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.

KaryudoDS wrote:
Leaking 15 minutes of a videogame though for example wouldn't be worth as much since I would still need the game, but heads would still roll over the leak. Maybe GW isn't sure or willing to figure out which heads need to roll, or maybe it sees any level of combinable information as threat.

Which... yeah I guess I wouldn't trust the Internet on that one either. To be fair.

What about Playthroughs on YouTube? There are thousands of videos of people playing through games on youtube. I dont have an Xbox, or PS but I'd like to experience some of the games on those system and thanks to playthroughs I can without buying the product, then again I'm not actually playing the game as I'm watching someone else do it. The questions is though if the gameplay or the story is what's the point of the game. Heck tons of games play like interactive movies and you can watch every alternative option and ending on youtube.
No idea where the law is regarding these things.

I guess this would compare to someone playing a game using a leaked book but without knowing points costs and rules this is pretty useless information as the game is dice based and can be completely random at times. The Swarmlord getting killed by a Commissar is unlikely but it can happen and if it happens it doesn't mean the Swarmlord is bad or that Commissars are OP, it just means the dice gods had a laugh.

 MadCowCrazy wrote:

KaryudoDS wrote:
Leaking 15 minutes of a videogame though for example wouldn't be worth as much since I would still need the game, but heads would still roll over the leak. Maybe GW isn't sure or willing to figure out which heads need to roll, or maybe it sees any level of combinable information as threat.

Which... yeah I guess I wouldn't trust the Internet on that one either. To be fair.

What about Playthroughs on YouTube? There are thousands of videos of people playing through games on youtube. I dont have an Xbox, or PS but I'd like to experience some of the games on those system and thanks to playthroughs I can without buying the product, then again I'm not actually playing the game as I'm watching someone else do it. The questions is though if the gameplay or the story is what's the point of the game. Heck tons of games play like interactive movies and you can watch every alternative option and ending on youtube.
No idea where the law is regarding these things.

I guess this would compare to someone playing a game using a leaked book but without knowing points costs and rules this is pretty useless information as the game is dice based and can be completely random at times. The Swarmlord getting killed by a Commissar is unlikely but it can happen and if it happens it doesn't mean the Swarmlord is bad or that Commissars are OP, it just means the dice gods had a laugh.

Nintendo has been cracking down on Let's Plays, albeit inconsistently

 Alfndrate wrote:

Nintendo has been cracking down on Let's Plays, albeit inconsistently

They have been cracking down on anyone who even mentions any of the products. I remember Total Biscuit mentioning they did a 3 hour show where they talked about games and they played an official trailer for a Nintendo game and Nintendo had a takedown done on the video. Showing gameplay from 20 year old games gets you a strike on your youtube account as well from Nintendo.

Guess they are the GW of the console and pc gaming world.

 hisdudeness wrote:


My understanding for the UK, is that if the work has not been released the owner has final say as to when/how release happens. After release, I believe the rules are more restrictive.

More restrictive than "final say"?!?

While this behaviour doesn't seem that odd given GW's reputation, I actually thought they were getting more savvy when 40k radio was leaking the codex.

It struck me that they were allowing them to leak things in a calculated manner. First blurry horrible pictures then vague chapter traits. With everything becoming clearer as the release grew closer.

It seemed to build a lot of excitement here and on other popular wargaming sites.

There will be no excitement! Only the quiet and orderly spending of money in our pursuit of our favorite hobby "buying things from Games Workshop!"

These are the aholes that deliberately lied to us about the space marine release and then blamed it on us for not asking the right questions, I hope they burn.

I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

In this case i would say they hate the people releasing information they don't want to get out until they release it to their fanbase

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

Lucasfilm.
edit: this was meant to be funny and not taken literally. Smile.

 pretre wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
That's what Im getting at. Lets go big picture here. What is GWs goal with all of this?

The same thing that it has always been. Protect their IP. Whether they are doing that in the right way or not, at least they have been consistent.

Or, you could just say an expensive legal department trying to justify their existence?

Some of these guys are their biggest fans, and this amounts to yet another big 'Feth off'.

And really, who gives a flying poo about them leaking points values?! Will it even diminish their sales by a quarter of one percent (in fact the opposite, considering 40k radio acting as advertising for their game). Once again, the level of self importance with the company is mind-bogglingly hilarious, and deserves to be scorned by the conscientious fan community.

Note that I have not listened to the show, so I really do not know what was said, in what context, and in what manner.

That said, there's also an issue of protectability. Rules just aren't protected by copyright, other than the specific text of the rules. The system is straight up not protectable. Anyone should be able to talk about the point costs of units as this is an element of the game rules. And even sections of the text should be distributable in the context of a review.

At the very least, any discussion or reading of game rules is a murky area.

“In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”

X unit costing Y points is part of a system. The force organization structure is part of a system. A unit's place in that force organization is part of the system.

