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.

Posted By Kilkrazy on 11/08/2007 8:01 AM
Trade Marks need to be defended or they lapse (see Hoover.)

Herbert or J. Edgar?

Hoover the vacuum cleaning company, which let its name become a household term in the UK and lost control of it for Trade Mark purposes.

You guys over at Damatus should have seen this coming when GW says Yes, they really mean NO.

Silly GW, always being coy. Give us a kiss first!


Seriously though, How about just up and selling the movie to GW if it's so good? Maybe trading it to them and getting one of those nifty ork boxed sets in return for the cost of production?

Strewth, the boards understanding and sympathies for the Damnatus guys brings a tear to my eye... NOT!

Boy, I've never seen such a collection of self righteous, up themselves people all in one place, it's amazing. Nice of you lot to make assumptions that the film is probably a total pile of crap (having not seen it in full) and that it's the guys & gals own fault for this whole situation, because they never got a yes from GW HQ signed sealed and delivered in blood.

Forgive me for being a little idealistic / cynical here, but I would of thought at some point in the 4 years that this non secret project was being made, somebody at GW would of said, "hummm,  I think we need to check this is ok for these people to be doing this." Come on, if someone tries to sell a copy of a GW model on ebay or something based on their IP, they come down like a ton of bricks. GW allowed this project to be advertised in their own publications, THEY knew what was going on here, this wasn't a misunderstanding. This is GW taking a sledgehammer to a nut.

Yes the Damnatus crew appear to of been a bit naive about this, but only in the way fans usually are about something they have a passion about. They weren't looking to make a living out of GW's IP.

I think the reactions have been pretty sympathetic, and well, I feel really bad for them too. I think most of the posters have now moved past "that sucks dude" and are trying to figure out where, exactly, the wheels came off the wagon.

I'm sorry if we come off as callous, but there are two possibilities here:
1) GW screwed around with Damanatus
2) The Damnatus guys misread GW's policy

I'm guessing GW literally looked up German copywrite law (which grants the authors of works rights to it for life, BTW) this summer and realized that it probably is not in their long term interest to allow a dilution fo their IP.

I'm upset about, as I wanted to see the movie. Hopefully it'll leak, but if not, this is just one of those things, ya know?

@Wolfstan

Finally someone talking sense..... but alas.... to deaf ears.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 11/08/2007 3:01 PM
@Wolfstan

Finally someone talking sense..... but alas.... to deaf ears.

I really don't see how that is talking sense.  Almost everyone who has posted feels bad about the Damnatus people not being able to put out something that they took a long time and put a lot of effort into.  What we are saying is that just because they arent allowed to put it out doesnt automatically make GW the bad guy.

What is wrong with voicing that opinion?  It actually seems that German IP law would hurt GW if they let Damnatus put it out.  So I would like either Duncan Idaho or Wolfstan to tell the rest of us why GW should allow this out *IF* it would hurt their IP?  Or if you could positively refute that it would hurt their IP that would be most helpful too.

Unfortunately, to date no one has shown that GW has misrepresented themselves over the IP issue.  And frankly we do not know what kind of 'permission' was given to the Damnatus people.  Who told them they could do this?  etc... etc...

I have been to their website and would love to see what they have come up with but I don't automatically jump all over GW for what appears to be a reasonable business decision.  Now it would have been nice if it didn't take 4 years to do but then the Damnatus guys might have wanted to consult a lawyer themselves and find out what the relevant legal issues would have been.  It really isn't GWs responsibility to tell them what they can and can't do.  It is the Damnatus people who are responsible for their own actions.  They should have done the research.  To me that is the bottom line.

There is, lamentably, some irony present in this statement.

We feel for you, truly we do. It sucks that you've poured so much effort into this project, only to reach the finish line, and discover the tape there is legal and unarguable. You've poured years of effort and significant treasure into a project which you wanted to share with the world, and have been barred by an out-of-left-field copyright consideration. Dedication to the project is no yardstick for actual success, but we know how much the project meant.

