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.

 Krinsath wrote:
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?

Who cares? There is no obligation, other than the ones specifically given in the law, to respect the desires of an IP owner. The fact that GW didn't want the material released is irrelevant.

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.

Of course I would make every effort to stop you because you would be guilty of various crimes. There's a difference between breaking into someone's property and stealing IP that they had not released and someone getting a copy of a magazine early and posting pictures of it. GW might be able to take action against the person who sold the magazine early, depending on their contracts, but isn't entitled to do anything about the bloggers who re-post the material.

If that's your definition of evil, you live in a very sheltered world.

No, I just don't assume that only the very worst acts can possibly be called "evil". The fact that GW's actions aren't as bad as mass torture and genocide don't change the fact that "evil" is still a very appropriate description.

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).

Or he just can't cover the legal costs (which are not necessarily 100% covered if a lawyer donates their time). Can you really not see the problem with a legal system where people who have lots of money can trample the rights of people who don't and make abusive legal demands that the target can't fight back against because they don't have as much money to spend on lawyers?

 puma713 wrote:
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. . .).

Fair enough. As Mathieu pointed out though most people simply don't care; they just want a game that they can play and has a pretty widespread audience.

A blog got taken down for showing things that GW made before GW released it? Heck, most people would probably think that the law actually allows them to do this (Look no further than this thread on that point). GW wants to hide what they're releasing? Whatever, I didn't pay attention before anyway and just found out what was new at the beginning of the month. Prices go up? So has everything else of late, and GW is still in line with many hobbies. Some random novel got taken down because of trademark infringement? That was dumb, but that novel probably ended up selling more copies than it ever would have otherwise.

And you can find similar "just don't care" arguments for pretty much all the dumb things that GW has done over the past couple years. Some people just can't find it in themselves to get indignant over toy soldiers, and as long as they outnumber the people who go onto forums and get worked up, GW will continue to be bull-headed. However, evangelizing about how awful GW is probably isn't going to win any converts so we just have to decide what to do with our own selves. GW's annual price hikes are probably going to solve the problem for us anyway.

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. . .).

Quoted for truth.

Lots of words passed back and forth, but ultimatley the point of whether the actions of GW is right or not is moot. The law is what it is, you violate it repeatadley what do you think is going to happen?

You and I might not agree with the practice but if your instructed to cease and desist over and over again, and continue to ignore it, then you have to face the consequences. Personally, I believe this was the wrong way to do it, but as a former cop and now GW employee, you violate the law and you suffer the penalty. I think we as a community complain, cry foul, gnashing of teeth and lots of rage; but at the end of the day GW (the info provided) tried to be cool about it. These websites had a chances but chose to ignore, so who really is at fault.

At the end of the day I am already missing the leaks faeit 212 provided, I hope that an alternative arises to continue to provide us info and leaks, within the law.

Jordanandrew249 wrote:
Lots of words passed back and forth, but ultimatley the point of whether the actions of GW is right or not is moot. The law is what it is, you violate it repeatadley what do you think is going to happen?

Apparently not enough words, because you still don't comprehend that what Faeit did was not against the law; what GW did, on the other hand, is.

Jordanandrew249 wrote:
Lots of words passed back and forth, but ultimatley the point of whether the actions of GW is right or not is moot. The law is what it is, you violate it repeatadley what do you think is going to happen?

You and I might not agree with the practice but if your instructed to cease and desist over and over again, and continue to ignore it, then you have to face the consequences. Personally, I believe this was the wrong way to do it, but as a former cop and now GW employee, you violate the law and you suffer the penalty. I think we as a community complain, cry foul, gnashing of teeth and lots of rage; but at the end of the day GW (the info provided) tried to be cool about it. These websites had a chances but chose to ignore, so who really is at fault.

At the end of the day I am already missing the leaks faeit 212 provided, I hope that an alternative arises to continue to provide us info and leaks, within the law.

No laws were broken.

A C&D has no legal basis as a letter and only holds weight following a judges order as the result of a lawsuit.

The only thing which it appears Faeit might have done was violated Google's terms of use by reposting articles without responding to the DMCA complaint.

 Peregrine wrote:


Who cares? There is no obligation, other than the ones specifically given in the law, to respect the desires of an IP owner. The fact that GW didn't want the material released is irrelevant.

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.

