Games Workshop has updated their IP rules...

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.

**H.B.M.C.**

It's all here, but the main thrust of it is this:

Games Workshop wrote:We have a zero tolerance policy in respect of infringement of our intellectual property rights. This includes:

1. Counterfeit models - our products must not be reproduced and sold.
2. Imitation models - our products must not be imitated. Imitators produce models which copy heavily from Games Workshop’s artwork, books or products.
3. Recasting and 3D printing - our products must not be illegally re-cast or scanned, nor should digital designs of our products be illegally produced and distributed.
4. Illegal downloads - our publications, audio books, and other material protected by copyright must not be illegally uploaded, shared, or distributed in any format.
5. Unauthorised use of our trademarks - unauthorised use or registration of our trademarks in respect of similar products or services is not permitted.
6. Fan-films and animations – individuals must not create fan films or animations based on our settings and characters. These are only to be created under licence from Games Workshop.
7. Games and apps – individuals must not create computer games or apps based on our characters and settings. These are only to be created under licence from Games Workshop.

Point 5 is wonderfully vague. It could mean that everyone here with a GW-derived avatar is in breach of that.

The point I've bolded in 6 is absurd.

And how does point 7 cover mods for games? Someone makes a mod for Dawn of War and they're in violation of GW's IP rules? Some makes a Space Marine skin for Gary's Mod, and it's all over red rover for them?

The last time GW went to court over their IP they found that they didn't actually own a lot of what they thought they did. I'd hate to see them try and start this gak again. Spots the Space Marine, anyone?

**Malika2**

Spots the Space Marine, anyone?

The term Space Marine will be phased out, replaced for stuff such as Primaris Marines and First Born.

**Hanskrampf**

Typical "Put all this stuff in there, we will check later if we can even do or enforce that".

**WholeHazelNuts**

I think it's a shame about the fan films. I saw this kind of thing generate nothing but ill-will for the Star Trek fan film community when they clamped down on theirs - you had the whole Axanar debacle that generated lots of bad feeling. Compare that to Star Wars fanfilms, where they embrace the fact that people want to celebrate their love for the subject matter and be creative... I think it's just asking for more irritated fans. Shame.

**Wha-Mu-077**

So how long until that is extended to written works and GW tries to sue Fanfiction.net into the ground?

**H.B.M.C.**

Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
So how long until that is extended to written works and GW tries to sue Fanfiction.net into the ground?

Or tries to take down fan wiki pages like Lexicanium.

**Albertorius**

I find the second point kind of hilarious, given what they do themselves

Spoiler:

Oh, but I guess it's OK if it's "homage".

**AllSeeingSkink**

What's changed? I remember years ago GW used to have some IP stuff up on their website and it looked very similar to what's quoted here.

**beast_gts**

Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
So how long until that is extended to written works and GW tries to sue Fanfiction.net into the ground?

From the linked page:

Fan-fiction, hobby books and magazines
Individuals may write their own stories, hobby books and magazines based on our characters and settings, but these must:

not include text, artwork or imagery copied from any official Games Workshop material
be non-commercial, with no money being received or paid. This includes all forms of fundraising activity, and generation of any advertising revenue
not be publicly distributed, except for no-charge digital distribution
make it clear that they are unofficial, without using any Games Workshop logos, and include the word ‘unofficial’ prominently on the front cover
not be prejudicial to the goodwill, reputation or integrity of Games Workshop or its intellectual property

Fan-artwork
Individuals may create their own artwork, drawings and designs, based on our characters and settings, but these must:

not include artwork or imagery copied from any official Games Workshop material
be non-commercial, with no money being received or paid. This includes all forms of fundraising activity, and generation of any advertising revenue
not be publicly distributed, except for no-charge digital distribution
make it clear that they are unofficial, without using any Games Workshop logos
not be prejudicial to the goodwill, reputation or integrity of Games Workshop or its intellectual property

Fan-sites
Individuals may create their own fan sites based on our characters and settings, but these must:

not include text, artwork, imagery, footage or animation copied from any official Games Workshop material
make it clear that they are unofficial, without using any Games Workshop logos
not post or display rules or stats copied from from any official Games Workshop material
not be prejudicial to the goodwill, reputation or integrity of Games Workshop or its intellectual property

**A Town Called Malus**

Albertorius wrote:
I find the second point kind of hilarious, given what they do themselves

Spoiler:

Oh, but I guess it's OK if it's "homage".

It also highlights that they learned nothing from the Chapterhouse suit with regards to how copyright works. It only protects an artistic work from imitation in the same medium as the original work. It is literally the right to copy something, hence the name. Taking something from one medium and transforming it into another is not copying the original, it falls under the derivative work definition.

**kirotheavenger**

I wonder how specific they'll be with "material copied from any official Games Workshop material".
If I write "Death Korps of Krieg" in my fanfic, is that allowed?
What if I include an aquila in my fan art? What if I draw one of those Krieg models? Is that copied?

**Billicus**

Why are they working so hard to undermine their Disney+ service by doing this? The backlash is going to be enormous. It's just plain idiocy

**lord_blackfang**

Sounds worse than Disney. Well, good luck with that.

(3d printer goes brrrr)

**Albertorius**

If this is meant to encourage me to subscribe to W+, well... they're probably not doing a great job.

