LEGALWATCH: Games Workshop vs Chapterhouse Trial

[Bigred]

The trial is underway in Chicago in open court.

Trial Location and Schedule

U. S. District Court
219 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 60604
Tel: 312-435-5684

Judge Matthew F. Kennelly - Courtroom 2103

The Court sets aside the following dates for trial in this case:
June 3, 2013 (a.m. session - jury selection; p.m. session - trial),
June 4-7, 2013, June 10-11, 2013, and, if needed for closing arguments, the morning of June 12, 2013.

The trial day typically will extend from 9:45 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and from 1:30 or 1:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., with morning and afternoon breaks. The Court notes that this is longer than its typical trial day. The Court reserves the right to extend any given trial day to 5:30 if warranted in order to complete the trial within the dates set aside.

Trial Summary

Jury selection is completed, and the trial is underway. Both sides have completed Opening Statements, and the first witness is on the stand:

Alan Merrett - Head of Games Workshop IP

Mr. Merrett's testimony was hours in length, initially focused on explaining Games Workshop's business to the jury. Some highlights from his testimony:

-A Realm of Battle board was pulled out to show the jury to help explain what wargaming is.

-Games Workshop was described as being producers of "Toy Soldiers" and their game systems as being "infinitely customizable".

-Mr. Merrett described Games Day to the jury as a Games Workshop event that allowed customers to perform their "favorite hobby activity; buying things from Games Workshop".

-It was explained that Games workshop uses no traditional advertising outside of word of mouth and social media based online communications. Customers could simply google for their products and find thriving communities of eager fans on websites such as "Dakka Dakka and Bell of Lost Souls".

-Warhammer 40,000 was described to the jury as "Warhammer Fantasy in space", along with describing the Eldar as "Space Elfs", along with other "space" factions such as "Space Orcs".

-The Dark Eldar were described as "spikey, evil, and every other evil cliche".

-The Tau were described as "modern sci-fi; more traditional sci-fi" in appearance, as opposed to the archaic aesthetic of the other ranges.

UPDATE: END OF WEEK 1 Summary

Testomony was heard from:
Alan Merrett (GW head of IP)
Andy Jones (Head of Licensing/Legal)
Gil Steveson (GW Chief Council)

Nick Valluci (Owner of CHS)

Alan Merrett Testimony:

Merrett outlined a general summary of GW's point of view with several points:

- GW takes pride in the "quality and originality" of their products. They do not like when any other company makes miniatures that are based on their own product line, viewing many of these to be of inferior quality. Me mentioned the aftermarket for add-ons "makes us jolly-cross indeed"

Andy Jones Testimony:

Jones laid out many GW points points involving both licensing and financials under questioning:

-GW latest annual numbers reflect revenue of $54 million USD in North american sales. 50% of that was 40K, the other 50% all other GW products sales combined.

-GW was described as having licensing agreements with "big companies", and there is a perception that any such "big companies" would be upset by percieved theft of GW IP. He introduced no evidence of licensees becoming upset having actually occurred.

-GW is concerned that the poor quality of CHS products will rub off or bring down the percieved quality of the GW line in the eyes of licensees. He introduced no evidence of this having actually occurred.

-GW feels that they should get to decide when a product they invent in print and illustration gets to come to market in the form of a physical miniature. When a company such as CHS introduces a competing miniature that was previously unreleased into the market ahead of GW, they consider this this "poisoning the well". Other companies such Kromlech, Maxmini, Scibor, Hitech were listed by name as being examples this concept.

-GW considers the following naming schemes to be acceptable for the aftermarket, applying to all products that interact with their own 40K products:
PRODUCT NAME: "compatible with 28mm science fiction miniatures"
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION: "compatable with Games Workshop "

-Said that "anytime CHS made money, that was money GW should have made"

-GW Legal has an "IP Protection Group" which investigates allegations of IP infringement and decides whether/how to proceed. They are usually first alerted to alleged IP infringement by GW customers who they consider to be "our first line of defense as it were".

-GW has 200+ casefiles on organizations and individuals it is investigating for potential legal action against.

Nick Valluci Testmony
-Mr Valluci was examined by GW council vigorously.

-CHS disclosed that its total gross revenue before expenses for a roughly 4 year period in question was @$400,000
-Valluci took home $3000 a month from CHS, while his overseas partner took home $2000 per month.

Evidence Brought Before the Jury:

The following game product was entered into evidence by the Judge over objections from GW council:
SPACE MARINES SCIENCE FICTION MINIATURES RULES (1980, Fantasy Games Unlimited) (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/17490/space-marines)
4198

[I]Both sides are done. The jury is deliberating.

Now we wait...

Partial Trial Transcript (http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/gov.uscourts.ilnd_.250791.388.2.pdf)(vis Blood of Kittens)

[Sainhann]

The trial is underway in Chicago in open court.

Trial Location and Schedule

U. S. District Court
219 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 60604
Tel: 312-435-5684

Judge Matthew F. Kennelly - Courtroom 2103

The Court sets aside the following dates for trial in this case:
June 3, 2013 (a.m. session - jury selection; p.m. session - trial),
June 4-7, 2013, June 10-11, 2013, and, if needed for closing arguments, the morning of June 12, 2013.

The trial day typically will extend from 9:45 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and from 1:30 or 1:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., with morning and afternoon breaks. The Court notes that this is longer than its typical trial day. The Court reserves the right to extend any given trial day to 5:30 if warranted in order to complete the trial within the dates set aside.

Trial Summary

Jury selection is completed, and the trial is underway. Both sides have completed Opening Statements, and the first witness is on the stand:

Alan Merrett - Head of Games Workshop IP

Mr. Merrett's testimony was hours in length, initially focused on explaining Games Workshop's business to the jury. Some highlights from his testimony:

-A Realm of Battle board was pulled out to show the jury to help explain what wargaming is.

-Games Workshop was described as being producers of "Toy Soldiers" and their game systems as being "infinitely customizable".

-Mr. Merrett described Games Day to the jury as a Games Workshop event that allowed customers to perform their "favorite hobby activity; buying things from Games Workshop".

-It was explained that Games workshop uses no traditional advertising outside of word of mouth and social media based online communications. Customers could simply google for their products and find thriving communities of eager fans on websites such as "Dakka Dakka and Bell of Lost Souls".

-Warhammer 40,000 was described to the jury as "Warhammer Fantasy in space", along with describing the Eldar as "Space Elfs", along with other "space" factions such as "Space Orcs".

-The Dark Eldar were described as "spikey, evil, and every other evil cliche".

-The Tau were described as "modern sci-fi; more traditional sci-fi" in appearance, as opposed to the archaic aesthetic of the other ranges.

Testimony is ongoing.

I would love to be on that jury.

[RealGenius]

I would love to be on that jury.

There's no way anyone that reads this site would have been selected by either attorney team.

[eldargal]

There's no way anyone that reads this site would have been selected by either attorney team.

Yup, anyone who had more than the most passing knowledge of GW would have been kicked off the jury precisely to avoid obnoxious haters trying to exert influence for one side or another.

[chicop76]

Yup, anyone who had more than the most passing knowledge of GW would have been kicked off the jury precisely to avoid obnoxious haters trying to exert influence for one side or another.

I agree.

Although I wanted to see what they described Necrons. Space Skeletons. I think He Man should sue. Also I think while He Man is sueing that the writter from Star Ship Troopers, if still alive should sue for the obvious rip offs of space marines and tyranids. Well you can argue a rip off from aliens which in turn is a rip off from Star Ship Troopers.

Although star craft and war craft is not fantasy or 40k ripoffs. Nor is halo a rip off from 40k or Aliens.

I say at one point a ripoff is a ripoff and no one cares. If GW wins than I think atleast the Aliens people should sue GW with the Star Ship Troopers people. As well as Tolkien which is basically fantasy.

[OrksOrksOrks]

I agree.

Although I wanted to see what they described Necrons. Space Skeletons. I think He Man should sue. Also I think while He Man is sueing that the writter from Star Ship Troopers, if still alive should sue for the obvious rip offs of space marines and tyranids. Well you can argue a rip off from aliens which in turn is a rip off from Star Ship Troopers.

Although star craft and war craft is not fantasy or 40k ripoffs. Nor is halo a rip off from 40k or Aliens.

I say at one point a ripoff is a ripoff and no one cares. If GW wins than I think atleast the Aliens people should sue GW with the Star Ship Troopers people. As well as Tolkien which is basically fantasy.

I think what you're trying to hint at is where infringing on copyright starts and where generic ideas in the public domain ends.
That isn't what is at trial here, Chapter House made models for Games Workshop games but also used Games Workshops trademarks to market those products and used identical designs and art styles.

Starship Troopers Space Marines are very different to Games Workshop Space Marines in all but name, the Tyranids aren't anything like the race of aliens in that novel and the Bugs of the film came after the Tyranids, the Xenomorphs of Alien were an obvious influence on the Tyranids though, particularly on the original Hunter-Slayer models, however, they diversified away from that years ago, to the point of not being pretty distinct.

And although hugely influential in the setup of modern, generic Fantasy, Tolkien himself borrowed a great deal from mythology and legend and other Fantasy writings and can hardly be thought of as original.

If there is anyone GW could be accused of ripping off for 40K, you need to go back and read some early 2000 AD, they might have a case as Rouge Trader is basically all influenced by the first 50 progs, Judge Dredd in particular.

[chicop76]

I think what you're trying to hint at is where infringing on copyright starts and where generic ideas in the public domain ends.
That isn't what is at trial here, Chapter House made models for Games Workshop games but also used Games Workshops trademarks to market those products and used identical designs and art styles.