I cannot speak to the specific quality of your work, as I have not seen it, but I know that there ARE fan works that can reach an extremely high level. (LucasArts encourages fan work, and we've seen some phenominal work there, for instance.)

But just because we feel badly for you, does not mean that we can villify GW over this decision, when it is a decision that makes sense, at least from a legal and business standpoint. And yes, the discussion went past "that sucks" and into "So, what went wrong?" and "Wait, copyright-whatsis?" It's just how message boards work - the initial post is a springboard, and there's no telling where the conversation will land.

GW has every right to protect their, but you are still missing the point. THIS project has been out there for 4 years, GW has promoted the project THEY knew about it. SOMEONE somewhere at GW should of picked up on it a long time ago, they do with everyother thing.

Again I say this, if this was the case of someone in Germany selling their version of a Space Marine model on Ebay, refering to it as a Space Marine and it looking near as damn it to a Space Marine, GW would get Ebay to remove it forthwith. If they can do this to a model, based on the idea of a Space Marine, how hard is it to work out a feature length film based on their IP is not allowed?

I think that this is GW sending out a message, they are saying, "don't do anything with our IP, fullstop." If they had done this in the early days it wouldn't of had the same impact, but now fans will be saying "bugger that" if someone suggests doing a fan based film.

Out of interest, how does licensing work, couldn't this be a work around?

I understand your point. And its the reason why one should not embark upon a long, expensive project without securing the necessary permissions (in writing) before getting 4 years in.

And GW, as handy a label as it is, is not actually a singular entity. It's made up people, some of whom have the authority to make these decisions, and many of whom don't. White Dwarf editors probably aren't in the first category, though they have the authority to include information in White Dwarf.

So who knows exactly what happened? Did no one even TALK to the legal department until the project was ready for release? Sadly, that is quite possibly the case - I seriously doubt that anyone in the development studio, for example, faced with a project like this would immediately think "But what about the inalienable, untransferable moral rights of the creators under (German) copyright law, and how will they affect our IP?!?"

I don't see a conspiracy here. I expect it's as simple as no one bothered to seek legal advice, either inside GW or outside, before the project got this far along.

(Licensing is only an option if GW was willing to accept the consequences of letting the creators obtain, unassignably, certain rights under copyright law. It's apparent they aren't.)

This seems like a really, really wierd law. You can't sign over certain rights for what youc reate, no matter what? Huh? Why not?

In the case of GW, then how does Golden Demon work in Germany? If I create a really cool scratchbuilt Space Marine for 40k single, do I now own a part of the IP because of my conversion based on the work of GW? Wha-?

Just seems very odd.

engine

Posted By Wolfstan on 11/08/2007 3:29 PM

I think that this is GW sending out a message, they are saying, "don't do anything with our IP, fullstop." If they had done this in the early days it wouldn't of had the same impact, but now fans will be saying "bugger that" if someone suggests doing a fan based film.

It's quite obvious that this is what is happening, since it's what GW has _always_ done with any fan project.  They wait until its ready for release and then sic their lawyers on it to bury the project under legal fees regardless of what's actually legal.

Posted By Buoyancy on 11/08/2007 4:57 PM

Posted By Wolfstan on 11/08/2007 3:29 PM

I think that this is GW sending out a message, they are saying, "don't do anything with our IP, fullstop." If they had done this in the early days it wouldn't of had the same impact, but now fans will be saying "bugger that" if someone suggests doing a fan based film.

It's quite obvious that this is what is happening, since it's what GW has _always_ done with any fan project.  They wait until its ready for release and then sic their lawyers on it to bury the project under legal fees regardless of what's actually legal.

Not contradicting you but when has this happened before?  I am not aware of this and would actually like to know if this is true.

The german Moral Right, or Author's Right, is based on the assumption that when you create something, it is virtually an extension of the self, and just like you can't sell your arm or leg (outside of Tijuana), you can't sell all the rights to your book, painting, or fanfilm.

German law also prohibits the selling of any rights to a corporation, meaning GW couldn't even buy the economic rights to Damnatus: one individual would literally have to. It's part of the difference between civil and common law.

