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.

Chapter house was in the wrong.

Actually CH is surely wrong... but I simply do not like the actual status... I hope that the sentence will change the actual status, forcing GW to "open the market"

Eldanar wrote: However, to my knowledge, GW has never won a case on the merits concerning its IP. Rather, GW uses its resources to outlast everyone it goes after, and/or to "punish" entities or people who do not adhere to its policies.

It's not a good example, but at one point I found a case where GW won against a guy duping minis in his basement. I'm not sure how that bad boy was appealed, but it was.

Simply put, as you stated, GW has never gone after any entity with the wherewithall to defend itself, so they usually just fold.

punkow wrote:The restaurants do not control the food market... You're not forced to go at tonio's restaurant if you wanna eat... but if you wanna play 40k you have to go to GW, and, in my opinion, if you wanna play a WARGAME you have to go to GW since WH40K and WHFB are today so relevant that GW substantially has the total control of the market...I obviously do not blame 'em for making such a successful product nor do I say they shouldn't gain from their IP ... but at least they should be forced to sell licenses to other producers, or naturally they will act as monopolist.

I think that CH wouldn't exist if there weren't a demand for products that GW do not make for its own marketing strategy. And even if GW obviously has the right to make its own strategy , It should be allowed to others to fill the "holes" and compete with the big GW... if not GW control prices as it wish and this isn't a good thing for the market...

If I want to eat a Chef's signature dish, I have to go to his restaurant. Hell, if I want a Big Mac, I have to go to McDonalds.

Why should they be forced to sell licenses for those things they produce themselves? RPG and PC Games are outsourced to those who know those markets better, likewise films now. Why should they have to split up their rights any further? Others ARE allowed to compete with GW, just not using GW's own IP.

I'm not meaning to single you out, but I really don't get the whole 'people should be allowed to use GW IP whenever' opinions. Not saying they're necessarily wrong either, I just don't get it.

Yeah, I'll never understand the "GW has a monopoly" argument. Yeah, only GW can sell, you know, GW products. And GW can tell you what you can and can't do in their stores. Aside from that, though, you can do whatever you want.

It's hard to argue any sort of monopoly when new companies enter the market as frequnetly as they do. Even if you restrict the market to scifi/fantasy miniatures wargaming, the market is pretty full of mid level players: PP, Reaper, Malifaux, the anime game. Add in FOW as a historical game that draws more from our market than the traditional historical market, and it's a pretty vibrant time.

Why should they be forced to sell licenses for those things they produce themselves? RPG and PC Games are outsourced to those who know those markets better, likewise films now. Why should they have to split up their rights any further? Others ARE allowed to compete with GW, just not using GW's own IP.

Yes it's right but what I'm saying is that others are not allowed to compete... Let's take a look at the wargame market...

It's hard to argue any sort of monopoly when new companies enter the market as frequnetly as they do. Even if you restrict the market to scifi/fantasy miniatures wargaming, the market is pretty full of mid level players: PP, Reaper, Malifaux, the anime game. Add in FOW as a historical game that draws more from our market than the traditional historical market, and it's a pretty vibrant time.

I really disagree... I think that even putting together all the other fantasy and sci-fi games you won't reach the size of the GW market...

There are historical wargames with a generally older audience that normally play with various miniatures that are not necessarily made all by the same company... There are minor Fantasy and Sci-Fi wargames like Confrontation or AT-43 that have a very small audience, made for the largest part of former or actual GW players that want to try other games.... and then there is GW! GW is the first company you will find when you start wargames. It's hard to find someone that didn't start wargaming with GW stuff... I do not know the share of the market but I'm pretty sure we're talking about 50% or more... In this situation GW uses its dominant position distorting the market... The fact that WH40K is so widely played inhibits the rise of other games (since new players will always start with a game others already play so they can find opponents).
This isn't necessarily negative: It means that GW products have been the best and won against other products... But in such a situation GW decides the prices, the release dates, often ruin the game balance to sell more minis (ehy Space wolves??? do you hear me???)....
It's a monopolist behaviour and I do not like it...
I think CH studios are wrong but I think that the simple existence of CH studios is a proof of the fact that GW has created something so great that a single company cannot satisfy all the demands (did you notice the increased relevance of forge world?)
I think this situation isn't good for us (players and customers) so I will be very happy of an innovative sentence changing the absolute grip of GW on the market of table top wargames

And... to makes things clear... I love GW.. I think that the game and the narration they created are wonderful, and that the Game designers deserve every cent they get... I'm a little unhappy with the marketing strategy their following and I'm sure that guys that decides this are not lovable nerds like us but managers that do not even imagine what is our passion... but now I risk to build a romantic-populist-communist-teaparty prosopopea so I quit

(not sure about the grammar.... aaaah nevermind)

Wrong. How do GW set the prices beyond their own? This would be a valid argument (in my opinion) if they used economoy of scale etc to produce models and games at a price newer companies cannot match. THAT is an abuse of position. But GW don't.

