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.

 Cybtroll wrote:
I'm with Karol on this one. Once you're the bigger fish in the pond, you should behave like one... you see no shark worried that the pilot fishes are stealing its food.
Sharks that does dies from parasites. Which in this analogy are recasted, not those who created 40k-compatible miniatures or eldar-esque miniature like recently happened.

I would love to see the HR Giger Foundation sent a C&D to GW for their ENTIRE Tyranid line (or even for some specific very-derivative design... of GSC for example).

Nah.

See that Kickstarter recently hit by GW? The Eldar knock-off one?

Without GW, where is that project’s market? What has that project done to create its own market in the way GW managed all those years ago and continue to expand today? If they weren’t copying GW’s design and aesthetic cues, what would their models (well, stl files) be of?

Granted they’ve taken the effort to do more of it off their own back than straight recasts. But you cannot escape the fact their express aim was to attract sales from GW customers, by making the models irrefutably copies of GW’s style and army.

 Cybtroll wrote:
I'm with Karol on this one. Once you're the bigger fish in the pond, you should behave like one... you see no shark worried that the pilot fishes are stealing its food.
Sharks that does dies from parasites. Which in this analogy are recasted, not those who created 40k-compatible miniatures or eldar-esque miniature like recently happened.

I would love to see the HR Giger Foundation sent a C&D to GW for their ENTIRE Tyranid line (or even for some specific very-derivative design... of GSC for example).

Missed opportunity, but then again Giger was not a principless corporatistic donkey-cave.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Cybtroll wrote:
I'm with Karol on this one. Once you're the bigger fish in the pond, you should behave like one... you see no shark worried that the pilot fishes are stealing its food.
Sharks that does dies from parasites. Which in this analogy are recasted, not those who created 40k-compatible miniatures or eldar-esque miniature like recently happened.

I would love to see the HR Giger Foundation sent a C&D to GW for their ENTIRE Tyranid line (or even for some specific very-derivative design... of GSC for example).

Nah.

See that Kickstarter recently hit by GW? The Eldar knock-off one?

Without GW, where is that project’s market? What has that project done to create its own market in the way GW managed all those years ago and continue to expand today? If they weren’t copying GW’s design and aesthetic cues, what would their models (well, stl files) be of?

Granted they’ve taken the effort to do more of it off their own back than straight recasts. But you cannot escape the fact their express aim was to attract sales from GW customers, by making the models irrefutably copies of GW’s style and army.

And let's ignore that GW did it first, nvm, did it far more extensive. In regards to copying.
No GW has no leg to stand on.

Pretty sure HR’s people wouldn’t have much success.

Genestealers. Four arms, upper set with stylised talons. Bulbous head, ovipositor in the mouth, stubby tail. And a very hunched posture.

The Xenomorph. Two arms, both terminating in hands. Long, elongated eyeless head with a secondary gob. Long, prehensile tail. Large vent like structures coming of the back, and a relatively upright posture.

Both are Aliens, it’s true. But their reproductive cycles are very different. Their societies are very different.

Is their inspiration from the Xenomorph in the Genestealer? Sure. But inspiration does not a theft of IP create.

Other than being space bugs with exoskeletons, there aren’t enough similarities where one can be mistaken for the other.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Pretty sure HR’s people wouldn’t have much success.

Genestealers. Four arms, upper set with stylised talons. Bulbous head, ovipositor in the mouth, stubby tail. And a very hunched posture.

The Xenomorph. Two arms, both terminating in hands. Long, elongated eyeless head with a secondary gob. Long, prehensile tail. Large vent like structures coming of the back, and a relatively upright posture.

Both are Aliens, it’s true. But their reproductive cycles are very different. Their societies are very different.

Is their inspiration from the Xenomorph in the Genestealer? Sure. But inspiration does not a theft of IP create.

Other than being space bugs with exoskeletons, there aren’t enough similarities where one can be mistaken for the other.

