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.

So just found out that the popular 40k online army builder, got hit with a C&D by GW legal and is gone, because it used images (shadows of the online store embargo?) and had points for 40k listed. Kinda surprising since they brought in Scrollbuilder to the community, but sent the hounds after the 40k equivalent. Of course, a lot of people felt GW would take a drastically different approach with their "cash cow" 40k that they didn't do with AOS, which was also proven by the fact no unit PDFs were being released for 40k while AOS embraced this concept immediately and many people felt it was the best way to go.

https://wertstammer40k.wordpress.com/2017/06/23/website-is-down/

I am sure they are planning something like this for 40K, but if they don't go after people using images and other trademarked items, they will lose court cases later.

Suck though.

I mean, I can understand why. Is it a pain to work without digital organisation and suchlike, with prebuilt calculators and suchlike? Absolutely. But at the same time, the owner was getting profit off of it via Patreon, so that's a red flag right there.

If people are going to complain and say that "it's wrong to call GW nice now when they do this!", it's not malice. This is protecting their IP and their own business. With an army builder like that, it removes any need for Codexes, Indexes, and suchlike, thereby taking revenue off of GW itself. It's not unfair, it's them protecting what they own.

Would it have been better if GW contacted the guy and actually had the army builder as an addition to their site, and actually endorse it? Yeah, absolutely, but they're also well within their rights to remove it completely.

So, I guess list building will take a bit longer with pen and paper now? Not a massive loss, personally. Especially if you can "hotkey" things (ie, you ALWAYS take this unit, with a certain wargear combination, so it's always X points).

I wonder if the differences between this and scrollbuilder were relevant? Specifically the use of GW art and images? Rippy said they didn't mention the Patreon, but that doesn't mean it didn't factor into their decision. I doubt he was actually profiting off the Patreon given the costs of running a site and his low number of supporters, but it was still a revenue model in place.

Anyone want to be a test case and make a list builder like scroll builder without any GW art or images (and without revenue) to find out if GW legal will contact you?

It could also be that there's a double standard with AoS and 40k. AoS is still a relatively recent reboot and they approached it from the start that the rules and stats are free, so maybe they're willing to look the other way a bit more for AoS as it's not 40k.

I don't really know if this is crossing a line or not on GW's part. It always sucks to sick your lawyers on your most dedicated fans, but there is something to be said for taking things too far in terms of using art and product images. Or this might actually be about its game utility and they see it as competition for an upcoming app.

I don't think it's wrong for GW to ask this to be taken down, but given Rippy's hope for collaboration, I'm guessing it could have been handled better. Not every interaction between lawyers and a fan site needs to be "cease and desist or we will sue!" A "here's why this doesn't work for us" pre C&D email conversation could go a long way. Then the blog post would be "I'm taking this down while I'm in conversation with GW."

Given this though:

I was infringing on their IP with:

GW artwork (featured in the background of your website)
Photographs of GW’s painted miniatures (taken from the GW web store)
Legion logos/ iconography
Army points and stats for 40K units
The Warhammer 40,000 logo
Seeing all of these I feel lucky they didn’t actually sue me.

It's hard to get up in arms when the guy who actually got the C&D letter totally agrees with it.

 frozenwastes wrote:
I wonder if the differences between this and scrollbuilder were relevant? Specifically the use of GW art and images?

Anyone want to be a test case and make a list builder like scroll builder without any GW art or images to find out if GW legal will contact you?

Like the Army Builder data file authors, you mean?

Wonder if Battlescribe will be hit too? :(

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Like the Army Builder data file authors, you mean?

Sure. Can you elaborate? I don't know enough about their history or lack thereof with GW legal. Are they open and contactable or are they anonymous?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ratius wrote:
Wonder if Battlescribe will be hit too? :(

Is this a situation like Army Builder where the publisher of the software doesn't have anything to do with individuals making files for it?

Are the people making Battlescribe files for GW's games identifiable? Is the hosting done in such a way that getting it taken down is plausible? GW has totally failed to get the pirated copies of their actual books taken down over the years, so if these file creators are anonymous forum members using online file locker services, getting them to C&D is pretty much impossible.

Or are these open and contactable individuals with a clear web presence that can be asked to remove the files like Rippy was?

 frozenwastes wrote:
I wonder if the differences between this and scrollbuilder were relevant? Specifically the use of GW art and images?

I didn't see the site before it was taken down, but the use of official artwork and logos could be misconstrued as having the support and sponsorship of Games Workshop. In general, the absolute best way to get a C&D letter from a corporation is to create something that passes off as official (especially if it directly competes with something similar that is actually official).

