New Sci-Fi Miniature from Andrea Miniatures

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.

**MagickalMemories**

Agamemnon2 wrote:
ArbeitsSchu wrote:Its a pain in the ass. Perhaps just tell us which models it is? (I gather that they would be pieces that the un-tutored wiill cry "lawsuit" about?)

Indeed. They were not-Conan, not-Robocop, not-James-Bond and not-Spiderman.

Not-Conan is the only one that didn't link directly for me.
From Not-Robocop, I even saw a pic of thier not-Terminator bust.

Eric

**ph34r**

Delephont wrote:
ph34r wrote:
Delephont wrote:Now for the love of god, can all the armchair lawyers bugger off, I for one am sick of hearing, "law suit", "I.P." etc everytime a new miniature gets posted. Can't you simply look at things like a hobby enthusiasts and critique the products on their own merit.

Second guessing the legal ground between two large companies is fruitless and boring, and almost always devolves into an internet flame war!!
If Blizzard wanted to C&D them for IP infringement they would be well within their rights.

Stop crying about this company's blatant copying. Do you own Andrea Miniatures stock or something?

Ahhh....and as if on cue, here comes our friendly neighbourhood troll.....ph34r you never let us down. I guess you missed the part of my post regarding internet flame wars....still, from most of your posts here and elsewhere, my guess is, thats why you come on to the forums.

Well to be quite frank, and looking at the childish content of your post, I really can't be bothered to try to reason this out with you. Of course, I have no idea whether Blizzard will issue a C&D, and don't particulary care. I come on here to talk wargames, miniatures and sometimes fluff, all the legal crap (to which I have no experience or knowledge) I leave to those whose business it is....I could suggest you do the same.....oh but I forget, when you're not out fighting crime, or performing a moon landing, your other job is that of I.P. Lawyer for most large gaming companies.....

Now before I put your I.D. on ignore (because you generally have nothing to say that interests me) heres some advice you probably won't take......wind your neck in, and learn to enjoy the hobby, rather then soaking your withered internet soul into every slice of internet based industry politics you think you can sniff out....it might make your experience a little less troublesome, and it might keep you off of peoples "ignore" lists.

No troll. As evidenced by CHS vs GW, to mention only a 40k related example, C&D are a very real thing. The model is almost exactly the same as the 3d model of the Terran Marine used in Starcraft 2.

There is no need for you to get so upset about this. I am being serious, and instead you are calling me a troll without addressing my points at all. If you have nothing to use to defend your argument try just not posting at all

**Guildsman**

ph34r wrote:
Delephont wrote:
ph34r wrote:
Delephont wrote:Now for the love of god, can all the armchair lawyers bugger off, I for one am sick of hearing, "law suit", "I.P." etc everytime a new miniature gets posted. Can't you simply look at things like a hobby enthusiasts and critique the products on their own merit.

Second guessing the legal ground between two large companies is fruitless and boring, and almost always devolves into an internet flame war!!
If Blizzard wanted to C&D them for IP infringement they would be well within their rights.

Stop crying about this company's blatant copying. Do you own Andrea Miniatures stock or something?

Ahhh....and as if on cue, here comes our friendly neighbourhood troll.....ph34r you never let us down. I guess you missed the part of my post regarding internet flame wars....still, from most of your posts here and elsewhere, my guess is, thats why you come on to the forums.

Well to be quite frank, and looking at the childish content of your post, I really can't be bothered to try to reason this out with you. Of course, I have no idea whether Blizzard will issue a C&D, and don't particulary care. I come on here to talk wargames, miniatures and sometimes fluff, all the legal crap (to which I have no experience or knowledge) I leave to those whose business it is....I could suggest you do the same.....oh but I forget, when you're not out fighting crime, or performing a moon landing, your other job is that of I.P. Lawyer for most large gaming companies.....

Now before I put your I.D. on ignore (because you generally have nothing to say that interests me) heres some advice you probably won't take......wind your neck in, and learn to enjoy the hobby, rather then soaking your withered internet soul into every slice of internet based industry politics you think you can sniff out....it might make your experience a little less troublesome, and it might keep you off of peoples "ignore" lists.
No troll. As evidenced by CHS vs GW, to mention only a 40k related example, C&D are a very real thing. The model is almost exactly the same as the 3d model of the Terran Marine used in Starcraft 2.