Yeah, let's ignore the Art in the GSC dex... Yeah sure. Let's ignore that whole design aspects have basically just been copied.
No. GW has like karol stated no point morally.
And that is the problem inspiration and copyright have devolved to a point where it is a blunt force weapon for the bigger IP holders to the detriment of everyone else.
It's a tool to defend monopolistic market power structures and has actively lowered inspiration and advancements. Take a look at disney and what their chokehold on the enertainment market has done. GW does the same thing to the miniature and TG scene.

There is a world of difference between making clear copies of another company’s product and declaring “all me own work, Guv”, and finding inspiration in the designs of another.

You...you do understand that, yeah?

Folk often point to Starship Troopers and Astartes.

Sure, both are soldiers in suits of powered armour. But....that’s about it. Marines are genetically enhanced using arcane science. A SST is not. Marines carry signature weapons unlike those in SST.

Inspired by, not a copy of. Repeat that phrase. Inspired by, not a copy of.

Example. GW’s Orks have a signature, ramshackle look. But they also have specific patterns of Buggies.

A ramshackle SciFi buggy or light vehicle might take design elements of GW’s Orks, because that isn’t in itself copyrightable. But, things like the Rukkatrukk Squig Wagon can be, as they’re specific interpretations of that design ethos.

And to wrap up how silly “bUt THeY tOoK iNsPiRaTiOn” is as an argument? Point me to any one truly original SciFi or Fantasy work that exists outside of all other media.

No, you can’t have LotR, as that drew heavy inspiration from folk tales.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Pretty sure HR’s people wouldn’t have much success.

Genestealers. Four arms, upper set with stylised talons. Bulbous head, ovipositor in the mouth, stubby tail. And a very hunched posture.

The Xenomorph. Two arms, both terminating in hands. Long, elongated eyeless head with a secondary gob. Long, prehensile tail. Large vent like structures coming of the back, and a relatively upright posture.

Both are Aliens, it’s true. But their reproductive cycles are very different. Their societies are very different.

Is their inspiration from the Xenomorph in the Genestealer? Sure. But inspiration does not a theft of IP create.

Other than being space bugs with exoskeletons, there aren’t enough similarities where one can be mistaken for the other.

Yeah, let's ignore the Art in the GSC dex... Yeah sure. Let's ignore that whole design aspects have basically just been copied.
No. GW has like karol stated no point morally.

Xenomorph don’t have hybrids, so what’s the GSC got to do with it? Nor do they seek to supplant authority on a world with the unconscious goal of flagging down a Hive Fleet to a world ready for consumption like some interplanetary drive-thru.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There is a world of difference between making clear copies of another company’s product and declaring “all me own work, Guv”, and finding inspiration in the designs of another.

You...you do understand that, yeah?

Stop whiteknighting for the morally objectionability of copyright law done by GW, disney and consorts. Just renaming the catachans as catachans doesn't make them not a coppy of 80s and 90 action films.
They grew big on liberal versions of the law and took" inspiration" from anywhere and everywhere and now deny the same thing to potential rivals.

Folk often point to Starship Troopers and Astartes.

Sure, both are soldiers in suits of powered armour. But....that’s about it. Marines are genetically enhanced using arcane science. A SST is not. Marines carry signature weapons unlike those in SST.

Background should be irrelevant , the issue i take with GW is that GW took the same liberally and then attempted to copyright everything and their mother in the range, cue chapterhouse and has become complacent thanks to it's IP.

Example. GW’s Orks have a signature, ramshackle look. But they also have specific patterns of Buggies.

A ramshackle SciFi buggy or light vehicle might take design elements of GW’s Orks, because that isn’t in itself copyrightable. But, things like the Rukkatrukk Squig Wagon can be, as they’re specific interpretations of that design ethos.

And to wrap up how silly “bUt THeY tOoK iNsPiRaTiOn” is as an argument? Point me to any one truly original SciFi or Fantasy work that exists outside of all other media.

No, you can’t have LotR, as that drew heavy inspiration from folk tales.

Inspiration and copyright right now bite each other thanks to disney and consorts.
What was deemed taking inspiration earlier, something GW did liberally , would nowadays classify as an IP right infringement. That is the issue i take.
Morally, GW has no leg to stand on. the same way btw, why Disney should not have copyright on any of their tales which are nothing more than brother grimm collections, from poland and germany.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


Xenomorph don’t have hybrids, so what’s the GSC got to do with it? Nor do they seek to supplant authority on a world with the unconscious goal of flagging down a Hive Fleet to a world ready for consumption like some interplanetary drive-thru.

