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.

@ Sean. Ya can't talk reason to some of the people in here that I believe are brain dead. Sorry just had a thought run through my mind as logical folk of reason running for their lives as hordes of GW Zombie loyalists shambling forward.

Screaming out phrases like:

"Expensive codex.... Must buy!!!" "GW goooood... Internet baaaad!!!" and also add the obligatory terms in between... "Braaaains" ...Heresy!!!" and "The H-H-Hobby.... The H-H-Hobby!!!!"

Though I do appreciate those people with reason (and of course common sense) in here to shoulder on because they are the ones I listen too.

 Adam LongWalker wrote:
@ Sean. Ya can't talk reason to some of the people in here that I believe are brain dead. Sorry just had a thought run through my mind as logical folk of reason running for their lives as hordes of GW Zombie loyalists shambling forward.

Screaming out phrases like:

"Expensive codex.... Must buy!!!" "GW goooood... Internet baaaad!!!" and also add the obligatory terms in between... "Braaaains" ...Heresy!!!" and "The H-H-Hobby.... The H-H-Hobby!!!!"

Though I do appreciate those people with reason (and of course common sense) in here to shoulder on because they are the ones I listen too.

steals the translator

got it.

you'll listen to anyone who agrees with you and ignore anyone who disagrees.

tree667 wrote:
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

I doubt that Google took the site down because of all the letters (total of I think 5 were linked to here...but lets make that 500 DMCA takedown notices just for giggles).

Each month, Google receives over 12,000,000 DMCA takedown notices. 500 for one site mean nothing to them - especially when it is only one or two a month. What got him in trouble and appears to have gotten his blog account deactivated was ignoring Google's messages and reposting the articles in question. As opposed to ignoring the messages - he should have sent Google a reply, stating - Nope, those images are perfectly legal...I am a journalist and they are news items.

Some interesting stats from Google regarding their DMCA requests... About 57% of them are from companies attempting to stifle competition. Another 37% are not valid copyright claims (such as this one). That leaves only 6% of the requests that actually are somewhat valid - and even those might not stand up to scrutiny.

well only way we'll find out the reason Google took down the site is if faeit tells us.

GW Board of Directors Found Murdered.
GW Stock Leaps 75% on NYSE....

The Auld Grump

@tree 667

Na I'll listen to those people that come up with a solid and reasonable argument or conversation. Better rethink your arguments further and try again.

Otherwise you are fighting a losing battle.

 Adam LongWalker wrote:
@ Sean. Ya can't talk reason to some of the people in here that I believe are brain dead.

Just don't follow blindly. When I remember to - I cite the law and the case law so that others can read for themselves. Sometimes of course, there seems to be a need to chop it up into tiny pieces so that it isn't choked upon.

 Krinsath wrote:

 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...

That ends up being an issue of semantics. The laws are written by lobbyist groups - no doubt the DMCA was formulated by a group who GW supports in one way or another (most corporations donate to slush funds which support their business framework). I don't think they had as large a part as a company like Disney or the RIAA did - but that still doesn't make them innocent.

Even so, if you were to take this and travel into a different realm...say a country where stoning someone for having premarital sex was legal - would that make the stoning evil or just sort of bad? After all - it wouldn't be the fault of the zealot that they through the stone...it is legal after all. No, I say that just because a law is poorly written...it doesn't make it OK to abuse it. Especially given that the sworn statements are demonstrably false to even a first year law student. The end result is a stifling of the free flow of ideas - something which GW chooses to do, not because they are forced to (as they might claim due to a misunderstanding of something like trademark law) but they had to actively choose to seek this out and stifle it. They had to choose to ignore the fair use exemptions that exist for news services. They had to choose to put in place policies that caused a source like Faeit to exist. All of those things make what they are doing more than just unethical. While you might not consider it evil - I consider attempting to control public discussions the highest form of evil.

pretty sure gw on london exchange not NYSE, but I hope not I wanna see GW stock go down in price I wanna buy there stock.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
yea but adam sometime that the best arguement to fight

So, Is BOLS gone forever?
Or will they have to agree to not host the leaked images?

I am not surprised by this at all. I just wish that GW would read some of this and make changes to help the community and themselves. Last week I played in an 1850 tournament, I came in second, but it felt hollow because of the heavy handed and just bad policy's GW has made. All of the players felt this way, the only reason we play at all is the effort we put into our models. If they do not listen to there fans they will fail. We after all, are the ones who drive their company.

actually it looks like Bols might be down for a whole different reason. Honestly there forums are still up, probally be more info on there site there.

