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.

I think it is a fairly common reaction for people in this day and age to not feel immoral over action which undermine major corporations. These are faceless, intentionally de-humanized organizations, which in GW's case, has said some pretty incendiary things under oath about how they view their customers. Their product quality has been consistently poor for some time, and importantly, has underwent a pretty direct downwards slide of quality on all fronts while raising prices. From objectively worse rulesets, to questionable models with huge pricetags and the intentional shutdown of all avenues of communication, GW has divorced itself from its customers as much as possible.

In short, you've got a multinational which is fleecing their customers and honestly believes their customers *want* to be fleeced, and that is what makes them happy.

From that, there are a number of different reactions an unhappy customer might have. Regionalized prices and high markups lead the discount retailer phenomena and online stores (honestly, how many products have to be offered at 25% just to move them? No Australian or Canadian store sells GW product at full retail and expects to move it in reasonable quantities). GW responded with banning online stores wherever they could and changing trade account policies prohibiting cross-border shipping. Alternatives exist, but the overall impact in those regionalized areas has been and is still less than stellar.

Taking things a step further than that, as frustration builds, angry customers who would otherwise be paying GW for a product, move to other product lines - no shortage of competition exists in the void GW has consistently left open. Others, however, remain attached to the 40k setting and game for all its flaws, but want nothing to do with GW any longer. What do they do? Buy used or recast.

My own observations on that front is that people with established collections who have clubs which make up for some of GW's shortfalls want some way to keep varying their forces and playing the game, but don't want to reward GW for its legion of bad decisions and anti-customer attitude, or simply can't afford GW's out-of-control pricing. Some will just give up and shelf everything, but most seek means of continuing in some capacity; buying used is certainly the most popular; no shortage of people leaving the hobby dumping stuff on eBay, but when/if that approach fails, that's when recasts enter the equation for most people.

I'd hazard a guess that recasts, from what I've seen and heard, are the choice of last resort. When GW has forced people out of the hobby they love and turned their back on their customer base, they go through various stages of trying to keep doing what they enjoy, and after all the more conventional means have been exhausted do they turn to the People's Republic to satisfy their demand. I don't know anyone who buys recasts en-masse - out of a community of about 150-175 people or so across my region, there was one guy who cast everything himself (and then got pissed off and sold it all for rock-bottom prices, it was most glorious, a warehouse full of Imperial Guard on sale for pennies), but there are plenty of armies with a few recast pieces in them; stuff which is OOP, stuff who's pricing is especially egregious (GW and FW's massively inconsistent pricing is worth considerign), and people who've been out of a game for some time, dug out their old collections and have discovered they've been completely priced-out of their old hobby. People still buy GW product from independents and the like (some even from the one GW store), moreso than recasts or aftermarket producers still, but the share going elsewhere is certainly rising in line with frustrations.

I, for one, have only ever bought one recast item which I had heard was a terrible cast and a nightmare to put it together, while also being extremely expensive (and at a time when the exchange rate was especially unfavourable). I had heard that recasts are sometimes a bit more reliable, and given the low price I figured I'd give it a go, see what happened. End result was damned impressive, but I haven't bought anything since - the state of 40k is such I don't want to invest any money, recast or not into it.

As far as morality enters the equation, what I have seen is when alternatives exist from other legitimate companies, people (myself included) would rather buy those even though recasts are cheaper. Small companies like Victoria Miniatures, Dreamforge, Kromlech and so on are all well represented, even though in some cases they offer little to no savings versus their GW/FW counterparts, but are more attractive due to being a much more human business, responsive to ideas, suggestions and desires.

