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.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:

I am happy to see this debate roll out. I've seen a lot of slightly different views on where to place that line as well as some who want no line at all, and I respect all your opinions. I will admit, I favor GW stuff very heavily. (I would play other games, but no one near plays anything else). But after this conversation, some of you might be convincing me to slack off a little on my view of 3rd party companies. Those of you who took a very hostile stance, or posted rude sarcastic comments, you weren't helpful at all. Insulting somebody in a debate is a definitive way to make sure that won't listen or take into consideration anything you say. but anyways, Thank you all for your time. I'll keep on reading this thread here to see how the conversation goes.

That's actually a really mature position to take - most people, when confronted with argument, entrench themselves in their position. The fact that you're opening up to the idea is pretty impressive.

I think it's admirable that you support the company that produces your hobby - I do, too. I support the companies I wish to succeed, as well. The whole, "put your money where your mouth is".

One thing to think about is that a lot of your favorite sculptors at GW have left GW and sculpt independently, or for other companies. Sometimes those sculptors produce models that you wouldn't have though about ever purchasing before Look at the Perry brothers - amazing sculptors, in and out of GW, and I have no problem with people using Perry historicals in Warhammer - they match stylistically with many Perry GW sculpts anyway!

That brings me to another point... look at this from another angle. I've never had any real desire to own a Chaos/Marauder army... yet Tre Manor, one of my favorite sculptors on the planet, did his Red Box Games Helsvakt kickstarter, and I invested heavily in it. Now I'm basically getting a Chaos/Marauder army. I never in a million years would have bought the models from GW, but because Tre's sculpts are SOO good, I bought them. Now I'll have a Chaos/Marauder army to use in WHFB or Kings of War. Similarly, that's how that CHS Lizard Ogre is - someone could see that and decide, wow, I want those models, and now I want to field an army of models that look like that. They'd never have bought the GW lizardmen, as they are a different style and they didn't appeal to them... but the CHS lizard ogre does. Or maybe another range of miniatures. And as long as you can tell what they are, what's the harm in gaming with him?

I love my GW Praetorians. I love my kilted not-Praetorians from Victoria Lamb. Hopefully they will soon be joined by some Spartan Britannians. When I play Dystopian Legions my mates will let me use my GW and Vic Lamb stuff as Britannians but I wouldn't expect to use my non-GW stuff in my local GW store. Their store...their rules...their product.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:
that is what I'm leaning towards. I know chapterhouse has crossed that line a couple of times, which is why they are in a big legal case right now, and why they always seem to be the example used in these debates.

It always irritates me when people assume that just because someone has filed a lawsuit, the defendant must have done something wrong. I collect data about this all of the time and it is frightening.

Just to be clear, being sued does not mean you did something wrong, and suing someone does not mean you are right. A lawsuit is an accusation only, and the prima facie standard is very, very low. It basically translates to "at first blush."

Like, if I find a small bit of dirt on my couch, I can accuse my dog of breaking the rules and getting on the couch. 'At first blush', this is a reasonable accusation. The dog walks in dirt outside and has a habit of going in and out of the house. The couch has dirt on it, therefore it is plausible that the dirt got on the couch because the dog jumped on it.

This prevents me from making a crazy accusation, like accusing you of stealing my bike when I have never owned a bike in my life, or accusing you of stealing my thoughts with your invisible hypno-disk. However, the standard is that in the absence of any other evidence to the contrary, the case could stand on its own. That is not very difficult to meet, even if you are completely in the wrong.

Maybe I really had dirt on my butt and it was my fault all along. Maybe my dog was inside all day and I did not know that. Maybe I knew it was really me who got the dirt on the couch, but I'd prefer my wife to think it was the dog, and the dog can't really defend itself, so....

Weeble, prima facie doesn't keep you from making stupid allegations, it just stops it from wasting time in court

Nuwisha wrote:
Weeble, prima facie doesn't keep you from making stupid allegations, it just stops it from wasting time in court

Yup, you are correct sir. It does indeed prevent stupid accusations from being entertained by the Court, which effectively bars one from bringing such accusations because they 'fail at the threshold'. So one can technically make whatever accusations one wants, but without a colorable case they don't get in the door. On a practical level, it prevents a stupid case from going anywhere and in theory has the effect of curtailing frivolous litigation.

One question:

No lines. The only problem is to brake TM issues.

When you play D&D, do you use only wizards of the coast miniatures, or mix them with those of other companies? Do you undersatand how you are using a third party miniature, whenever you are using a non Wizards of Coast miniature to play D&D?

Third party miniatures will not hurt the business of big companies like GW, they have enough money to developed better products if faced with real competition.

My stand: If GW is not selling what I want I will buy elsewhere or make it and mold copies of my "original works" for my own use. I am not going to sit around and have someone ask me to wait for a demand they created.

The loyalty to a brand can be heartwarming to the investors.
Copying media like codexes or rulebooks are a big no-no.
Molding a copy of the miniatures are bad as well.
Anything after that is fair game.

They ARE obligated to challenge copyright infringement since their biggest nightmare is their "brand" of anything being determined as "lost trademark status" (look up Saran Wrap) so they do get SOME sympathy from me.

I'm literally fine with whatever - I regularlly cast units and bits.

If it looks good and is painted well, I don't care