There is no need for you to get so upset about this. I am being serious, and instead you are calling me a troll without addressing my points at all. If you have nothing to use to defend your argument try just not posting at all

I hate this. All of it. I'm seriously considering giving up on this whole site, based on the fact that every non-GW news thread devolves into an intellectual property rights argument. I don't even care who wins the chapterhouse case, just as long as it stops the arguments about every new model that is released.

To the point of the thread, this model is gorgeous. It's exactly the sort of model that I would love to work on and put a ton of effort into.

**Delephont**

Guildsman wrote:I hate this. All of it. I'm seriously considering giving up on this whole site, based on the fact that every non-GW news thread devolves into an intellectual property rights argument. I don't even care who wins the chapterhouse case, just as long as it stops the arguments about every new model that is released.

To the point of the thread, this model is gorgeous. It's exactly the sort of model that I would love to work on and put a ton of effort into.

There's no need to give up the site, just use the ignore button on the side

This is generally a good site, in fact, it's one of the best sites if you want a good range of wargaming and miniatures news. Unfortunately, there are those individuals who trouble themselves with things outside their knowledge and control.

I was very much intending to get this miniature, unfortunately the price is too steep for me....which is a real shame, it's a lovely piece :(

**ph34r**

Guildsman wrote:I hate this. All of it. I'm seriously considering giving up on this whole site, based on the fact that every non-GW news thread devolves into an intellectual property rights argument. I don't even care who wins the chapterhouse case, just as long as it stops the arguments about every new model that is released.

To the point of the thread, this model is gorgeous. It's exactly the sort of model that I would love to work on and put a ton of effort into.

So you honestly don't think this model infringes on Blizzard's IP?

Or you DO think it infringes, but hate that people talk about this fact?

You know, the vast majority of models that are released have no IP problems whatsoever. It is inappropriate to suggest that "every model" is attacked as infringing on IP.

**Delephont**

ph34r wrote: So you honestly don't think this model infringes on Blizzard's IP?

Or you DO think it infringes, but hate that people talk about this fact?

You know, the vast majority of models that are released have no IP problems whatsoever. It is inappropriate to suggest that "every model" is attacked as infringing on IP.

look, it's similar, ok?! but as you can see from your own photos it's not the same. Have you seen th miniatures made by Scibor, they are also similar to GW Space Marines, but they're not the same. Are these miniatures by Andrea being advertised as Terran Marines? Are they being advertised as having any connection to StarCraft?...no, on both counts...so, on what grounds could Blizzard claim I.P. infringment?....on the basis that they look similar? Do I need to list all of the items out there that have a similarity to something else? what about Warlord Games trenchcoat troopers....ohh, don't they look like Death Korps.....need any more.

Now lets ask the relevant question.....is this "supposed" I.P. infringement going to sway you to buy this miniature or not? If so, please make your statemen, get it off your chest and move on.....look at the above post, you're boring people with this I.P. nonsense....so please STOP!

**ArbeitsSchu**

I'm wondering if the reason why there isn't an IP issue is because there is no real clash of interests. Blizzard don't lose a penny for something that looks broadly like something that appears in their game, that clashed with their business interests on exactly no levels at all.

It might resemble the Starcraft marine because It also looks a bit like the Halo chaps, and a host of other power armour archetypes, because its a guy in powered armour. It even looks like War Machine (Iron Man's friend.) in some ways. About the only one it doesn't look like is a GW marine, and thats predominantly because GW over-scale things a hell of a lot.

**MajorTom11**

To me, those 2 are only roundly similar in sillouette, there is not one actual detail that is a direct copy, and some parts are actually quite dissimilar. IMO only, since I am under no impression that I am a lawyer, there is no issue here.

**Monster Rain**

/Steps over the dead horse. (Honestly. The IP flamewars are getting extremely tedious.)

That's a pretty cool model, but probably not something I'd buy. The idea of it being a statue of some sort on a terrain feature does have merit, though...

