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.

Howard A Treesong wrote:.......

Kanluwen wrote:Dune, Aliens, The Lost World and Terminator fall under the parody/homage bit also. Maybe back in the 80s when GW was getting off the ground you'd have a case for arguing that, but the background has evolved since.

And you're absolutely right, that ONCE AGAIN, back in that timeframe of the 80s/early 90s.
GW did exactly what Hasslefree is doing now.

Hang on, so when Hasslefree do it it's a "rip off" but when GW do it it's a "homage". Or were they "ripping off" back in the 80s and it's ok now because they got away with it?

Not exactly. In the 80's Citadel/GW became the first company to produce gaming miniatures based on this genre and as such became capable of claiming certain rights to it as original [within that field]. Where as by following on and producing their own troll slayer miniature/dune pastishe in the established Citadel/GW style, Hasslefree are making facsimilies/infringing on the previous miniature creation within that genre. A technicality but one that GW clearly recognises.

For my 2p [sorry I have read 11 pages and feel I have earn't the right to rehash, I meant comment!], I still don't agree that there is any heavy handedness in GW's actions, the C&D notices are fairly established method of reaching out and informing people of what GW would like them to address. If you are late paying you credit card bills you will receive more sternly worded warnings. I do agree that the amount of sites contacted seems allot but as others have posted there are good reasons for this. It is probably worth adding that allot of the Specialist Games/OPP games were released at about the same time so it could just be that the end of the rights period nears on a few titles.

As for GW producing a MGS's "using our IP pack", no need for GW to do this. If you are intending to work with or near GW IP the onus is on you check the status/legallity of doing so, not for GW. As you can see by the re-posting of GW's IP it really isn't hard to find what they are happy with, and as with most things insure that no one looks at the small print until it s too late! And while it is clear to those who are in the know that all of the things are not necessarily enforceable by law, it does provide a boundry as to what GW legal will be looking into.

insaniak wrote:

Hawkins wrote: i didnt know hasslefree got hit too. wheres that coming from? linky?

I don't think the Hasslfree thing was part of the recent wave of C&D's. Kev White mentioned on Frothers that he had received two C&Ds from GW a while back, but wasn't saying which minis they were for.

What!? didnt know this... the ranges are quite diferent! Yet Kev's models are much superior quality wise... maybe that was the content of the C&D... "stop this one man operation that is making us look bad"
Next wave will be to other miniature companies refering; stop making 28mm miniatures... and because they have the right to behave like a megalomaniac ass many will nod to that.

Is it true that GW have told Hasslfree to take this model off sale?

http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/pack.php?pack=784

Kilkrazy wrote:Is it true that GW have told Hasslfree to take this model off sale?

http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/pack.php?pack=784

I'm assuming so from this comment by Kev on the Frothers forum I linked to above:

Hasslefriesian wrote:

Mad McGobbo wrote:GW own the trademark on "Trollslayer" not Troll Slayer.....

Are you sure? Because if that's the case the legal team don't even know their own I.P, since the letter is claiming an infringement on the words "Troll Slayer". That and barechested Dwarves and Mohicans.

NAVARRO wrote:Next wave will be to other miniature companies refering; stop making 28mm miniatures... and because they have the right to behave like a megalomaniac ass many will nod to that.

From the Frothers Forum posted earlier in the thread, it certainly looks like it's the Troll Slayer mini that prompted the C&D letter.

Interestingly, it looks like Hasslefree are going to respond with a "feth off" letter. This can work. As others have pointed out, C&D letters are just starting points; I had a C&D letter from another multinational company whose income is pretty much entirely derived from its IP, regarding the website mentioned in my Dakka profile. I negotiated with them a little, which came to nothing, and I ended up telling them that as far as I could see, they didn't really have a case anyway. They stopped bothering me.

I have to confess I went to the Frothers thread and saw it was 24 pages long and I gave up on it.

GW might be able to build a case that Trollslayer and Troll Slayer are so close that a typical member of the wargaming 'community' might be confused by the similarity of the terms.

To be fair, I know I would.