Aside from the one fellow, I've never seen recast Guardsmen, Marines, Leman Russes and the like; people will prefer to vote with their wallet by supporting a legitimate business, but Spartans, Sicarans, Riptides, Wraithknights, Wave Serpents, Tyranids? If they can't be found used, players are certainly turning to recasters, much moreso than when I started playing. Hell, the first recast I ever saw/heard of was in 2012, an Ironclad Dreadnought someone had done themselves in their garage. This is a new phenomena, but it also can't be viewed in a vacuum, it is part of a much larger phenomena and process, most of the blame can be attributed to GW itself.

Of course, one can argue that this is a luxury, you don't need to buy it, accept you aren't the target and move on to someone who does value your business. The problem with that arguement, and a comparison to Prada or Ferrarri is that GW did not use to price things as high as they do now - they've always been expensive, but the fact that in the space of a few years (and this is a long-term sort of hobby) many people who were once the target and product was justifiable in terms of cost/reward no longer are. People aren't about to just give up on a hobby they have enjoyed for years, decades even, where they have invested a lot of money, with established social circles and so on just because GW has priced them out of keeping up. Some will, and have done just that, and there certainly are far fewer people getting in to the game (back in Canada, I don't think there's been more than 2 new people in the entire BC 40k/Fantasy community in 6 months, and the demographic is decidedly older - I'm one of the youngest at 23, whereas here in France the demographic is notably younger, there clearly are people getting in to it here, but that I imagine is heavily predicated on the regional pricing model and higher wages in France, especially for youth). People are deciding this is a luxury they're not getting involved in, but it's a lot harder for someone already in it to back out as the business has decided they don't want them. Recasting is one of a legion of responses to that.

In the end, I'm more in favour of "Oldhammer" myself, but I understand recasting and the like, and I'm not about to offer any moral defense of GW. If anything, healthy capitalism is dependent on people voting with their wallets, choosing competition and encouraging companies to change. IP infringement on a large scale is a symptom of dysfunction, and history has taught us that should the enterprise(s) in question realign their business model in reflection of that dysfunction, people will return to buying "legitimate" product, morals don't factor into it.

 Peregrine wrote:

LordBlades wrote:
Not really. For example, what coukd could GW do to dissuade me from buying recast: start pricing models according to their size and detail, not their tabletop performance and stop shifting game rules around just to push the sales of model X or Y, both of which aren't exactly moral in themselves.

Sorry, but in what bizarre world is not using the pricing policies that you want an immoral act? GW sells plastic toys, not essential goods/services. If you don't like their prices you're free to buy something else instead. There are pricing decisions that maximize profit and pricing decisions that fail to do so, but no possible pricing decision by GW (or any other company selling luxury items like GW) could be reasonably labeled "immoral".

In the same bizzare world where buying a product that I want and I'm well within my legal rights to buy/own can be labeled immiral.

recasters of course have lower prices, they have lower costs. No designers, stores (I'm not saying that is a good thing for GW to have, just a fact) and infrastructure to maintain. So of course it is cheaper to copy than create, that is a simple fact

Morally I cannot stand recasting, it is repugnant , parasitical behaviour. No amount of post hoc rationalisation by those on here will change that, as is simply selfish justification of an entitled mind.

Dont like GW prices? Dont do things with GW. Dont try to claim your want is a need.

LordBlades wrote:
In the same bizzare world where buying a product that I want and I'm well within my legal rights to buy/own can be labeled immiral.

Legal =/= moral. And that doesn't do anything to answer the question of how GW's pricing decisions are immoral. So I guess that's your concession that "immoral" in this context just means "more than I want to pay"?

nosferatu1001 wrote:


Dont like GW prices? Dont do things with GW. Dont try to claim your want is a need.

Who here claimed it's a need? Corporations are by and large company letely amoral, so why should their customers be expected to behave differently?

You want my cash? Earn it. Make me feel your products are worth the asking price.

 Peregrine wrote:

LordBlades wrote:
In the same bizzare world where buying a product that I want and I'm well within my legal rights to buy/own can be labeled immiral.

Legal =/= moral. And that doesn't do anything to answer the question of how GW's pricing decisions are immoral. So I guess that's your concession that "immoral" in this context just means "more than I want to pay"?

