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.

 Rippy wrote:
It doesn't matter if you want to enter the market at a certain price, and will only at a certain price, the point is you are willingly buying recasts which is infringing on GW's IP. It doesn't matter if you would never have spent the money on the real deal, you are not entitled to spend less on counterfeits, you are still doing the wrong thing.

Entitled or not, wrong or not, it happens. Deal with it.

One of the great things about capitalist economys is you vote with your dollars. You don't like the company or don't agree with their price. Spend your money else where. A secondary market pops up that you want to support.. do it. The IP holder can learn from that or not. ::shrugs::

I find this thread fascinating, because people seem to confuse what's legal with what's common practice, and find a way to justify something that is clearly illegal.

All of the following are illegal, as far as I'm aware, in every country in the European Union, the United States, and Canada:

- Downloading a song that you don't own
- Downloading a TV show or movie from a torrent site
- Playing an unlicensed video game
- Using unlicensed computer software such as Windows or Office

It really doesn't matter if you planned on buying the DVD later. Remember the MPAA lawsuits for bittorrent downloads? "I was going to buy the DVD in 6 months" was not a defense. It doesn't matter if you don't like the other 19 songs on the CD, you hate iTunes, or you think a game's garbage and you'll toss it after 15 minutes of play. It doesn't matter if you didn't know that the PC you bought had a pirated copy of Windows.

It doesn't matter if you couldn't afford or wouldn't have bought the $2,000 handbag; the $50 knockoff is still illegal.

All of those things are illegal. There may not be sanctions (penalties) due to weak enforcement and no particular desire to prosecute individuals, but it doesn't make it more legal.

So why try to justify it?

Why not just simply say something like: "I don't like GW as a company, so screw 'em; I'd rather give my money to a recaster. Screw them, but hopefully they scrape through just enough to survive, so that they can make stuff that other people can copy so that I can buy it from a recaster for cheap."

Or: "I really like GW products, but I can't afford them, so I'm going to buy their stuff from a recaster. I know it's illegal, but hey, I'm probably not going to get caught."

Really, anything but: "I really like GW products, but I hate their prices, and I don't like the company. That makes it totally okay for me to buy from someone who recasts it and sells it for cheaper. "

I respect either of the first two a whole lot more, because at least it's honest.

To be clear: I play with LOTS of people who pirate IP in some way or another. Download a codex, buy a recast, whatever. I don't really care that they do it, but it would bother me if they tried to convince me that it were legal, or somehow morally justified.

I would posit that there's a difference between "rationalization" and what actually is.

Sure, you can rationalize anything and abuse any truth, but that doesn't take away from the fact that these things still hold true.

Ultimately, you want to produce where marginal revenue=marginal cost. That is where you maximize profit.

If people still pirate from other parties at lower price points, well, you're never going to eliminate that entirely, but if you are producing at the above price point, then you're already maximizing your profit and you either were never going to have those people as customers, or wouldn't be as profitable (or even operable) at those price points. In this case, the *only* piracy you care about is those that are willing and able to pay your price, but aren't. Now obviously that's where it gets murky, but those are the only instances where you're going to face actual harm, and they're typically a relatively small proportion of the piracy population. .

Remember, your goal isn't to eliminate piracy, it's to maximize profit. If piracy exists, but your producing at the optimal point and you're selling your full production, then you don't care.

Now, there's a case to be made that GW has perhaps raised their prices too much, and that the piracy is the inevitable result of *NOT* producing where marginal revenue=marginal cost or that perhaps the point where such is true for the time being is simply unsustainable over the long term, both of which will stimulate piracy and result in lower sales over time, but the problem lies with the producer blaming the consumer is counter-productive. That's a conversation for another thread however.


EDIT: Note: I'm not attempting to approach this from any sort of morality, only trying to make the point that piracy does not automatically harm the original producer, and you cannot equate an instance of piracy directly with a lost sale. Much like Trespassing, yes it's illegal, but if I'm just hopping a fence without causing damage to get to the buss top, you're not materially harmed.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Remember, your goal isn't to eliminate piracy, it's to maximize profit. If piracy exists, but your producing at the optimal point and you're selling your full production, then you don't care.

