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.

 Kanluwen wrote:
While I will certainly agree that White Dwarf is hardly "confidential material", if GW can't even expect a bit of protection for making sure that they get to be the ones who break something first--not some guy who gets a copy we don't know how...that bothers me.

It does sort of seem, though, that this should be an internal security matter for GW to sort out for themselves, rather than a reason to unleash the hounds on people whose 'crime' is ultimately just being interested in the product that GW is selling...

Mohoc wrote:
Faeit DMCA Notice:
http://chillingeffects.org/dmca512c/notice.cgi?NoticeID=928410

Apocalypse40k DMCA Notice:
http://chillingeffects.org/dmca512c/notice.cgi?NoticeID=918221

Edit: Was beaten to it.

Interestingly, my post was merely reverted to a draft. My blog is unaffected. I did take down a few articles that GW could be sensitive too.

Alec

I was on the Hafele website for work related reasons and came across this:

https://hachol02.hafeleonline.com/OA_HTML/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?section=10236&item=28094&sitex=10020:22372:US&HAC_frm=HAC_ibeCCtdLeafSctSsI_txt

It's a "Ultramarine Blue" coat hook

Wonder how long till they get a phone call?

linnear wrote:


Interestingly, my post was merely reverted to a draft. My blog is unaffected. I did take down a few articles that GW could be sensitive too.

Alec

That's the same thing Faeit212 did/had to do the first .. .dunno ... 20 times

January 2013 - http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512c/notice.cgi?NoticeID=786609
October 2012 - http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512c/notice.cgi?NoticeID=668987

I doubt Google will pull the really harsh measures on you until you've got a few strikes against you already.

 Gorlack wrote:
Once again, thank you for a very informative post. People new to this thread should really filter it and read your comments.

My next question is: do you (or anyone) know anything about how the process goes now for the sites affected? I mean, is it hard to get your blogger account opened up again after something like this or? And could there be consequences for any of the affected parties, both BoLS/Faeit but also GW? (except ofcourse loss of visitors and add revenue and general PR trouble - I'm specifically thinking legal trouble).

Can't speak for GW specifically - but in general terms relating to the DMCA process...I can shed a bit of light (though I am not familiar with how Google has chosen to implement the process).

Basically GW sends a takedown request to Google.

Google reads the request and in order to qualify under the Safe Harbor provisions - they take down the offending material (either specific images or in this case, apparently the entire site).

Google then will contact Faeit 212 and tell them they took down the site because of the GW request.

If Faeit tells Google, the use was Fair Use (or the stuff wasn't copyrighted to begin with...which doesn't apply here) then Google will send a letter to GW telling them that Faeit believes the use is allowed under the law.

GW then has around two weeks to file an actual lawsuit in response to Faeit's claims of fair use. If they do not, then Google has to reinstate the removed content.

Now, it is possible that Google might (probably) have a clause in their Blogger terms of use which would allow them to skip on all that paper work and just cancel the account "just 'cuz" - but hopefully they will attempt to live up to things.

Image or video only posts with no text is considered spam, sorry B - MT11

Wow, GW it smells of Fanatism


Down with the IP Offenders!

All the hate yet you continue to buy the models...

Love the drug, hate the dealer

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
All the hate yet you continue to buy the models...

Some people do and some people do not.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
All the hate yet you continue to buy the models...

pah, I don't buy squat, nothing GW, nothing

As an employee, not sure how I feel about this. Seems really harsh. I understand the need to protect your IP but I dont see how this hurts GW.

I've been model-buying free since 2012, I bought the DA codex and have regretted it. Tau isn't getting a cent from me.

I'm looking more and more forward to upcoming releases of Malifaux, Infinity, Blackwater Gulch, Deadzone and Mecha Front... I'm happy I'm kicking the habit.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Wow, GW it smells of Fanatism

The last time I saw a company hammer people this hard for putting out stuff before the "official" press releases was back in the days when Wizkids own MechWarrior. They weren't very good at coding web pages and some of us noticed that we could "guess" URLs that had stuff not yet released. When we started linking to them or posting their content in their (or other fan owned) forums, the BAN-3R Banhammer assault 'mechs quickly came out, guns ablaze. Yea, they were pretty tight about their IP, too. (and look where they are now)

Is the DMCA being abused? Arguably, which is why many people in tech circles have pointed out it's a terrible law for doing what it was actually needed. It's definitely a grey area on the overall scheme, but it seems too much of a stretch for those claims to stand up in a lawsuit. GW's complaints sound much more like a security issue with their printer than with bloggers.