And again, GW owns it's own IP, because they created it. How does demand for a specific model or conversion kit mean another company can come and fill in the gap using GW's sketches etc, without their permission?

You even said it yourself, GW haven't achieved market dominance for nothing. They operate their own stores, nobody else does. That was a massive risk when they first went down that path, but it has paid off and handsomely. I'm certainly not aware of them doing a Microsoft and buyng out competitors just to take them out the market.

Mr Mystery wrote:And again, GW owns it's own IP, because they created it. How does demand for a specific model or conversion kit mean another company can come and fill in the gap using GW's sketches etc, without their permission?

In the US, the law allows you to use whateever you want to create your own product, as long as it's a unique creation by the end. In other words, it's totally legal to look at the sketch of the Doom, and use that to sculpt your own Alien Brain of Doom, as long as it's not "substantially similar" to the sketch. (see FASA v. Tomy)

Wrong. How do GW set the prices beyond their own? This would be a valid argument (in my opinion) if they used economoy of scale etc to produce models and games at a price newer companies cannot match. THAT is an abuse of position. But GW don't.

They don't cause they do not need!! because there aren't competitors for the reasons I explained.
I think this is a dominant position... I'm not using this terms with their formal meaning in microeconomics so maybe I messed up things... sorry....
That said... do not get me wrong... I do not accuse GW of being a monster... I just think that if they had competitors, prices would lower and that, all in all, I do not think that this would have negative impact on GW... They will always keep their IP rights ( I do not say CH should keep doing what it does without PYING anything to GW) and the world of 40K would expand and become even better.
Btw let's see what the judge say...

Polonius wrote:

Mr Mystery wrote:And again, GW owns it's own IP, because they created it. How does demand for a specific model or conversion kit mean another company can come and fill in the gap using GW's sketches etc, without their permission?

In the US, the law allows you to use whateever you want to create your own product, as long as it's a unique creation by the end. In other words, it's totally legal to look at the sketch of the Doom, and use that to sculpt your own Alien Brain of Doom, as long as it's not "substantially similar" to the sketch. (see FASA v. Tomy)

I take it CH's use of IP and copyrighted terms (Tervigon, instead of say, Brood Bug) changes things for them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

punkow wrote:

Wrong. How do GW set the prices beyond their own? This would be a valid argument (in my opinion) if they used economoy of scale etc to produce models and games at a price newer companies cannot match. THAT is an abuse of position. But GW don't.

They don't cause they do not need!! because there aren't competitors for the reasons I explained.
I think this is a dominant position... I'm not using this terms with their formal meaning in microeconomics so maybe I messed up things... sorry....
That said... do not get me wrong... I do not accuse GW of being a monster... I just think that if they had competitors, prices would lower and that, all in all, I do not think that this would have negative impact on GW... They will always keep their IP rights ( I do not say CH should keep doing what it does without PYING anything to GW) and the world of 40K would expand and become even better.
Btw let's see what the judge say...

There are competitors though. PP, Mantic, FoW as already mentioned, plus dozens if not hundreds of competing manufacturers/rules sets. Gw have never taken steps to kill off opposition, beyond continued market dominance.

Mr Mystery wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Mr Mystery wrote:And again, GW owns it's own IP, because they created it. How does demand for a specific model or conversion kit mean another company can come and fill in the gap using GW's sketches etc, without their permission?

In the US, the law allows you to use whateever you want to create your own product, as long as it's a unique creation by the end. In other words, it's totally legal to look at the sketch of the Doom, and use that to sculpt your own Alien Brain of Doom, as long as it's not "substantially similar" to the sketch. (see FASA v. Tomy)

I take it CH's use of IP and copyrighted terms (Tervigon, instead of say, Brood Bug) changes things for them?

Well, terms like Tervigon are trademarked, not copyrighted. And both are considered IP. Just to help clear that up.

