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.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Mallo wrote:

Which one of them are they going to use the new rules against? Of course they are going to let channels that lean towards being sterile hobby content that shine a good light on the new hype.

Now yes, I'm not a fortune teller and can't see the future, but this is repeated behaviour from GW and it can be predicted from that. It was 'new' GW after all that went after the company 'War Banner' and forced them to change their name as it was too close to 'warhammer'. This was only in 2019 as well. They will stamp out the folk that don't tow the company line. I honestly think that we will see the days of 'honest' reviews of their products gone or at least seriously depleted.

Again, they aren't new rules. The only thing that's really new is the change purporting to completely ban fan animation/movies. So why do we think they're suddenly about to start enforcing rules they haven't been enforcing up to now, just because they changed a different part of the document to address a different issue?

I'll be the first to hold up my hand if I'm wrong, but to me this reads 100% as about Warhammer+ and trying to make sure there are no free alternatives, not as some big change in their general IP strategy.

It isn't sudden, they've been attempting to enforce these rules for a long time now. Its just the companies they have gone after are not big enough to have caused waves on social media or they tried to enforce their own version of IP laws and failed. Them posting the new update just brings it more to light.

And yes, the primer seems to have been Warhammer+. They've recently shut down multiple sources of the repositories for things like old white dwarfs. Yes, sure they legally have a right to have things like white dwarf under their control and not given out for free. But its not been an issue for the last 20 years, they've let it slide and let communities continue to play and read about old 'dead' games in old publications. Now they see a $$ sign in them, suddenly they change up the rules. I'd love to be wrong but I fully expect communities that have kept their 'dead' games alive all these years to sudden be hit with C&Ds to remove old white dwarf rules. Sure, they can hide behind the legality of it all, but they can't be expect to win the hearts of gamers who already feel slighted from their favourite game(s) having been removed from GW years ago.

They've been making record profits with all these things existing until now, so it would be hard to say that having fan animations/white dwarf/reading from books etc have hurt the company in anyway. Perhaps I'm wrong and there is some GW executive that has starved to death because someone used the warhammer fantasy logo in their youtube video seen by 16 people.

 Polonius wrote:
There's a lot of "the sky is falling" hyperbole that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how IP laws work, both in how much they can cover (pretty much everything GW stated in their list) and also what it won't cover (pretty much everything not stated).

GW can't go after cosplayers, or review channels, or battle reports. Sure, they could strong arm YouTube, but that's a YouTube TOS issue, not an IP issue. And even then, I doubt that's the case. Fan made movies are actual creative works that deliberately slot along side canon works. That's very different from an unboxing or painting tutorial.

Polonius, maybe you're forgetting, but you're actually arguing this with people who have previously received Cease and Desist orders from GW for these exact things. Actual legal action has been taken by GW for the things that you're saying they could never do.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I’m surprised they haven’t tried to shut down companies like Wargames Atlantic, who make obvious and effective Imperial Guard proxies.

Year isn’t over yet.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
Getting a real sense of Deja vu from all this.

GW have always been this way, they just managed to convince people that they were 'friendly' with their Social Media presence.

THIS.

Guys, this is GW. They didn't change, they just pretended to play nice for a while to get you all buying their gak again. As someone who was on the receiving end of this last time, I've been sitting here posting that GW's behavior was becoming more and more like the Bad Old Days of ten years ago when they were threatening their fans for supporting them.

Now, low and behold, I knew what I was talking about, and here we are again.

Just what is it those against this whole thing want? For GW to let anyone do anything they like with their IP?

For GW to not stop people from being creative. For GW to stop punishing people from being fans of the game. For GW to not treat the hobby as their personal monopoly where the filthy customers only exist at the behest of the GW overlords.

So "let people do whatever they want with your IP despite not having permission" or they're "evil"? GW are not "stopping people being creative" or "punishing" fans and it's absurd hyperbole to say so, unless you're going to claim that the fan-made artwork, sites and fiction that they explicitly state in these guidelines for some reason don't count as "creative".

GW don't make a Carcharadons upgrade kit. They have no intention of ever doing so, so if someone wants to provide that for people the person making it shouldn't be slapped with the threat of legal action for making something GW has no intention if making themselves. Its not protecting their IP, they just don't want anyone else making money from it. It's just a crap way to treat people who love the setting and want to support it in a way that GW doesn't.

GW are within their rights to not make a kit, they are not obligated to make a kit for every single possiblity. And yes, stopping others making money via unauthorized use isexactly the sort of thing protecting an IP involves.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Just what is it those against this whole thing want? For GW to let anyone do anything they like with their IP?

