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.

 Ketara wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Court is as much about who can afford the best lawyer.

Here, that’d be GW, hands down.

I'm sorry, but did you read GW's original depositions during Chapterhouse? They'd have done better for themselves hiring clowns. There's a reason their head of legal affairs got fired. Competence=/=salary for in-house lawyers.

It isn't really in most cases about the best the lawyer, but just the fact one side has one. Most the small shops back then would just fold and take the stuff down. CH was able to obtain pro-bono council and if this company wanted to, they should reach out to the firm as well. Pretty sure the firm wants to finish what they started with CH. I remember they were mainly doing to make a name for themselves in IP law and be the firm with a precedent setting case.

What quality is the new GW in-house lawyer? Don't know. They might be aiming for lower hanging fruit right now. Also that Alan "this is great news" Merrett isn't there anymore is, they might have a better idea of IP law.

 rayphoton wrote:
Oh I have no doubt that there will be some privare purchases of these file raging around the internet

Yep, but he won't be able to reach the same amount of people than on KS and he will have a harder case of going unnoticed now by the big sharks. After all, he publicly said his real identity, it's not like they don't know who is behind these files. The risk is clear and real even if he "sells under the mantle" the same files. If GW sees them elsewhere, the link is easy to do. If he sells "black market style", he can never be sure of what the buyer will do with the files - if that person will be stupid as well and doesn't care if the blame falls on the original creator.

It's basically made so that he gives up touching GW's turf. That all the hassle and risks for the smaller gains aren't worth it anymore.

I mean, he could have done 3d sculpts of something much different, but like someone else said on this topic : the reason why it was looked after is because it was very close to the current GW's Craftworld Eldar product line.

It will be hard for him to give counter arguments here.

This thread is a clear example why copyright lawyers should be put together on some..monster island, so they can live out their lives in peace without destroying Tokyo constantly.

Cronch wrote:
This thread is a clear example why copyright lawyers should be put together on some..monster island, so they can live out their lives in peace without destroying Tokyo constantly.

No, no, no. You're only blaming the consequence here. The real culprit behind this situation is the existence of copyright at all.

Lawyers are only here so that it means something : without the fear of punishment if you "steal another's intellectual property", it would have crumbled a long time ago.


And besides, if the guy is really an independant 3d sculptor having already worked for others companies like CMON...this situation is really bad looking for him. Sure, he may not have worked for GW, but that's not really encouraging when you hire someone who doesn't hesitate to put such a blatant copy-and-paste product on KS...if he did for GW, why wouldn't he do the same for others ? Would CMON be happy if he began to make "not zombicide" previous exclusive characters that you can't find elsewhere ?

Of course, the reason why is because it wouldn't bring as much money as a whole army of Craftworld eldars.

Sarouan wrote:

Cronch wrote:
This thread is a clear example why copyright lawyers should be put together on some..monster island, so they can live out their lives in peace without destroying Tokyo constantly.

No, no, no. You're only blaming the consequence here. The real culprit behind this situation is the existence of copyright at all.

Lawyers are only here so that it means something : without the fear of punishment if you "steal another's intellectual property", it would have crumbled a long time ago.


And besides, if the guy is really an independant 3d sculptor having already worked for others companies like CMON...this situation is really bad looking for him. Sure, he may not have worked for GW, but that's not really encouraging when you hire someone who doesn't hesitate to put such a blatant copy-and-paste product on KS...if he did for GW, why wouldn't he do the same for others ? Would CMON be happy if he began to make "not zombicide" previous exclusive characters that you can't find elsewhere ?

Of course, the reason why is because it wouldn't bring as much money as a whole army of Craftworld eldars.

Agreed tough I would say Copyright works against GW just as much as for.

GW have to pursue "infringing" materials otherwise they loose everything.

The reason we can comment on how evil GW are is because they are able to sustain their IP and thus our involvement with their particular brand of the wargaming hobby.

 Mr. Burning wrote:


The reason we can comment on how evil GW are is because they are able to sustain their IP and thus our involvement with their particular brand of the wargaming hobby.

Still, it's not an excuse to advocate for people doing such copycats...because if you justify it by "GW is evil", then what happens when they begin to do the same for others "not evil" ? Who is deemed "evil enough" so that's it's right to act that way ?