Background is irrelevant. Simply put there are text breakers that are nothing more than Gigers work.
Just because right now GW is protected because GIger didn't at the time intervene against GW doesn't make their taking "inspiration" not hypocritical compared to the behaviour they show torwards the smaller fish they bludgeon to death with ip law.

Your talking nonsense.

Morally? Don’t copy other people’s IP, knowing the consequences, then claim “oh noes, the bully are tea mi stuff”.

And yeah, background does make a difference. There are bare reflections of the Xenomorph in Genestealers. And even less so in Tyranids.

Go back and look at the very first art of each. They look nothing like a Xenomorph. At all.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Your talking nonsense.

Morally? Don’t copy other people’s IP, knowing the consequences, then claim “oh noes, the bully are tea mi stuff”.

And yeah, background does make a difference. There are bare reflections of the Xenomorph in Genestealers. And even less so in Tyranids.

Go back and look at the very first art of each. They look nothing like a Xenomorph. At all.

No, i won't it seems you need to look into the actual GSC dex and tell me the page stopper art doesn't look like giger.

And no the background doesn't make a lick of a difference if i just copy something, add an arm and call it totes something diffrent.

Different body shape. Lacking specific details (no prehensile tail, no second jaw, the presence of eyes, completely different posture and head shape).

You’ve literally got “they’re both imaginary aliens with exoskeletons” in terms of commonalities of design. That’s it. Nothing more. Especially when even the design of said exoskeleton is notably different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, art style cannot be copyrighted.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Different body shape. Lacking specific details (no prehensile tail, no second jaw, the presence of eyes, completely different posture and head shape).

You’ve literally got “they’re both imaginary aliens with exoskeletons” in terms of commonalities of design. That’s it. Nothing more. Especially when even the design of said exoskeleton is notably different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, art style cannot be copyrighted.

Sure, then how come GW can copyright their artstyle for miniatures?

Do you see the problem?

It's not necessarily a GW problem it's a general problem of copyrightlaw.

Tbf the 2nd Ed hormagaunt did look rather like a Xenomorph (other than the arms) and the 3rd Ed Hive Tyrant looked rather like the queen in Aliens (again, less the arms).

Notably though GW moved sharply away from that on the next iteration- with the former being made to look more like the termagants and the latter reverting to be more like the 2nd Ed one as part of the 3-4th Ed drive to make the nids have more consistent design cues.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Different body shape. Lacking specific details (no prehensile tail, no second jaw, the presence of eyes, completely different posture and head shape).

You’ve literally got “they’re both imaginary aliens with exoskeletons” in terms of commonalities of design. That’s it. Nothing more. Especially when even the design of said exoskeleton is notably different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, art style cannot be copyrighted.

Sure, then how come GW can copyright their artstyle for miniatures?

Do you see the problem?

It's not necessarily a GW problem it's a general problem of copyrightlaw.

This is why copyright law is confusing and complex.

Genestealers. Yes there’s some Xenomorph DNA in there. Enough for Disney (who now own the movie rights) or Giger to claim them as derivative works? Not even close.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Different body shape. Lacking specific details (no prehensile tail, no second jaw, the presence of eyes, completely different posture and head shape).

You’ve literally got “they’re both imaginary aliens with exoskeletons” in terms of commonalities of design. That’s it. Nothing more. Especially when even the design of said exoskeleton is notably different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, art style cannot be copyrighted.

Sure, then how come GW can copyright their artstyle for miniatures?

Do you see the problem?

It's not necessarily a GW problem it's a general problem of copyrightlaw.

This is why copyright law is confusing and complex.

Genestealers. Yes there’s some Xenomorph DNA in there. Enough for Disney (who now own the movie rights) or Giger to claim them as derivative works? Not even close.

i'd argue no, it's technically close enough, however since Giger didn't intervene at the time GW could manifest their claim and make it foolproof for them.
However that doesn't make them morally any less hypocritical when they took that and did run with it meanwhile they are bludgeoning everyone else.
It's the problem right now that big fishes like GW, or the house of a certain rodent that should be burnt to the ground, have waaaaayyyy too many rights on their side comparatively to the small companies.

