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.

weeble1000 wrote:

You guys do not understand litigation, do you?

That a plaintiff would ever offer to pay the defendant to get out of a case is incredibly unlikely in any circumstance, regardless of whether or not it would make good sense to do so. Human behavior is often irrational, and litigation tends to make people angry and irrational, especially when one or both parties take it so personally as the parties in this case did.

Nothing changed about who was involved in the case on GW's end. No change of lawyers, no change in management.

We know that GW did just about absolutely the most aggressive thing it could have possibly done given the circumstances. Do you think GW would have telegraphed that it was scared of losing by suddenly shifting its tactics of persuasion?

I certainly don't think so. But if it makes you feel better to think that GW got scared, blinked, and gave Nick a nice, fat check with five zeros on it, go right ahead.

Um, Weeble, actually they removed the counsel that got them into this. For 'reasons unspecified'. Remember?

Also, just a few pages ago, the judge stating that unless GW gave a damn good reason for the freeze, he was unfreezing it.

I do think GW did blink and made some sort of compromise offer. What that offer was, i have no idea. I don't think Nick threw up his hands and quit with at best a few days to go before his assets were unfrozen, since we all know GW's game there was every bit as flimsy as their IP claims.

Surely the point of settling out of court is that it doesn't have to go through the court and be recorded? FOI doesn't apply to private bodies making agreements with each other. I think a private body only has to abide by a FOI if it's on matter involved with a public body or funding.

Maybe weeble1000 can clarify but I though the existence of a settlement was public record even if the terms are not.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:

You guys do not understand litigation, do you?

That a plaintiff would ever offer to pay the defendant to get out of a case is incredibly unlikely in any circumstance, regardless of whether or not it would make good sense to do so. Human behavior is often irrational, and litigation tends to make people angry and irrational, especially when one or both parties take it so personally as the parties in this case did.

Nothing changed about who was involved in the case on GW's end. No change of lawyers, no change in management.

We know that GW did just about absolutely the most aggressive thing it could have possibly done given the circumstances. Do you think GW would have telegraphed that it was scared of losing by suddenly shifting its tactics of persuasion?

I certainly don't think so. But if it makes you feel better to think that GW got scared, blinked, and gave Nick a nice, fat check with five zeros on it, go right ahead.

Um, Weeble, actually they removed the counsel that got them into this. For 'reasons unspecified'. Remember?

Also, just a few pages ago, the judge stating that unless GW gave a damn good reason for the freeze, he was unfreezing it.

I do think GW did blink and made some sort of compromise offer. What that offer was, i have no idea. I don't think Nick threw up his hands and quit with at best a few days to go before his assets were unfrozen, since we all know GW's game there was every bit as flimsy as their IP claims.

Changing in house counsel is not the same as changing outside counsel. And GW simply removed Gill without hiring someone else. Also, you are referring to an implication drawn from the way in which I framed the Court's minute entry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Breotan wrote:
Maybe weeble1000 can clarify but I though the existence of a settlement was public record even if the terms are not.

Yes and no. Mostly a settlement can be inferred from a joint motion to dismiss a case. Sometimes such a motion will mention that the parties were able to reach a settlement, other times it won't. Sometimes various aspects of settlement negotiations will appear in publicly available court filings. For example, the fact that Jonathan Moskin was personally sanctioned for a material misrepresentation made during settlement negotiations in the E & J Gall v Cantine Rallo case is in a publicly available document.

Most of the time settlement negotiations and the specifics of settlement deals are not a matter of public record. There are times, however, when the exigencies of various circumstances can give the public a glimpse behind the curtain, so to speak.

Next windmill for GW, suing the entire country of China for recasting.

 agnosto wrote:
Next windmill for GW, suing the entire country of China for recasting.

Lol, GW aside, if companies in general keep pushing this IP scam, i really see casting and data banks in general moving to China and good luck trying to push this BS ever again.

GW does pursue recasters by going after their websites, when they can. It won't acutally stop the recaster, but it diminishes their ability to reach customers, and demolishes whatever street cred they had built as a recognizable name.