To give you an example of what I'd consider an immoral decision: Gw makes new broadside kit that, relative to size/levelof detail costs a great deal more than comparable models. Then, in order to also make people who already have the old broadsides buy the new ones, they make HRR useless and HYMP (which was only an option in the new kit) super strong. I find that disrespectful toward existing customers.

LordBlades wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

LordBlades wrote:
Not really. For example, what coukd could GW do to dissuade me from buying recast: start pricing models according to their size and detail, not their tabletop performance and stop shifting game rules around just to push the sales of model X or Y, both of which aren't exactly moral in themselves.

Sorry, but in what bizarre world is not using the pricing policies that you want an immoral act? GW sells plastic toys, not essential goods/services. If you don't like their prices you're free to buy something else instead. There are pricing decisions that maximize profit and pricing decisions that fail to do so, but no possible pricing decision by GW (or any other company selling luxury items like GW) could be reasonably labeled "immoral".

In the same bizzare world where buying a product that I want and I'm well within my legal rights to buy/own can be labeled immiral.

Legal does not automatically mean moral. Thats a fundamental truth.

Want - so entitlement again. You want a product, just think it costs too much.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordBlades wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:


Dont like GW prices? Dont do things with GW. Dont try to claim your want is a need.

Who here claimed it's a need? Corporations are by and large company letely amoral, so why should their customers be expected to behave differently?

You want my cash? Earn it. Make me feel your products are worth the asking price.

So Prada should reduce their prices, because you dont like them?

Entitlement complex again.

Oh, and "I can be bad because X is bad" is a gakky way to live, you realise that yes?

LordBlades wrote:
Who here claimed it's a need?

It's implied by the statement that GW's pricing decisions are immoral. You can't have immoral pricing with a luxury item that potential customers are completely free to stop buying if the prices aren't desirable.

You want my cash? Earn it. Make me feel your products are worth the asking price.

And I don't object to that at all. The problem is when your conclusion is "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy recasts because I have to have GW products no matter what" instead of "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy some other thing instead".

Sorry I took a wrong turn from atop my high horse.
The "recasts is okay" camp's main argument at this time is "GW doesn't deserve my money". That is fine, don't give them your money, though using this as justification to immorally buy illegal products is simply pathetic.
Sorry if I sound like a broken record (which is in no way broken due to the slave labour used in creating the record), though my same point still needs to be made.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

So Prada should reduce their prices, because you dont like them?

More that Prada should make their price seem justified if they want him as a customer.


It comes back to that relationship with the customers that was discussed earlier. People are happy to spend money with companies that they like. We've seen comments in this very thread from people who buy direct from GW because they feel that they should support GW for producing the product that they like.

If GW want to stop people buying from recasters, they need to make those people feel that the product they are buying is worth the asking price. Lowering prices is only a part of that, and not inherently required because the price is only one part of the relationship equation. The other part (and IMO the bigger part) is fostering a positive outlook in your customers. Happy customers are often far less concerned about the price.

 insaniak wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

So Prada should reduce their prices, because you dont like them?

More that Prada should make their price seem justified if they want him as a customer.


It comes back to that relationship with the customers that was discussed earlier. People are happy to spend money with companies that they like. We've seen comments in this very thread from people who buy direct from GW because they feel that they should support GW for producing the product that they like.

If GW want to stop people buying from recasters, they need to make those people feel that the product they are buying is worth the asking price. Lowering prices is only a part of that, and not inherently required because the price is only one part of the relationship equation. The other part (and IMO the bigger part) is fostering a positive outlook in your customers. Happy customers are often far less concerned about the price.

Do you honestly think that even if GW made plastic sister's of battle (sorry this thread hadn't mentioned them yet), made a rule book everyone in the world was happy with, and lowered all of their prices by half that people still wouldn't buy recasts if they could get them cheaper?