An Imperial whatsit in the new codex costs bla points and is now in the bla force organization slot. It used to cost bla points which was bla more than now. Now you can take bla unit as a bla force org and that allows you to take bla units as this force org instead of this other force org, and at bla points you could field bla number of them in a bla point game.

That's ipso facto a discussion of rules, which would necessarily mention the name of units, which is potentially copyrightable, but even if it were, it would be such a minimal portion of the whole work that I can see it easily falling within the limits of fair use.

There might be something if those guys were reading off stat lines, wargear options, and rule descriptions straight from the book exactly as printed. But I can imagine a ton of ways to communicate that information in a way that relates almost exclusively to a procedure, process, system, or method of operation.

 Ouze wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
I know GW likes to think it can stop people talking about points costs unless it's in a roundabout manner (X costs 30 skaven slaves/a powerfist/etc) and that they think because they put a tm on the back of the book anything in it is trademarked but presumably 40k radio acquired it in a legal manner, then spoke about it in a news/commentary show that they do right?

... Snape killed Dumbledore...

Noooooooooooooo!

 Eldarain wrote:
While this behaviour doesn't seem that odd given GW's reputation, I actually thought they were getting more savvy when 40k radio was leaking the codex.

It struck me that they were allowing them to leak things in a calculated manner. First blurry horrible pictures then vague chapter traits. With everything becoming clearer as the release grew closer.

It seemed to build a lot of excitement here and on other popular wargaming sites.

This is EXACTLY what I thought as well. It was as if GW accidentally discovered that controlling their previews builds excitement and increases sales. As if they actually WANTED us to look forward to their releases, rather than just guessing (or reading about somebody else's guesses) as to what was coming next.

Pretty foolish of us to think GW was going to try to grow and learn and avoid all the trash talking we aim at them when they do something like this...

 Ravenous D wrote:
That's what Im getting at. Lets go big picture here. What is GWs goal with all of this?

I'm with you: What exactly is GW's end goal here?

The best thing in the world for a company is when customers are talking about you and your product. In the case of 40K Radio they gave a LOT of information, most of it positive, about the SM:Codex... I'd be curious as to how many people bought the book because of the in depth coverage versus those who simply scribbled notes down and ignored the book? My gut "feeling" is that very few people did the latter.

So, what really is GW trying to do? I know that in certain cases trademarks can be lost when the words become synonymous with a general class of products/services; but I don't think any of their valid trademarks are in danger of that. - and no, I don't consider Space Marine to be a valid trademark due to prior usage.

Regarding copyright infringement, well, GW's best way to stop it is by putting out quality physical books and letting social behavior fix it. Most hobby shops already require you to have a codex in order to play there, which is a powerful motivator to force people to buy the product. And, sure, the PDF will show up on in a torrent fairly quickly but my experience (software) has been that "thieves" wouldn't have bought it in the first place.

So, again, what are they trying to do? Is this possibly some form of backwards advertising? In other words trying to use the Streisand Effect? Honestly, I can't see any reason for them to send out C&D letters like this. I get the feeling that a lot of companies have simply gotten onto the IP Law bandwagon created by the music industry and have simply lost site of what's important.

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

Have a read up on TSR.

I'm still not sure if GW have actually managed to surpass TSR in general assclownery...

More bullying from a company that thinks they the hobby rather than simple part of it.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

Have a read up on TSR.

I'm still not sure if GW have actually managed to surpass TSR in general assclownery...

First, my greatest hope for GW and all the games they produce is that they meet the exact same fate as TSR did (namely, being bought out by a company that cares about it's fans and it's products).

But, there's a big difference between TSR and GW in that TSR was run by somebody who actively thought gaming was dumb and that gamers were unworthy of respect or concern.

It is even more embarrassing, I think, for GW to behave so abhorrently when, as far as we know anyway, they actually WANT to make good products and WANT to be popular. If it comes out in 10 years that the board of directors and the CEO genuinely hated us, this all makes more sense, but we have no reason to believe that they don't at least consider themselves to be an ally to the gamer, do we?

 azreal13 wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

 MadCowCrazy wrote:

As far as 40K Radio is concerned GW has no legal ground to stand on unless you would count reading something that hasn't been released yet as corporate espionage?

Regardless if it was released or not... I cannot go and buy all 7 Harry potter books and narrate the entire thing on youtube. I can go buy all 7 harry potter books and do a series of reviews of it with reading limited excerpts as an integral part off the review.

Basically narrating the entire codex and statlines for the sake of just getting the information out there is reproducing copyrighted work and if it is the work in its entirety with little to no actual news story or review, they are just copyright infringement. Hence a court case. If they want to claim 'fair use' they need to prove it, or take it down.

I don't think any pro bono work will support what they were doing as legitimate 'fair use' as if there is a hazy line, it is pretty clear they are over it.

Except it wasn't the whole codex was it?

Sure, it was the most relevant parts, but then, if you were reviewing something, wouldn't you concentrate on the parts that were most relevant to your expected audience?