They could start with allowing people to do what they are allowed to do under the law, without the threat of legal action.

...and how is that not what they're doing here? Copyright law means you don't get the right to use GWs ip to do whatever you like without permission.You get to use it under specific circumstances like parody or reviews and such, but the guidelines here don't mention anything against those at all. The part about animations could potentially come under that if it's a parody animation for example though, and in that case it would not necessarily be infringing.

Love to see them try.

Speaking of parody IIRC they went after a comic strip years ago didn't they?

You talking about Turn Signals on a Landraider? No, the author wanted to publish it and get the profits from it. He asked GW for permission, they said no, he stopped updating it.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

...and how is that not what they're doing here? Copyright law means you don't get the right to use GWs ip to do whatever you like without permission.You get to use it under specific circumstances like parody or reviews and such, but the guidelines here don't mention anything against those at all. The part about animations could potentially come under that if it's a parody animation for example though, and in that case it would not necessarily be infringing.

Well, one, as you will undoubtedly find if things go as they have before, GW does not feel 'fair use' exists. Further, I'll remind you that GW forbids ALL fan made animation. History again suggests they WILL try to enforce that, and will come down hard on people regardless of what copyright law actually allows.

This is a flat out blatant attempt to crush potential competition for Warhammer + no matter what the victims actual rights under the law are. The only reason Chapterhouse's case managed to actually get fought is that they got Pro Bono legal representation, despite the fact that GW's case was made from cardboard and happy thoughts. And even though GW lost the vast majority of their claims, CH still ended up closing. Which his, likely, the goal here.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
You talking about Turn Signals on a Landraider? No, the author wanted to publish it and get the profits from it. He asked GW for permission, they said no, he stopped updating it.

And then they put it on WHC.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/01/24/no-44-ironic/#comictop

 Mr. Grey wrote:

 jeff white wrote:


This move is aggressive on GW’s part. I have never wanted a 3D printer or some Kromlech orks more than I do now.

I was excited about new Heresy plastics and new KT, new ork battle force… now, well,we are moving and my models are all boxed up for shipping but I could save a couple hundred euros if I just ditched these things. GW does stuff like this, and it makes me sad that I spent so much of my life modelling and painting in the Old World and the original 40k universe. I hardly recognize the game, the context, the purpose of the hobby anymore. Profits over all… ruins everything beautiful.

So go buy some Kromlech orcs. Get a 3d printer. Go hog wild, play older editions of 40k with your buddies and make up some homebrew rules for a better version of Kill Team. Nobody's stopping you. You can build an entire orc army out of Kromlech's various lines and nothing whatsoever is stopping you from using that army anywhere except maybe in an official GW store or at Warhammer World(for obvious reasons).

GW is a publicly traded company, of course they're going to want to make profit on new releases and all of their various miniatures, paints, brushes, books, terrain, whatever. That's kind of how business works. You don't like it, you're always welcome to stop participating and step away from the GW bubble.

Wow. Thanks so much for pointing out the obvious. I might have forgotten that I am free to do what I want, including posting sentiment on dakka. Or, is there something else that you were trying to communicate?

doesn't suprise me they're going after fan videos. copyright and trademark laws are very "use it or lose it" if it's not enforced then future suits may be thrown out. GW is just covering their ass here. with youtube monetization I expect GW is concerned that if someone released a warhammer animation for profit down the line they could get hammered with "well you let those videos on youtube stand and THEY made a profit"

so it's GWs intreast in entering animation themselves, combined with a careful legal approuch which is whats prompted this

 NAVARRO wrote:
Speaking of parody IIRC they went after a comic strip years ago didn't they?

Games Workshop Fulchester remembers.

BrianDavion wrote:
doesn't suprise me they're going after fan videos. copyright and trademark laws are very "use it or lose it" if it's not enforced then future suits may be thrown out. GW is just covering their ass here. with youtube monetization I expect GW is concerned that if someone released a warhammer animation for profit down the line they could get hammered with "well you let those videos on youtube stand and THEY made a profit"

No, they aren't. Please stop spreading this false information, it is so frustrating because someone else reads what you wrote and then repeats it and before long the internet is convinced it's true even though it has no basis in fact - that's probably how you started thinking it yourself, you read someone else type it and didn't think to check if it was actually true. Copyright is not use or lose, you are completely free to choose whether to enforce your copyright or not to, it has no impact on your ability to enforce it in the future. Trademark is only use or lose in the sense that if your trademark becomes generic (think Aspirin for pain medication), it means you may not be able to keep it trademarked any more. But that's not a fear that comes from people making Adeptus Astartes fan videos clearly situated in GW's 40k universe, because there's no dilution as a result of that - in fact, it's reinforcing the trademark, just like someone drinking a bottle of Coca-cola in a movie is reinforcing the trademark, not diluting it. Instead, what GW would be afraid of re: dilution is someone making their own universe and using the Adeptus Astartes name to refer to generic space marine-like figures, so that it stops meaning something specifically about GW and just becomes a term for super warriors generally. That's dilution.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Speaking of parody IIRC they went after a comic strip years ago didn't they?

