Terminators?

[Tynskel]

Is it just me, or is there a terminator at the end of this trailer for Iron Man...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsZfl4-mS7c

[Wildcard]

GW has sued for less for copyright stuff.. Will be fun to watch if they will have the balls to follow their mandate and go up against Marvel and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures.. Both of which should have the resources to give it a good fight..

Or will the big bully GW just let it be, cos they can't bully their way out of this :)

[Tynskel]

I like that you mention lawsuits. I highly doubt GW will file a suit against Walt Disney/Marvel. Why? Not for the reasons that you are stating, but more, because the 'terminator' shown does not actually have the defining characteristic: the large shoulder pauldrons. The recent work on the chapterhouse case has made it pretty clear that the pauldron design on space marines is GW property.

Disney/Marvel isn't copying that.

[flekkzo]

Didn't someone point out that Marvel's IP is older than GW's?

[DarkLink]

IP law isn't so crude and simplistic as to allow the older company to always claim precedent. Intellectual Property isn't a single blanket thing, it's a bunch of small, individual ideas. It doesn't matter if Marvel is older, or if it filed a trademark or copyright before GW even existed. The design of GW's Terminators, specifically, came before this Iron Man movie. If the Iron Man design was similar enough, and there was no example thereof in prior Marvel lore, then GW could sue Marvel. Marvel's only defense, strictly speaking, would be either "no, if you read issue 235 you'll see we had this single, specific idea first" or "our design is different from yours". "We were founded as a company before you" is not a legal defense.

[Magpie]

Is it just me, or is there a terminator at the end of this trailer for Iron Man...

Just you I reckon. I can't see any real similarities, none that would lead me to think that it was a copy of GW's stuff.
Try searching for "Hulk Buster" and you'll see.

[eldargal]

There is a very, very slight resemblance

[Dalleron]

Agreed. Small similarity in the helmet/face is the only thing I can see.

[DarkLink]

From the angle in the trailer, it looks a lot like a Grey Knight Terminator head, and in the concept art the fists look like power fists by simple virtue of being really, really big, but aside from that it there isn't any particular similarity.

[DeadPanda]

Looks very cool non the less.

[eldargal]

From the angle in the trailer, it looks a lot like a Grey Knight Terminator head, and in the concept art the fists look like power fists by simple virtue of being really, really big, but aside from that it there isn't any particular similarity.

I hought it looked more similar to this:
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/mediawiki/images/8/8f/TerminatorB.JPG
As well as a vaguely similar silhouette. Certainly not enough to say one copied the other let alone justify a lawsuit.

[Mr Mystery]

Iron Man, Iron Man. Does whatever and Iron can.
Gets your clothes nice and flat, left unattended, burns down your flat.

[Minibem]

Iron Man, Iron Man. Does whatever and Iron can.
Gets your clothes nice and flat, left unattended, burns down your flat.

Just what I needed to make me smile on a Monday morning

[DWest]

Taking a look at the video, I can easily see where you'd get the "Terminator" impression, but that's mostly a trick of the scene in question.
-The eyeslits do look very similar to the Terminator style, but there's no "snout". There is instead the standard Iron Man faceplate.
-The suit is hunched over because it's charging headlong through a wall. At rest it would take up a more normal up-and-down profile, whereas Terminators are permanently squat and hunched.
-And yes, those look like Power Fists for hands. There's a lot of meat on them bones.

[Gotthammer]

Here's concept art of the armour:

http://static.hypable.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Iron-Man-3-Hulkbuster-armor.jpg

[Wildeybeast]

This was discussed ages ago in the Oubliette. Get yourselves down there!

[gwensdad]

I think I even posted this (or something like it) in the Oubliette then:
http://chaosundivided.tumblr.com/post/48730218735/fatherton-tony-stark-what-is-this-are-you

3938

[DarkLink]

From the front they look very similar. From the side there's a pretty good difference, though.

[Chapter Master Jake]

If I had the time and resources I'd make my own futuristic/sci-fi version of the space marines, imperial guard, orcs, tyranids, and eldar, and laugh in GW's face as they try to sue me for creating something of my own. Intellectual Property swings both ways, as does the justice system. Besides, something made in america, sold only in america, I don't believe should be of any concern to the english of the UK.

Now, I love WH40K to bits, even for all it's flaws! But... at the same time I see GW for what they are and I see what they do, and I personally cannot approve of much of it, even from a business standpoint. Bullies and whiners sue people for things like "Intellectual Property" and "Copyrights" because they're too comfortable with routine to examine their competition's success and innovate to rival it. GW has been pulling the same nonsensical bull for more than a decade and they've unfortunately gotten very proficient at it. The thing is, you can't own an idea otherwise we're essentially trying to own other human being's minds, and that's some Geneva Convention stuff right there...

I'm truly astonished that GW has been able to succeed in it's legal practices, let alone their employment and business practices. How they can get away without justifiably raising their prices across the board some 30% over 5 years alone, without negative turnabout from we customers, is beyond my understanding. Don't even get me started on the skull-sapping they did to Chapter House and War Store...

[Wildeybeast]

How do you go from GW's defence of it's copyright to international law on humanitarian conduct during war? You lost me there.

[Gotthammer]

http://www.allmystery.de/i/tadef6c_signs_tinfoil_hats.jpg

[DarkLink]

We do know what the Geneva Convention actually was, right... (I mean that in the literal sense, as in the Geneva Convention cemented the rules of war including stuff like POW rights, protections afforded to non-combatants, etc, and had absolutely nothing to do with non-war international trade in any way, shape, or form).

[Power Klawz]

It was obviously an aside pointed at the absurdity of trying to legislate thought patterns, you know like some big brother, 1984 Orwellian geneva convention type s... stuff.

[daboarder]

It was obviously an aside pointed at the absurdity of trying to legislate thought patterns, you know like some big brother, 1984 Orwellian geneva convention type s... stuff.

I'm tempted to say your giving him to much credit, just his views on IP and international legislation and trade should be enough to pretty much discredit his response.