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.

 Raesvelg wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

I freely admit I'm a little ignorant in this area, but isn't issuing a C+D out of the blue somewhat akin to punching someone in the face as soon as they say something you don't agree with? Wouldn't there be a more cooperative method of both defending their IP and not being so heavy handed?

How? The only other option they really have would be to license the work to a third party, and if they don't want to (and clearly they don't, for obvious reasons), then you can't expect them to be held ransom by companies that go ahead and violate (or skirt the edge of violating) their trademarks and copyrights anyway.

C&Ds may be rather blunt, but the content wouldn't vary if you were really polite about telling someone to stop ripping off your products.

I guess a more informal approach initially. Contacting the seller and outlining your concerns and perhaps even going as far as suggesting changes that could be made. Of course, were those concerns to be rejected or ignored, you can then go legal on them, and if it did go to court, it would be much easier to spin their actions as the good guy.

Of course, this whole issue could be circumvented by a licensing or approval scheme (such as Apple's "made for.." stamp which indicates an accessory has been made to their standards and with their approval) GW are clearly not afraid of licensing their IP to other industries, or even sub sectors of the same (FFG) but somehow don't seem willing to do the same for miniatures.

 azreal13 wrote:

There's room for more than one version of a given model, GW will have to you know, be original if this situation exists.

One would question why people seem to be holding GW to a higher standard than the third-party groups who haven't been particularly original themselves, but that's not relevant to this specific point. Which I'll get to in a second.

I'm not holding them to any different standard, I would happily buy a GW Flakk Rhino out of all the other Flakk Rhinos if it was the model I liked best, or offered me the best value There's only so many things you can do when designing a concept before it ceases to look like what you intended, a sci fi APC will have to feature certain design cues otherwise people will think its a tank, or a plane or whatever.

What I like to have is alternatives for my model and competition in the market, and hopefully this outcome will stimulate those things.

 Adam LongWalker wrote:
Okay Raesvelg who are you... really? You are coming off too polished on certain aspects of your reply.

Curious I am.

Now I'm curious.

What does "too polished" entail?

As for who I am, suffice to say that I'm one of the people in this picture who is NOT Jervis Johnson.


I realize that doesn't really narrow down my identity that much (unless you happen to know who took the picture and when), but if you're insinuating that I'm involved with GW beyond the role of a long-time hobbyist, you're mistaken.

 Raesvelg wrote:

 Adam LongWalker wrote:
Okay Raesvelg who are you... really? You are coming off too polished on certain aspects of your reply.

Curious I am.

Now I'm curious.

What does "too polished" entail?

As for who I am, suffice to say that I'm one of the people in this picture who is NOT Jervis Johnson.


I realize that doesn't really narrow down my identity that much (unless you happen to know who took the picture and when), but if you're insinuating that I'm involved with GW beyond the role of a long-time hobbyist, you're mistaken.

He means you're coming in with a low post count and making reasoned and balanced arguments. Doesn't happen that often!

 azreal13 wrote:
[
What I like to have is alternatives for my model and competition in the market, and hopefully this outcome will stimulate those things.

You do have alternatives and competition in the market.

It's called Warmachine. Or Malifaux. Or Dystopian Wars.

Or if you prefer systems that didn't survive to the present day, VOR, Shockforce, Chronopia, Warzone and so on.

Games Workshop games are not the market.

If you don't like their minis, you don't have to buy them. You also don't have to buy their games. What you don't really have is the right to expect them to allow other manufacturers to take money away from GW because you don't like the choices that GW provides to you in their own product. In circumstances where GW can't stop them, fine, whatever. But when they can, you should expect them to try, and accept that they're not evil because they do. They're just trying to make money, the same as the guy who's blatantly copying their products.

Are CHS taking money off them? And a big problem with GW is that they send a lot of claims to people that clearly aren't reasonable. They once sent a C&D to Hasslefree for their 'troll slayer' for heavens sake. It's difficult to have sympathy or even know for sure when they are in the right because of the welter of aggressive nonsense from them.

