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.

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Honest question do they really have a legal dept /laywer on retainer? I thought it was just a group of folks that worked for Merret and sent C&Ds.

Don't they hire out real lawyers to do the actual work when they go to court?

They do have a small internal legal team - as I gather from the legal filings with CHS it seems to be one head and 2 or 3 additional lawyers.

A friend interned at the Burbank Disney legal office - they had at the time somewhere around 150 lawyers on staff at the time (not sure if he was including legal aides/paralegals when he made that comment...I know he was not including all the secretaries and what not though). When Disney was filming Oz, the Great and Powerful - they had a team of 8 lawyers whose job it was just to sit there and watch the filming and make sure they didn't stray into Warner Brothers interpretation of Oz.

 Morachi wrote:
Could this be the beginning of something big? (no pun intended)

I wonder what GW will do now...

Nothing, they are too much of a pussy to go against some one with actual legal teeth like Disney.

Or of course it doesn't matter.

Think about it, everyone will watch ironman 3 and some will search the net/wander down the shops and see terminators a think "wow that's like that big thing in Ironman 3, I wonder what that's all about?" - buys terminators.

Of course it's just as likey they may will say feth that we can't go up against Micky's gang!

it'd be funny if they tried

 Kroothawk wrote:
GW will stay quiet, because Disney can afford to defend the lawsuit and is capable of suing them in return.

Fixed that for you.

 Breotan wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
GW will stay quiet, because Disney can afford to defend the lawsuit and is capable of suing them in return.

Fixed that for you.

ATM all law firms working on IP stand in line to defend against GW pro bono. It is easy on the job training for fresh graduates. Manage the noob level and you get a more serious opponent

 notprop wrote:

Azazelx wrote:GW versus Disney? There'd be nothing left of them.

The reichstag vs the fairy princess's castle. [opens very small bag of popcorn]

But which one is which?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kroothawk wrote:
GW will stay quiet, because the next Marvel movie features Thor against Malekith the Dark Elf King, a concept that GW "borrowed" and made good profit with, without asking for permission

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1050195

Cruella De'ville, Kruella the Vile, she's a lady devil that Kruella da Ville.

 notprop wrote:
Dark Elves were definitely in the original Warhammer Armies book that was out with 3rd edition. So that's what, 1987-88?

They could well have LE been in ravening hordes before then as well. I'm sure I can remember pre-slotta metal based dark elves long prior to that. Where that effects anything I don't know?

Yeah didn't come in till 3rd so no idea about earlier books, I had the Warhammer Armies book at the time, sadly I can only seem to remember the Nippon and Cathay pages, the rest has faded, although I don't seem to recall there being much background for the armies in there.

 notprop wrote:
Dark Elves were definitely in the original Warhammer Armies book that was out with 3rd edition. So that's what, 1987-88?

They could well have LE been in ravening hordes before then as well. I'm sure I can remember pre-slotta metal based dark elves long prior to that. Where that effects anything I don't know?

Night Elves were introduced in the first edition rule book which is 1983.

Dark Elves were introduced in the "Forces in Fantasy" books that were an expansion to first edition and was published in 1984.

Dark Elves were also in the basic rules of 2nd edition which has a publication date of 1984.

I am quite sure of all this because I still have the books.

Miniature wise there were Dark Elves in the first compendium but that doesnt have a date on it, probably someone knows though and it is possible the minis were available much earlier than that compendium.

Dark Elves with Malekith? Or just Dark Elves

It is less about the miniatures existing and more about when GW used the name versus Marvel. Citadel was doing dark elves (drow) as part of the AD&D line they were distributing on behalf of Ral Partha in Europe (would have been 1983 or 1984 on those).

Shortly after that - they did some in house designs which were based on those drow (same style helmets and general aesthetic in terms of armor and weapons). There were witch elves (basically females in full chain with scimitars), sorcerors (or sorcerous...maybe both), some with crossbows and some with a sword and shield in chain.

Around 1988 or 1989 they added some things like the Cold Ones and Bolt Throwers (though I think it was just called a repeating ballista at the time). 1990 or 1991 added a command unit to things - but everything was still built around the design which was made compatible with the Ral Partha Drow still.

In 1995 or 1996, the current flavor of Dark Elf miniatures should have been released. Most the line was redesigned with taller, pointier helmets. They added a bunch of new stuff like the harpies, black dragon and dark Pegasus. The witch elves took off their armor. The dragon had a rider who had a name...it wasn't Malekith though...memory is fading.

I am not too sure still when the first mention of him was though by GW. I know he showed up in the first actual Dark Elf army book - but that was well into the 1990s. I don't recall ever seeing anything significant in White Dwarf about the dark elves throughout the 1980s time period.