Of course I would make every effort to stop you because you would be guilty of various crimes. There's a difference between breaking into someone's property and stealing IP that they had not released and someone getting a copy of a magazine early and posting pictures of it. GW might be able to take action against the person who sold the magazine early, depending on their contracts, but isn't entitled to do anything about the bloggers who re-post the material.

The poorly-written and understood DMCA disagrees with you, hence we are here. I agree in principal that GW is in the wrong, but I also see where natfka isn't flitting about with a halo and wings while strumming a harp.

No, I just don't assume that only the very worst acts can possibly be called "evil". The fact that GW's actions aren't as bad as mass torture and genocide don't change the fact that "evil" is still a very appropriate description.

GW's actions are "Profoundly immoral and malevolent."? Hardly, as we established the morality here is far from clear-cut (legality and morality being completely unrelated at the end of the day). GW didn't want things released, but natfka did anyway knowing this. GW acted much as would be expected, and had acted in the past. They believe they are right, and as the unquestioned rights-holder the burden of proof was shifted to natkfa to prove otherwise. He did (I assume this was the case) and Google decided he was too much trouble, in which case the fault is Google's for deciding to ditch him. The other option is he simply ignored the past DMCA notices in which case he is just as culpable for this happening; just because you think something is baseless/stupid doesn't give you leave to ignore it.

Or he just can't cover the legal costs (which are not necessarily 100% covered if a lawyer donates their time). Can you really not see the problem with a legal system where people who have lots of money can trample the rights of people who don't and make abusive legal demands that the target can't fight back against because they don't have as much money to spend on lawyers?

If such a legal system existed, it'd be the fault of the society who created it and allowed it to persist, not those who worked within its framework. However, that too is over-simplifying. There are plenty of avenues out there if one truly desires to avail themselves of them. Again, the DMCA in particular is a target many entities have an interest in finding a challenger for. If a music pirate who 1) actually knew they stole the songs and was 2) shockingly the right person can get legal representation, natfka probably can too (let's not delve into the RIAA's similarly stupid lawsuit campaign).

Jordanandrew249 wrote:
Lots of words passed back and forth, but ultimatley the point of whether the actions of GW is right or not is moot. The law is what it is, you violate it repeatadley what do you think is going to happen?

You and I might not agree with the practice but if your instructed to cease and desist over and over again, and continue to ignore it, then you have to face the consequences. Personally, I believe this was the wrong way to do it, but as a former cop and now GW employee, you violate the law and you suffer the penalty. I think we as a community complain, cry foul, gnashing of teeth and lots of rage; but at the end of the day GW (the info provided) tried to be cool about it. These websites had a chances but chose to ignore, so who really is at fault.

At the end of the day I am already missing the leaks faeit 212 provided, I hope that an alternative arises to continue to provide us info and leaks, within the law.

Here is the thing though: Natfka was operating within the law. GW send a bunch of DMCA notices that claimed otherwise and Google killed his account. There is nothing ethical in what GW did. Websites like Natfka are news sites protected by copyright law. GW deliberately circumvented this by abusing the "take down first, ask questions later" provision of the DMCA.

so basically from this thread I get.

1) If GW does anything at all to protect it's product, research, ip, sale, shareholders......=BAD

2) if anyone does anything illeagal to GW = Good

I Love Faeit site. Almost every morning I log see whats going on and get giddy once or twice a month about whats coming down the pipeline next. This fact of my enjoyment does not change the fact that he had received multiple warnings to stop posting pictures of scanned white dwarf pages BEFORE the release date of the magazine. Yes some of you will say "but it not a magazine it's an advertisement for there stuff.....guess what EVERYTHING IS AN ADVERTISMENT" ....forums...banner advertisement....tv -commerical advertisements and product placement.....movie advertisements, product placements....radio...advertisement.....hell you can make your house an advertisment.

Btw think of the economic losses a simple picture a couple of weeks could do. It takes month's to design just a single model. they gotta make sure it safe and little timmy's mommy won't think it too bad, focus groups, testing, Multiple goverments to appease there standards..blah blah blah. This cost money. That's even before you make a single one. That's allll rolled into the cost. Now lets take that one picture/video of the leaked eldar I saw a few weeks back. Now some guys in china/arizona/chile/etc etc could study the photo make a copy(or change the size slightly...you know to call it original). well this guys from that one photo/drawing/video just cut out alot of the r/d cost and now makes money on GW back. Now this isn't an attack on chapterhouse or any other company GW has gone after. Just something to think of before you just roll your eyes and saw...pssst GW just being a bully.

