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.

Still a thriving market on ebay. Lots of bits available of all types. Bought a bunch of specific meganob bits as recently as last month. Needed some spares to make another mega-armor big mek, and they had exactly what I needed without any excess.

My past go-to site, hoard o' bits, sure seems like they are TOS on a lot of items, but eh. Ebay works fine.

Bits world and bulletbits55 are what I see a lot of on ebay.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:
How can GW stop someone from busting a box apart and selling bitz out of it? All I can think of is revoke their account. If I were to buy under Joes game shop and sell under Sams bitz place how would they know?

I'd thought of this, but it probably wouldn't take much to put 2+2 together. If it's a shop's major source of income, they may not be willing to take that chance. I was even considering starting a store of my own for a while until I saw the new ToS.

Bulletbits on ebay seem unaffected. Same prices, and listing more bits than ever. I've ordered from them a few times, great source of bits if you take the time to camp the auctions. Only thing stopping me from ordering more atm is the horrible exchange rate ; /

I've ordered huge amounts of bits since the new policy, from sellers in the US, UK, and Europe. The selection isn't what it was, and prices are probably higher (more expensive for them to procure the bits, and less competition). But bits are still a thing.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Good God GW hates us. I guess that's the price I pay for being a 20 year customer.

I don't buy new from them anymore... I buy from people...like on dakka lol

If gw made bitz on new sprues, they'd sell loads.
But they don't , so bitz sites it is.

the fact bit traders now need to buy retail and split up the boxes, realy upped the prices on bits across the board on Ebay.

Well it sucks, it has made it worth wild to start putting up bits from my own collection on ebay.
*shrugs*

 Yonan wrote:
Bulletbits on ebay seem unaffected. Same prices, and listing more bits than ever. I've ordered from them a few times, great source of bits if you take the time to camp the auctions. Only thing stopping me from ordering more atm is the horrible exchange rate ; /

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dark-Eldar-Scourges-HAYWIRE-BLASTER-bits-Warhammer-40K-Games-Workshop-c-/351307096341?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item51cb88e115

That right there is the problem.

He has crap for selection and much of what he has are in single quantities and auctions instead of buy it now. So for these guys needing 4 haywire blasters for their scourge it starts to make way more sense to buy a new box at $25 then $14 for one gun.

 Paradigm wrote:

tgjensen wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

REMINDER, DAKKA DOES NOT CONDONE PIRACY. RECASTING YOUR OWN BITZ IS FINE, RECASTING SOMEONE ELSE'S IS NOT.

Just a word to the wise.

Wait, recasting your own bitz is fine?

All these years, I thought I was a criminal!

To clarify, if you made those bits yourself (sculpted, scratch-built ect) then it's fine, you 'own' those bits. If, on the other hand, you're casting a flamer or SM head from GW then it's not technically allowed.

Actually, unless I'm mistaken; you are legally allowed to make a few copies of your legitimately purchased bits as long as it is for private use and not for reselling. Same way as you are allowed to make a copy of a music CD to keep in your car.

Zywus wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:

tgjensen wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

REMINDER, DAKKA DOES NOT CONDONE PIRACY. RECASTING YOUR OWN BITZ IS FINE, RECASTING SOMEONE ELSE'S IS NOT.

Just a word to the wise.

Wait, recasting your own bitz is fine?

All these years, I thought I was a criminal!

To clarify, if you made those bits yourself (sculpted, scratch-built ect) then it's fine, you 'own' those bits. If, on the other hand, you're casting a flamer or SM head from GW then it's not technically allowed.

Actually, unless I'm mistaken; you are legally allowed to make a few copies of your legitimately purchased bits as long as it is for private use and not for reselling. Same way as you are allowed to make a copy of a music CD to keep in your car.

I am not a lawyer, but the laws and protections concerning this topic varies from country to country and has been rehashed in many 30+ page threads here...

I've noticed some bits on HoB being perpetually TOS, but the few factions I generally buy bits for have been TOS then restocked.

