GW vs CHS legality for the layman (or Laywoman)

[Renegade]

Thought I would add a new topic so people could get to grips with what is going on, and the legal complications are US and UK law regarding CHS vs GW on IP, Copyright and Trademarks.

As we know it is a US court presiding over the issue, yet UK law comes into account due the WIPO Treaties (http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/general/) signed by both the US and the UK.

UK law and US law are similar but not the same. Here is a Wiki source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_Kingdom)and another one is here[/I (http://www.ihaveawebsite-nowwhat.co.uk/copyright/)] the is more basic. However, more detailed information can be found [I]here (http://www.ipo.gov.uk/copy.htm), here (http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/uk_law_summary)and here (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents).

It is important to note that The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, is the current UK copyright law. It gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works the right to control the ways in which their material may be used. The rights cover: Broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public. In many cases, the creator will also have the right to be identified as the author and to object to distortions of his work.

Copyright arises when an individual or organisation creates a work, and applies to a work if it is regarded as original, and exhibits a degree of labour, skill or judgement.

Interpretation is related to the independent creation rather than the idea behind the creation. For example, your idea for a book would not itself be protected, but the actual content of a book you write would be. In other words, someone else is still entitled to write their own book around the same idea, provided they do not directly copy or adapt yours to do so.

Names, titles, short phrases and colours are not generally considered unique or substantial enough to be covered, but a creation, such as a logo, that combines these elements may be..

Lists of the countries which trigger qualification are published in Statutory Instruments periodically. They are, in point of fact, those countries which have acceeded to the Berne Copyright Convention.

UK copyright law has a set of exceptions to copyright known as fair dealing. Database right has a similar set of exceptions. Fair dealing is much more restricted than the American concept of fair use. It only applies in tightly defined situations, and outside those situations it is no defence at all against a lawsuit for copyright (or database right) infringement.

s29.—(1) Fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical, etc, work, for the purpose of research for a non-commercial purpose, does not infringe any copyright in the work, provided it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement of the source.

s30.—(1) Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another work, or of a performance of a work, does not infringe copyright in the work, provided it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement, and provided the work has actually been made available to the public.

Copyright fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work is most often encountered in the context of research or private study. Under the 1988 Act, it was originally the case that any research use was fair dealing. However, in 2003, the 1988 Act was amended to exclude commercial use from the definition of fair dealing. Fair dealing for research should be accompanied by acknowledgement if this is possible. Fair dealing with the typographical arrangement of a work for the use in research or private study is also explicitly allowed.

The areas I have brought to attention seem to be the main areas of contention with other commentators.

It is my honest opinion that CHS is in quite clear breach of UK law under which GW IP, Copyright and Trademarks are protected in the US. I am not a judge or lawyer, but do have some understanding of UK laws and how they work in the world of bookkeeping, so I am not illiterate in legalese either.

I hope that you all find this interesting.

[Mr Mystery]

Very cool! Thank you for the round up.

With regard to the docs now available, am I right in thinking that these only go up to a certain date? And if so, is it safe to assume that neither request for summary judgement was successful?

[lattd]

This sort of law is what i want to specialise in, so it bogels me they haven't argued their design rights as well.

For those who do not know the law in this area, England and wales (not the UK, NI and Scotland have their own laws) these laws protect the look of a product where as patents protect the workings of a product. As such not only has chapterhouse breached English copyright law thhey have breached english design law.

[Renegade]

This sort of law is what i want to specialise in, so it bogels me they haven't argued their design rights as well.

For those who do not know the law in this area, England and wales (not the UK, NI and Scotland have their own laws) these laws protect the look of a product where as patents protect the workings of a product. As such not only has chapterhouse breached English copyright law thhey have breached english design law.

From pages 10 - 18 of MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT: (http://ia600405.us.archive.org/18/items/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791/gov.uscourts.ilnd.250791.213.1.pdf)

In view of the large number of individual works appearing on defendant’s website, all of
which are admittedly derived from Games Workshop’s original works... The finding that Chapterhouse’s copying as a whole is substantial and substantially
similar to Games Workshop’s Warhammer 40K is reinforced by reviewing specific products
Chapterhouse sells... The extent of copying of creative elements is as great if not greater here, rendering the entire Chapterhouse website an infringement. Even if it might be true, as Chapterhouse seems to
argue, that some individual Chapterhouse products could in theory escape a finding of copyright
infringement, so long as they are sold together on Chapterhouse’s website, which itself
constitutes a copyrightable collective whole, the entire website is an infringement.Thus Chapterhouse has
created a series of shoulder pads for Space Marine Tactical, Space Marine Assault and Space
Marine Devastator squads that copy the exact multifaceted iconography and intricate numerical
sequencing of Games Workshop’s Space Marine Tactical, Space Marine Assault and Space
Marine Devastator squad... All such products adhere to Mr. Villacci’s
instructions to his designers to ensure that the products are all sufficiently “recognizable” to
Games Workshop’s customers.Chapterhouse does not use general imagery from heraldry, such as
crowns or flowers; it uses only the specific symbols Games Workshop has incorporated into its
characters and only for the same characters. Chapterhouse does not make miniature birds or
animals; it makes miniature Eldars and Space Marines. Even something as simple as the Roman
numerals IX and X (together with a chevron), which are used by Games Workshop to designate
squads of “Devastator” Space Marines, are used by Chapterhouse only on its own Devastator
Space Marine shoulder pads – together, of course, with the other design features created by
Games Workshop. (Undisputed Facts #60-61). It does not use these symbols in any other way.
It also similarly uses the number I-VI and VII-VIII for “Tactical” and “Assault” squad shoulder
pads (expressly so-named), just as Games Workshop does. And the colors and shapes of the
shoulder pads have all been borrowed from Games Workshop – right down to the tiny aesthetic
indents on the rear of the pads.

Recommended reading from page 19 onwards talks of design.

Interesting note: Chapterhouse failed to produce any of its advertising or promotional materials (despite an express Court order)

What is the penalty in the US for failing to adhere to a court order?

[Mr Mystery]

Atomic Wedgie?

But seriously, I don't think they did themselves any favours in declining that one, Spesh with the court order.

EDIT - Also, with CH being represented Pro-Bono, what happens if they lose? Who pays their Solicitors?

[Caitsidhe]

Atomic Wedgie?

But seriously, I don't think they did themselves any favours in declining that one, Spesh with the court order.

EDIT - Also, with CH being represented Pro-Bono, what happens if they lose? Who pays their Solicitors?

Nobody pays them. That is the point of it. That is why I commented on the fact that in Civil cases, lawyers cherry pick the ones they want to take because the only thing they have to gain is reputation in winning.

[Mr Mystery]

So even if they win, they get nowt? Seems a tad odd. But then I guess if they aren't charging, there are no fees to speak of. Cheers for the clear up!

[gendoikari87]

Names, titles, short phrases and colours are not generally considered unique or substantial enough to be covered, but a creation, such as a logo, that combines these elements may be..

which then of their products, was chapterhouse in violation of. Most of what GW seems to be suing over, under this appears to be not in violation. Save maybe for some of the shoulderpads, but then those were not exact copies. what are the requirements in the UK for them to be unique, because under american law, chapterhouse covered it's *** very well. I know this after having read over a similar issue over logos with one of my cousins companies. The difference between the two logos was literally millimeters . and to anyone walking down the street the two designs would be almost indistinguishable. That was found to no be a violation of trade mark.

[Renegade]

which then of their products, was chapterhouse in violation of. Most of what GW seems to be suing over, under this appears to be not in violation. Save maybe for some of the shoulderpads, but then those were not exact copies. what are the requirements in the UK for them to be unique, because under american law, chapterhouse covered it's *** very well. I know this after having read over a similar issue over logos with one of my cousins companies. The difference between the two logos was literally millimeters . and to anyone walking down the street the two designs would be almost indistinguishable. That was found to no be a violation of trade mark.

Copyright arises when an individual or organisation creates a work, and applies to a work if it is regarded as original, and exhibits a degree of labour, skill or judgement.

Its a judgement call. Every work in the UK is considered under copyright including my comment here with the exceptions applying.

It is something you check for in the beginning, not when in production.

CHS uses GW artwork for designs, which in my opinion would fall under The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, is the current UK copyright law. It gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works the right to control the ways in which their material may be used. The rights cover: Broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public.

[gendoikari87]

Copyright arises when an individual or organisation creates a work, and applies to a work if it is regarded as original, and exhibits a degree of labour, skill or judgement.

Its a judgement call. Every work in the UK is considered under copyright including my comment here with the exceptions applying.

It is something you check for in the beginning, not when in production.

CHS uses GW artwork for designs, which in my opinion would fall under The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, is the current UK copyright law. It gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works the right to control the ways in which their material may be used. The rights cover: Broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public.

Except as far as I know chapterhouse never used any unique names, and never just copy and pasted any GW miniatures, they created third party bits and models based on GW's stuff. Which is clearly not illegal or at the very least is not something GW has a right to complain about seeing as warhammer fantasy is as much a copy of lord of the rings, as any of chapterhouses models.

do you have any specific examples that would support copyright infringement? I've heard they had something named malantai, which if true would be unique and in violation, but thats only what ive heard and nothing ive seen from them, is in violation.

[Mr Mystery]

Except as far as I know chapterhouse never used any unique names, and never just copy and pasted any GW miniatures, they created third party bits and models based on GW's stuff. Which is clearly not illegal or at the very least is not something GW has a right to complain about seeing as warhammer fantasy is as much a copy of lord of the rings, as any of chapterhouses models.

do you have any specific examples that would support copyright infringement? I've heard they had something named malantai, which if true would be unique and in violation, but thats only what ive heard and nothing ive seen from them, is in violation.

Fantasy has a high Fantasy setting. As does LotR. That's pretty much it. The races are markedly different from each other. Inspiration is there. Outright theft of IP simply is not. As for Chapterhouse and unique names..... You did see their Nid stuff? And their Striking Scorpion etc???

[gendoikari87]

did not see the striking scorpion or any of the nid stuff except for the big pod thing, saw the exarach or whatever they called it.

Also, GW did more than just borrow. for 40k they used the name ELDAR. which is straight out of the silmarilion. Light elves/darkelves/woodelves, all there taken straight from D&D, which itself is based on LOTR. You can't sue over something being highly suggestive or highly inspired by, something else. Otherwise the tolkien estate would have sued the pants off of gary gygax.