 Rippy wrote:

Do you honestly think that even if GW made plastic sister's of battle (sorry this thread hadn't mentioned them yet), made a rule book everyone in the world was happy with, and lowered all of their prices by half that people still wouldn't buy recasts if they could get them cheaper?

No, I think that with the effort GW have put into alienating their customer base over the last few years, it would take a lot more than that to regain all of the goodwill that they have lost.

 insaniak wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

So Prada should reduce their prices, because you dont like them?

More that Prada should make their price seem justified if they want him as a customer.


It comes back to that relationship with the customers that was discussed earlier. People are happy to spend money with companies that they like. We've seen comments in this very thread from people who buy direct from GW because they feel that they should support GW for producing the product that they like.

If GW want to stop people buying from recasters, they need to make those people feel that the product they are buying is worth the asking price. Lowering prices is only a part of that, and not inherently required because the price is only one part of the relationship equation. The other part (and IMO the bigger part) is fostering a positive outlook in your customers. Happy customers are often far less concerned about the price.

Indeed, and I get that - however from the attitude here, most of it is I want something, I'm just not prepared to pay X for it so will pay X/4 instead.

That's the main problem I have; I want something thats too expensive, so I'll commit an immoral act with the post hoc justification that "GW need to earn my custom"

 Peregrine wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:
I am on a very restricted budget, so if I want stuff that I can get up to 50% cheaper and 100% better quality from a recaster then I'll do it and damn anyone who says otherwise.

Here's a better idea: buy something else and just accept that you can't afford GW products. This isn't a basic need like food or water that you can't possibly live without, and would be justified in stealing if you had no other option.

Which would still leave the issue of having lower quality products. I've bought stuff from forgeworld, and I've seen some of the illegal, chinese recasts (Tauros vehicles & drop sentinel in this case), and the recasts were simply better. Less flash, less warping, details were surprisingly crisper plus free shipping at 1/3rd of the price.

So even if they were to cost the same and even if people had all the money in the world to spend, why pay more for an inferiour product?

 insaniak wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

Do you honestly think that even if GW made plastic sister's of battle (sorry this thread hadn't mentioned them yet), made a rule book everyone in the world was happy with, and lowered all of their prices by half that people still wouldn't buy recasts if they could get them cheaper?

No, I think that with the effort GW have put into alienating their customer base over the last few years, it would take a lot more than that to regain all of the goodwill that they have lost.

Sorry, my point was that in a hypothetical world where GW's customer base wasn't alienated, people would still take the recast option if it was cheaper.

 Peregrine wrote:

LordBlades wrote:
Who here claimed it's a need?

It's implied by the statement that GW's pricing decisions are immoral. You can't have immoral pricing with a luxury item that potential customers are completely free to stop buying if the prices aren't desirable.

You want my cash? Earn it. Make me feel your products are worth the asking price.

And I don't object to that at all. The problem is when your conclusion is "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy recasts because I have to have GW products no matter what" instead of "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy some other thing instead".

Nope, I will buy recasts because:
- I want (not need) the specific model
- I can do so legally
- I feel no obligation to be moral toward a company that IMO treats their fan base like gak

That being said:
- I do buy from GW stuff that I feel is worth it (ally my Tau army apart from broadsides basicly)
- I would rather support an independent original creator but I haven't found anything the right size abd aesthetic for a HYMP Broadside.

BRB wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:
I am on a very restricted budget, so if I want stuff that I can get up to 50% cheaper and 100% better quality from a recaster then I'll do it and damn anyone who says otherwise.

Here's a better idea: buy something else and just accept that you can't afford GW products. This isn't a basic need like food or water that you can't possibly live without, and would be justified in stealing if you had no other option.

Which would still leave the issue of having lower quality products. I've bought stuff from forgeworld, and I've seen some of the illegal, chinese recasts (Tauros vehicles & drop sentinel in this case), and the recasts were simply better. Less flash, less warping, details were surprisingly crisper plus free shipping at 1/3rd of the price.