 Raesvelg wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
[
What I like to have is alternatives for my model and competition in the market, and hopefully this outcome will stimulate those things.

You do have alternatives and competition in the market.

It's called Warmachine. Or Malifaux. Or Dystopian Wars.

Or if you prefer systems that didn't survive to the present day, VOR, Shockforce, Chronopia, Warzone and so on.

Games Workshop games are not the market.

If you don't like their minis, you don't have to buy them. You also don't have to buy their games. What you don't really have is the right to expect them to allow other manufacturers to take money away from GW because you don't like the choices that GW provides to you in their own product. In circumstances where GW can't stop them, fine, whatever. But when they can, you should expect them to try, and accept that they're not evil because they do. They're just trying to make money, the same as the guy who's blatantly copying their products.

All fine points.

However, my motivation for wargaming very much comes from the creative end, I built and painted models long before I even knew anyone else who was interested in 40K or wargaming in general.

I'll make no bones about it, I want to be a special snowflake, I like having models that are different from everyone else's. I get a buzz when people complement me on my two CHS extended Storm Ravens. Those are two Storm Ravens I couldn't honestly say I would have bought if I didn't know the CHS kit existed by the way.

There are many rule sets that don't have an associated miniature line, there are many miniatures that don't have a game they are manufactured to be used in. You cannot seriously tell me I must spend my own money only on GW products if I wish to play a GW game? That's laughable. Especially as no company is singly more responsible for pinching other ideas and tropes and trying to claim them as their own than GW.

[

 azreal13 wrote:

I'll make no bones about it, I want to be a special snowflake, I like having models that are different from everyone else's. I get a buzz when people complement me on my two CHS extended Storm Ravens. Those are two Storm Ravens I couldn't honestly say I would have bought if I didn't know the CHS kit existed by the way.

This is essentially the specific reason why aftermarket parts industries exist, both in wargaming and generally. GW's insistence on disbelieving that this sort of thing is important and will simply not exist if they wish hard enough was also seen with their general take-my-ball-and-go-home response to social media and the 'internets' in general.

There are many rule sets that don't have an associated miniature line, there are many miniatures that don't have a game they are manufactured to be used in. You cannot seriously tell me I must spend my own money only on GW products if I wish to play a GW game? That's laughable. Especially as no company is singly more responsible for pinching other ideas and tropes and trying to claim them as their own than GW.

There are ways to do it. Take Privateer Press, for example. You see few custom models for a number of reasons: 1. strict conversion policy, 2. you need a card, 3. a number of official tournament circuits exist, backed by "official" (pressganger volunteer) representatives. I really think that GW allowing the 'official GW tourney circuit' to more or less die on the vine and their becoming increasingly reclusive and non-interactive with the communities, especially those gaming outside of an official GW store, is what has allowed this particular aftermarket parts industry to gain such a broad foothold.

 azreal13 wrote:

I'll make no bones about it, I want to be a special snowflake, I like having models that are different from everyone else's. I get a buzz when people complement me on my two CHS extended Storm Ravens. Those are two Storm Ravens I couldn't honestly say I would have bought if I didn't know the CHS kit existed by the way.

Fully understandable, I enjoy converting minis to be unique myself, and I don't necessarily limit myself to "Games Workshop Approved" bits when I do it.

But.

I also don't hold GW at fault when they decide that they don't want someone using their IP without a license, and don't feel like issuing such licenses for fear of the potential consequences.

The situation is murkier with "upgrade" kits than with outright imitations, I'll admit. GW's apparent policy of not releasing some models, expecting that the players will convert them, is also a significant nuisance and source of irritation.

The point isn't that you have to buy GW minis and only GW minis. GW can certainly enforce such a policy on events that they run, of course, but that doesn't affect friendly play.

The point is that it's unreasonable to expect GW not to do everything in its power to make as much money as possible off of its IP, and it's unreasonable to attack GW when they fight to maintain control of that IP.