About the only unique thing about WFB is the empire and bretonia, and even they are reminicent of neverwinter. hell if you could sue over something being based on something GW would have sued over starcraft, though i don't how much of the copyrights blizzard had bought or if it was only a rumor that starcraft was originally intended to be a 40k RTS.

[Renegade]

Except as far as I know chapterhouse never used any unique names, and never just copy and pasted any GW miniatures, they created third party bits and models based on GW's stuff. Which is clearly not illegal or at the very least is not something GW has a right to complain about seeing as warhammer fantasy is as much a copy of lord of the rings, as any of chapterhouses models.

do you have any specific examples that would support copyright infringement? I've heard they had something named malantai, which if true would be unique and in violation, but thats only what ive heard and nothing ive seen from them, is in violation.

From pages 10 - 18 of MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT:

In view of the large number of individual works appearing on defendant’s website, all of
which are admittedly derived from Games Workshop’s original works... The finding that Chapterhouse’s copying as a whole is substantial and substantially
similar to Games Workshop’s Warhammer 40K is reinforced by reviewing specific products
Chapterhouse sells... The extent of copying of creative elements is as great if not greater here, rendering the entire Chapterhouse website an infringement. Even if it might be true, as Chapterhouse seems to
argue, that some individual Chapterhouse products could in theory escape a finding of copyright
infringement, so long as they are sold together on Chapterhouse’s website, which itself
constitutes a copyrightable collective whole, the entire website is an infringement.Thus Chapterhouse has
created a series of shoulder pads for Space Marine Tactical, Space Marine Assault and Space
Marine Devastator squads that copy the exact multifaceted iconography and intricate numerical
sequencing of Games Workshop’s Space Marine Tactical, Space Marine Assault and Space
Marine Devastator squad... All such products adhere to Mr. Villacci’s
instructions to his designers to ensure that the products are all sufficiently “recognizable” to
Games Workshop’s customers.Chapterhouse does not use general imagery from heraldry, such as
crowns or flowers; it uses only the specific symbols Games Workshop has incorporated into its
characters and only for the same characters. Chapterhouse does not make miniature birds or
animals; it makes miniature Eldars and Space Marines. Even something as simple as the Roman
numerals IX and X (together with a chevron), which are used by Games Workshop to designate
squads of “Devastator” Space Marines, are used by Chapterhouse only on its own Devastator
Space Marine shoulder pads – together, of course, with the other design features created by
Games Workshop. (Undisputed Facts #60-61). It does not use these symbols in any other way.
It also similarly uses the number I-VI and VII-VIII for “Tactical” and “Assault” squad shoulder
pads (expressly so-named), just as Games Workshop does. And the colors and shapes of the
shoulder pads have all been borrowed from Games Workshop – right down to the tiny aesthetic
indents on the rear of the pads.

This would be a breach of:

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, is the current UK copyright law. It gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works the right to control the ways in which their material may be used. The rights cover: Broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public.

Remember this is UK not US law. Making third party parts only really applies if those parts will need replacement, which is not the case with GW miniatures.

Elves are from folklore, as is much of Tolkiens work. You seem to forget that GW also have a licence from the estate as well.

You also forget that 40K is not a generic item such as a car. Making Sci-Fi parts is all well and good, 40K is its own thing and the TM, IP and Copyright is owned by GW.

[Wolfshade]

Remember this is UK not US law. Making third party parts only really applies if those parts will need replacement, which is not the case with GW miniatures.
Finally someone else gets it (doctrine of non-derogation from grants)!
But interestingly, in the states it is very similiar in the doctrine of repair and reconstruction.

[Psychosplodge]

You do know the LOTR licence specifically prohibits the combining of WH/WH40k ranges with LOTR (hence the rules for Golden daemon) So the Tolkien estate obviously sees it as a separate entity.

[Renegade]

You do know the LOTR licence specifically prohibits the combining of WH/WH40k ranges with LOTR (hence the rules for Golden daemon) So the Tolkien estate obviously sees it as a separate entity.

Sure, that does not however, stop parts that are from generic folklore being used. So as long as GW do not actually copy exactly as written, they are safe. It does however give GW licence to explore the LOTR in more depth in regards to what is covered.

You really think that GW would have got the licence if they were already using LOTR Copyright? Of course GW would have not. I would have made them about as trustworthy as a company that ignores court orders.

[Mr Mystery]

Sure, that does not however, stop parts that are from generic folklore being used. So as long as GW do not actually copy exactly as written, they are safe. It does however give GW licence to explore the LOTR in more depth in regards to what is covered.

You really think that GW would have got the licence if they were already using LOTR Copyright? Of course GW would have not. I would have made them about as trustworthy as a company that ignores court orders.

Zing!

[Wolfshade]

Renegade I like your thinking, +2 to you

[Psychosplodge]

Sure, that does not however, stop parts that are from generic folklore being used. So as long as GW do not actually copy exactly as written, they are safe. It does however give GW licence to explore the LOTR in more depth in regards to what is covered.

You really think that GW would have got the licence if they were already using LOTR Copyright? Of course GW would have not. I would have made them about as trustworthy as a company that ignores court orders.

Exactly, sorry the point I was making is all these people suggesting that GW ripped off tolkien, the tolkien estate clearly don't think that or they'd be in court not licensing LOTR to GW...

[Anggul]

Exactly, sorry the point I was making is all these people suggesting that GW ripped off tolkien, the tolkien estate clearly don't think that or they'd be in court not licensing LOTR to GW...

Well they did. That doesn't mean they did it in a way which broke the law though. It's just generic ideas that are copied, not specifics. Pretty much all High Fantasy comes from Tolkien, and pretty much all Sci-fi comes from Frank Herbert's Dune series. That doesn't make it illegal though, only certain things are, (like if they used the names of characters or planets etc.)

The God-Emperor, Space Marines (or the Sardaukar as they were called), Sisters of Battle (The Fish Warriors), the Navigators who begin to mutate as they go on, a galactic jihad to conquer in the name of the God-Emperor, -lasguns-, and probably other things that I can't remember. All copied from Dune. :p

[Psychosplodge]

I couldn't possibly comment, as I found Dune so boring I only got two thirds the way through the first book...

[gendoikari87]

Okay before this goes any farther does anyone know the legal standard to which one can claim Copyright infringement? Because it's clear cut that chapterhouse has not directly copied their works, merely used GW's work as inspiration for. Which in itself is not infringement. What GW has to show is that chapterhouse is making money off of the 40k universe. I.E. they are making money off of GW releasing the rulebook ect, ect, ect.

You cannot claim chapterhouse is infringing any of GW's individual artworks, which is what most of you seem to be trying to do, and failing hard at it. But that is not what GW has to proove here, and in fact, cannot save maybe for the tervigon (seriously CH? couldn't just call it bug bit baby maker?). GW merely has to prove that chapterhouse is making money off of the game for which GW makes and markets the rules and creates the Universe. Which if they win this, could possbily be used to go after companies like scibor and other third parties. Will they? probably not if they know what's good for them, and extra bits sell gw KITS.


It's just generic ideas that are copied,

you mean like space marines?

Starcraft
http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/3/39440/1355594-terran_marine_comparison_by_aphaits_super.jpg
GW
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4571052778782936&id=a959d0bbc5420e033a9b035bda999728
Starcraft
http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4943284701495479&id=6eb887892605c2ecd5544af97083ecac
GW
http://www.dakkadakka.com/s/i/at/2010/1/menelker-trygon-heavy-tactica-20030514.jpg

[Wolfshade]

Don't forget Dune has a lot of influences from Hamlet. That and the fall of the Roman Empire

[Caitsidhe]

Okay before this goes any farther does anyone know the legal standard to which one can claim Copyright infringement? Because it's clear cut that chapterhouse has not directly copied their works, merely used GW's work as inspiration for. Which in itself is not infringement. What GW has to show is that chapterhouse is making money off of the 40k universe. I.E. they are making money off of GW releasing the rulebook ect, ect, ect.

You cannot claim chapterhouse is infringing any of GW's individual artworks, which is what most of you seem to be trying to do, and failing hard at it. But that is not what GW has to proove here, and in fact, cannot save maybe for the tervigon (seriously CH? couldn't just call it bug bit baby maker?). GW merely has to prove that chapterhouse is making money off of the game for which GW makes and markets the rules and creates the Universe. Which if they win this, could possbily be used to go after companies like scibor and other third parties. Will they? probably not if they know what's good for them, and extra bits sell gw KITS.

In fairness (and remember I disagree with them) they are purposely ignoring the United States copyright law and making the argument that the copyright laws of the United Kingdom (which are different) only apply. By their argument (which remains to be seen) anyone could go to the United Kingdom, publish their books there, and thus have vast control of every idea that even had the suggestion of having been inspired by a previous work. I don't subscribe to this notion, but that is the idea they are putting forward. In short, they suggest that the United Kingdom is the Cayman Islands of copyright law, giving you the most bang for the buck.

[Wolfshade]

Okay before this goes any farther does anyone know the legal standard to which one can claim Copyright infringement? Because it's clear cut that chapterhouse has not directly copied their works, merely used GW's work as inspiration for. Which in itself is not infringement. What GW has to show is that chapterhouse is making money off of the 40k universe. I.E. they are making money off of GW releasing the rulebook ect, ect, ect.
It need not be an exact copy

The work should be substantially similar in design, structure or content, to the degree that it can be said that the work was copied or adapted from your original, rather than simply a similar idea or concept.
That is from the uk copyright service



You cannot claim chapterhouse is infringing any of GW's individual artworks, which is what most of you seem to be trying to do, and failing hard at it. But that is not what GW has to proove here, and in fact, cannot save maybe for the tervigon (seriously CH? couldn't just call it bug bit baby maker?). GW merely has to prove that chapterhouse is making money off of the game for which GW makes and markets the rules and creates the Universe. Which if they win this, could possbily be used to go after companies like scibor and other third parties. Will they? probably not if they know what's good for them, and extra bits sell gw KITS.

Both companies make Fleshtearers Shoulder pads which have a more than a passing similiarity...