Mymearan wrote:
How are you reaching that conclusion? I can't imagine sales to bits sites making up more than a tiny percentage of their sales, unless you have some info to the contrary. I can understand why they would forbid bits sales, since it doesn't benefit them at all. The sales they made to bits sites would probably have been offset by the sales they lost because people bought bits rather than complete kits. Their own bit service was amazing, but it must've been complete HELL logistically. And with plastic kits the labor required just to sit there and snip bits and organize them... I can't imagine that being even close to worth it.

I don't look into their finances,so I'm just going with what I've deduced. Bear with me here:

I moderately convert and I've roughly spent €150 on GW bits out of total €500 I've spent on their products. So 30% of what I've (indirectly) purchased from them has been in the form of loose bits. Out of about 20 players I know, about 3 would spend a similar amount. So say on average, worldwide even 2 out of 10 players spend 30% of their miniature purchases on GW bits. That means purchases from bits companies constitutes 4.5% of collector's expenditure. Say Those bits companies sell those parts for twice what GW sell the complete kits to them for. That's still 2.25% of their sales.

I can't stress enought that these are very rough estimates, of my own making, but if I'm anywhere near the mark, financially speaking, a 2.25% fall in sales is a huge percentage.

Mymearan wrote:

How are you reaching that conclusion? I can't imagine sales to bits sites making up more than a tiny percentage of their sales, unless you have some info to the contrary. I can understand why they would forbid bits sales, since it doesn't benefit them at all. The sales they made to bits sites would probably have been offset by the sales they lost because people bought bits rather than complete kits..

This is the contradiction that always seems to pop up in Bits Store discussions. Bits sellers are an inconsequential percentage of GW's sales... but GW had to cut them off, because they were causing some massive hit to GW's sales...

Doesn't seem like it can have been both...



Here's the thing - Yes, Bits Sellers mean that some customers who might otherwise have bought, say, a Tactical Box just buy a single meltagun instead, and the sales of the Tactical Box that the bit seller is selling are spread out amongst multiple people, rather than selling all of those people Tactical boxes individually. And that seems like it means that GW are selling fewer Tactical boxes.

But it's not quite that simple in actual practice. The guy who wants a whole squad with the same 1-to-a-box breastplate isn't generally going to buy 10 Tactical boxes to get them. If there's nobody selling them, he just trades for them, or accepts that it's too hard to do what he wants to do and just makes do with what he has. Or press-moulds them.

By allowing people to access the specific bits they want without having to buy entire boxes for a single component, bits sellers encourage sales. Projects that would otherwise be completely out of reach suddenly become do-able. And that's good for business.


But it seems that GW just look at the surface, and see that one box being broken up amongst multiple customers, and they think that's a problem. Because after all these years, they still just don't actually understand their customers.

I used to occasionally buy bits off eBay- if you buy multiple bits fr the same seller they'll generally send you an invoice so you don't have to pay shipping on all your purchases.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

REMINDER, DAKKA DOES NOT CONDONE PIRACY. RECASTING YOUR OWN BITZ IS FINE, RECASTING SOMEONE ELSE'S IS NOT.

I learned to press-mould bits after reading an article in White Dwarf that showed how to do it and recommended using it to add extra interest and details to your conversions. I'm quite happy to take that as pretty unambiguous.


edit - aargh - mangled quotes!

I looked at Bullet and thought jimmy crickets they are cheap prices and delivery, however taking EBay's currency conversion it works out at $1.32 Australian per $1.00USD.

In some cases it is cheaper to pay Australian retail than to purchase anything from USA via EBay, the postage is the killer and it is getting worse from vendors from usually cheap UK.

I now pay full Aussie retail, just because I can't be bothered to get individual bits, also I can always find something to do with all those extra bitz.

Well thanks to GW my press mold skils and greenstuff are on the up.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Cothonian wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:

Now instead of giving them some money bu buying bitz from someone who buys from GW, I'll just recast.

