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.

Wouldn't surprise me to see GW forcing Amazon to take down all the works of Lionel Johnson.

"We want Amazon to take down every book, comic and movie we ever stole from, because our customers might be confused when seeing the original."

Another news piece on the BBC, although doesn't really say anything new:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21409490

Does anyone really understand the GW blanket ban on talking to the media or giving interviews? Their flat refusal to speak to anyone and engage with the outside world at all seems almost cult-like and insular. They deliberately choose to turn down opportunities to increase awareness of their product and present themselves and their hobby in a positive light is just weird. Instead they just shut out the whole world, turn down their right of reply to journalists and let stories like the one on this thread get published on the BBC.

There's a thread going elsewhere where people say how they would run GW. Well I've not run many international companies so can't speak on authority, but as a minimum I would suggest they should invest in someone to do some PR and media work for them. Instead of paying for more lawyers and lawsuits to reinforce that paranoid 'fortress wall' they have spoken about, try making the walls look a little more inviting.

Its because their owners are stuck in an outdated business model which assumes they are the only company in the market and that the internet doesn't exist.

I think they just have no idea what they're doing and the people in charge have no business running a McDonald's shift let alone an actual company.

 Amaya wrote:
I think they just have no idea what they're doing and the people in charge have no business running a McDonald's shift let alone an actual company.

To be fair, they are a lot more successful than the miniature gaming companies that you and I run.

And 50 Cent is a multi platinum selling rapper, that doesn't mean he's actually good at what he does.

 Amaya wrote:
And 50 Cent is a multi platinum selling rapper, that doesn't mean he's actually good at what he does.

Actually, it kind of does. Even if 'what he does' is just sell albums. It makes him kind of an amazing salesman.

Not really considering Dr. Dre and Eminem are the ones supporting him. Interscope/Shady/Aftermath could sell just about anyone other than Bizarre.

They business model worked well when they first started up, IE: no competition and the internet wasn't what it was today.

Is it stupid, yes and no. It works well with a captive audience. Little school kids that walk into a GW store, get their parents to buy them space marines, and never ever know that other wargames exist(or even Amazon and E-bay)

 Amaya wrote:
Not really considering Dr. Dre and Eminem are the ones supporting him. Interscope/Shady/Aftermath could sell just about anyone other than Bizarre.

Not really on topic at this point and really mixing business models. GW runs their own business. Saying '50 cent isn't good at what he does' in reference to a debate about GW is really saying that '50 cent/interscope/shady/aftermath isn't good at what it does'.

Obviously, you already disproved that. So maybe a better analogy next time.

So has GW contacted Marvel and Paramount about this yet?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1981115/

Actually you'd kind of hope they are moronic enough to do so

They actually might have a leg to stand on with that one. IIRC the Fantesy Malekith got invented shortly before the comic character.

Marvel malekith wins over GWs version by about eight years iirc

The Malekith's are called slightly different, and both IP's are specific to those names if I recall correctly.

Marvel has "Malekith the Accursed".

GW has "Malekith, Witch King of Naggaroth".

However GW also claims ownership of "Dark Elves".....

What was the first appearance of WHFB Malekith?

According to wikipedia, Comic Malekith was:
Created by Walt Simonson, Malekith first appeared in Thor #344-349 (June-November 1984)

I think Malekith has been around since the beginning. Which was 1983, I could be wrong.

Even if he was around at the beginning, it would be almost simultanious with the comic.

Google brought me to Warseer, and this is what it says:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?265077-Malekith-Were-We-First

It is ok to link to Warseer, right?

(if not a mod can of course delete)

So it appears GW stole another idea here.

Not surprising. They stole tons of stuff. There's even a planet called Metallica.

Pretty sure - GW stole everything, I had attempted to identify an original idea which they had a while back...but failed to.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Not surprising. They stole tons of stuff. There's even a planet called Metallica.

I think Inquisitor Obi-Wan Sherlock Clouseau must go investigate this!

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
Pretty sure - GW stole everything, I had attempted to identify an original idea which they had a while back...but failed to.

Didnt somebody earlier point out that a Grimdarkness future with starships that look like cathedrals was orignal to GW ? or was i misreading that post?

 TBD wrote:



However GW also claims ownership of "Dark Elves".....

WOTC and Hasbro might have somthing to say about that. By oh, 10-20 years.

But did they trademark it?

GW have a few original ideas actually....

The most influential is surprisingly... green orcs.

As the story goes, GW used to be good buddies with D&D and there was quite a good flow of ideas between the two. Up until someone at GW made an orc model for the D&D games and painted it green, they had all looked more like the LOTR orcs.

Or, so the story goes...

And, as we've seen from someone earlier in the thread. Other companies trademarking things like 'land speeders' isn't any barrier to Games Workshop trying it!

carmachu wrote:

 TBD wrote:

However GW also claims ownership of "Dark Elves".....

WOTC and Hasbro might have somthing to say about that. By oh, 10-20 years.

Not to speak of the Edda (Snorri version around 1200) which describes Light, Black and Dark Elves as part of Northern mythology. BTW the word "dwarf" originated from the word Dwarftalf=Black Elf.

But the modern Dark Elf picture was formed by Michael Moorcock (Elric) who also introducced the Chaos Star, followed by the obsidian skinned D&D version.

BTW the value of GW shares recovered today, so GW management might not learn from this.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Not surprising. They stole tons of stuff. There's even a planet called Metallica.

I think Inquisitor Obi-Wan Sherlock Clouseau must go investigate this!

They totally ripped off Sherlock. Bad GW! Bad GW!

They own everything else though

 Breotan wrote:
But did they trademark it?

TSR, The orignial owners of the D&D franchise, was as bad with trademarks as GW is today(meaning they agreessively tried to get things trademarked, including Nazis as the story goes).. So I would say yes. COnsidering GDQ series was a huge hit.....

 swampyturtle wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
Pretty sure - GW stole everything, I had attempted to identify an original idea which they had a while back...but failed to.

Didnt somebody earlier point out that a Grimdarkness future with starships that look like cathedrals was orignal to GW ? or was i misreading that post?

Not sure if someone did - but if they did, they would be sort of wrong.

Various GDW works (Space 1889 and Sky Galleons of Mars) both utilize ships which are identical to those used in Space Fleet and later Battlefleet Gothic by GW. Both of those games predate GW's entry by several years. You can also see comparable shapes in a variety of the pulp comics which dealt with similar concepts to Space 1889 published in the 1970s and early 80s. The Silver Ships in the Nemesis series published in 2000AD also have the same look to them (interestingly enough, you also have Xenos eradicating inquisitors and a protagonist who is wearing head gear which was the basis for the first Eldar).

Now, GW did add skulls and stained glass to them...but those surface details are not intrinsic to the design.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

carmachu wrote:

 Breotan wrote:
But did they trademark it?

TSR, The orignial owners of the D&D franchise, was as bad with trademarks as GW is today(meaning they agreessively tried to get things trademarked, including Nazis as the story goes).. So I would say yes. COnsidering GDQ series was a huge hit.....

The problem of course is that the Nazi was a LucasArts trademark not a TSR one. Not much different than the front of FFG books for the 40K RPG probably having a long list of claimed marks by GW in it...whether or not FFG agrees that they should be, it is a clause in their license agreement.