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 wrote:

 Baragash wrote:


You're confusing "published" with "released to the public". For him to have pictures of the magazine it has to already have been published.

Doesn't matter.

Just because something is out there, doesn't mean you're free to plaster it onto your own website. Magazines, even online magazines and blogs, have copyright protection even after they are published.

If I go out and simply re-publish articles published by .. dunno .. the Huffington Post or NYTimes.com on my blog, I'll be in trouble soon enough. Just because they published it, or released it to the public, doesn't give me the right to take it.

I can "review" it or provide commentary, but to do that under the terms of fair use, certain conditions need to be filled. These include substantive amount of original discussion to go with it (if you go to court, the judge will have to make that call) and a convincing effort to quote no more than is necessary for a review or commentary.

It clearly matters in the context of the post I quoted.

But I guess if throwing in a strawman and then repeating stuff already said many times in this thread makes you feel you've looked good, more power to you. Ignore list activated.

 Zweischneid wrote:
You don't need to be an IP lawyer or familiar with american IP law to know that IP can be protected, even post-publication.

Or do you want to argue that everything ever published is fair game under fair use?

No, clearly not.

If there is such a thing as IP protection for published content, there'll be criteria that distinguish between fair use of content quoted by a third-part, and not-fair use of content quoted by a third-party.


Whatever these rules may be, I have yet to see one referenced in this thread - American, British, Chinese, I don't care - that could cover Nafka-style "leak-posts".

You miss the point entirely... You need to look at cases (and consequently ip law) to see how courts have defined what "fair use", "published", or what any other terms mean which people are failing to do...you also need to look at specific facts in cases to compare the facts regarding faeit 212. Absent such an analysis everything posted is just meaningless assertion!

Anything said in the legal community must be based on proper authority/citations otherwise it is meaningless... You never stand before a judge and say "clearly IP stuff can be protected, yo! And by the way judge, this was totally fair game so I win!" You need to say "based on this case here and these facts, this court must rule this way..." I don't think anyone outside of being a lawyer familiar with ip cases can do that. Therefore, making legal arguments as many people are doing in this tread is just silly:/.

 Zweischneid wrote:

Or do you want to argue that everything ever published is fair game under fair use?

No, clearly not.

Actually it is or no one would be able to write reviews about it or write newspaper articles...so on.

*not directed at you*
I think it's funny how some actual lawyers came in here, said "they didn't do anything wrong" and people had the brass cajones to argue with them. Cracks me the heck up; this thread was an entertaining read.

I mean...really?

Carry-on.

 agnosto wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

Or do you want to argue that everything ever published is fair game under fair use?

No, clearly not.

Actually it is or no one would be able to write reviews about it or write newspaper articles...so on.

*not directed at you*
I think it's funny how some actual lawyers came in here, said "they didn't do anything wrong" and people had the brass cajones to argue with them. Cracks me the heck up; this thread was an entertaining read.

I mean...really?

Carry-on.

Law doesn't work like computer coding, where you get an "OK" or a "BROKEN". There's always a judge (or in some US criminal cases a jury) sitting there making a call based on the arguments presented. Just because a Lawyer argued it one way, and might do so in court, doesn't mean there isn't a counter-argument, nor that the argument couldn't or wouldn't hold some weight, even in court.

And yes, there are reviews. But not every replication of content is a review, otherwise sites like MegaUpload, etc.. wouldn't be shut down and The PirateBay wouldn't run on some South Pacific Domain by now. There's a difference between reviews and plain copy-cat-ting. And I don't see any regular ol' judge (at least the kind I met) putting Faeit212 into the review category, EVEN IF some cutting-edge Web 3.0 lawyer might side with Nafka. Judges don't tend to be the Zuckerberg-style everything-is-public-type of persons.

 Zweischneid wrote:
There's a difference between reviews and plain copy-cat-ting.

