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.

Ouze wrote:

Hellfury wrote:

Polonius wrote:So, we're going to have a legal discussion amongst a group of people with ( a few exceptions aside) no legal expertise and no access to the relevant facts.

If anybody is curious, I'm going to start a roundtable discussion on Thoracic Surgery in a little bit, as soon as I finish my debate on Byzantine Art...

Just to reiterate Polonius' comments. Worth repeating.

I have no love for GWS and I think CHS makes nice kit. That being said:

I don't have to be a doctor to know rubbing a wound in filth might lead to an infection. Similarly, I don't think you need to be a lawyer to, when presented with, say, a non-Disney site that lists Disney movies by name, including using art from the movie, clicking the links of which lead to non-licensed add-ons, realize you might have a copyright problem.

This page uses 7 pieces GWS artwork (at least one of which might be owned by Relic)). As a layman, I know this might be a problem.

I totally agree, but as a layman, you're pretty much done with your analysis after "There might be a problem." Knowledge of the law and the facts would help determine:
1) How likely legal action by GW is (regardless of merit)
2) how strong GW's claim would be
3) The standard used to determine copyright infringement on 3d sculptures.
4) The extent to which "style" can be protected, if at all

There is probably some case law, if not on miniatures, than on some sort of figurines or toys that would be analagous to the issue.

If Chapterhouse's lawyer advised them that either legal action by GW is unlikely, or any action could be won (at a cost less than crippling the company), than I'm inclined to believe that. Here's why: neither Chapterhouse nor the lawyer have any real reason to lie. If chapterhouse haven't consulted a lawyer, and GW figures out that they could sue successfully, than that's a company down the drain (see statutory penalties). If the lawyer lied or simply was wrong, he's opening himself for a malpractice suit as well as reprisals from his state bar.

aka_mythos wrote: Counterfeiters are breaking the law and thats a different issue. Chapterhouse is not counterfeiting.

I certainly wasn't trying to suggest that they were. It was just an example of GW legal taking their time to take action.

I don't know what happened with enigma or daemonblade, if they were also counterfeiting or what?

Enigma produced a range of miniatures that included some rather shockingly bad models that looked considerably like Space Marines.

Daemonblade had a post-apocalyptic game called 'Shockforce' (the remnants of which you can still sometimes find on eBay) that included, amongst other things, human soldiers that were almost identical to the old metal Cadians, a 'Commissar' model, and an 'Org Atrocitor' that was a more or less direct design copy of the 2nd edition Ork Dreadnought. I believe the Atrocitor was what actually tipped it over the line for them as it was only available for a short time before being pulled from sale and replaced with a differently designed (and quite silly looking) MkII version, and then shortly after that the company folded.

As much as GW not suing is not any indication of their intent to; nor is a company following the demands of a cease and desist an indication of guilt.

Also very true.

redstripe wrote:I'll post what I always post in a thread where folks are trying to crucify Chapterhouse.

Whatever it is that Chapterhouse is doing, if they challenge the fascist idea that GW can dictate how I use their products, then they receive my sound support.

LOL. That's the funniest thing I've heard all day

Fascist? Seriously? I can't believe you actually called them fascists. Although not quite an example of Godwin's Law, I shake my head that you compare Games Workshop to a fascist government like Nazi Germany or Fascisti Italy.

GW has not one iota of interest in how you use their products. They simply want you to buy them. They have not only an interest, but an obligation to their shareholders to ensure that companies like Chapterhouse do not violate their IP.

There is a pall of fear covering this hobby that anyone who challenges GW will be crushed by the weight of their legal department. Games Workshop is a bully, a bully that is terrified that people will realize they're phonies. They are terrified that people will realize that other people can make fantasy and science fiction games and miniatures and make them with far better quality and for far more reasonable prices. They are terrified that people will realize that they can play with whatever miniatures they want in whatever game they want and that GW has no right to dictate how their miniatures are used.

Actually, I mispoke above, THIS is the funniest thing I've heard all day. GW is a company that wants you to buy their products. You make it sound like they're organizing the brown shirts to go burn down the poor independent miniatures company. GW created a compelling background with decent game mechanics supported by a huge miniatures range. There are not that many other sci-fi miniature companies out there that even attempt it although I enjoy Battletech and I used to enjoy Babylon 5.