This is by far the dumbest thing I have seen Games Workshop do recently. Sure it was overstepping their bounds with Space Marine and Chapter House, but at least you could see why there were trying that, even if you don't agree with the tactic.

This is like they are trying to make people less aware of their own products and squash their (free) marketing. Sure a low quality page from a rule book gets posted, but it isn't the whole book, nor is it high enough quality usually for people to be able to read it in detail. It takes nothing from their sales saves for get people more interested.

I normally find that when a company begins to cannibalize their own fan sites for posting rumors, even leaks, it is usually because the company is panicking for some reason.
I suspect it has something to do with the Chapter House suit and their sales number, but I have been wrong in the past.

tree667 wrote:
so basically from this thread I get.

Hang on, let me get my translator out...

Ah, here we go.

tree667 wrote:
I couldn't be bothered to actually read this thread, so instead I'll post my own opinion that's based on conjecture, stereotypes, and poorly thought out reasoning.

sorry ....infinite_array .....I guess forming an an opposing view isn't allowed. Oh i'm sorry your from phillie....explains everything.

 zedmeister wrote:

 Dez wrote:
BoLS missing too? The Inquisition is real...

Oh no! They'll be coming for DakkaDakka next. Batten down the hatches! Man the Montana bunker! Everybody PANIC!

Already there! LOL!

tree667 wrote:
so basically from this thread I get.

1) If GW does anything at all to protect it's product, research, ip, sale, shareholders......=BAD

2) if anyone does anything illeagal to GW = Good

That's a perfectly reasonable conclusion to reach if you haven't read the thread.

Well done.

How is it people can read this entire thread and after several clear and concise posts about how the use of the DCMA was incorrectly applied still think that GW did everything right and the rest of the forum posters are completely insane to think otherwise? It simply boggles the mind.

 jlong05 wrote:
How is it people can read this entire thread and after several clear and concise posts about how the use of the DCMA was incorrectly applied still think that GW did everything right and the rest of the forum posters are completely insane to think otherwise? It simply boggles the mind.

Pick any or all
1) They only read the posts they agree with
2) They don't understand what they are reading
3) They didn't read anything but the first post
4) GW is always right, even when they are wrong
5) They think this is clear cut, because GW says so

Mohoc wrote:

 jlong05 wrote:
How is it people can read this entire thread and after several clear and concise posts about how the use of the DCMA was incorrectly applied still think that GW did everything right and the rest of the forum posters are completely insane to think otherwise? It simply boggles the mind.

Pick any or all
1) They only read the posts they agree with
2) They don't understand what they are reading
3) They didn't read anything but the first post
4) GW is always right, even when they are wrong
5) They think this is clear cut, because GW says so

All of the above. My favorite answer to multiple choice questions.

ok since some people can't understand what I meant by my first statement.


so after reading every word written by everyone formed by there unbiased views of either parties i have as(S)certained That

1) on a 61.8734% to 38.1266% negative to postive view that Game workshop, when it decides to do anything it see in it best interest and the interest of it stockholder it is deemed as negative action

2) if anyone decides that there allowed to use,copy or take liberties with Games Workshop I.P. then it is deemed that said company is "the man" and it is ok.

 Krinsath wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:


Who cares? There is no obligation, other than the ones specifically given in the law, to respect the desires of an IP owner. The fact that GW didn't want the material released is irrelevant.

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.

Of course I would make every effort to stop you because you would be guilty of various crimes. There's a difference between breaking into someone's property and stealing IP that they had not released and someone getting a copy of a magazine early and posting pictures of it. GW might be able to take action against the person who sold the magazine early, depending on their contracts, but isn't entitled to do anything about the bloggers who re-post the material.

The poorly-written and understood DMCA disagrees with you, hence we are here. I agree in principal that GW is in the wrong, but I also see where natfka isn't flitting about with a halo and wings while strumming a harp.

No, I just don't assume that only the very worst acts can possibly be called "evil". The fact that GW's actions aren't as bad as mass torture and genocide don't change the fact that "evil" is still a very appropriate description.

GW's actions are "Profoundly immoral and malevolent."? Hardly, as we established the morality here is far from clear-cut (legality and morality being completely unrelated at the end of the day). GW didn't want things released, but natfka did anyway knowing this. GW acted much as would be expected, and had acted in the past. They believe they are right, and as the unquestioned rights-holder the burden of proof was shifted to natkfa to prove otherwise. He did (I assume this was the case) and Google decided he was too much trouble, in which case the fault is Google's for deciding to ditch him. The other option is he simply ignored the past DMCA notices in which case he is just as culpable for this happening; just because you think something is baseless/stupid doesn't give you leave to ignore it.