Their single minded resolve to crush all advertisement of their products knows no bounds.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, Is BOLS gone forever?
Or will they have to agree to not host the leaked images?

Still up in the air. As others have mentioned - the forum is still up. However, if they had received previous takedown notices and not responded - Google might be placing them in time out for a bit. They may end up looking to make the rebuttal claim of being journalists and protected fair use - which would be a good thing IMO. We won't find out though till he decided to share the outcome and inner details of the goings on between the BoLS blog and Google.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, Is BOLS gone forever?
Or will they have to agree to not host the leaked images?

A reply from Bigred:

Bigred wrote:Hi guys,

A formal heads up.

We are working with Blogger to figure out what's up with the frontpage.

The domain is fine, and the Lounge is (obviously) in fine shape.

We are still proceeding under the impresison that we are dealing with an internal Google IT issue.

We have received no takedown requests, or any emails from any parties regarding any IP related issues.

We are treating this outage as out top priority and working on it round the clock.

I can not speak to the outages of any 3rd party sites, or the timing involved with them.

Thanks and feel free to visit the Lounge even more in the hours ahead.

-Larry

It seems... a little suspicious? Maybe? I dunno. Occam's Razor and all that, but the refusal to speak about Faeit and the 'impression' of it being an internal Google issue doesn't really inspire any confidence.

This is Orwellian level suppression here. If what was posted about journalistic law is true, then GW has no case. Someone needs to call them on this.

well here something I just read on another forum/blog. It seem faeit had pictures of pages of ia12? like 29 of them. I remeber seeing em but not how many pages there were.

Bell of Lost Souls and Faet212 have both gone down. The question is why.

First, this blog, as well as Faeit212, both got Digital Millennium Copyright (DMCA) Act notices served to Google, the host of Blogger, the blogging software we both use. You can see Faet212's DMCA notice here and the Apocalypse40K one, which was filed last week, here.

Now that was the second such notice I know of. Interestingly, when I went to the offending URL the article was not up, but all that happened was the offending article was reverted to draft in my control panel. I then deleted it because, though I find Games Workshop legal overbearing and meglomaniacal, if I step over the IP line, I am happy to comply. And of course, the fact is I am an attorney by training (I don't practice) so I know when they have a case (here) and don't (Chapterhouse mostly).

from Loken of apoc40k

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

Some information you might be interested in.

Alec

Mohoc wrote:

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.

If Natfka was operating within the law, then there would not have been a problem. If gw sent previous request to stop/remove, etc and he didnt, causing a violation of DMCA, a copyright law, and Googles own policies then fault lies with him unfortunately. Im sure the corporate lawyers found all violations to be within the law and Google reviewed before blatantly nuking the sight. If there is some violation on GW and Googles part then it will be dealt with. At the end of the day, everything was done legally as it should to protect copyright, etc. on the other hand, was it the right thing to do? I dont know, I dont believe so but unless you are Natfka, GW and Google legal department then we should probably wait and see whats going to happen. I realize thats not likely to happen.

sooo what everyone drinking as we discuss little plastic men corp. policies?

tree667 wrote:
Stuff

So a fellow on another site says 'I'm a trained attorney and these are the facts' with no back up, and you post that as if it's supporting your point without a doubt, and a fellow on this site posts the exact codes and what not that are relevant to this case, and you don't acknowledge it at all, let alone have it affect your argument?

Also,

tree667 wrote:
well here something I just read on another forum/blog. It seem faeit had pictures of pages of ia12? like 29 of them. I remeber seeing em but not how many pages there were.

That is your least brain hurting sentence I've seen you type so far. Try it like this;

Well here's something I just read on another forum/blog. It seems faeit had pictures of pages of IA12? Like 29 of them. I remember seeing them but not how many pages there were.

It doesn't have to be perfect, just readable. Please.

To chime in, I checked Faeit today before it went down (between noon and 1pm EST) and Natfka had posted about 10-20 images of the High Elves army book.

I understand posting WD pics is one thing, but army book/codex pics is another. Not that I'm taking GW's side, just shining a light on why Faeit is down.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:


That ends up being an issue of semantics. The laws are written by lobbyist groups - no doubt the DMCA was formulated by a group who GW supports in one way or another (most corporations donate to slush funds which support their business framework). I don't think they had as large a part as a company like Disney or the RIAA did - but that still doesn't make them innocent.