The continued success of GW despite new games showing up and either dropping off the radar or not significantly affecting GWs market share (Starship Troopers, Heavy Gear, Grear Krieg, etc..) probably means that people prefer GW's product so your jibe about GW being inferior in quality cannot be supported.

They jealously guard their stolen ideas to prevent others from pulling the same hoodwink. GW has made money producing games and miniatures that recreate those scenes in all our favorite sci-fi/fantasy movies and novels, from Aliens, to Terminator, to the tales of Camelot, to The Lord of the Rings. They're posers and they are terrified that their ivory tower rests on an increasingly uncertain foundation.

Third time is the charm, and this part cements your post as the most hilarious today. Congratulations.

GW has acted within the law and legally obtained licenses to produce products like their Judge Dredd game and LOTR. They've produced their own intellectual property and copyrighted it as is their right. Maybe anyone should be allowed to produce boeing 747s because they stole the idea from The Wright Brothers, or I can start producing Iphones because they stole the idea from Alexander Graham Bell. Grow up and calm down.

I don't support all of GW's recent C&D letters, but if you're really that miffed about this then go play your games of 40k using hasslefree minis or CH bitz. No one cares - just don't expect to get into an official GW event. Not being a lawyer, I can't tell if CH actually violates IP - I suspect and hope not. I also support their endeavor because I like their stuff. However, IF CH violates the law with their product, I would expect GW to take action and shut them down.

Those are examples where GW did what they would insist others have done and that is because of the specific nature of what they were making. Yet they get away with using concepts blatantly similar to other media. I bet after Avatar is out GW will have some new Kroot riding flying creatures and Dark Eldar riding panther like warp beasts. That is all perfectly fine, but so is making the type of kits Chapterhouse makes.

There are plenty of companies that make scifi and modern model kits, where other companies come along and make add on specifically for their kits. Common practice is a good guidline for understanding what's acceptable. I realize it isn't the absolute last word, but I think its a good starting point.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Grot 6 wrote:Chapterhouse needs to start branching out into other markets. The writing on the wall is there, WE all can read it.

Personally, after the past month on Dakka, I am really beginning to reconsider my 15 or so year commitments to playing thier game and am debating lightening my life of GW.
Obviously they do not want players anymore. They would rather get thier money by downsizing and hasseling fans, smaller companies, and generally anyone they think they can get a easy doller out of. Is it just me, or do others feel like they are being played for marks over something that is supposed to be a hobby?

Chapterhouse should start doing what others are doing and looking to expand the Superhero miniatures, Wild Weird West/ World War Genere, or other countless other alternatives.

The fact that we are STILL having this conversation would put me into looking to other areas, irregardless of lawyers, and outside distractions.

Models, alternative victorian horror, Sci Fi, Where is the miniatures game for Sanctuary, Dr Who, Primal, Torchwood, or some time traveling games out there?

...
...

Right here...

http://www.drwhominiatures.co.uk/

The reason why Chapterhouse are doing the things they are doing is because GW have created a large market for bits to customise their SM models, which either they do not supply or only at a high price.

As long as Chapterhouse keep their designs sufficiently generic or differentiated from GW designs, there is nothing GW can do to stop them.

So, Chapterhouse... How are those Stargate and Torchwood Minis coming along?


I see Luna is already running with the Clockwork Wolf Idea, How about running it a step further with the City of Heros minis or some of those Thundar the Barbarian sculpts.

Great find, By the way. Guess some of these extra GW guys I have are going to be useful, afterall.

I was thinking about what games we could do... if we went that route...

First thing that came to mind was a space battle game based on the "SciFy" channels space shows..

Sort of a melding of all the ships from Stargate, Battlestar Galactica and Farscape into one universe.

StarShips would be a new thing for us to do, but I thought of some rather unique ideas for 3D battles and maps.

Would it not be cool to have a Go'uld mother ship with fighters vs a Colonial Carrier and Vipers go at it?!

well you would have to change all the name I guess because I'm sure those are all copyrighted as well.

Seriously, with your talent, why don't you come up with something not already licensed?

Who said anything about not licensing it? If we did that I would love to get a licence from the owners and move foward.

Sweet! I would love to see a farscape expanded universe game with leviathan and command ship etc etc.