I think the allusion to GW railing people over IP was mostly on fan sites, where they used too much GW imagery. There is also the ban on using their images in online shopping carts.

I work in a large IP related corporation and have a lot of dealings with various aspects of IP and our legal department.

From my experience it is quite likely that GW simply did not join up all the dots until near the end, when the need to resolve the situation became urgent. Up until then, the Damnatus guys must have thought they were "talking to GW" and that "GW approved their project" though actually they just talked to a couple of guys at GW who liked the idea, but had no authority to form contracts, and some stuff on their project appeared in WD which is edited by some other guys who also probably liked it but again these guys had no authority to make contracts.

Once the project neared completion, the corporate legal department got involved, and the whole thing was stamped on.

If its in the magazine its now a question of fact as to whether those "approving" had apparent authority and control to those outside of the Company.

Again I agree with the camp that says "what you didn't get anything in writing" But I'm also of the camp that this is a real shoot foot with own pistol sort of move by GW-not in nixxing the film, but doing it so late in the game.

You would have to see the exact wording of the magazine article to form an opinion.

If we are to pursue this line of enquiry, perhaps someone might copy and post it.

You're right Kilkrazy, but thats my point, its partially a question of fact now. Its not a line I'd follow if I were the damnatus boys as a legal fight would be surpremely stupid.

Posted By jfrazell on 11/09/2007 6:12 AM
If its in the magazine its now a question of fact as to whether those "approving" had apparent authority and control to those outside of the Company.

Again I agree with the camp that says "what you didn't get anything in writing" But I'm also of the camp that this is a real shoot foot with own pistol sort of move by GW-not in nixxing the film, but doing it so late in the game.

I agree, it was a blunder.  I suppose GW had a meeting, where legal made it's case to nix the film, and marketing made it's argument that'll bring ill will to the company.  Part of me simply envisions this shadowy figure sitting through the entire meeting, then quietly saying, "We raised prices, the fans stayed.  We cancelled specialist games, the fans stayed.  We won't answer rules questions, our magazine is a monthly catalog, and despite our core demo being adults, we continue to dumb done the product for 10 year olds.  And you honestly think vetoing a german fan movie is going to hurt us?  Nothing can hurt us, we are invincible!"

And then everybody around the table laughs, and laughs, and laughs.

And then they eat a kitten.

Posted By Polonius on 11/09/2007 6:39 AM

Posted By jfrazell on 11/09/2007 6:12 AM
If its in the magazine its now a question of fact as to whether those "approving" had apparent authority and control to those outside of the Company.

Again I agree with the camp that says "what you didn't get anything in writing" But I'm also of the camp that this is a real shoot foot with own pistol sort of move by GW-not in nixxing the film, but doing it so late in the game.

I agree, it was a blunder.  I suppose GW had a meeting, where legal made it's case to nix the film, and marketing made it's argument that'll bring ill will to the company.  Part of me simply envisions this shadowy figure sitting through the entire meeting, then quietly saying, "We raised prices, the fans stayed.  We cancelled specialist games, the fans stayed.  We won't answer rules questions, our magazine is a monthly catalog, and despite our core demo being adults, we continue to dumb down the product for 10 year olds.  And you honestly think vetoing a german fan movie is going to hurt us?  Nothing can hurt us, we are invincible!"

And then everybody around the table laughs, and laughs, and laughs.

And then they eat a kitten.

Now THAT was funny! (Glad I wasn't drinking anything as I read it!)

And sadly, probably closer to the truth than we'd really like to believe...

Actually from the article in the German WD you could get the impresion that it was fully supported by GW. Have to look for a copy of the article.

>>I agree, it was a blunder. I suppose GW had a meeting, where legal made it's case to nix the film, and marketing made it's argument that'll bring ill will to the company. Part of me simply envisions this shadowy figure sitting through the entire meeting, then quietly saying, "We raised prices, the fans stayed. We cancelled specialist games, the fans stayed. We won't answer rules questions, our magazine is a monthly catalog, and despite our core demo being adults, we continue to dumb done the product for 10 year olds. And you honestly think vetoing a german fan movie is going to hurt us? Nothing can hurt us, we are invincible!"