[Wolfshade]

In fairness (and remember I disagree with them) they are purposely ignoring the United States copyright law and making the argument that the copyright laws of the United Kingdom (which are different) only apply. By their argument (which remains to be seen) anyone could go to the United Kingdom, publish their books there, and thus have vast control of every idea that even had the suggestion of having been inspired by a previous work. I don't subscribe to this notion, but that is the idea they are putting forward. In short, they suggest that the United Kingdom is the Cayman Islands of copyright law, giving you the most bang for the buck.
I do not see what is wrong with Games Workshop a company registered in the UK applying UK law to this case...

[gendoikari87]

In fairness (and remember I disagree with them) they are purposely ignoring the United States copyright law and making the argument that the copyright laws of the United Kingdom (which are different) only apply. By their argument (which remains to be seen) anyone could go to the United Kingdom, publish their books there, and thus have vast control of every idea that even had the suggestion of having been inspired by a previous work. I don't subscribe to this notion, but that is the idea they are putting forward. In short, they suggest that the United Kingdom is the Cayman Islands of copyright law, giving you the most bang for the buck.

This is true, but according to a friend of mine in lawschool, where chapterhouse shot themselves in the foot was not the models themselves, but by placing the name Games Workshop on their site, and consequently causing confusion and causing people to call GW about CH products. If that is true and provable then CH has some explaining to do. But to be clear GW has a very bad cased based on the models themselves. It's CH website in it's entirety as of when they filed the lawsuit that has CH in deep water. Space marine for instance cannot be copyrighted, it's trademarked. and the way it was explained to me is that space marine in this context would, well have to be take into context in order to be a violation of trade mark. Basically you cannot claim all space marines (Aliens, starcraft, ect, ect, ect.) only space marine in terms of the geneseed based space marines of GW. Now CH using the name space marine alone isn't enough to get them in hot water, it's using Space marine in conjunction with calling it "for games workshop"

so while non of the individual creations of chapterhouse might be in violation, even space marine stuff, taken in the context of the site as of the date the lawsuit was filed, GW might have a case, but they will have to prove it. and that could be harder than it seems.

[gendoikari87]

It need not be an exact copy

That is from the uk copyright service



Both companies make Fleshtearers Shoulder pads which have a more than a passing similiarity...


Names, titles, short phrases and colours are not generally considered unique or substantial enough to be covered
A passing similarity does not equal infringement.

[Caitsidhe]

I do not see what is wrong with Games Workshop a company registered in the UK applying UK law to this case...

I'm sure you don't. :) For my own part, I'm interested in the outcome as a consumer not as an American or any other nationality. My view is that more options are better and the more side market materials available the better. No matter how this case comes down it will be a good thing because it will draw the line for all the little companies in a way that they can straddle it. It is my personal opinion that GW made a mistake in bringing the case at all. CH (particularly if the claims they are subpar are true) would have gone away on their own. All this case did was draw attention to them and other companies who provide this kind of service. I think Games Workshop would have been far better off simply out-competing their opponents into the ground and used their powerful market share like Walmart, i.e. lowering prices until all the gnats were destroyed. They chose the insane route of thinking they can legally get rid of the little guy. It won't work. It hasn't worked for the music industry, the film industry, or anyone else. Love or hate Walmart, they have applied the only functional fix. You crush the little guy by giving a better deal until all opposition has been eliminated and then you live on the volume or you jack up your prices until competition rears its head again.

This case was always a Lose-Lose option for Games Workshop. Even if they win, they lose by setting legal boundaries every little company can use without fear to ramp up production. Before this case everyone did it with great trepidation. Will I get sued? How far can I go before I go too far? That question will be answered for them. It was a bad idea.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I think, as an aside, that people are confusing the strict, legal sense in which something can be copied/"ripped off" with the looser vernacular use. Under the latter, nobody's thought up an original war drama since, oh, Homer. Dune itself was Lawrence of Arabia... IN SPACE! Tolkien was writing love letters to northern mythology. And so on.

There's nothing new under the sun. There is, however, copyright, and copyright infringement. It doesn't matter that there were space marines before GW, because they invented Space Marines, and their iconography and so on.

[Psychosplodge]

In fairness (and remember I disagree with them) they are purposely ignoring the United States copyright law and making the argument that the copyright laws of the United Kingdom (which are different) only apply. By their argument (which remains to be seen) anyone could go to the United Kingdom, publish their books there, and thus have vast control of every idea that even had the suggestion of having been inspired by a previous work. I don't subscribe to this notion, but that is the idea they are putting forward. In short, they suggest that the United Kingdom is the Cayman Islands of copyright law, giving you the most bang for the buck.

It's to do with the treaty,I'm sure I saw something that said Broadway exists because prior to international treaty if a play wasn't performed first in the US it had no protection in the US under US copyright right law.

You're using bad analogies again or was that a different new member who only visited the CHS threads?

[gendoikari87]

I think, as an aside, that people are confusing the strict, legal sense in which something can be copied/"ripped off" with the looser vernacular use. Under the latter, nobody's thought up an original war drama since, oh, Homer. Dune itself was Lawrence of Arabia... IN SPACE! Tolkien was writing love letters to northern mythology. And so on.

There's nothing new under the sun. There is, however, copyright, and copyright infringement. It doesn't matter that there were space marines before GW, because they invented Space Marines, and their iconography and so on.

1959
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/St59.jpg

Space marines as in Genetically altered "sons" of the primarchs? that's GW. GW did not invent superhuman power armored space marines

[Cpt Codpiece]

Okay before this goes any farther does anyone know the legal standard to which one can claim Copyright infringement? Because it's clear cut that chapterhouse has not directly copied their works, merely used GW's work as inspiration for. Which in itself is not infringement. What GW has to show is that chapterhouse is making money off of the 40k universe. I.E. they are making money off of GW releasing the rulebook ect, ect, ect.

You cannot claim chapterhouse is infringing any of GW's individual artworks, which is what most of you seem to be trying to do, and failing hard at it. But that is not what GW has to proove here, and in fact, cannot save maybe for the tervigon (seriously CH? couldn't just call it bug bit baby maker?). GW merely has to prove that chapterhouse is making money off of the game for which GW makes and markets the rules and creates the Universe. Which if they win this, could possbily be used to go after companies like scibor and other third parties. Will they? probably not if they know what's good for them, and extra bits sell gw KITS.



you mean like space marines?

Starcraft
http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/3/39440/1355594-terran_marine_comparison_by_aphaits_super.jpg
GW
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4571052778782936&id=a959d0bbc5420e033a9b035bda999728
Starcraft
http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4943284701495479&id=6eb887892605c2ecd5544af97083ecac
GW
http://www.dakkadakka.com/s/i/at/2010/1/menelker-trygon-heavy-tactica-20030514.jpg

warcraft.... orcs v humans...... blizzards game for GW based on WFB that GW dropped before release, and by extension starcraft 40k marines v tyranids...... yeah kind of like those marines.
ill point out again GW was licensing the games to blizzard then pulled it at last minute

[Wolfshade]

I'm sure you don't. :)
Sorry what I meant was that if the company was German, they could equally apply German law, it does seem to be perculiar to try in the states under UK law, but under the terms of the various treaties they are able to try it wherever using whichever laws that they feel they have the greatest chance of winning. Similiarly, if I were to be selling counterfit cheese, I could be tried in any of the countries which I exported to.


For my own part, I'm interested in the outcome as a consumer not as an American or any other nationality. My view is that more options are better and the more side market materials available the better. No matter how this case comes down it will be a good thing because it will draw the line for all the little companies in a way that they can straddle it. It is my personal opinion that GW made a mistake in bringing the case at all.

I would generally agree with you on the whole, more suppliers greater market diversity, but Warhammer 40,000 isn't the market, the market is table top wargames and 40k is just a product in said market. It is akin to me casting new metal counters for Monopoly based on previous markers released/described.


This case was always a Lose-Lose option for Games Workshop. Even if they win, they lose by setting legal boundaries every little company can use without fear to ramp up production. Before this case everyone did it with great trepidation. Will I get sued? How far can I go before I go too far? That question will be answered for them. It was a bad idea.
Again I am not sure if I totally agree with this, there is an interesting thing you can do in British Law and you take a case to court for a rule clarrification, I am not sure if that exists in the states, but it is this clarity over what can be produced that co-incidentally fits the new industry standard 28mm heroric space warrior (before GW it was 25mm) which is and isn't acceptable usage.

[Psychosplodge]

1959
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/St59.jpg

Space marines as in Genetically altered "sons" of the primarchs? that's GW. GW did not invent superhuman power armoured space marines


I font remember the mobile infantry being gene enhanced...

[Caitsidhe]

I font remember the mobile infantry being gene enhanced...

You didn't read far enough in the Dune books you found dull. :)

[Psychosplodge]

You didn't read far enough in the Dune books you found dull. :)
that's a starship troopers reference.

[Renegade]

Having the case decided is very good for GW and the others in that they know just how far things can be pushed. It is quite clear what the wording of the law is, ignorance of the law is no excuse (under UK law).

This will probably push GW to make their stuff even more original and creative, making it harder to copy without infringement. Creating a sculpture that is from GW artwork is a breach of UK law, this is what CH have done in the past and what the case against them is based on, the design of the pauldrons could also be a breach as they to are a copy of GW work, if it is decided that they are closer to an attempt to make an exact copy.

The strength of UK copyright law is why is has been a leader on research in competitive fields. This hardly makes it the Cayman Islands, but shows a weakness in other legislatures to protect the work of others.

[Caitsidhe]

that's a starship troopers reference.

I know that. I was commenting in general that all the elements can be found in one of the major Science Fiction settings of the last forty years. You say you don't remember eugenics in the mobile infantry (talking about Starship Troopers), so I point out it was a big thing in Dune which you didn't read very far in.

[Psychosplodge]

I know that. I was commenting in general that all the elements can be found in one of the major Science Fiction settings of the last forty years. You say you don't remember eugenics in the mobile infantry (talking about Starship Troopers), so I point out it was a big thing in Dune which you didn't read very far in.
Ah fair enough.

[Renegade]

You didn't read far enough in the Dune books you found dull. :)

Not gene seed, you need a better analogy.

Dune

In Frank Herbert's Dune series of novels, selective breeding programs form a significant theme. Early in the series, the Bene Gesserit religious order manipulates breeding patterns over many generations in order to create the Kwisatz Haderach. In God Emperor of Dune, the emperor Leto II again manipulates human breeding in order to achieve his own ends. The Bene Tleilaxu also employed genetic engineering to create human beings with specific genetic attributes. The Dune series ended with causal determinism playing a large role in the development of behavior, but the eugenics theme remained a crucial part of the story.

