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.

The purpose of management is to, well, manage. If GW has a rogue legal department, that's the fault of GW's executives, just as much as if it was GW's executives themselves ordering the actions in question. That's what an executive is.

yukishiro1 wrote:
The purpose of management is to, well, manage. If GW has a rogue legal department, that's the fault of GW's executives, just as much as if it was GW's executives themselves ordering the actions in question. That's what an executive is.

I agree with this, and we as the community can put pressure on them to change that.

As for the "Astra Militarum" stuff and such, well, yeah, that's GW protecting their IP. God forbid a company do that in this day and age. There was also the name changing of all of the paints, which wasn't even GW's fault initially. They had hired a company to handle their paints. That company then separated and made their own paint line using all of the recipes they'd made for GW. They literally got burned by not having highly copyrightable names to their paint recipes. This kind of thing happens. I'll bet you Duncan Rhodes' new paint line also has some specific IP protection on their recipes and names and such. The more unique something is, the easier it is for you to defend your IP, that's just the way of things these days.

Just because the legal department says "Hey, we should rename Imperial Guard to the Astra Militarum in order to IP protect our stuff" doesn't immediately make the designers, writers, and factory workers evil.

yukishiro1 wrote:
You can imagine whatever you want, but the document is there in the first page and clearly says something completely different than what your imagination says it says (if it's real).

ok, then let me rephrase that "I imagine the clauses in the NDA are to prevent folks from immediatly leaving GW and starting their own wargame using their insider knowledge to get a leg up"

If so, they're extremely bad at creating contract language to say that.

No content creator with any sense at all would sign the document that's posted at the top of this thread.

Can we get a mod to lock this or summarize recent events without doxing the leaking content creator further, along with the shitshow between the other two content creators and then lock this

Talbaz wrote:
Can we get a mod to lock this or summarize recent events without doxing the leaking content creator further, along with the shitshow between the other two content creators and then lock this

You know, you're the eighth guy to demand that discussion of a news item in the news and rumors section be locked. I know that GW fan boys want to quash this hard, but FFS. At least the others had more than 12 posts and read what the thread was about rather than making weird assumptions.

Edit: I just saw what happened. Apparently, NornQueen Alexis has doxxed the leaker and is now banned on twitter. I'd say that this is now news for a whole slew of other reasons now, many of them... unsavory.

BrianDavion wrote:

ok, then let me rephrase that "I imagine the clauses in the NDA are to prevent folks from immediatly leaving GW and starting their own wargame using their insider knowledge to get a leg up"

It doesn't appear to be aimed at employees though, at least, not if what's being said about it is true, but rather at reviewers, independent creators, and Influences. I know that people keep trying to go to the idea that this NDA applies to GW employees, and, frankly, it doesn't. It even expressly spells out that no such relationship exists between the signee and GW.



Edit: Mods, given what's happened, much as I hate advocating my own news thread be closed, the fact that Alexis has taken this step may warrant the thread being closed.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Talbaz wrote:
Can we get a mod to lock this or summarize recent events without doxing the leaking content creator further, along with the shitshow between the other two content creators and then lock this

You know, you're the eighth guy to demand that discussion of a news item in the news and rumors section be locked. I know that GW fan boys want to quash this hard, but FFS. At least the others had more than 12 posts and read what the thread was about rather than making weird assumptions.

Edit: I just saw what happened. Apparently, NornQueen Alexis has doxxed the leaker and is now banned on twitter. I'd say that this is now news for a whole slew of other reasons now, many of them... unsavory.

Oof, not the greatest thing for Alexis to do. Ah well. Hopefully she learned a lesson from that maneuver.

And here's the thing, out of all of the posts, the 12 pages of BS that's been slung back and forth, where have we really gotten? Just a lot of bad feelings and drama and not a lot of news.

I don't see what closing the thread would accomplish. It's not like anything happened here. The fact a GW-sponsored youtuber did something bad in some deluded attempt to defend GW (while also apparently admitting the NDA is real, incidentally, not that she necessarily knows any better than anyone else) doesn't seem like a great reason to shut down discussion about GW's (alleged) business practices.

yukishiro1 wrote:
I don't see what closing the thread would accomplish. It's not like anything happened here. The fact a GW-sponsored youtuber did something bad in some deluded attempt to defend GW (while also apparently admitting the NDA is real, incidentally, not that she necessarily knows any better than anyone else) doesn't seem like a great reason to shut down discussion about GW's (alleged) business practices.