This isn't entirely true. Adobe is the perfect example of a company which ignores profit efficiency. It prices products like Photoshop, Creative Suite, and Acrobat Pro so ridiculously high that it's hard for most generally honest people to be customers.

I understand that people pirate those products for these reasons. But why rationalize it? Just call a spade a spade, and don't t try to make it "legal" somehow because of silly high prices.

Or, do the smart thing, use GiMP, Corel, and any number of other PDF alternatives.

 Talys wrote:
I find this thread fascinating, because people seem to confuse what's legal with what's common practice, and find a way to justify something that is clearly illegal.

All of the following are illegal, as far as I'm aware, in every country in the European Union, the United States, and Canada:

- Downloading a song that you don't own
- Downloading a TV show or movie from a torrent site
- Playing an unlicensed video game
- Using unlicensed computer software such as Windows or Office

It really doesn't matter if you planned on buying the DVD later. Remember the MPAA lawsuits for bittorrent downloads? "I was going to buy the DVD in 6 months" was not a defense. It doesn't matter if you don't like the other 19 songs on the CD, you hate iTunes, or you think a game's garbage and you'll toss it after 15 minutes of play. It doesn't matter if you didn't know that the PC you bought had a pirated copy of Windows.

It doesn't matter if you couldn't afford or wouldn't have bought the $2,000 handbag; the $50 knockoff is still illegal.

All of those things are illegal. There may not be sanctions (penalties) due to weak enforcement and no particular desire to prosecute individuals, but it doesn't make it more legal.

So why try to justify it?

Why not just simply say something like: "I don't like GW as a company, so screw 'em; I'd rather give my money to a recaster. Screw them, but hopefully they scrape through just enough to survive, so that they can make stuff that other people can copy so that I can buy it from a recaster for cheap."

Or: "I really like GW products, but I can't afford them, so I'm going to buy their stuff from a recaster. I know it's illegal, but hey, I'm probably not going to get caught."

Really, anything but: "I really like GW products, but I hate their prices, and I don't like the company. That makes it totally okay for me to buy from someone who recasts it and sells it for cheaper. "

I respect either of the first two a whole lot more, because at least it's honest.

To be clear: I play with LOTS of people who pirate IP in some way or another. Download a codex, buy a recast, whatever. I don't really care that they do it, but it would bother me if they tried to convince me that it were legal, or somehow morally justified.

I didn't say I downloaded torrents. The shows are ALL hosted on websites to be streamed.

Besides that I was not saying it was legal. I was saying there is nothing GW or the music companies can do about it besides adapt their business to better meet the demands of their consumers. Talking about "legal or not" or "morally wrong or not" is basically a waste of time. What is actually happening is that GW is pushing it's consumers away. Those consumers will vote with their dollars.

 Talys wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Remember, your goal isn't to eliminate piracy, it's to maximize profit. If piracy exists, but your producing at the optimal point and you're selling your full production, then you don't care.

This isn't entirely true. Adobe is the perfect example of a company which ignores profit efficiency. It prices products like Photoshop, Creative Suite, and Acrobat Pro so ridiculously high that it's hard for most generally honest people to be customers.

I understand that people pirate those products for these reasons. But why rationalize it? Just call a spade a spade, and don't t try to make it "legal" somehow because of silly high prices.

Or, do the smart thing, use GiMP, Corel, and any number of other PDF alternatives.

I'm not trying to "rationalize" it, only trying to note that one can't equate every instance of piracy to a lost sale.

Likewise, Adobe isn't really selling primarily to individuals, but to organizations (businesses, governments, schools, etc). They don't really care about joe-schmoe pirating Photoshop for his family photos, that's not really who they're selling to in the first place. If you're a business however and aren't paying, then Adobe will care, notably taking "Forever 21" to court a couple months ago. Forever 21 had the willingness and ability to pay, and didn't, thus Adobe is taking them to trial, while Joe-Schmoe did not and thus they don't pursue legal action against him.

