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.

From a perspective purely based on looking at how often people "pirate" or "steal" and "why", consider music.

They sell CDs with 8 songs on them for 20 dollars when people only heard 1 or 2 of the songs on the album. Suddenly people can download the music for free and burn their own cds.

Then, they start selling songs for .99. Suddenly people are not risking the viruses and the mad hunt for torrents. What they want is made more readily available at a fair price. Generally with the ability to preview the songs first in one way or another (youtube or whatever).

People go for the path of least resistance. Everyone leaves their shopping carts all over the parking lot until they start putting shopping cart corrals in the middle of it. Very few people were willing to go all the way back to the store to return the cart, but most people are willing to go the short distance to put the cart in the corral.

Now some people leave the carts around the parking lot anyway. They were never going to put them away no matter how little work it involved. And some people will steal songs no matter how easy it is to get them. And some people will buy/make recasts regardless.

But the amount of people doing that are insignificant, and they are not actually costing you money. They were never going to pay you anyway.

GW puts their products spread across multiple websites. They make certain products difficult to acquire and they do so at prohibitive prices.

$30.00 for a single infantry sized model? Fine-Crap? Hierophant Biotitans built to have their legs get ruined by their own weight? Metal Sisters that may or may not be out of stock forever? Shutting down web stores for years and price fixing for brick and mortar locations? You can expect people to go for the other means if the price is better, the materials are better, and the access is easier. GW as a business needs to recognize this truth of the market that the music industry already has. Price it fairly and make it readily available and when its more hassle then it's worth to find and do business with a re-caster only the people who were never going to pay you to begin with will bother to buy from anyone but you.

This isn't promoting re casting or saying GW doesn't have a right to price their products however they want and make their web stores as convoluted as they want. They can. They do. It's their call. But the market will respond and it IS their fault for not recognizing the consequences of their actions. They try to fight the legal fight like the music industry did for years before Itunes and whatever came around. But that is an idiots hill to die on. Easier to make your product more profitable by expanding your market.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Oh, ok.

Figures you'd make an exception for that.

...to thine own self be true...!

Well I've just put another order in for some recasts so it seems all this talk about morality and entitlement hasn't made a difference to my wallet

 Peregrine wrote:

Looking for recasts of OOP models (or other cases of piracy/recasting/etc of products that the IP owner has abandoned) is more of a gray area, as even a customer who wants to buy legal copies from the original manufacturer is unable to do so. That's more comparable to the situation with media piracy, where many people would have been happy to pay for music downloads/streaming tv/etc if only it was available and immediately did start paying for it once the legitimate product became available. But that's not the case when we're talking about stuff that is in production and available to buy at any time, and people are just deciding that they're entitled to get it at a cheaper price.

Sorry, but how on earth does that work? The music/films were available in a store to purchase on tape, CD and DVD, at cinemas to go and see, and gigs to hear live, and so on. But you think it's more comparable to casting a model which you can't get hold of than one you can?

Sorry, but I can apply your logic precisely to those kinds of IP piracy as you can recasting. The goods are available in multiple formats in multiple places, and you're not dying without them, they're not a necessity of life, and the people producing them need the money to make a living off. Therefore all the people copying it must be 'entitled' and selfish.

Making a copy of a tape is exactly the same as recasting a model by the qualifications of your own argument. Trying to compare it to an OOP model would only work if the original product (say, a piece of music) was equally unavailable to purchase from the legitimate rights holders. Which, given the existence at the time of millions of stores, web downloads and so on, clearly wasn't the case.

Some of the 'moral' posters' arguments have done more to convince me of the acceptibility of recasts than any arguments by people who've actually bought them. They come across like the kind of consumers who'd berate people for buying Moxifish antibiotics instead of paying for a proper urgent care visit. Yeah, it's a luxury hobby, but so is refrigerator ownership.


Let's put things in perspective:

1) No one has demonstrated that the harm of recasts outweighs the benefits for GW. Recasts keep a lot more people in the hobby than the salty tears of the poor stewing in their own resentment.

2) GW attempted to destroy the legal (moral?) alternative to recasts, and in Chapterhouse's case succeeded. They also used in ethical business practices to close the legitimate bits trade online leaving morally upstanding customers fewer options.

3). Buying a recast figure is a minor act of immorality by almost any scale. Some cultures do not find it immoral at all. For some perspective, I drove on the 5 freeway for 8 hours last week and in not a single minute of that time did I avoid seeing at least one other driver make a choice far more immoral than buying recast minis... Wait, how many recast Titans does one have to buy to create the equivalent evil to a 1% chance of killing a family of four through negligence?