Same here, I've started looking at casting tutorials, looks easy enough. Now I just gotta get some materials and start experimenting...

REMINDER, DAKKA DOES NOT CONDONE PIRACY. RECASTING YOUR OWN BITZ IS FINE, RECASTING SOMEONE ELSE'S IS NOT.

Just a word to the wise.

This is an area where I have both Great Knowledge and Great Experience.

In 2003 I got my first job after being nearly killed by my late/ex-wife and the motorcycle accident prior to that.

It paid REALLY, really well.

It was all contract work doing Architectural Sculture for VERY expensive houses/homes and buildings (I can give a link to some of the work on request, to give examples).

People would pay six to eight figures for the work.

My own part of that take was small, amounting to only a few thousand dollars a piece.

But we had this one guy commission a fountain for which I made $15,000,

Then he asked how much we would charge to make 20 of them.

I was in Heaven...

With the discount, I would have made $250,000 for half a year's work.

Turns out the guy simply made a mold of the original fountain, and then paid some Persians to add the details he wanted for a few thousand dollars.

We sued him, of course.

But turns out, that since he made these copies for himself, and not to sell, that it was considered "Fair Use" (in the US legal parlance).

I discovered he could have made a billion copies of the fountain (or anything else he wished to copy), and as long as those did not affect our ability or price of our work, then it was all legal and fine.

It is only when a work "enters the economy/market" does it become illegal.

Because the copies never entered the market (no one ever paid to see them, he never made money off their existence - saving money isn't the same as making money, apparently - and they were never offered to anyone for sale).

Our ONE victory.

If he sells the house, he must either remove them or destroy them before he puts the house on the market.

This was the issue that put me at odds with the owner of The Miniatures Page, as he arbitrarily ruled against any mention of making molds or other processes because "recasters are evil," yet refused to define what "recasting meant" or even to recognize the case law(s) concerning that very issue.

There are limits to what is reasonable.

Someone who buys one space marine, and then casts an army for their own use is on dangerous ground (because in their use of it, they will likely profit in some way - they might win a tournament... Even entering the tournament could be seen as market entry).

But a guy who obtains a long OOP model, and casts it to create a unit might be on safer ground, as long as he never explicitly sells, nor explicitly uses the recasts to substantially affect the market value of the original work would probably be on safe ground.

Either way.... Recasting works that are available at a reasonable price, regardless of how they intend to use it! is a fething jerk ass thing to do to the artist who created that work.

And not supporting artists to create is evil.

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azazelx wrote:

Zywus wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

REMINDER, DAKKA DOES NOT CONDONE PIRACY. RECASTING YOUR OWN BITZ IS FINE, RECASTING SOMEONE ELSE'S IS NOT.

To clarify, if you made those bits yourself (sculpted, scratch-built ect) then it's fine, you 'own' those bits. If, on the other hand, you're casting a flamer or SM head from GW then it's not technically allowed.

Actually, unless I'm mistaken; you are legally allowed to make a few copies of your legitimately purchased bits as long as it is for private use and not for reselling. Same way as you are allowed to make a copy of a music CD to keep in your car.

I learned to press-mould bits after reading an article in White Dwarf that showed how to do it and recommended using it to add extra interest and details to your conversions. I'm quite happy to take that as pretty unambiguous.

As I just related.

Yes... You ARE allowed to do this.

Just beware that you do not use the cast pieces in any way to market yourself or your property, and ESPECIALLY NEVER offer those recast bits or pieces for sale.

And given the rapidly falling prices of 3D scanners and printers.... It will not be too terribly long before you can "Photocopy/Xerox" a miniature in the same way you would an article in a magazine.

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW...

I and my little sister are the only people in my family who are not Lawyers (although my younger brother is primarily an Aerospace Engineer, he is also qualified on orbital and extra-planetary lease-law).

But my father, aunt's, uncle, sister, cousins, grandfathers, etc... Are all Lawyers, and the family still has a Law firm in Dallas, Texas (currently itself involved in litigation after my uncle' sheath): Bailey, Vaught, Vauhgn, and Robertson.