You're right, and a major part of that difference is the amount of copying. Uploading an entire movie is just plain copying, it would be almost impossible to argue that there was any legitimate purpose that required the entire movie. However, what Faeit 212 did was copy a very small part of the magazine (and one of the least valuable parts), and only the part required to support a legitimate news story. The articles/painting guides/etc, which were not relevant to the story, were not copied at all.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
There's a difference between reviews and plain copy-cat-ting.

You're right, and a major part of that difference is the amount of copying. Uploading an entire movie is just plain copying, it would be almost impossible to argue that there was any legitimate purpose that required the entire movie. However, what Faeit 212 did was copy a very small part of the magazine (and one of the least valuable parts), and only the part required to support a legitimate news story. The articles/painting guides/etc, which were not relevant to the story, were not copied at all.

True, but the "legitimate news story" these pictures might have supported wasn't there, as he only uploaded pics with little more than a headline. Hence why I might see difficulties (not 100% impossibility, just difficulties) to argue that there was some sort of news or review involved.

 Zweischneid wrote:
True, but the "legitimate news story" these pictures might have supported wasn't there, as he only uploaded pics with little more than a headline. Hence why I might see difficulties (not 100% impossibility, just difficulties) to argue that there was some sort of news or review involved.

But that was a legitimate news article. It accomplished its goal of informing the community about an upcoming event, and was a starting point for discussion in the comments. It's no different than the average "breaking news" story which is often just a sentence or two, and then followed by a more elaborate discussion later.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
True, but the "legitimate news story" these pictures might have supported wasn't there, as he only uploaded pics with little more than a headline. Hence why I might see difficulties (not 100% impossibility, just difficulties) to argue that there was some sort of news or review involved.

But that was a legitimate news article. It accomplished its goal of informing the community about an upcoming event, and was a starting point for discussion in the comments. It's no different than the average "breaking news" story which is often just a sentence or two, and then followed by a more elaborate discussion later.

Yes, but that more elaborate discussion is legally required on this side of the pond to qualify as "news", even if nobody reads it. And while it may not be explicitly required state-side, its very, very obvious absence will not go unnoticed in court.

Peregrine and Szeischneid sitting in a tree, A-R-G-U-I-N-G...

First come arguments without legal support/basis (about a legal matter)...

Then come rebuttals without legal support/basis (about a legal matter)...

Then comes a thread derailed by unsupported legally inept arguments (about a legal matter) in a baby carriage?

=(

 mortetvie wrote:
Peregrine and Szeischneid sitting in a tree, A-R-G-U-I-N-G...

First come arguments without legal support/basis (about a legal matter)...

Then come rebuttals without legal support/basis (about a legal matter)...

Then comes a thread derailed by unsupported legally inept arguments (about a legal matter) in a baby carriage?

=(

So what? Maybe you might want to head over to www.expertlaw.com/forums or a similar site, if you wanna discuss the case with lawyers, instead of wargamers.

 mortetvie wrote:
Peregrine and Szeischneid sitting in a tree, A-R-G-U-I-N-G...

First come arguments without legal support/basis (about a legal matter)...

Then come rebuttals without legal support/basis (about a legal matter)...

Then comes a thread derailed by unsupported legally inept arguments (about a legal matter) in a baby carriage?

=(

Stop it! Remember those moms that stopped a fight between classmates? Nobody liked those!

Go on people, go on.

Sorry, was this thread not about what had happened to Faeit in the average Joe's terms. (ie: There was a DCMA, not The income of GW could be affected by the WD pics...yada yada yada) This seems to be getting out of hand and off topic...

 Timmy149 wrote:
Sorry, was this thread not about what had happened to Faeit in the average Joe's terms. (ie: There was a DCMA, not The income of GW could be affected by the WD pics...yada yada yada) This seems to be getting out of hand and off topic...

The issues being discussed have to do with both the good faith basis GW had to make the DMCA takedown request and issues of fact and the law that may be relevant in a counterclaim. As Faeit 212 has stated an intention to respond with a counterclaim, I think the issues being discussed are rather clearly on topic.

This thread is about the removal of the Faeit 212 websites. It is an ongoing story that continues to develop, and it would seem that this would certainly be the place to talk about the way the DMCA impacts the wargaming industry/is used by GW.