Lance845 wrote:


I didn't say I downloaded torrents. The shows are ALL hosted on websites to be streamed.

Besides that I was not saying it was legal. I was saying there is nothing GW or the music companies can do about it besides adapt their business to better meet the demands of their consumers. Talking about "legal or not" or "morally wrong or not" is basically a waste of time. What is actually happening is that GW is pushing it's consumers away. Those consumers will vote with their dollars.

Any website streaming that latest episode of GoT other than HBO Go is equally illegal, bud.

While I agree with what you're saying -- people will do it anyways -- the subject of this thread WAS, "How are recast sites are legal?"

 Talys wrote:

Lance845 wrote:


I didn't say I downloaded torrents. The shows are ALL hosted on websites to be streamed.

Besides that I was not saying it was legal. I was saying there is nothing GW or the music companies can do about it besides adapt their business to better meet the demands of their consumers. Talking about "legal or not" or "morally wrong or not" is basically a waste of time. What is actually happening is that GW is pushing it's consumers away. Those consumers will vote with their dollars.

Any website streaming that latest episode of GoT other than HBO Go is equally illegal, bud.

While I agree with what you're saying -- people will do it anyways -- the subject of this thread WAS, "How are recast sites are legal?"

Which was answered with the very first post. The conversation shifted into this "what is morally correct. And what should GW do and what do we owe GW?"

We owe GW nothing. They earn our business. Or they don't.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not trying to "rationalize" it, only trying to note that one can't equate every instance of piracy to a lost sale.

Likewise, Adobe isn't really selling primarily to individuals, but to organizations (businesses, governments, schools, etc). They don't really care about joe-schmoe pirating Photoshop for his family photos, that's not really who they're selling to in the first place. If you're a business however and aren't paying, then Adobe will care, notably taking "Forever 21" to court a couple months ago. Forever 21 had the willingness and ability to pay, and didn't, thus Adobe is taking them to trial, while Joe-Schmoe did not and thus they don't pursue legal action against him.

Yeah, I get what you mean about the lost sale. You certainly can't convert every pirated copy of Windows into a lost $100 (or whatever), which is what software companies like Microsoft like to calculate as dollars lost to piracy being kazillions of dollars.

Also, what you say about Adobe is spot on. Likewise, GW wants to shut down people making knockoffs, not people buying a $60 knockoff. For so many obvious reasons, the latter makes no sense.

Like I said, I don't actually mind that it happens -- I know it does, and will, unless GW (really, FW) prices their products much lower than they would be willing to -- I just wish people would stop trying to say that somehow, it's legal, or moral, or whatever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lance845 wrote:

Which was answered with the very first post. The conversation shifted into this "what is morally correct. And what should GW do and what do we owe GW?"

We owe GW nothing. They earn our business. Or they don't.

Absolutely!

Out of pure curiosity, since Google doesn't seem to come up with much on the issue: are there countries where buying (not selling) knock-offs is illegal?

LordBlades wrote:
Out of pure curiosity, since Google doesn't seem to come up with much on the issue: are there countries where buying (not selling) knock-offs is illegal?

Apparently Britain will confiscate imports if they can be bothered to look for those things and know what to look for. So basically no. It might be illegal nominally in many places, but it is impossible to prove that a person knowingly purchased recasts. So, again, no.

Lance845 wrote:

LordBlades wrote:
Out of pure curiosity, since Google doesn't seem to come up with much on the issue: are there countries where buying (not selling) knock-offs is illegal?

Apparently Britain will confiscate imports if they can be bothered to look for those things and know what to look for. So basically no. It might be illegal nominally in many places, but it is impossible to prove that a person knowingly purchased recasts. So, again, no.

Same with USA and Canada. If you try to buy $5,000 of knockoff product, usually to resell, there's a chance it will get stopped at customs (this happens all the time, actually -- not with models, obviously). But for someone who buys a $60 kit, it's not nearly worth the effort.

 Talys wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not trying to "rationalize" it, only trying to note that one can't equate every instance of piracy to a lost sale.