And when my own work was pirated, they were among the legal aid team involved with researching the laws.

I can post a rundown of the legal statuses of most countries in the Western World (which includes, ironically, the Far East Asia in terms of legal foundations) regarding Fair Use.

It pretty much runs down to:

The Americas have laxer laws involving personal use, including things the Europeans don't.

And Eastern Europe and the Middle East (and China) pretty much don't give a damn as long as it isn't the work of a native.

MB

I will echo Be Afraid's experience, but in Canada. I was doing accounting work for a stoneware and ceramics company and someone reproduced a custom piece rather than buying multiples. As the items were in no way distributed, as far as the courts were concerned, they were non-existent.

We even had video footage of the multiple copies. They were even visible from a public street. We couldn't even get a ruling, injunction or agreement that prohibited their distribution in the future as that would be a ruling on something that could not be established to exist.

If you start paying attention to copyright rulings you'll start noticing a common denominator. They are only about things that actually change hands/put on display or are made available to change hands or be put on display. Even when a specific statute in a jurisdiction prohibits all reproduction and doesn't mentioned distribution, that law will only come into effect once the item has in some way entered the larger market and can be established to exist in the eyes of the court. In our case, sitting on either side of someone's drive way in full view of a public street still wasn't enough to count as public display. In the end, the only thing the judge did say was that my boss should consider himself lucky that there was no counter complaint for trespassing and recording video on private property without permission.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Yonan wrote:
Bulletbits on ebay seem unaffected. Same prices, and listing more bits than ever. I've ordered from them a few times, great source of bits if you take the time to camp the auctions. Only thing stopping me from ordering more atm is the horrible exchange rate ; /

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dark-Eldar-Scourges-HAYWIRE-BLASTER-bits-Warhammer-40K-Games-Workshop-c-/351307096341?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item51cb88e115

That right there is the problem.

He has crap for selection and much of what he has are in single quantities and auctions instead of buy it now. So for these guys needing 4 haywire blasters for their scourge it starts to make way more sense to buy a new box at $25 then $14 for one gun.

He has 3,000 auctions running, 1600 seem to be buy it now, 1400 are auctions which are replaced every week that's definitely not what I'd call "crap for selection". The same kits are broken down and sold each week so you know what you can expect. I looks like every week he'll have 2 of those haywire things going, and you have 3 weeks or so before you have to pay so you can get up to 6 of them in one order. If you're impatient and want to buy lots in one go, they do buy it now for some items with plenty in stock. I've picked up a couple like that, but find the auctions to be much cheaper if you're willing to wait.

The most desired bits of course go for a premium. Isn't that the same on any bits seller?

You can however get 10 GK falchions for $1, 5 terminator bodies (legs and torsos) for $6, SM Lascannons for $2 and so on. If you're willing to check the auctions and try to get a good price - as I have for far more than my wallet says I should have ; p

You clearly missed my point by a country mile.

Your post just gave an example of a bit auction. If you bothered searching his products you would notice a lack of parts which is a big problem for smaller bits. If I need 10 haywire blasters I am clearly not going to buy 1 from 10 sellers and pay 10 separate shipping fees. Sure he has multiples of shredders, and thats because no one wants them.

The larger bit sellers are getting rid of their stock which makes it very hard for some people (like me) to complete projects. Projects that I wouldn't attempt without ready access to the quantities of parts I need.

 frozenwastes wrote:
I will echo Be Afraid's experience, but in Canada. I was doing accounting work for a stoneware and ceramics company and someone reproduced a custom piece rather than buying multiples. As the items were in no way distributed, as far as the courts were concerned, they were non-existent.

We even had video footage of the multiple copies. They were even visible from a public street. We couldn't even get a ruling, injunction or agreement that prohibited their distribution in the future as that would be a ruling on something that could not be established to exist.