Gary (Naftka) just released a video on his youtube channel, stating that the Faeit 212 will be back within a week.

He states that it will be - as expected - a stand-alone blog site so as to avoid future 'easy takedowns' by DMCA claims against Google/Blogger.

Also, he explains that the site will be 'bigger and better' and going above and beyond the quality content we already came to enjoy.

Faeit 212 'on steroids' - take that GW!

This is great news!

This is great news!

That may be a bit of an exaggeration for most Warhammer fans on the Internet. Did anyone ever really go to that blog for anything other than leaked pictures once or twice a month before a big new GW release? Honestly, how many people visited that blog for anything other than the "sneak peeks" and how many will be visiting that blog if it's no longer a rumors site with early pics of new releases? Most of us here would never have even heard of the site nor would we be discussing it if it wasn't for the the leaked photos and the controversy over them. Few of the users of this site, Spikey Bits and other Warhammer fan sites are going to be rushing to post links to that blog if it is no longer leaking out pictures and info about new releases.

 BrassScorpion wrote:

This is great news!

That may be a bit of an exaggeration for most Warhammer fans on the Internet. Did anyone ever really go to that blog for anything other than leaked pictures once or twice a month before a big new GW release? Honestly, how many people visited that blog for anything other than the "sneak peeks" and how many will be visiting that blog if it's no longer a rumors site with early pics of new releases? Most of us here would never have even heard of the site nor would we be discussing it if it wasn't for the the leaked photos and the controversy over them. Few of the users of this site, Spikey Bits and other Warhammer fan sites are going to be rushing to post links to that blog if it is no longer leaking out pictures and info about new releases.

This.
Until the website got shut down, I was under the impression that Natfka and Faeit212 were both separate usernames on some other forum, like Hastings or Harry.

To be sure, just upload any links to /tg/ and the link to them or any other anonymous filesharing / download site and then spread it...tada

The downside is no longer being able to generate money via advertisements, but then again, several upload services will reward you with cash for people downloading files.

I personally like the site very much. The Blog Exchange was great, found a lot of great sites there. I also admire Naftka’s dedication.

I hope he will be back soon and with more stuff.

Just found out that Naftka's attorney is a friend of mine. It's a small world.

Mohoc wrote:
Just found out that Naftka's attorney is a friend of mine. It's a small world.

And this is precisely why GW should be wary of antagonizing its fans and customers. A large portion of GW's customer base is composed of intelligent, educated adults who participate in a global network of specialized social media. GW's behavior does not escape attention, and those impacted by it are in a position to reach out for, and find, specialized support.

Does GW think it is a miracle that Chapterhouse Studios was able to secure pro-bono representation from not one, but two major law firms? It wasn't a miracle. Just read the CHS lawsuit thread and take a gander at how many fantasy table top wargames enthusiasts are not only legal professionals, but also regular Dakka posters and willing to spend a great deal of time posting about the case. That is a subset of a subset of a subset of active enthusiasts keeping track of GW news, and does not begin to scratch the surface of people who are friends, acquaintances, associates, and colleagues of table top wargames enthusiasts.

It is a small world indeed, too small for GW to act with impunity. Gillian Stevenson, if you are reading this, I encourage you to take note and think before you act. It may end up saving your employer a great deal of time, trouble, and money.

weeble1000 wrote:

Mohoc wrote:
Just found out that Naftka's attorney is a friend of mine. It's a small world.

And this is precisely why GW should be wary of antagonizing its fans and customers. A large portion of GW's customer base is composed of intelligent, educated adults who participate in a global network of specialized social media. GW's behavior does not escape attention, and those impacted by it are in a position to reach out for, and find, specialized support.

Does GW think it is a miracle that Chapterhouse Studios was able to secure pro-bono representation from not one, but two major law firms? It wasn't a miracle. Just read the CHS lawsuit thread and take a gander at how many fantasy table top wargames enthusiasts are not only legal professionals, but also regular Dakka posters and willing to spend a great deal of time posting about the case. That is a subset of a subset of a subset of active enthusiasts keeping track of GW news, and does not begin to scratch the surface of people who are friends, acquaintances, associates, and colleagues of table top wargames enthusiasts.