Or he just can't cover the legal costs (which are not necessarily 100% covered if a lawyer donates their time). Can you really not see the problem with a legal system where people who have lots of money can trample the rights of people who don't and make abusive legal demands that the target can't fight back against because they don't have as much money to spend on lawyers?

If such a legal system existed, it'd be the fault of the society who created it and allowed it to persist, not those who worked within its framework. However, that too is over-simplifying. There are plenty of avenues out there if one truly desires to avail themselves of them. Again, the DMCA in particular is a target many entities have an interest in finding a challenger for. If a music pirate who 1) actually knew they stole the songs and was 2) shockingly the right person can get legal representation, natfka probably can too (let's not delve into the RIAA's similarly stupid lawsuit campaign).

Although the DMCA is poorly written - that is not why we have gotten here. We are at this point because large companies know that they can use the legal system and scary sounding documents to scare small companies and individuals to "shut up and color". There is even a term for it which is used quite often...SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation). As I had already mentioned above - the DMCA is actually written (in theory at least) to help prevent SLAPPs and the general chilling effect of DMCA takedown notices (though most people probably will not have read the course work...so let me go ahead and quote things here for simplicity):

(f) Misrepresentations.— Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section—
(1) that material or activity is infringing, or

(2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification,

shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512

Under the DMCA, if a company like GW were to misrepresent the facts and file fraudulent DMCA takedown complaints - a group (individual) like Faeit could say prove it. GW then has to put up or shut up in court. If the court finds that the original filing was fraudulent (as many of the GW takedown orders are and they are clearly examples of fair use as in the OPG v Diebold case) - then the violator who misrepresents the signed and sworn to takedown order has to pay legal fees and related costs of the alleged violator (Faeit).

The problem that we come to is that many people are ignorant to the law. They are ignorant to what steps can be taken. This ignorance is further perpetuated by companies like GW who put up a big legal sounding front regarding things like their claimed trademarks and send out rather intimidating C&D letters (a big difference between a letter and an order). That has a stifling effect on the free exchange of ideas - so much so that other sites...like this very site put terms in place that would prevent someone from posting the same images here that are found on sites like Faeit. That stifling is a very evil thing to do.

That is of course unless you really do think for some reason that what Faeit was doing was not providing news (which several of the supporters of GW in this very thread have stated clearly that they went their looking for news) and thereby not protected use of copyrighted material - regardless of whether or not it was leaked ahead of the release of the White Dwarf (which as I already stated since the images are available online before the magazines ship destroys any claim to financial damages to the sales of White Dwarf - not to mention that the sections in question are presentation of fact and generally not afforded the same level of protection as a creative work...).

tree667 wrote:
so after reading every word written by everyone formed by there unbiased views of either parties i have as(S)certained That

You just stopped being entertaining.

*ignore*

Mohoc wrote:

4) GW is always right, even when they are wrong
5) They think this is clear cut, because GW says so

These should have been the first two.

GW doing something wrong, Heresy! Purge those chaotic buyers! A clean slate is what we need, Exterminatus!

tree667 wrote:
Now some guys in china/arizona/chile/etc etc could study the photo make a copy(or change the size slightly...you know to call it original). well this guys from that one photo/drawing/video just cut out alot of the r/d cost and now makes money on GW back.

Sorry, but that's just nonsense. We're talking about small, often poor-quality, pictures that are leaked shortly before the official release date. So not only will that supposed "guy in China" have no problem getting a copy of those pictures they'll have better pictures (for free) directly from GW's own website. And of course soon after that the "guy in China" will have the actual model which can be used to make the molds for an exact copy. The absolute most anyone could get from it would be a small head start on making their competing model (while GW's product is sitting in the warehouse ready to ship), and that's not even close to a meaningful advantage. Chapterhouse only succeeded because they got started months/years before GW, while GW didn't make any effort to produce models for certain popular units. Arguing that getting WD scans a week early would have the same result just shows your own ignorance of the design and production process.

I never stated GW is doing a good business move, just I understand there actions, big difference

tree667 wrote:
ok since some people can't understand what I meant by my first statement.

2) if anyone decides that there allowed to use,copy or take liberties with Games Workshop I.P. then it is deemed that said company is "the man" and it is ok.