Likewise, Adobe isn't really selling primarily to individuals, but to organizations (businesses, governments, schools, etc). They don't really care about joe-schmoe pirating Photoshop for his family photos, that's not really who they're selling to in the first place. If you're a business however and aren't paying, then Adobe will care, notably taking "Forever 21" to court a couple months ago. Forever 21 had the willingness and ability to pay, and didn't, thus Adobe is taking them to trial, while Joe-Schmoe did not and thus they don't pursue legal action against him.

Yeah, I get what you mean about the lost sale. You certainly can't convert every pirated copy of Windows into a lost $100 (or whatever), which is what software companies like Microsoft like to calculate as dollars lost to piracy being kazillions of dollars.

Also, what you say about Adobe is spot on. Likewise, GW wants to shut down people making knockoffs, not people buying a $60 knockoff. For so many obvious reasons, the latter makes no sense.

Like I said, I don't actually mind that it happens -- I know it does, and will, unless GW (really, FW) prices their products much lower than they would be willing to -- I just wish people would stop trying to say that somehow, it's legal, or moral, or whatever.

I don't think anyone here is saying it isn't illegal (or those that are are insane), but rather that isn't as immoral or wrong as some people claim it is. Recasters aren't running GW out of business, poor management and an unwillingness to adapt to changing times are.

 Talys wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not trying to "rationalize" it, only trying to note that one can't equate every instance of piracy to a lost sale.

Likewise, Adobe isn't really selling primarily to individuals, but to organizations (businesses, governments, schools, etc). They don't really care about joe-schmoe pirating Photoshop for his family photos, that's not really who they're selling to in the first place. If you're a business however and aren't paying, then Adobe will care, notably taking "Forever 21" to court a couple months ago. Forever 21 had the willingness and ability to pay, and didn't, thus Adobe is taking them to trial, while Joe-Schmoe did not and thus they don't pursue legal action against him.

Yeah, I get what you mean about the lost sale. You certainly can't convert every pirated copy of Windows into a lost $100 (or whatever), which is what software companies like Microsoft like to calculate as dollars lost to piracy being kazillions of dollars.

Also, what you say about Adobe is spot on. Likewise, GW wants to shut down people making knockoffs, not people buying a $60 knockoff. For so many obvious reasons, the latter makes no sense.

Like I said, I don't actually mind that it happens -- I know it does, and will, unless GW (really, FW) prices their products much lower than they would be willing to -- I just wish people would stop trying to say that somehow, it's legal, or moral, or whatever.

That's understandable, and in many ways I'd agree.

However, I will straight up say, on a personal note. I got into this game from grabbing a big huge PDF torrent years and years ago of GW books. Without piracy I probably never would have gotten into 40k, and I've since spent probably 5 digits on GW products over the years. I know my story isn't unique.It's not at all unreasonable to see some instances of piracy essentially as "Loss Leaders".

 Vaktathi wrote:

However, I will straight up say, on a personal note. I got into this game from grabbing a big huge PDF torrent years and years ago of GW books. Without piracy I probably never would have gotten into 40k, and I've since spent probably 5 digits on GW products over the years. I know my story isn't unique.It's not at all unreasonable to see some instances of piracy essentially as "Loss Leaders".

That's a very valid point. In high school, I wrote an essay taking a position that limited piracy was good for the software industry, and the CEO of Corel was once quoted saying that he would prefer a person pirate a Corel product than buy an Adobe product.

It neither makes it right nor legal, but it's a perfectly valid assertion, in my opinion.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not trying to "rationalize" it, only trying to note that one can't equate every instance of piracy to a lost sale.

Likewise, Adobe isn't really selling primarily to individuals, but to organizations (businesses, governments, schools, etc). They don't really care about joe-schmoe pirating Photoshop for his family photos, that's not really who they're selling to in the first place. If you're a business however and aren't paying, then Adobe will care, notably taking "Forever 21" to court a couple months ago. Forever 21 had the willingness and ability to pay, and didn't, thus Adobe is taking them to trial, while Joe-Schmoe did not and thus they don't pursue legal action against him.