Games Workshop Fulchester remembers.

I'd forgotten all about this gem.

Hilariously, the things they ripped into the most are the very same things that are still huge problems now.

From reading these forums, it seems that all GW are trying to do is give a little slap on the wrist to scare animators into removing their animations (or make it so they can't afford to make them).

GW have probably realised they don't have enough animations to make a really full WH+ channel, so have tried to employ those fans that are making them. Where they've failed to hire, they're trying to scare the animators off with a generic IP reminder threat to include the animations.

It just seems really late preparation for their WH+ subs release next month.

All the rest of the scare talk about shutting youtubers down for painting videos is just silly.

I hope they see this bro

You guys need to be nice. Fan sites aren’t allowed to criticize GW. Also we’re going to need to remove all images of upcoming releases taken from GW pages.

 Nurglitch wrote:
It's a pity there's nothing else to play but GW games in GW's universe with GW toys...

That's terribly disingenuous and you know that.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
From reading these forums, it seems that all GW are trying to do is give a little slap on the wrist to scare animators into removing their animations (or make it so they can't afford to make them).

GW have probably realised they don't have enough animations to make a really full WH+ channel, so have tried to employ those fans that are making them. Where they've failed to hire, they're trying to scare the animators off with a generic IP reminder threat to include the animations.

It just seems really late preparation for their WH+ subs release next month.

All the rest of the scare talk about shutting youtubers down for painting videos is just silly.

Yeah, this is my read too. I guess we'll find out soon enough, if GW does start slapping people other than the animators with cease and desist notices I'm sure we're going to hear about it. But it'd be deeply stupid of them to try it, it's literally free advertising for them and powers a lot of their sales growth.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
You talking about Turn Signals on a Landraider? No, the author wanted to publish it and get the profits from it. He asked GW for permission, they said no, he stopped updating it.

And yet it came back on Warhammer Community.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Which is a non-argument.

So is "they’re in the business of making as much money as they can".

WholeHazelNuts wrote:
I think it's a shame about the fan films. I saw this kind of thing generate nothing but ill-will for the Star Trek fan film community when they clamped down on theirs - you had the whole Axanar debacle that generated lots of bad feeling. Compare that to Star Wars fanfilms, where they embrace the fact that people want to celebrate their love for the subject matter and be creative... I think it's just asking for more irritated fans. Shame.

Especially considering that Axanar was light years ahead of the crap CBS has been putting out and calling "Star Trek."

Everything today is about monetization. As a well known game critic once said "It is no longer enough to make a product, put it out and make some money. Companies need to make ALL of the money, or it is considered a failure."

 privateer4hire wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I’m surprised they haven’t tried to shut down companies like Wargames Atlantic, who make obvious and effective Imperial Guard proxies.

Year isn’t over yet.

And GW would lose any case, as there is nothing that is similar to a GW product. Chapter House lost copyright decisions when it was determined that the particular model in question was VERY similar to a GW model, like the Doomseer one. Design ethos and shapes could not be copyright-able, though. You can sell sci-fi dwarves with guns all you want, that happen to work in GW games. Just don’t make them look too much like Squats with Lasguns. There is no need to even be concerned about the stuff Wargames Atlantic is doing.

They don’t have to win a single case or even go to court. All they have to do is make complaints to YouTube and generally make clattering noises to keep people jumping.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Theophony wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
They weren't enforcing most of those rules. They changed the rules to put a ban on the thing they just started a streaming service for. It doesn't take a genius to connect the dots on that one and see why they changed the rules for that specific thing.

I'm no GW fanboi by any stretch of the imagination. But I'd wait to see if they're actually going to start doing anything besides what they've already been doing - shutting down 3rd party animation producers in order to kneecap the competition to Warhammer+ - before acting like this heralds any big change in their IP enforcement strategy beyond the animation issue. Literally three weeks ago they were sending "guy who reads book on youtube" a free copy of the GHB2021 to, well, read on youtube. This directly violates their rules re: reproducing GW text and rules. And yet they've been not only tolerating this, but actively sending him the stuff for free so he can read it on youtube. Do we really think they've done a complete 180 degree pivot in the last three weeks?