I also don't see what is left to discuss? There's an NDA, it's got some competition clauses, it might not be favourable to sign if you want to start selling/pushing gw alternative products.

That's it start to end right?

 StrayIight wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

No you're right, in my time working in solicitors they had a similar no competition clause, it was for 6 months within 30 miles of a principal office but never enforced even when staff left for direct competition 0.4 miles away. My current job has one as well, it's had 1 attempted enforcement in 2 years and it was wildly unsuccessful as the ex-employee simply claimed to have been working in a different capacity upon leaving for 6 months.

As an edit: it does seem the people most worried about this have US tags, is it a freedom of speech type situation?

Yeah, I just dug out my old contract and it also stated 6 months, not 18 - I think you're right, and that 6 is probably the standard here (it'd partially explain why almost no-one actually cares very much in practice).

'You will not, for a period of 6 months after the termination of the Employment, be engaged in or concerned in any capacity in any business concern which is in competition with the Restricted Goods of Services.' (it does say 'of Services', not 'or', which does go to show that proofreading in legal documents, or the lack of, doesn't say much about their genuineness!)

I've had those on employment contracts too, but at least over here those clauses have been declared unlawful except in the specific cases of training provided by the company, where those can be waived if the worker pays the tab.

Also, as stated abouve, mine where on the 6-month range, not 36.

drbored wrote:
They had hired a company to handle their paints. That company then separated and made their own paint line using all of the recipes they'd made for GW. They literally got burned by not having highly copyrightable names to their paint recipes.

I don't think you know anything about IP law.

You know things are bad when a seemingly nice bloke like Brent from Goovertown Hobbies gets involved in a big Twitter fight over all of this.

Seems simple to me, if you are a content creator it is your choice to sign this stuff or not. There are pluses and minuses, but ultimately you should trust in your own creativity to be able to exist and thrive without it. If you do not sign it and fail...maybe you were not very good at it anyway

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
You know things are bad when a seemingly nice bloke like Brent from Goovertown Hobbies gets involved in a big Twitter fight over all of this.

Seems simple to me, if you are a content creator it is your choice to sign this stuff or not. There are pluses and minuses, but ultimately you should trust in your own creativity to be able to exist and thrive without it. If you do not sign it and fail...maybe you were not very good at it anyway

What a wildly reductionist statement.

I have no idea what that means...so thank you I guess?

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I have no idea what that means...so thank you I guess?

Keyboard warrior language for "you're reducing down all the nuance and complexity to simple terms and concepts". This isn't an inherently bad thing though.

 BaronIveagh wrote:


You know, you're the eighth guy to demand that discussion of a news item in the news and rumors section be locked. I know that GW fan boys want to quash this hard, but FFS. At least the others had more than 12 posts and read what the thread was about rather than making weird assumptions.

Edit: I just saw what happened. Apparently, NornQueen Alexis has doxxed the leaker and is now banned on twitter. I'd say that this is now news for a whole slew of other reasons now, many of them... unsavory.

FWIW I didn't want the thread to be locked, only moved over to general discussion where the majority of other GW drama topics were also discussed.

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I have no idea what that means...so thank you I guess?

It means that you're trying to simplify it to "hey, it's a personal choice, you can choose to BOHICA or not". Also, you're trying to transform it somehow into a binary choice instead of a conversation.

What anyone willing to sign this should do is, with the help of a lawyer, point out the parts they'd have problems with and propose whatever changes they need for it to work, and then work it out with GW. At least that way they'd have to explain exactly what all the nebulous stuff actually mean.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I have no idea what that means...so thank you I guess?

Keyboard warrior language for "you're reducing down all the nuance and complexity to simple terms and concepts". This isn't an inherently bad thing though.

You know, if you retort to everything with a disparagement or a direct insult, you can't really expect anyone to take you seriously.

Also, it actually means that you're "considering or presenting something complicated in a simple way, especially a way that is too simple".

I might genuinely open a thread asking anyone that absolutely hates and is disgusted by GW to post so I can add them to the ignore list for myself, it may help many people out on here. Whilst I should know better than to look at threads like this, the insidious posters are all over all threads anyway. I can't get my head round people spending so much time on here reading and posting and revelling in anger. It's plastic toys.

I do not agree with everything GW does, but as I've said numerous times, there are more important things in the world to rage about if you must rage. If you are UK based get stuck into the 'Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021'.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Apparently, NornQueen Alexis has doxxed the leaker and is now banned on twitter.

