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.
tree667 wrote: 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.
See previous comments about how things like catalog pages are NOT protected in the same way that the full text of a novel would be.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
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).
While I agree in principle, their is actually a fairly substantial sized group of lawyers who are looking to get involved in a case just like this...and will do so on a pro bono basis. There is basis for filing a countersuit and winning large sums of money for false claims (See OPG v. Diebold). Not to mention lawyers who want to fight this particular fight, or those who are simply interested in checking a box for pro bono hours.
Peregrine wrote: 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.
I think what really adds to GWs bad publicity is that GW have never gone after anyone the same size or bigger (probably cause they steal ideas like no tomorrow but whatever) but instead pick on no name randoms that actually do more in promoting the hobby if anything. Im waiting for GW to sue that guy that made the terminator armour because he makes costumes for money using GW designs.
Rick Priestley said it best:
Bryan always said that if the studio ever had to mix with the manufacturing and sales part of the business it would destroy the studio. And I have to say – he wasn’t wrong there! The modern studio isn’t a studio in the same way; it isn’t a collection of artists and creatives sharing ideas and driving each other on. It’s become the promotions department of a toy company – things move on!
I said it a few months back, "White Dwarf is DEAD"
The ONLY reason for a magazine is......
TO SELL ADVERTISING. PERIOD.
When you sell ZERO ad space, you generate ZERO income.
The fact the GW is trying so hard to hang onto the dying media called PRINT is just sad. Im willing to speculate that the fan based websites are generating more money than WHite Dwarf is and that just burns the guys in corporate.
I'm still surprised how much air time GW (and its antics) get. So glad I dropped buying GW stuff and I figured more people would have done the same by now.
I have a suspicion that almost all of this gak over the last few months is just more to do with the GW legal division getting some sort of autonomy, and since all they care about all this legal nonsense, they don't even bother to stop and think about the consequences to sales and marketing.
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...
I think it might be at this point that GW has caught whiff of the bloggers potentially being part of the internal security problem.
This is just completely speculative on my part, but considering the things which consistently are getting "leaked" relate to White Dwarf or Codices--it might be someone not directly at the company but rather at one of the printers.
I want to say that the plastic Eldar Farseer that we saw recently is one of the few models we've had leaked far in advance and not in a format where the leak is a photo of a photo type situation.
Even if the writer of Faeit worked in the print house GW uses to print the White Dwarf that would not change that the applicationof the DMCA here is invalid. If they believe that they have an internal leak (which they do) they should handle it using internal security methods, not attempt to use the law as a cudgel (else they end up paying out $125k in damages as Diebold did).
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).
While I agree in principle, their is actually a fairly substantial sized group of lawyers who are looking to get involved in a case just like this...and will do so on a pro bono basis. There is basis for filing a countersuit and winning large sums of money for false claims (See OPG v. Diebold). Not to mention lawyers who want to fight this particular fight, or those who are simply interested in checking a box for pro bono hours.
Oh, I don't mean to say (s)he could not find pro bono representation. The question would be for him/her if the whole thing is worth the aggravation, or maybe to just restart the blog on a new service. From personal experience, a lot of lawyers that work pro bono do not cover things such as filing fees, though your mileage may vary. Most of my experience in that regard comes from working with the National Lawyers Guild and political activists.
Sean_OBrien wrote: Even if the writer of Faeit worked in the print house GW uses to print the White Dwarf that would not change that the applicationof the DMCA here is invalid. If they believe that they have an internal leak (which they do) they should handle it using internal security methods, not attempt to use the law as a cudgel (else they end up paying out $125k in damages as Diebold did).
I can agree with this. I think companies end up going kind of heavy handed on leaks and punishing the fanbase/customers more than the leaks personally.
BioWare/EA did this with Mass Effect 3's multiplayer component and it irked me to no end.
Jordanandrew249 wrote: 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.
At least you are honest about being a GW employee. I can respect that.
Adam's Motto: Paint, Create, Play, but above all, have fun. -and for something silly below-
"We are the Ultramodrines, And We Shall Fear No Trolls. bear this USR with pride".
Also, how does one apply to be a member of the Ultramodrines? Are harsh trials involved, ones that would test my faith as a wargamer and resolve as a geek?
You must recite every rule of Dakka Dakka. BACKWARDS.
I just don't understand how people can read this crap and then, in good conscience, go spend money on their products. Every time I look at something GW has produced, I get a sickly feeling in the pit of my stomach and know that there is no way I could support them as a company, no matter how much I love the art or the sculpt.
WH40K Death Guard 5100 pts.
Daemons 3000 pts.
DT:70+S++G+M-B-I--Pw40K90-D++A++/eWD?R++T(D)DM+
28 successful trades in the Dakka Swap Shop! Check out my latest auction here!
Not a lot of people are aware of this. I am the only member of my gaming group that surfs forums. They all plead kids and life, and they just want to play a simple game that they can coax me into assembling/painting the minis for.