It would not work quite like that.

Legal would point out that for the directors to relax control on the firm's IP would be a gross dereliction of their duty, and would certainly see them dismissed for gross misconduct and sued personally and individually for substantial damages for malfeasance, and Marketing would shut up.

Posted By brettz123 on 11/08/2007 5:19 PM

Not contradicting you but when has this happened before?  I am not aware of this and would actually like to know if this is true.

There's at least one roguelike games based on Warhammer that was forced to change it's theme only after it was released.

Posted By Buoyancy on 11/09/2007 7:50 AM

Posted By brettz123 on 11/08/2007 5:19 PM

Not contradicting you but when has this happened before?  I am not aware of this and would actually like to know if this is true.

There's at least one roguelike games based on Warhammer that was forced to change it's theme only after it was released.

Well why did they theme something on Warhammer?  I don't see how you blame GW when someone else tries to use their IP to put out a product?

Now back to Damnatus.  It is pretty crappy to put something about it in a White Dwarf and then years later tell them its a no go.  That really is bad form.  Just looks to me that both sides really dropped the ball.  Damnatus crew because they wanted to do something cool and didnt really get the approval they need and GW because it seems like no one understood the legal implications until it was too late.

And as far as upsetting most people I don't even think the Damnatus petition got more then 5000 signatures so I dont think most people either know or care that the film didnt come out.

Posted By Polonius on 11/09/2007 6:39 AM

I agree, it was a blunder.  I suppose GW had a meeting, where legal made it's case to nix the film, and marketing made it's argument that'll bring ill will to the company.  Part of me simply envisions this shadowy figure sitting through the entire meeting, then quietly saying, "We raised prices, the fans stayed.  We cancelled specialist games, the fans stayed.  We won't answer rules questions, our magazine is a monthly catalog, and despite our core demo being adults, we continue to dumb done the product for 10 year olds.  And you honestly think vetoing a german fan movie is going to hurt us?  Nothing can hurt us, we are invincible!"

And then everybody around the table laughs, and laughs, and laughs.

And then they eat a kitten.

Exalt.  That was good.

Remember, never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity.

Posted By Kilkrazy on 11/09/2007 7:48 AM
>>I agree, it was a blunder. I suppose GW had a meeting, where legal made it's case to nix the film, and marketing made it's argument that'll bring ill will to the company. Part of me simply envisions this shadowy figure sitting through the entire meeting, then quietly saying, "We raised prices, the fans stayed. We cancelled specialist games, the fans stayed. We won't answer rules questions, our magazine is a monthly catalog, and despite our core demo being adults, we continue to dumb done the product for 10 year olds. And you honestly think vetoing a german fan movie is going to hurt us? Nothing can hurt us, we are invincible!"

It would not work quite like that.

Legal would point out that for the directors to relax control on the firm's IP would be a gross dereliction of their duty, and would certainly see them dismissed for gross misconduct and sued personally and individually for substantial damages for malfeasance, and Marketing would shut up.

And to threaten the marketers that they would be personally liable would also be malfeasance on the part of the bloodsuckers but I digress from the main topic-when do they eat the kitten? 

Posted By Kilkrazy on 11/09/2007 7:48 AM
Legal would point out that for the directors to relax control on the firm's IP would be a gross dereliction of their duty, and would certainly see them dismissed for gross misconduct and sued personally and individually for substantial damages for malfeasance, and Marketing would shut up.

  I really like how you used the word "gross" twice in once sentence, and "and" four times. 

  Right, so we all learned a valuable lesson here?  Don't spend a lot of time and effort on fanfic/films.  It'll all end in tears.

If people have that much talent they should just go and make a great film of their own. Maybe the Damnatus guys could do that using the stuff they learnt making Damnatus.

Well, thats the problem. Damnatus is the proof of capability for Spaerentor, no Damnatus, not thing to show to forward their careers. While a labour of love (which makes ittwice as bad to crush) it was also an indirect meal ticket for Mr Hu and other production staff, and maybe even the actors.