For the record, I think this, superficially, seems like one of the less spurious legal actions GW's have shat out over recent times, but as I'm unfamiliar with the law, and only know what 40K Radio did by virtue of that which was reposted here, I don't really feel informed enough to argue either way.

More to the point is that mechanics have fairly soundly been determined to not have copyright protections. Provided they were not reading the fluff portions outloud on YouTube, the numbers and statlines are generally outside of copyrights. They lack the creative nature needed. The rules and stats which support them end up being under different IP protections (patents in most cases) and more often than not...no protection at all.

GW might not like when stats and rules are discussed on forums and I am sure they release all manner of legal hounds when they do...but, that doesnt mean they have a leg to stand on.

 Steve steveson wrote:
No, but if you read out whole sections of the book she/her publishing company would. It is a question of where the line is.

There is no line, it is clearly a free speech issue.

If GW cares that much, they should clamp down on rumors.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

 tomjoad wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

Have a read up on TSR.

I'm still not sure if GW have actually managed to surpass TSR in general assclownery...

First, my greatest hope for GW and all the games they produce is that they meet the exact same fate as TSR did (namely, being bought out by a company that cares about it's fans and it's products).

But, there's a big difference between TSR and GW in that TSR was run by somebody who actively thought gaming was dumb and that gamers were unworthy of respect or concern.

It is even more embarrassing, I think, for GW to behave so abhorrently when, as far as we know anyway, they actually WANT to make good products and WANT to be popular. If it comes out in 10 years that the board of directors and the CEO genuinely hated us, this all makes more sense, but we have no reason to believe that they don't at least consider themselves to be an ally to the gamer, do we?

We've seen some pretty derogatory comments from the marketing director for north America that went without any sort of apology or aknowledgment from the company. To me that suggests they do look down on the grown men playing with their childrens toys.

Chris - wrong country, and free speech in the US still doesnt allow you to breach copyright.

Come on, we all expected GW to react that way, when 40k radio leaked the complete rules from SM Codex and Dark Elf armybook. Only surprise was how long it took this time.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

Have a read up on TSR.

I'm still not sure if GW have actually managed to surpass TSR in general assclownery...

Aye. Same train of thought, same Casey Jones rail service.

It comes with having a cooperate culture of loosing touch with your fan base and thinking you are above your business. I/E GM, FORD, Sears Robuck, JC Penny, etc.etc.etc.

Fat Cat mentality.

It happens more then we care to admit it in the gaming world. Ask FASA, TSR, and GDW for a look into their crystal ball's.

As to the assclownery, I only have to point to the "Gamesday" footage that is prevalent on the net before GW C and D's it as well.

That's not the Gamesday I used to know.

 azreal13 wrote:
There will be no excitement! Only the quiet and orderly spending of money in our pursuit of our favorite hobby "buying things from Games Workshop!"

I am so glad I walked away from that expensive Game.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Come on, we all expected GW to react that way, when 40k radio leaked the complete rules from SM Codex and Dark Elf armybook. Only surprise was how long it took this time.

I'm not fully aware of the actual leak, but if they leaked all the rules and points costs, instead of listing some noteworthy highlights as part of a review/critique, then a C&D seems fine to me.

Wanna see my shocked face?

 Grot 6 wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

Have a read up on TSR.

I'm still not sure if GW have actually managed to surpass TSR in general assclownery...

Aye. Same train of thought, same Casey Jones rail service.

It comes with having a cooperate culture of loosing touch with your fan base and thinking you are above your business. I/E GM, FORD, Sears Robuck, JC Penny, etc.etc.etc.

Fat Cat mentality.

It happens more then we care to admit it in the gaming world. Ask FASA, TSR, and GDW for a look into their crystal ball's.

As to the assclownery, I only have to point to the "Gamesday" footage that is prevalent on the net before GW C and D's it as well.

That's not the Gamesday I used to know.

This pretty much says it all:

I weep for Games Workshop.

 MadCowCrazy wrote:


What about Playthroughs on YouTube? There are thousands of videos of people playing through games on youtube. I dont have an Xbox, or PS but I'd like to experience some of the games on those system and thanks to playthroughs I can without buying the product, then again I'm not actually playing the game as I'm watching someone else do it. The questions is though if the gameplay or the story is what's the point of the game. Heck tons of games play like interactive movies and you can watch every alternative option and ending on youtube.
No idea where the law is regarding these things.

Well as pointed out Nintendo went on the warpath. So I'm thinking that does technically count as a public performance. I don't think most companies normally bother because we buy the games to actually play them. So while I'm pretty sure they were in their rights to do so it didn't really make any sense. Same thing has come up in eSports with companies not wanting their games being used but in that case money is usually changing hands... want to say that was Nintendo too actually. Not sure.

 pretre wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
I've never seen a company hate its fanbase as much as GW

Lucasfilm.
edit: this was meant to be funny and not taken literally. Smile.

You clearly meant LucasArts sir.
edit: while funny I'm fairly certain that was the reason it committed suicide.