GamesWorkshop wrote: And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
The problem with Faeit claiming fair use is that his releasing pictures/scans of what White Dwarf is claiming as a "first look" at new models/rules before the work is published is negatively impacting "the potential market value of the copyrighted work," the copyrighted work in this case being White Dwarf. Using copyrighted material in "news reporting" or "criticism" does not magically give someone free reign to used the material however they see fit.
puma713 wrote: I just don't understand how people can read this crap and then, in good conscience, go spend money on their products. Every time I look at something GW has produced, I get a sickly feeling in the pit of my stomach and know that there is no way I could support them as a company, no matter how much I love the art or the sculpt.
Because GW is simply protecting themselves from the big bad bloggers that wanted to preview their upcoming products. Everyone knows that previews kill excitement for products, so if GW wants to even sell a single box of new High Elves, then everything needs to be taken down until GW releases it.
I don't really comment on it anymore - I don't play GW games or buy GW products - but I have to say, it's semi-sickening seeing the same people cry out against GW's actions, and then 'ooh' and 'aah' over the new releases. Any money you put towards GW models helps to fund actions like these. I suppose we can excuse those who aren't aware of these events, but those of you who are on these forums and know of these events should reflect on what you're helping to support.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/04/30 02:19:10
puma713 wrote: I just don't understand how people can read this crap and then, in good conscience, go spend money on their products. Every time I look at something GW has produced, I get a sickly feeling in the pit of my stomach and know that there is no way I could support them as a company, no matter how much I love the art or the sculpt.
Probably because for most people, life is not black nor white. Is GW wrong? On the letter of the law perhaps, but it can't be argued that Faeit 212 was doing anything other than going against the express wishes of the company who produced the material he was sharing. Is it dumb that GW tries to be so secretive? You can certainly believe so, but it is their right to do as they please with the things they create. This blog intentionally and repeatedly violated that right, and so GW took action. There is a logical cause-and-effect here and while you can argue the technical points of law, and probably find out that GW has no legal leg to stand on outside of a courtroom that's completely irrelevant.
To say that GW is evil, which is what you seem to be implying, for doing stupid things is grossly underestimating what "evil" truly means. GW is heavy-handed, short-sighted and overzealous, but they are looking out for what they perceive to be their best interests and are using legal remedies (again, likely improperly) to do so. This is not a situation where Faeit was taken into the back room and had his kneecaps shattered, nor should it really come as a shock to them if there were as many previous incidents as people have related.
Granted, I agree that people should avoid buying whatever they can from GW, especially directly, to send a message that these behaviors are NOT in their best interest. However to paint the situation as moralistically black-and-white is a bit of an oversimplification. Neither party in this equation are completely angels, just one undertook their actions with far less malice than the other.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/04/30 02:20:02
entropolous wrote: The problem with Faeit claiming fair use is that his releasing pictures/scans of what White Dwarf is claiming as a "first look" at new models/rules before the work is published is negatively impacting "the potential market value of the copyrighted work," the copyrighted work in this case being White Dwarf. Using copyrighted material in "news reporting" or "criticism" does not magically give someone free reign to used the material however they see fit.
But it doesn't have any effect on the market at all, since (supposedly, I don't care enough about WHFB to have read it myself) we're talking about the catalog images, not copies of the entire article text, or the painting guides/special missions/whatever else WD might include. Nobody buys WD to get access to some thumbnail pictures that are worse than what GW's own website offers for free, the sole value of the scans is getting to see what GW is going to release before they make an official announcement.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
This isn't them scanning WD issues into their computers, turning 'em into PDF's, and unleashing them unto the world. It's a few bad iPhone photos of some ultra-dippy flying chariots.
Krinsath wrote: On the letter of the law perhaps, but it can't be argued that Faeit 212 was doing anything other than going against the express wishes of the company who produced the material he was sharing.
So what? If you disagree with GW's decisions you have no obligation to obey their preferences. Just like, for example, I could post quotes from a book by a politician I hate even though their wish is that I don't criticize them.
To say that GW is evil, which is what you seem to be implying, for doing stupid things is grossly underestimating what "evil" truly means.
No, it's an entirely appropriate use of the term 'evil'. They're abusing the legal system to gain IP protection that doesn't exist in the actual law, purely because of their target's inability to afford to defend themselves in court.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
The problem with Faeit claiming fair use is that his releasing pictures/scans of what White Dwarf is claiming as a "first look" at new models/rules before the work is published is negatively impacting "the potential market value of the copyrighted work," the copyrighted work in this case being White Dwarf. Using copyrighted material in "news reporting" or "criticism" does not magically give someone free reign to used the material however they see fit.
All factors are taken into account when determining if something is fair use. The impact on the value of White Dwarf is negligible. At the same time that White Dwarf is released, the same images and information is available in spam folders across the world as well as on the GW website, free of use. If White Dwarf were released earlier than the online images...then they might have grounds to claim that it devalues the White Dwarf magazine...though that isnt the sole factor to determine if it is fair use.
Keep in mind, if I review a product, and say it is utter crap...that would in fact devalue the product. If I use images of one of the wonky GW releases to show that it is a cheap knock off of a Cylon Raider only rather expensive, that would be fair use, regardless of whether or not it cost GW to never sell a knock off Cylon Raider.