It's analogous in broad strokes to the situation extant in fanfiction. Fanfics offer a broader range of options within a given universe; some of those options might not be ones that the IP holder (ie, the author) wants to explore, or frankly wants explored by anyone, and how each individual author deals with fanfic is typically up to them. A fair number will allow anything, so long as it's not being sold. Others will aggressively pursue anyone who posts fanfic of their works in any capacity. A large number are officially opposed to fanfic, but won't pursue the issue so long as they don't know about it, and take steps to make sure that they won't (ie, refusal to associate with forums that allow the posting of fanfic, etc). A scant few will accept submissions, vet and then publish some of the better examples. All of them are keenly aware that they're putting themselves in an invidious position by even acknowledging the existence of a particular work of fanfic for fear a subsequent accusation of intellectual theft. It's happened, shockingly enough.

Legally speaking, the authors who go after fanfic writers have every right to do so, though they may lose such lawsuits if the fanfic is judged to be a transformative work. Typically, that's limited to parody and critical works, but every now and then something sneaks by.

Or it gets rewritten and turned into Fifty Shades of Gray, and we all lose.

GW takes a lot of flak for its aggressive policies regarding IP enforcement, but you also have to recognize that GW is far and away the most successful miniatures gaming corporation in the world, and subject to vastly more imitation and blatant infringement than anyone else. They go after more people in no small part because they have so many more targets to go after; I can think of a half-dozen people that have basically based their business off of making alternates/copies of GW minis. I can't think of one that has done the same for Warmachine, and that's not because Privateer has adopted an enlightened pricing model where everything is so cheap that any kid can afford it. You don't need as many pieces to get started, of course, but on a per-miniature basis, there's little to choose from between the two manufacturers.

It'd cost me a hair under $60 to add another 10-man unit of Praetorian Swordsmen to my Skorne army. It'd cost me a bit over $36 to add 10 Guardians to my Eldar army. And they come with a weapon platform. Admittedly, it would cost me around $70 to add another unit of Dire Avengers, but that's because GW is flying rodent gak insane with their pricing sometimes. Metal vs Plastic, etc etc, but in the end we're basically paying for well-sculpted tokens.

You could play the games with labeled washers if you really wanted to, after all. Possibly with corks glued to the tops for height. You get the idea.

azreal13 wrote:

He means you're coming in with a low post count and making reasoned and balanced arguments. Doesn't happen that often!

Yup that is true. Does not happen often in here.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Are CHS taking money off them? And a big problem with GW is that they send a lot of claims to people that clearly aren't reasonable. They once sent a C&D to Hasslefree for their 'troll slayer' for heavens sake. It's difficult to have sympathy or even know for sure when they are in the right because of the welter of aggressive nonsense from them.

Sympathy? You do not treat people like this in this sector of the entertainment industry. This "holier then thou" aspect of the corporation is what is harming them in the long run. They are bleeding customers. 40K is not the hobby. It is not as large as the perception of what the corporation want people to believe. The lawsuit did open up valuable information on how "soft" and vulnerable (at least in my perception) the corporation is.

Why try to sue someone when it would have been so much easier to license the product and better yet sell it in their own stores. Profit for everybody.

The millions lost in cross licensing deals to 3rd tier companies because of their behavior is what I find astounding.

Now at the end of the day though GW won the suit they are in more ways weaker in IP rights (IMHO) than before the the suit.

But more importantly they have to deal with all of the negativity because of the suit.

And this will affect their profits in the long run. No one likes a Bully, perceived or not.

Now if people are really patting CH on the backs, then as a community we should be doing some crowd source funding to help pay for the bills. Or buy lots of their product in question.

That right there will send an important message to GW.

"We the customers are not happy with the corporation".

"We are voting with our wallets".

This old timer has done what he can do. It's up to you young guns to take over and take charge of the situation.

Adam.

 spaceelf wrote:
I suspect that one of the consequences of the case will be for GW to include 'unique' elements in its models so it can better claim copyright. In a sci-fi setting this can kind of work, but in a Fantasy setting it leads to silly monsters such as their jabberslythe.

It will be sad to see GW stop making 'generic' dragons and such.