Kilkrazy wrote:Windows™ is trademarked as a computer operating system.

I can make a boardgame called Windows™, featuring a device which allows the user to open portals in space and time -- nicknamed Windows™ -- and MS can't touch me.

I can also sell a utility add-on for Windows™ (copyright of Microsoft Corporation acknowledged, etc.) and I can advertise it as such.

This is why Chapterhouse are able to sell add-ons for GW's Salamanders.

GW resorted to threatening fans with cancelling Blood Bowl™ v6 if 3rd party companies did not stop advertising star player figures because they do not have a legal basis for stopping those adverts.

Yes - your example works because you're not in the same space as Microsoft. A "Windows" board game would be unlikely to cause confusion in the marketplace, as it's got nothing to do with "Windows" software. However, "Salamanders Space Marine" is the same space.

What I am saying is that I can't make a computer operating system called WIndows.

I can make and sell software for the Windows operating system as long as I make it clear it is not a Microsoft product and it doesn't use any unlicensed code. BY unlicensed code I mean code belonging to MS or another company which I copied without authority. If I can write the whole product in my own code, I don't need any licences.

Same same for Chapterhouse and their shoulder pads.

Hellfury wrote:

Polonius wrote:So, we're going to have a legal discussion amongst a group of people with ( a few exceptions aside) no legal expertise and no access to the relevant facts.

If anybody is curious, I'm going to start a roundtable discussion on Thoracic Surgery in a little bit, as soon as I finish my debate on Byzantine Art...

Just to reiterate Polonius' comments. Worth repeating.

I actually want to participate in the Thoracic Surgery discussion - sometimes knowledge is a burden, and gets in the way of a good wild-ass conjecture post.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

aka_mythos wrote:

kinghammer wrote:Is there a way for you not to list your products as: "salamander pad" or "flesh tearers pad" and still be able to produce your product? Maybe be simple name change is good enough.

Cheers

GW has not copyright on those terms. They are available for anyone to use. If someone came along and said you're neighbor uses the the sceen name "kinghammer" on some other forum, you should change yours, you'd probably laugh. Since GW has no ownership to the names "Flesh tearers" and "Salamanders" it is ridiculous for anyone to change it due to the niche market notoriaty GW has slapped on to some words.

The only thing I'm going to contribute here is the minor (but important) note that a trademark does not have to be registered at the USPTO in order to be a trademark. Just because GW hasn't registered "Salamanders" (relating to toy soldiers & games) doesn't give a third party a free pass to make use of the term. What is does do is limit GW's legal options a bit - they can't file a federal trademark infringement suit, until they register the trademark.

Which they can do at any time.

Janthkin wrote:
I actually want to participate in the Thoracic Surgery discussion - sometimes knowledge is a burden, and gets in the way of a good wild-ass conjecture post.

I'm actually less interested in the whole copyright discussion, then what it has sprouted - this entirely specious argument that unless you have mastered a field, you are not qualified to hold an opinion on it or partake of a discussion. Can anyone explain this... this instinctual appeal to authority; is it just an innate urge to cling to intellectual provinciality?

As I understand it, there was this recent economic tempest in a teapot - this global economic meltdown business - which could have been largely avoided if some of the parties involved had used some common sense, and asked if "this seems like a good idea" rather then blindly listen to the experts who counseled that yes, it is wise financial business to borrow thirty dollars for every dollar you hold. Not that I'm comparing CHS to, say, Bear Stearns, obviously.

Chapterhouse wrote:I believe those pieces of art are created by fans for USE in relics game. Am I wrong in thinking they are fan created and not owned by GW, anyone get me proof please? (If so they will be modified).

I don't think that the fact a fan created the banner is relevant, really... and it's far more likely that Relic would own the rights to any such derivative works then, say, you would. Whether or not a fan drew it, a Blood Raven logo would still belong to GWS... The fact is that you are using GWS's unique logos and marks to sell your own product, without permission.

Ouze wrote:I'm actually less interested in the whole copyright discussion, then what it has sprouted - this entirely specious argument that unless you have mastered a field, you are not qualified to hold an opinion on it or partake of a discussion. Can anyone explain this... this instinctual appeal to authority; is it just an innate urge to cling to intellectual provinciality?