Yeah, I get what you mean about the lost sale. You certainly can't convert every pirated copy of Windows into a lost $100 (or whatever), which is what software companies like Microsoft like to calculate as dollars lost to piracy being kazillions of dollars.

Also, what you say about Adobe is spot on. Likewise, GW wants to shut down people making knockoffs, not people buying a $60 knockoff. For so many obvious reasons, the latter makes no sense.

Like I said, I don't actually mind that it happens -- I know it does, and will, unless GW (really, FW) prices their products much lower than they would be willing to -- I just wish people would stop trying to say that somehow, it's legal, or moral, or whatever.

That's understandable, and in many ways I'd agree.

However, I will straight up say, on a personal note. I got into this game from grabbing a big huge PDF torrent years and years ago of GW books. Without piracy I probably never would have gotten into 40k, and I've since spent probably 5 digits on GW products over the years. I know my story isn't unique.It's not at all unreasonable to see some instances of piracy essentially as "Loss Leaders".

This is another aspect IP owners try to downplay: piracy helps increase your visibility and future sales, especially in developing markets. I know a lot of people that have become honest buyers in fields they would have never gotten into without piracy/knock-offs.

Edit: I also heard the 'brain' behind one of the most successful simulation softwares in my field (hydraulics) arguing they only benefit from piracy of their software. They can come down hard legally on anyone making money or publishing research with a pirated version of their software at any time, so all the piracy does is allow private users to (learn to) use their software, thus increasing user base and potential sales.

GW games have just strait up insanely unreasonable barriers to entry. If you couldn't pirate the books easily to get an idea of what you would be getting into I have no idea how anyone would get into it to begin with.

Lance845 wrote:
GW games have just strait up insanely unreasonable barriers to entry. If you couldn't pirate the books easily to get an idea of what you would be getting into I have no idea how anyone would get into it to begin with.

Legally with money.

 Rippy wrote:

Lance845 wrote:
GW games have just strait up insanely unreasonable barriers to entry. If you couldn't pirate the books easily to get an idea of what you would be getting into I have no idea how anyone would get into it to begin with.

Legally with money.

 Rippy wrote:

Lance845 wrote:
GW games have just strait up insanely unreasonable barriers to entry. If you couldn't pirate the books easily to get an idea of what you would be getting into I have no idea how anyone would get into it to begin with.

Legally with money.

Which is quite a bit more money than many are willing to part with just to get the basic reading materials, especially at the target age-range GW seems to be aiming for these days (13-16 year olds) who also happen to be amongst the most prolific demographics engaged in piracy, and amongst the least concerned with the legal/moral aspects of their behavior.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

Lance845 wrote:
GW games have just strait up insanely unreasonable barriers to entry. If you couldn't pirate the books easily to get an idea of what you would be getting into I have no idea how anyone would get into it to begin with.

Legally with money.

Which is quite a bit more money than many are willing to part with just to get the basic reading materials, especially at the target age-range GW seems to be aiming for these days (13-16 year olds) who also happen to be amongst the most prolific demographics engaged in piracy, and amongst the least concerned with the legal/moral aspects of their behavior.

Yes, luckily Lance is here to prove that very point!

 Talys wrote:
I find this thread fascinating, because people seem to confuse what's legal with what's common practice, and find a way to justify something that is clearly illegal.

All of the following are illegal, as far as I'm aware, in every country in the European Union, the United States, and Canada:

- Downloading a song that you don't own
- Downloading a TV show or movie from a torrent site
- Playing an unlicensed video game
- Using unlicensed computer software such as Windows or Office

Spoiler:

It really doesn't matter if you planned on buying the DVD later. Remember the MPAA lawsuits for bittorrent downloads? "I was going to buy the DVD in 6 months" was not a defense. It doesn't matter if you don't like the other 19 songs on the CD, you hate iTunes, or you think a game's garbage and you'll toss it after 15 minutes of play. It doesn't matter if you didn't know that the PC you bought had a pirated copy of Windows.