It could also be that there's a double standard with AoS and 40k. AoS is still a relatively recent reboot and they approached it from the start that the rules and stats are free, so maybe they're willing to look the other way a bit more for AoS as it's not 40k.

This is the other possibility. I know Privateer Press was rather draconian about publishing unit stats, to the point where BattleCollege would just list the stats as "high" or "average" rather than explicitly saying them. Could be that publishing points is a big no-no (I think GW doesn't like people to publish points from the General's Handbook either). The problem with this is that facts are not generally copyrightable (phonebooks can't be copyrighted, for instance) and well within the purview of fair use (copyright can't be used to shut down discussion or criticism of your product), so I'm not sure that GW could do anything about it without the accompanying trademark/copyright infringement from the images that were apparently taken in great quantities.

I don't think it's wrong for GW to ask this to be taken down, but given Rippy's hope for collaboration, I'm guessing it could have been handled better.

I think they collaborated on the AoS one because it had already become somewhat of a standard in the (small) community. They aren't just going to work with everybody who builds an app for them. They'd need to create a whole new division just to deal with every 14 year old with a JavaScript book who wants to make an official app.

If GW would wake the heck up and realize that maybe outsourcing/hiring to people who make these, might be benefit ALL parties.

Digital is the way to go.

I use BattleScribe and love it. Why? Because its easy, its always updated, and it just makes perfect sense.

GW should hire the creator of BS and Army Builder, etc. etc. and make it an official app in order have a piece of the pie. Instead it seems they are stuck in the old days when it comes to 40k.

The roster was done by a very old friend of mine. He poured a lot of effort, free time and passion in it and tried to get in touch with GW on multiple occasions just to make sure he was on good terms with their legal stuff. He also offered to give them rights for code so they can use it for themselves. All he wanted was a good builder so he and other people can enjoy the game...

 CoreCommander wrote:
The roster was done by a very old friend of mine. He poured a lot of effort, free time and passion in it and tried to get in touch with GW on multiple occasions just to make sure he was on good terms with their legal stuff. He also offered to give them rights for code so they can use it for themselves. All he wanted was a good builder so he and other people can enjoy the game...

Thats what I am talking about. GW is being dumb about it.

Vaxx wrote:
If GW would wake the heck up and realize that maybe outsourcing/hiring to people who make these, might be benefit ALL parties.

Digital is the way to go.

I use BattleScribe and love it. Why? Because its easy, its always updated, and it just makes perfect sense.

GW should hire the creator of BS and Army Builder, etc. etc. and make it an official app in order have a piece of the pie. Instead it seems they are stuck in the old days when it comes to 40k.

While I agree in principle, there's a process to projects like this in big companies like GW. I don't think they were in the wrong in this case - it's just the nature of the beast when it comes to IP.

Is this a situation like Army Builder where the publisher of the software doesn't have anything to do with individuals making files for it?

Are the people making Battlescribe files for GW's games identifiable? Is the hosting done in such a way that getting it taken down is plausible? GW has totally failed to get the pirated copies of their actual books taken down over the years, so if these file creators are anonymous forum members using online file locker services, getting them to C&D is pretty much impossible.

Or are these open and contactable individuals with a clear web presence that can be asked to remove the files like Rippy was?

Dont know enough about it Im afraid. Im under the impression though that the BS file builders are definitely distinct to the party who created the program.
Hence the data file guys are likely unidentifiable, could be me or you for all we know sitting at home.
And BS does cater to a huge number of other games systems from FoW to Battletech.

 Jambles wrote:

Vaxx wrote:
If GW would wake the heck up and realize that maybe outsourcing/hiring to people who make these, might be benefit ALL parties.

Digital is the way to go.

I use BattleScribe and love it. Why? Because its easy, its always updated, and it just makes perfect sense.

GW should hire the creator of BS and Army Builder, etc. etc. and make it an official app in order have a piece of the pie. Instead it seems they are stuck in the old days when it comes to 40k.

While I agree in principle, there's a process to projects like this in big companies like GW. I don't think they were in the wrong in this case - it's just the nature of the beast when it comes to IP.

They were not wrong. But they are missing an opportunity to reach out to the community, generate another revenue stream, and make people happy all at the same time.

Does anyone remember the Counter Strike mod team? The Day of Defeat mod team? They were hired, by the developer because the work was good, and they took advantage of the fact those were popular . They made it "official".