Starship Troopers Space Marines are very different to Games Workshop Space Marines in all but name, the Tyranids aren't anything like the race of aliens in that novel and the Bugs of the film came after the Tyranids, the Xenomorphs of Alien were an obvious influence on the Tyranids though, particularly on the original Hunter-Slayer models, however, they diversified away from that years ago, to the point of not being pretty distinct.

And although hugely influential in the setup of modern, generic Fantasy, Tolkien himself borrowed a great deal from mythology and legend and other Fantasy writings and can hardly be thought of as original.

If there is anyone GW could be accused of ripping off for 40K, you need to go back and read some early 2000 AD, they might have a case as Rouge Trader is basically all influenced by the first 50 progs, Judge Dredd in particular.


I have to re look, but here is a rough time line

- Xenomorph painting/ sculpture design used by aliens film 1910 roughly, have to re look.
- John Carter of Mars books 1920s the books forexample helped inspire Star Wars for example
- 1950s Star Ship Troopers the book
- 1970s D&D first table top game. Actually second since D&D used another company for the table top concept, but all rules ws D&D
- 1986-1989 the film Aliens came out
- 1989-1992 rouge trader/40 k

Than everything else like halo, star craft, war craft, etc. came afterward.

So the xenomorph design is still older than 40k.

[[email protected]]

If there is anyone GW could be accused of ripping off for 40K, you need to go back and read some early 2000 AD, they might have a case as Rouge Trader is basically all influenced by the first 50 progs, Judge Dredd in particular.
not to mention nemesis the warlock

[Denzark]

Unlike some posters on the main page, I don't think GW getting costs for dragging their paperwork submissions, is game over. They would happily eat $1900 or whatever the fine was, to get a 1" advantage in this case.

[rle68]

I think what you're trying to hint at is where infringing on copyright starts and where generic ideas in the public domain ends.
That isn't what is at trial here, Chapter House made models for Games Workshop games but also used Games Workshops trademarks to market those products and used identical designs and art styles.

Starship Troopers Space Marines are very different to Games Workshop Space Marines in all but name, the Tyranids aren't anything like the race of aliens in that novel and the Bugs of the film came after the Tyranids, the Xenomorphs of Alien were an obvious influence on the Tyranids though, particularly on the original Hunter-Slayer models, however, they diversified away from that years ago, to the point of not being pretty distinct.

And although hugely influential in the setup of modern, generic Fantasy, Tolkien himself borrowed a great deal from mythology and legend and other Fantasy writings and can hardly be thought of as original.

If there is anyone GW could be accused of ripping off for 40K, you need to go back and read some early 2000 AD, they might have a case as Rouge Trader is basically all influenced by the first 50 progs, Judge Dredd in particular.

ill end your comment right here and now yes starship troopers are not space marines not even close but they ARE A DIRECT RIPOFF BY GW OF IG

[chicop76]

1987 October rouge trade/ warhammer 40k 1st edition
1979 Alien film
1986 July Aliens Film

Imagine that Rouge trader comes out 1 year after aliens. Wonder if Aliens didn't come out would 40k be the same.

H.R Geiger 1975 is where the alien concept art is originated.

I just want to point out I mean Star Ship Troopers from the book which have Space Marine Power Armour. Not the Star Ship Trooper from the movie in the 1980s which came out after all the other stuff and pretty much had cadians in it.

[Mr Mystery]

ill end your comment right here and now yes starship troopers are not space marines not even close but they ARE A DIRECT RIPOFF BY GW OF IG

Yes. Because Space GI's certainly never existed pre Heinlen. At all.

Xenonmorphs? Was it the six limbs and lack of prehensile tail that gave it away?!

[Valyrius]

-Mr. Merrett described Games Day to the jury as a Games Workshop event that allowed customers to perform their "favorite hobby activity; buying things from Games Workshop".

Yup, that's definitely the best part. Giving Games Workshop more and more money for less and less stuff! I can't wait until I'm paying $35 per troop model, instead of per box. I don't even bother assembling, customizing, painting, or gaming with my miniatures because buying things from GW is just all the fun I'll ever need!

I do hope the jury is clever enough to see how telling that was for Games Workshop's business practices, and know that this whole case is nothing but their greedy narcissism showing.

[chicop76]

ill end your comment right here and now yes starship troopers are not space marines not even close but they ARE A DIRECT RIPOFF BY GW OF IG

Do us a favor and look when Star Ship Troopers came out. That's like saying Games Workshop was around in the early 50s. Star Ship Troopers the book had Space Marines in it( these marines was bad I mean awesome). It was written in the late 1950s.

[OrksOrksOrks]

1987 October rouge trade/ warhammer 40k 1st edition
1979 Alien film
1986 July Aliens Film

Imagine that Rouge trader comes out 1 year after aliens. Wonder if Aliens didn't come out would 40k be the same.

H.R Geiger 1975 is where the alien concept art is originated.

I just want to point out I mean Star Ship Troopers from the book which have Space Marine Power Armour. Not the Star Ship Trooper from the movie in the 1980s which came out after all the other stuff and pretty much had cadians in it.

Expect that the Power Armour of Starship Troopers is more like a Mecha than the armour of a GW Space Marine, they're not the same at all. Again, in name only, the concepts are totally different.

[Calicojack73]

ill end your comment right here and now yes starship troopers are not space marines not even close but they ARE A DIRECT RIPOFF BY GW OF IG

Have you even read Starship Troopers (not the movie)???
The mobile infantry in Starship Troopers are more like Space Marines. They wore incredibly powerful power armor and could kill bugs by the thousands before they were killed by sheer numbers. The point of the book was that it didn't matter... it took 18 years for a human to grow to adulthood and be trained in the use of the power armor. By comparison the bugs could spawn in the tens of thousands each day and be fully grown in about a week and ready for battle.

Yes... the mobile infantry in the MOVIE was very much like the IG but the movie missed the point of the book by a mile.

BTW, the proper spelling for ROGUE TRADER is R-O-G-U-E. It is driving me crazy seeing everyone spell it rouge... that is the word "Red" in French. :P

[Caitsidhe]

Unlike some posters on the main page, I don't think GW getting costs for dragging their paperwork submissions, is game over. They would happily eat $1900 or whatever the fine was, to get a 1" advantage in this case.

Except when it blows up in your face and you get caught. No advantage was gained by it. They did, in fact, take a hit. It will be admissible to the Jury (as well as on the Judge's mind) that Games Workshop attempted (the Judge says as much) to obscure that they had already been denied a copyright for the items being too general.

The Jury (nor the Judge) isn't going to see that as them just playing a legal game. They are going to see it as attempting to hide the facts. It looks deceptive (even if it was an honest mistake). I think that tactic was a poor one. One rule that should NEVER be broken when dealing with the American Justice system is... if you are going to hide discovery... you better not get caught. I, personally, believe the case was lost the moment that happened.

[Calicojack73]

The Jury (nor the Judge) isn't going to see that as them just playing a legal game. They are going to see it as attempting to hide the facts. It looks deceptive (even if it was an honest mistake). I think that tactic was a poor one. One rule that should NEVER be broken when dealing with the American Justice system is... if you are going to hide discovery... you better not get caught. I, personally, believe the case was lost the moment that happened.

Agreed!

[David_Jackson]

Nothing is created in a vacuum. Nothing is original. As Harlan Ellison once said, "there's nothing new under the sun."

What is NOT on trial here is where GW got their ideas; what is on trial here is if Chapter House produced content (models) that was derivative of GW's IP.

And they did. If you say they didn't, then you aren't being honest.

Here's a definition of "derivative works"; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_works

Which includes how it works in regards to copyright law.

David Jackson

[Psyberwolfe]

Yeah ... Buying things isn't my favorite aspect of wargamming. My favorite aspect is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Nothing else matters.

[chicop76]

Expect that the Power Armour of Starship Troopers is more like a Mecha than the armour of a GW Space Marine, they're not the same at all. Again, in name only, the concepts are totally different.

Well not my fault they had awesome power armour that probably can kill a squad of marines in not so awesome power armour.

Power Armour, Exo-Skelteton, Robot Armor, Powered Suit, Armoured Powered Suit, Mjonir Armour, etc.

Power Armour basically enhances speed, endurance, strength of the wielder. The planes in robotech can be seen as power armor. While the destroids was more robot armour. The armour in aliens was an exosuit.

Man I need to read troopers again. I found some anime that was closer to the book than the movie was.

[Mr Mystery]

And what of the various other infringements? A technicality on one does not exonerate the others. Especially when the sculptor of one has admitted he was given copyrighted material to generate his sculpt from?

Or using copyrighted terms and trademarks to peddle your shoddy wares!

Cut and dried? Not by a long shot.

[chicop76]

I don't see the problem really. It's like saying I can't buy a floor matt for my car just because it's not the same company for the car.

How about this thought. Differant companies making differant and cheaper wall charges for your phone.

Bottom line is Chapter House do not stop you from buying GW models. In fact they are encouraging you to buy GW models and than go to their site and modify your models for a better apperance. If GW had any brains they would hire these guys and do the same for them.

However it does come into conflict with forge world which does the same thing.

At the end of the day I am buying a GW model. If GW doesn't give me an oppurtunity to make female cadians and another site allows me the oppurtunity than GW should make female cadians which will crush companies like chapter houjse sells. Chapter House is making money off what GW don't feel like doing.

[Mr Mystery]

Wrong wrong wrong.

According to that, the likes of JK Rowling, because 'she didn't feel like' making her book into a movie, WB could have cracked on without a no doubt extremely expensive license....