It doesn't matter if you couldn't afford or wouldn't have bought the $2,000 handbag; the $50 knockoff is still illegal.

All of those things are illegal. There may not be sanctions (penalties) due to weak enforcement and no particular desire to prosecute individuals, but it doesn't make it more legal.

So why try to justify it?

Why not just simply say something like: "I don't like GW as a company, so screw 'em; I'd rather give my money to a recaster. Screw them, but hopefully they scrape through just enough to survive, so that they can make stuff that other people can copy so that I can buy it from a recaster for cheap."

Or: "I really like GW products, but I can't afford them, so I'm going to buy their stuff from a recaster. I know it's illegal, but hey, I'm probably not going to get caught."

Really, anything but: "I really like GW products, but I hate their prices, and I don't like the company. That makes it totally okay for me to buy from someone who recasts it and sells it for cheaper. "

I respect either of the first two a whole lot more, because at least it's honest.

To be clear: I play with LOTS of people who pirate IP in some way or another. Download a codex, buy a recast, whatever. I don't really care that they do it, but it would bother me if they tried to convince me that it were legal, or somehow morally justified.

In my country there are some strange rules (The Netherlands) that it is not illegal to download it but it is illegal to own it, not sure if that is still like that now

Yes Rippy it is illegal in certain countries to buy recasts, but i can understand why people do it and not all people have the income to spend like other people. I just go another route buy some valkir from dreamforge and proxy them as terminators, my Leviathans can stand in as imperial knights and so on. There are other ways.

In some countries it is illegal to buy recasts, but now own or be gifted them. And if at the same time you decide to buy a banner or shirt from the same person, it is your right to do so.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

Yes Rippy it is illegal in certain countries to buy recasts, but i can understand why people do it and not all people have the income to spend like other people. I just go another route buy some valkir from dreamforge and proxy them as terminators, my Leviathans can stand in as imperial knights and so on. There are other ways.

This proxys are more illigal in the eyes of GW shop owners than recasts, because they can't tell recast from original if it's have been painted and can tell you instantly that your proxy is not belong in their shop.

On the topic: piracy is present and only become stronger as GW drops production wxpences but refuses to drop prices. I think that the rules should be free, they could put their rules on their website and STILL sell their codeces for fluff and illustrations. Hell it is known fact that people are wwilling to buy even illustratin books without ane fluff. Free rules would attract more people into a game. An more: they could FAQed codeces more often, it is not expencive, it is not even timeconsuming, but they refuse.

I personally bought my own copy of codex half year after playing my first game, if I could not play without it, I simply would not start to play at all.

Lance845 wrote:
GW games have just strait up insanely unreasonable barriers to entry. If you couldn't pirate the books easily to get an idea of what you would be getting into I have no idea how anyone would get into it to begin with.

Well, let's call a spade a spade. For a hundred bucks, you get a starter box with lots of models (which have fantastic hobby value), rules, dice, and templates. For $700-$1000 you can put together a pretty decent army. If you're shrewd, you can spend half that buying used. On top of that, prepared to spend serious time getting some models to look cool if that's your thing. That's the entry fee to the 40k club.

Now, you can say, "OMG that's crazy", because for a tiny fraction of that you can play StarCraft until your head explodes.

But, on the other hand, there is an endless list of entertainment that makes 40k look like the deal of a lifetime. People pay that much for a couple of hockey or football tickets without thinking twice. A season pass on a ski hill can be $1,500 or more, and you still need a crap ton of gear, possibly hotel rooms, and all that. A golf club membership can rock $20,000 a year (or more), and it's the same 18 holes and restaurant, y'know?

So, yes, relative to some things, it's expensive, but it's hardly had "insanely unreasonable barriers to entry". It's just a game where you play with a lot of toy soldiers, all of which take a respectable amount of time and money to get going.

Getting back to recasts -- recasts don't really fix that to any real degree. Pick any army other than Imperial Knights, GW will still be cheaper for the stuff in plastic, and you'll still not get out of spending $600+ to build a respectable army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Reinokarite wrote:

This proxys are more illigal in the eyes of GW shop owners than recasts, because they can't tell recast from original if it's have been painted and can tell you instantly that your proxy is not belong in their shop.