Which can be found on Wiki regards Genetic engineering in sci-fi. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_engineering_in_science_fiction)

A quick Wiki search seems to say that you are trying to hard to justify your opinion which is not based on fact.

[Caitsidhe]

Not gene seed, you need a better analogy.

Dune

In Frank Herbert's Dune series of novels, selective breeding programs form a significant theme. Early in the series, the Bene Gesserit religious order manipulates breeding patterns over many generations in order to create the Kwisatz Haderach. In God Emperor of Dune, the emperor Leto II again manipulates human breeding in order to achieve his own ends. The Bene Tleilaxu also employed genetic engineering to create human beings with specific genetic attributes. The Dune series ended with causal determinism playing a large role in the development of behavior, but the eugenics theme remained a crucial part of the story.

Which can be found on Wiki regards Genetic engineering in sci-fi. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_engineering_in_science_fiction)

A quick Wiki search seems to say that you are trying to hard to justify your opinion which is not based on fact.

Genetic engineering and eugenics are the same thing; they merely use different technological approaches. Human beings have been using genetic engineering for thousands of years via controlled manipulation of plant and animal species. The technology (the how) moves forward, but the aim is always the same.

[Psychosplodge]

Genetic engineering is active manipulation at DNA levels, eugenics closer to animal husbandry/selective breeding. One's pot luck the others far more deliberate...

[Renegade]

Genetic engineering is active manipulation at DNA levels, eugenics closer to animal husbandry/selective breeding. One's pot luck the others far more deliberate...

+1

I think someone is trying to hard to make a point that falls apart as soon as one looks at the background to Space marines.

Sure some of the things about 40K have been used before, but the take and detail that GW uses is not directly linkable to those that came before in any exact way, only in a more general way.

CHS has gone out of its way to copy GW work in an explicit and very linkable way to make a profit for themselves (IMHO), this is different to what GW have done.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Space marines as in Genetically altered "sons" of the primarchs? that's GW. GW did not invent superhuman power armored space marines

Um. That was exactly the point I was making. Hence the distinction between "space marines" and "Space Marines". The fact that Heinlein did powered armour wearing space soldiers 30 years previously is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. The fact that something is derivative is irrelevant - everything is derivative! Ever-y-thing! - but the fact something is deliberately leeching off someone else's Intellectual Property is entirely relevant.

(also the Starship Troopers aren't superhuman or indeed Marines~)

To elaborate:

GW took an archetype and created The Space Marines. This is fine. They're wearing Space Armour in Space, like so many others before them, but the GW iteration is distinctive enough that they can claim ownership of the design, the aesthetic, the fiction, etc.

Starcraft's Space Marines are not GW's Space Marines. They're two different approaches to a common archetype.

This is also a thread in some stuff GW do themselves. Guardsman Marbo? Iron-Hand Straken? (Who is more or less Rasczak mixed with some other mechanically assisted fictional hardcases). You can do that because you're riffing, creating a pastiche, offering a knowing wink towards some well-loved and known character, event, or trope. But the important thing is that these people have been written into their own universe, with their own lives, and their own distinctive iterations.

This, too, is fine, if (intentionally and playfully!) cheeky.

CH took GW's Space Marines, a property they do not own, and started making stuff for them, using GW's name and GW's stuff to sell their own pieces. They didn't license the IP - they're using the work GW did (and paid for) to sell their own stuff. This isn't fine.

The ridiculous thing is that CH totally could've happily churned out stuff that Just Coincidentally Happens To Work With GW Kits, Wink Wink, and there wouldn't have been a (major) problem. But they deliberately chose to confuse people and trade off GW's work.

All beside that is chaff, wishful thinking, or (honest and otherwise) misunderstanding.

[Renegade]

Seems to me that CHS lawyers thought it would be a US law case, and are now wishing they never went pro bono. That CHS has had to change a lot of their site IMO means they suddenly realised the jig was up, and retreated.

If CHS lawyers want to comment on this, then feel free. Your client seem to have ignored a US court order, so in my opinion, has already proven themselves as untrustworthy.

[wittdooley]

This will probably push GW to make their stuff even more original and creative, making it harder to copy without infringement. Creating a sculpture that is from GW artwork is a breach of UK law, this is what CH have done in the past and what the case against them is based on, the design of the pauldrons could also be a breach as they to are a copy of GW work, if it is decided that they are closer to an attempt to make an exact copy.

.

We're already seeing the fruits of this lawsuit with Chapter Approved making a comeback. I have a feeling that in the future, if the model isn't ready at launch, the model won't be in codex. Most likely they'll release it chapter Approved style in WD.

As for diversity making for a better market: I'd argue that's only true if it pushes other companies to make better product. I don't think CHS does this, as many of their products are straddling the sub-par. I like their not-Farseer, but I think the rest of the pieces are mediocre at best, particuarly when weighed in comparison to Kromlech or Puppet's War.

[Renegade]

We're already seeing the fruits of this lawsuit with Chapter Approved making a comeback. I have a feeling that in the future, if the model isn't ready at launch, the model won't be in codex. Most likely they'll release it chapter Approved style in WD.

As for diversity making for a better market: I'd argue that's only true if it pushes other companies to make better product. I don't think CHS does this, as many of their products are straddling the sub-par. I like their not-Farseer, but I think the rest of the pieces are mediocre at best, particuarly when weighed in comparison to Kromlech or Puppet's War.

Where are they making a comeback? You have a judge that could be said to be a novice in terms of UK law ruling on this, so it is likely that he is going to take time out to consider things fully and brush up on whatever he knows.

CHS have fully retreated as far as I can tell on what they sell, and have not produced a full catalogue despite a court order in (my opinion) all likelihood because they know it would show them up for IP thieves. No reason has been given, so my opinion for the breach of the court order without out proof to the contrary is as valid as any other reason.

Cutting your range is not a comeback, it is acknowledging that you did something wrong.

The judge is deciding using civil law in this case, so any breach is a full breach of the law.

[Mr Mystery]

Oh, and if it's civil law, remember folks it's done on 'balance of probability'

[Cap'nSmurfs]

He said Chapter Approved is making a comeback, not Chapter House. Chapter Approved is GW's own occasional rules updates through White Dwarf and supplements.

Even their name is confusing~

[Psychosplodge]

I did have to re-read that.

[DF3CT]

He said Chapter Approved is making a comeback, not Chapter House. Chapter Approved is GW's own occasional rules updates through White Dwarf and supplements.

Even their name is confusing~

I wish they would release chapter approved books again when there is enough content. Like the old Rogue Trader Compendium and the other manuals. Those were solid books.

With print on demand content easy and more affordable than print runs, there's no reason they can't take "risks" on print products as, for the most part, you order directly from them. Book is printed and shipped to you. HELL, if they didn't want to be stuck with thousands of copies in stores they can set it up so you can order on their website or in the store and have it shipped to your house or the store.

[Mr Mystery]

I wish they would release chapter approved books again when there is enough content. Like the old Rogue Trader Compendium and the other manuals. Those were solid books.

With print on demand content easy and more affordable than print runs, there's no reason they can't take "risks" on print products as, for the most part, you order directly from them. Book is printed and shipped to you. HELL, if they didn't want to be stuck with thousands of copies in stores they can set it up so you can order on their website or in the store and have it shipped to your house or the store.

Looks like what GW Digital are aiming for....

[Renegade]

He said Chapter Approved is making a comeback, not Chapter House. Chapter Approved is GW's own occasional rules updates through White Dwarf and supplements.

Even their name is confusing~

Whoops... my apologies.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Yeah, digital is the new compendium. :D

[Morbid]

First I would love to address the Blizzard ripping GW off part. Warcraft was originally pitched to GW to be a Warhammer RTS. GW said no. So Blizzard then made their own lore. To look at Warhammer lore and Warcraft lore and they are staggeringly different. Warhammer is closer to classical high fantasy, where as Warcraft is wholesale inspired by Greek and Norse mythology.

Next Starcraft was originally going to BE a Warhammer 40k RTS. GW backed out so Blizzard changed it enough to not be Warhammer 40k and was packaged as Starcraft. That is why the terran look like space marines and why the zerg look like nids, oh and the protoss look slightly like eldar. Again this is because it was actually GOING to be a Warhammer 40k RTS, but GW pulled out and Blizzard didn't want to lose their work.

To say that GW ripped off Dune or Paradise lost or Tolkien is pretty much a moot point. Yeah they were very strongly inspired but still different. I don't see you guys ripping Dungeons and Dragons from wholesale ripping off Tolkien or Conan or any early fantasy fiction. Why? Why is GW suddenly the bad guy for making an IP with similar tropes that have existed since the dawn of fiction thousands of years ago?

CHS is guilty imo. Making "Space Warrior" of the "Skin Butchers Army" or to the close to name but not quite would have been okay imo. But direct name rip offs and the like is unacceptable according to the law. I did see their site before they took most of the bad stuff down because I have been looking for a good model for Lion El'Johnson for years. No luck but FW will have me covered soon.

[DF3CT]

First I would love to address the Blizzard ripping GW off part. Warcraft was originally pitched to GW to be a Warhammer RTS. GW said no. So Blizzard then made their own lore. To look at Warhammer lore and Warcraft lore and they are staggeringly different. Warhammer is closer to classical high fantasy, where as Warcraft is wholesale inspired by Greek and Norse mythology.

Next Starcraft was originally going to BE a Warhammer 40k RTS. GW backed out so Blizzard changed it enough to not be Warhammer 40k and was packaged as Starcraft. That is why the terran look like space marines and why the zerg look like nids, oh and the protoss look slightly like eldar. Again this is because it was actually GOING to be a Warhammer 40k RTS, but GW pulled out and Blizzard didn't want to lose their work.

To say that GW ripped off Dune or Paradise lost or Tolkien is pretty much a moot point. Yeah they were very strongly inspired but still different. I don't see you guys ripping Dungeons and Dragons from wholesale ripping off Tolkien or Conan or any early fantasy fiction. Why? Why is GW suddenly the bad guy for making an IP with similar tropes that have existed since the dawn of fiction thousands of years ago?

CHS is guilty imo. Making "Space Warrior" of the "Skin Butchers Army" or to the close to name but not quite would have been okay imo. But direct name rip offs and the like is unacceptable according to the law. I did see their site before they took most of the bad stuff down because I have been looking for a good model for Lion El'Johnson for years. No luck but FW will have me covered soon.

