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.

subject

Where that edge behind which the model will be still suitable for a proxy of models from 40k, thus won't be "fraud"?
For example, a lascannon - a diagonal nozzle on a barrel. It's a copyrighted by GW, right? And if to turn it other angle, it will became "strongly based on GW design".

And if I will totally change it, anyways "Just because we haven’t gotten around to making the model yet doesn’t mean you can."


What about lasgun battery pack. If there is a "/" shaped deepening, it is design of GW?
If I will change it into "X" shaped, it will be a still GW-based design?

For example. This rifle design "is stolen from GW"?


Because of similar barrel end and battery. GW will call it "totally identical to lasgun".

What about names? "Laser gun" is a stealing from GW lasgun copyrighted weapon name?

it seems to me, I have already a paranoia

What is it you wish to do? Make a few custom items for your army? Mass produce?

My friend, let me introduce you to the Pancor Jackhammer.


http://www.giantbomb.com/pancor-jackhammer/3055-3981/
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancor_Jackhammer

Designed three years before Rogue Trader: Warhammer 40,000 appeared on the scene. If you want to go back a bit further, the muzzle of the Russian PPSh-41 isn't entirely dissimilar either.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPSh-41

Not to say, just go and copy every bit of a lasgun*; but as with so many things, don't worry too much about ripping it off from GW - think about where they ripped it off from instead.

*The terms 'laser gun' and even 'lasgun' were also around long before Laserburn was a twinkle in Brian Ansell's eye.

 BlackOps wrote:
What is it you wish to do? Make a few custom items for your army? Mass produce?

I want to make something usable as 40k proxy and want to say "No it is not GW design, it's my own design" (so, it will be protected from IP issues and will allow possbile commercial use)

So wait, hang on, you want to make something that uses similar elements to GW's design, but you don't want anyone making something similar to your design...?

Ohh, I see. I'm no legal expert but i would say avoid exact duplication. In name and design (inc iconography). Look at what scibor and chapterhouse are doing to see how close to line you can get. A gun is gun shaped, you cant copyright that

 Vermis wrote:
So wait, hang on, you want to make something that uses similar elements to GW's design, but you don't want anyone making something similar to your design...?

I made writing mistake. Now fixed.

I'm going to be somewhat gung ho with my advice.

Your idea is not as unique as you think it is. In fact, the render you have in your post is about as common as you can get.

Make it, enjoy it, get something from it if you sell it.

You are over thinking things, but even paranoids have enemies.

are you going to sell it? if the answer is no..who the hell cares if its the same?

 Freakazoitt wrote:
I made writing mistake. Now fixed.

Ah, okay.

In that case, go ahead. You wouldn't be the first to make guns that look a bit like GW versions.

http://victoriaminiatures.highwire.com/product/laser-rifle-mk3-x5

It happened...

These models came under violation:







I worried, it can be happen, but not with these designs (it was looks quite generic for me).

+ some shoulder pads models

I think, it because of two headed eagle. But I'm afraid to use these models again, even if I will remove eagle symbol

If you are actually intending to do this legally and properly, you need to stop asking here and go and consult an IP/copyright lawyer.

Copyright law and infringement is a very grey area that comes down to a lot of legal and nomenclature semantics.

 Freakazoitt wrote:
It happened...

These models came under violation:







I worried, it can be happen, but not with these designs (it was looks quite generic for me).

+ some shoulder pads models

I think, it because of two headed eagle. But I'm afraid to use these models again, even if I will remove eagle symbol

Yes, the "two headed Eagle" (search "GW Aquila" and you'll find countless images/products of theirs with it) was the issue. I'm sure that's GW copyright protected. Lose that and you should be fine.

As a general rule of thumb, something is considered unique if:

1.) it is 60% different from the source material (it is now considered "inspired by") This is the hardest one as what is 60% different can be subjective.

2.) it includes no trademarked iconography (so no imperial aquilla, the cross skull thing, etc).

3.) You do not explicitly call it by the same name as the source (so you can call it a "laser rifle" or some such, but not a "lasgun") unless said name has fallen into public use (this is why Band-Aid insists you call them Band-Aid-Brand adhesive bandages, not "Band-aids" since the latter means they can actually lose their trademark).