On the topic: piracy is present and only become stronger as GW drops production wxpences but refuses to drop prices. I think that the rules should be free, they could put their rules on their website and STILL sell their codeces for fluff and illustrations. Hell it is known fact that people are wwilling to buy even illustratin books without ane fluff. Free rules would attract more people into a game. An more: they could FAQed codeces more often, it is not expencive, it is not even timeconsuming, but they refuse.

I personally bought my own copy of codex half year after playing my first game, if I could not play without it, I simply would not start to play at all.

I've actually not seen a store tell someone to remove either a proxy or a recast before. Mind you, I don't really go to the GW store much. What you describe as changes are things that many people would absolutely love, but it won't ever happen with GW. There are lots of companies with games that do have free rules though.

Personally, I think a compromise would be significantly cheaper eBook rules (which have no printing or distribution cost, other than, possibly, the iTunes store).

I look at it as GW has caused this themselves by the continuous price hikes over the last couple of years, eventually people have enough of it and decide to try and find the cheapest way to enjoy the hobby they love. Not saying its right or wrong but if anyone is to blame is GW, I mean the amount of recasts and illegal downloads are testament to that.

 Talys wrote:


Yup. I personally don't care if the government doesn't get sales tax fir several reasons:

1. If the store shipped it to an out of jurisdiction customer, or I bought it from an out of jurisdiction vendor, it would be tax free. Just like if you bought it from an out of country vendor.

2. If I went to an out of jurisdiction event and bought product or prepaid gift cards, that would be tax free.

3. I actually practically never do this as I don't walk around with hundreds or thousands of dollars of cash. But on the odd occasion that I do, the store owner asks me if I need a receipt ("You don't need a receipt, do you?"), and if I say no, I always happen to get some money back. I don't even ask for it. It just happens. Certainly, that isn't a crime.

4. Whether my hairdresser reports their tip, or my waiter, or the FLGS storeowner... That just isn't my business.

Edit: To add to the list, if I pay a gardener, piano teacher, handyman, or any other of a long list of services and negotiate a tax price (quite often, THEY ask for it), my suspicion may be that they aren't remitting the tax, but this may nit be the case, and either way, it isn't my problem, is it? Even if someone like that provides me a service, I don't want the receipt, because what am I going to do with it? And if I guy models, likewise, I tell them to keep or destroy the receipt (unless it's credit card) because I there is a problem, they don't need me to drag the receipt back.

So if there's a way around a law in existence, it is ok to disregard said law?
Paying someone cash for services and you not knowing what they do tax-wise later is a little different from someone asking "Do you want a receipt?" {Wink,wink} and you know exactly what they're up to.

 Talys wrote:
Getting back to recasts -- recasts don't really fix that to any real degree. Pick any army other than Imperial Knights, GW will still be cheaper for the stuff in plastic, and you'll still not get out of spending $600+ to build a respectable army.

If you haven't even bothered to check how much recasters ask for their product, why do you keep making these kind of statements?

As a matter of fact, recasters usually sell their resin replicas cheaper than GW plastic originals. Much cheaper in some cases.

I think that it's important to note here that, at least in the US, it is NOT illegal to buy or own knockoff products. You're actually discussing two very different things under the law when you're talking about music/software piracy and recast or rebranded products. Piracy is covered under a different section of US law. Here, I'll let the US Attorney's office tell you:

Subsection 2320(d) provides a definition of the term "trafficking." This definition is derived from a related, recently enacted statute, the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act of 1982, now codified at 18 U.S.C. 2318(b). Under this definition, the scope of the act is limited to commercial activities. Thus it is not a crime under this act for an individual knowingly to purchase goods bearing counterfeit marks, if the purchase is for the individual's personal use.

http://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1709-joint-statement-parts-c-and-d-definitions-trafficking-counterfeit

What is illegal is to "traffick" in such products which means sell/resell them. There was a pretty big case a few years back involving the "Purse Lady" she had sold over $1million in counterfeit designer bags and did some jail time for it.

