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.

Kilkrazy wrote:You can find out by reading the government copyright and web pages of the USA and UK. There's a sticky thread about copyright at the top of this forum to get you started.

Wow, sorry, thanks!

Actually, that 10 myths doesn't address my question. Currently searching through the US Copyright site for an answer.

The 10 Copyright Myths is a basic starter. You need to do a lot of reading into copyright and patent law -- it's all there online.

I think I found what is applicable?

U.S. Copyright Office wrote:What Is Not Protected by Copyright
Ideas, methods, or systems are not subject to copyright protection. Copyright
protection, therefore, is not available for ideas or procedures for doing, making,
or building things; scientific or technical methods or discoveries; business
operations or procedures; mathematical principles; formulas, algorithms; or
any other concept, process, or method of operation.
Section 102 of the copyright law, title 17, United States Code, clearly expresses
this principle: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation,
concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described,
explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Scarier was this item from an ex-member of staff linked to on that page.

http://www.notsounwashed.com/2009/11/very-dangerous-remove-immediately/

This is pure gold. Seriously 'free thinkers' represent a 'threat' to GW and should be removed immediately? Kirby wrote a 'little red book'? W.T.F... Does this explain the immobile and foaming mouthed stance of anyone who defends them here and is then identified as an employee? Because they fit into the 'ideal' category of enthusiastic without free thinking?

Can anyone provide the current C&D funstuff to somethingawful.com and 4chan? Lets spread the viral backlash. Let's have GW learn the lesson when the entire interwebs is saturated with vitriol about them and their thick-headed bullying.

There you go -- nice work!

Some of those things can be protected by patent, which is a different area of IP law.

Even better...

U.S. Copyright wrote:Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for
playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material
involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public,
nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar
principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary,
artistic, or musical form.

That seems really interesting. Can someone else interrupt that? I don't believe my interpretation.

jabbakahut wrote:Is this true? Anybody know where I can find out? If I can verify that my next project will be Jabba's guide to 40K.

As far as I know it's true. It worked for the OSRIC project (a rewriting of the OOP 1st edition AD&D rules for the internet so they could be used with the WotC OGL: http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/osric/. Its certainly a fundamental given in the computer games industry.

As the copyright law quote states - you cannot copy an idea - just the specific expression of that idea - so the knowledge of "how to play 40k" (or any other game) cannot be copyrighted, but if you photocopy the text and artwork of the rulebook it is still basically illegal (with certain caveats in the US for fair use, acedemic study etc.). So if you tell someone how to play 40k and write it down in your own words, using non-trademarked words/names, then there is (as I understand it) nothing at all GW can do to prevent it. Even if you then sold your own expression of the rules for real cash money, although you'd be advised to get a copyright lawyer double check your work, and a good proofreader to check you hadn't inadvertently regurgitated chunks of GW text. This is the same in the UK as in the US.

Patent law is an area that can cover the protection of ideas, but I am not aware of GW having filed any patents for game mechanics in the US or the UK. I'm not even sure patent law can cover purely intellectual rather than mechanical processes anyhow.

Patent law cannot cover intellectual ideas, only inventions and mechanical processes.

The US patent office has extended patent protection to some what are called business methods, for example, the idea of having a shopping trolley icon on your website to represent the bundle of items a customer has selected for purchase.

This and similar cases would not be permitted under Euro patent laws and they have started to cause some trouble because they are too broad.

It's actually pretty easy for a writer to rewrite game rules so they say the same thing but in different words. I've done it occasionally myself, in the OGL / d20 System licence days of D&D 3.0 / 3.5, when I used to work for Mongoose Publishing.

You'd want to alter the title, despite that clause about the title not being subject to copyright, because of course the title's a trademark. But theoretically there's nothing to stop someone releasing a "Space Empires Miniature Wargame", using the 40K rules in different words (hopefully clearer, less ambiguous, & more grammatically correct ones). You'd want to tweak some faction names a bit -- Imperial Marines rather than Space Marines, Heavy Power Armour rather than Terminator Armour, whatever.

jabbakahut wrote:Even better...

U.S. Copyright wrote:Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for
playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material
involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public,
nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar
principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary,
artistic, or musical form.

That seems really interesting. Can someone else interrupt that? I don't believe my interpretation.