And stop using the word "entitled". "Entitled" is what you call a young person who expects his hard work and diligence to give him a future worth living. "Entitled" is what you call a poor person who wants to spend his free time doing anything other than squatting in his hovel flushing resumes down the proverbial etoilet until he dies from malinsurance. We are all gamers here; we are just cheap.

 Ketara wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Looking for recasts of OOP models (or other cases of piracy/recasting/etc of products that the IP owner has abandoned) is more of a gray area, as even a customer who wants to buy legal copies from the original manufacturer is unable to do so. That's more comparable to the situation with media piracy, where many people would have been happy to pay for music downloads/streaming tv/etc if only it was available and immediately did start paying for it once the legitimate product became available. But that's not the case when we're talking about stuff that is in production and available to buy at any time, and people are just deciding that they're entitled to get it at a cheaper price.

Sorry, but how on earth does that work? The music/films were available in a store to purchase on tape, CD and DVD, at cinemas to go and see, and gigs to hear live, and so on. But you think it's more comparable to casting a model which you can't get hold of than one you can?

Sorry, but I can apply your logic precisely to those kinds of IP piracy as you can recasting. The goods are available in multiple formats in multiple places, and you're not dying without them, they're not a necessity of life, and the people producing them need the money to make a living off. Therefore all the people copying it must be 'entitled' and selfish.

Making a copy of a tape is exactly the same as recasting a model by the qualifications of your own argument. Trying to compare it to an OOP model would only work if the original product (say, a piece of music) was equally unavailable. Which, given the existence at the time of millions of stores, web downloads and so on, clearly wasn't the case.

I think he is just trying to justify illegally downloading music at one time in order to fit into his moralistic creed about recasting. As you point out, it really doesn't work. Unless one puts less credence on ephemera art than tactile art, which is silly. I have no qualms about the live Zappa concert in Paris I downloaded. I have made copies for all of my friends, whether they get Zappa or not, because that concert just needs to be heard, I don't really get worried about wether or not Zappa's estate gets paid. I doubt he does either, wherever he is. Ram it down the poop chute, indeed!

 Ketara wrote:
Sorry, but how on earth does that work? The music/films were available in a store to purchase on tape, CD and DVD, at cinemas to go and see, and gigs to hear live, and so on.

They were available in theory, but they weren't available in the desired format. If you wanted to listen to music on your computer you had to go out and find a store that had a CD with the music you wanted (not always easy if you wanted something outside of the mainstream hits), and then you still had to make a copy of it to get it in digital form. Decide late at night that you're in the mood to watch a particular movie? Sucks to be you, not thinking of this before the rental store closed. Etc. There were a ton of customers saying "getting this is a pain in the ass, give us streaming video/downloads for games/etc", and as soon as the industry provided those desired sales channels the interest in piracy crashed.

Now, I'm not saying that it was the right thing to do, but if you look at the motivations there's a significant difference. The person buying a recast of an OOP model is like the person pirating a movie after the store closed, they'd prefer a legal source but there isn't one. The person buying a recast of an in-production item is just whiny and entitled about the fact that they have to pay $10 more than they think is "fair".

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
Sorry, but how on earth does that work? The music/films were available in a store to purchase on tape, CD and DVD, at cinemas to go and see, and gigs to hear live, and so on.

They were available in theory, but they weren't available in the desired format. If you wanted to listen to music on your computer you had to go out and find a store that had a CD with the music you wanted (not always easy if you wanted something outside of the mainstream hits), and then you still had to make a copy of it to get it in digital form. Decide late at night that you're in the mood to watch a particular movie? Sucks to be you, not thinking of this before the rental store closed. Etc. There were a ton of customers saying "getting this is a pain in the ass, give us streaming video/downloads for games/etc", and as soon as the industry provided those desired sales channels the interest in piracy crashed.

Now, I'm not saying that it was the right thing to do, but if you look at the motivations there's a significant difference. The person buying a recast of an OOP model is like the person pirating a movie after the store closed, they'd prefer a legal source but there isn't one. The person buying a recast of an in-production item is just whiny and entitled about the fact that they have to pay $10 more than they think is "fair".

Pretzel, meet human who wants to maintain moral high ground. All of what you said boils down to you thinking you were entitled to hear or see what you wanted at any time you wanted. Motivations are irrelevant here. The copyright holder doesn't care about your motivations.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Pretzel, meet human who wants to maintain moral high ground. All of what you said boils down to you thinking you were entitled to hear or see what you wanted at any time you wanted. Motivations are irrelevant here. The copyright holder doesn't care about your motivations.