GW shut down LowPriceWarhammer and CoolCastOrNot by contacting/threatening their web hosting providers.

 adamsouza wrote:
GW does pursue recasters by going after their websites, when they can. It won't acutally stop the recaster, but it diminishes their ability to reach customers, and demolishes whatever street cred they had built as a recognizable name.

GW shut down LowPriceWarhammer and CoolCastOrNot by contacting/threatening their web hosting providers.

and bazilion more apeared on aliexpress 2 weeks later.

xxvaderxx wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
GW does pursue recasters by going after their websites, when they can. It won't acutally stop the recaster, but it diminishes their ability to reach customers, and demolishes whatever street cred they had built as a recognizable name.

GW shut down LowPriceWarhammer and CoolCastOrNot by contacting/threatening their web hosting providers.

and bazilion more apeared on aliexpress 2 weeks later.

Yeah, I'd love to see GW sue Alliexpress.

Let's not discuss (at least active) recasters by name here lest we unintentionally send business their way, as this is against Dakka's rules... thanks.

Yaaaaaaay! I found weeble again! I've been sorely lacking in my CH v. GW weeble fix. After everything got shut down over at WS, I didn't think to check here... and lo, there is quite the discussion. I clearly am out of the loop with some of the details, and don't have the time to catch up reading just yet... so sorry if I come off as ignorant...

All I can say is WOW... HOLY gak! First, strong arm tactics by GW would likely have ultimately failed, but the settlement? Why? At that point? What the Hell?

I would have LOVED to be a fly on the wall to see what was up, because you know as well as I this was certainly NO WIN for GW... at all. No matter what anyone thinks or says... This was a Pyrrhic victory at best. the judgment really was paltry, given all of what GW was claiming, and they could have clearly come out even worse after the appeals process, given that there seemed to be a lot of procedural errors IIRC...

But, as you have so clearly articulated, this was damaging on so many levels to GW. I've seen a lot of civil cases, where wheeling and dealing is the cornerstone of what is going on. But, IDK... to jointly settle in this case... You clearly know the players better but...why fold? It makes me wonder if GW really wanted this to go away ASAP and preserve as much as they could. I really think the appeals process could/would have gone poorly for them.

But, its still bs. esp. for the people involved. I'd be pissed. Anything from the firms/people working with him? They upset or on board with this? Do you think the firms that represented him get what they wanted/anything from him settling?

Oh, and Hi everyone (waves). Apparently this is my first post here. I could have sworn I've posted before... Long time Warseer member, there when it was called "portent"... new to Dakka.

I do agree that further litigation, in general, will be a loosing battle for GW.

I think your post (even the question parts) sums up a lot of our feelings here well! I think we'll never know the answer to some of them, but hopefully a trajectory has been altered here.

And welcome to Dakka

 adamsouza wrote:
GW shut down ... CoolCastOrNot by contacting/threatening their web hosting providers.

Hehehehe.

Sure they did...

I hope Nick can pop in and shed some light on the matter or could the settlement cause that he may not talk about any of it?

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
I hope Nick can pop in and shed some light on the matter or could the settlement cause that he may not talk about any of it?

Nick, set up a personal Dakka account.

Post once for: its all groovy baby and twice for: Its great news!

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
At the same time, GW has been making a specific effort to rebrand what they sell from gaming pieces to collector's pieces. That may well be indicating that the next go around they want to try thing out in the UK as opposed to out in the colonies. That alone is enough to make me suspicious of where they might go next. It is a very target rich environment for them - and if CHS made them as upset as they did...I can only imagine how twisted up they must be about any of a dozen companies in their own backyard.

I hope they have a much higher bar to clear on home soil with that regarding copyright/design rights. I think it'll take some amount of logical gymnastics and weasling to get anyone to accept that they are art/collectors pieces when they have rules and points values for a game, whatever they are branded as. If they were to produce busts or pieces that can't be used in a game it'd be a different matter though.

Is Nick the person that has posted under the 'Chapterhouse' profile name in this thread a few times?

The thread covering this on Warseer got shut down? Haha, "this is a forum, BUT, you're not allowed to talk about anything!" Jesus wept...