If you start paying attention to copyright rulings you'll start noticing a common denominator. They are only about things that actually change hands/put on display or are made available to change hands or be put on display. Even when a specific statute in a jurisdiction prohibits all reproduction and doesn't mentioned distribution, that law will only come into effect once the item has in some way entered the larger market and can be established to exist in the eyes of the court. In our case, sitting on either side of someone's drive way in full view of a public street still wasn't enough to count as public display. In the end, the only thing the judge did say was that my boss should consider himself lucky that there was no counter complaint for trespassing and recording video on private property without permission.

Ditto.

I sneaked into the guy's estate after he installed the fountains to get photographic evidence.

The court asked how we obtained the photos, and when no one would admit to having taken them, the court threw them out as inadmissible.

As my sister explained to me...

No matter how many copies exist in reality, they do not exist in a market until they in some way affect a dollar Bill that could be diverted TO the person who made the copies (and NOT "away" from us)... Because we can't establish that he would have actually bought the fountains had he not copied them. We would have to LEGALLY:

1) Show that they existed.
2) Show that they somehow affected the producer of the copies in a way that they profited.

And if a guy has a billion copies of a million dollar fountain (exaggeration) stashed in an estate, but no one ever sees them but his family, they technically do not exists in terms of affecting the market for original work by us.

MB

BeAfraid wrote:
We would have to LEGALLY:

1) Show that they existed.
2) Show that they somehow affected the producer of the copies in a way that they profited.

In our case, existence was insufficient (you could see them from the street). The court only cared about 2) and my boss at the time told me that the judge actually snorted when his lawyer tried to make the point that the other guy was gaining from their display in terms of his property value. Then he asked if they could demonstrate any actual money that changed hands. Real damages. It never made it past that hearing.

What would be amazing would be a copyright case where nothing changed hands and no money was involved. Has any judge anywhere ever let that get to trial, or do they all get weeded out in hearings beforehand? I suspect they would be.

In short: press moulds are your friends. And I too first learned about them from White Dwarf. I believe it was about making more purity seals or something.

 Red Corsair wrote:
You clearly missed my point by a country mile.

Your post just gave an example of a bit auction. If you bothered searching his products you would notice a lack of parts which is a big problem for smaller bits. If I need 10 haywire blasters I am clearly not going to buy 1 from 10 sellers and pay 10 separate shipping fees. Sure he has multiples of shredders, and thats because no one wants them.

The larger bit sellers are getting rid of their stock which makes it very hard for some people (like me) to complete projects. Projects that I wouldn't attempt without ready access to the quantities of parts I need.

Huh? I just showed that you could get 6 (at least, probably more) from this one guy in one order. There is no lack of parts, just lack of parts listed at one time. He breaks boxes down every week - 2 of that particular kit it looks like, you just have to wait a couple weeks to get all the bits you need. If you bothered reading my post you'd have known that.

BeAfraid wrote:
This was the issue that put me at odds with the owner of The Miniatures Page, as he arbitrarily ruled against any mention of making molds or other processes because "recasters are evil," yet refused to define what "recasting meant" or even to recognize the case law(s) concerning that very issue.

Bill's own little world in his head, Bill's rules.

 frozenwastes wrote:

BeAfraid wrote:
We would have to LEGALLY:

1) Show that they existed.
2) Show that they somehow affected the producer of the copies in a way that they profited.

In our case, existence was insufficient (you could see them from the street). The court only cared about 2) and my boss at the time told me that the judge actually snorted when his lawyer tried to make the point that the other guy was gaining from their display in terms of his property value. Then he asked if they could demonstrate any actual money that changed hands. Real damages. It never made it past that hearing.

What would be amazing would be a copyright case where nothing changed hands and no money was involved. Has any judge anywhere ever let that get to trial, or do they all get weeded out in hearings beforehand? I suspect they would be.

In short: press moulds are your friends. And I too first learned about them from White Dwarf. I believe it was about making more purity seals or something.

I should have added "...in the Marketplace." To "... that they existed..."