The problem with IP laws is that small creators (so small as to be ignored by larger companies) have proliferated to the point where they are viewed as normal, and therefore acceptable.
This means people have become entitled to IP infringement and view any such enforcement as wrong.

I've also noticed a fair amount of shifting the goal posts - Yes the Catachans are basically 80's action heroes. This goes pretty well for the entire Imperial Guard, and as such GW doesn't have much of a leg to stand on were they to claim IP infringement of some Catachan-esque miniatures.
This is why sites like Victoria miniatures and Anvil Industries are so common and untouched by GW, because they don't directly copy any uniquely GW IP.
The claim that GW is bludgeoning everyone that even comes close to their IP falls apart when you consider these companies.

Astartes, on the other hand, was expressly a direct copy of GW's IP. There could be no argument that the super soldiers in that were the creator's own design. GW had every right to pull them up on that.

In fact, they not only had the right to do so, they had the obligation to do so. If you don't enforce your copyright you risk losing it. If GW knowingly allowed Astartes to continue another company could easily claim in court that Space Marines should be in the public domain because GW allowed Astartes and you're not allowed to play favourites with the application of the law.

The law is equal, not only is GW not allowed to play favourites (so they can't allow Astartes but block Disney) but it protects everyone equally.
Imagine you're a small artist named Steve, you create your own sci-fi world called Farglebargle. You'd cry foul if someone else took Farglebargle and created a popular animation that was earning them thousands, and didn't give you a penny.
That same law protects GW just as much as it protects Steve. Being a big company doesn't waive your rights to IP ownership.

So, GW is fully within their rights both legally and morally as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, hiding them on their community site is less convenient than allowing them to remain on youtube and/or moving them to GW's own youtube channel.
But really that's a minor complaint.

chaos0xomega wrote:

...

A nice theory. But just as valid as any others.
"They did everything right and everything is gonna be awesome" has just the same basis as "this sucks and its horrible."
We have NO insider info, so berating and insulting someone on speculation while speculating yourself is hypocritical.
Also, a C&D is not "meaningless" - but it is enough to scare single guys into submission if you dont want to fight a multi-million dollar company in a lawsuit about your hobby. Because they cant afford to fight that legal battle and have to afford it.
THAT is the consequence and by any means not "meaningless". As an author on BS, I know what would happen if our group received a C&D. We talked about it. We'd have to shut down because we could not afford to fight a battle for work we do for free.

Did it also ever occur to you what happened if they said "well, I was forced to agree the terms because otherwise my livelyhood would be ruined with a lawsuit I cannot afford to fight?" Do you think GW would accept such negative PR and would not drop the hammer on said person?
I might be a misanthrope, but you appear to live in some kind of corporate utopia where only gentle philantropic beings lead companies.

Way more visibility how? You need to visit WarCom to view and stumble upon them. Means you know about Warhammer and have an interest in Warhammer in the first place. YT might just recommend those things to you because you like scifi animations and not even know Warhammer exists.
I have my rumour. You have yours. It is ok to disagree, it is not ok to call people misanthropes, short-sighted, and warped.

You’re still ascribing malice for your version though.

Remember. As the owner of the IP, GW (whether one likes it or not) had every right to just shut it down entirely.

A grey area for my knowledge is whether they could then claim the entirety of the work and publish it themselves, keeping all the money. Perhaps someone can provide fact rather than opinion and reckons to this one, as I for one would be interested in the answer whatever it is.

Instead, we’ve seen them clearly defend their IP whilst not being dicks about it, as they’ve hired the guy. They absolutely, categorically, did not have to do that. Indeed it’s the more expensive option for them.

As far as I'm aware, the fact that it's based on GW's work doesn't entitle to the entire work. Only to prevent it's continuation.

So I'm sure GW taking the animations under their own site is a part of whatever agreement they've come to with the creators.