[Kirsten]

At the end of the day I am buying a GW model. If GW doesn't give me an oppurtunity to make female cadians and another site allows me the oppurtunity than GW should make female cadians which will crush companies like chapter houjse sells. Chapter House is making money off what GW don't feel like doing.

that isn't the problem though, loads of companies make conversion bits without hassle. the problem is when they start making GW alternatives using GW names, basing them on GW art in a codex and the like. other companies make 'sci fi Vikings on wolves' chapter house made space wolf thunder wolves

[chicop76]

that isn't the problem though, loads of companies make conversion bits without hassle. the problem is when they start making GW alternatives using GW names, basing them on GW art in a codex and the like. other companies make 'sci fi Vikings on wolves' chapter house made space wolf thunder wolves

I thought they started doing that cause they was being sued. Which was stupid on their part.

[DarkLink]

That's what I don't get, Chapterhouse could have probably avoided this whole thing just by doing that. And if they did do that, they'd probably have a sure win in court. Instead, they had to specifically invoke GW's trademarks for some reason.

[Kyban]

That's what I don't get, Chapterhouse could have probably avoided this whole thing just by doing that. And if they did do that, they'd probably have a sure win in court. Instead, they had to specifically invoke GW's trademarks for some reason.

It almost seems like they were trying to make a point or something, intentionally bring up this controversy.

[Mr Mystery]

Or they're really really thick....

[chicop76]

No. They use to not call them by name. When they was being sued they went full blown name calling. I would think to make it less obvious instead of just giving GW ammunition.

Before being sued I would had like to see them win. However it seemed like oh GW is suing us. Frick let's call everything space marines, Tau, etc.

I remember they was slighly doing it before and when they been sued they just seem to try to be piss of GW now. Which is stupid in my opionion. They should had left things a lone and see what happens with being sued. Now they just gave GW more ammunition to help them win.

[Kirsten]

yes, they had a warning to change the names of some of their bits and that would have been the end of it, they then took the opposite action and stuck two fingers up at GW and told them where to go, posting an open letter I think which was fairly confrontational. they brought it all on themselves.

[Mr Mystery]

Anyone got a link to that letter?

[Bigred]

Regardless of the outcome, this trial should set some interesting precedent for the 3rd party goods market.

For example one of the big things that is in contention is the exact legal line that aftermarket companies can use with existing trademarks.

GW says no one can use their trademarks under any circumstances without persmission. But the general aftermarket industry for years allows usage of trademarks for informational use only to inform the customer what they are buying "this case is compatible with Apple IPod 4", or "windshield will fit 2004 Ford Taurus".

A lot of this wargaming aftermarket naming silliness "sci-fi viking techno heads" and "sci-fi eternal robot flying cycle" goes away with a clear set of rules on the record for everyone to use. I would bet that all the Scibor/Maxminis/Puppetwars/Chapterhouses out there would rename many of their products overnight if they had clear rules to follow.

I wouldn't be surprised if a large amount of the motivation for this case isn't based on the merits of the legal arguments, but GW wanting to obfuscate and chill the entire 3rd party add on market in wargames. They probably don't want it to exist in the first place - viewing it as lost potential revenue.

[chicop76]

yes, they had a warning to change the names of some of their bits and that would have been the end of it, they then took the opposite action and stuck two fingers up at GW and told them where to go, posting an open letter I think which was fairly confrontational. they brought it all on themselves.

Darn didn't know about the letter. Knew about everything else. It was prtty obvious to anyone that used their site. I was like wow are they crazy.

I really don't feel for them. At first I did until they was cofrontational about it. I wanted them to win the case so it open up more leeeway on other companies. If they somehow win I expect major changes from othe companies like Zealot minitures.

[Gotthammer]

I wouldn't be surprised if a large amount of the motivation for this case isn't based on the merits of the legal arguments, but GW wanting to obfuscate and chill the entire 3rd party add on market in wargames. They probably don't want it to exist in the first place - viewing it as lost potential revenue.

The GW sculptors seem to think of it as a blight on their hard work given the undisguised disdain they show when they speak of it. I also like the delightful silliness of the 3rd party names they come up with. I mean saying "I'm painting my sci-fi eternal robot flying cycle" is way better than "I'm painting my Tomb Blade" (well, at least in my opinion).

[Kirsten]

I wouldn't be surprised if a large amount of the motivation for this case isn't based on the merits of the legal arguments, but GW wanting to obfuscate and chill the entire 3rd party add on market in wargames. They probably don't want it to exist in the first place - viewing it as lost potential revenue.

that is pure speculation in know way backed up by evidence. there are plenty of third party bits sites operating, who have operated for years, without any hassle from GW at all.

[Gotthammer]

Doesn't mean they don't hate them and just haven't had enough of a reason to go after them.
Somewhat tangential evidence, but when I talked to Jes Goodwin at Games Day and asked about taking a pic of his sketches he said he didn't like them released to stop "little companies springing up in Poland". We talked about that a little and he said that the designers generally dislike the after market sites as they feel like their work is getting mooched off of.

[Kirsten]

sure, but a few designers not liking them does not mean there is some grand plan by GW as a whole to put an end to them all

[Mr Mystery]

As I'm sure any creative type would feel aggrieved their hard work was lining a stranger's pockets.

[spaceman91]

As I'm sure any creative type would feel aggrieved their hard work was lining a stranger's pockets.

Beat me to it. I am trying to write a book and if anyone tryed to do dodgy rip offs i would feel a bit peed off.( for anyone who cares it's crap so far anyway)

[RGilbert26]

I think what you're trying to hint at is where infringing on copyright starts and where generic ideas in the public domain ends.
That isn't what is at trial here, Chapter House made models for Games Workshop games but also used Games Workshops trademarks to market those products and used identical designs and art styles.

Starship Troopers Space Marines are very different to Games Workshop Space Marines in all but name, the Tyranids aren't anything like the race of aliens in that novel and the Bugs of the film came after the Tyranids, the Xenomorphs of Alien were an obvious influence on the Tyranids though, particularly on the original Hunter-Slayer models, however, they diversified away from that years ago, to the point of not being pretty distinct.

And although hugely influential in the setup of modern, generic Fantasy, Tolkien himself borrowed a great deal from mythology and legend and other Fantasy writings and can hardly be thought of as original.

If there is anyone GW could be accused of ripping off for 40K, you need to go back and read some early 2000 AD, they might have a case as Rouge Trader is basically all influenced by the first 50 progs, Judge Dredd in particular.

GW owned 2000AD, once apon a time.

[Gotthammer]

True, but I did say it was tangential ;) Also it shows that GW is aware in some capacity that these companies are siphoning off potential monies, and any way of slowing that is something I'm sure they'd be looking at.

[Mr Mystery]

Come to think of it, I don't like people who aren't me benefitting from my hard work, and I'm not remotely creative. I am however bloody good at my job, and when I've busted a nut in the past, I've had others try, and all too often succeed, in not just riding my coat tails, but stealing my thunder altogether. It's galling!

[Denzark]

Nothing is created in a vacuum. Nothing is original. As Harlan Ellison once said, "there's nothing new under the sun."

What is NOT on trial here is where GW got their ideas; what is on trial here is if Chapter House produced content (models) that was derivative of GW's IP.

And they did. If you say they didn't, then you aren't being honest.

Here's a definition of "derivative works"; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_works

Which includes how it works in regards to copyright law.

David Jackson

This (welcome, a well reasoned first post)


And what of the various other infringements? A technicality on one does not exonerate the others. Especially when the sculptor of one has admitted he was given copyrighted material to generate his sculpt from?

Or using copyrighted terms and trademarks to peddle your shoddy wares!

Cut and dried? Not by a long shot.

And this! None of the Chapter House defenders like to remember the bit where a sculptor was asked if he wanted CHS to send him a copy of HH collected visions to crib from - he said he already had it!


Regardless of the outcome, this trial should set some interesting precedent for the 3rd party goods market.

For example one of the big things that is in contention is the exact legal line that aftermarket companies can use with existing trademarks.

GW says no one can use their trademarks under any circumstances without persmission. But the general aftermarket industry for years allows usage of trademarks for informational use only to inform the customer what they are buying "this case is compatible with Apple IPod 4", or "windshield will fit 2004 Ford Taurus".

A lot of this wargaming aftermarket naming silliness "sci-fi viking techno heads" and "sci-fi eternal robot flying cycle" goes away with a clear set of rules on the record for everyone to use. I would bet that all the Scibor/Maxminis/Puppetwars/Chapterhouses out there would rename many of their products overnight if they had clear rules to follow.

I wouldn't be surprised if a large amount of the motivation for this case isn't based on the merits of the legal arguments, but GW wanting to obfuscate and chill the entire 3rd party add on market in wargames. They probably don't want it to exist in the first place - viewing it as lost potential revenue.

BR - what is wrong with companies using such names - the difference between them and CHS is that they appear to appreciate the company upon the ideas of which they get to put bread on their families tables. Hence they are discrete with names. CHS on the other hand, wants to bite the hand that feeds it.

[lattd]

There's a massive difference between parts for salamander space marine chapter and salamander space marine chapter parts, one implies ownership and it's this implied ownership that causes issues. If it wasn't late I would go through my class notes and give you all English statutory law references for this, I mean I have 3 or 4 copies of the relevant acts :/

[GrauGeist]

Unlike some posters on the main page, I don't think GW getting costs for dragging their paperwork submissions, is game over. They would happily eat $1900 or whatever the fine was, to get a 1" advantage in this case.

Getting the Judge to label you a cheater is never a good thing.

