Faeit 212 site removed

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.

**Zweischneid**

Timmy149 wrote:
Gorlack wrote:
Timmy149 wrote:

I see what everybody else means by the legality of the image posting. I agree with what you are saying, but I still don't think that GW should have attacked google and Natfka.

What?! When did GW attack google?! Think you have misunderstood the situation here... And besides, since BoLS wasn't taken down by a DMCA act I don't think we can assume that Faeit was either...

GW had a DCMA complaint put through to google. BoLS was unrelated, Faeit was taken down by google following the DCMA.

BoLS was possibly down because the blogger-account (!) of nafta was taken down/locked/whatever. That account had author-permissions to both Faeit212 and BOLS.

Nafta's posts on BoLS no longer link to any active account - http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2013/04/faeits-40k-rumor-tarot-visions-and_28.html

**Ravenous D**

sounds like BOLS decided to throw Faeit to the wolves and pretend like it never happened. Then again, even here on dakka GW strikes down anytime WD pictures are posted. Its gotten to the point where mods ask for people not to repost or link to the pictures without threat of removal.

**FabricatorGeneralMike**

God I love Games Workshop. Just when I think to myself "Self they can't do anything more stupid then their last stunt" I am proven wrong.

Thank you GW legal department for hours upon hours of amusement.

I really do hope Faeit can/does file some kind of response to this legal wise. Best of luck to you.

**Pacific**

tryanotherone wrote:
Copyright or not ... Faeit was actually helping GW by pushing the hype and promoting their products for free.

The way GW is dealing the IP issue just pisses off the fanbase and their customers.

I think this is the point that people keep forgetting .. regardless of what you think about the legal connotations, it's just a crappy way to treat your most fanatical fans.

And do you know what? I don't think GW could give a toss, they have long since gone past the point of caring about what anyone thinks of them.

**Ravenous D**

Pretty much, GW came to the crossroads and had the choice of redemption or becoming evil as feth.

**Orktavius**

Right, cause theft of intellectual property for the sake of seeing the pretty pictures of models a few days early is totally fine.

This is pretty much no different than someone leaking Iron Man 3 online a week before release, just because we REALLY want to see it now doesn't mean we are entitled to. Far as I can tell what they were doing was outright copyright infringement and GW did exactly what it's legal rights allow it to do and asked for it to be removed. This isn't fair use and it isn't protected, it's just plain theft.

**Kroothawk**

It's free advertising for a company that doesn't advertise itself. So GW is basically hunting down all free advertising now.

**brassangel**

Pacific wrote:
tryanotherone wrote:
Copyright or not ... Faeit was actually helping GW by pushing the hype and promoting their products for free.

The way GW is dealing the IP issue just pisses off the fanbase and their customers.

I think this is the point that people keep forgetting .. regardless of what you think about the legal connotations, it's just a crappy way to treat your most fanatical fans.

And do you know what? I don't think GW could give a toss, they have long since gone past the point of caring about what anyone thinks of them.

Fanatical fans? The same ones who have .pdf copies of every codex and spiral-bound Xerox rule books? The ones who don't even buy a codex but instead use Battlescribe? The same people who only eBay for their models, proxy them from another range, and/or give virtually nothing to GW but then ask that GW "throw them a bone" somewhere?

So tuning rules and missions to reflect TO's isn't paying attention to the fanbase? Turning tournaments over to independent organizers isn't listening to the fanbase? Frequent FAQ's isn't listening to fan outcry? How about a new army release per system every month? Reformatting White Dwarf to contain more hobby content than ads doesn't count? No? Ever dealt with customer service? They will remedy and/or replace a faulty product for you faster than most, and genuinely get enthused to help people take interest in the hobby. The in-store employees encourage players to spend most of their time at their FLGS, and use a GW store only for learning, or getting those absolutely hard-to-get pieces. But protecting their IP is a "stunt" that undoes all that and shows they aren't listening?

The fans just have the ability to only pay attention to the negative.