The tervigon is a really, really grey area. It's not a registered trademark, only under common law. And GW has created a picture and a description/rules for the tervigon, but not the model. I doubt that's enough, but it's actually arguable that you can create a "Tervigon" model and market it as such.

If you're saying that they used the image GW created (the sketch) as the basis, that's also allowed, again, as long as the actual creation is not "substantially similar" Again, I'd recommend reading FASA v. Tomy http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-5.txt which does a really good job of demonstrating how copyright would apply to hobby products.

Marketing the brain bug as a "doom of malantai" might violate GW's trademarks. Marketing a model as a substitute for the Doom would be less likely to. Marketing the exact same model as the Alian Briain doom would not violate the trademarks. Copyright (for the image used) is still a factual issue, but if you read FASA v. Tomy it's really tough to succeed outside of direct copying.

Polonius wrote:
If you're saying that they used the image GW created (the sketch) as the basis, that's also allowed, again, as long as the actual creation is not "substantially similar" Again, I'd recommend reading FASA v. Tomy http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-5.txt which does a really good job of demonstrating how copyright would apply to hobby products.

Thank you for the explanation here. I assumed the sketch was a bit more 'powerful.'

@Polonius Just a quick question:

From what you have said in both threads then this is a case Not about what CH did then, but instead about what CH said about what they did?

I hope that Chapterhouse wins, for the sole reason that I hate GW for their douchebaggery. (edit by Manchu)

But Chapterhouse were arrogant the way they advertised, they tried in no way to hide that they were just making models based off of GW models, and even naming them the same thing.

Like someone said, they put shoulderpads as "Space Marine Shoulderpads" not "Shoulderpads that could be used for Warhammer 40,000 Space Marines"

Chapterhouse will lose, but I hope not.

Define 'faggotry'.

Because you know, you're not meant to break rule #1 etc.

Mr Mystery wrote:Define 'faggotry'.

Because you know, you're not meant to break rule #1 etc.

+1

Kandle wrote:@Polonius Just a quick question:

From what you have said in both threads then this is a case Not about what CH did then, but instead about what CH said about what they did?

It's about both. In my completely non-expert opinion, I think GW has a stronger, although certainly not unbeatable, case with regards to the use of trademarks.

There is pretty solid caselaw that would allow CHS to sculpt very similar looking products.

Lanrak wrote:Hi all.
I think I may have found the crux of the problem.(I am not an IP lawyer but looked at the difference between chapterhouse and other companies NOT being sued...)
Lots of companies make ancillery and suplimentry products to be used with other companies products .They are not constantly being sued .

As far as I am aware GW is stating Chaptehouse is in breach or tradmark laws for using GW trademarks for 'advertising' chapterhouse products.(Paraphasing loads of lawyer speak.)

Where as Chapterhouse is claiming the use of tradmark to show intended use.

Using the 'body-kit' company relationship with car manufacturers listed above by Loki.

Speed Sports Body kits .
Give your car the look of a winning Rally car!
Our 'Rally Pack' will fit Ford Escort 1100,1300 and 1600.(The Ford Escort RS 2000 doesn't need it!)

This is fair use of trade mark to show intended use.

Where as
Ford RS 2000 Body kits.
The Ford RS 2000 body kits will for all type of Ford Escort Cars.

This is using Ford Trade Marks (Escort RS 2000) . And could imply Ford endorcement licence or even manufacture of the body kits!

Applied to the case in hand.(Just an example NOT based on any actual advert/web page.)

Chapterhouse 28mm Power Armour Shoulder pads.
Get the detail and depth of character you deserve on your minatures !
With this exelent range of Power Armour Shoulder Pads.
Suitable for use with most 28mm minatures, including Games Workshops 40k(tm) Space Marines(tm) , and Chaos Space Marines(tm).

This is a CLEAR case of using a trade mark to illustrate 'intended use'.As it used the trade marks to illustrate what the seller means by a '28mm minature'.By using a well known brand and atributing the trademark to the owning company.

Where as...

Warhammer 40k (c)(tm) Space Marine (tm) Shoulder Pads.
We have a wide range of Space Marine(tm) and Chaos Space marine (tm) shoulder pads.
That cover all chapters listed in the Warhammer 40k (c)(tm) codexes.

This is NOT just using the trade mark to show intended use.It could cause the reader to think the product is lienced endorsed or even manufactured by GW , as it uses GW trade marks descriptions and terms in the advertising of the product.


Has this made the issue (as I see it) a bit clearer?