Generally, it's perfectly acceptable for amateurs to discuss whatever they want. The argument you've mentioned does get bandied about on IP issues, but that's largely just because it's such a complicated subject... A lot of what people 'know' about it is wrong, or not the complete story, and people form opinions based on a flawed understanding of how it all actually works.

Ouze wrote:

Janthkin wrote:
I actually want to participate in the Thoracic Surgery discussion - sometimes knowledge is a burden, and gets in the way of a good wild-ass conjecture post.

I'm actually less interested in the whole copyright discussion, then what it has sprouted - this entirely specious argument that unless you have mastered a field, you are not qualified to hold an opinion on it or partake of a discussion. Can anyone explain this... this instinctual appeal to authority; is it just an innate urge to cling to intellectual provinciality?

As I understand it, there was this recent economic tempest in a teapot - this global economic meltdown business - which could have been largely avoided if some of the parties involved had used some common sense, and asked if "this seems like a good idea" rather then blindly listen to the experts who counseled that yes, it is wise financial business to borrow thirty dollars for every dollar you hold. Not that I'm comparing CHS to, say, Bear Stearns, obviously.

well, hold on there. My point, which I think is valid, is that a legal expert in the field has the knowledge to make the best possible prediction of how a court case will turn out (which is most of what lawyers do. Actually trying cases is a pretty small part of it.). Now, those that aren't IP lawyers can still have opinions, but the value, defined as how likely it is that they are correct, will go down the less tehy know about litigation, IP law, or even simple business.

Look at it like this: if you were discussing the NFL, and were trying to guess who will win who will win a game, whose opinion has more value? A long time bookie and oddsmaker? Or a person that watches the super bowl occaisionally but doesn't even know the positions or all the rules?

In a previous post I explained the areas that none of us can really answer. It's not that I'm against discussion, I just think that International Copyright Law is maybe one of those areas I shouldn't give opinions on, because I don't know very much. From what I've seen posted in multiple threads on the topic, not only do many people know far less, they often have wildly incorrect ideas of how it works.

Now, in a discussion on Policy, that is, what IP should be, opinions from the peanut gallery have more value.

As for the economic model, I think the experts were pretty leery about some of the lending, or at least they weren't all unified. You're right, in that when dealing with deeply unpredictable, essentially organic systems (weather, the stock market, etc) having some common sense is probably more valuable in the long run than any model or expert opinion. Law isn't organic though: the whole purpose behind the legal system is justice: that like cases are treated alike. Now, in some areas there are major changes to the law, such as in Constitutional law or Criminal procedure, but for highly statutory areas like IP law the legislated code is kept intact, while the courts generally only provide an FAQ, so to speak.

Because the courts are very unlikely to overturn precedent, and virtually guaranteed not to overturn the law itself on a constitutional claim, there is a predictability to the field. Now, it's still a fact intensive issue, as at the end of it you have to get a jury to decide how much one thing looks like another, but even that can be predicted relatively well by those in the field. Common sense, as valuable as it is, can be wrong. And when it's been wrong for 100 times in a row (as in previous cases), and the outcome of the 101st relies on the outcome of the previous 100 (courts aren't a fair coin), than the value of common sense dwindles rapidly.

It is quick and easy to get up to speed on the basics of IP law by a bit of reading, but hardly anyone does.

Almost no-one in these arguments on Dakka bothers to read the "10 copyright myths" link -- a good entry point to the field compiled by the UK Copyright Office. They don't even know the difference between copyrights, trademarks and patents.

People who can't be bothered to spend a few minutes reading before they enter the argument, can validate their opinion by (in their eyes) invalidating other peoples' with the accusation that, "You are not an expert."

Polonius is quite right that a lot of IP cases only get settled in court because they hinge on the value of relatively small distinctions and arguments. However that does not invalidate laymen's opinions based on obvious points of IP law, such as the distinction between copyright and trademark.

Polonius wrote:So, we're going to have a legal discussion amongst a group of people with ( a few exceptions aside) no legal expertise and no access to the relevant facts.

If anybody is curious, I'm going to start a roundtable discussion on Thoracic Surgery in a little bit, as soon as I finish my debate on Byzantine Art...