Kilkrazy wrote:I have to confess I went to the Frothers thread and saw it was 24 pages long and I gave up on it.

Don't blame you. The Froth Pot is an acquired taste!

Kilkrazy wrote:GW might be able to build a case that Trollslayer and Troll Slayer are so close that a typical member of the wargaming 'community' might be confused by the similarity of the terms.

To be fair, I know I would.

Well GW may have a case. Anyone can try and make an argument out of anything. The issue is how strong do they think it is and how strong is the other guy's?

The law in this is all about "passing off" GW would have to try and prove that HF was deliberately trying to mislead their customers into thinking his wares were authentic GW product. Producing a model that "looks a bit like" authentic GW product is not illegal if you are not attempting to mislead the general public. As HF makes no mention of GW's wares he is just offering a model for sale that happens to look a bit like a GW product with a similar name but using no trademarked images or iconography.

Sounds to me like they were pitching for an easy win on a tenuous possibility based around the similarity of the words "Troll" and "Slayer" (both common enough words in the fantasy genre) and the word "Trollslayer". Whether they took it to court would depend on whether they really thought they had a case and were likely to recoup costs. Given the low level of potential infringement I can't see GW trying very hard.

The issue I am trying to highlight though is not how close to the wind HF sailed (which is undoubtedly closer than I would feel comfortable doing myself) but how stupid and arrogant GW were for trying to assert copyright over bare chested mohican-wearing dwarfs! It's absolute lunacy to try and claim copyright over a pose of a model and the way it looks unless it is a direct pressmoulded copy of a Citadel original. In fact now I think about it I remember John Blanche waxing lyrical about this very issue of the derivation of artistic inspiration in defence of some of his own artwork which clearly paid close homage to some works of artists like (IIRC) Durer.

I agree it would hardly be worth it to stop the sale of a single figure worth £3.50.

But the purpose of a C&D is to try and frighten the recipient into compliance without the sender needing to take expensive legal action.

At any rate, Hasslefree are still selling the figure in question. It will be interesting to see if GW sue them.

Kilkrazy wrote:I have to confess I went to the Frothers thread and saw it was 24 pages long and I gave up on it.

GW might be able to build a case that Trollslayer and Troll Slayer are so close that a typical member of the wargaming 'community' might be confused by the similarity of the terms.

To be fair, I know I would.

Well that's what happens when your IP is based on words in common usage/public domain. If they were infringing upon a unique special character name (eg. Zogwod the Unbrave) then there would be a clear case. But GW don't hold the rights on dwarves that "slay" things and the Hasslefree Dwarf is of all different proportions to GW ones. He's taller, thinner and has no beard. What GW dwarf has no beard?

I can't even find "Trollslayers" on the GW site, "Dwarf Slayers", "Daemon Slayers" and "Dragon Slayers" yes, no "Trollslayers". This is the closest match and looks nothing like Hasslefree's offering.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod780898

GW's really pushing it. Their lawyer must really have nothing to do.

Howard A Treesong wrote:I can't even find "Trollslayers" on the GW site, "Dwarf Slayers", "Daemon Slayers" and "Dragon Slayers" yes, no "Trollslayers". This is the closest match and looks nothing like Hasslefree's offering.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod780898

What, so they have Dragon Slayers, Daemon Slayers, and ... Dwarf Slayers? One of these is not like the others.

Looks alot like a Dwarf Berserker Hero by Avatars of War... or a Sworn Dwarf by Gamezone miniatures to me...

And the news has gone global. Its on Slashdot and Boing Boing now.

Way to ruin your reputation GW!

http://slashdot.org/palm/10/09/12/01/070232_1.shtml

What did the original C&D to BGG state had to be taken off their boards. The derivative fan stuff should be fine but anything copied, scanned should go?

Looking at how this has snowballed its getting a bit 'chinese whispers'. Thats how it feels to me anyway. What are the facts?

or is it naive to ask?

Silly idea, but there is one thing I'm really loving about all this GW legal 'tardness...
And that is the great publicity GW giving to competition... if some here, were not aware off hasslefree , they are now... Multiply that with huge influx of members searching and posting alternatives to GW stuff and you have a better dakka.