What part of "I'm not saying it's the right thing to do" is so hard to understand? Nowhere in there did I say "yay piracy, steal all the music you want". But it's absurd to suggest that the motivations in the two cases are the same, especially when we have indisputable evidence that most of the people saying "I just want a better way to buy this" promptly started buying legally as soon as the option became available. Meanwhile people keep buying illegal recasts of in-production models even though the legal sellers are far more convenient and offer a superior product, simply because they feel entitled to cheaper prices.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
Sorry, but how on earth does that work? The music/films were available in a store to purchase on tape, CD and DVD, at cinemas to go and see, and gigs to hear live, and so on.

They were available in theory, but they weren't available in the desired format. If you wanted to listen to music on your computer you had to go out and find a store that had a CD with the music you wanted (not always easy if you wanted something outside of the mainstream hits), and then you still had to make a copy of it to get it in digital form.

Mate, you could buy a track a track online at the same time as Napster existed. It was just expensive. Pirates didn't exist until the exact day that iTunes came about, and then vanish in a poof of smoke. Ever heard of Ritmoteca? Duet? Musicnet?

Plus, isn't complaining that the product isn't available in the precise format you want like arguing you should be allowed to buy a recast because a model you want is in metal instead of resin or vice versa? It's entitlement is what it is. You feel entitled to copy somebody's art and infringe their intellectual property because it's not exactly in the shape of the product you want to buy. It's like making a copy of a photograph because you prefer it to be printed in slightly different dimensions.

Additonally, people were copying CD's and taping films off the telly years before household internet was a thing. So the format thing doesn't even apply there.

If you're going to just conveniently exclude media piracy here, you're showing your own morals to be quite flexible when you feel like it.

Oh crap, I just remembered copying dirty movies off of HBO back when they showed dirty movies late at night and I'm sure those VHS tapes are in my mom's basement somewhere. Well, I guess that will be one more thing I will have to explain to somebody when she dies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Pretzel, meet human who wants to maintain moral high ground. All of what you said boils down to you thinking you were entitled to hear or see what you wanted at any time you wanted. Motivations are irrelevant here. The copyright holder doesn't care about your motivations.

What part of "I'm not saying it's the right thing to do" is so hard to understand? Nowhere in there did I say "yay piracy, steal all the music you want". But it's absurd to suggest that the motivations in the two cases are the same, especially when we have indisputable evidence that most of the people saying "I just want a better way to buy this" promptly started buying legally as soon as the option became available. Meanwhile people keep buying illegal recasts of in-production models even though the legal sellers are far more convenient and offer a superior product, simply because they feel entitled to cheaper prices.

I didn't say the motivations were the same, just that they were irrelevant. The person you stole from doesn't care what your motivations were. I don't care about your motivations. Not really sure anybody does. Would it be better for you to know that the Chinese sellers ship in two days as opposed to "within two weeks" of FW? Or that the recasters actually make sure the part you ordered is actually in the bag? cause that's sort of what you are coming off as here with this tack.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What it basically boils down to is you feeling a bit put off that your army is not the elite of the elite (and it really is, if you haven't seen his stuff people, stop right now and check it out because he is one of the best realistic modellers we have in the game) and you don't want your status being disrupted. That's fine and all. And I'm sure you have thought of this already. Just don't put morality on top of modeling. Your stuff will still be good. As will zeppelins or led bellys, or Zappa's. We, who might get a few models from china might give you a run for your money someday, but that doesn't take away anything from the amazing stuff you have done.

That's some damn fine diplomacy right there Exalted!

Incidentally, how does one check out his stuff? I'm still finding my way around here

Every time I scroll past this thread title I read the word "racist" instead of "recast".

I don't usually put racists on my table, and I wouldn't know how to spot one if there were one on the table. Maybe the white hood and robes or swastikas?

Interesting and informative thread - got me thinking about recasting on my long run this morning. Its not something I've really paid attention to.

If a person is recasting a current product and selling it under the guise of the authentic model then he is a pirate and a fraud. The buyer is a victim, although if it looks too good to be true it probably is. Knowingly buying knock-offs of current model ranges is undercutting the health of the hobby. Competition to keep prices in check should come from other manufacturers who offer better value, not folks using somebody else's leg-work. This is difficult in some "closed garden" systems that are quite popular, but I think its the only way.