For my part this whole episode has been a waste of time and effort. There are a few bright points though, Allan Merrits star within GW has dimmed substantially, and the company should now actually have a better grasp of how to protect its IP and prevent episodes like this in the future.

Alternative part makers are still as safe as they ever were, assuming they play it smart and don't try to claim parts of someone elses IP, as they have done for decades before this. I did bring this up at the beginning of this sorry episode, being smarter could have saved CHS all this unwanted hassle. Despite some users bravado, nobody would want their home threatened and I could think of little else worse in this scenario.

On balance, GW legal did need a shake up and some of the directors needed a bloody nose to wake them up to the fact that their assumption of the law was wrong, it's just a pity it has cost so much to do it.

If we weren't interested in plastic crack from GW then most would not be bothered with this, but we are. We need GW to be strong, not a bully but strong so that people who would not necessary be into gaming as a whole get an insight. What other gaming systems out there provides a large stream of potential customers to the niche games we now know and play?

For me personally, I feel that with this case we have all lost a bit. GW being cast, yet again, as the bully because of a legal system that demands action be taken or you loose your rights. The assumption of invulnerability of a small retailer hiding behind a foreign (to main GW) legal system. I understand wholeheartedly that all multinationals have to do this, before anyone starts.

The upshot is that the other parts makers are still being smart and are making themselves an impossible target by marketing themselves reasonably. Every one knows what they are doing, but accepts it because they are not challenging in the manner that CHS did.

You can bet that GW legal is tightening its grip on the IP so this doesn't happen again, and you can bet your bottom dollar that this case has had a big hand in shaping the changes to the release system we currently have. Gone are the days where there are gaps in a codex for modellers to create there own while getting excited over what the official release is going to be like. I miss that, even though it didn't always deliver.

weeble1000 wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
His pro bono counsel may have advised him to settle. They may have felt they got what they needed from the settlement. You say the offer "may" have been abyssmal, or they "may" have thrown him a bone, but it's just a guess like everyone else's. GW's annual report indicated they did not think the litigation was worth continuing, so they could very possibly have made a good offer to get out of it. They did not want to be stuck in this case for next year's report.

Counsel does not advise you to settle. Lawyers simply give you information. It is one of the worst, and most understandable, habits of a lawyer.

The client makes the decision. The lawyer only provides the client with information, and lawyers never tell you that there is a guarantee. It is in a lawyer's interest to be conservative and to not over promise.

Just to clarify, Counsel advises clients on if/when they should settle all the time. It's actually one of the biggest decisions most parties to a claim have, as nearly all cases settle at some point.

The rule is that Lawyers, who are normally allowed to make a lot of binding decisions on behalf of the claimant such as trial strategy, venue, etc., cannot accept or reject a settlement offer. All such offers have to be taken to the client, who has the final say.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
I hope Nick can pop in and shed some light on the matter or could the settlement cause that he may not talk about any of it?

Do not expect Nick to weigh in on this. Settlement NDAs are very common, and usually are bargained for by the parties.

I haven't followed this too closely, but it seems there are a few things that could be swapped in a settlement. You have the $25,000 penalty, you have CHS as an ongoing concern, and you have the legal precedents against GW. In terms of "leverage," while GW was getting quite aggressive in their attempts to reach Nick's personal assets, they were also bleeding money in legal fees for, at most, a mixed bag of results.

My gut is telling me that the biggest piece of info going forward is if CHS resumes operations. If they stay dark, I would bet that Nick walked away with something, as he could point to huge swathes of his product range that he can legally produce and sell in order to come up with the cash. You can fight and delay anything, and $25k is a lot of money, but it's not so much that you'd pull the plug on a reasonably successful ongoing concern over.

In short, my completely blind, shot in the dark guess is that GW did what they should have done at the beginning: bought him out. Now, admittedly, they got him into a position where he was more amenable to sell, but it's still a pretty mild "win" for GW.

 Polonius wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
His pro bono counsel may have advised him to settle. They may have felt they got what they needed from the settlement. You say the offer "may" have been abyssmal, or they "may" have thrown him a bone, but it's just a guess like everyone else's. GW's annual report indicated they did not think the litigation was worth continuing, so they could very possibly have made a good offer to get out of it. They did not want to be stuck in this case for next year's report.