It isn't that we can't understand you - it is that you are wrong. No one was supporting Brian Beal in GW v Beal. He was a recaster and GW was entirely within their rights to pursue their legal position against them. However, that is not the case here. If you read that actual statutes in question, it is clear that Faeit's use of copyrighted material was legal. GW filed the takedown order in a manner which was not consistent with their rights or the law - for really no practical reason at all (really - there is no reason for it...other than someone thinks they should).

In the CHS case, you have a company making compatible parts - not at all illegal and common place with almost every other consumer good you can find.

In the BW case, things are more grey - but there is plenty of meat on that bone as well should you feel that BW was using an idea (which can not be protected) to create a product of their own making.

In the Spots case, GW attempted to make a claim for a long standing and highly generic science fiction term that predates them as a company by some 40 years and 40K as a property by 60 years. Not only that, but it was against an author who is about as far from competition for GW's market as you can get while still writing science fiction.

What you have is people thinking that when GW do dumb things to protect what they claim as their IP - people think it is dumb. If they do smart things to protect what IS their IP, people don't care.

tree667 wrote:
sorry ....infinite_array .....I guess forming an an opposing view isn't allowed. Oh i'm sorry your from phillie....explains everything.

It's not that you can't form an opposing view. It's just that your opposing view is coming from the inside of your own bowels.

And I'm not sure what me being from Philly has to do with anything. It's not like I have a pile of D-batteries stockpiled in case someone needs a good pelting, no siree. Unless you take offense at the way I pronounce water, and that's just a low blow.

tree667 wrote:
I never stated GW is doing a good business move, just I understand there actions, big difference

Except you don't understand their actions. This has nothing to do with paranoia about someone using the WD images to make a competing model, it's about GW's obsessive need to control all information about upcoming products until release day and avoid any chance of potential customers having time to think about their purchases and maybe decide that they don't want to buy it after all. Leaking the WD images means that potential customers have information that isn't under GW's direct control, potentially including criticism of those products.

Ok...breathe. Just saying Games Workshop is acting like a business....a large business. It worried about every piece of it's IP. Anything released early or without a model is a scary thing to them. What happened with chapterhouse was a wake up call for them which forced them change a busy models. Changing business model in a major company is not as easy as saying " you know bob we should ship this package UPS instead of FedEX." It's takes years, changing timetables, designs, production timetables, workshifts, hell down to what time the worker show up and leave. If anything Chapterhouse studio probally saved Games workshop. Now I don't agree that chapterhouse 100% is innocent in there case and that another whole thing, but it causing GW to attack like a GIANT wounded animal. it is lashing out at anything it sees as a threat. There trying to get through this change. Also add on the pressure forums like this add on to it with instant feedback or the fact there is so many other gaming companies out there trying to do the exact same thing Games Workshop does.

Chances are everything we have said in this forum is wrong,right, close all at the same time. Chances are the guy who said google just took the site because of so many letters from GW is probally the guy who wins the prize. I'm just trying to show a different point of view

Hey Peregrine, wanna help me move these goal posts? They look heavy and I don't think tree can do it all by himself.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
A nicely stated and laid out post that's too long to quote

That the DMCA can be used to further something it has safeguards against is simply further evidence that it's a bad law that needs re-working. I strongly believe that naftka should avail himself of these remedies because you never stop bullies by letting them have their way, and bad laws never get fixed if they're not challenged. I would understand if he chose not to, but someone will have to stand up at some point for anything to change.

That said, I also do not view GW's actions as "evil." Unethical I'd agree with all day long, but there is a huge gulf between those terms, and it is there for a reason. To misapply "evil" here serves only to cheapen the word for when its use would be warranted, which does a disservice to all parties. Also, GW is not stifling the exchange of ideas, the people who wrote and educated about the law poorly did that, and they along with those in power that let the travesty continue are far more guilty on a much grander scale than GW could fathom. Again though, to characterize something as evil implies malice to do something immoral, and they set out with good intentions when they wrote the law, as you point out.

We're just getting to see where those paving stones lead...

ok H.B.M.C that actually made me laugh....it an inside joke, thanks I needed a laugh.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
btw peregine I agree a scan from a white dwarf a week ahead isn't going to lead to a gult of models coming. That was more in reference to any leaked item week(s) in advance. You be surpised how much money is spent in corporate security. Doesn't mean that isn't what going on through GW brain.