I agree with Space Elf (great name BTW) and I think it's already happened. Generic names like Juggernaut and Dreadnaut have given way to silly but more trademarkable names like Blood Crusher and Hell Brute.

Between this ruling and the decision not to adapt any FW designs (is that official or still just rumored) GW will try to more out there with distinctive designs which is a shame since I always thought one of GW's strengths was when the universe had texture and looked lived in rather than just skulls and more skulls.

So bad news for GW models, good news for the 3rd party bitz folks and as for the rest of us, hey Mutant Chronicles Resurection is coming!

 Raesvelg wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

I'll make no bones about it, I want to be a special snowflake, I like having models that are different from everyone else's. I get a buzz when people complement me on my two CHS extended Storm Ravens. Those are two Storm Ravens I couldn't honestly say I would have bought if I didn't know the CHS kit existed by the way.

Some more well reasoned and explained stuff

I'm afraid my battery is low, so please excuse the brevity of my response to your long and well expressed post.

In short, I simply believe that GW have every right to do what they feel they have to to defend their IP, as without it their business is almost worthless, but I think they went about it the wrong way.

Personally I would favour a collaborative approach, where I could earn something back from third party sales through licensing, and have tighter control on quality, as well as indirectly growing sales of core product, rather than the belligerent, adversarial approach they have taken, which has cost them money and damaged their reputation.

1% left!

 sourclams wrote:
[
There are ways to do it. Take Privateer Press, for example. You see few custom models for a number of reasons: 1. strict conversion policy,

Hell, that's the number one reason why I DON'T play WarmaHordes, and I suspect it's one of the reasons that I don't really see that many great and creative conversions using PP minis as a base. It's just not worth the risk to put the time into a piece and then get told that it's not welcome. At least with the abandonment of "official" GW tournaments the environment has become far more permissive with regards to alternate models.

 Magc8Ball wrote:
and I suspect it's one of the reasons that I don't really see that many great and creative conversions using PP minis as a base.

I think you do see great and creative conversions using PP minis as a base, but you do not see the more average-level and 'just okay' conversions using PP minis as a base because they're largely monopose with a single big 'body' bit to which other stuff is attached. Thus the skill hurdle to convert a PP mini is much higher. I used to do a fair bit of artistic stuff with SPEHSS MARENS because it was easy. I haven't attempted much at all with the PP line because it's not.

For customizability, I think most admit that GW figure kits take the cake. Interesting to me, though, that recently they've veered into more 'big piece' snap-together assembly for a lot of their larger kits. Makes me wonder if customizability suffers as a result when all that the 'okay' level of modelers can really achieve is mounting a different gun barrel or strapping even MOAR skulls and chains onto things.

 Marine_With_Heart wrote:
We don't have a full verdict yet? I just sort of want the short summary of what happened and what it now means for the industry.

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?33351-LEGALWATCH-Games-Workshop-vs-Chapterhouse-Verdict

It was pretty much 60/40 win for CHS

nevermind

 azreal13 wrote:

I'm afraid my battery is low, so please excuse the brevity of my response to your long and well expressed post.

In short, I simply believe that GW have every right to do what they feel they have to to defend their IP, as without it their business is almost worthless, but I think they went about it the wrong way.

Personally I would favour a collaborative approach, where I could earn something back from third party sales through licensing, and have tighter control on quality, as well as indirectly growing sales of core product, rather than the belligerent, adversarial approach they have taken, which has cost them money and damaged their reputation.

1% left!

Nothing wrong with brevity.

I'm not so prone to it myself, of course, but I'm enjoying the debate.

It's fairly easy to say that GW is losing money by their decision regarding third-party manufacturers of accessories, but it's difficult to actually prove it. Saying that CHS was doing $100k/yr in sales makes it sound like GW is losing $100k/yr that they could have been making otherwise (had they been making the product themselves), but it's significant to note that a lot of CHS's products overlapped FW products. Salamander should pads? FW has them. Various vehicle door/armor kits? FW has them. Imperial Jetbikes? FW has them. They're not even that much more expensive most of the time; heck, the FW Shrike warrior wings are cheaper in bulk than the CHS kit. Just wings, rather than wings/legs/head, but we can also admit, I expect, that the FW products are significantly higher quality than anything produced by CHS.