So even if they were to cost the same and even if people had all the money in the world to spend, why pay more for an inferiour product?

Because one is made legally and the other is made illegally. It depends on what your moral.compass says.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordBlades wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

LordBlades wrote:
Who here claimed it's a need?

It's implied by the statement that GW's pricing decisions are immoral. You can't have immoral pricing with a luxury item that potential customers are completely free to stop buying if the prices aren't desirable.

You want my cash? Earn it. Make me feel your products are worth the asking price.

And I don't object to that at all. The problem is when your conclusion is "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy recasts because I have to have GW products no matter what" instead of "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy some other thing instead".

Nope, I will buy recasts because:
- I want (not need) the specific model
- I can do so legally
- I feel no obligation to be moral toward a company that IMO treats their fan base like gak

That being said:
- I do buy from GW stuff that I feel is worth it (ally my Tau army apart from broadsides basicly)
- I would rather support an independent original creator but I haven't found anything the right size abd aesthetic for a HYMP Broadside.

I Hope everyone doesn't start acting with your questionable attitude, as then there will be no more GW to pirate off.

 insaniak wrote:
More that Prada should make their price seem justified if they want him as a customer.

But you're confusing two very different things here: continuing to buy GW products and buying illegal recasts. It's perfectly fine to decide that GW's prices are too high and stop buying. It's not ok to decide that GW's prices are too high so you're entitled to buy recasts instead.

If GW want to stop people buying from recasters, they need to make those people feel that the product they are buying is worth the asking price.

And examples of piracy in other industries seem to disprove this argument. Music/game/etc piracy isn't limited to just the big evil corporations that everyone hates, pretty much everything with more than a handful of fans is easily available. The only thing that seems to stop the pirates is being so obscure that nobody cares enough to buy and uploads a copy. And that includes some amusing incidents where game publishers or musicians said "we're going to sell this DRM-free because we respect our customers, please do the right thing and buy it" and their stuff was pirated just as much as any other popular game/album/etc.

So no, I don't believe that people will stop buying recasts if GW jumps through all of their hoops and magically becomes the best company ever. They'll just invent more rationalizations for why they "have" to buy recasts and save money. Similarly, I bet the vast majority of the people saying "GW is evil and I won't support them" as an excuse for buying recasts would immediately switch back to GW if the recasters raised their prices to GW levels.

 Rippy wrote:

Sorry, my point was that in a hypothetical world where GW's customer base wasn't alienated, people would still take the recast option if it was cheaper.

Some would, yes. There will always be those who are driven solely by price.

You reduce them though by making your customers want to support you, and by making it as easy as possible for them to do so. Again, look at the music industry. Rather than carrying on playing whack-a-mole with file-sharing sites, they just evolved their business model to one that works for today's market. GW, by contrast, is still refusing to accept that the '90s were a long time ago, and think that more restrictive business practices and refusing to communicate with their customer base will still work because they're the only fish in the pond.

The goal isn't to eliminate recasters. That's not going to happen. The goal is to build the loyalty of your customer base to the point where those few who turn to cheaper options simply don't matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

But you're confusing two very different things here: continuing to buy GW products and buying illegal recasts. It's perfectly fine to decide that GW's prices are too high and stop buying. It's not ok to decide that GW's prices are too high so you're entitled to buy recasts instead.

I don't recall having ever said that anyone is 'entitled' to buy recasts.

 insaniak wrote:
Again, look at the music industry. Rather than carrying on playing whack-a-mole with file-sharing sites, they just evolved their business model to one that works for today's market.

And the file-sharing sites kept operating exactly as they had been, other than upgrading their file-sharing technology occasionally. The only thing that seems to have ever made any meaningful impact on the easy availability of pirated music has been legal action against file-sharing sites.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
I don't recall having ever said that anyone is 'entitled' to buy recasts.