Krinsath wrote: On the letter of the law perhaps, but it can't be argued that Faeit 212 was doing anything other than going against the express wishes of the company who produced the material he was sharing.
So what? If you disagree with GW's decisions you have no obligation to obey their preferences. Just like, for example, I could post quotes from a book by a politician I hate even though their wish is that I don't criticize them.
His goal was not to post it as some sort of protest, it was to fill a void in the market that GW (stupidly) created. However, it was at the end of the day a commercial event to drive up his own readership, not an altruistic public service or else he could have easily waited until the White Dwarf was on the shelves, but that doesn't pull in the readers does it?
Was it effective? Sure, and GW have nobody but themselves to blame for creating that void. However, if I decide to go to your house and take some sort of IP from you and share it, I would expect you to in turn use every tool you could possibly use outside of criminal activity to stop me. That's all that has happened here. To paint it as angels versus demons is, as I said, oversimplifying.
To say that GW is evil, which is what you seem to be implying, for doing stupid things is grossly underestimating what "evil" truly means.
No, it's an entirely appropriate use of the term 'evil'. They're abusing the legal system to gain IP protection that doesn't exist in the actual law, purely because of their target's inability to afford to defend themselves in court.
If that's your definition of evil, you live in a very sheltered world. GW has abused a bad law, and in doing so has opened the door to have that bad law challenged. As many have pointed out, there are firms chomping at the bit to go toe-to-toe over this law, and while it would be aggravating and time-consuming, any US-based website would probably benefit from it (assuming GW is, in fact, wrong...obviously if the courts somehow side with them then the whole issue is moot). However, as we established natfka wasn't in this to make the world a better place; he was trying to get people to read his blog. He does not have an inability to defend himself, he likely just wouldn't want the hassle (as is his right, as the legal process isn't known for being fast).
Evil isn't taking advantage of a bad law; that's how bad laws are uncovered and fixed which in the long run is an unquestionably good thing. GW helped take down a blog (as I believe Google actually pulled the trigger on that) and earned themselves a huge helping of ill-will from the people they depend on. That too is self-correcting and will result in a punishment of a sort. Evil is perpetuating human suffering for your own gain. Blood diamonds, for example, are evil. Products made without regard for the fact they will kill their users is evil. Doing something that will intentionally put others in harm's way because it's cheaper for you to do it that way is evil. What GW has done is thoughtless, which is in a whole category below that sort of thing.
puma713 wrote: I just don't understand how people can read this crap and then, in good conscience, go spend money on their products. Every time I look at something GW has produced, I get a sickly feeling in the pit of my stomach and know that there is no way I could support them as a company, no matter how much I love the art or the sculpt.
Probably because for most people, life is not black nor white. Is GW wrong? On the letter of the law perhaps, but it can't be argued that Faeit 212 was doing anything other than going against the express wishes of the company who produced the material he was sharing. Is it dumb that GW tries to be so secretive? You can certainly believe so, but it is their right to do as they please with the things they create. This blog intentionally and repeatedly violated that right, and so GW took action. There is a logical cause-and-effect here and while you can argue the technical points of law, and probably find out that GW has no legal leg to stand on outside of a courtroom that's completely irrelevant.
To say that GW is evil, which is what you seem to be implying, for doing stupid things is grossly underestimating what "evil" truly means. GW is heavy-handed, short-sighted and overzealous, but they are looking out for what they perceive to be their best interests and are using legal remedies (again, likely improperly) to do so. This is not a situation where Faeit was taken into the back room and had his kneecaps shattered, nor should it really come as a shock to them if there were as many previous incidents as people have related.
Granted, I agree that people should avoid buying whatever they can from GW, especially directly, to send a message that these behaviors are NOT in their best interest. However to paint the situation as moralistically black-and-white is a bit of an oversimplification. Neither party in this equation are completely angels, just one undertook their actions with far less malice than the other.
No, I wasn't making a profound statement about GW or their practices (whether they are evil or not, etc.), I was literally confounded by the fact that people will read through the decisions that they're making and still spend money to support the company. If you spend money on their product then, by statement of action, you are supporting these decisions. But if these types of things get under your skin - whether it is a piece of crap cast, a price increase, a snub at your favorite FLGS, or a legal notice that seems petty or unfounded - then think about how you felt when you read about it the next time you pick up that new box of terminators or email your online vendor (because you're not allowed a shopping cart. . .).
WH40K Death Guard 5100 pts.
Daemons 3000 pts.
DT:70+S++G+M-B-I--Pw40K90-D++A++/eWD?R++T(D)DM+
28 successful trades in the Dakka Swap Shop! Check out my latest auction here!
JSF wrote:... this is really quite an audacious move by GW, throwing out any pretext that this is a game and that its customers exist to do anything other than buy their overpriced products for the sake of it. The naked arrogance, greed and contempt for their audience is shocking.
-3500+
-1850+
-2500+
-3500+
--3500+ 
-and for something silly below-
Death Guard 5100 pts.
2000 Pts