That's how corrupt people get caught in the corruption death's spiral : they always begin by justifying it "once", thinking it's not a big deal.

Hell is paved with good intentions. Once you make a step on that road...it's hard to turn back.

At its core the concept of copyright is a sound idea because it allows a person or firm to develop something and to then share that something with the world and to profit from that development whilst being protected. Without that protection development can reach a standstill because any small firm has no benefit to developing or innovating because once the idea is in the market any bigger firm would easily be able to copy-cat the design and bring it to market cheaper/faster/better.


In short without copyright it would heavily stifle creative freedom and a desire to innovate. It would also leave big firms with supreme power and leave little/less chance for smaller firms to develop niches for themselves.



Now this isn't to say that copyright is perfect, there are issues with it including firms that will buy up ideas and concepts and then use ownership of the copyright to deny that idea reaching the market.



GW gets a lot of flack in the wargame community, but a big part of that is because so many take the easier path of copying GW designs and ideas to try and essentially steal a slice of GW's pie. GW aren't alone either, the team behind Battletech has to issue takedowns too to those who are copycatting their ideas and designs too. They are just much smaller so we hear of it less and see it happening less but it happens too. Plus this is a 40K forum more than it is a Battletech one.


This is why I don't begrudge GW defending their copyright, because I wouldn't begrudge other firms protecting theirs - Dropfleet, Dystopian Wars, Battletech, Kingdom Death and so many others.

 Overread wrote:
At its core the concept of copyright is a sound idea because it allows a person or firm to develop something and to then share that something with the world and to profit from that development whilst being protected. Without that protection development can reach a standstill because any small firm has no benefit to developing or innovating because once the idea is in the market any bigger firm would easily be able to copy-cat the design and bring it to market cheaper/faster/better.

The irony here of course being that GW is the bigger firm, and yet...

(Not that I'm necessarily on the side of the small companies here; I'd rather see those make something new rather than yet another knock-off 40k model most of the time. It just gets old.)

Do GW not see the thirst for new Eldar models that has led to several 3rd party sellers making their own and selling them?

Talk about leaving money on the table.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I always wonder how GW finds these things out, like there's some eagle scout Dakkanaut (or somewhere sle) who runs to tell GW the moment something like this shows up.

Probably. There's people who'd take a bullet for the Sigmarine statue outside Nottingham HQ.

 dan2026 wrote:
Do GW not see the thirst for new Eldar models that has led to several 3rd party sellers making their own and selling them?

Talk about leaving money on the table.

Clearly they'd rather make the 8th unit of Primaries Verb-ators with a gun (but a diffrent one this time), because that'll get them more money for less effort

 dan2026 wrote:
Do GW not see the thirst for new Eldar models that has led to several 3rd party sellers making their own and selling them?

Talk about leaving money on the table.

This maybe a tad simplistic but:

It is arguable that GW only real concern with 3rd party products is the IP consideration. If current range sales track within company expectations then thirst for new minis isnt an issue.

If existing revenue from an existing range is cannibalised due to to alternative 3rd party or proxy product then there 'might' be some conversations in Lenton. But that will be set against the long term product development goals of the studio.

I think we are looking at the copyright and not the complaint issue.

GW didnt complain to the developer via a cease and desist, they complained to Kickstarter.

This is a bit like a video takedown complaint on YouTube, it doesnt need to be justifiable in legalese it just needs to interfere with the daily life of the corporation that they just want rtide of the problem.

GW does have a case, and so whether that case would be successfully provable in a court of law may or may not be relevant, but it isnt relevant to Kickstarter. Kickstarter want their 5% cut on the project, they dont want to use up any man-hours of their employees getting it. Big company wants to complain, take down the little company's project and move on. Now what are we having for lunch? Kickstarter will get their 5% from elsewhere and not acrue costs in doing so.

Arguing about specificity or legal right wont help here, its not a court that the developers must appeal to but a company that thinks every problem that needs solving is an unwanted drain on smooth minimum input profitability. GW on the other hand are happy to howl all day as it is getting results.