At the other end of the spectrum is somebody recasting an OOP model from a long-gone manufacturer because he wants to fill out his army of obscure but beloved models for his old system. He does the recasting himself of one of his old minis and uses the results in his games. I do not see this as piracy. Selling them, though, might be a different story.

Cheers

xraytango wrote:
Every time I scroll past this thread title I read the word "racist" instead of "recast".

I don't usually put racists on my table, and I wouldn't know how to spot one if there were one on the table. Maybe the white hood and robes or swastikas?

I did think about making some nazi-zombie themed plague marines, but I wasn't sure if they'd be a bit too offensive

Some figures were made in very small quantities (some of the inquisitor range was available for a couple of months, by the time I heard of it they were gone), and GW have said they've no intention of returning to them (squats) or have implied the mounds have been broken up (some discontinued ranges), some cannot be made due to licensing issues (Judge Dredd range, Dr Who, etc). I'd buy recasts of these because I could enjoy the figure without paying £20-100 per figure, or more, some of the old stuff hits crazy prices and they've no relevance to the current product being made. I'm fine with the morality of that as long as they're openly passed on as recasts. Trying to rip collectors off by passing recasts of very rare figures as the real thing is clearly wrong.

The talk about DVD piracy makes me laugh as I've known people pirate stuff just because they wanted to watch the damn film be not be forced to sit through the anti-piracy stuff and adverts which you can't skip! There's a certain irony in forcing people who have brought the genuine product to sit through a lecture on piracy.

 Peregrine wrote:
They were available in theory, but they weren't available in the desired format. If you wanted to listen to music on your computer you had to go out and find a store that had a CD with the music you wanted (not always easy if you wanted something outside of the mainstream hits), and then you still had to make a copy of it to get it in digital form.
[...]
Now, I'm not saying that it was the right thing to do, but if you look at the motivations there's a significant difference.

Gotcha! I think we are in agreement here then. If I want a product in Resin (so I can cut it up and convert it) that is only available in Metal, then this is a situation where I am just as In The Right to procure the item in this alternative method, just as we do not look down and hate on those that pirate music that wasn't available online easily. Presumably you have pirated music once in your youth or Watched A Music Video On YouTube?
With my powers of divination I can absolutely 150% guarantee every single person in this thread has watched a non-authorized (not legal) upload of a song on YouTube. This is good because it fits the moral standards of "if it isn't available in the format you want (I want it to be on Youtube!), it is more acceptable" which would therefore put my wanting to get a Metal model for Cheaper And In Resin into the "more acceptable and something Peregrine is understanding of" morality category, yes?

I just don't understand what some arbitrary morality has to do with a commercial product?

Also, morality is man-made concept that is not universal, and in any case is meant to be a PERSONAL thing, not something you jam down everyone else's throat like some evangelist.

Legitimate question:
I have an Ork Warboss.
It's a reaper bones Bugbear kitbashed with bitz I received secondhand. GW got Zero dollars from me for that Ork.
Is that as (morally) bad as a Recast?

What if that Warboss was a Kromlech model?
Besides the tournament implications, morally what's the difference between buying a Proxy model and a recast?

The difference is obvious imo - It is definately not as bad (or rather not bad at all) as a recast.
The recast uses products other people create, which you use to simply copy it and deprive them of their intellectual (and in some cases, via a lost sale they would otherwise have) property. You pay for the work of the recaster, but not of the original creator.

The Kromlech model e.g. is a unique creation and by purchasing you pay for the work invested.

That is basically asking if purchasing a Ford is a moral fallacy if you could buy an Toyota instead.
Both serve the same purpose, but differ in actual implementation.

It's simple competition. You buy what you like more.
You paid separately for the rules, so there is no obligation to GW for using their models.
You paid for rules, you got the rules. Do with them as you please.

 dreamakuma wrote:
Legitimate question:
I have an Ork Warboss.
It's a reaper bones Bugbear kitbashed with bitz I received secondhand. GW got Zero dollars from me for that Ork.
Is that as (morally) bad as a Recast?

What if that Warboss was a Kromlech model?
Besides the tournament implications, morally what's the difference between buying a Proxy model and a recast?

The difference is buying from Reaper or Keomlech is buying from a legitimate business that makes, or commissions, its own products. They might be influenced by an IP but they didn't straight up steal someone else's work.

 Thairne wrote:
The difference is obvious imo - It is definately not as bad (or rather not bad at all) as a recast.
The recast uses products other people create, which you use to simply copy it and deprive them of their intellectual (and in some cases, via a lost sale they would otherwise have) property. You pay for the work of the recaster, but not of the original creator.