Counsel does not advise you to settle. Lawyers simply give you information. It is one of the worst, and most understandable, habits of a lawyer.

The client makes the decision. The lawyer only provides the client with information, and lawyers never tell you that there is a guarantee. It is in a lawyer's interest to be conservative and to not over promise.

Just to clarify, Counsel advises clients on if/when they should settle all the time. It's actually one of the biggest decisions most parties to a claim have, as nearly all cases settle at some point.

The rule is that Lawyers, who are normally allowed to make a lot of binding decisions on behalf of the claimant such as trial strategy, venue, etc., cannot accept or reject a settlement offer. All such offers have to be taken to the client, who has the final say.

Not to be excessively contrary, but that is not my experience Polonius. I think that our difference of opinion comes down to a definition of "advise."

I have never heard a lawyer say, "you should accept this settlement offer." I have heard lawyers characterize a settlement offer as fair, or reasonable, or explain that a deal is the best that they can work out given the circumstances. I have seen lawyers characterize settlement offers as unreasonable. I have heard lawyers estimate what the fair settlement value for a case probably is.

I have never heard a lawyer advise a client to accept or reject a settlement offer. Now, I work in civil litigation. My pro-bono experience in criminal litigation has suggested that such advisory behavior is more common in criminal cases, but my limited experience with it is related to public defenders railroading defendants into plea deals. I don't think that's a fair characterization of either public defenders in general or the behavior of lawyers writ large.

I'm not saying that lawyers don't give advice. All I am saying is that when lawyers give advice, they tend, in my experience, to provide information that assists a client in making a decision as opposed to recommending a specific course of action, and this behavior is most pronounced with respect to settlement offers. This has often led, again in my experience, to a discernible gulf between what a lawyer says and how a client interprets what the lawyer said. The less sophisticated/experienced the client, the more pronounced the gulf.

I totally expect Nick to be silent now and for us not to hear any more. Not just because of an NDA but because I would imagine he is heartily sick of GW and the horse it rode in on.

I am amazed he kept CHS going and trading as long as he did. I certainly would have folded and sought employment doing something, anything that didn't take me within a 100 miles of GW or anything that stank of it. I know that's not easy with a family to support, I've been there, stuck in a job I hated and made me ill and brought on depression, simply because I had bills to pay. It is a horrible place to be. But, ultimately, now the case is settled he has every incentive to do anything he can to get the putrid stench of GW out of his nose. I imagine that would involve doing something that did not involve. toy soldiers in any way, shape or form.

I for one wish Nick all the best whatever he decides. Sure it sucks we don't know the details, and sure he (may have) let down some folks who batted hard on his side and it is a pity he couldn't have held out for 3 more days, but ultimately I suspect he did what he had to do to survive.

In the end I have nothing but sympathy for the man. He went a whole country mile further than any other small business has done in facing off GW, and it has poisoned his dream, and given him an unbearable level of grief and aggro

 Captain Jack wrote:
For my part this whole episode has been a waste of time and effort. There are a few bright points though, Allan Merrits star within GW has dimmed substantially, and the company should now actually have a better grasp of how to protect its IP and prevent episodes like this in the future.

Alternative part makers are still as safe as they ever were, assuming they play it smart and don't try to claim parts of someone elses IP, as they have done for decades before this. I did bring this up at the beginning of this sorry episode, being smarter could have saved CHS all this unwanted hassle. Despite some users bravado, nobody would want their home threatened and I could think of little else worse in this scenario.

On balance, GW legal did need a shake up and some of the directors needed a bloody nose to wake them up to the fact that their assumption of the law was wrong, it's just a pity it has cost so much to do it.

If we weren't interested in plastic crack from GW then most would not be bothered with this, but we are. We need GW to be strong, not a bully but strong so that people who would not necessary be into gaming as a whole get an insight. What other gaming systems out there provides a large stream of potential customers to the niche games we now know and play?