I would like BOTH parties to win , by GW letting Chapterhose continue to trade , and Chapterhouse showing more respect for GW trademarks and IP.

But I am reasonable like that ...

TTFN

The reason I used the mark 1 escort was because the kits where identical to the ford RS1600, having used the real car to make the moulds. (As people have suggested CH has done with shoulder pads and doors).
The real flares were steel and part of the wing.
The copies were fiberglass.
They avoided a court case by advertising them as replicas.
The later mk2 RS2000 fiberglass front was easy to spot. as the flute on the wing went the wrong way, and was a poor copy.

No particularly strong feelings either way. I voted for Chapterhouse, just because I prefer having a diversity of bitz suppliers, even if I opt not to use them.

Polonius wrote:Yeah, I'll never understand the "GW has a monopoly" argument. Yeah, only GW can sell, you know, GW products. And GW can tell you what you can and can't do in their stores. Aside from that, though, you can do whatever you want.

It's hard to argue any sort of monopoly when new companies enter the market as frequnetly as they do. Even if you restrict the market to scifi/fantasy miniatures wargaming, the market is pretty full of mid level players: PP, Reaper, Malifaux, the anime game. Add in FOW as a historical game that draws more from our market than the traditional historical market, and it's a pretty vibrant time.

It really depends on the parameters of how you define the "market" as to whether an entity has a monopoloy or not.

I actually went after my last post and looked up the definition of monopolization in Black's. The Sherman Antitrust Act defines monopolization as the power to fix or exclude competition, coupled with policies designed to use or preserve that power. Monopoly power can be defined as the power to fix prices, to exclude competitiors, or to control a market.

Just as people have been accusing CH of skirting the line over what is legal and what is not, I would argue that GW has done similar equivocal acts in setting internet sales prices, dictating the amount of discounting BAM stores can do, and squeezing out established BAM stores in established markets when they open new stores. How many internet sales stores went out of business because of GW's internet sales policy?

Even though people have correctly pointed out that there are numerous other gaming companies and gaming systems, I would like to see a comparison of relative market share, to see just how much of the miniature/gaming market GW actually controls. My guess is that it would be substantial. Even if it is only say 40% of the world or a specific geographic region's market, if the next largest competitior is only 5%...well, that is a significant amount of difference in relative market share and power.

Anecdotally, you can just go to Ebay and look at the number of GW auctions there are compared to the number of other manufacturer's miniatures and gaming systems auctions.

Eldanar wrote: How many internet sales stores went out of business because of GW's internet sales policy?

I'm extremely biased in this regard, but I hope all of them.

How can you lament the plight of BAM stores and internet stores in the same statement?

GW stores sell at regular retail, and also only have one product range(The GW Hobby). A BAM has that same product range as well as a stable of others at a discount. If an indy shop goes out of business when a GW store opens up shop down the street, it was doing something wrong to begin with. If an established market jumps ship to a more expensive store, that indy shop and its owner has no business... being in business. I don't buy the whole "GW put our local hobby shop out of business" thing. I have 2 shops down the street from me that each only sell one of particular brand and they have never been a legit competitor to my place.

Internet stores on the other hand... are the biggest threat to an indy shop. They cost a fraction of what a B+M store takes to start up so has a much higher and quicker return on investment than a B+M shop, costs a fraction of what a B+M store takes to maintain, has less employees to pay and insure, has little to no property tax to pay compared to an indy shop that has to pay rent or the mortgage and utilities. Because of that vast difference in overhead costs, that internt vendor can then pass on all that savings onto the customer and sell at a deeper discount then the LGS, but still make a profit. And they are always open and convenient to a customer, being that they are just a click away.

I work for a small business(not gaming related, but same issues) and I can tell you from first hand experience that internet vendors are the biggest impediment to a small, family owned business. I can offer better customer service, a friendlier atmosphere, and hands on knowledge of the products that I sell, but I cannot make a profit at the prices my online competitors are able to sell the same things for. The American consumer, despite stereotypes to the contrary, loves saving money and now even moreso since the recession, and we damn near all have internet access. Its a no-brainer that they'll prefer to shop from the convenience of their homes while saving money. Its a 1,2 punch thats knocking alot of businesses out.

I applaud GWs decision to make online vendors have a B+M base, and wish more big companies would do the same.

Sorry about the off topic rant and hope it didn't come off as condenscending or preachy, Eldanar, but I just can't agree with your statements about GW's treatment of indy shops and internet vendors.