Look, they aren't perfect. They do some things that irritate me, but so does every company on planet earth. EVERY company. Even the top of the customer service heap companies like Amazon, Google, and Apple do things to piss people off and "money grab." Those companies have just become large enough to have more IP in place than someone like GW, so their disputes are virtually unheard of.

**Kroothawk**

So all GW fans are criminals now? Thanks.

**Peregrine**

Orktavius wrote:
Right, cause theft of intellectual property for the sake of seeing the pretty pictures of models a few days early is totally fine.

Actually it is. There's this thing called "fair use" that you should try to understand.

This is pretty much no different than someone leaking Iron Man 3 online a week before release, just because we REALLY want to see it now doesn't mean we are entitled to.

It's absolutely different. Leaking an entire movie damages the value of that movie (why pay to see it in a theater when you can watch it for free without the wait), so it is not covered under "fair use" laws. Leaking the catalog pages from a magazine does not damage the value of the magazine because nobody buys the magazine for the catalog pictures (which GW posts for free on their website), so it passes that aspect of the "fair use" test. The correct analogy would be leaking a legally-obtained copy of the trailer for a movie a few days early as part of an article criticizing how much the movie sucks. It might annoy the copyright holder, but it's fair use.

This isn't fair use and it isn't protected, it's just plain theft.

You might want to go read about what "fair use" means. Posting limited parts of a magazine (which have no financial value) for purposes of comment on an important (for the gaming industry) news event is textbook fair use.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

brassangel wrote:
Even the top of the customer service heap companies like Amazon, Google, and Apple do things to piss people off and "money grab."

There's a difference between a legal but unpopular "money grab" and GW's blatant abuse of the legal system. The criticism here isn't that GW is making the fans unhappy by refusing to release information about new releases, it's that they abused the DMCA system to silence legitimate fair use and claim protection for their IP that exceeds what the law actually grants.

**Medium of Death**

Hopefully this will spur Faeit into getting a proper site up and running. The old one was god awful.

He's also much older than I expected, and doesn't like to post on Dakka apparently...

**Timmy149**

Zweischneid wrote:
Timmy149 wrote:
Gorlack wrote:
Timmy149 wrote:

I see what everybody else means by the legality of the image posting. I agree with what you are saying, but I still don't think that GW should have attacked google and Natfka.

What?! When did GW attack google?! Think you have misunderstood the situation here... And besides, since BoLS wasn't taken down by a DMCA act I don't think we can assume that Faeit was either...

GW had a DCMA complaint put through to google. BoLS was unrelated, Faeit was taken down by google following the DCMA.

BoLS was possibly down because the blogger-account (!) of nafta was taken down/locked/whatever. That account had author-permissions to both Faeit212 and BOLS.

Nafta's posts on BoLS no longer link to any active account - http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2013/04/faeits-40k-rumor-tarot-visions-and_28.html

BoLS went down due to unrelated incidences. their physical server went down at the same time (coincidence, LOL) It's back up now.

**Azreal13**

Orktavius wrote:
Right, cause theft of intellectual property for the sake of seeing the pretty pictures of models a few days early is totally fine.

This is pretty much no different than someone leaking Iron Man 3 online a week before release, just because we REALLY want to see it now doesn't mean we are entitled to. Far as I can tell what they were doing was outright copyright infringement and GW did exactly what it's legal rights allow it to do and asked for it to be removed. This isn't fair use and it isn't protected, it's just plain theft.

"Point, Orktavius"

"Orktavius, Point"

Now you've been introduced, hopefully you won't keep missing each other so easily...

**Kazwulf**

Orktavius wrote:
Right, cause theft of intellectual property for the sake of seeing the pretty pictures of models a few days early is totally fine.

This is pretty much no different than someone leaking Iron Man 3 online a week before release, just because we REALLY want to see it now doesn't mean we are entitled to. Far as I can tell what they were doing was outright copyright infringement and GW did exactly what it's legal rights allow it to do and asked for it to be removed. This isn't fair use and it isn't protected, it's just plain theft.