Prior GW History says YES

So we should put you in the "yes, they completely changed their approach in the last three weeks for <reasons>" camp?

I'm not saying it's impossible. But why would a company that was happy to send a free review copy to the guy who reads the book page by page on youtube suddenly decide three weeks later that it was a big deal if people reproduced even a tiny bit of rules text on their websites? What changed?

We have years of prior history of GW not enforcing these rules. Then before that we have years of history of the opposite re: the Chapterhouse debacle. And we know that as little as three weeks ago, they were still in the "not enforcing" camp. So why do you think that they suddenly had another personality swap? Isn't the much more reasonable explanation that the changes they made specifically to boost the debacle called Warhammer+ are just, well, specifically to boost the debacle called Warhammer+?

Simple, GW is a really big company. The marketing department sees a free avenue of getting the word out and the cost is sending them a copy of the rulebook, they reach thousands of customers for the cost of one book and postage, WIN. The IP department sees somebody reading the rules and screams FOUL. The production department hears about it and says WHATEVER. The accountants wonder why they didn’t use the bulk shipping pricing that they negotiated which would have saved the company £1.25.

Every time they come up with a new plan things change, wether it was because Bob in accounting was on vacation and couldn’t voice his concerns, or Ted in janitorial threw away a piece of paper on the floor which was actually a really important note, change happens. Look at Cursed City. A planned system that was shown off as an ongoing item, marketed as such, and then stricken from all record better than the expunged legions.

 Vaktathi wrote:
At one point GW's IP policy included notes about tattoos of Warhammer stuff not being authorized

None of this really looks new to me, GW has always publicly maintained a strict IP policy, even if enforcement has been wonky.

Back when they had the tattoo thing in there, they also had the claim that conversions were 'technically' an IP infringement, but that they would 'allow' them so long as people weren't mass-producing them.


Other than the animation thing, all of this looks like the same stuff that GW have had on their legal page for as long as they've had a legal page.

yukishiro1 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
doesn't suprise me they're going after fan videos. copyright and trademark laws are very "use it or lose it" if it's not enforced then future suits may be thrown out. GW is just covering their ass here. with youtube monetization I expect GW is concerned that if someone released a warhammer animation for profit down the line they could get hammered with "well you let those videos on youtube stand and THEY made a profit"

No, they aren't. Please stop spreading this false information, it is so frustrating because someone else reads what you wrote and then repeats it and before long the internet is convinced it's true even though it has no basis in fact - that's probably how you started thinking it yourself, you read someone else type it and didn't think to check if it was actually true. Copyright is not use or lose, you are completely free to choose whether to enforce your copyright or not to, it has no impact on your ability to enforce it in the future. Trademark is only use or lose in the sense that if your trademark becomes generic (think Aspirin for pain medication), it means you may not be able to keep it trademarked any more. But that's not a fear that comes from people making Adeptus Astartes fan videos clearly situated in GW's 40k universe, because there's no dilution as a result of that - in fact, it's reinforcing the trademark, just like someone drinking a bottle of Coca-cola in a movie is reinforcing the trademark, not diluting it. Instead, what GW would be afraid of re: dilution is someone making their own universe and using the Adeptus Astartes name to refer to generic space marine-like figures, so that it stops meaning something specifically about GW and just becomes a term for super warriors generally. That's dilution.

Here's a good blog on this dynamic.

http://www.firstventurelegal.com/2014/05/27/supreme-court-says-failure-to-defend-copyright-not-completely-fatal-to-infringement-claims/

 totalfailure wrote:

And GW would lose any case, as there is nothing that is similar to a GW product. Chapter House lost copyright decisions when it was determined that the particular model in question was VERY similar to a GW model, like the Doomseer one.

Mind you, they don't actually have to care about winning or losing. And their legal team previously used a 'flood the zone' mentality. They did, as you might recall, accuse Chapter House of basically pirating every single mini they had ever made, and won on, what was it, 4 out of 400? It was some absurdly tiny number of the accusations actually stuck.

 insaniak wrote:
Other than the animation thing, all of this looks like the same stuff that GW have had on their legal page for as long as they've had a legal page.

Because it is.

The purpose of this thread was to show the updates, hence "Games Workshop has updated their IP rules..." being the subject heading.

Was that not clear?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Other than the animation thing, all of this looks like the same stuff that GW have had on their legal page for as long as they've had a legal page.

Because it is.

The purpose of this thread was to show the updates, hence "Games Workshop has updated their IP rules..." being the subject heading.

Was that not clear?

The snark is unnecessary. There's been 7 pages of people discussing this as if it's all new. That's what I was responding to.