Legally CH should loose as it's bladantly using someone else's trademarks to sell stuff. However Chapterhouse doesnt seem to be making any alternative sets. If anything they're generating sales for GW as they only sell conversion sets, which prompts the average consumer to purchase the sets from GW.

Eldanar wrote:Just as people have been accusing CH of skirting the line over what is legal and what is not, I would argue that GW has done similar equivocal acts in setting internet sales prices, dictating the amount of discounting BAM stores can do, and squeezing out established BAM stores in established markets when they open new stores.

All of which only affect their own product range.

How many internet sales stores went out of business because of GW's internet sales policy?

And in how many cases was that because they based their entire business on selling one particular company's range of product?

Specialisation has it's risks. It also sometimes has specific advantages. But the fact that some businesses choose to specialise in one company's product does not mean that company has a monopoly on the market.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NELS1031 wrote: Its a no-brainer that they'll prefer to shop from the convenience of their homes while saving money. Its a 1,2 punch thats knocking alot of businesses out.

Which makes it all the more puzzling why more small businesses don't try to harness the online market.

I think it's hard to argue that GW can exlude competition or fix prices, when new companies appear regularly. Look at Mantic: they produce similar goods at a lower price.

God I cant wait to the GW legal team codex comes out =) Now there is an army of fanatical zealots if I ever saw one would proberly make BA look like a bunch of girly men.

Yeah "I don't like the other miniatures companies" is not the same thing as "GW is the only miniatures company that matters" - the fact that some guy in his basement can crank out a ruleset and sell some resin on the internet pretty effectively demonstrates GW's lack of a monopoly. Compare GW to, say, your power company, and it should put things into perspective.

Now GW might ignore other competitor's contributions to the market when they decide how much they are going to sell a box for, effectively meaning the follow monopolist pricing practices, but that is not the same thing, and I think most people here that think GW has a monopoly are conflating the two concepts. GW does not lower the price of a box of Black Templar because Privateer Press made models of some armored guys with swords and guns, but that doesn't mean that PP is not also a miniatures/wargames/RPG license/etc. company.

The analogy of comparing GW to a power company regarding monopolistic practices is a non-equivocation on two parts. First, the power company is probably a legal monopoly. Second, the definition of a monopoly does not necessarilly have to entail complete and utter control and domination of a particular market; it only has to entail enough economic clout to be able to set and dictate prices in a market.

Once again, I am not saying that GW is a monopoly. First off, we do not have enough information on the Miniature-Wargaming market in general to know what GW's clout is. Second, I highly doubt they are anyhow. However, GW has engaged in monopolistic practices.

Also, I am not saying that some of GW's rationales for why it enacted some of its sales rules don't have a legitimate basis. Most playeras need a BAM store in order to play and socialize, and if the internet-only operators were hurting them, then that was a problem that needed to be addressed. However, GW could have addressed it a different way than by the blanket, "Sell at the price we dictate or else." GW could have just required that every store that has an account with it maintain an actual retail location with X number of tables and X number of gaming hours available to customers.

I have been in this hobby for almost 20 years, and this is not the first time I have seen GW go after a competitor and basically crush them. I also remember the period from before GW went public; some things are better now and some things are worse.

And too, I think that CH has engaged in some dicey business practices. However, as long as they are producing items that GW does not produce, and they are clearly identifying their products as 3d party after-production original casts, I don't have a problem with it.

I merely wanted to point out that GW's collective hands are not necessarily clean in its business practices. And as much as we want to speculate on GW's motives in the suit, and what it's actual goals are, and whether it is merely trying to force a settlement, or otherwise; I have a feeling, based on GW's modus operandi and past history, that it's ultimate goal is to drive CH out of business. And that sends a chilling effect across all of the 3d party after-production market.

Hi Eldanar.
I agree that GW is and has never been 'whiter than white'.
However, I dont think its in GW interest to drive CH out of buisness,but just to protect its trademarks.

The 3rd party after production market will continue to thrive , as long as it plays safe with other companies trade marks...

TTFN

Lokirfellheart wrote:And it has a picture as well- It looks nearly identical to a Zoanthrope.

Identical?
Umm, have you seen a Zoanthrope while you are sober?

Again, if GW loses, they may raise prices on those kits you would need.
Think about the models.
CH doesn't send you the plastic crack you desire - GW does.
So, remember who gives you the plascrack, and who doesn't.
I'm glad if you read this.