It's not that GW isn't producing the models, it's that CHS is making an inferior version that costs less. You could argue that GW is failing to fulfill a market for cheap, inferior goods, but if GW doesn't want to fill that market (and 3rd Edition Dark Eldar models aside, I'd say that they don't), then we can't expect them to let someone else undercut them on their own IP.

As for issuing licenses, it would pretty much be limited to very specific things, upgrade kits to be exact. There's no way GW would be handing out licenses to make full miniatures in direct competition with themselves, after all. So if we engage in the hypothetical that GW would issue upgrade kit licenses, we have to consider a few things.

If GW wants to maintain control of quality and IP, after all, they're going to have to arrange these licenses in a very specific fashion, giving themselves full control over end product. They'll have to pay someone to vet all the products that they're busy licensing out, control which products they are, and so on. That all costs money, and that's going to be reflected in the license itself, which will in turn be reflected in the cost of the end product. GW isn't going to issue blanket "make whatever you want and if it's good we'll approve it" licenses. They'd be issuing "submit a design and we'll tell you if you can make it or not" licenses. There'd be a lot of back and forth from GW to the studio in question (adding to cost), and quite possibly a percentage of each sale included as part of the licensing fee.

When you add it all up, it doesn't seem particularly likely that the sort of small operations that typically produce these products would be able to afford a license on start-up, or inclined to put up with the necessary hoops that GW would probably add on for quality control purposes. Like everyone else here, I don't have access to the sort of market analysis that I'd need to make a definitive statement, but it wouldn't surprise me if GW hadn't considered the possibility, and already decided they'd be better off just sticking with Forgeworld.

Damaging their reputation? That one I'll grant, though it's also important to remember that one corner of the internet, even the general GW-related internet as a whole, isn't the entirety of their market. The internet may be incensed by GW's policy of trying to destroy internet retailers, for example, but most brick & mortar stores that don't have a significant internet presence themselves are huge fans of the policy, in my experience.

C&D letters aren't a belligerent or adversarial approach to the matter, is the other thing. They're the industry standard; it might be nicer if GW called them up and said "We'd appreciate it if you'd stop making products X, Y, and Z because we feel that they infringe on our IP", but the end result is the same. Most people just do away with the pretense and issue the C&D letter.

 Adam LongWalker wrote:
azreal13 wrote:

He means you're coming in with a low post count and making reasoned and balanced arguments. Doesn't happen that often!

Yup that is true. Does not happen often in here.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Are CHS taking money off them? And a big problem with GW is that they send a lot of claims to people that clearly aren't reasonable. They once sent a C&D to Hasslefree for their 'troll slayer' for heavens sake. It's difficult to have sympathy or even know for sure when they are in the right because of the welter of aggressive nonsense from them.

Sympathy? You do not treat people like this in this sector of the entertainment industry. This "holier then thou" aspect of the corporation is what is harming them in the long run. They are bleeding customers. 40K is not the hobby. It is not as large as the perception of what the corporation want people to believe. The lawsuit did open up valuable information on how "soft" and vulnerable (at least in my perception) the corporation is.

Why try to sue someone when it would have been so much easier to license the product and better yet sell it in their own stores. Profit for everybody.

The millions lost in cross licensing deals to 3rd tier companies because of their behavior is what I find astounding.

Now at the end of the day though GW won the suit they are in more ways weaker in IP rights (IMHO) than before the the suit.

But more importantly they have to deal with all of the negativity because of the suit.

And this will affect their profits in the long run. No one likes a Bully, perceived or not.

Where are you coming up with the estimate of millions lost in cross licensing, thats pure nonsense, the add on market is not even a tiny fraction of that number.

There is already negativity toward GW, forumites are already polarized, the overwhelming majority of GW customers dont know about the suit or dont care.

I know a lot of people want to spin this as some disaster for GW, its not a disaster its just business as usual for them. Plenty of people chimed in that they will continue to buy battlefoam even though they dont like the owner. I doubt it is different for GW.