**LunaHound**

@ph34r

Yes , artistically speaking it is copying ( or derive? ) the Terran Marine. It has identical flow on the curve / shape even if the "details" are changed.
Most of the armor plates shares the same design , just different details. I bet if the pic is showed to anyone that doesnt know SC , FOR SURE they'll assume thats just MK1 and MK2 armour.

Now who ever sculpted this piece i think has a smart sense of humor. This miniature's design pretty much a bastard child of SC and 40K Marines.

**Just Dave**

ph34r wrote:You know, the vast majority of models that are released have no IP problems whatsoever. It is inappropriate to suggest that "every model" is attacked as infringing on IP.

Exactly.

As Tom said, the silhouette's similar but that's it. If there's an IP problem, Blizzard will/should raise it, but I don't think there is one or that suggesting there is is at all reasonable.

----

Now, if someone wants to pass me a bucket and spade, I intend to make a mountain out of a molehill...

**ph34r**

ArbeitsSchu wrote: I'm wondering if the reason why there isn't an IP issue is because there is no real clash of interests. Blizzard don't lose a penny for something that looks broadly like something that appears in their game, that clashed with their business interests on exactly no levels at all.

I think this is definitely the case.

Blizzard has no real reason to care about this model as they are not in the miniatures market. Even if it is blatant IP infringement, the potential C&D will probably never materialize.

**Guildsman**

ph34r wrote:
Guildsman wrote:I hate this. All of it. I'm seriously considering giving up on this whole site, based on the fact that every non-GW news thread devolves into an intellectual property rights argument. I don't even care who wins the chapterhouse case, just as long as it stops the arguments about every new model that is released.

To the point of the thread, this model is gorgeous. It's exactly the sort of model that I would love to work on and put a ton of effort into.
So you honestly don't think this model infringes on Blizzard's IP?

Or you DO think it infringes, but hate that people talk about this fact?

You know, the vast majority of models that are released have no IP problems whatsoever. It is inappropriate to suggest that "every model" is attacked as infringing on IP.

Dude, you totally missed the point of my post. I really could not care less if it is ip infringement. If you want to be an armchair lawyer about every new model that comes along,fine, but take the discussion elsewhere. In fact, why don't you send Blizzard an email, if this bothers you so much? I'm sorry if I exaggerated a little. But if you look at the news threads about new models, somewhere around half of them turn into ip discussions at some point. It's boring, pointless, and downs out actual useful feedback.

**ArmorOfContempt**

I like the model except for the "who farted?" look on his face.

**ph34r**

Guildsman wrote:Dude, you totally missed the point of my post. I really could not care less if it is ip infringement. If you want to be an armchair lawyer about every new model that comes along,fine, but take the discussion elsewhere. I'm sorry if I exaggerated a little. But if you look at the news threads about new models, somewhere around half of them turn into ip discussions at some point. It's boring, pointless, and downs out actual useful feedback.

I think you are going to have to learn to deal with the fact that sometimes people talk about things that you don't want to talk about. We don't need an entire additional thread about how this model is ripped from SCII.

If you think "somewhere around half" of news threads you read turn into IP discussions, you need to read a wider range of news threads about new models.

**ArbeitsSchu**

ArmorOfContempt wrote:I like the model except for the "who farted?" look on his face.

I can't help but think that he vaguely resembles "Queeny" from Blackadder The Second. However, I'm notoriously bad at facial recognition, so maybe not.

**ArmorOfContempt**

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
ArmorOfContempt wrote:I like the model except for the "who farted?" look on his face.

I can't help but think that he vaguely resembles "Queeny" from Blackadder The Second. However, I'm notoriously bad at facial recognition, so maybe not.

I have seen. Now I can't unsee.

**ArbeitsSchu**

Not just me then.

**Just Dave**

I hate to admit it, but I see it too...

**reds8n**

Let's just leave the IP discussion from here on in please.

Posts on or relating to that in this thread will simply be deleted.

**ArbeitsSchu**

So we can't ponder whether Ben Elton et al have a case for IP over the similarity in facial features to Queen Elizabeth?