GW horrendously borrowed from Tolkien and Dune. It very much isn't a moot point when the fingers start getting pointed.
If you want to air other peoples skeletons, best be ready to have your own dragged over the coals.

GW has been around long enough in my mind to be considered an "inspiring work." where people can float the line with new game designs.

They are in the same category of Dbaggery as White Wolf when they tried to sue "Underworld." That was laughable.

Now, in GW's defense, they did have the rights to produce quite a few OLD Lotr games and miniatures. Hence why I didn't toss Judge Dredd into the mix of films getting ripped and twisted to seem "different". They had a fair amount of Dredd games and minis when they made good bookshelf games.

I don't remember much of my youthful D &D days, but none of the book material I read launched at my face screaming Tolkien.

Could we argue that "Warlock of fire top mountain" was a take on Sauron? Maybe.

Steve Jackson get inspired by Mad Max and Death Race? More than likely.

No one cares about those developers borrowing because they aren't righteous goon lawyers running a passionless wayward gaming company which has lost its heart and maybe even its soul.

Ya, ya they're a business and need to do what makes them the most profit, but they are in a habit of recycling their games. Their creativity is as dead as a Necron Lords Harem.

Well lets hope this conversation doesn't continue because I'm sure the mods will simply erase it like the other one if it continues off its intended rails.

Semi confrontational debate is fun. Not for everyone I guess.

[DarkLink]

DnD was heavily inspired by Tolkien. It's hard to find a Fantasy that wasn't. Before Tolkien, elves were tiny, mischievous little midgets not unlike faeries. Orks are a combination of a number of different mythological creatures.Tolkien singlehandedly created the way we commonly view elves, dwarves, orks, and a whole host of other Fantasy tropes.

[daboarder]

Except as far as I know chapterhouse never used any unique names, and never just copy and pasted any GW miniatures, they created third party bits and models based on GW's stuff. Which is clearly not illegal or at the very least is not something GW has a right to complain about seeing as warhammer fantasy is as much a copy of lord of the rings, as any of chapterhouses models.

do you have any specific examples that would support copyright infringement? I've heard they had something named malantai, which if true would be unique and in violation, but thats only what ive heard and nothing ive seen from them, is in violation.

Probably already adressed, but CHS does indeed use GW names such as "tervigon" is the advertisement of their product.




GW horrendously borrowed from Tolkien and Dune. It very much isn't a moot point when the fingers start getting pointed.
If you want to air other peoples skeletons, best be ready to have your own dragged over the coals.

GW has been around long enough in my mind to be considered an "inspiring work." where people can float the line with new game designs.

They are in the same category of Dbaggery as White Wolf when they tried to sue "Underworld." That was laughable.

Now, in GW's defense, they did have the rights to produce quite a few OLD Lotr games and miniatures. Hence why I didn't toss Judge Dredd into the mix of films getting ripped and twisted to seem "different". They had a fair amount of Dredd games and minis when they made good bookshelf games.

I don't remember much of my youthful D &D days, but none of the book material I read launched at my face screaming Tolkien.

Could we argue that "Warlock of fire top mountain" was a take on Sauron? Maybe.

Steve Jackson get inspired by Mad Max and Death Race? More than likely.

No one cares about those developers borrowing because they aren't righteous goon lawyers running a passionless wayward gaming company which has lost its heart and maybe even its soul.

Ya, ya they're a business and need to do what makes them the most profit, but they are in a habit of recycling their games. Their creativity is as dead as a Necron Lords Harem.

Well lets hope this conversation doesn't continue because I'm sure the mods will simply erase it like the other one if it continues off its intended rails.

Semi confrontational debate is fun. Not for everyone I guess.


Except we aren't talking about referencing or homage or anythign like that.

We ARE talking about CHS releasing "TERVIGON" kits, or "STORMRAVEN UPGRADE" kits.....BIG difference.

[Wolfshade]

In the other thread you seemed to be under the inmpression that if created an original artwork and you made a sculture (3D representation) of it then that is not breaching copyright. In the UK, and in this case we are talking UK law and its application to this case, this is a derivative work and the copyright would be retained by the original author, i.e. me.
It is akin to designing something then taking that design to a draftsman to formalise the design into a technical spec/drawing.

[Renegade]

Umm, Chaos is GW TM (as is GW)

A list here (http://oami.europa.eu/CTMOnline/RequestManager/en_Result_NoReg) and here (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=&pIndex=5&aId=3900002&start=6) found after a quick search.

[Rapture]

A trademark on a common work like 'chaos' (with respect to a fighting faction) is about as weak as they come.

[Renegade]

A trademark on a common work like 'chaos' (with respect to a fighting faction) is about as weak as they come.

It is still a registered trade mark, like it or not, it is fact.

[Mr Mystery]

In the other thread you seemed to be under the inmpression that if created an original artwork and you made a sculture (3D representation) of it then that is not breaching copyright. In the UK, and in this case we are talking UK law and its application to this case, this is a derivative work and the copyright would be retained by the original author, i.e. me.
It is akin to designing something then taking that design to a draftsman to formalise the design into a technical spec/drawing.

Or making films of a book without the authors permission. Which must be legal because that happens all t.....no wait that never happens.....

[DF3CT]

Probably already adressed, but CHS does indeed use GW names such as "tervigon" is the advertisement of their product.






Except we aren't talking about referencing or homage or anythign like that.

We ARE talking about CHS releasing "TERVIGON" kits, or "STORMRAVEN UPGRADE" kits.....BIG difference.

IF those upgrade products are available from the bowels of GW I could see how it would effect them. Otherwise, no.

Now, if GW releases rules, no model and another 3rd party produces a model or upgrade kit(without being stupid obvious), which is fine and then GW starts making those upgrade kits/models.....what happens?

It's almost like GW's seeing that there's a niche market to exploit that they didn't want to put money or attention on prior to these guys producing their wares, seeing that people are wanting that service, now scrambling to provide that service in some capacity and gunning after the 3rd party people when they do.

Sort of like GW, in the past, distributing to a new market without a GW store. When the sales to that area reach a certain level, they plop a store down and end up screwing the margins of the very people holding them up.

OH the righteous whiners at best!

I'll do you wrong. No problem. Do me wrong. It's curb smiley time.

I think this discussion should turn to the debate of whether ethics have any place in big business. Yes. No. Maybe so.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

I may just remove all CHS threads. It's the only way to be sure.

[DF3CT]

Why?

They seem fairly functional to me.

Aren't we "allowed" to discuss controversy regarding our experiences?

[Renegade]

IF those upgrade products are available from the bowels of GW I could see how it would effect them. Otherwise, no.

Now, if GW releases rules, no model and another 3rd party produces a model or upgrade kit(without being stupid obvious), which is fine and then GW starts making those upgrade kits/models.....what happens?

It's almost like GW's seeing that there's a niche market to exploit that they didn't want to put money or attention on prior to these guys producing their wares, seeing that people are wanting that service, now scrambling to provide that service in some capacity and gunning after the 3rd party people when they do.

Sort of like GW, in the past, distributing to a new market without a GW store. When the sales to that area reach a certain level, they plop a store down and end up screwing the margins of the very people holding them up.

OH the righteous whiners at best!

I'll do you wrong. No problem. Do me wrong. It's curb smiley time.

I think this discussion should turn to the debate of whether ethics have any place in big business. Yes. No. Maybe so.

Nope, that is infringing on another's copyright. The Art and name is in the codex, and to make a sculpt of that at are is illegal without first getting the copyright owners consent.

[Scripts]

Nope, that is infringing on another's copyright. The Art and name is in the codex, and to make a sculpt of that at are is illegal without first getting the copyright owners consent.

Hence, the text at the bottom of certain pages in the codex and big rule book about "this page can be photocopied for personal use" and the C&D for the army builder stuff that used full point values from the different codexes and rule books for army building purposes, with GW feeling that those points values being considered proprietery information and that they could defend the C&D if necessary.

It really sounds like the arrogance of the person running CHS got him in trouble with GW.

As others have said, this may help the consumer, since it will set a "do not cross" line for all the other makers of "compatible pieces" for GW products. We'll have to see.

[gendoikari87]

A trademark on a common work like 'chaos' (with respect to a fighting faction) is about as weak as they come.

A copyright on chaos would be weak a trademark is taken in context so you can trademark anything. People can use chaos all day long and it not be in violation of trademark until you start talking about chaos in the context of the GW universe.


I think this discussion should turn to the debate of whether ethics have any place in big business. Yes. No. Maybe so.

Currently they do not. Should they? Probably, but under our current economic system, without a major overhaul they won't.

again, don't be getting confused between copyright and trademark. 99% of chapterhouses wares do not violate copyright, with the exception of two or three models (and even those on shakey grounds). What's getting them in trouble is the website taken in it's entirety.

[Psychosplodge]

Anyone seen this? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19425052)

Do you not think there's a greater difference between what samsung and apple do, than the difference between chs and GW ?

[Renegade]

Anyone seen this? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19425052)

Do you not think there's a greater difference between what samsung and apple do, than the difference between chs and GW ?

CHS is in trouble after this (IMO) as the whole ethos is for their products to be as much like GW as can be.

[DrLove42]

I think the biggest thing sthe Apple vs Samsung things shows is that an American Court will always side with the American company over a foreign one. Which doesn't ring well fro GW. This is shown by Samsungs claims being ignored completly and only focusing on Apple.

There is a bit of a difference, as these are Patents, as opposed to IP

[Psychosplodge]

Also was a jury not a judge.

[Mr Mystery]

The whole bias thing is likely spurious. Samsung can't claim patent stuff if Apple can (and presumably have) prove the alleged infringement came before Patent was applied for.

CH are still screwed. Seems unlikely they can produce any real evidence to prove they haven't sought to match GW's aesthetic.

[Wolfshade]

I think part the trouble with the whole Samsung/Apple case is an over arching probelme that some patents are granted are for too general a thing, or for things which aren't distincitve.

[gendoikari87]

CH are still screwed. Seems unlikely they can produce any real evidence to prove they haven't sought to match GW's aesthetic.

uh, you can't sue over that, or else GW would have been sued many a time over.

[Wolfshade]

Like with the whole alien thing?

[Psychosplodge]

I think thats the closest they've come in actual product imo.