There is a vast and over-riding difference between leaking a movie online a week before release AND what Faeit212 did, which is basically publishing poor quality photos and second-hand information.

Comparatively, it would be like someone taking photos during filming or publishing a synopsis of the movies plot online - neither of which is illegal and floods every movie blog and news site.

It happens ALL THE FLOGGIN' TIME and most entertainment companies treat it like it is, which is free advertisement which builds energy in the fan-base.

Going after blogs like Faeit212 is just another in a string of horrible business decisions by Games-Workshop ...

I think the argument that has been made time-and-time again, across our entire online hobby space is incredibly poignant and especially valid at times like these -- any idiot worth two-pence could do a better job of running this company, and being a stockholder (not much, mind you) I think it is high-time those governing the company were replaced, en mass.

If only we had £640 million quid we could make it happen ...

EDIT: I accidentally a word ...

**Adam LongWalker**

Getting close to 2 years that I have commented about GW's revenue streaming process and its effects.

Front line gaming has written an article about his opinions concerning most recent GW's actions. I suggest you read it to get an idea what "vertical Integration" is about. I consider this a response from GW to their failures in competing at the current economic climate.

http://thefrontlinegamer.blogspot.com/2013/05/how-can-you-tell-when-business-is-in.html

It's all about control. From manufacturing to distribution, it is all about control. The need to do this is IMHO is that loss of their customer base by their actions since 2006.

Another thing. I am going to cut and paste a comment made on Frontline's article as it continues the current business trend coming from GW.

BLACKHAND1 May 2013 20:37

Hey Frontline, Another smallish GW douche move that people may not be aware of....

I work at a bookstore in New Zealand, because I also help to run the local gaming club I stock White Dwarf, Fantasy Flight's Relic and other gaming related product(ignore the fact that we get White Dwarf two months later than GW stockists, its not worth arguing over) For the last 2 years we have been stocking Black Library titles, buying them through Penguin books. We have two entire shelves of books ( a lot for a Sci-Fi series in a small shop believe me)and a small but dedicated audience who salivate for the latest title. Two weeks ago I received an email from Penguin advising me that as of May 30th Penguin has lost the rights to distribute Black Library titles and in order to stock these titles we would have to open a Black Library Trade Account. As of today I have received no information on how to open such an account and tbh I have no intention of looking into it, if their terms are anything like the terms for Independent stockists of GW models then we will not be interested.

I can only shake my head at this point as it is more of the same foot shooting that GW has been doing for the 7 years I have been in the hobby but the real kicker? Of the 10 odd customers who regularly peruse the shelves for Black Library only 2 actually play the game! The rest of them will never set foot in out towns model shop (that only ever carries one copy of the latest title and never restocks) and so will JUST STOP BUYING BLACK LIBRARY. Anyways, what can you do? If they are determined to do this to themselves how can we stop it, and do we even want to?

Can someone verify this to be the case? Thanks.

**Janthkin**

Peregrine wrote:
[You might want to go read about what "fair use" means. Posting limited parts of a magazine (which have no financial value) for purposes of comment on an important (for the gaming industry) news event is textbook fair use.

"Textbook" fair use? Hardly. This isn't YMDC, and "fair use" is almost always a fact-based issue in copyright disputes; it's not nearly as clear-cut as you keep trying to portray it.

**Ravenous D**

Adam LongWalker wrote:
Getting close to 2 years that I have commented about GW's revenue streaming process and its effects.

Front line gaming has written an article about his opinions concerning most recent GW's actions. I suggest you read it to get an idea what "vertical Integration" is about. I consider this a response from GW to their failures in competing at the current economic climate.

http://thefrontlinegamer.blogspot.com/2013/05/how-can-you-tell-when-business-is-in.html

It's all about control. From manufacturing to distribution, it is all about control. The need to do this is IMHO is that loss of their customer base by their actions since 2006.