GW needs to realize there is an opportunity here, and if they dont get involved, it will continue with or without them.

GW has said that is gonna do a army builder for 40k, but I don't remember if they are talked about it being free.

 Galas wrote:
GW has said that is gonna do a army builder for 40k, but I don't remember if they are talked about it being free.

Probably not. Azyr for AOS is like $2 a month but Scrollbuilder is free. I think the main issue here is the Patreon (Scrollbuilder had a donate button too and removed it later when asked) and the images (which, unless I'm mistaken cannot actually be copyrighted because they are images; this is the same boogeyman tactics GW used to shut down shopping carts for 15 years by saying images of their models are their IP and nobody but GW has the right to post them on their website; could you imagine if like Toyota said that nobody could show pictures of their cars online?). Points/stats cannot be copyrighted, but people are too afraid of being sued that they would kowtow regardless when asked (same with PP and BattleCollege, even though it's not actually enforceable)

 CoreCommander wrote:
The roster was done by a very old friend of mine. He poured a lot of effort, free time and passion in it and tried to get in touch with GW on multiple occasions just to make sure he was on good terms with their legal stuff. He also offered to give them rights for code so they can use it for themselves. All he wanted was a good builder so he and other people can enjoy the game...

Ask him to accidentally be hacked and have the source code stolen and made public

On a serious note I wonder if it didn't have images and the patreon if they'd be okay with it. There's already a precedent (Scrollbuilder) for allowing points to be shown, so their argument there is really nonsense.

I'm not sure what you mean; images can indeed be subject to copyright.

If I paint all my models exactly like GW do and photograph them myself, then I own the copyright to those photographs*. I don't own the copyright if I right-click the images on GW's website, hit "save" and upload them to my own website, Flickr, etc. That, IIRC, was what GW were prohibiting, relying on the fact that most internet retailers aren't going to photograph every stock item they sell.

*Same goes to my photograph of a Banksy painting; I own the copyright of my photograph, but not the copyright of the painting itself.

Game statistics is something that to my knowledge has not been tested in court - I know all the arguments on one side or the other, but until there's an actual legal precedent, it's all hot air. "you can't copyright mechanics" vs "you're copying too much of the text to qualify for fair use". After all, none of the roster planners I've used re-write the text of stat blocks or special rules, so they're clearly guilty of copying a significant amount of the original work; even moreso with the Index books, since there's a higher "crunch to fluff" ratio.

 Ratius wrote:
Wonder if Battlescribe will be hit too? :(

Battlescribe is a fight they can't win, because he has compartmentalized the program from the data. It would be like trying to sue VLC because people use it to play pirated movies. They can go after the data repositories, but at worst that will be a minor inconvenience, since the program already has a data editor so anyone can modify the data files. They will just go from hosting it on github to hosting it on Mega with all of the other GW stuff of questionable legality. I don't want to sound like a battle scribe fanboy, because I'm not, in fact if I had my fancy I would punch the author square in his jimmies for what he did with battlescribe 2.0. Invalidating all of the battle scribe 1 repos (by replacing them with BS2 repos and hiding the BS1 repos), and adding a subscription model not because the program justified it, but because he could, is what we earthlings like to call a move. I bought the first battlescribe, and I loved it, and if the second had come with a similar business model, I would have bought that as well. As it is, I'm eagerly waiting for the GW version of war room, so I can drop battlescribe like a bad habit. Pigs get fat hogs get slaughtered.

Back to web roster, The thing that made it a more urgent target than battlescribe is that web roster was good. The UI was intuitive, it was visually appealing, battle scribe and GW could learn a lot from this guy. If GW had any sense they would offer him a job.

Vaxx wrote:

 Jambles wrote:

Vaxx wrote:
If GW would wake the heck up and realize that maybe outsourcing/hiring to people who make these, might be benefit ALL parties.

Digital is the way to go.

I use BattleScribe and love it. Why? Because its easy, its always updated, and it just makes perfect sense.

GW should hire the creator of BS and Army Builder, etc. etc. and make it an official app in order have a piece of the pie. Instead it seems they are stuck in the old days when it comes to 40k.

While I agree in principle, there's a process to projects like this in big companies like GW. I don't think they were in the wrong in this case - it's just the nature of the beast when it comes to IP.

They were not wrong. But they are missing an opportunity to reach out to the community, generate another revenue stream, and make people happy all at the same time.

Does anyone remember the Counter Strike mod team? The Day of Defeat mod team? They were hired, by the developer because the work was good, and they took advantage of the fact those were popular . They made it "official".