The way we constanly move as a comunity should not be ignored by anyone in business, bigger or smaller companies will perish and only the smart ones that have the capacity to decode our movements will endure.
Some may think we are irrelevant and easly ignored, we are not main target afterall... but in hobby oriented small business and companies, everyting does matter and these latest atitudes will dent direct and indirectly GW business.

Vets have the money to feed their children with GW, vets have the capacity to galvanize tons of potential fans, vets been providing GW with the propaganda tools for years at zero cost... and Vets can easly do the oposite of the above.

Again nice image Hellfury

Kilkrazy wrote:I agree it would hardly be worth it to stop the sale of a single figure worth £3.50.

But the purpose of a C&D is to try and frighten the recipient into compliance without the sender needing to take expensive legal action.

At any rate, Hasslefree are still selling the figure in question. It will be interesting to see if GW sue them.

Yeah, here in the states it's called a SLAPP lawsuit (strategic lawsuit against public participation).

Personally, if I owned one of these sites, I would contact Stanford University's "Fair Use Project" in regards to fighting off any frivolous SLAPP.

Something that many of the posters here are forgetting is that to bring a successful lawsuit, the plaintiff (GW) must present sufficient evidence that they are being financially affected by the defendant and have suffered damages as a result of said defendant's actions. The defendant may then choose a number of defense options one of which could be "fair use" (depending on the situation).

In some situations even a 1:1 copy of a copyrighted work may be construed as fair use under the law; such was the case in Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation where a judge ruled that the 1:1 copy of the work in question even increased public exposure to the copyrighted work thus causing the opposite of harm and remanded the case to a lower court for arbitration.

Another case of note in 2008, as some here may recall, involved a mom posting a video of her baby dancing to Prince's "Let's go crazy" on you-tube. Universal Music served a C&D to you-tube and the video was removed under the DMCA. The mom didn't take it lying down and fought the removal. Finally, a federal judge ordered that a company must first evaluate fair use before issuing a C&D or pursuing a lawsuit. Of interesting note is a clause in the DMCA that states any individual that wins against a take-down attempt may seek damages (read punitive damages $$$$$).

It would be interesting to see what would happen if a GW C&D recipient were to choose to fight as there is sufficient legal precedence for a stout defence of basic infringement through a fair use defence. Note that this would not exempt anyone from outright copyright violations, there is a difference after all.

Just some musings.

edit: Really, I know how to spell; I promise.

agnosto. Thanks for posting that. I remember that "dancing baby" issue boinding around the interwebs now you mention it. It would be delicious irony if GW's bullying and aggro actually really cost them cold hard cash!

The proof of commercial damage is required in the USA but not under UK law, unless I am mistaken.

GW can loose the IP if they don't protect it by sending C&D's, how is that even possible? If it is possible-let me know, I'll do whatever it takes if I can steal their IP rights.

Trademarks can be lost if not defended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark

Hey so.. kinda unrelated but is anyone else a video game geek like me?

I ask this because one of my favourite Blizzard Games products (Starcraft) is entirely identical to 40K!

Zerg - Tyranids with hive mind the whole shebang..
Terran Marines - self explanatory

Did they ever pull any of this tomfoolery on Blizzard does anyone know?

mattyrm wrote:Hey so.. kinda unrelated but is anyone else a video game geek like me?

I ask this because one of my favourite Blizzard Games products (Starcraft) is entirely identical to 40K!

Zerg - Tyranids with hive mind the whole shebang..
Terran Marines - self explanatory

Did they ever pull any of this tomfoolery on Blizzard does anyone know?

They wouldn't have a leg to stand on because the visuals and "fluff" are very different.

'Cept for the fact that Blizzard had originally approached GW back in the day to do Warhammer/40k games.

GW backed out, and Blizzard altered it to create their own universe if I remember it right. Been awhile since I bothered to look.