And if fans are now more afraid of being C&Ded, their visibility is going to go down as well.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

kirotheavenger wrote:
I wonder how specific they'll be with "material copied from any official Games Workshop material".
If I write "Death Korps of Krieg" in my fanfic, is that allowed?
What if I include an aquila in my fan art? What if I draw one of those Krieg models? Is that copied?

Probably.

If you drew the Aquila, not it’s not copied. If you took it from a Gw publication, yes it is copied. At least that’s my guess.

**lord_blackfang**

Maybe they could even try pulling a Green Stuff World and copyright striking channels that review competing miniatures!

**kirotheavenger**

They want to control the whole market for animations.
They don't want people going "why would I spend £5 to watch this when I get similar stuff for free on Youtube?"

**Not Online!!!**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Albertorius wrote:
I find the second point kind of hilarious, given what they do themselves

Spoiler:

Oh, but I guess it's OK if it's "homage".

It also highlights that they learned nothing from the Chapterhouse suit with regards to how copyright works. It only protects an artistic work from imitation in the same medium as the original work. It is literally the right to copy something, hence the name. Taking something from one medium and transforming it into another is not copying the original, it falls under the derivative work definition.

Well, GW is the good guy as we last learned in the thread about an animator, so gw can do no wrong, and its their ip which they absolutely have not stolen bits and pieces all over, nope not at all.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirotheavenger wrote:
They want to control the whole market for animations.
They don't want people going "why would I spend £5 to watch this when I get similar stuff for free on Youtube?"

They want to sanitise the hobby, and monetise everything.

No other company gets away with monetising a balance patch, except GW, and somehow their lazyness should be applauded cue 2 W csm... FOMO, blatant cut content DLC, preorder DLC.. etc.

**NAVARRO**

Hum I wonder If a commission painter on YouTube cannot paint GW minis anymore if he wants to profit from the videos?

**Billicus**

kirotheavenger wrote:
They want to control the whole market for animations.
They don't want people going "why would I spend £5 to watch this when I get similar stuff for free on Youtube?"

A market that wouldn't exist without fan animations on YouTube. It's not like people were clamouring for more after Ultramarines The Movie

**Albertorius**

Also, it's not just animations. This is also clearly aimed to 3d model Patreons, KS and the like.

**Cronch**

i mean, if they want to throttle the golden squig it's their right. Going to war with the fan creators strikes me as dumb, but what do I know.

**kirotheavenger**

The bit about imitation models was already there before. It's only the animation bit that is new (or rather it's moved to "zero tolerance").

A lot of this stuff I'm not sure how legally enforceable it actually is. Unfortunately most people simply don't have the money to stand up to GW, and they've only got more money to bury people in since Chapterhouse, so it doesn't really matter.

**H.B.M.C.**

kirotheavenger wrote:
A lot of this stuff I'm not sure how legally enforceable it actually is.

YouTube doesn't care. This could annihilate channels with little to no way of stopping it.

**Wha-Mu-077**

beast_gts wrote:
Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
So how long until that is extended to written works and GW tries to sue Fanfiction.net into the ground?
From the linked page:

Fan-sites
Individuals may create their own fan sites based on our characters and settings, but these must:

not include text, artwork, imagery, footage or animation copied from any official Games Workshop material
make it clear that they are unofficial, without using any Games Workshop logos
not post or display rules or stats copied from from any official Games Workshop material
not be prejudicial to the goodwill, reputation or integrity of Games Workshop or its intellectual property

So... Lexicanum is now illegal? Given how it uses official images and quotes from official material. 1d4chan is definetly illegal, since in addition to also putting official GW artwork on their pages, the tactics pages usually mentions unit stats and rules.. and I'd say the style is very prejudiced to Games Workshop.

**Sotahullu**

I would have understood if GWs attidude towards fan films/animations would had been "you can use it but you can't profit from it" but total ban on it is just bizarre and stupid.

**Not Online!!!**

IF gw wants to chapterhouse 2.0 itself... again.. I guess we can't stop em.

**Apple fox**

Not Online!!! wrote:
IF gw wants to chapterhouse 2.0 itself... again.. I guess we can't stop em.

Reasonable to think that didn’t really cost them all that much, they are doing great considering. They where able to turn people around on there App easy by just offering a plastic mini.

**Slipspace**

kirotheavenger wrote:
The bit about imitation models was already there before. It's only the animation bit that is new (or rather it's moved to "zero tolerance").

A lot of this stuff I'm not sure how legally enforceable it actually is. Unfortunately most people simply don't have the money to stand up to GW, and they've only got more money to bury people in since Chapterhouse, so it doesn't really matter.

This is pretty standard stuff from a corporate IP policy perspective. The big problem with current IP laws is the principle is often secondary to the ability to pay for legal representation. Combine that with a presumption of guilt from places like YouTube when it comes to DMCA takedowns and too much power is with the large corporations. That said, the guidelines that expand on the bullet points actually seem relatively reasonable. We'll need to see just how far GW are willing to go to enforce these rules. That's where the real test will be.

**Not Online!!!**

Apple fox wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
IF gw wants to chapterhouse 2.0 itself... again.. I guess we can't stop em.

Reasonable to think that didn’t really cost them all that much, they are doing great considering. They where able to turn people around on there App easy by just offering a plastic mini.

Well, gw did foster an isolated environment, which of cours afects spending and purchasing patterns.
Insofar i am not surprised, just a bit disapointed that the community seems to have took the bait ...