What the devs need to do is make multi part space elves, so that individual components are not eldar, where the whole joins up to be a not-eldar but could also be something else entirely. However they will need to go to Indiegogo to do this. GW has tasted blood in the water and there is no amount of toning down the developer can do to appease GW at this point because in their eyes space elves are their exclusive IP.

we don't know whether GW went to the developer first and only went to KS once they didn't respond

The guy has apparently found a way around the issue and we will all learn more "soon"

I smell a patreon in the oven

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
we don't know whether GW went to the developer first and only went to KS once they didn't respond

Does it matter. GW approached Kickstarter and Kickstarter corporate pulled it. So only Kickstarter corporate can restore it, they wont want a fight with GW, they wont even want to allocate man hours and certainly wont want a lawyers time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rayphoton wrote:
The guy has apparently found a way around the issue and we will all learn more "soon"

I smell a patreon in the oven

Most likely the developer will go elsewhere and use backdoor advertising.

Or perhaps just tweak designs

Certainly an option. Looking at those original 3D renders, one thinks "new Craftworld models" not "Craftworld-like models". It may be an eye of the beholder thing, but your inspired by models shouldn't be easily mistaken for the real thing.

Nobody is going to mistake Raging Heroes Sisters of Eternal Mercy Sci-Fi for Games Workshop Adepta Sororitas.

Tweaking designs is going to work best in the long run. If they just go "underground" or try other platforms its just a dance to get what they can before being shut down and that won't take long. Plus the more underground you go the more chance that your sculpts just enter the pool of stuff passed around privately in the background - ergo instead of customers coming to your store they are copying hte files from a friend of a friend.

Plus people will post photos of them, they will talk about them and finding them will be as simple as someone going "hey where'd you get those from they look cool."

Tweaking the designs so that they are not going to be taken down means they can openly advertise; secure customers; expand their market and brand and generally profit.

Voss wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
boy, I cant wait for the Tolkien estate to sue Wizards of the Coast for including basically every race from Tolkien's universe in their RPG game system.

You do know the Tolkien estate did in fact sue TSR way back at the start of D&D, and did force a lot of changes, right?
Some were superficial, some were just name changes (Ents->Treants, Hobbits ->Halflings), but this isn't new or unusual behavior by anyone.

It was Saul Zaentz, he who sued John Fogerty for sounding like John Fogerty not the Tolkien estate. TSR made changes to the names of Hobbit, Balrog and Ent (to Halfling, Balor and Treant), removed a poorly drawn illustration labelled Nazgul, but that was about it. The game did not change in the least. The suit, or threat thereof, did not force a lot of changes at all. Gary Gygax talked about it on Q&A threads on a few RPG forums, ENWorld and Dragonsfoot, IIRC.

The important thing to remember is that TSR 'stole' Dwarves, Elves, etc from the same place that Tolkien stole them. GW stole them from the same place too, Northern European folklore.

This guy hurt himself when he posted that scale image of his mini next to actual GW minis. Oops. I could not tell which was which at first. Creating that sort of confusion is actionable in most cases.

 Overread wrote:
Or perhaps just tweak designs

I don't think so, GW will still likely complain and Kickstarter corporate will take the path of least resistance.

There was a Kickstarter for generic fantasy and SF decals on Kickstarter, it got pulled because GW complained about their IP being depicted, so the artist changed the images, GW still complained. It only stopped because the artist was informed that the fleur de lys was not a lawful IP of Games Workshop, that the artist should change the image back to the classic fleur de lys and stand his ground. He did so and the project went ahead.

GW are a give inch take mile company, appeasing them doesn't make their claims go away. However not-eldar models cannot appeal to genericity.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Or perhaps just tweak designs

I don't think so, GW will still likely complain and Kickstarter corporate will take the path of least resistance.

There was a Kickstarter for generic fantasy and SF decals on Kickstarter, it got pulled because GW complained about their IP being depicted, so the artist changed the images, GW still complained. It only stopped because the artist was informed that the fleur de lys was not a lawful IP of Games Workshop, that the artist should change the image back to the classic fleur de lys and stand his ground. He did so and the project went ahead.