It is a small world indeed, too small for GW to act with impunity. Gillian Stevenson, if you are reading this, I encourage you to take note and think before you act. It may end up saving your employer a great deal of time, trouble, and money.

It should be telling that in my local meta, where we are mostly middle aged professional adults, a lot of us are attorneys or IT professionals, and not the 12 to 16 year old kids that GW is trying to target with their non-existing marketing. Sure we have a few of those, but they are a small minority (probably less than 10%). With a very active and involved community like that, I am really not surprised at the fact that Naftka did not even have to look for pro bono legal council, but instead it came to him.

Back to the actual case though. The DMCA counter notice has been filed, the only thing keeping the blog shut down at this point is Google dragging their feet with putting it back up. They can always decide to keep it shut anyways due to their Terms Of Service though.

weeble1000 - I think it's more of an issue that GW don't give a flying frankfurter about their most ardent fans. To me, it doesn't matter if they are in the 'right' legally for something like this, which seems rather a grey area anyway. Regardless, it comes across as an extremely 'female genitalia-ish' move, uncaring, and arrogant to the extreme.

 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
Gary (Naftka) just released a video on his youtube channel, stating that the Faeit 212 will be back within a week.

He states that it will be - as expected - a stand-alone blog site so as to avoid future 'easy takedowns' by DMCA claims against Google/Blogger.

Also, he explains that the site will be 'bigger and better' and going above and beyond the quality content we already came to enjoy.

Faeit 212 'on steroids' - take that GW!

They should switch to promoting another games system - then that would be 'take that GW'. The company that they are working so hard to enthuse about has essentially just returned their generosity by telling them to 'feth off'.

 Pacific wrote:
weeble1000 - I think it's more of an issue that GW don't give a flying frankfurter about their most ardent fans. To me, it doesn't matter if they are in the 'right' legally for something like this, which seems rather a grey area anyway. Regardless, it comes across as an extremely 'female genitalia-ish' move, uncaring, and arrogant to the extreme.

 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
Gary (Naftka) just released a video on his youtube channel, stating that the Faeit 212 will be back within a week.

He states that it will be - as expected - a stand-alone blog site so as to avoid future 'easy takedowns' by DMCA claims against Google/Blogger.

Also, he explains that the site will be 'bigger and better' and going above and beyond the quality content we already came to enjoy.

Faeit 212 'on steroids' - take that GW!

They should switch to promoting another games system - then that would be 'take that GW'. The company that they are working so hard to enthuse about has essentially just returned their generosity by telling them to 'feth off'.

He's taking the somewhat high road but essentially doing that. He's still covering 40k because I'm sure he loves the game even if the company isn't high on his list right now. His announcement that they're going to be starting to cover other games now too just seems more than a bit coincidental.

Goes back to why GW is kind of stupid to attack one of the (increasingly few) positive public voices out there for them.

 Pacific wrote:
weeble1000 - I think it's more of an issue that GW don't give a flying frankfurter about their most ardent fans. To me, it doesn't matter if they are in the 'right' legally for something like this, which seems rather a grey area anyway. Regardless, it comes across as an extremely 'female genitalia-ish' move, uncaring, and arrogant to the extreme.

 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
Gary (Naftka) just released a video on his youtube channel, stating that the Faeit 212 will be back within a week.

He states that it will be - as expected - a stand-alone blog site so as to avoid future 'easy takedowns' by DMCA claims against Google/Blogger.

Also, he explains that the site will be 'bigger and better' and going above and beyond the quality content we already came to enjoy.

Faeit 212 'on steroids' - take that GW!

They should switch to promoting another games system - then that would be 'take that GW'. The company that they are working so hard to enthuse about has essentially just returned their generosity by telling them to 'feth off'.

The point is that GW acts aggressively with its IP against its own fans and customers...who are educated adults in a community of educated adults, many of which are legal professionals. You can't do that and expect people to roll over without a fight. So filing and threatening lawsuits in such a context is a good way to get drawn into costly litigation, over and over and over again.