[gendoikari87]

Like with the whole alien thing?

Aliens, elves, to some degree space marines more specifically early dreadnoughts (Extremely similar to starship troopers marauders), Dwarves, the list can go on and on and on. More imporantly Wizards could be sued by the tolkien estate along with millions of other cases. There's a reason you have to prove a direct copy or do the harder case and prove they are making money off of your effort instead which entails more than just a resemblance. A lot of what humans do, especially in art, is use other sources for inspiration. that's how a lot of things come about. You can't stop that, and the consequences for trying are far greater than most people realize.

In this case chapterhouse has gotten in hot water by directly linking itself with GW, and the most damning bit of evidence GW has, are the calls made to it about CH's products. Not chapterhouses products themselves.

[Wolfshade]

We can ignore tolkien as GW have the rights to produce miniatures for wargames using his works and have done for a very long time.

But I seem to recall that genestealers were thought at one point to be too similiar to the alien from the eponymous films

[gendoikari87]

We can ignore tolkien as GW have the rights to produce miniatures for wargames using his works and have done for a very long time.

But I seem to recall that genestealers were thought at one point to be too similiar to the alien from the eponymous films

They have not had the tolkien rights forever however. and when they started warhammer they did not.

[Kyban]

They have not had the tolkien rights forever however. and when they started warhammer they did not.

It seems like Tolkien's work had become a standard in all fantasy by then though.

[Caitsidhe]

It seems like Tolkien's work had become a standard in all fantasy by then though.

What difference would that make? :) The argument put forward by GW is that these other companies (CH in particular) should not be allowed to be inspired or work on anything which they called dibs on first (kind of like licking a bit of choice food to try and keep others away).

Games Workshop, long before it paid for the rights to use Tolkien's work had Wood Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, and all sorts of odd thing which were CLEARLY directly the result of someone reading The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. One might wonder if Games Workshop decided to rip off Dungeons & Dragons (who ripped off Tolkien) or whether they got their "inspiration" right from the source.

In the end, it is all academic. You cannot copyright an idea. All you can do is copyright your specific bit of art. Games Workshop wasn't in the wrong for creating their game, drafting off other games and fictional works that came before them. And make no mistake, Games Workshop did NOT invent war gaming tech anymore than they invented the concepts they personalized for their setting. They reached their current position by drafting off of others and standing on the shoulders of giants. Just as there was nothing wrong with them doing it, there is nothing wrong with other people setting forth to make some coin.

[Wolfshade]

Agreed Gen. & Cait.

Though I would say that there is a difference between being inspired and reproducing existing models/pictures at least in part.
If I were to take a photograph of a vase of sunflowers that could be inspired by van Gough, if I were to copy a sunflower in another painting, that wouldn't be inspired, it would be a derivative work.

I would suggest that just looking at the GW line, that the Tolkien elves/dwarves/orcs are visually distinct from the fantasy elves/dwarfs/orcs.

[Mr Mystery]

We can ignore tolkien as GW have the rights to produce miniatures for wargames using his works and have done for a very long time.

But I seem to recall that genestealers were thought at one point to be too similiar to the alien from the eponymous films

Except the only similarity would be the exo skeleton.

Gene stealers have a bulbous head, Xenomorphs are more phallic. Genestealers have 6 limbs, Xenomorphs have 4. Genestealers have a hunched posture, Xenomorphs do not. Genestealers have a stubby, vestigial tail, Xenomorph have a long, prehensile tail.

Can we now put that one to bed?

[weeble1000]

Anyone seen this? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19425052)

Do you not think there's a greater difference between what samsung and apple do, than the difference between chs and GW ?

The Apple v Samsung case was a patent infringement lawsuit, and by and large the jury found that Samsung had willfully infringed Apple's patents related to the iPhone and iPad devices. Note that the jury did not find that Samsung infringed Apple's design patents related to the shape of the devices.

The lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with the wargaming industry, unless you are concerned about the potential impact the jury's verdict and Judge Koh's upcoming rulings will have on wargaming related apps. Discussion about the Apple v Samsung case is most probably a topic for The Oubliette.

I am very familiar with the Apple v Samsung lawsuit, so feel free to PM me or start a new topic if you are interested in discussing it.

[DF3CT]

The Apple v Samsung case was a patent infringement lawsuit, and by and large the jury found that Samsung had willfully infringed Apple's patents related to the iPhone and iPad devices. Note that the jury did not find that Samsung infringed Apple's design patents related to the shape of the devices.

The lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with the wargaming industry, unless you are concerned about the potential impact the jury's verdict and Judge Koh's upcoming rulings will have on wargaming related apps. Discussion about the Apple v Samsung case is most probably a topic for The Oubliette.

I am very familiar with the Apple v Samsung lawsuit, so feel free to PM me or start a new topic if you are interested in discussing it.

SAMSUNG sure did on infringe on Apples right to a "rectangular phone".

Some of this crap is laughable. Even more laughable with the trucks full of nickles as payment.

[DF3CT]

Except the only similarity would be the exo skeleton.

Gene stealers have a bulbous head, Xenomorphs are more phallic. Genestealers have 6 limbs, Xenomorphs have 4. Genestealers have a hunched posture, Xenomorphs do not. Genestealers have a stubby, vestigial tail, Xenomorph have a long, prehensile tail.

Can we now put that one to bed?

People somehow defending Genestealers not being lifted from Aliens. Today seems to be a "special" day.

What you're describing as a defense is the process they went through to change it enough so they didn't have pulled on them what they are now pulling on others.

This thread is getting cute.

[evilamericorp]

Except the only similarity would be the exo skeleton.

Gene stealers have a bulbous head, Xenomorphs are more phallic. Genestealers have 6 limbs, Xenomorphs have 4. Genestealers have a hunched posture, Xenomorphs do not. Genestealers have a stubby, vestigial tail, Xenomorph have a long, prehensile tail.

Can we now put that one to bed?

Genestealers and Xenomorphs do have some similarities, but as for GW ripping off the film, I'd go with the obvious 3rd edition Hive Tyrant vs. Alien Queen. Practically identical except for the arms.

[Durendin]

Regardless of whether or not Games Workshop are hugely original in their approach as to how they create their IP with massive amounts of "inspiration" derived from other sources, some of Chapterhouse stuff is pure cheek! Look at the Land Raider doors or Shoulder Pads Chapterhouse offer and tell me they didn't just take existing GW parts and add a bit of green-stuff before re-moulding it?

Now it's fashionable to bash GW (and I've done my share of it, some justified and some not) but let's be clear. They have lawyers to first ensure that they're not breaking the copyrights of others lest they be put in an actionable position such as Beaky helmets being developed over a shaky moment with Star Wars Stormtrooper concerns etc. so you can put to rest that they're in some way illegally ripping off LoTR or the Aliens franchise.

[DF3CT]

Regardless of whether or not Games Workshop are hugely original in their approach as to how they create their IP with massive amounts of "inspiration" derived from other sources, some of Chapterhouse stuff is pure cheek! Look at the Land Raider doors or Shoulder Pads Chapterhouse offer and tell me they didn't just take existing GW parts and add a bit of green-stuff before re-moulding it?

Now it's fashionable to bash GW (and I've done my share of it, some justified and some not) but let's be clear. They have lawyers to first ensure that they're not breaking the copyrights of others lest they be put in an actionable position such as Beaky helmets being developed over a shaky moment with Star Wars Stormtrooper concerns etc. so you can put to rest that they're in some way illegally ripping off LoTR or the Aliens franchise.

Bashing GW is a way of life.

[Durendin]

They're the abusive spouse of the table-top gamer! :D

[wittdooley]

Bashing GW is a way of life.

Sure. If you're a douche that has nothing better to do.

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Look at the Land Raider doors or Shoulder Pads Chapterhouse offer and tell me they didn't just take existing GW parts and add a bit of green-stuff before re-moulding it?They didn't remould existing GW parts. You don't need to do that to get the same dimensions.

[Durendin]

They didn't remould existing GW parts. You don't need to do that to get the same dimensions.

I'm sure you're sincere in that remark but I find it slightly incredulous.

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

I'm sure you're sincere in that remark but I find it slightly incredulous.Quick example; look at how the bottom tab on this is asymmetrical. (http://chapterhousestudios.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=85_86&product_id=127) If they'd just remoulded the plastic shoulderpad, it wouldn't be.

[Durendin]

Take a look at the Land Raider doors?

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Take a look at the Land Raider doors?Take a look at how the hinge-spoke thing isn't even at right angles to the front door. (http://chapterhousestudios.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=85&product_id=224)

Besides, simple geometric shapes like that can be replicated with a ruler and plasticard.

[Durendin]

That's not what I meant.

Look at the teeth grooves where the doors meet? They're exactly the same as GW, five teeth on the top and bottom both inter-locking in exactly the same place as the parts they're supposed to be replacing. Look at the stoppers on the drop-ramp? Five in the middle with two large ones either side? Again, exactly the same. This isn't fitting a door over a hole where measurements can be taken!

Now what's more likely, that a designer started with the GW original and added his own work or that the designer independently managed to craft the exact same specifications that a GW designer did?

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Now what's more likely, that a designer started with the GW original and added his own work or that the designer independently managed to craft the exact same specifications that a GW designer did?Replicating the teeth is tricky, but not beyond a skilled sculptor. Here's a review of that kit (http://bloodofkittens.com/40kblogs/2011/08/23/the-rogue-trader-chapterhouse-studios-vehicle-kit-reviews/), it mentions that the assault ramp pieces had several sculpt issues with parts being at the wrong angle, or too large, which seems unlikely for something moulded from the original. (Ignore the note about the plastic kit being older, the hull-sprue hasn't been retooled since then).

[Durendin]

Replicating the teeth is tricky, but not beyond a skilled sculptor.

I don't doubt that but I suggest that in this case it's highly unlikely that a Chapterhouse sculptor laboured to independently create the door teeth exactly in the same specifications that Games Workshop did. If it were six teeth in different places or even five of different sizes I would happily concede the point as an original work or even a legitimate re-interpretation of the original. That isn't the case.


with parts being at the wrong angle, or too large, which seems unlikely for something moulded from the original.

Being too large is generally the first sign of a re-cast part, (I know because I've recast parts before using everything from plaster to metal to resins).

[Mr Mystery]

People somehow defending Genestealers not being lifted from Aliens. Today seems to be a "special" day.