I'm not sure what they're entitled to in regards to payment though. The creator of Astartes made quite a bit of money off of it, whether or not GW would be entitled to any of that, and if so how much, I have no idea.
I'm sure they could sue for lost profits though if they can prove any.

I agree GW has handled this fairly well though. They certainly could have done a lot worse.

The YT argument is a load of nonsense. The YT algorithm isn't recommending Astartes or SODAZ work to anyone who doesn't already watch 40k videos because they don't fall into the categories the algorithm pushes i.e. FTOM gaming videos, lifestyle stuff and TikToks. Was Astartes ever on the trending page? Unlikely, which means the audience for Astartes was almost exclusively going to be 40k fans.

As for the rumours, if you hate GW because of their prices/fixation on SM/rule writing thats fine you can have that opinion and back up a lot of that with hard evidence. But has anyone who ACTUALLY knows either Astartes or SODAZ said that they were given an ultimatum? The rumour you're spreading isn't like "Amazon workers don't get bathroom breaks" because whistle-blowers came forward about that and Amazon tried to nuke the story out of existence.

Lets look at this from a different perspective. You're a guy who is making 40k animations on the side of your full time job. People are saying they're good quality and it's gaining social media traction. At this point you might start getting ads on the YT video or more people might be singing up to your Patreon or Twitch. At this point money starts coming off your side projects and you make more 40k animations. At this point GW contacts you with an offer to join their animation team to produce content for them. The caveat is your 40k work must be removed from your channel and given to them. You can now choose to believe this is a veiled threat that you have overstepped the mark (read as no longer fair use) and will be sued into oblivion if you refuse OR you have the opportunity to get paid a wage to do your hobby as a job. So far people have only chosen the latter but it is important to remember that they CHOSE to make 40k animations that they 100% knew would grab the attention of the 40k community. More people are interested in SM than "Generic Space Trooper". This isn't "GW kills animator for making videos similar to 40k", it's "GW protects it's IP but also hires the creators to make more things under the official Warhammer trademark".

I do know that YouTube are renowned for an all or nothing approach to DMCA.

Let’s say I make a video, and include a 5 second video clip with the corresponding audio. Strictly speaking I can do that under fair use. But, a DMCA would see the owner of that clip and audio get all income from that video. Not just a percentage related to how much of the content the clip and audio contributed to the video’s run time.

YouTube’s rep is even worse because they don’t seek to validate DMCA’s.

Eckhart’s Ladder has trouble with this. Not from Disney (he’s predominantly a Star Wars content creator), but from a music house claiming the music he plays at the beginning and end of his vids. Except....Eck knows the musician, and the musician said the company in question was sod all to do with him.

Here’s the video in which he explains it all should anyone care to watch.

Exactly. Anyone on YT can send a claim to a video, at which point the video is demonitised and taken out of recommended feeds. YT also doesn't like to promote videos that use certain terms because it's a dumb algorithm that has no shades of grey. Using the word "War" can get a video flagged for promoting violence and a channel I watch, who makes videos on ww2 game, has the use words like "kerfuffle" to avoid the YT kill hammer. YT is a terrible platform, let's stop pretending it isn't.

I wouldnt call it malice as much as a very strong scepticism/pessimism. Its not that I think GW does it because its EVIL, but because they do not consider anything else but their own gains - which is just standard corporate stuff. So they're... lawful neutral.
That this so far turned into a net negative for me makes me salty, true.
So GW gave, in my mind, two options to the creator - take the job or get shut down. That is a possibility and legal. That classifies as browbeating of the legal kind. The big one threatened the small one and the small one had to comply. I admit browbeating is a poor choice of words since that is actually a term used for a crime - yet as a non-native speaker I do not know of another term that could convey the same.

Having the right to it legally is one thing - actually doing it can be questionably morally.
As an extreme example, it is legal to transfer your profits to the Cayman Islands, but morally that is just corrupt, yet in the best interest of the company.

It turned from a free work of art where the creator communicated with his fan base on patreon and updates via newsletters into what I have to assume a signed NDA disclosure. The changes made to Astartes on the WarCom site made it, in my oppinion, an inferior product. Which is mostly where my original joy of Astartes being pulled in and having the team and financial support of GW was turned sour.