The Kromlech model e.g. is a unique creation and by purchasing you pay for the work invested.

That is basically asking if purchasing a Ford is a moral fallacy if you could buy an Toyota instead.
Both serve the same purpose, but differ in actual implementation.

It's simple competition. You buy what you like more.
You paid separately for the rules, so there is no obligation to GW for using their models.
You paid for rules, you got the rules. Do with them as you please.

Your response makes me ask another question, and I do appreciate the straightforward response.
My AOS Force is almost entirely OOP models I've bought secondhand. It's all very old metal and plastic Monopose Chaos Warriors. My only "Current" model is the new Slambo. I haven't paid for any rules, GW hasn't seen a cent for the majority of the army I own in 25 years or more.

All GW has seen from me was the $25 dollars I spent in a store for Slambo. Is this morally reprehensible?

What I'm trying to gauge is where the line's drawn at. I can Play AoS right now without GW getting a cent from me. A lot of people can.
If I recast and convert some of my secondhand metal monopose chaos Warriors for my own personal use instead of buying the current line am I doing some terrible deed?

It feels very subjective from what I've read and I think that's a very good thing.

Morality is always subjective.
What I deem acceptable raises the hackles of other people and vice versa.

And no, that is not morally reprehensible either. There is a legal 2nd hand market for miniatures.
Using my above example that is the same as buying a used car instead of a new one.
Would you have qualms doing that? If no, then why would you with miniatures?
You can drive around in cars without ever buying one from the manufacturer directly and noone will blame you for it (well.. since its all subjective someone could, but... yeah).

Most morality can be gleaned from legality.
If it is legal, it is ok. If it's not, it's not

Although there are cases where legality and morality clash (prime example is that dude that bought the patent for that AIDS treatment and then increased price twentyfold - legal yes, but deeply amoral by most peoples standard) but miniature wargaming usually does not really have such extreme cases.

 dreamakuma wrote:
Legitimate question:
I have an Ork Warboss.
It's a reaper bones Bugbear kitbashed with bitz I received secondhand. GW got Zero dollars from me for that Ork.
Is that as (morally) bad as a Recast?

What if that Warboss was a Kromlech model?
Besides the tournament implications, morally what's the difference between buying a Proxy model and a recast?

That only makes sense if you believe GW are the sole company to have the moral and legal right to make models.

Obviously absurd.

Kromlech and others all made their own unique products, they commission, sculpt and cast things they create, and as creator they own the sole right to reproduce them. If you buy kromlech, you are buying a legitimate alternative on the market. If you buy s recast of anything, you are buying something reproduced by a third party with permission of the creator.

Ten years ago, Kromlech, Chapterhouse and the rest were all immoral IP thieves for using GW's design cues. I guess times change.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Ten years ago, Kromlech, Chapterhouse and the rest were all immoral IP thieves for using GW's design cues. I guess times change.

I remember that was a thing back in 2011. I used to get crap for using a few Non-Gw models.
I left the hobby for a while and have started to come back to GW with AoS, but I prefer the old Chaos models where I can.

Personally I'm not a fan of buying recasts of models currently in production, or passing off a fake as something else. But honestly, if I could get the 1980's realm of chaos Warriors of chaos in a good resin and a good recast I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Even at current going prices for most of them.

I've heard of a Russian company that aims to improve on the original designs- neatening edges, straightening bits et al before recasting.
What would people thoughts be on this?

Firstly, using information in posts that could be construed as providing people with the ability to source recasters is sailing very close to breaking forum rules, so I'd edit that bit about the name of the process.

Secondly, while there may indeed be a Russian doing that, the only one I'm aware of is Chinese, but he's not so pretentious as to give it a pseudo brand name.

Ok, done. I'm not sure I'm remembering the name right either way

I have never bought a recast, but I did once recast a troll's face out of curiosity for the process.

I think there is definitely room for 'home casting' as part of the hobby, although in truth it should preferably be casting NOT recasting.

There has been a lot of talk about morality, but I haven't seen it mentioned the moral responsibility of the business / copyright holder.

GW has the copyright for the production of many models, and is in the business of model production. In my mind it is GW's responsibility to the customer to produce the models it has rights to (and to do so in a profitable manner as they also have responsibility to themselves and their shareholders).

Now this doesn't vindicate those who step in to provide what GW is no longer willing to, but I do feel it reduces the severity of their 'crimes'.