GW are a give inch take mile company, appeasing them doesn't make their claims go away. However not-eldar models cannot appeal to genericity.[/quote

I mean....CAN THEY? At the end of the day, if you change the gun, the cone hat, and the backpack doodads, an eldar is literally any space warrior wearing armor and holding a gun. Rangers are even more generic - change the design of the sniper rifle and you've got zero case telling someone "hey man, that's an eldar ranger right there" and not any robed sci fi warrior with a sniper rifle.

 Red Harvest wrote:

Voss wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
boy, I cant wait for the Tolkien estate to sue Wizards of the Coast for including basically every race from Tolkien's universe in their RPG game system.

You do know the Tolkien estate did in fact sue TSR way back at the start of D&D, and did force a lot of changes, right?
Some were superficial, some were just name changes (Ents->Treants, Hobbits ->Halflings), but this isn't new or unusual behavior by anyone.

It was Saul Zaentz, he who sued John Fogerty for sounding like John Fogerty not the Tolkien estate. TSR made changes to the names of Hobbit, Balrog and Ent (to Halfling, Balor and Treant), removed a poorly drawn illustration labelled Nazgul, but that was about it. The game did not change in the least. The suit, or threat thereof, did not force a lot of changes at all. Gary Gygax talked about it on Q&A threads on a few RPG forums, ENWorld and Dragonsfoot, IIRC.

Um... ok? No one was talking about 'changing the game.' Any game. Its a discussion of lawsuits about names and concepts, and TSR wisely buckled, no matter how much Gygax liked to downplay things later.

The important thing to remember is that TSR 'stole' Dwarves, Elves, etc from the same place that Tolkien stole them. GW stole them from the same place too, Northern European folklore.

That actually isn't important to remember, because they've never really been a focus of a suit. Which is why this is about the appearance of figures and the relationship to Aspect Warriors and the Tolkien lawsuits were about the names the Tolkien estate could actually lay claim to. And did.

 Overread wrote:
At its core the concept of copyright is a sound idea because it allows a person or firm to develop something and to then share that something with the world and to profit from that development whilst being protected. Without that protection development can reach a standstill because any small firm has no benefit to developing or innovating because once the idea is in the market any bigger firm would easily be able to copy-cat the design and bring it to market cheaper/faster/better.


In short without copyright it would heavily stifle creative freedom and a desire to innovate. It would also leave big firms with supreme power and leave little/less chance for smaller firms to develop niches for themselves.

Leaving aside the big trumpeting political elephant in the room - the kind of copyright you're talking about was the kind that lasted 10-30 years and then everything went into the public domain. That hasn't existed for decades. Copyright as it exists today does nothing else but give the big firms supreme power and leave little chance for smaller firms, case in point this thread where a company about as small as you can get will almost certainly be ground out of existence for doing their own take on a concept that a big company have done almost nothing with for a couple of decades.

GW refuse to serve the market that exists, but will use copyright law to prevent anyone else from serving it either because it might impact potential profits they could make at some future point.

Large companies don't actually need copyright as it exists today in order to be competitive - how many people would even look twice at this KS if there was a modern, well-supported plastic Eldar range on sale at your friendly local hobby store? - they need it to establish utter unassailable dominance. Or rather, Certain Entertainment Companies That Will Remain Nameless need it for that reason, and big-fish-small-pond corporations like GW just happily make use of the result of the lobbying and bribery that got us to where we are today.

While I think the law re: copyright is bs, this is very clearly an infringement on GW's IP as the law stands.

I hope this gives GW a little more sense of urgency with updating the Craftworld line.

You know it won't. Don't entertain foolish hopes.

With sculptors as talented as these guys, why not create something unique themselves with a bit of background and perhaps a game to go with it?

Copyright law or not, living such a pathetic parasite life leeching of other companies shouldn't be an option for any creative in the industry with even the tiniest bit of self-respect, IMO.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
With sculptors as talented as these guys, why not create something unique themselves with a bit of background and perhaps a game to go with it?

Copyright law or not, living such a pathetic parasite life leeching of other companies shouldn't be an option for any creative in the industry with even the tiniest bit of self-respect, IMO.

Rude.

tinbee wrote:
I hope this gives GW a little more sense of urgency with updating the Craftworld line.

Hey, maybe the reason they were so bothered is because they have a big line planned for later this year for Eldar.
Right,
.. right?