Except the small one started off piggybacking the big one’s IP.

This isn’t GW seeking to dominate the SciFi market, or stifle upcoming competition. This is as close to an equitable compromise.

You can use their IP, and they’ll pay you for it (turning an amateur to a professional overnight by definition). But, that means they’ll have inevitable oversight - because it’s their product and their IP.

NGL Astartes was good BUT I don't remember enough of the original to notice the differences between it and the one currently on WarCom.
Browbeating is generally used in a sense of telling someone off for doing something wrong, which technically both Astartes and SODAZ did if/when they started making money off of their 40k projects.

The thing people seem to be forgetting is that GW itself is trying to break out into the "tv show" business with their animation studio and Eisenhorn show. They are never going to compete with Netflix, Prime TV, Disney+, or Crunchyroll because their product base is too small and has no backlog outside of the Ultramarines movie, which I hope to God is put in their archive. However, this streaming service is absolutely going to be paid and the more people they get working on projects the more likely GW will be able to sell this service to its customer base. Launching with 1 or 2 titles at what will probs be something like £4.99/month if not less isn't going to work.

The creator of Astartes made some comments about his new employment, it was quite vague because he's obviously had to sign an NDA of some sort, but he basically said he was fully on board with the opportunity and liked that his work was now entirely "above board" rather than profiting off the legally grey (at best) Astartes Patreon.

I also don't think these creators were co-erced into joining GW. I think the offer of employment was a genuine offer.

I do however think they were pressured into removing their content and transferring it to GW.
"You will take down this content, you have no right to use it, but we can work out a deal that better suits both parties".

I think that's entirely fair, and characterising it as blackmail is a bit unfair.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Would this person have been so successful in the first place if they were not using an established IP? Because I am pretty sure the answer is no. The only reason they became popular enough for us to hear about it is because of using the IP that belongs to GW. It was borrowed popularity from the start.

Now I'm not saying fan content is bad. But this person got first a successful youtube channel then a job from GW in exchange for borrowing their IP without permission and showing them what they could do with it. Pretty sweet fething deal for everyone involved if you ask me.

But that is more or less what you can say about w40k. GW took material that inspired them, build a game around it, it become popular because people had contact with stuff they knew and presto the game is huge all around the world. In no small part to people that were doing free advertisment for them in all the parts of the world where there were no GW stores, GW adds on TV etc

Yet somehow it is not okey for people to make something like Astartes or Cosmic Knight Crusader Marshal.

I'm getting really, really tired of this argument that just because Games Workshop's Warhammer 40,000 IP draws inspiration from dozens of different sources means they have no ground to stand on when it comes to defending their IP. I hate to tell you this, but surprise surprise, a LOT of media is at least somewhat derivative and draws its inspiration from things that came before it.

Yet when Artel or Kromlech do they stuff, GW tries or tried to take them down, that is bad. But when GW does the same thing it is okey. Sorry, but I have more in common with the prior, then the later. And when I understand the law and why it is enforced, I do not like the moralising part of it. Stealing is bad, because it is GW IP. When the idea of Hives, marines arbites are copy pasted from stuff like Judge Dredd.
I mean they litteraly named the word bearer primarch the Aurelian, copying the same religious reforms the historical Aurelian did, all we need for him to be a full copy paste is for him to say in a BL book "one truth, one faith, one empire".

A couple of points Karol:
1 - GW evolved from some guys who made some games in their shed/living room. The corporation today is not the same as those guys and I'm pretty sure not a single one even works for the company. In the 70's it was just a distribution point for D&D and other traditional board games. It was only in the late 80's it started to fully focus on the Warhammer brand.
2 - There is a difference between taking inspiration from a previous product and fully copying an existing one. Someone making an animation called "Centurions" about "Space Warriors with Void Armour" who makes something similar to a SM but distinctly not a SM isn't getting GW's attention. Someone who makes an animation called "Astartes" with specific GW designs implemented and starts making money off of it, IS going to get GW's attention.
3 - "Aurelian" is a historical name and as such cannot be protected under IP. "Lorgar Aurelian" can because it is a separate entity and the name of a character that can be copyrighted. The name "Luke" is not copyrightable and anyone can use it. "Luke Skywalker" is a Star Wars copyrighted character so it cannot be used in another IP's product.
4 - "Big City with lots of people" is not a copyrightable idea. The term "Hive City" is because it is distinct. Likewise, the design of the Arbites might be similar to the Judges but they are not the 2000 AD Judges. Also, GW tends to favour the use of Enforcers in its publications so it can avoid issues with an older OOP product sharing similarities with another brand.