When you're judging tournaments, how do you treat a player who cheats, assuming you don't simply kick him out of the tournament under a Zero Tolerance program?

[GrauGeist]

Chapter House made models for Games Workshop games but also used Games Workshops trademarks to market those products and used identical designs and art styles.

There are a lot of fair uses of trademarks, legitimate protected uses. Nominative Fair Use immediately comes to mind, when referencing specific compatibility and suitability. GW sued over those uses, which was clear overrreach.

Second, the vast majority of those designs and styles are unprotectable, like the sawblade motif. I can make all the Templar crosses I like, and there isn't a damn thing GW can do about them.

And that is what this trial will come down to.

[GrauGeist]

Except when it blows up in your face and you get caught. No advantage was gained by it. They did, in fact, take a hit. It will be admissible to the Jury (as well as on the Judge's mind) that Games Workshop attempted (the Judge says as much) to obscure that they had already been denied a copyright for the items being too general.

The Jury (nor the Judge) isn't going to see that as them just playing a legal game. They are going to see it as attempting to hide the facts. It looks deceptive (even if it was an honest mistake). I think that tactic was a poor one. One rule that should NEVER be broken when dealing with the American Justice system is... if you are going to hide discovery... you better not get caught. I, personally, believe the case was lost the moment that happened.

Mark my words, this will be mentioned in the opening and closing statements to drive home that:
1) GW's "IP" really isn't special or protectable, and
2) GW tried to hide that fact from CHS legal team.

It's not evidence, but CHS will use it with great effect to paint GW as a bunch of cheaters.

[GrauGeist]

No. They use to not call them by name. When they was being sued they went full blown name calling. I would think to make it less obvious instead of just giving GW ammunition.

Before being sued I would had like to see them win. However it seemed like oh GW is suing us. Frick let's call everything space marines, Tau, etc.

I remember they was slighly doing it before and when they been sued they just seem to try to be piss of GW now. Which is stupid in my opionion. They should had left things a lone and see what happens with being sued. Now they just gave GW more ammunition to help them win.

Actually, what happened is that CHS spoke with their lawyers after being sued, and their lawyer advised them as to nominative fair use being strongly protected as precedent from vast numbers of aftermarket compatibility cases, such as custom hoods & bumpers for Civic, Mustang & Camaros; accessories for various Weber & Egg grilles, iPhone and so forth. CHS then agreed to double down, because CHS lawyers want to win big here, forcing GW to accept nominative fair use in the US.

CHS has excellent legal advice, and would not be doing so against their advisors.

[GrauGeist]

As I'm sure any creative type would feel aggrieved their hard work was lining a stranger's pockets.

There is art in converting a 2D item to a 3D item. If they choose not to take the risk and monetize it themselves, that's their problem.

[ammobunkerdean]

ill end your comment right here and now yes starship troopers are not space marines not even close but they ARE A DIRECT RIPOFF BY GW OF IG
Ah... You watched the movie didnt you?... Try reading the book.

Starship Troopers are equipped with a massive suit of armor that has the appearance of an "ape" that greatly boosts strength and has the ability to jump long distances with "jets". They deploy from orbit to planet in a single user sized, egg shaped drop pod.

Sound familiar?

I dont see how a jury of 12 thinking people can look at the Ltd edition Sally Chaplain and not see that one company is directly copying another... GW at least made the armor not look "simian" like the book described.

[chicop76]

[QUOTE=ammobunkerdean;314449]Ah... You watched the movie didnt you?... Try reading the book.

Starship Troopers are equipped with a massive suit of armor that has the appearance of an "ape" that greatly boosts strength and has the ability to jump long distances with "jets". They deploy from orbit to planet in a single user sized, egg shaped drop pod.

Sound familiar?

I dont see how a jury of 12 thinking people can look at the Ltd edition Sally Chaplain and not see that one company is directly copying another... GW at least made the armor not look "simian" like the book described.[/QUOTE

Sadly troopers had multiple movies that came out. Only one, two, and three was actually named starship troopers.

Space Marines dropping from drop pods fighting alien bugs on their door step with the bugs dropping pods as well. Nahh
doesn't sound similar at all. Move along now.

I can't see how the jury won't pick up the copy off aliens.

[DarkLink]

ill end your comment right here and now yes starship troopers are not space marines not even close but they ARE A DIRECT RIPOFF BY GW OF IG

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/wp-content/blogs.dir/445/files/2012/04/i-19dcd1674ac61154723256c1de9bd8f0-facepalm.jpg

[daboarder]

I wish I could like that Darklink...so much!

[Lexington]

Come to think of it, I don't like people who aren't me benefitting from my hard work, and I'm not remotely creative. I am however bloody good at my job, and when I've busted a nut in the past, I've had others try, and all too often succeed, in not just riding my coat tails, but stealing my thunder altogether. It's galling!
Quite right, The Tolkien and Herbert Estates do have every right to be peeved at GW. :p

[Mr Mystery]

Except for very specific differences between them. Inspiration is all legal and above board, else the creative world would be in a very sorry state!

[GrauGeist]

No +1?

Fine.

http://allthingsd.com/files/2011/11/double_facepalm.png

[lattd]

There is art in converting a 2D item to a 3D item. If they choose not to take the risk and monetize it themselves, that's their problem.

There's also copyright infringement in changing a 2D item to a 3D item ;)

[Caitsidhe]

I don't really have a lot to say, as we have gone over all this already. :) The trial has started. There isn't a lot of point in rehashing when we should get definitive answers shortly.

[Wolfshade]

I don't really have a lot to say, as we have gone over all this already. :) The trial has started. There isn't a lot of point in rehashing when we should get definitive answers shortly.

True. Also, whomever wins opponents will say that the court came to the wrong conclusion.

[Caitsidhe]

True. Also, whomever wins opponents will say that the court came to the wrong conclusion.

It won't matter though as the ruling will still be clear and all the armchair lawyers on the wrong side of it will simply have to gnash their teeth while the armchair lawyers on the right side of it do the snoopy dance. I stated my opinions a while back, and will NOT be one of the ones saying the court "got it wrong" if it comes down against my predictions. I will say, "I was wrong." :) My original prediction was split decision with minor slap on the hand to Chapterhouse about names and an admonition not to do that anymore and a monumental loss for Games Workshop wherein a clear line of where their IP begins and ends is set and after market products being reaffirmed in this area of product (toys) as they are in all the others. Subsequent events have not changed my mind. The obfuscation of Discovery by Games Workshop (and their getting caught) only reinforced my original opinion. *I'm not restating my opinion to restart the conversation, merely posting it again since I'm willing to say, "I'm wrong" at the end if the Courts show me to be so, and this saves people the trouble of going back to see what I said before. I consider the thing talked to death already.

The Court case itself will be moot soon anyway. The rapid advance of third party companies making extraordinary models, Kickstarter, and several other points of access are quickly relegating the Chapterhouse case irrelevant to the flood of now UNSTOPPABLE sources of alternatives to the consumer. I'm going to pledge in on the new Kickstarter for Raging Heroes and their Heroines line myself. That is my next big purchase. I've been extremely impressed by several Kickstarters of late and can honestly say the not only is the Genie out of the bottle, it took the time to smash the bottle when it came out.

[lattd]

Well if GW wins it will be interesting to see if criminal charges are pressed.

[Caitsidhe]

Well if GW wins it will be interesting to see if criminal charges are pressed.

This is a civil case. Irregardless of who wins, the jurisdiction remains civil. The only awards or losses either will face are being decided right now.

[Psychosplodge]

Is it nearly done yet?

[jgebi]

I still think we should storm GW HQ and take control of our hobby for the greedy pigs who control it. then we could finally get down to making real space marines... because thats not dangerous at all :rolleyes:

[MajorWesJanson]

Doesn't mean they don't hate them and just haven't had enough of a reason to go after them.
Somewhat tangential evidence, but when I talked to Jes Goodwin at Games Day and asked about taking a pic of his sketches he said he didn't like them released to stop "little companies springing up in Poland". We talked about that a little and he said that the designers generally dislike the after market sites as they feel like their work is getting mooched off of.

Yeah, I had a similar discussion with him at a Gamesday myself.

[lattd]

This is a civil case. Irregardless of who wins, the jurisdiction remains civil. The only awards or losses either will face are being decided right now.

If Chapterhouse are found to infringe on copyright or trademark it can give rise to a criminal action as well.

[Caitsidhe]

If Chapterhouse are found to infringe on copyright or trademark it can give rise to a criminal action as well.

I don't believe you are correct in this particular case. The types of infringements being discussed here are not those that fall under criminal statute, like say selling fake Armani bags or pirate copies of a film. Chapterhouse made no attempt to pawn off their models as official Games Workshop merchandise. Even if Games Workshop got a slam dunk, the only penalties would be Civil.

[Psychosplodge]

It is like that though, you can effectively buy an entire "custom" space marine on their site with the exception of arms, because apparently making it 2mm bigger makes it unique.
Or to put it to the car thing everyones so fond of, here have a knock-off (third party) mustang to go with your official ford mustang bonnet...

[lattd]

Doesn't matter if they intend to or not trademark infringement is strict liability.

[Bigred]

SPECIAL REQUEST:

The trial is open to the public. If ANYONE has some free time between now and Monday and can make it to the Chicago address, please go down with a notepad and let the community know what you see here.

If you know anyone who may be able to attend, please let them know.

[Psyberwolfe]

<snip> I would go through my class notes and give you all English statutory law references for this, I mean I have 3 or 4 copies of the relevant acts :/

Good thing this is happening in an AMERICAN court otherwise he may well be screwed. LOL!