However, I have a feeling the "blog offline" is more Google than GW; after X complaints they get tired of it and you become more trouble than you're worth. See also: why the DMCA kind of sucks; there could easily be 0 wrongdoing, but Google may have decided to pull the plug on TOS grounds just on the chance that there was something awry.*


* - this is pure speculation, all rights reserved. Anyone attempting to duplicate this speculation may face a DMCA notice.

And where is MechWarrior now? Trying to rebuild their fanbase.

http://apocalypse40k.blogspot.com/2013/04/bols-and-faeit212-down-faeit212-out.html

Apocalypse40K is up and running. I just spoke to Larry, did a little research, and posted an article.

Alec

Guess it's time to show your support for your favorite non-GW product.

Well, I didn't have the time to check every *single* post here, apologies if it's already mentioned. But I would like to point this out - a DMCA takedown is NOT proof of infringement. It's a request to remove potentially infringing material that the site owners can choose to act on in order to give themselves "safe harbour" if the material posted by users of the site is later proven to be infringing.

It's very rare for a site to refuse this, but there are lots of cases of the material being restored afterwards. Youtube is also known for taking down perfectly valid requests to remove videos found by software that only tracks music clips, and was being requested to take down by various music companies. ...I should know, I got one of my "offending" videos restored after the fact.

Hello everyone who has commented on this thread.

I cannot confirm that the removal of these sites is because of legal pressure by GW, but that pressure is very definitely real.

I am a minor painter/tournament organizer for GW, and I follow and regularly read blogs such as Faeit 212, Apocalypse 40k, etc. Personally, I love these types of sites, and I gleefully search for every rumor/leak that I can find. I am outraged at the prospect that these blogs will be shut down, because I believe that they are important to a large part of the online community, as well as being a beneficial source of advertising for GW. Heck, I had some kids come into the store earlier in the month that had learned about the hobby exclusively from online blogs like Faeit. I think that this latest up by GW is one that could have been averted with some more actual thought, and, god forbid, an actual interest in the thoughts and opinions of their customers. This being said, I have resigned myself to the fact that the corporate imbeciles running GW either do not recognize the needs of their player base, or more likely, just don't care.

However, when I hear people saying things like "GW is a company of fascist ", and that they won't be giving them any more money, I get pretty aggravated. There are large numbers of people in the upper echelons of GW that do want what's best for the hobby and don't just want to screw over the entire community. After hearing about the more recent lawsuits by Games Workshop, I was talking with someone (I will not reveal his, or her, name, but you will all recognize this person from the pages of white dwarf and the online newsletter), and they share many of the views that have been expressed about the way GW doesn't seem to care for its customer base, past simply taking their money in ever-increasing amounts. What I am trying to say is that the people who are actually involved with the hobby side of things are often of the same opinion as you, and have expressed their own concerns about the ways GW is running things, including things like their crackdown on third party bit makers and blogs. I do understand that they are required to protect their copyrights when faced with repeated infringement, and that what people like Natfka are doing related to leaks and posting images directly from white dwarf is illegal. But I don't think that this calls for GW to completely eradicate these blogs.

I will wait and see how this all turns out, but I expect this type of thing to become increasingly common in the future.

Interesting addition, though I would disagree with his conclusion of GW having standing...especially in the US, because of the journalistic nature and public interest issues related to the infringing material.

If the information regarding Faeit is correct it may be an issue with Google's Blogger demerit system for why it was taken down.

That doesn't actually change the specific underlying issues of GWs heavy handed and out of line use of the DMCA. Unfortunately, it would mean that one of the recipients would have to actually challenge the claims.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
All the hate yet you continue to buy the models...

pah, I don't buy squat, nothing GW, nothing

Ive gotten tempted a few times lately, then found someone elses stuff I like better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Breotan wrote:
Guess it's time to show your support for your favorite non-GW product.