GW has plenty of significant problems, this lawsuit is not one of them.

Just made my contribution to the CHS punitive fee fund. Can't wait to use the truscale Stormraven kit, and LR Iconoclast kit.

Really happy that this case turned out (mostly) positively for Chapterhouse. I fully expect that they, and the wargaming community as a whole, will come out of this ordeal stronger. Freer artistic expression is unilaterally a good thing, especially when it leads to great products for consumers like us.

I have to agree with whoever suggested that this case has bought CHS a lot of advertising. Now that it's over, I'm eying a few of their products myself. Is the CHS news/comments thread still alive?

Another reason that GW sees more 3rd party and fan-made conversions is that they built off of a much more generic base than Privateer.

And, early on, that was very much a conscious decision, at least in the case of WHFB.

The original creators wanted to have iconic fantasy battles - and many of their early scenarios reflected this, up to and including borrowing from Shakespeare. (I loved MacDeath....)

Some of the conversions that I have seen for Mantic's Kings of War come from that same mold. (And Mantic, at this point at least, is encouraging that - even allowing miniatures from other companies in tournament games.)

And, in regards to using other folks bits... look at some of the more ancient models from Citadel - they borrowed parts from Ral Partha models, and used them on some of their own models....

And those parts were direct copies - in fact today they would be called 'recasts'.

The Auld Grump, tempted to get a jetbike from CH, just 'cause....

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Another reason that GW sees more 3rd party and fan-made conversions is that they built off of a much more generic base than Privateer.

And, early on, that was very much a conscious decision, at least in the case of WHFB.

The original creators wanted to have iconic fantasy battles - and many of their early scenarios reflected this, up to and including borrowing from Shakespeare. (I loved MacDeath....)

Some of the conversions that I have seen for Mantic's Kings of War come from that same mold. (And Mantic, at this point at least, is encouraging that - even allowing miniatures from other companies in tournament games.)

And, in regards to using other folks bits... look at some of the more ancient models from Citadel - they borrowed parts from Ral Partha models, and used them on some of their own models....

And those parts were direct copies - in fact today they would be called 'recasts'.

The Auld Grump, tempted to get a jetbike from CH, just 'cause....

Ral Partha used to sell Citadel miniatures in the US. I am not sure whether Citadel sold Ral Partha stuff in the UK but I think maybe they did.

I would be very interested in a specific example where you think part of a Ral Partha model was used on a Citadel miniature. Stylistically and scale wise they were very different even back in the 80s.

At this point Mantic probably would have to allow nonMantic figs in their tournaments just have enough people to run a tournament. They have not been around long enough for a lot of people to have amassed collections of mantic only armies. Many of their miniatures are the suck, I cant even imagine buying enough of their elves to make an entire army.

I don't see the difference between someone buying Chapter House shoulder pads instead of Forge World shoulder pads, and someone making an entire IG army from Mantic figures and Tamiya vehicles. Both result in money not being spent on GW goods. In the first instance the player has to buy GW figures to put his non-GW shoulder pads on, which benefits GW.

From the business angle, the argument that Chapter House should not be allowed to produce conversion kits or figures because it disbenefits GW, is clearly illogical.

From the legal angle, the trial result so far shows that Chapter House were largely within their legal rights in making their kits.

I'm not going into the swamp of GW's supposed moral rights to prevent anyone from making stuff. We've had dozens of pages about that in the other thread -- Dune, Starship Troopers, etc.

JWhex wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Another reason that GW sees more 3rd party and fan-made conversions is that they built off of a much more generic base than Privateer.

And, early on, that was very much a conscious decision, at least in the case of WHFB.

The original creators wanted to have iconic fantasy battles - and many of their early scenarios reflected this, up to and including borrowing from Shakespeare. (I loved MacDeath....)

Some of the conversions that I have seen for Mantic's Kings of War come from that same mold. (And Mantic, at this point at least, is encouraging that - even allowing miniatures from other companies in tournament games.)