You can't SLAAP someone with a lawsuit when it is impossible to keep the news of it hidden from a community of educated professionals. It not only shows how out of touch GW is with regard to the law, but also how out of touch GW is with its own fans and customers. GW should take note. The CHS thing was not a fluke, nor a flash in the pan.

GW sued CHS, CHS got pro-bono counsel from a major law firm in less than two months. GW files a second lawsuit against CHS, CHS gets pro bono representation from a second major law firm. GW sends a C&D to some author over "Space Marine" and the Popehat signal gets lit. GW takes down a fan blog with the DMCA and a counterclaim gets filed within a month. I will not be surprised if Blight Wheel is able to get representation as well.

GW needs to wake up and smell the courthouse.

Speaking of that little "Space Marine" book debacle, whatever happened to that? It was in the news for all of a day, then it just disappeared.

Mohoc wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:

Mohoc wrote:
Just found out that Naftka's attorney is a friend of mine. It's a small world.

And this is precisely why GW should be wary of antagonizing its fans and customers. A large portion of GW's customer base is composed of intelligent, educated adults who participate in a global network of specialized social media. GW's behavior does not escape attention, and those impacted by it are in a position to reach out for, and find, specialized support.

Does GW think it is a miracle that Chapterhouse Studios was able to secure pro-bono representation from not one, but two major law firms? It wasn't a miracle. Just read the CHS lawsuit thread and take a gander at how many fantasy table top wargames enthusiasts are not only legal professionals, but also regular Dakka posters and willing to spend a great deal of time posting about the case. That is a subset of a subset of a subset of active enthusiasts keeping track of GW news, and does not begin to scratch the surface of people who are friends, acquaintances, associates, and colleagues of table top wargames enthusiasts.

It is a small world indeed, too small for GW to act with impunity. Gillian Stevenson, if you are reading this, I encourage you to take note and think before you act. It may end up saving your employer a great deal of time, trouble, and money.

It should be telling that in my local meta, where we are mostly middle aged professional adults, a lot of us are attorneys or IT professionals, and not the 12 to 16 year old kids that GW is trying to target with their non-existing marketing. Sure we have a few of those, but they are a small minority (probably less than 10%). With a very active and involved community like that, I am really not surprised at the fact that Naftka did not even have to look for pro bono legal council, but instead it came to him.

Back to the actual case though. The DMCA counter notice has been filed, the only thing keeping the blog shut down at this point is Google dragging their feet with putting it back up. They can always decide to keep it shut anyways due to their Terms Of Service though.

That's really the issue with GW attacking its Vets (which they actively are doing yet claim otherwise) We have all been around the block long enough to spread what's happening far and wide at a moments notice.

 McNinja wrote:
Speaking of that little "Space Marine" book debacle, whatever happened to that? It was in the news for all of a day, then it just disappeared.

Amazon pretty much took the matters out of GW's hands and put the book back up.

GW then ragequit twitter and facebook in response.

 Compel wrote:

 McNinja wrote:
Speaking of that little "Space Marine" book debacle, whatever happened to that? It was in the news for all of a day, then it just disappeared.

Amazon pretty much took the matters out of GW's hands and put the book back up.

GW then ragequit twitter and facebook in response.

Surprisingly, that is a very succinct summary. The only bit I will add is that EFF took the case, and it turns out you can't use the DMCA for trademark claims.

GW took the route of pretending it did not happen, and as the situation was essentially resolved by Amazon putting the content back up, the whole thing went away. The author probably could have gone after GW with a counterclaim, but she has no skin in the game, got what she wanted already, and was relying on the goodwill of others for aid.

GW got lucky on that one. If Amazon did not have an ironclad reason to put the content back up of their own volition, it would have needed to get real. Once you are filing claims in court, you might as well go whole hog.

There is actually a video interview with the Author of "spots the space marine" and she doesn't give a lot of details or go into what happened with GW, which basically means they more then likely just handed her a big settlement.