I'd lack to wrap into that discussion a debate on the merits of the M & M theory in light of the 2008 financial crisis, and whether or not the use of overnight adjustments by the Fed meaningfully, and inversely, impacts LIBOR rate activities in a positive, or a negative manner.

Please cite examples.

You know frazz, demanding examples is just snobbery and provincialism. My opinion on whatever you're talking about is just as good as anybody else's.

Polonius wrote:You know frazz, demanding examples is just snobbery and provincialism. My opinion on whatever you're talking about is just as good as anybody else's.

You're clearly just a (insert noun here) Fanboy Polonius. You might even be an (insert noun here) lawyer mole.
Mole!

Several things when you discuss byzantine art are we talking eastern roman early era's, or more towards the fall when it was just constantinople(however it is spelled). Personally I am a big fan of what they did with mosiacs and implementing it into their buildings. Also studying upon the facits that their ancestors in roman society had to play upon their culture. Many can argue even that the Byzantine truely was the last of the Roman empire, which can be true to an extent since it was eastern rome.

Now onto what I am going to say... ahhh hemmm.. If under any reason chapterhouse gets sued i for one would be happy to donate money to their legal defence fund. Just hit me up and I will give more then what I can. Would not be tons, but a start. Why you all ask because I am tired of the little guy getting pushed around. I think some major companies forget about when they were small, being as no one starts big. Chapterhouse is putting out a great product, and instead of disscussing that most of you are complaining about IP laws. I for one have little clue about IP laws, and that is why I have EXPENSIVE FREAKING LAWYERS. They worry for me, and make my day a sunnier one for it. Believe it or not I sued GW U.S and won. I recieved a hell of an apology letter from their CEO(well his secratary but you get it), and settled out fo court. If you stand up to them they will back down. BTW fwiw I sued over defimation of character years ago.

Hmmm a defense fund donation, I like it!

With every donation you will recieve a very Limited Edition, "I stuck it to Games Workshop and all I got was this crappy miniature" mini

Chapterhouse wrote:Hmmm a defense fund donation, I like it!

With every donation you will recieve a very Limited Edition, "I stuck it to Games Workshop and all I got was this crappy miniature" mini

WOOT MINI INSTEAD OF A T SHIRT BRILLLIANT!!!!!!!!!!!

Ketara wrote:Haven't we had this discussion multiple times before?
Allow me to summarise the next 5 pages of discussion quickly.

Poster 1: Chapterhouse can do what they like.
Poster 2: Nuh-uh! I just looked at GW's IP page, and they're clearly breaching it!
Poster 3: : Actually, GW's IP page isn't valid on this. They lie about a lot of stuff.
Poster 2: Yeah, but this is blatantly copyright!
Poster 1: Actually, GW copies a load of the their stuff *insert generic chaos star comment*
Poster 4: I don't care that stuff is awesome!
Poster 5: Then how come all the other companies get shut down? Why are they special?
Chapterhouse: Actually, we have a legal fund to set up so we don't have to fold if we get a C&D.
Poster 2: Yeah, but you guys are taking the bread out of the designers mouths! Make your own stuff!
Poster 5: I just read a generic law text that says they can get sued.
Poster 1: : How many times have we had this discussion before?
Poster 6: Too many.
Poster 3: Yeah, but I can point out a problem with that text by quoting a legal case I just looked up on Wikipedia!
Chapterhouse: We actually consulted a lawyer who said we can do this.
Poster 6 You guys do realise you guys are both wrong, right?
Poster 2: Nu-uh! Because this other wikipedia case proves that what they're doing is wrong.
Poster 5: lol, you guys gonna get shut down
Hired Gun 27: You guys are terrible people and are going to get sued by the almighty and righteous GW.
Poster 1: Who let the hired gun in?


And so on ad infinitum.

I vote to be Poster 1. Who wants to be Poster 6?

You're summary is both true and hilarious.

Thank you for giving me a good laugh

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:LOL. That's the funniest thing I've heard all day

Fascist? Seriously? I can't believe you actually called them fascists. Although not quite an example of Godwin's Law, I shake my head that you compare Games Workshop to a fascist government like Nazi Germany or Fascisti Italy.

If I can't be intelligent, at least I can be funny. I'm glad you got a chuckle. Two shows a night, ladies and gentlemen. Tip your waitress.