Disney could swallow GW whole if it chose. While GW makes sport of harrassing small business over armor designs yet they haven't dared look Disney's way over Buzz Lightyears legs which are nearly identical to Marine armor. GW may be seen as a big fish in the gaming world but they can't hold a candle to the legal power that a company like Disney can muster, anyone that can buy Star Wars outright as a cash deal is a serious force to be reckoned with.

I think it would be hilarious if somebody re-created one of the C&D letters that GW has sent to other small gaming companies, changed around the subject a bit, and then mailed it to Disney on GW's behalf.

I might actually wet myself if that got taken half seriously and made news.

 sourclams wrote:
I think it would be hilarious if somebody re-created one of the C&D letters that GW has sent to other small gaming companies, changed around the subject a bit, and then mailed it to Disney on GW's behalf.

I might actually wet myself if that got taken half seriously and made news.

Probably not a good idea. Also probably not a good idea to send a letter to Disney's licensing department with pictures of GW models and pictures of these comic book characters asking if they are licensed replicas or action figures and asking where you can buy them.

czakk wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
I think it would be hilarious if somebody re-created one of the C&D letters that GW has sent to other small gaming companies, changed around the subject a bit, and then mailed it to Disney on GW's behalf.

I might actually wet myself if that got taken half seriously and made news.

Probably not a good idea. Also probably not a good idea to send a letter to Disney's licensing department with pictures of GW models and pictures of these comic book characters asking if they are licensed replicas or action figures and asking where you can buy them.

Why not? From what I have seen IRL, a lot of these "infractions" are brought to GW's attention by busy-body whiter that white knight kool-aid drinkin' fanbois.

 Grimtuff wrote:

czakk wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
I think it would be hilarious if somebody re-created one of the C&D letters that GW has sent to other small gaming companies, changed around the subject a bit, and then mailed it to Disney on GW's behalf.

I might actually wet myself if that got taken half seriously and made news.

Probably not a good idea. Also probably not a good idea to send a letter to Disney's licensing department with pictures of GW models and pictures of these comic book characters asking if they are licensed replicas or action figures and asking where you can buy them.

Why not? From what I have seen IRL, a lot of these "infractions" are brought to GW's attention by busy-body whiter that white knight kool-aid drinkin' fanbois.

Well now that you mention it, Disney does have a whole special department for this...

We welcome reports of suspected infringement of any of these rights. Please direct reports to us via one of the following methods:

http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/content/disney-antipiracy

Email: tips@disneyantipiracy.com

Voice Mail: 818-560-3300

Mail: The Walt Disney Company
Antipiracy Group
500 South Buena Vista Street
Burbank, California 91521-0644

 Grimtuff wrote:

czakk wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
I think it would be hilarious if somebody re-created one of the C&D letters that GW has sent to other small gaming companies, changed around the subject a bit, and then mailed it to Disney on GW's behalf.

I might actually wet myself if that got taken half seriously and made news.

Probably not a good idea. Also probably not a good idea to send a letter to Disney's licensing department with pictures of GW models and pictures of these comic book characters asking if they are licensed replicas or action figures and asking where you can buy them.

Why not? From what I have seen IRL, a lot of these "infractions" are brought to GW's attention by busy-body whiter that white knight kool-aid drinkin' fanbois.

At least that is how I read what he wrote.

It was intended to be read as tongue in cheek. Next time I'll remember to do an emoticon.


Also, think of the joy and happiness you will provide some young lawyer, who is probably sitting at a desk right now, desperate to bill some hours so that s/he can meet the yearly target and not get fired. Probably has 200k in student debt, a young child to feed, rent due soon... Partners breathing down their neck!

Your letter or email could make their day! Finally, some work to do that isn't document review!

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

czakk wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
I think it would be hilarious if somebody re-created one of the C&D letters that GW has sent to other small gaming companies, changed around the subject a bit, and then mailed it to Disney on GW's behalf.

I might actually wet myself if that got taken half seriously and made news.

Probably not a good idea. Also probably not a good idea to send a letter to Disney's licensing department with pictures of GW models and pictures of these comic book characters asking if they are licensed replicas or action figures and asking where you can buy them.

Why not? From what I have seen IRL, a lot of these "infractions" are brought to GW's attention by busy-body whiter that white knight kool-aid drinkin' fanbois.

At least that is how I read what he wrote.

Me right now.

 Azazelx wrote:
GW versus Disney? There'd be nothing left of them.

You beat me to it!

It would be somewhat amusing though...