And, they also have to be shown to exist by a way that allows legal introduction of the evidence.

If you illegally obtain the evidence, this can create a situation where the judge can either set it aside, or completely reject it, depending upon what is at stake.

If it is millions of dollars, then even illegally obtained evidence might be accepted, given the gravity of the theft involved.

The actual "fair use" statues provide a five point standard for determination.

Most people get hung up on all the first points.

But point five trumps all:

How much money was made by a copier from their copy?

If that value is zero.... Case dismissed, and it doesn't matter at ALL what ANY of the answers to the other points are.

People don't seem to understand that Law is both statute and case law, and that the law has very specific definitions for words which most people seem to not even think to ask "What is your definition of "Is" in this sentence?" It might just be that a case determined that the word "is" in a specific statute had its definition altered to mean "exists between 5am and 12 noon on the second Tuesday of April, if the 1st was not on a Friday, then the existence is for the entire year"

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vermis wrote:

BeAfraid wrote:
This was the issue that put me at odds with the owner of The Miniatures Page, as he arbitrarily ruled against any mention of making molds or other processes because "recasters are evil," yet refused to define what "recasting meant" or even to recognize the case law(s) concerning that very issue.

Bill's own little world in his head, Bill's rules.

I got tired of putting up with him. He is too arbitrary and biased.

What was funny was when my roommate at UCLA joined TMP after starting to play miniature games because of my miniatures, and everyone thought he was me, and banned him.

We were going to produce a picture, but realized that it would not do any good, because Bill's mind was made up, and no amount of reason will penetrate.

His web site is somewhat influential in some circumstances to promoting companies... But his attitude has spawned other sites that are better run, and using better technology. His site still seems very 90's/early-00's with almost no ability to do anything... No real galleries, poor search or no search, poor thread structure. No tools for posting, lousy fonts for posting, and poor mixing of styles. Maybe he doesn't know how to use PHP, Ajax, Ruby, or any of the other newer (than basic CSS/javascript) that he seems to be using (if even javascript.... I've never thought about taking a look at the source)?

MB

This is a great discussion, but as a reminder... once again...

Dakka is not the place to discuss piracy, in this case recasting someone else's copyrighted work.

It's a long-standing site policy based on the simple facts that this is an international site, so many different laws are in play, and we have neither the resources nor the desire to pick a fight with any of the manufacturers.

I still don't understand how a company not selling EXTRA means they lose money. Profit is funny..

So I buy a box of Scourges and they cannot be WYSIWG with the purchase I made if I equip them with HWB. If I buy another box, then I have 5 more bodies. There are lots of bits already in the box, but I can't create the loadout that is possible in the codex. Since I can't buy the extra bits from GW, I have to do one of the following:

1) not worry about it, cuz i can just be all "those shardcarbines are HWB. can you tell the difference?"
2) buy extra bits against the company's wishes
3) make them myself
4) buy more and more and more and then throw out all the extra Scourge bodies

It's safe to say I'll never do #4, so bits sellers aren't "cutting into profit" as far as I see it.

*shrugs*

When GW stopped selling bitz on their site, that was a huge amount of my budget I stopped spending with GW. Every time I made a bitz order, it was 50 or 75+ dollars of just bitz alone, sometimes every month besides the full-on kits I was buying from my LGS every month. When The Warstore had to shut down their Battlewagon service, that was even more of my GW budget that dried up.

Good ecomomics plan, GW. You singlehandedly stopped me from spending most of my budget with you.

 Azazelx wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

REMINDER, DAKKA DOES NOT CONDONE PIRACY. RECASTING YOUR OWN BITZ IS FINE, RECASTING SOMEONE ELSE'S IS NOT.

I learned to press-mould bits after reading an article in White Dwarf that showed how to do it and recommended using it to add extra interest and details to your conversions. I'm quite happy to take that as pretty unambiguous.


edit - aargh - mangled quotes!

Was that the article where they made tombstones?