You can't patent or copyright methods or systems of doing things, or mere 'ideas'. If GW decided there was the "GW way to glue figures together" they could not protect it because there's no material product there. Although to get a patents you also have to prove your idea is a novel solution to something, not an obvious one, and it cannot be already in the public domain which is why you mustn't publish a design for something you intend to patent. A pharmecutical company can protect a drug, or a specialised piece of equipment they have invented, but they can't protect a medical proceedure.

I don't see how this law helps anyone here, GW aren't telling people how to make their models and don't claim ownership of the concept of wargaming. They claim control over their rulesets but not over over the idea of futuristic games played with a ruler, dice and a table.

Howard A Treesong wrote:They claim control over their rulesets but not over over the idea of futuristic games played with a ruler, dice and a table.

They can't copyright their rulesets.

I was going to post it, but you can see it here. It's GW's 81 copyrights held in the US. I didn't actually notice anything Bloodbowl on there.

EDIT:
I don't think it works as a link, I'll edit it into a better format and post it.

The comments in this post have been removed at the request of Games Workshop ®

ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

NAVARRO wrote:ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

You're gonna get sued, buster. Consider this a 'cease and desist enjoying life' notice.

Hellfury wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

You're gonna get sued, buster. Consider this a 'cease and desist enjoying life' notice.

No worries I unleash - Kanluwen the Boom! Leman Russ Commander on GW... Hes in good graces on the top of the right corner in the GW secret red book... so he will, for sure, speak up in my behalf... or shoud I say scream in my behalf

Joking mate, argumentations are going back and forth and seem way to serious. Thank god for these funny images.

[Your creativity and loyalty are a threat to our IP - Do not post this again]

H.B.M.C. wrote:[Your creativity and loyalty are a threat to our IP - Do not post this again]

I was about to say how harsh that was for HBMC to say that but I have to say...

[if you continue to make such libelous statements, we will sue you ass into the dirt, to use the parlace posters as yourself seem to appreciate.]




This message was edited 1 time by Games Workshop Legal Department. Last update was at 02/Dec/2009 08:38:02 AM

I think this could be the start of a new internet meme. GW IP rules.

M.

Look, we shouldn't be scared of any [The Workshop is Mother, The Workshop is Father, you will be a constructive citizen. Only a Constructive Citizen may benefit from the Citizen's Reward, only those who seek The Citizen's Reward may enjoy The Product with 10% vouchers only redeemable with The Workshop. The Citizen's Reward is not a discount.]

This meme sucks.

[Games Workshop Legal would like to remind you that the contents of their legal documents
are owned by Games Workshop Legal. Therefore any messages posted on their behalf
misrepresenting themselves as coming from Games Workshop Legal itself would be subject to
legal action from Games Workshop Legal.

Including this one.

]

Forcing a meme is a crime, you know.

We didn't force this one. It spawned naturally (or unnaturally, depending on your point of view).

I'd have a problem if [OBEY. REPRODUCE. CONSUME.]

I was really thinking more [TRUST THE WORKSHOP, THE WORKSHOP IS YOUR FRIEND] if you see what I mean?

jabbakahut]

Hawkins wrote:

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) .


Whoa dog, you know we agree right?



i ment to exclude you
sorry i wasn't clear jabba.

NAVARRO wrote:

Hellfury wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:ROTFLMAO... brilliant.

You're gonna get sued, buster. Consider this a 'cease and desist enjoying life' notice.

No worries I unleash - Kanluwen the Boom! Leman Russ Commander on GW... Hes in good graces on the top of the right corner in the GW secret red book... so he will, for sure, speak up in my behalf... or shoud I say scream in my behalf

Joking mate, argumentations are going back and forth and seem way to serious. Thank god for these funny images.

Pft. I wish I had some kind of upper level connections with GW. All I can claim is having met Abnett and getting him to sign my copy of "Xenos" in 02.

But yeah. I can't decide if this thread is destined for a slow death and people trying to force a 4chan meme...

Or if it just needs a sidehug to kill it quickly.

Kanluwen wrote:I can't decide if this thread is destined for a slow death and people trying to force a 4chan meme...

Or if it just needs a sidehug to kill it quickly.

The whiners will simply make a new thread or threadjack another one into GW-bashing. Lately they do not seem to have anything else to do with their time.

Kanluwen wrote:Or if it just needs a sidehug to kill it quickly.

Oh no, have you seen the "Gimmie dat christian side hug" rap video too?

Seen it?

I'm the one who posted it in OT the other day

Kanluwen wrote:Seen it?

I'm the one who posted it in OT the other day

Ah right, I didn't know there was a thread here as I was sent it from elsewhere.