Maybe you haven't, but that's the argument you're entering: that people are entitled to own GW products, so if GW won't sell them at "fair" prices (where "fair" means "what I want to pay for them") then of course it's ok to get them from recasters because not having the desired GW product isn't an option.

 Peregrine wrote:
And the file-sharing sites kept operating exactly as they had been, other than upgrading their file-sharing technology occasionally. The only thing that seems to have ever made any meaningful impact on the easy availability of pirated music has been legal action against file-sharing sites.

That's because the goal is no longer to eliminate file-sharing sites, but simply to make the legal options more appealing. The same stuff will continue to be shared, yes. It just won't be shared by as many people.

Maybe you haven't, but that's the argument you're entering: that people are entitled to own GW products, so if GW won't sell them at "fair" prices (where "fair" means "what I want to pay for them") then of course it's ok to get them from recasters because not having the desired GW product isn't an option.

It's not, however, what I have said at any point in this thread, which makes it a fairly pointless response to a post that also wasn't making that claim.

 insaniak wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
And the file-sharing sites kept operating exactly as they had been, other than upgrading their file-sharing technology occasionally. The only thing that seems to have ever made any meaningful impact on the easy availability of pirated music has been legal action against file-sharing sites.

That's because the goal is no longer to eliminate file-sharing sites, but simply to make the legal options more appealing. The same stuff will continue to be shared, yes. It just won't be shared by as many people.

The makers of Dallas Buyers Club have just won a legal battle forcing all Australian ISPs to hand over details about stolen illegal downloads of their movie. The crusade to stop illegal downloads is still in full swing.

 insaniak wrote:
That's because the goal is no longer to eliminate file-sharing sites, but simply to make the legal options more appealing. The same stuff will continue to be shared, yes. It just won't be shared by as many people.

Do you have any credible statistics on this? How much did piracy decline when the music industry went digital? How many of the new customers for legal music downloads were "reformed" pirates, and how many were people who had been buying CDs until the change? And how much of the decision to move to a legal download system was driven by piracy vs. recognition that CDs were becoming obsolete?

It's not, however, what I have said at any point in this thread, which makes it a fairly pointless response to a post that also wasn't making that claim.

Now go back and look at the chain of posts you were responding to, where the original argument about "GW needs to convince me to buy" comes from someone who believes that they're entitled to buy recasts if GW won't give them the prices they want.

 Peregrine wrote:


Now go back and look at the chain of posts you were responding to, where the original argument about "GW needs to convince me to buy" comes from someone who believes that they're entitled to buy recasts if GW won't give them the prices they want.

All I feel entitled to is vote with my wallet and spend my cash elsewhere if GW doesn't convince me. Buying recasts IS a perfectly legal 'elsewhere' in that matter.

And no, until I see any sign GW gives a gak about their fans I won't lose any sleep over the perceived 'immorality' of my action.

LordBlades wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:


Now go back and look at the chain of posts you were responding to, where the original argument about "GW needs to convince me to buy" comes from someone who believes that they're entitled to buy recasts if GW won't give them the prices they want.

All I feel entitled to is vote with my wallet and spend my cash elsewhere if GW doesn't convince me. Buying recasts IS a perfectly legal 'elsewhere' in that matter.

And no, until I see any sign GW gives a gak about their fans I won't lose any sleep over the perceived 'immorality' of my action.

Okay so you admit you are immoral, don't care about GWs profits, or the fact that others purchasing non-recasts is the only reason there are new models being made for you to pirate. What is your point?

LordBlades wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

LordBlades wrote:
Who here claimed it's a need?

It's implied by the statement that GW's pricing decisions are immoral. You can't have immoral pricing with a luxury item that potential customers are completely free to stop buying if the prices aren't desirable.

You want my cash? Earn it. Make me feel your products are worth the asking price.