Hasn't Alexis had to move because of stalkers and other weird gak before? Seems odd that she would do that.

 Albertorius wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I have no idea what that means...so thank you I guess?

It means that you're trying to simplify it to "hey, it's a personal choice, you can choose to BOHICA or not". Also, you're trying to transform it somehow into a binary choice instead of a conversation.

What anyone willing to sign this should do is, with the help of a lawyer, point out the parts they'd have problems with and propose whatever changes they need for it to work, and then work it out with GW. At least that way they'd have to explain exactly what all the nebulous stuff actually mean.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I have no idea what that means...so thank you I guess?

Keyboard warrior language for "you're reducing down all the nuance and complexity to simple terms and concepts". This isn't an inherently bad thing though.

You know, if you retort to everything with a disparagement or a direct insult, you can't really expect anyone to take you seriously.

Also, it actually means that you're "considering or presenting something complicated in a simple way, especially a way that is too simple".

Might want to check that, nothing about the term reductionist statement automatically means "too simple", that was your inferred undertone.

Yeah, one particular nutter. Can’t be nice being stalked.

Dudeface wrote:
Might want to check that, nothing about the term reductionist statement automatically means "too simple", that was your inferred undertone.

It's literally the dictionary meaning:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/es/diccionario/ingles/reductionist


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Apparently, NornQueen Alexis has doxxed the leaker and is now banned on twitter.

Hasn't Alexis had to move because of stalkers and other weird gak before? Seems odd that she would do that.

This is the thing, right?

[snipped]

 Albertorius wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Might want to check that, nothing about the term reductionist statement automatically means "too simple", that was your inferred undertone.

It's literally the dictionary meaning:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/es/diccionario/ingles/reductionist


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Apparently, NornQueen Alexis has doxxed the leaker and is now banned on twitter.

Hasn't Alexis had to move because of stalkers and other weird gak before? Seems odd that she would do that.

This is the thing, right?

Spoiler:

Kinda depends which dictionary you want to check.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reductionism

But power to her for taking grasp of matters like that, those comments kind of echo this thread ironically.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Apparently, NornQueen Alexis has doxxed the leaker and is now banned on twitter.

Hasn't Alexis had to move because of stalkers and other weird gak before? Seems odd that she would do that.

"it was bad for me but they, they deserve it" seems to be a near-universal human thought pattern.

Anyway, NDAs suck, current IP protection regulations are a racket, eat the rich, they're full of vitamins.

 Albertorius wrote:

This is the thing, right?

And *that's* why the thread should be locked, because someone would inevitably try to repost her doxxing the guy. Right or wrong on the contract,by spreading that around, we're making ourselves complicit in her crime. And it is, in some states, a crime.

California Penal Code 653.2 PC and, arguably, 18 U.S. Code § 2261A.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

This is the thing, right?

And *that's* why the thread should be locked, because someone would inevitably try to repost her doxxing the guy. Right or wrong on the contract,by spreading that around, we're making ourselves complicit in her crime. And it is, in some states, a crime.

I'm not on the States, though, but fair enough. I'll assume that's the one then.

 Albertorius wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

This is the thing, right?

And *that's* why the thread should be locked, because someone would inevitably try to repost her doxxing the guy. Right or wrong on the contract,by spreading that around, we're making ourselves complicit in her crime. And it is, in some states, a crime.

I'm not on the States, though, but fair enough. I'll assume that's the one then.

Crime in the UK too, she's probably going to get a telling off from someone.

 Albertorius wrote:

I'm not on the States, though, but fair enough. I'll assume that's the one then.

It doesn't matter where *you* are, it matters where Dakka is. Protection for service providers under US law hinges on if they made an good faith effort to moderate, so the mods will want to get on this one.

Dudeface wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

This is the thing, right?

And *that's* why the thread should be locked, because someone would inevitably try to repost her doxxing the guy. Right or wrong on the contract,by spreading that around, we're making ourselves complicit in her crime. And it is, in some states, a crime.

I'm not on the States, though, but fair enough. I'll assume that's the one then.

Crime in the UK too, she's probably going to get a telling off from someone.

It's never cool doxxing some one, especially for a 'online clout' kinda thing.

WWE and NornQueenAlexis have comes to terms on there release, we wish them all the best in their future endeavors. Just change WWE to GW

Hm... not that it's cool or anything anyways (it's very much not)... but for it to be doxxing, wouldn't it be needed to have information about the actual, real life identity of the person? Or have doxxing requirements changed that much lately?