That said. NYC actually passed an ordinance making the purchase of knockoff products illegal so if you live in NYC, you're subject to local law on the matter but the federal government could care less if you're buying recast GW products from China.

My personal experience, big stuff can be had fairly cheaply through a recaster but individual models/troops, you're better off getting at retail. I don't frequent a FLGS but when I did, I always supported them by buying items from them. I buy recast, large items for my own personal use; when I'm done with them, I throw them in the trash...oddly enough I do this with GW plastic models too, I can't be arsed to deal with ebay, trade or anything else.

Let's play a game. One of these things is not like the other....

 insaniak wrote:

Murrdox wrote:

Under your definition, anybody who cannot afford a $100 is justified in buying this model from someone who has stolen my design, and is selling it for $50.

He wasn't saying that buying it from someone who has stolen your design is justified. Just that it's not actually costing you a sale, because you weren't going to get that sale even if the cheaper option wasn't available.

It's not about whether or not people should be able to buy your product cheaper. It's about whether or not the product you are selling is seen by your customers as being value for money.

I'm trying to sell a $100 model for $25 dollars now. That's harm.

If you can sell that '$100 model' for $25 and still remain in business, it wasn't a $100 model to begin with. It was a $25 model with a grossly inflated price tag.

Simply costing you the individual sale is very narrow-sighted, however, and it doesn't take the big picture into account. Maybe you were NEVER going to buy that Warhound Titan, but seeing it for $100 was too good to pass up and you jumped on it. Forge World was never going to get your $800. That doesn't mean it was a harmless transaction. You're still helping to keep that recaster in business so that he can continue to steal designs and sell illegal copies of them. It's not a harmless transaction.

Regardless of whether or not your customers see it as being value for the money also doesn't justify the illegal stealing of designs.

In any industry like this, you are going to have a black market for goods. The black market will depend on the cost of the original item, the cost of copying that item, and the amount that copy can be sold for.

Prada bags are a great example. They are extremely expensive! But the raw materials to actually make a Prada bag are very very cheap! This means the black market can create a knock-off Prada bag for a very very low cost. However because the retail Prada bag is VERY expensive, they can sell that knockoff for fairly cheap, and STILL make a very high profit margin. Prada bags are also priced very high on purpose. The designer WANTS them to be rare, and WANTS them to be a status symbol. This means you have a ready pool of customers who would never be able to afford a Prada bag that are willing to purchase a knock-off instead.

If you can sell that '$100 model' for $25 and still remain in business, it wasn't a $100 model to begin with. It was a $25 model with a grossly inflated price tag.

I'm sorry, but this is just untrue. There could be HUNDREDS of reasons why I initially set that price-tag at $100. First off, it's not my job as a company owner to simply "stay in business". I need to make as much money as possible! If I'm a public company, not only do I have to make as much money as possible, but I'm beholden to my shareholders to do so! If I have to sell that model for $25, and I only make a $5 profit margin on it, sure maybe I'll stay in business, but it probably wasn't worth having the model commissioned to be made in the first place!

But I see where you're going. You're saying that if my profit margin was excessive enough that I can afford to lower the price due to piracy, then my profit margin was "too high" to begin with and I should have started at the lower price. That argument fails, however, because you could say that about ANY price that I set.

Granted as I illustrated earlier, the higher price I set, the more likely the black market is going to step in and steal my design. So that's a risk as a business owner I have to take into account when I set my prices. This is absolutely true.

When it comes right down to it though, you're not being a "smart customer" when you buy from a recaster. You're stealing. You can rationalize it however you want, but you're stealing. Such transactions are not victimless crimes. They hurt the very business that you're so passionate about. If you're OK with that in your own mind, then there you go. I'm not here to convince you not to steal. I'm just here to tell you to own up to it, and don't sell anyone else in this hobby some story about how it's not really stealing, or you're not hurting anybody, or there's nothing wrong with it.

There's a REASON copying stuff like this is illegal. It's wrong.