Another thing. I am going to cut and paste a comment made on Frontline's article as it continues the current business trend coming from GW.

BLACKHAND1 May 2013 20:37

Hey Frontline, Another smallish GW douche move that people may not be aware of....

I work at a bookstore in New Zealand, because I also help to run the local gaming club I stock White Dwarf, Fantasy Flight's Relic and other gaming related product(ignore the fact that we get White Dwarf two months later than GW stockists, its not worth arguing over) For the last 2 years we have been stocking Black Library titles, buying them through Penguin books. We have two entire shelves of books ( a lot for a Sci-Fi series in a small shop believe me)and a small but dedicated audience who salivate for the latest title. Two weeks ago I received an email from Penguin advising me that as of May 30th Penguin has lost the rights to distribute Black Library titles and in order to stock these titles we would have to open a Black Library Trade Account. As of today I have received no information on how to open such an account and tbh I have no intention of looking into it, if their terms are anything like the terms for Independent stockists of GW models then we will not be interested.

I can only shake my head at this point as it is more of the same foot shooting that GW has been doing for the 7 years I have been in the hobby but the real kicker? Of the 10 odd customers who regularly peruse the shelves for Black Library only 2 actually play the game! The rest of them will never set foot in out towns model shop (that only ever carries one copy of the latest title and never restocks) and so will JUST STOP BUYING BLACK LIBRARY. Anyways, what can you do? If they are determined to do this to themselves how can we stop it, and do we even want to?

Can someone verify this to be the case? Thanks.

Chapters indigo here in Canada has cut their shelf space in half for BL at 3 of the stores I visit. Means they are either doing crappy or GW is being a bunch of piss pots

**Peregrine**

Janthkin wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
[You might want to go read about what "fair use" means. Posting limited parts of a magazine (which have no financial value) for purposes of comment on an important (for the gaming industry) news event is textbook fair use.
"Textbook" fair use? Hardly. This isn't YMDC, and "fair use" is almost always a fact-based issue in copyright disputes; it's not nearly as clear-cut as you keep trying to portray it.

It really is. Look at the laws for fair use. The US laws give four things to consider:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

Faeit 212's posts were done for journalistic purposes, with no commercial gain. Using portions of copyrighted material that is relevant to a news article for purposes of commenting on it is textbook fair use.

the nature of the copyrighted work;

The WD pages that were posted were a catalog, not really a creative work. Copyright protects the expression of an idea, not mere facts, and it isn't really plausible to claim that the exact layout of the product pictures and price list has any creative merit.

the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

The posted pages were only a small part of the magazine by page count, and a negligible part of the magazine in terms of its actual content. The "heart" of the magazine, the articles/painting guides/etc, was not posted at all.

the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The posted material is also available, for free, on GW's own website, so the effect is nonexistent.

So yes, it has to be settled in court to be 100% sure, but Faeit 212's use of copyrighted material passes all of the tests without any real room for debate.

**cowen70**

That is just slowed. I spend a fortune on GW's products and I used to love Faeit 212, it got me worked up and excited and was a good/the best place to look for upcoming stuff since GW has a slowed Apple like policy of keeping people guessing which creates the appetite for stuff like Faeit 212. With the difference I guess that Apple actually bought a clue and realises that the rumour mill is good for business and not bad.

**nkelsch**

Peregrine wrote:

So yes, it has to be settled in court to be 100% sure, but Faeit 212's use of copyrighted material passes all of the tests without any real room for debate.

Including the rumored 21 full pages photographed of the Imperial Armorer book?

If true, double digit full page images of copyrighted publications seems hard to twist into legitimate. It doesn't seem reasonable to photograph much more than the cover and ToC when reviewing a copyrighted publication.

**Ravenous D**

Im just going to leave this here

**Absolutionis**

Ravenous D wrote:
Im just going to leave this here

I really, really, hate that phrase. It adds nothing to the conversation.