What you're describing as a defense is the process they went through to change it enough so they didn't have pulled on them what they are now pulling on others.

This thread is getting cute.

You mean, making sure that their interpretation couldn't be mistaken for an actual Xenomorph? Like a responsible company should do yes? The very opposite of what CH have been doing?

You know, I have reason to believe you may be linked to CH in some way....

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Being too large is generally the first sign of a re-cast part, (I know because I've recast parts before using everything from plaster to metal to resins).But being rotated to an odd angle wouldn't be, yes? I've done some resin-casting in the past, don't recall that being a problem.

Also; when GW brought suit against chapterhouse, they had a fair few grievances, but I don't recall seeing full-on recasting mentioned in any of the legal docs. If the recasting was obvious/undebatable, they'd probably have mentioned it - especially since a lot of the legal debate seems centered around intent; recasting would be their smoking gun.

[Mr Mystery]

If memory serves, there is certainly an insinuation, as they refer to specific design cues, such as a small indentation on a power armour shoulder pad.

But yeah, as far as I'm aware there is no direct accusation of recasting.

[Psychosplodge]

I am very familiar with the Apple v Samsung lawsuit, so feel free to PM me or start a new topic if you are interested in discussing it.

Seriously as much as I like arguing on the internet, An apple vs anything is pointless considering the sh!tstorm it caused critiscing macs elsewhere on here....:D


Bashing GW is a way of life.

I thin k you'd find most of the people who are defending them in this, have criticised aspects of their business in some form or another, I doubt anyone here is a 100% pro-GW zealot...They just take it as they see it.

Didn't somebody suggest on the deleted thread that there had been pictures on Dakka Dakka That showed WIP sculpts that were simply greenstuff emblems onto the standard SM shoulder pad?

[Mr Mystery]

Seriously as much as I like arguing on the internet, An apple vs anything is pointless considering the sh!tstorm it caused critiscing macs elsewhere on here....:D



I thin k you'd find most of the people who are defending them in this, have criticised aspects of their business in some form or another, I doubt anyone here is a 100% pro-GW zealot...They just take it as they see it.

Didn't somebody suggest on the deleted thread that there had been pictures on Dakka Dakka That showed WIP sculpts that were simply greenstuff emblems onto the standard SM shoulder pad?

I've seen thoe photo. And to be fair, it's very hard to say for sure. They could be resin masters, rather than plastic originals.

[Psychosplodge]

Fair enough, at least I didn't imagine it lol

[gendoikari87]

well technically CH wouldn't have a market if GW had made what they made first, the very point to CH was that they were filling a gap in GW's lineup.

[gendoikari87]

You know, I have reason to believe you may be linked to CH in some way....

Ad hominem's are a non argument.

[wittdooley]

well technically CH wouldn't have a market if GW had made what they made first, the very point to CH was that they were filling a gap in GW's lineup.

Truth be told, I really dont think anyone is mad that the 3rd party vendors exist. They're great for the hobby because GW cannot realistically produce all of the various tiny components they do. People are taking umbrage with the manner in which CH is conducting it's business, which is...distasteful.

[RGilbert26]

Or was as clearly his Lawyers told him to stop acting like an asshat.

[DrLove42]

Truth be told, I really dont think anyone is mad that the 3rd party vendors exist. They're great for the hobby because GW cannot realistically produce all of the various tiny components they do. People are taking umbrage with the manner in which CH is conducting it's business, which is...distasteful.

This is the exact opinion of many, including myself.

After market parts are fine, and in many cases are awesome.

BUT CHS approach of arrogance, poor quality parts and completely stealing designs and IP's is the issue here

[The Shadow King]

Truth be told, I really dont think anyone is mad that the 3rd party vendors exist. They're great for the hobby because GW cannot realistically produce all of the various tiny components they do. People are taking umbrage with the manner in which CH is conducting it's business, which is...distasteful.

I'm certainly unhappy they exist. It's one thing to use miniatures from a different system in your games, but someone deliberately horning in on anothers' business leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I would not be sad to see them go.

[wittdooley]

I'm certainly unhappy they exist. It's one thing to use miniatures from a different system in your games, but someone deliberately horning in on anothers' business leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I would not be sad to see them go.

I think companies like Puppet's War and Victoria are great. They're providing ORIGINAL pieces that, truth be told, look nothing many of the things GW produces. The thing is, for weapons, there are lots of people that are very good with crafting them out of plasticard, etc. I tried to make some Custodian Halberds once (before the GK ones existed) and they were, quite frankly, an embarassment. I'm not good enough with sculpting or plasticard to make good ones. GW doesn't make them. Puppet's War did, and I appreciate that.

I dont think creating "original" work intended for a particular chapter is bad. Take, for example, the egyptian god head shoulders. THOSE ARE GREAT. GW makes NOTHING similar. However, when CHS makes crappy Flesh Tearers knock offs, thats the problem. I also have much less of an issue with the digital sculptors because I don't believe they're recasting anything. It's been very clear in the past that CHS has simply put green stuff on GW parts and recasted it.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

I wish CHS a swift and just demise.

That is all.

[DF3CT]

I'm certainly unhappy they exist. It's one thing to use miniatures from a different system in your games, but someone deliberately horning in on anothers' business leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I would not be sad to see them go.

Real life experience has seen GW push and grow local brick and mortar independent shops in the past and when their records show the region can support a store they plop one down and attempt to leech a high percentage of that business to their own store, with success.

You wanna talk about people horning in on someone else's business? We can point fingers all day long with comparisons.

CHS may have been cocky and may have a handful of products that defy sensibility, but it isn't everything on their site. Who knows, they may only have to remove the blatant product breaches, sparking them to name/create things more subtly, but I have faith that they won't be buried in a large pit. They aren't dead yet.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

They aren't dead yet.

I hope that they are.

[gendoikari87]

the problem with 3rd party stuff and the current status quo is that they are hard to find. I mean if you google Space marine 3rd party bits, you get nothing, it takes some fair amount of digging to find what you want and even if it's there, doesn't mean you will find it. You'll often find them under "generic space trooper" or "space warrior", "space ork", "mechanical Brotherhood", and god knows what i've missed, i mean hell "space marine" would be fine but unless it's reaper and it's clearly an aliens inspired "space marine" they don't use it for fear of GW, even though you can use SPACE MARINE all day long, without GW being able to say a G-D thing. So at the very least, infringement or not, I think it should be allowed to say that one's products are "compatible" with Games workshop models. The auto industry already does that and the biggest and you don't see honda going under. In fact part of why i got my civic is so i can upgrade it as time goes on.

[lattd]

Actually using space marine when talking about models that look or fit GW space marines lines is illegal if you say spae marine shoulder pad, which is what CHS did and still does.

[gendoikari87]

No, because the concept of a space marine being a sci fi power armored soldier, does not belong to GW. And a passing resemblance or even a strong one, does not count. Otherwise D&D would have had it's *** sued by tolkien LOOOOOONG ago.

[lattd]

but it does in England, i shouldn't have to repeat the law in the area, but English law requires significant difference, and D&D can trace its routes back to basic myths such as george and the dragon.

[Renegade]

the problem with 3rd party stuff and the current status quo is that they are hard to find. I mean if you google Space marine 3rd party bits, you get nothing, it takes some fair amount of digging to find what you want and even if it's there, doesn't mean you will find it. You'll often find them under "generic space trooper" or "space warrior", "space ork", "mechanical Brotherhood", and god knows what i've missed, i mean hell "space marine" would be fine but unless it's reaper and it's clearly an aliens inspired "space marine" they don't use it for fear of GW, even though you can use SPACE MARINE all day long, without GW being able to say a G-D thing. So at the very least, infringement or not, I think it should be allowed to say that one's products are "compatible" with Games workshop models. The auto industry already does that and the biggest and you don't see honda going under. In fact part of why i got my civic is so i can upgrade it as time goes on.

Try 40k bits in your search.

Anyway.... There is no comparison between Warhammer 40K and the auto industry.

40k is its own thing, a car is a car is a car. In the UK this whole 3rd party parts for Autos (cars, motorbikes etc) was resolved in law, as there is a requirement to keep a vehicle in running condition. There is no such law regarding Warhammer miniatures.

Please try again with a 'like for like' scenario.

[DF3CT]

Elves from across the sea. Check and mate.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Badass.jpeg

[gendoikari87]

but it does in England, i shouldn't have to repeat the law in the area, but English law requires significant difference, and D&D can trace its routes back to basic myths such as george and the dragon.

and space marines trace back to the early 1900's the concept power armor predates even GW as a company.

[Deadlift]

and space marines trace back to the early 1900's the concept power armor predates even GW as a company.

Really ?, I guess early sci-fi has given lots of influences and ideas to many modern day films, books and games. But I always thought early space marine armour owed more to medieval armour. A kind of re-imagining for a sci-fi age.
Do you have any pictures you could share ?

[gendoikari87]

Really ?, I guess early sci-fi has given lots of influences and ideas to many modern day films, books and games. But I always thought early space marine armour owed more to medieval armour. A kind of re-imagining for a sci-fi age.
Do you have any pictures you could share ?

Keep in mind GW as a company came into being in 1975

1963
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=2693&d=1346885706
1959
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e5/StarshipSoldier.jpg

1934-1948
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lensman_series

and if you want to get into the full history of space marines, imperial guardsmen aren't all that unique, they are in fact based on other space marines.


The first space marine unit, the Galactic Marines, was used in E. E. Smith's Lensman series, published starting in 1937.[citation needed], but the lesser known Bob Olsen (1884-1956) also wrote a few stories and novelettes about Space Marines in Amazing Stories ("Captain Brink of the Space Marines", November 1932; "The Space Marines and the Slavers", December 1936).
The phrase "space marines" appears in Robert A. Heinlein's "Misfit"[2] (1939) and is again used in "The Long Watch"[3] (1941). Heinlein's Starship Troopers (1959) is considered the defining work for the concept; for example, the actors playing the Colonial Marines in Aliens (1986) were required to read Starship Troopers as part of their training prior to filming.[4] Heinlein intended for the capsule troopers of the Mobile Infantry to be an amalgam of the shipborne aspect of the US Marine Corps relocated to space and coupled with the battlefield delivery and mission profile of US Army paratroopers.

and starship troopers basically wrote the book on power armor, not the first mine you, but the most famous, even today in the world of GW if you ask joe on the street corner where power armor comes from, he will likely say "starship troopers"

[Deadlift]

Point taken :)

But surely if GW did use these previous incarnations as inspiration for their space marines, at least their designers put their own spin on the finished design. The Space marine we know and love is an iconic piece of 40k lore and I personally feel it looks unique to anything else.