[lattd]

Good thing this is happening in an AMERICAN court otherwise he may well be screwed. LOL!

American court under ENGLISH law. Still don't understand why this was brought in an English court.

[RGilbert26]

Because CHS is based in the US.

[Nabterayl]

No, because the alleged infringement occurred in the U.S. If an American citizen punches an English citizen in the face, the choice of venue is not a question of whose citizenship trumps whose but where the alleged battery happened. American punches Englishman in Texas, Englishman sues in Texas. American punches Englishman in England, Englishman sues in England. American punches Englishman in Zimbabwe, Englishman sues in Zimbabwe. Same principle.

[lattd]

True but the infringement took place on the Internet and as an Englishman could purchase the goods the infringement also took place in England so English courts can have jurisdiction.

[Wolfshade]

The whole location of service provision is a nightmare. Not just in this case but in all kinds of other matters, like for tax purposes.
Where does the transaction take place?
- The location of the person who clicked "buy"
- The location of the selling website
- The location of the monetary transaction website of either purchaser or supplier
- The location of the selling company

In terms of jurisdiction there does not seem to be a clear definition.

[lattd]

Gets even worse in the eu where there's rules to help decide jurisdiction but that does not mean law so you can have a French jurisdiction but enforcing Bulgarian law.

[Alqualonde]

American punches Englishman in Zimbabwe, Englishman sues in Zimbabwe. Same principle.
Probably best the Englishman sues under Alien Tort in US. Zimbabwe has a bias against Englishmen and biased courts

[Alqualonde]

Nothing is created in a vacuum. Nothing is original. As Harlan Ellison once said, "there's nothing new under the sun."



David Jackson

The oldest version of this quote seems to be either Plutarch or Ecclesiastes. Not sure which Harlan Ellison was ripping off :cool:

[daboarder]

The whole location of service provision is a nightmare. Not just in this case but in all kinds of other matters, like for tax purposes.
Where does the transaction take place?
- The location of the person who clicked "buy"
- The location of the selling website
- The location of the monetary transaction website of either purchaser or supplier
- The location of the selling company

In terms of jurisdiction there does not seem to be a clear definition.

Just wanted to say wolfshade is absolutely right, jurisdiction online is a cluster f*ck.

[Caitsidhe]

Technically the jurisdictional issues were rather black and white and worked out a long time ago. :) That is why the thing is now at trial. It is important to remember that the case will NOT be decidedly soley on British law. There is an international treaty (which I learned about due to this case) which deals with this issue and makes it somewhat thorny. British law will be weighted and so will American law into the mix. It isn't merely a case of British law applied in an American Court. The self same treaty protects both trade partners equally.

What this means is that any judgements are likely to be light and apply mainly within national boundaries. For example, since the United States allows after market products, Chapterhouse's ability to make them isn't going to be affected although it is quite possible that the site will have to make adjustments disallowing sale of certain items to those in EU (if the Judge determines the law there prevents them under the EU interpretation of IP). I'm not saying this is what will happen, only that no judgement is going to overwrite the law of an existing nation with that of a foreign one.

The first problem for Games Workshop is proving the infringements took places. This is not an easy task. It is made more difficult by Games Workshop shooting itself in the foot with the Discovery nonsense. That will only serve to make them look guilty in the eyes of the jury who will go into deliberations with a bias that a large company tried to put something over on the court. I don't think there is any doubt that Chapterhouse will be admonished and get a hand slap over the use of names without using the minimal required deference. That, however, is moot because it was long since corrected and Games Workshop won't be able to show actual damages of any kind came from it, at least in so far that a jury is going to believe. Combine this with the fact that the United States Copyright Office declined them several key copyrights which pertain directly to the case will also bear directly.

I'm not rehashing all of this stuff to argue or debate it. What I (or any of us here) think is irrelevant. It is a trial in motion and probably won't take too long (perhaps 2-3 months at most). I'm not talking about the right or the wrong of it as those passions seem largely a caprice here too. I'm playing booky here and taking odds, and playing the ponies. That is all that is really left to us now. We have to look at the things which are likely to happen, not the things we want to happen.

Things Which Will Hurt Chapterhouse:

1. Early Arrogance
There is no denying that Chapterhouse gave Games Workshop "the bird" in no uncertain terms. They were unwise and arrogant in assuming that Games Workshop would not go after them. I'm sure Games Workshop will use this for a lot of their case, trying paint the company (or the owner) as an unrepentent thief who thinks the law doesn't apply to him. The language of the earlier exchanges won't bask Chapterhouse in glory, but in fairness they aren't mortal wounds either.

*Unfortunately for Games Workshop that is the extent of the negatives against Chapterhouse. Those are the ONLY self-inflicted wounds their opponent made and it isn't surprising that all of these happened before the highly skilled Pro Bono representations stepped in. All of the rest of the case (the majority and most important) will be proving the actual infringements and somehow demonstrating actual finanical damages because of them.

Things Which Will Hurt Games Workshop:

1. The Blurring of Copyright versus IP Issues
There is a growing problem with Copyright, Trademark, and IP issues because companies and corporations keep trying to blur the lien of where one ends and the other begins. Courts, however, don't like blurry lines. They like crisp, clear lines and color within them. The Court will continually remind the jury (as will the lawyers on the side of Chapterhouse) where those lines sit and this is a problem because Games Workshop is really upset about IP infringement but since that is too difficult to prove direclty, they have to try and invoke Copyright and Trademark too. The Court and the Jury will not try to look at them as whole (what Games Workshop wants) but break them all down into neat little bites as if the issues are unrelated. There will be no weight of evidence. There will only be... Chapterhouse did do this. Ruling. Chapterhouse didn't do this. Ruling. You get the idea. This method will only result in a slap on the hand at most and a devastating loss for Games Workshop on the goals it actually intended to achieve.

2. Discovery Nonsense
Perception is everything. Don't cheat and get caught. You would think people who design games would understand this all too well. Once you catch someone cheating at 40K (or any game) you will always perceive that person as a cheat. It is human nature. Well, Games Workshop got caught cheating.

3. Proof of Damages
A larger problem for Games Workshop which isn't often discussed here is the fact that the Court will want to discuss damages for several reasons. Games Workshop has to demonstrate them. How will it do that? As we have all discussed in other threads, Games Workshop has been working VERY hard to make sure they stay in the black and seem proof against the hard economic times. The means they have used to accomplish this vary, but it suffices to say that their very success in this accounting area makes it difficult to say they have suffered any damages. :) They could, of course, say the opposite and have to (on the public record) say all sorts of things which go contrary to the company line. This isn't likely as THAT would be a public relations (and a stock) nightmare. Thus, all damages will have to be theoretical in nature. Courts generally don't like theories. They like facts.

4. American Bias
I'm not talking about American vs. British bias here. Americans love the British. We are fascinated by them, although our image of England and the reality are very different. :D I'm talking about American CONSUMER bias. Americans are used to after market products, like competition, hate big business, and like the little guy. Is this fair? Probably not, but it is the ride that Games Workshop foolishly paid for.

My comments here aren't a reflection of my own feelings and bias (these are well known). I'm honestly trying to weigh the likely outcomes. Are there any negatives against Chapterhouse that I'm missing?

[Psychosplodge]

My comments here aren't a reflection of my own feelings and bias (these are well known). I'm honestly trying to weigh the likely outcomes. Are there any negatives against Chapterhouse that I'm missing?

Isn't one of their "designers" on record as having being told to base his work from collected visions?

[lattd]

Yea and the fact the flatly denied the some of the trademarks applied even though they are registered....

[Caitsidhe]

Isn't one of their "designers" on record as having being told to base his work from collected visions?

Yes but not in the specific enough context to bite. It was more in the context that anyone can say they were inspired. It falls back to what is considered fair game, rather than what is not. I will have to add that to the "possible" negative column for Chapterhouse, but it might actually be a positive for them depending on their legal team. It will be shown and embraced by them in all likelyhood saying, "Look they had NOTHING to hide. They openly say they drew inspiration from Games Workshop, but inspiration is not infringement." They will contrast this frank honesty with the Discovery issue. They will further go on to show legal precedents in regards to the differences between drawing inspiration for one's own work and actual infringement.

I suspect Team Pro Bono considers that admission a positive, but we shall have to wait and see.

[Psychosplodge]

The suspense is killing us...

[40kGamer]

Yes but not in the specific enough context to bite. It was more in the context that anyone can say they were inspired. It falls back to what is considered fair game, rather than what is not. I will have to add that to the "possible" negative column for Chapterhouse, but it might actually be a positive for them depending on their legal team. It will be shown and embraced by them in all likelyhood saying, "Look they had NOTHING to hide. They openly say they drew inspiration from Games Workshop, but inspiration is not infringement." They will contrast this frank honesty with the Discovery issue. They will further go on to show legal precedents in regards to the differences between drawing inspiration for one's own work and actual infringement.

I suspect Team Pro Bono considers that admission a positive, but we shall have to wait and see.

Very thoughtful summary. Are you in the legal profession by any chance? :)

[lattd]

I think openly admitting you based your work on or closely too the company who's suing you isn't that wise especially in a jury case.

Gw attorney: Jury here's a copy of my clients work and here's a copy of chapter house stuff which they admitted to basing on our work, look how similar they are and they even called them the same name my client has being going since the 80's ch since 2005 or whenever. Do you fully elie e these items items weren't made to take advantage.

[Deadlift]

As much as the details of this case confuse me, I'm thinking the eventual ruling is going to confuse me more :O

[lattd]

I suspect appeals from GW if this does not go their way whether a company acting for free in such an expensive case will appeal is a different matter.