Even so, if you were to take this and travel into a different realm...say a country where stoning someone for having premarital sex was legal - would that make the stoning evil or just sort of bad? After all - it wouldn't be the fault of the zealot that they through the stone...it is legal after all. No, I say that just because a law is poorly written...it doesn't make it OK to abuse it. Especially given that the sworn statements are demonstrably false to even a first year law student. The end result is a stifling of the free flow of ideas - something which GW chooses to do, not because they are forced to (as they might claim due to a misunderstanding of something like trademark law) but they had to actively choose to seek this out and stifle it. They had to choose to ignore the fair use exemptions that exist for news services. They had to choose to put in place policies that caused a source like Faeit to exist. All of those things make what they are doing more than just unethical. While you might not consider it evil - I consider attempting to control public discussions the highest form of evil.

Given that murder is generally agreed to be immoral, I would saying stoning someone to death is immoral and therefore evil, even if legal. As I previously said legality and morality are, at the end of the day, separate concepts. One certainly informs the other at the best of times, but they aren't interchangeable terms. A better example would be putting a convicted mass-murderer to death where it's a murky issue on what is and isn't moral, and reasonable people can disagree on that point and many more because life isn't always black-and-white as much as lawyers wish it was. You have your thoughts on why it's immoral and therefore evil; I disagree that there's enough of a moral facet to the case to use that descriptor. GW is using whatever they can get away with to protect their business interests, which many companies do and will continue to do until they are told to stop. Unethical is, in my opinion, the proper term. I think that's where that particular points ends, because we each have our views and have laid out our reasons and I don't see a preponderance of evidence favoring either one of us and it is a debate mainly over semantics. We can agree in principle that GW has done something stupid that they shouldn't have even if we don't agree on the severity,

However, as you point out, the takedown was probably prompted by ignoring DMCA warnings from Google and not directly by GW. This could be plain ignorance of the proper conduct under the law, but if we're going to hold GW accountable then some level of accountability needs to be assigned to Faeit as well since this wasn't their first. I doubt Google would not explain what needed to happen as when you reportedly receive almost 150 million takedown notices annually, I'm pretty sure you know the process and how to explain it.

Also, even if each takedown notice only costs a dollar to process, what a fantastic waste of time and money, and that's just with Google...

ummm motyak ...i know it the cool thing to jump all over what ever I say, but the guy i was quoting there was the owner of one of the 3 sites that went down......going to go with him on this one.

Also I am sorry that my lack of grammer is bothering you, but I'm 3 sheets to the wind and really enjoying it. Have another tim tams (btw really good btw)

Krinsath 524002 5562134 402. wrote:

However, as you point out, the takedown was probably prompted by ignoring DMCA warnings from Google and not directly by GW. This could be plain ignorance of the proper conduct under the law, but if we're going to hold GW accountable then some level of accountability needs to be assigned to Faeit as well since this wasn't their first. I doubt Google would not explain what needed to happen as when you reportedly receive almost 150 million takedown notices annually, I'm pretty sure you know the process and how to explain it.

Also, even if each takedown notice only costs a dollar to process, what a fantastic waste of time and money, and that's just with Google...

Part of the rage right now appears to be everyone up in arms against corporate goons and not looking to see if the victim is innocent or guilty of the declared violations. We tend to forget that there are two parties in the wrong here....three if you want to count Google.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 motyak wrote:

tree667 wrote:
Stuff

So a fellow on another site says 'I'm a trained attorney and these are the facts' with no back up, and you post that as if it's supporting your point without a doubt, and a fellow on this site posts the exact codes and what not that are relevant to this case, and you don't acknowledge it at all, let alone have it affect your argument?

Also,

tree667 wrote:
well here something I just read on another forum/blog. It seem faeit had pictures of pages of ia12? like 29 of them. I remeber seeing em but not how many pages there were.

That is your least brain hurting sentence I've seen you type so far. Try it like this;

Well here's something I just read on another forum/blog. It seems faeit had pictures of pages of IA12? Like 29 of them. I remember seeing them but not how many pages there were.

It doesn't have to be perfect, just readable. Please.

Probably best to leave the character attacks and snarky comments out of this, stay on track with what the thread is about. Its a good thread about who is right and wrong here and i would hate to see mods step in and regulate.

dude its cool, actually he was right my grammer could be better and I agree. He probally didn't realize the quote I made was directly from Loken, who is the owner of the 3rd site that was taken down.

tree667 wrote:
ummm motyak ...i know it the cool thing to jump all over what ever I say, but the guy i was quoting there was the owner of one of the 3 sites that went down......going to go with him on this one.