Chapter House have never produced anything of their own with originality of any kind. They just blatantly copied an existing model. Going so far as to even use the names and descriptions that originated with GW. In my opinion executed quite poorly too.

I think thats where what Chapter house for me crossed a line. Its producing something which is described as themselves as Space Marine compatible, but in looks and quality is actually far inferior to GWs finished product.

[gendoikari87]

well hold on, one can also say that chapter house put their own spin on their items as inspired by GW's. Poorly? maybe, but they weren't copies, if they were copies they would not have sold. Sure other 3rd parties do it better, scibor being a major example. (also Kromlech, if you haven't checked these guys out, DO, they make awesome stuff)

[DarkLink]

I think the majority of the argument in this thread is being confounded by the thought that this is an issue about inspiration. Tolkein was inspired by a wide range of mythology, and in turn inspired an entire genre of literature. That's not the legal issue in question. CHS studio was not 'inspired' by GW. They directly and openly copied GW for profit.

GW didn't invent Space Marines. They were inspired by stuff before them. People have been inspired by GW's idea of Space Marines, and even made models that are close enough to be used in 40k as counts-as (scribor is a perfect example). But that's inspiration, and that's not the issue at the center of CHS vs GW. All the talk about how Tolkein inspired DnD really isn't the same thing, and it's fruitless to diverge into an argument over who first though up the Space Marine as a concept.

If you can argue that CHS didn't copy GW, you're a pretty good lawyer.

[DF3CT]

There's inspiration and then there's drawing directly from the source material. GW leaves a muddy footprint of drawing from source material.

When I'm inspired by another artist to make music, I don't copy their base line but with a different instrument. Inspiration puts you on your own path, drawing from source material means you put your "twist" on it and hope people don't notice.

[gendoikari87]

I think the majority of the argument in this thread is being confounded by the thought that this is an issue about inspiration. Tolkein was inspired by a wide range of mythology, and in turn inspired an entire genre of literature. That's not the legal issue in question. CHS studio was not 'inspired' by GW. They directly and openly copied GW for profit.

GW didn't invent Space Marines. They were inspired by stuff before them. People have been inspired by GW's idea of Space Marines, and even made models that are close enough to be used in 40k as counts-as (scribor is a perfect example). But that's inspiration, and that's not the issue at the center of CHS vs GW. All the talk about how Tolkein inspired DnD really isn't the same thing, and it's fruitless to diverge into an argument over who first though up the Space Marine as a concept.

If you can argue that CHS didn't copy GW, you're a pretty good lawyer.

You say Chapterhouse copied GW, prove it. Make a logical proof of it.

[DarkLink]

...explicitly labeling their products as "Salamander Space Marine shoulderpads" and similar isn't blatant enough for you:rolleyes:? The question isn't whether they copied GW or not, it's whether the way in which they did it was in violation of GW's IP under US and UK law.

Kromlech did it right. They have wolf themed backpacks that just happen to be a perfect fit for Marines (I assume, I just glanced at their stuff). They just happen to be for "Thor/Norse themed miniatures". Clearly inspired by Space Wolves, but not a direct copy. Had they been labled "Space Marine Space Wolf Power Armor backpacks", well, then they'd be CHS.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

This thread is going 'round in circles...

HALP HALP, HELICOPTER GOING DOWN.
*crashes*

[Adra]

I have to agree with DarkLink. There is a game being played by the 3rd party models/custom bits sellers. its the game of "suitable for 28mm models" and you have to be stupid to not see that some bits are obviously for a space marine backback or obviously for a guard head swap. The important bit is that the sell does not say that, they play the game and sell a product that hints at what it should be used for, but they dont say it. By staying the hell away from overtly advertising themselves as compatible with GW kits they keep the majority of GW pressure off while still selling for that purpose. What CHS studios do is to **** on the game and not only copy style and designs but also to call the models by the same names. This is either because they are stupid or because they think the buyer is. I have no issue with companies making money off the back of GW in the form of additional bits or alternative models, but CHS think its ok to **** in the sandbox. Maybe I wouldnt mind so much but their models are a pile of crap...wish this was all for something more worth while than the melty fungus on a stick stick that was their doom model :P

[Renegade]

This thread is going 'round in circles...

HALP HALP, HELICOPTER GOING DOWN.
*crashes*

Yeah, bet the Judge presiding over this is feeling the same. The cut and dry element is that any doubt goes in the favour of the aggrieved in such a case, as it is how the law is written.

[Mr Mystery]

On the matter of originality of Space Marines....

GW have their own, distinctive take on what a Space Marine is, and this is instantly recognisable. The style of the model, the iconography , even having various marks of armour all unique to GW. That is their IP, regardless of who first came up with the idea of a Space Marine. All ideas receive influence from others. It's unavoidable.

Now, whilst I am free to create my own take on Space Marines, I cannot utilise GW's design cues to make a complete model. Nor can I simply pinch GW's sculpts and rename them 'Star Daves', I have to take pains to ensure that my design is suitably unique.

CH have not done this. At all. Nor have they tried to. They have taken someone else's concept and IP and made their models. Their work is clearly derivative, and not only does the physical evidence demonstrate this, but one of their own sculptors testimony says as much. The intention and end product is clear as day. And being tried under UK law, I'd imagine GW Legal are choosing their lube and implement as we speak....

[gendoikari87]

...explicitly labeling their products as "Salamander Space Marine shoulderpads" and similar isn't blatant enough for you:rolleyes:? The question isn't whether they copied GW or not, it's whether the way in which they did it was in violation of GW's IP under US and UK law.

Kromlech did it right. They have wolf themed backpacks that just happen to be a perfect fit for Marines (I assume, I just glanced at their stuff). They just happen to be for "Thor/Norse themed miniatures". Clearly inspired by Space Wolves, but not a direct copy. Had they been labled "Space Marine Space Wolf Power Armor backpacks", well, then they'd be CHS.A name is not a model however, so your logic fails. Furthermore, Salamanders are old english creatures and often used in regalia, Space marines well, we've already shown how GW has no claim on them, so basically your argument breaks down to GW having hold over shoulderpads. You might have some kind of argument however, if they had named them "genetically altered, god emperor worshiping, Space marines". But that still fails to satisfy the previous falsity, that a name is not a physical object, and you were asked to logically state how chapterhouse has copied GW's product.

[Psychosplodge]

It's all context specific, use salamnder where you want and you'll be fine, except in context of sci-fi miniatures... Where it's trademarked...

[DrLove42]

You say Chapterhouse copied GW, prove it. Make a logical proof of it.

Challenge Accepted.

Games Workshop. Flesh Tearer Shoulder Pads.
http://media.nextopia.net/805c66bab86573a7bdb33aa2a51e4a44/7a876cccf939f1accf37b9a73c3c5411?wm=0&h=160&w=224&bg=FFFFFF&src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.games-workshop.com%2FMEDIA_CustomProductCatalog%2Fm99011 9a_99060101459_FTShoulderPads1_224x160.jpg

Have been on sale on GW.com for a long time, and named for a chapter they created and designed a long time ago

CHS

Flesh tearer Shoulder pads

http://chapterhousestudios.com/image/cache/data/second%20grey%20redux-500x500.jpg

They have used;

a) the name of GW chapter, and its not something that is common.
b) They have used the exact same design.
c) Their copy is actuall more expensive than the GW ones, and are lower quality

They also have shoulder pads advertised as "Heresy Era" pads. The heresy is a GW thing! You cna't say it for something else in wargaming terms! They have pads for "Scythes of the Emperor". THE EMPEROR? Very clearly stolen.

And this is before we get into their stuff being copy and pasted from the Heresy artwork book

[lattd]

A name is not a model however, so your logic fails. Furthermore, Salamanders are old english creatures and often used in regalia, Space marines well, we've already shown how GW has no claim on them, so basically your argument breaks down to GW having hold over shoulderpads. You might have some kind of argument however, if they had named them "genetically altered, god emperor worshiping, Space marines". But that still fails to satisfy the previous falsity, that a name is not a physical object, and you were asked to logically state how chapterhouse has copied GW's product.

But in the context of a 28mm game with space marines in that style with a chapter called salamanders they do have copyright, the design of their shoulder pads in such a convex shape with a symbol directly in the middle with a raised bar on the outside edge and indents on the inside, thats GW's design if chapterhouse had produced a cube shaped shoulder pad with a dragon and said these fit space marine's from gamesworkshops range, rather than saying salamander shoulder pads then this wouldn't be an argument. This case is being tried under English law (please everyone note their is no such thing as UK law) where design law states that a product sold must be significantly different and not just enlarged and differently coloured.

[Gotthammer]

But she's got a new hat! - I mean - the sawblade goes in the other direction - totally unique and new!

[Wolfshade]

I believe this point has been made previously, also, it is the copying of the distincitve elements which is an issue, otherwise people would not be able to copyright/ip/trademark football designs afterall, they are all spheres, and you can't copyright a shape (well unless you are apple in a court ruling against samsung...)

[Psychosplodge]

you can't copyright a shape (well unless you are apple in a court ruling against samsung...)

Only in the third court though after two others threw it out...

[Deadlift]

Bollocks to this debate, I want an army of Mr Mysterys "Space Daves"

[Psychosplodge]

Don't worry, we'll do an add-on for warmace 400c

[gendoikari87]

But she's got a new hat! - I mean - the sawblade goes in the other direction - totally unique and new!

legally for copyright yes the opposite direction does make it legally unique, but more importantly is the number of teeth. So no, CH's flesh tearers shoulderpads are not a copy of GW's, they might borrow heavily, immorally so, but they are not copies.

[gendoikari87]

where design law states that a product sold must be significantly different Now here this is a problem, who defines "significatly different" Significant without a mathematical base is subjective so is GW significantly distinct from D&D is D&D significantly distinct from Lord of the rings? If so Why is Chapterhouses Unique designs considered not significant and GW's are?

You're letting your brain fool you into thinking there is logic here that just isn't there beyond subjectivity.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

After going around the same argument 500 times I think it's time to be rid of these silly CHS vs GW debates.
Thread closed.