GW?

I first heard about this in the mid 90's but as far as I'm aware its an urban legend.

I'd not heard anything about a lawsuit by Giger, Fox, Scott, Cameron, or anyone else involved in the movies.

Back on topic: I think the market will benefit. With GW pricing themselves out near Saturn's orbit, they'll finally have a little competition. Not much, mind you but possibly enough to make them dial back a bit. There will be a short period of garage bits makers but hopefully those will consolidate and quality will improve. I have to wonder if there are some quality after-market bit makers just waiting for this case to be resolved before they decide to start production.

One area I see being filled is making bits that extend the stuff left over in GW's current model design. The Triarch Stalker is a good example. With it you get the bits to make three weapons, one of which you can put on the model. The problem is that a central bit has only one piece and once you make a weapon with it, you can't do anything with the rest of the weapon bits. Bring in the after-market bit maker and you can get a substitute bit that you can buy two of cheaply and put the other weapons together, magnatize them all and have everything swappable. This will save you from buying another Stalker or trying to get the bit from eBay at extortionist pricing.

If Chapterhouse wins then we may see more bits manufacturers and greater numbers of parts being released at realistic prices.

Puppetswar are putting out great stuff atm as well as many others as well. Competition is good for innovation, creativity and the consumer. If GW produce the finest models in the world (according to them) then they would have nothing to worry about. The fact that these companies exist and are making money means that there is a need in the market that GW are not filling.

If CH wins, I think we all win by getting more choice

Their are already plenty of bits manufactures running aorund out their.

1)What we will see is more Total Converstion kits like the True Scale Storm Raven and Tervigon Kits that Chapter house made.

2)Conversion bits can look closer to the original ideas, and you will start seeing whole modles ment as alternative sculpts to the GW selection.

Kromlech, Microart and the slew of others all do conversion bits, but their is sort of this imaginary line they would keep well away from. They would try and keep their parts generic enough that it wouldn't get them in trouble, and advoided directly referencing GW.

Chapter House for better or worst were the 1st bits manufacture to cross that imaginary line, and push the boundires of what bits manufactures could make. For pushing that boundary Chapter house moved GW's hand.


In all honesty I don't think things will be that different then they are now. Except now chapter house is probably going to find them selves with more competition. lol


I will admit thow. Now that GW's hand has been moved, I hope Chapter house does win. Because if GW wins this case, I fear it might give them a confidence to start moving ageist other "infringements". Witch to see alot of the 3rd party bits manufactures go would be a sad day for our hobby. I'd rather have more competing for my dollars, then less.

I hope they win. I really don't understand the problem with the conversion kits really. We still have to buy the GW model to convert it and its not like they make many conversion kits anyway.

I wonder if this would actually allow three things to happen, if Chapterhouse wins...

1. GW must actually back up 'we make the best toy soldiers in the world' because other companies will be able to make directly competing figures. So, perhaps they'll be forced to consult and invest and avoid stinkers like the spikey pig or the new melee obliterators. The finecast criticism might actually be addressed properly as well.

2. GW have the means of mass production and plastics, so they can also actually suffer a lowering of prices to remain competitive against 'all those little Polish firms'.

3. GW might actually consider hiring out their IP and let independents take up the running of the specialist games (please give FFG BFG and let them run it... ).

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I wonder if this would actually allow three things to happen, if Chapterhouse wins...

1. GW must actually back up 'we make the best toy soldiers in the world' because other companies will be able to make directly competing figures. So, perhaps they'll be forced to consult and invest and avoid stinkers like the spikey pig or the new melee obliterators. The finecast criticism might actually be addressed properly as well.

That's just marketing speak and means just as much. Every line has stinkers so thinks like the Porche Pig and the reject oblits from Star Trek Insurrection will still make it through. They are likely years away from having direct competition if this comes to pass and it won't be on the scale that GW would likely even notice.

2. GW have the means of mass production and plastics, so they can also actually suffer a lowering of prices to remain competitive against 'all those little Polish firms'.

They do not care about being price competitive and have stated this on many occasions. There is also little actual business threat at this point from 'all those little Polish firms'.

3. GW might actually consider hiring out their IP and let independents take up the running of the specialist games (please give FFG BFG and let them run it... ).

They would have to believe there is value in doing this. If they did, they would have done so by now. FFG would also not keep BFG as it is now and you'd see it turned into a board game like the X-Wing game or something along those lines.

IF CH win .
GWplc would have to acknowledge the real world exists.
And that there IS competition to thier product range.

And the 'moat of bullying the little guys into line' and the 'walls of complete and utter indiference to customer base ' are no protection ...

Which wouold be good for all apart from GW plc corperate managment.

I am really rooting for CHS. I hope that a CHS victory will force GW to change its corporate culture. Maybe leading to a more customer friendly business model.

 FattyJay wrote:
I am really rooting for CHS. I hope that a CHS victory will force GW to change its corporate culture. Maybe leading to a more customer friendly business model.

...or just delaying new releases longer until the full range is modelled, packaged and distributed.

I don't feel there will be a radical change unless the outcome is severely weighted against GW. For a start it's a case in the US, do they'll still be able to fight on in out countries and they are UK based. Also, assuming CH win, it will be within certain conditions regarding this specific case. They probably won't win or lose on every point, but on a range of things, and compensation etc will be worked out on which things they lose on. As every care is different, the case may set some precedents for future cases which will weaken GW's position, but you still have to stand up to GW and put up a legal defenc when they send a C&D - and GW still have size and money on their side which will still intimidate smaller companies that don't have the luxury of pro bono representation.

The reality I feel is that if GW lose it won't change a great deal. I'd love to be wrong because I think GW is unhealthy for this hobby, but they still are bigger than everyone else and can get their way by throwing their substantial weight behind actions against others. This is how large companies beat down small opposition, they can just run them out of money in legal actions, even if the opposition is in the right, they need money, and all those little firms we like don't have it.

I'm thinking more accurate naming practices.

Instead of "Guns for an armored supersoldier in space."
We'd see: "New pattern Bolters for GW Space Marines."