Also I am sorry that my lack of grammer is bothering you, but I'm 3 sheets to the wind and really enjoying it. Have another tim tams (btw really good btw)

Just because he owns one of the sites doesn't automatically make him legally correct, especially when you haven't a clue as to his reasoning behind it. But I guess there isn't much point discussing this since you are pissed, so...

tree667 wrote:
You be surpised how much money is spent in corporate security. Doesn't mean that isn't what going on through GW brain.

I know that companies have a strong interest in security. GW has every right to attempt to improve their internal security if they're tired of suffering leaks. For example, things they are perfectly entitled to:

*Fire employees who break NDAs or leak information.
*Stop doing business with magazine printers who can't keep copies from leaking.
*Sue their printer for breaking a "no leaks" contract and leaking information.
*Limit access to pre-release material to as few people as possible.
*Put pre-orders up on the website earlier, before WD leaks can happen.

They are NOT entitled to abuse the legal system to silence anyone who posts perfectly legal leaked information just because they didn't want it to happen.

Jordanandrew249 wrote:
If Natfka was operating within the law, then there would not have been a problem.

Nonsense. There is a long and ugly history of companies with lots of money to spend on lawyers abusing the legal system to silence people who are acting entirely within the law but doing something the company doesn't like. "But I'm not doing anything illegal" doesn't protect you unless you can afford to hire your own lawyers and fight the abuse in court.

If gw sent previous request to stop/remove, etc and he didnt, causing a violation of DMCA, a copyright law

That's not how the law works. You only have to take down material as demanded in a DMCA notice if the material is illegal. If you're legally allowed to post the material you have every right to tell the person making the demand to off with their illegitimate demands.

Im sure the corporate lawyers found all violations to be within the law and Google reviewed before blatantly nuking the sight.

That's not how it works. There is clear precedent that content hosts often have a "shoot first, ask questions later" policy when dealing with DMCA notices and will not make any real effort to find out if it's legitimate before taking action.

At the end of the day, everything was done legally as it should to protect copyright, etc.

Except, as stated multiple times already in this thread, the information in question was NOT protected by copyright law and Faeit 212 had every right to post it.

 Krinsath wrote:
Also, even if each takedown notice only costs a dollar to process, what a fantastic waste of time and money, and that's just with Google...

And then some. I know that with my small business we generally had legal fees of $50-75K a year...and that was when we weren't involved in any form of litigation. A company like Google is likely spending more on their legal staff than GW makes in a year.

One thing of note (and a potential path forward for Faeit...should they be listening). Create a blogger.ru account instead of a blogger.com account. GW can huff and puff - but they can not blow your house down...as scene here:

http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512c/notice.cgi?NoticeID=918175 - Huff and Puff

http://www.google.com/#safe=off&hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=Darog%27s+Company:+Imperial+Armour+12%3A+Fall+of+Orpheus+&oq=Darog%27s+Company:+Imperial+Armour+12%3A+Fall+of+Orpheus - Still listen on Google.

http://darogscompany.blogspot.ru/2013/04/imperial-armour-12-fall-of-orpheus.html - And the offending post which is sited in GW's Huff and Puff

(Mods feel free to edit links if you feel that it is outside your comfort zone).

While it isn't the best manner in dealing with issues like this (I would go to the EFF and get them involved...yesterday - especially given that the Guardian article which was linked to in General Discussions was written by an EFF Fellow).

While I am thinking of it - reading the complaints against Apocalypse40K - they might have longer legs than the WD image leaks. In those, it appears (not actually being able to see though) that their were significant number of rules pages photographed. That is not to say that that alone would be enough to break the journalistic application of fair use (after all - you have to mention and show rules before you can critique them) but it would depend on the extent of the rules and how that might further impact the sales of the Forge World book. I say this, because no doubt someone will point to them admitting that GW might have had grounds with them...but there is a big difference between rules pages from a rulebook and pictures of upcoming releases from a magazine.

Well BoLS isn't on 404 anymore. It's got a "This website is temporarily unavailable, please try again later." message.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
but there is a big difference between rules pages from a rulebook and pictures of upcoming releases from a magazine.

Actually, there's a big difference between the two: you can't copyright game rules, period. It would be entirely legal to post the entire rules from IA12, as long as you posted them in your own words.