I didn't say that GW were Nazis. I think it's clear that GW's crusade against fan sites is significantly different than the Holocaust. Just as there are communists who aren't Russian or Chinese (the US senate has "Democratic Communists" in it currently,) there are fascists who aren't Nazis.

1) Games Workshop refers to their games as "The Games Workshop Hobby." (fascists advocate a single-party system)
2) Games Workshop actively denounces contrary opinions to their policies. (There was an article in White Dwarf complaining about and belittling commentary about their company on the internet. I can't find the link but that article was discussed on this site.) (fascists attempt to suppress open critique of their policies.)
3) Games Workshop has expressed on multiple occasions how they intend their products to be used. (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/269279.page) (fascists seek tight constraints on the activities of consumers)
4) Games Workshop opposes natural competition that would be legal in a capitalist economy. (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/269800.page)

Perhaps fascism (the word has strong ties to Nazism) was the wrong word to choose. However, if you find ethical problems with fascism, I believe there are similar ethical issues (though on a much smaller, less genocidal scale) with GW's corporate policies.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
You make it sound like they're organizing the brown shirts to go burn down the poor independent miniatures company.

I think this analogy is very close to the truth. Do lawyers wear brown shirts?

1) Games Workshop refers to their games as "The Games Workshop Hobby." (fascists advocate a single-party system)
2) Games Workshop actively denounces contrary opinions to their policies. (There was an article in White Dwarf complaining about and belittling commentary about their company on the internet. I can't find the link but that article was discussed on this site.) (fascists attempt to suppress open critique of their policies.)
3) Games Workshop has expressed on multiple occasions how they intend their products to be used. (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/269279.page) (fascists seek tight constraints on the activities of consumers)
4) Games Workshop opposes natural competition that would be legal in a capitalist economy. (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/269800.page)

Where's Games Workshop's rejection of class warfare? Where's the emphasis on the struggle between races? The belief in social darwinism? The hope for the recreation of a preexisting empire?

Your analogy is awful. Games Workshop has never said that they're the only wargaming company in existence (nor would this make any sense) they just try to distinguish their games from those of other companies by referring to their products as a hobby by themselves. By your logic Games Workshop are Democrats, because they remain distinct from other left wing parties. And Republicans because they remain distinct from other parties on the right wing. And communists because they're not capitalists, etc.

Games Workshop's article written in their own magazine that disagrees with what other people have said about them is an "attempt to suppress open critique of their policies"? Laughable. We can conclude that Games Workshop are every political part to have ever existed, because every political party to have ever existed has responded to criticisms with defenses of their policy. Apparently they should be silenced because to say their views would be censorship?

The claims that Games Workshop wants to restrict consumer choice and eliminate competition aren't particularly related to fascism. Fascism was economically centrist over all, the things you mentioned are done to a degree by nearly every government on Earth. Both major parties of the United States restrict the choices of consumers and eliminate competition. Hell, Games Workshop's attempts to restrict the choices of consumers don't even have any actual legal weight, they're requests. Do governments merely request that you obey their speed limits?

Wow. Capitalism = Fascism?

who knew?

I think perhaps that analogies of GW to ..to... I can't even bring myself to finish typing that sentence.

ah well..

@ fascist analogies before page 4 though.. I win that bet !

I would suggest that comparisons of Gw and the myriad of atrocaties carried out by real world totalitarian regimes is .. a tad OTT and perhaps best avoided for the continuance of the thread.

Anyway, must get back to polishing my jackboots...

reds8n wrote: I think perhaps that analogies of GW to ..to... I can't even bring myself to finish typing that sentence.

ah well..

@ fascist analogies before page 4 though.. I win that bet !

I would suggest that comparisons of Gw and the myriad of atrocaties carried out by real world totalitarian regimes is .. a tad OTT and perhaps best avoided for the continuance of the thread.

Anyway, must get back to polishing my jackboots...

has anyone seen my SS tabs laying around... Damn it ever since I went capitalist I have missplaced them.. oo well.... We must go forward in the name of the EVIL EMPIRE GW!!!!!

"Don't forget your your gasmasks for when the fishes teargas you!"

"I think you meant, 'facists' dear."

No, those nazi fish are out to get us all!