[magickbk]

There are so many companies right now making things that really could be used for GW games, but are veiling it behind their own free download rules or being careful about how they market. Chapterhouse put it right out there for better or worse. Regardless of which way this case goes, I expect the final ruling to lay out exactly what and how this entire market needs to operate in order to do so without fear of lawsuit.

[Caitsidhe]

There are so many companies right now making things that really could be used for GW games, but are veiling it behind their own free download rules or being careful about how they market. Chapterhouse put it right out there for better or worse. Regardless of which way this case goes, I expect the final ruling to lay out exactly what and how this entire market needs to operate in order to do so without fear of lawsuit.

Agreed. This is always why I said this lawsuit wasn't the best approach. There were easier ways to squish Chapterhouse. The problem with a lawsuit is that it WILL spell out in perfect clarity how rivals can produce like product while remaining free of the threat of litigation. Games Workshop was better as the boogeyman that MIGHT sue you which held many companies at bay or made them very circumspect. The moment that line is drawn in the sand EVERYONE and their cousin will get on that line because the risk was already taken by someone else. In short, a nebulous... never tested gray area of after market product was better for Games Workshop since nobody wanted to be the first to get dragged into court. A clear line they can get on and flood the market at low risk of litigation (or successful litigation) is bad for Games Workshop because they lose the boogeyman power.

[40kGamer]

Agreed. A clear line they can get on and flood the market at low risk of litigation (or successful litigation) is bad for Games Workshop because they lose the boogeyman power.

Oh so true. If you listen you can almost hear the equipment firing up in basements and garages everywhere.

[magickbk]

Agreed. This is always why I said this lawsuit wasn't the best approach. There were easier ways to squish Chapterhouse. The problem with a lawsuit is that it WILL spell out in perfect clarity how rivals can produce like product while remaining free of the threat of litigation. Games Workshop was better as the boogeyman that MIGHT sue you which held many companies at bay or made them very circumspect. The moment that line is drawn in the sand EVERYONE and their cousin will get on that line because the risk was already taken by someone else. In short, a nebulous... never tested gray area of after market product was better for Games Workshop since nobody wanted to be the first to get dragged into court. A clear line they can get on and flood the market at low risk of litigation (or successful litigation) is bad for Games Workshop because they lose the boogeyman power.

I had actually considered getting into the market before Kickstarter and many of the up-and-coming companies that are around now popped up. I had gone so far as to consult a variety of people regarding mass production and import/export of the products, but the boogeyman power is essentially what made me decide to not do it, as even if I had protected my personal assets, the litigation could have bankrupted my family and I decided the risk wasn't worth dragging my wife and children through the stress, even though my wife was supportive and thought the angle I was working would have minimized potential issues. I'm sure many others considering entering the market made the same decisions I did.

[lobster-overlord]

Oh so true. If you listen you can almost hear the equipment firing up in basements and garages everywhere.

What'd you say? I can't hear you over the whine of my vibrating table and gas pot....

[victorpofa]

that isn't the problem though, loads of companies make conversion bits without hassle. the problem is when they start making GW alternatives using GW names, basing them on GW art in a codex and the like. other companies make 'sci fi Vikings on wolves' chapter house made space wolf thunder wolves

I am surprised nobody caught this. Like them or hate them Chapterhouse never made Thunderwolf Cavalry models. GW tried dragging another small company into this suit claiming they worked for Chapterhouse and made Thunderwolf models for them. I believe it was Paulson Games.

[40kGamer]

What'd you say? I can't hear you over the whine of my vibrating table and gas pot....

Oh so funny! The air compressor and vacuum chamber are drowning out everything!! :D

[rle68]

check out anvil industries for a group that does it right

[40kGamer]

check out anvil industries for a group that does it right

Cool. The bionics bitz are sweet! Thanks for the info.

[LordGrise]

check out anvil industries for a group that does it right

Linkie, please?

[rle68]

Linkie, please?

www.anvilindustry.co.uk

[LordGrise]

Thank you, sir!

[rle68]

Thank you, sir!

glad to help :)

[Bigred]

UPDATE: END OF WEEK 1 Summary

Testomony was heard from:
Alan Merrett (GW head of IP)
Andy Jones (Head of Licensing/Legal)
Gil Steveson (GW Chief Council)

Nick Valluci (Owner of CHS)

Alan Merrett Testimony:

Merrett outlined a general summary of GW's point of view with several points:

- GW takes pride in the "quality and originality" of their products. They do not like when any other company makes miniatures that are based on their own product line, viewing many of these to be of inferior quality. Me mentioned the aftermarket for add-ons "makes us jolly-cross indeed"

Andy Jones Testimony:

Jones laid out many GW points points involving both licensing and financials under questioning:

-GW latest annual numbers reflect revenue of $54 million USD in North american sales. 50% of that was 40K, the other 50% all other GW products sales combined.

-GW was described as having licensing agreements with "big companies", and there is a perception that any such "big companies" would be upset by percieved theft of GW IP. He introduced no evidence of licensees becoming upset having actually occurred.

-GW is concerned that the poor quality of CHS products will rub off or bring down the percieved quality of the GW line in the eyes of licensees. He introduced no evidence of this having actually occurred.

-GW feels that they should get to decide when a product they invent in print and illustration gets to come to market in the form of a physical miniature. When a company such as CHS introduces a competing miniature that was previously unreleased into the market ahead of GW, they consider this this "poisoning the well". Other companies such Kromlech, Maxmini, Scibor, Hitech were listed by name as being examples this concept.

-GW considers the following naming schemes to be acceptable for the aftermarket, applying to all products that interact with their own 40K products:
PRODUCT NAME: "compatible with 28mm science fiction miniatures"
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION: "compatable with Games Workshop "

-Said that "anytime CHS made money, that was money GW should have made"

-GW Legal has an "IP Protection Group" which investigates allegations of IP infringement and decides whether/how to proceed. They are usually first alerted to alleged IP infringement by GW customers who they consider to be "our first line of defense as it were".

-GW has 200+ casefiles on organizations and individuals it is investigating for potential legal action against.

Nick Valluci Testmony
-Mr Valluci was examined by GW council vigorously.

-CHS disclosed that its total gross revenue before expenses for a roughly 4 year period in question was @$400,000
-Valluci took home $3000 a month from CHS, while his overseas partner took home $2000 per month.

Evidence Brought Before the Jury:

The following game product was entered into evidence by the Judge over objections from GW council:
SPACE MARINES SCIENCE FICTION MINIATURES RULES (1980, Fantasy Games Unlimited) (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/17490/space-marines)
4198

[I]Testimony is ongoing.

[sgtmac]

Any one else remember the lovely fight between Harmony Gold, and FASA? Reading all this, it sounds like the same basic issue, but that the parts of that fight which didn't get resolved need resolved now.

[PaD]

This makes an extremely interesting read given the on going law suite!

4199

Oh how times have changed!! :rolleyes:

[Sainhann]

[SIZE=4][B]Merrett outlined a general summary of GW's point of view with several points:

- GW takes pride in the "quality and originality" of their products.[/COLOR][/I]

Originality that is good since they have taken from so many other sources and are now calling it their own.

[Magpie]

Originality that is good since they have taken from so many other sources and are now calling it their own.

Taking inspiration is very different to simply "taking"

[chicop76]

Reminds me of I think Harmony Gold vs Hasbro, or the Jetfire/ Skyfire looking veritech transformer that was ripped of from Robotech.

The cartoon series had to change the character's name and image.

[Psyberwolfe]

This makes an extremely interesting read given the on going law suite!

4199

Oh how times have changed!! :rolleyes:

The irony is certainly delicious.

[krispy]

This makes an extremely interesting read given the on going law suite!

4199

Oh how times have changed!! :rolleyes:

thats a gem! hah!

[eldargal]

Funny how having your own strong valuable IP to protect changes your perspective isn't it?:rolleyes:

[Mr Mystery]

Especially over, oh, 36 years.

Even more so when said opinion is from someone no longer involved in the company.

[Caitsidhe]

The first week's summary does not look very good for Games Workshop. As I commented before, their main issue seems to be a distaste for people taking their inspiration from their product. That is a real problem for them because that is NOT illegal. They comment on the irritation they feel about people beating them to market. Again, getting beat to market is an issue of business. The large number of so-called "issues" they are trying to introduce are conjecture. "But these other 'big' companies we do business with might get upset." None of this is supported, nor can it be. Last but not least, the Judge seems to already have a clear viewpoint on the issue. The evidence the Judge entered "over the vigorous objections of GW counsel" is very telling.

[Gauthic]

thats a gem! hah!

I especially like how Steve Jackson is the associate editor too :)

[Nabterayl]

The first week's summary does not look very good for Games Workshop. As I commented before, their main issue seems to be a distaste for people taking their inspiration from their product. That is a real problem for them because that is NOT illegal. They comment on the irritation they feel about people beating them to market. Again, getting beat to market is an issue of business. The large number of so-called "issues" they are trying to introduce are conjecture. "But these other 'big' companies we do business with might get upset." None of this is supported, nor can it be. Last but not least, the Judge seems to already have a clear viewpoint on the issue. The evidence the Judge entered "over the vigorous objections of GW counsel" is very telling.
I'm inclined to agree.

[Caitsidhe]

I'm inclined to agree.