Yes. I once had someone point this out to me, and it's worth looking at:


Tyranids Pre-Starcraft:


Along came a Hydralisk:


Tyranids Post-Starcraft:

jabbakahut wrote:GW can loose the IP if they don't protect it by sending C&D's,

You know ive been hearing nothing but this: 'GW need to protect its IP' from the pro Gee Doubleyas (not you Jabba) . does any one else know of a mini company that is actively trying to protect its IP as viciously??
Come to think of that, what companies are most ripped off by mini makers. the movies right? how many IP C&D's have been sent out by universal? fox? paramount? against mini companies. specificaly... aliens? maybe starwars cause they licene out to mini makers? Star trek, we all know they are heavey handed with IP. ?? fact is i only see GW feeling the need.
You never see a swarm of C&Ds go out from the movie makers, heck most of the time they rip each other off as a sort of fair play deal (think of bugs life and Antz).
Will they really loose IP if a fan site puts up pics of their stuff? come on. with all the fan sites for everything out there, not one has ever lost anything, especialy IP.
It all comes down to GW crying wolf, GW IP is in as much danger of being lost as Benidict is of being bent over the Popemobile and bailer poled.
Its just the iron fist when it comes down to it, GW obviously thinks theirs isnt tight enough.
And thats sad cause i dont know of another mini company that is as strong. their like the microsoft of the mini world. what really do they have to fear?

mattyrm wrote:Hey so.. kinda unrelated but is anyone else a video game geek like me?

I ask this because one of my favourite Blizzard Games products (Starcraft) is entirely identical to 40K!

Zerg - Tyranids with hive mind the whole shebang..
Terran Marines - self explanatory

Did they ever pull any of this tomfoolery on Blizzard does anyone know?

This is where things get ugly, really. From what I understand, it can come down to a judge listening to a debate about specific points of infringement between the two designs. The concept of a horde of aliens with a hive mind is not particularly unique. GW and Blizzard's implementations are.

For example, Jeep tried to protect the 'seven slot grille' as a key design element, but lost to, IIRC, Hummer.

I think if someone wanted to build a case between WH40k Space Marines and Starcraft Terran Marines, you'd need to really quatify specific design elements that were ripped off from each other. SC's Marines, for example, don't really have the whole 'warrior monk' background aspect, and the bling that comes with it. The designs have very different helmets and backpacks, too. basically, they're 'Marines' in heavy powered armor, but the comparison stops there for the most part.

notprop wrote:Not exactly. In the 80's Citadel/GW became the first company to produce gaming miniatures based on this genre...

How did this slip under the radar? No they were not. There were dozens of fantasy manufacturers before GW consumed the market.

Did that 'White Wolf (who's very name is stolen from a Michael Moorcock book) goes easy on the fans' thing happen around the same time that they got their arses handed to them in court by Sony for making up ownership of other peoples works? Coincidence? I think not.

I used to have a lot of time for White Wolf and their White Wolf/Inphobia magazine but somewhere along the line they lost track...

I actually do remember hearing about GW litigation over the Terran Marines. They tried to sue Blizzard and lost.
It's funny, it used to irritate me that Blizzard took so many ideas from GW. But Blizzard has proven to be much more open to its fans as far as hearing suggestions, comments and criticism. GW is looking more and more like a stubborn old dinosaur that will die because of its refusal to adapt.

hmmmmmm, on another thread i found this:
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/28/games-workshop-decla.html

which lead to this:´
'Interesting. Maybe the folks at GW should look at what happened to White Wolf Games. They essentially went to war with THEIR OWN FANCLUB for years over petty nonsense, including the fact people liked playing an older edition of the World of Darkness games. Lots of bad blood and lost customers later, White Wolf is in full repair mode.A great press release from White Wolf:

http://www.white-wolf.com/index.php?line=news&articleid=1172


Id forgotten how WW went up against its fans oh so long ago.

but this here is the line that most gives me hope:
'A drastic easing of Fansite Rules under the Dark Pack. We’re taking a step back from overseeing what you, as the fans, want to celebrate on your own websites. Of course, we’ve still got to protect our brand identity as creators, but you’ll find the new fansite rules to be more open, accepting and helpful.'

Now if only Gee Doubleya would get of its hinny and fallow a good example.