Karol wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Would this person have been so successful in the first place if they were not using an established IP? Because I am pretty sure the answer is no. The only reason they became popular enough for us to hear about it is because of using the IP that belongs to GW. It was borrowed popularity from the start.

Now I'm not saying fan content is bad. But this person got first a successful youtube channel then a job from GW in exchange for borrowing their IP without permission and showing them what they could do with it. Pretty sweet fething deal for everyone involved if you ask me.

But that is more or less what you can say about w40k. GW took material that inspired them, build a game around it, it become popular because people had contact with stuff they knew and presto the game is huge all around the world. In no small part to people that were doing free advertisment for them in all the parts of the world where there were no GW stores, GW adds on TV etc

Yet somehow it is not okey for people to make something like Astartes or Cosmic Knight Crusader Marshal.

You're massively oversimplifying the scenario. GW's IP has enough distinctive elements both in specifics and generalities to stand as its own set of background universes. There are a lot of elements that are homages to (or direct rip-offs of, depending on your level of salt) certain other IPs. the concept of a genetically engineered super soldier is not unique to GW and wasn't when 40k was released. The same concept plus all the imagery and background material surrounding it since the concept was truly solidified in 2nd edition is. That's all work GW has put into building their IP. If you look at the Spartans from the Halo video game and background they are pretty much Astartes - genetically engineered from the best genestock, equipped with power armour and the best weapons their military has to offer. But they're distinct enough that GW isn't going after them to get them shut down. That's due to a combination of many factors including the look of the two things and the background IP too.

Almost any sci-fi or fantasy race, weapon, idea etc can be reduced to a superficial comparison with existing ideas. The importance is more often than not in the details. Astartes is obviously not some superficially similar IP to what GW produces. It's a direct copy down to almost every last detail. That's the difference and it's why GW can make genuine legal attempts to have it shut down but an identical show without any of GW's IP involved would be absolutely fine. I'd also wager that other show wouldn't be even one tenth as popular as Astartes was. The reason why is precisely the reason IP protections are not automatically bad and immoral.

2000AD and 40K also share a common breeding ground - late 70’s early 80’s Britain, a politically and economically tumultuous time as it was transformed from Imperial and Industrial Decline.

A backdrop of glittering (and expensive) New Builds and decaying industrial infrastructure. Disaffected youths and punk rock with the hedonism of New Romantic etc. A time of a widening gap between the Haves and the Have Nots.

Both are satirical takes on it, both ramped things up to 11.5.

Both have fed off each other over the years. Neither is a carbon copy of the other. At all.

Example? Insurrection. Written by Dan Abnett, same artist as Blood Quest.



Dates to around 2010ish, takes place in the Dreddiverse. Ships look familiar, no?

Now, compare them to Justice-1 from the Judge Child epic which was published in 1980. Couldn’t find a decent sized, clear pic of the original Brian Bolland art, but here’s a more modern 3D model based on its appearance.



A very different look, no?

Crucially, neither company is trying to pass off their work as the other’s work. That is the difference. And remember. GW used to do licensed games for 2000ad properties. If 2000ad had an issue with any of it, one suspects they’d have done something about it.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
In fact, they not only had the right to do so, they had the obligation to do so. If you don't enforce your copyright you risk losing it.

This has never, ever been true. If you don't enforce a trademark you risk losing it. As a copyright holder I am free to enforce my copyright as selectively as I wish- let someone I like make derivative content, while sending C&Ds to others who infringe on my work.

GW is under no legal obligation to sue, C&D, or assimilate anyone using their IP. Full stop. It's their choice.

Looks like it's time for this video again.