For me personally, I feel that with this case we have all lost a bit. GW being cast, yet again, as the bully because of a legal system that demands action be taken or you loose your rights. The assumption of invulnerability of a small retailer hiding behind a foreign (to main GW) legal system. I understand wholeheartedly that all multinationals have to do this, before anyone starts.

The upshot is that the other parts makers are still being smart and are making themselves an impossible target by marketing themselves reasonably. Every one knows what they are doing, but accepts it because they are not challenging in the manner that CHS did.

You can bet that GW legal is tightening its grip on the IP so this doesn't happen again, and you can bet your bottom dollar that this case has had a big hand in shaping the changes to the release system we currently have. Gone are the days where there are gaps in a codex for modellers to create there own while getting excited over what the official release is going to be like. I miss that, even though it didn't always deliver.

There is nothing unreasonable with informing customers of the fact that the parts you are making will fit on GW models.

Imagine trying to buy an alternative car part if none of the manufacturers could say what model of car they would fit on. Sound fun?

 Osbad wrote:
I totally expect Nick to be silent now and for us not to hear any more. Not just because of an NDA but because I would imagine he is heartily sick of GW and the horse it rode in on.

I am amazed he kept CHS going and trading as long as he did. I certainly would have folded and sought employment doing something, anything that didn't take me within a 100 miles of GW or anything that stank of it. I know that's not easy with a family to support, I've been there, stuck in a job I hated and made me ill and brought on depression, simply because I had bills to pay. It is a horrible place to be. But, ultimately, now the case is settled he has every incentive to do anything he can to get the putrid stench of GW out of his nose. I imagine that would involve doing something that did not involve. toy soldiers in any way, shape or form.

That's exactly how I feel. After all of this I'm not sure how he can look at an over-sized shoulder pad without feeling physically sick, he has certainly had a lot more fortitude than I could have had in this situation.

Please forgive my total ignorance of the law, but here's a question for people: Why didn't the community rally round and give the CHS guy some cash to see him through the tough times until the appeal was over?

Ok, I'm not familiar with asset freezes, so I don't know if it applied to the business or the individual (or both) but couldn't people have posted money through his letterbox, or gave him food, or started a kickstarter or whatever?

And another thing, If the guy has been battling this for 4 years, then 3 days won't make a difference. Something must have happened behind the scenes...

 agnosto wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
GW does pursue recasters by going after their websites, when they can. It won't acutally stop the recaster, but it diminishes their ability to reach customers, and demolishes whatever street cred they had built as a recognizable name.

GW shut down [REDACTED FOR MOD ] and [REDACTED FOR MOD ] by contacting/threatening their web hosting providers.

and bazilion more apeared on [REDACTED FOR MOD ] 2 weeks later.

Yeah, I'd love to see GW sue [REDACTED FOR MOD ].

What is funny is that while GW goes after small studios like Chapterhouse - which really do not take away any finances from GW, they rarely go after recasters. Yes they go after the small sites, but larger sites, not going to name names, are still up and running. What is even more saddening is that while GW pushes harsher against small businesses like this, and strong arm others, and then continue to essentially raise the price, more and more people I know are going to trusted recasters.

Now is that right - meh I do not know. Will I lie and say I haven't bought from recasters - no - but I kind of feel somewhat bad. On one hand, I love to support businesses and small local hobby stores by buying local or by buying from source (AKA Dropzone Commander from Hawk Wargames) because I agree with their system of business or their product - but the more GW acts this way the more I say "feth it" and just purchase it from somewhere else where it is.... cheaper.

I don't know though, its a grey line. What is funny is that I have heard the arguments saying "well if you purchase from others then duh their going to raise the price..." where as my counterargument is if they promoted better business practices and better community I wouldn't care what the price was in the first place.

Bah but again.... I don't know. New world we gamers live in - its not like the 80's or 90's anymore - god I feel old.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Please forgive my total ignorance of the law, but here's a question for people: Why didn't the community rally round and give the CHS guy some cash to see him through the tough times until the appeal was over?

Ok, I'm not familiar with asset freezes, so I don't know if it applied to the business or the individual (or both) but couldn't people have posted money through his letterbox, or gave him food, or started a kickstarter or whatever?