There is a lot of merit in this statement. For about a year now Ive been dabbling in the games make by the "little guys" like Ganesha Games...and Ive found that many are very good. Once someone finally gives other products a fair try, they will find that GW is very, very far from the end-all be-all of gaming.

seems to me that GW sent multiple letters to the site asking for him to stop posting UNRELEASED pictures of the magazine. It would be like if some how someone got a copy of the newest Hunger Game or Game of Thrones book, took copies of it and posted on there blog. Now they had the best intentions in mind. 1) its against the law. 2) he was warned multiple times. I have heard 4 to 20 times (from earlier posts in this thread). GW wants you to spread the photos ITSELF releases on pre-order release day and have no problem if you post those all over your own blog, but when you release photos of COPYRIGHTED material before there time your in the wrong, your even more in the wrong when they have given you multiple warnings to stop. Would you be upset if you spent Hundreds of thousands of dollars developing a product, Hundreds of thousands of dollars more producing the product, and thousands more prepping the item to be released, and suddenly someone scoops you by posting on there site. Well Gw was upset the first time, the second time they got madder......see where I'm going with this. Finally GW said enough and had his cord (internet) yanked.

linnear wrote:
http://apocalypse40k.blogspot.com/2013/04/bols-and-faeit212-down-faeit212-out.html

Apocalypse40K is up and running. I just spoke to Larry, did a little research, and posted an article.

Alec

Huh...

So effectively GW are trying to crush avenues of rumours?

I understand the purpose of them cutting the rumours back, because they want the initial release numbers to be as high as possible because they drop like a brick quickly after but this is fethed, this is adding to their reputation as "Gestapo Workshop". Do they really not realize that attacking harmless fan sites is what toppled other companies in the past?

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
Interesting addition, though I would disagree with his conclusion of GW having standing...especially in the US, because of the journalistic nature and public interest issues related to the infringing material.

If the information regarding Faeit is correct it may be an issue with Google's Blogger demerit system for why it was taken down.

That doesn't actually change the specific underlying issues of GWs heavy handed and out of line use of the DMCA. Unfortunately, it would mean that one of the recipients would have to actually challenge the claims.

Here is the thing though. As a civil lawsuit, it would make no sense for someone like Faeit to challenge GW in court. He doesn't make money of his blog and would have to find pro-bono representation. Somebody like the EFF might be willing to do so, but the out of pocket legal expenses such as filing fees would still make it very expensive for no gain (except to get his blog back up).

tree667 wrote:
seems to me that GW sent multiple letters to the site asking for him to stop posting UNRELEASED pictures of the magazine. It would be like if some how someone got a copy of the newest Hunger Game or Game of Thrones book, took copies of it and posted on there blog.

Not really, it would be like posting the cover or the picture of the book.

If rules and everything was posted then it would be piracy, but as is its just free advertising for a model that no one knows what it does.

actually look at some of the photos, there pages from inside the magazine and the cover the magazine, soooo yes it is the same thing.

tree667 wrote:
seems to me that GW sent multiple letters to the site asking for him to stop posting UNRELEASED pictures of the magazine. It would be like if some how someone got a copy of the newest Hunger Game or Game of Thrones book, took copies of it and posted on there blog. Now they had the best intentions in mind. 1) its against the law. 2) he was warned multiple times. I have heard 4 to 20 times (from earlier posts in this thread). GW wants you to spread the photos ITSELF releases on pre-order release day and have no problem if you post those all over your own blog, but when you release photos of COPYRIGHTED material before there time your in the wrong, your even more in the wrong when they have given you multiple warnings to stop. Would you be upset if you spent Hundreds of thousands of dollars developing a product, Hundreds of thousands of dollars more producing the product, and thousands more prepping the item to be released, and suddenly someone scoops you by posting on there site. Well Gw was upset the first time, the second time they got madder......see where I'm going with this. Finally GW said enough and had his cord (internet) yanked.

All nice and good that you feel that way...but irrelevant. Those issues are issues for GWs internal security and have no bearing on the issues at hand, or any basis in the law.

So, how long until Faeit 213 is launched with the exact same content and the only meaningful result from all of this is that, once again, GW gives themselves bad publicity for abusing the legal system to give themselves "rights" that don't exist in the actual law?

Mohoc wrote:
Here is the thing though. As a civil lawsuit, it would make no sense for someone like Faeit to challenge GW in court. He doesn't make money of his blog and would have to find pro-bono representation. Somebody like the EFF might be willing to do so, but the out of pocket legal expenses such as filing fees would still make it very expensive for no gain (except to get his blog back up).

He could do it as a matter of principle, and it's plausible that he could find someone to take the case for free. The whole DMCA thing is not exactly popular, and there are a lot of people with an interest in fighting back against people who abuse the system to suppress information they don't like.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
All the hate yet you continue to buy the models...

pah, I don't buy squat, nothing GW, nothing

I have to admit I might actually consider buying squats if they were well-designed, interesting, and in plastic.