**cowen70**

nkelsch wrote:
Peregrine wrote:

So yes, it has to be settled in court to be 100% sure, but Faeit 212's use of copyrighted material passes all of the tests without any real room for debate.

Including the rumored 21 full pages photographed of the Imperial Armorer book?

If true, double digit full page images of copyrighted publications seems hard to twist into legitimate. It doesn't seem reasonable to photograph much more than the cover and ToC when reviewing a copyrighted publication.

Was reading Faeit 212 regularly and I never spotted that. It was rumours and comment, and quite specifically strayed away from negativity and tried to remain objective.

**H.B.M.C.**

Absolutionis wrote:
I really, really, hate that phrase. It adds nothing to the conversation.

Technically you are correct. The phrase itself doesn't. What follows the phrase however...

**cowen70**

The irony of complaining about adding nothing to the conversation whilst adding nothing to the conversation and sparking a tangential set of replies that add nothing to the conversation.

The irony of my reply sparking yet another tangent.

My brain running like jam out of my nose into the keyboard. fething agents of chaos everywhere.

**Ravenous D**

Absolutionis wrote:
Ravenous D wrote:
Im just going to leave this here
I really, really, hate that phrase. It adds nothing to the conversation.

What other then the notice by the then owner of GW claiming copyright is bs because it screws small business?

Its obviously to point out the hypocrisy of GWs recent legal insanity.

Or are you really going to tell me that GW hasn't stolen an idea ever?

**H.B.M.C.**

cowen70 wrote:
The irony of complaining about adding nothing to the conversation whilst adding nothing to the conversation and sparking a tangential set of replies that add nothing to the conversation.

The irony of my reply sparking yet another tangent.

My brain running like jam out of my nose into the keyboard. fething agents of chaos everywhere.

Mind: Blown!

**Peregrine**

nkelsch wrote:
Including the rumored 21 full pages photographed of the Imperial Armorer book?

But that's a separate issue. GW was entirely justified in going after the IA12 page scans*, but that doesn't excuse their abuse of the legal system in the case of the WD stuff.

*Though they were NOT justified in demanding the removal of the text describing the rules, since game rules can't be copyrighted (no matter how much GW's lawyers insist otherwise).

**nkelsch**

cowen70 wrote:
nkelsch wrote:
Peregrine wrote:

So yes, it has to be settled in court to be 100% sure, but Faeit 212's use of copyrighted material passes all of the tests without any real room for debate.

Including the rumored 21 full pages photographed of the Imperial Armorer book?

If true, double digit full page images of copyrighted publications seems hard to twist into legitimate. It doesn't seem reasonable to photograph much more than the cover and ToC when reviewing a copyrighted publication.

Was reading Faeit 212 regularly and I never spotted that. It was rumours and comment, and quite specifically strayed away from negativity and tried to remain objective.

The URL in one of the takedown notices was referencing imperial armorer which people said were a ton of photos including detailed synopsis. So depending what the content was, it may or may not have been over the line... But the arguments of "it is just white dwarf catalog pages" doesn't apply to rule books or dozens of full pages opposed to small thumbnails of subparts of pages. Of course this is all going by rumors and other people's comments on what was contained.

And when you mix one more substantial and potentially legitimate complaint with a bunch of BS, then google is going to say "they might be on to something" and do what hosting companies do best... Throw you off their server regardless who is right, since they basically have a right to deny service based on almost anything due to the EULA you agree to.

If GW wants to squash their own product and prevent advertisement or exposure of their products... Let them? Who cares?

**H.B.M.C.**

nkelsch wrote:
But the arguments of "it is just white dwarf catalog pages" doesn't apply to rule books or dozens of full pages opposed to small thumbnails of subparts of pages.

I don't think anyone has said that it does, or argued that they're the same.

nkelsch wrote:
If GW wants to squash their own product and prevent advertisement or exposure of their products... Let them? Who cares?

Why should anyone just 'let them'?