And I don't object to that at all. The problem is when your conclusion is "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy recasts because I have to have GW products no matter what" instead of "if it isn't worth it then I'll buy some other thing instead".

Nope, I will buy recasts because:
- I want (not need) the specific model
- I can do so legally
- I feel no obligation to be moral toward a company that IMO treats their fan base like gak

That being said:
- I do buy from GW stuff that I feel is worth it (ally my Tau army apart from broadsides basicly)
- I would rather support an independent original creator but I haven't found anything the right size abd aesthetic for a HYMP Broadside.

Youre not being moral "towards" a company. there is no directional component here. You are being IMmoral, full stop.

@ Peregrine:
In Australia, downloading copyright-infringing music has dropped by 20 per cent since Spotify launched.

Considering Australia is one of the biggest downloaders of pirated material... that's pretty good.

Most people want to get the product the right way, however a lot of companies don't seem to understand this. In Australia the biggest reasons for pirating are the cost (Up to 400% that of what other countries pay for subscription-based television content for no reason, 261% more on iTunes, 219% for Google Play, etc.) or lack of availability (GoT only being accessible on 1 channel of 1 subscription-based TV service, shows airing days or weeks after they'd already aired elsewhere in the world, etc.). Sure, there are those who will still pirate (e.g. Doctor Who is still pirated even though episodes aired here at the same time as in the UK and again later on for those who weren't able to wake up early enough) but you can't completely erase everything even if you make it illegal (e.g. Marijuana is still used even if it is illegal).



Personally, when it comes to recasts, I would only buy them for OOP models and maybe for individual bits if I couldn't buy the real-deal. I can understand why people would be 100% ok with buying an entirely recasted kit that is still in production because of cost/availability (especially here in Australian with the ridiculous markup of prices that were already ridiculous to begin with).

Remeber morality is 100% subjective guys, you may find buying recasts immoral but others (like Lance and Lord) don't.

Rippy wrote:
The makers of Dallas Buyers Club have just won a legal battle forcing all Australian ISPs to hand over details about stolen illegal downloads of their movie. The crusade to stop illegal downloads is still in full swing.

I'm not sure I'd class one company making a bone-headed move as a 'crusade in full swing'...

Peregrine wrote:Now go back and look at the chain of posts you were responding to, where the original argument about "GW needs to convince me to buy" comes from someone who believes that they're entitled to buy recasts if GW won't give them the prices they want.

If your response was aimed at that part of the discussion, you probably would have been better off quoting that part of the discussion rather than my post.

 insaniak wrote:

Rippy wrote:
The makers of Dallas Buyers Club have just won a legal battle forcing all Australian ISPs to hand over details about stolen illegal downloads of their movie. The crusade to stop illegal downloads is still in full swing.

I'm not sure I'd class one company making a bone-headed move as a 'crusade in full swing'...

I would. It isn't the only example either. It was just you said that they are no longer trying to stop illegal downloading sites, when there is now precedence in our courts for ISPs handing over details for illegal downloadIng.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another example is the constant raids on sites such as the pirate bay.

 Rippy wrote:
It was just you said that they are no longer trying to stop illegal downloading sites, ...

No, I didn't. I said that it is no longer the main objective


(It's probably also worth pointing out that I was referring to the music industry specifically. The movie industry is still quite firmly stuck in the idea that stamping harder will do the trick, despite it being completely ineffectual so far...)

 insaniak wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
It was just you said that they are no longer trying to stop illegal downloading sites, ...

No, I didn't. I said that it is no longer the main objective


(It's probably also worth pointing out that I was referring to the music industry specifically. The movie industry is still quite firmly stuck in the idea that stamping harder will do the trick, despite it being completely ineffectual so far...)

Apologies, I thought you said exactly that with

insaniak wrote:Rather than carrying on playing whack-a-mole with file-sharing sites, they just evolved their business model to one that works for today's market