GW needs to realize there is an opportunity here, and if they dont get involved, it will continue with or without them.

You're right about the missed opportunity. I'm thinking it's probably to do with GW having their own software in the pipeline, as some have suggested already. It's like that fan-made remake of Metroid 2, which was a huge disappointment when Nintendo put the kibosh on it. But a couple months down the line, it turns out they were working on their own version.

 Grimgold wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
Wonder if Battlescribe will be hit too? :(

Battlescribe is a fight they can't win, because he has compartmentalized the program from the data. It would be like trying to sue VLC because people use it to play pirated movies. They can go after the data repositories, but at worst that will be a minor inconvenience, since the program already has a data editor so anyone can modify the data files. They will just go from hosting it on github to hosting it on Mega with all of the other GW stuff of questionable legality. I don't want to sound like a battle scribe fanboy, because I'm not, in fact if I had my fancy I would punch the author square in his jimmies for what he did with battlescribe 2.0. Invalidating all of the battle scribe 1 repos (by replacing them with BS2 repos and hiding the BS1 repos), and adding a subscription model not because the program justified it, but because he could, is what we earthlings like to call a move. I bought the first battlescribe, and I loved it, and if the second had come with a similar business model, I would have bought that as well. As it is, I'm eagerly waiting for the GW version of war room, so I can drop battlescribe like a bad habit. Pigs get fat hogs get slaughtered.

Back to web roster, The thing that made it a more urgent target than battlescribe is that web roster was good. The UI was intuitive, it was visually appealing, battle scribe and GW could learn a lot from this guy. If GW had any sense they would offer him a job.

GW doesn't care about winning, it never has. It's about making the other person bleed money so they give up.

Does GW provide a tool to build lists? No
Was the ListBuilder for Profit? No

The result is that i have now to write with pen and paper and much discomfort , so yes GW is being a dick because it forced to take down a useful tool without providing any alternative and pissing off an awful lot of people. Just when I started thinking they learnt their lessons....

I enjoy programs like the one mentioned as much as the next person. I have no idea how/why this should surprise anyone. Tons of GW content there used without permission. Completely understandable. If they make money by selling products and information, why allow that information to be provided by other sources for free? (and even minor profit if the Patreon stuff is true).

I can't get over how many people villify GW (and heaps of other companies) for defending their products/IP.

 Elbows wrote:
I enjoy programs like the one mentioned as much as the next person. I have no idea how/why this should surprise anyone. Tons of GW content there used without permission. Completely understandable. If they make money by selling products and information, why allow that information to be provided by other sources for free? (and even minor profit if the Patreon stuff is true).

I can't get over how many people villify GW (and heaps of other companies) for defending their products/IP.

Defending their IP against what exactly ? what damage was GW occuring from the List Builder? What tool does GW provides to ease the list building?

I am not surprised, just good old GW back on the usual tracks of antagonizing the customer base. For the past 3 years I have been playing infinity with CB providing a FREE web army builder , I am probably spoiled now....

 Elbows wrote:
I enjoy programs like the one mentioned as much as the next person. I have no idea how/why this should surprise anyone. Tons of GW content there used without permission. Completely understandable. If they make money by selling products and information, why allow that information to be provided by other sources for free? (and even minor profit if the Patreon stuff is true).

I can't get over how many people villify GW (and heaps of other companies) for defending their products/IP.

Because they aren't doing that. If it was they would have done it 3 years ago when it first showed up. They are doing it now to punish the playerbase for not buying their upcoming, shittier army builder.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
GW doesn't care about winning, it never has. It's about making the other person bleed money so they give up.

Can't make them bleed if you get a dismissal in pre-trial. When I say no chance, i mean not even a good chance of it making it to a trial. A dismissal would also make future lawsuits harder, so they are waiting for BS to step one toe over the line, until then BS is safe by design.

This is pretty simple.

GW produces products which contain information.

This program (and similar) give you that information for free.

GW loses money that way. End of story.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
They are doing it now to punish the playerbase for not buying their upcoming, shittier army builder.

Riiight, just like they made people buy their AoS army builder...

 Elbows wrote:
This is pretty simple.

GW produces products which contain information.

This program (and similar) give you that information for free.

GW loses money that way. End of story.

Beyond that US laws on IP are defend it at every opportunity, or lose your right to defend it. If they let Web roster get away with it, other less scrupulous companies could use that as precedence. GW was as nice as they could possibly be given the situation, and even the author of web roster got that point.