It is somewhat amusing to note (per Judge entered evidence) that Games Workshop does NOT actually have the oldest copyright on Space Marines, not even in context to a tabletop wargame. They were beat to the copyright and introduction by nine years and to market a good six before even Rogue Trader. It makes me wonder what grounds the old guy (old now) has for suing the pants off Games Workshop. :D It seems to he would have at least as good (probably a lot better) case of showing someone basing their product line on his game. It seems to me that saying Games Workhshop has a case against Chapterhouse would be tantamount to having to admit he has an even better case against them.

[Psychosplodge]

Question. Would you not take into account that that was the pre internet age, and i'm assuming the exhibit was a US product, so it's entirely possible that they are unaware of its existence, as opposed to CHS have more or less admitted copying GW, but are arguing to what extent they can?

[Caitsidhe]

Question. Would you not take into account that that was the pre internet age, and i'm assuming the exhibit was a US product, so it's entirely possible that they are unaware of its existence, as opposed to CHS have more or less admitted copying GW, but are arguing to what extent they can?

They did not admit to "copying" GW. They admitted to being inspired by and basing their product line on concepts by Games Workshop. A copy is entirely different. Games Workshop themselves, in their old White Dwarf Magazine article from the appropriate time period, admits that they base all their ideas on films, movies, books, and other companies. :D Space Opera was pretty big in its day and they would be HARD PRESSED to claim they never heard of it.

The issue keeps coming back to there are STRICT defintions of copyright, trademark, and notions of intellectual property. You don't get to stick a flag in an "idea" and say it and all possible variations of it belong to you. If we are to give Games Workshop's argument weight in this case against Chapterhouse, we must (in order to avoid being hypocrites) admit that the makers of the first Space Marines tactical wargame probably should be paid obscene sums of money.

Or you can accept the arguments of most people, most legal precedent, and Games Workshop itself "back in the day" and agree that you don't get to own ideas, only the specific excecution of an idea. In which case Games Workshop are hypocrites and out of luck.

[Chris Copeland]

I came of age as a gamer back in that era. Fantasy Games Unlimited was one of the top gaming companies back then. Villains and Vigilantes and Space Opera had good-sized followings. Space Opera came from the game Space Marines. I'd find it hard to believe that Steve Jackson and friends hadn't heard of the works of FGU. However, it's silly to think of anyone owning the term "Space Marine" since it's been part of the lexicon of science fiction for so long... GW owns their particular kind of Space Marines but not all iterations...

[Caitsidhe]

I came of age as a gamer back in that era. Fantasy Games Unlimited was one of the top gaming companies back then. Villains and Vigilantes and Space Opera had good-sized followings. Space Opera came from the game Space Marines. I'd find it hard to believe that Steve Jackson and friends hadn't heard of the works of FGU. However, it's silly to think of anyone owning the term "Space Marine" since it's been part of the lexicon of science fiction for so long... GW owns their particular kind of Space Marines but not all iterations...

Exactly. :) It is amusing to think of Games Workshop actually winning their case (which I think unlikely) only to open themselves up to being barbecued based on the same legal precendent when FGU comes knocking. Talk about the taste of ashes.

[Chris Copeland]

I doubt it. One cannot own "Space Marines." Again, it has been in the lexicon of science fiction for far too long for anyone to stake out that term. I agree that GW owns their particular brand of Space Marines. That is it. Also, it's a combination of two completely normal terms: space and Marine. It's silly to think of anyone owning that combination.

Follow up: the Marines will be in space soon enough. I promise you that those jarheads who get deployed to off-Earth duty will refer to themselves as "Space Marines."

[Caitsidhe]

I doubt it. One cannot own "Space Marines." Again, it has been in the lexicon of science fiction for far too long for anyone to stake out that term. I agree that GW owns their particular brand of Space Marines. That is it. Also, it's a combination of two completely normal terms: space and Marine. It's silly to think of anyone owning that combination.

Follow up: the Marines will be in space soon enough. I promise you that those jarheads who get deployed to off-Earth duty will refer to themselves as "Space Marines."

You are preaching to the choir. They can't own the idea.

[lattd]

But you can trade mark it which they have done.

[altbob]

And a competitor can make "Nominative Use" of a trademark in the context of comparative advertising.

[lattd]

But they only did that once they got sued until then they freely used GW's trademarks and copyrights.

[Caitsidhe]

But you can trade mark it which they have done.

Actually, no. You cannot trademark an "idea." :) You can trademark a symbol or words used in a specific, stylistic way. Trademarks are exactly that, marks of trade. Most people don't seem to understand copyright, trademarks, or patents.

http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp#_Toc275426672

[lattd]

Yes I know this I was saying they own the trade mark to space marine

[Caitsidhe]

Yes I know this I was saying they own the trade mark to space marine

My apologies. Your comment left out that context. I had said that Games Workshop can't own an IDEA. You followed my statement with one that said, "but they can trademark it." I took that to mean you thought ideas could be trademarked; hence my correction. I'm sure you can see why I would draw a different inference?

Many people don't understand copyright, patent, or trademark and mistakenly believe that ideas can somehow be proprietary. That ignorance is in essence what this entire trial is about. Certain business entities would very much like "ideas" to become proprietary, see the public domain eliminated, and systematically plant their flag on everything possible (like the old days when people started registering domain names as fast as they could knowing full well that when the internet took off big companies would WANT those name brand domain names and have to pay through the nose for them). The problem with this kind of approach is that it reduces the rest of the world to intellectual serfs who must pay for any work whatsoever because, as has been said many times before, there are no new stories/ideas only clever new ways of presenting them.

Games Workshop stood on the shoulders of science fiction/fantasy giants to create their fictional world and thus erect their company. They seemed darn eager to do so and defend the rights of people to do that while in the process. Only now, that they see themselves as one of those giants, do they not want anyone standing on their shoulders. They will just have to suck it up. Once an idea is out there other people are within their rights to put their spin on it and take advantage of the trail blazed before them.

[Psychosplodge]

So is it nearly over yet?

[Caitsidhe]

So is it nearly over yet?

Actually, yes. :) Final Arguments are scheduled (barring unforseen events) for the 12th of this month. Jury deliberations on things like this tend to only last about 1-5 days. The Judge will deliberate on damages (if any) somewhat longer. I think it is likely we will see the entire thing wrapped up no later than the middle of July (depending on the Judge's backlog).

[Psychosplodge]

That's too long.... :p

[rle68]

anyone remember when disney tried to trademark seal team 6?.. and quite honestly if anyone owns the term "MARINE" at all is the us govt. established in what 1776? im army so i dont really care the exact year but you get my point

[daboarder]

anyone remember when disney tried to trademark seal team 6?.. and quite honestly if anyone owns the term "MARINE" at all is the us govt. established in what 1776? im army so i dont really care the exact year but you get my point

Dumbest statement on the internet.....


you do realise that the rest of the world has been around for a while and marines....well no they are not a us entity, nor were they the first or last.

[rle68]

look in the mirror when you look at dumb ok?

ok smart guy show me where the term marine was etablished before.. and yes i know the greeks had marines long ago but then again the greeks arent around any more in that sense are they wise guy

Captain Samuel Nicholas formed two battalions of Continental Marines on 10 November 1775

i stand correct royal marines were est 20 years earlier

do yourself a favoir you dont have to be an @#$ hole everyday of your life

[daboarder]

look in the mirror when you look at dumb ok?

ok smart guy show me where the term marine was etablished before.. and yes i know the greeks had marines long ago but then again the greeks arent around any more in that sense are they wise guy

HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA hehe

oh mercy....such a stereotype.

Royal marines, 1664
Royal netherlands marine corp 1665
troupes de marine 1622
and finally, the oldest extant marine corp. the spanish marine corp, which has been in service since 1537

so start paying the piper mate.....

you are literally about a couple of hundred years OFF!

oh and I believe that the hellenic army would like to inform you that yes, they are still "around".

[rle68]

HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA hehe

oh mercy....such a stereotype.

Royal marines, 1664
Royal netherlands marine corp 1665
troupes de marine 1622
and finally, the oldest extant marine corp. the spanish marine corp, which has been in service since 1537

so start paying the piper mate.....

you are literally about a couple of hundred years OFF!

oh and I believe that the hellenic army would like to inform you that yes, they are still "around".

the were officially established as part of the royal navy in 1755.. god learn your history ok

The Corps of Royal Marines, the infantry land fighting element of the United Kingdom's Royal Navy, was formed as part of the Naval Service in 1755.

[daboarder]

the were officially established as part of the royal navy in 1755.. god learn your history ok

The Corps of Royal Marines, the infantry land fighting element of the United Kingdom's Royal Navy, was formed as part of the Naval Service in 1755.

The irony it hurts.....well at least your getting an education, now if only we could work on your linguistics.

Allow me to present a counterpoint.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/The-Fleet/The-Royal-Marines/About-the-Royal-Marines/History

I believe THEY know when they started service? Don't you?


On the 28th October 1664 an Order-in-Council was issued calling for 1200 soldiers to be recruited for service in the Fleet, to be known as the Duke of York and Albany's Maritime Regiment of Foot. As the Duke of York was The Lord High Admiral, it became known as the Admiral's Regiment. The Regiment was paid by the Admiralty, it and its successors being the only long service troops in the 17th and 18th century navy.

Furthermore, the Spanish still beat you!

[rle68]

The irony it hurts.....well at least your getting an education, now if only we could work on your linguistics.

Allow me to present a counterpoint.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/The-Fleet/The-Royal-Marines/About-the-Royal-Marines/History

I believe THEY know when they started service? Don't you?