I think the asset freeze made that pretty much impossible, as even handing him food would need to be declared. He also had no way of paying any bills even if he had cash.

And another thing, If the guy has been battling this for 4 years, then 3 days won't make a difference. Something must have happened behind the scenes...

He was allowed to trade until recently, when the asset freeze left him stuck. 3 days might have been the difference between paying the mortgage final reminder or not.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Captain Jack wrote:
For my part this whole episode has been a waste of time and effort. There are a few bright points though, Allan Merrits star within GW has dimmed substantially, and the company should now actually have a better grasp of how to protect its IP and prevent episodes like this in the future.

Alternative part makers are still as safe as they ever were, assuming they play it smart and don't try to claim parts of someone elses IP, as they have done for decades before this. I did bring this up at the beginning of this sorry episode, being smarter could have saved CHS all this unwanted hassle. Despite some users bravado, nobody would want their home threatened and I could think of little else worse in this scenario.

On balance, GW legal did need a shake up and some of the directors needed a bloody nose to wake them up to the fact that their assumption of the law was wrong, it's just a pity it has cost so much to do it.

If we weren't interested in plastic crack from GW then most would not be bothered with this, but we are. We need GW to be strong, not a bully but strong so that people who would not necessary be into gaming as a whole get an insight. What other gaming systems out there provides a large stream of potential customers to the niche games we now know and play?

For me personally, I feel that with this case we have all lost a bit. GW being cast, yet again, as the bully because of a legal system that demands action be taken or you loose your rights. The assumption of invulnerability of a small retailer hiding behind a foreign (to main GW) legal system. I understand wholeheartedly that all multinationals have to do this, before anyone starts.

The upshot is that the other parts makers are still being smart and are making themselves an impossible target by marketing themselves reasonably. Every one knows what they are doing, but accepts it because they are not challenging in the manner that CHS did.

You can bet that GW legal is tightening its grip on the IP so this doesn't happen again, and you can bet your bottom dollar that this case has had a big hand in shaping the changes to the release system we currently have. Gone are the days where there are gaps in a codex for modellers to create there own while getting excited over what the official release is going to be like. I miss that, even though it didn't always deliver.

There is nothing unreasonable with informing customers of the fact that the parts you are making will fit on GW models.

Imagine trying to buy an alternative car part if none of the manufacturers could say what model of car they would fit on. Sound fun?

You missed my point. The reasonable bits makers, those that use their own naming and nudge nudge wink wink the community are fine. Use the official name before that kit comes and the brown is going to hit the fan.

I'm all for alternative parts makers, as long as they play the game smart.

If anything, I think this case has shown that saying something is "compatible with _______ kit from GW" is acceptable. No "nudge nudge wink wink" required. I think some of the things CHS lost on were whole models (the "not" farseer) but most of the bits were totally fine. The after market car parts industry is a perfect analogy, as another poster above stated (and has been often compared to in this case).

CHS were pretty brazen (they got smarter later and made things clearly "compatible with" but not to be confused with) and imo as Polonius says, likely just got bought out after GW spent a fortune in legal fees trying to squash them. I think this sets a great example (even if only internally at GW, deterring them from legal bullying) and third party bits makers will be quite safe.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING.

Boring boring boring boring.

I wanted to see blood here. GW's blood, to be precise. As it stands now, GW didn't get all the beating they deserved, there is still the prospect of legal battles for everyone who's doing something that might be looking vaguely compatible or related to 40k and chapterhouse did not post a big happy "we're back in buisness" on all forums and their page.

The later is especially telling. If there are some changes to the product range or relabling, you'd have the webpage changed to "hey guys, new webshop content incoming, prepare for awesome!" and some "we're back" everywhere else to stirr up some interest and get people to buy again.
Since they keep quiet, that means GW probably just bought them out of buisness. And while I would not mind having enough money to never work a single day of my life ever again and can not fault anyone from jumping at the possibility, I still find whatever transpired there highly unsatisfactory.

It would be really interesting if he got bought out and becomes the Forgeworld of bitz and mod kits...