And, in regards to using other folks bits... look at some of the more ancient models from Citadel - they borrowed parts from Ral Partha models, and used them on some of their own models....

And those parts were direct copies - in fact today they would be called 'recasts'.

The Auld Grump, tempted to get a jetbike from CH, just 'cause....

Ral Partha used to sell Citadel miniatures in the US. I am not sure whether Citadel sold Ral Partha stuff in the UK but I think maybe they did.

I would be very interested in a specific example where you think part of a Ral Partha model was used on a Citadel miniature. Stylistically and scale wise they were very different even back in the 80s.

At this point Mantic probably would have to allow nonMantic figs in their tournaments just have enough people to run a tournament. They have not been around long enough for a lot of people to have amassed collections of mantic only armies. Many of their miniatures are the suck, I cant even imagine buying enough of their elves to make an entire army.

Been a long time... but the 'offending' parts were wings used on early Citadel wyverns and pegasi (not the same wings....) Sculpted by either Tom Meier or Dennis Mize, if I recall correctly - with the Ral Partha models being created first. Late seventies, early eighties.

I put 'offending' in quotes mostly because, as far as I know, nobody was offended. Everybody involved was a hobbyist, working in their hobby. Pretty sure that they asked Meier if they could use the bits when he visited them around 1981, and he just said 'sure'. Not a matter of theft. Not even a matter of contract.

The Auld Grump

A scant few will accept submissions, vet and then publish some of the better examples.

Just wanted to point out the curiosity, in the context of the rest of this thread, that GW is one of these. One wonders whether BL's model could conceivably be extended to other areas of the business. Probably not, of course, but I like to blue-sky.

Meanwhile, I'm off to make my own modest contribution to CHS's fine fund. Not because I particularly support their position over GW's, but because, regardless of the outcome, I don't believe they deserve to go under because of it.

R.

Personally, I think its premature to contemplate on the consequences, we do not have the final verdict and it may well go to appeals.

I have big issues with GW and how they want to handle the fantasy and science fiction miniatures wargames gender, their cease and desist letters are not just "protecting their IP" but trying to solidify and enforce an IP bully, the vast majority of their claims fall firmly in the common domain, they essentially plagiarize symbols, expressions and ideas that go back decades, centuries, millenia.

I do not want to have to fight legally with GW for such common terms and ideas as "space marine", "twin headed eagle", "plasma", "sculls", ectr ectr, I am against a company that tries to sue any competition and that is what GW geared up to do, with the raging heroes Lamasu cease and desist letter , spots the space marine case and many other its pretty clear they intended (before this one got big) to threaten just anybody, today CHS tomorrow, whoever they fancy.

This had to be stopped by somebody.

Now do they have the right to try and fight upgrade kits? well one can try to turn off the sun, but might get easier and better results harnessing its power, upgrade kits is something well established in the industry and prolific in all other industries, I see nothing wrong with it, it exists because GW leaves gaps in their lines, gives incentives to have specific combinations without providing them or making them prohibitively expensive, they could harness this power enforce their quality control to the garage industry and strengthen their IP by licencing it, make a better face as a cooperating manufacturer, they chose to be the bully and raise their negative image, their managers testimony were quite revealing on how they view themselves and the industry, quite arrogant stance especially from a company that has ripped every single part of their IP from somewhere else, the "we create everything in isolation" comment would make me laugh if it was not said on a trial.

Sorry for been incoherent, in this, but these are my thoughts.

 SickSix wrote:
Just made my contribution to the CHS punitive fee fund. Can't wait to use the truscale Stormraven kit, and LR Iconoclast kit.

Nod. Looks like I need to get a couple of Iconoclast kits.

Reinholt over at Warseer wrote:

Lothlanathorian wrote:If GW thinks CHS are taking sales from them, maybe they should step up their game instead of trying to step on the 'competition'.

GW saw a company making a product that fits with theirs and said, 'Hey, people are buying those, we need to eliminate them so they can't do that' instead of, 'Hey, people are buying those other, probably inferior products.

I would like to point out that the resolution of this case is that, while you are entitled to your opinion, the US legal system disagrees with you.

CH was found to be infringing upon several copyrights and trademarks for GW. This is not an issue of "inferior products" or "we need to eliminate them", this was a case of "those guys are actually breaking the law and flat out stealing our stuff!". Obviously GW hit them with many claims; some of them stuck. This is typical practice when you are suing someone (I have been involved in both sides of lawsuits, and you always throw everything, inclusive of the kitchen sink, at someone so that they have to defend every single claim; it's good practice of law to do this, and it tells you that both sides had professional lawyers, because you always try to maximize your odds of winning, part of which is making every single claim you have legal standing and enough factual basis to make, even if your odds of winning on it are low). This is not an indication that GW was over-reaching. Virtually every single case in the US looks like this. You don't start negotiating at the point you want to end up at; you start at the most favorable position for you that you can plausibly claim.

CH was producing things that infringed upon GW's IP. These are not of the "we are making these as legitimate additions, or added functionality, or producing things that GW has actively chosen not to produce in such a way that we are not stepping on their toes". A legal decision was made that they were out of line.

Notice that GW has not aggressively sued multiple other manufacturers of alternative pieces, many of whom also produce products compatible with GW goods. Why? Because they didn't push the line as much as CH (who were much more aggressive about potential infringement than, say, Kromlech, to pull a random example). Are those people prohibited from continuing their practices by this ruling? No. In fact, much of it is added certainty that what they are doing is legal.

So let's call a spade a spade here: CH was out of line and got called on it. They subsequently lost, though not in truly catastrophic fashion, in court, and will have to alter/remedy their behavior in the future. Pretty much everyone else can keep on doing what they were doing. This is not some evil tyrant stomping out all competition. This is shutting down the most outrageous example of the group, while the others continue to operate.

Reinholt just forgets that GW publicly announced that they will try to shut down the next 200 most outrageous examples as well

...you always throw everything, inclusive of the kitchen sink, at someone so that they have to defend every single claim; it's good practice of law to do this...

It's not good practice of law, it's merely exploiting how badly the law is set up that encourages this. It's simply not right that any company can just raise hundreds of claims to swamp the defendant making it impossible for them to defend themselves, short of being fortunate enough to get pro-bono representation, because it occupies all their time and money. This is one of the big problems with IP law today. It's suppose to protect people's ideas, but instead it's just a weapon to destroy anyone with less money than you. With GW, it's clear that a large number of their claims were just spurious, given by how many were dropped immediately prior to trial. But those were dropped after wasting a colossal amount of time and money which most people in CHS's shoes could not afford.

Typically to win all GW have to do is cook up a huge piles of claims, and watch the defendant buckle under the sheer enormity of having to deal with the paperwork. That's not justice or 'good practice of law', it's abuse of the system. And GW are hardly alone in that, which is my issue with IP law. Similarly is the problem with libel laws, which suffer similar problems beine abuse d in the courts. Basically, you can't afford to say something true about someone who is much richer than you. The fact that the UK is becoming known for libel-tourism is absolutely shameful.

Goresaw wrote:
I know this is a british case, and its highly egotistical to believe there system is similar to America's courts, but at least in the U.S., a jury verdict doesn't mean much.

Juries are notoriously... confused, if not downright stupid. They don't understand the law, and they tend to pursue group think ideas, no matter how legally wrong they are. I bet once you see the full list of counts, very similar things will be ruled both ways, despite being essentially the same.

Second, the actual ruling itself, at least in the american system, is simply persuasive to other judges. Until it goes to an appeals court, and the appeals court rules, other lower level courts can easily 'distinguish and dismiss' this court case's rulings.

The biggest pain is going to be how expensive appeals are. If CHS wins anything, it would be getting a denial of appeal, so this case doesn't enter a lengthy, and expensive appeals process.

Again, though, just ignore everything I said, because I'm not familiar with the UK legal system, only the U.S. one.

The jury verdict seems like it might be pretty laser-like consistent, which would be unusual, especially for a case as large, complex, and confusing as this one.

That 200 companies claim had me raised an eyebrow, are there even that many related companies in the industry?