Furthermore, the Spanish still beat you!

i guess the part where they were officially recognized as royal marines escapes someone of your limited mental powers

[daboarder]

I guess your missing the part where,

a) That was still before 1775
b) Given the fact that "marine" is the military terminology for an infantry man in the service of the navy, they always were marines and the name is irrelevant.
c) They are still not the longest serving marine corp on the planet, that honour belongs to the Spanish. So my original point still stands ;)

Please shall we continue to dance?

[rle68]

I guess your missing the part where,

a) That was still before 1775
b) Given the fact that "marine" is the military terminology for an infantry man in the service of the navy, they always were marines and the name is irrelevant.
c) They are still not the longest serving marine corp on the planet, that honour belongs to the Spanish. So my original point still stands ;)

Please shall we continue to dance?

Are you blind? i ALREADY SAID IT WAS BEFORE 1775 I CORRECTED IT.. why dont you go back to school and learn to read

ill even repost it for the reading impared

The Corps of Royal Marines, the infantry land fighting element of the United Kingdom's Royal Navy, was formed as part of the Naval Service in 1755.

SEE 1755 NOT 1775 thats basic english try reading it

[Magpie]

The really Ironic thing is that if you do a search on the UK Trademark website you'll find the the Royal Marines are the owners of the "Marine" trademark as it applies in certain nominated areas.

[daboarder]

What I want from you mate, is a simple retraction, of your original statement that the US should gain any "copyyright" of the term marine, due to the history of the USMC.

I am however overjoyed that I have been able to increase your education in areas that you we're previously ignorant. Still working on the english however.


The really Ironic thing is that if you do a search on the UK Trademark website you'll find the the Royal Marines are the owners of the "Marine" trademark as it applies in certain nominated areas.

Brilliant!

edit: May I say Rle68, I particularly like how you call out my intelligence, before agreeing with me in the very same post.

[rle68]

What I want from you mate, is a simple retraction, of your original statement that the US should gain any "copyyright" of the term marine, due to the history of the USMC.

I am however overjoyed that I have been able to increase your education in areas that you we're previously ignorant. Still working on the english however.



Brilliant!

edit: May I say Rle68, I particularly like how you call out my intelligence, before agreeing with me in the very same post.

i know this may be hard for you to accept but if you actually go back and read i said oh wait nvm the royal marines had it before us.. ipso facto already corrected my own error thank you very much

and i particularly like how you only read what you want to read and make yourself looks worse then you normally do

i dont want you to strain your brain so ill post it where i said i was wrong

"""i stand corrected royal marines were est 20 years earlier""" if thats not good enough for you.. well TOUGH

[Magpie]

Do you think it might be time to move on from this lads or take it to PM ?

[daboarder]

Do you think it might be time to move on from this lads or take it to PM ?
fair cop.

[Sainhann]

Yes I know this I was saying they own the trade mark to space marine

and they have tried to stop Amazon from selling the following book:

Spots the Space Marine

The fall out from it got them a ton of bad press and they ended up dropping it and you can get the book of Amazon and from other sources.

They wanted to own the complete right to the Term Space Marine and yes they got it Trademark which should have never happen in the first place.

[Sainhann]

Actually, yes. :) Final Arguments are scheduled (barring unforseen events) for the 12th of this month. Jury deliberations on things like this tend to only last about 1-5 days. The Judge will deliberate on damages (if any) somewhat longer. I think it is likely we will see the entire thing wrapped up no later than the middle of July (depending on the Judge's backlog).

Plus if GW has come across as A'holes that will not be good for them and quite frankly I do believe that they more than likely did just that.

I am rooting for them to take a big fall and if they do you can expect others to jump on and provide needed bits for us because GW won't.

[lattd]

Except GW has been ramping up the bits since this case. And the spot thing was amazon going too far, GW asked for a cease and desist in the UK as they have space marine trademarked in paper goods.

For those of you who said 400k isn't that much to GW that's about 4% net profit that really is a significant amount for such a blatant infringement, GW are happy for after market bits they pretty much said that its the way chapter house did it and then had the arrogance to bite the hand that feeds.

[Magpie]

They wanted to own the complete right to the Term Space Marine and yes they got it Trademark which should have never happen in the first place.

Why ?

If GW should be denied a Trademark because a term isn't unique to them then Coke, Ford, Nike and several million other companies are in some serious trouble.

A trademark is simply a brand name that you use to sell your products it doesn't matter where the term came from.
As long no one else has sold products under the Space Marine name, prior to and concurrently with GW they have a right to not allow another to trade on that name. If some one has used it before they it is they who need to challenge GW to the right to use it. Since 1987 no one has done so.

[Wolfshade]

Also remember a trademark only applies to specific areas hence you can have:

Enterprise - the car rental firm
Enterprise - the engineers
Enterprise - the 8-bit Elan system
Enterprise - the passenger rail firm
Enterprise - the advertising firm
Enterprise - the clothing brand
Enterprise - the hospital bed manurfacturer

And many more, fun fact, there are 997 registered trademark that contain the work "Enterprise".

None of these are infringing on each other just because they have the same name.

[lattd]

Yes I know GW's space marine covers books, toys, games and I think there's another group but cannot remember what.

[Caitsidhe]

Yes I know GW's space marine covers books, toys, games and I think there's another group but cannot remember what.

It actually doesn't cover "books" at least not as broadly as most people think. Trademark doesn't lock people out from using "space marines" in their fiction. Books are more governed by copyright and as long as the other space marines and fictional setting is different enough, Games Workshop cannot say anything. If you look up titles for books you will find countless with the same title (just as you often find films the same) and as we are all aware "space marines" have been used countless times in fiction. Once you enter the realm of books you are moving more into the domain of copyright.

[lattd]

Copyright does not cover titles as well as you think, copyright will not cover items that are not substantial, even made up names like Exxon are not covered by copyright.

[Caitsidhe]

Copyright does not cover titles as well as you think, copyright will not cover items that are not substantial, even made up names like Exxon are not covered by copyright.

I never said copyright "covers" titles. I was specific in the fact that it does not. Neither Trademark or copyright can stop the use of a title without context of further infringement.

[Sainhann]

It actually doesn't cover "books" at least not as broadly as most people think. Trademark doesn't lock people out from using "space marines" in their fiction. Books are more governed by copyright and as long as the other space marines and fictional setting is different enough, Games Workshop cannot say anything. If you look up titles for books you will find countless with the same title (just as you often find films the same) and as we are all aware "space marines" have been used countless times in fiction. Once you enter the realm of books you are moving more into the domain of copyright.

Well GW did try to do just that and got smacked down.

http://pinsofwar.com/games-workshop-vs-spots-the-space-marine-hits-bbc/

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/02/trademark-bully-thwarted-spots-space-marine-back-online

GW got a ton of bad press on this one and they were shown to be the Trademark Bully that they are.

They want no completion at all so they bully others.

Well now they are in an American court and I get they came across as arrogant bullies and I expect them to lose this case.

[AirHorse]

I am not entirely sure why people are so determined for GW to fail.

They will never stop people from making 28mm models that fit into 40k.

All that might happen is that someone might have to stop using Games Workshops trademarks to sell their models, quite frankly I don't see what is wrong with that, why on earth should anyone be allowed to sell their products using someone else's trademark? If its granted then its there, do your business without infringing.

Don't understand why defending a trademark counts as being a bully. Its like someone stealing your identity.

[Caitsidhe]

Don't understand why defending a trademark counts as being a bully. Its like someone stealing your identity.

Perhaps because many of us (as well as the Judge who didn't give them a summary judgement) feel that they aren't defending their Trademark. They are attempting to extend Trademark into jurisdiction it doesn't have. Nobody is stealing their identity. Chapterhouse never claimed to be Games Workshop nor to be providing Games Workshop products. They have always CLEARLY been an after market vendor.

[lattd]

Caitsidhe I have to disagree before they got legal advice chapter house never marketed there products as after market, they had the exact names such as tervigon kit and space wolf pads. They had no disclaimer and even if they did the method of advertising was such a flagrant abuse of GW trademark and copyright that the disclaimer was void. How arrogant do you have to be when you try to argue that the word malanti is not GW's copyright when it is in a published book used to describe a fictional creature. If people want to question that go back a year or two on this very forum for their release post about it.

[Caitsidhe]

Caitsidhe I have to disagree before they got legal advice chapter house never marketed there products as after market, they had the exact names such as tervigon kit and space wolf pads. They had no disclaimer and even if they did the method of advertising was such a flagrant abuse of GW trademark and copyright that the disclaimer was void. How arrogant do you have to be when you try to argue that the word malanti is not GW's copyright when it is in a published book used to describe a fictional creature. If people want to question that go back a year or two on this very forum for their release post about it.

Well we will know in a few days though won't we? :D My only comment on your little screed there is that if it was that cut and dried the Judge would have dealt with the matter via summary judgement and saved the taxpayers (and himself) a lot of time and irritation. I'm sure this case isn't the most interesting subject matter for him. :)

[rle68]

why do we wish gw to fail.. well lets see

for years gw didnt sell its products online and they found out that is was quite lucrative.. so what did gw do.. issued demands to all online retailers they werent allowed to have a shopping cart on their websites.... now one might ask wtf does that have to do with jack spit? i asked myself the same question...no answer has ever emerged from gw

now they are telling individual online bitz sellers to stop selling bitz .. now gw stopped its own mismanaged bitz sales years ago...now there tactic is intimidation without force of law... if you do not do as we say we will not sell to you nor will we allow anyone who buys from us to sell to you which is a violation of law

coupled with the fact they directly lied to retailers on black reach.. and continually raise prices and offer inferior product.. I WILL NOT DISCUSS THE lack of quality in their craptastic finecast line

one might get an idea why people hate the company but play the game

[Renegade]

Clear GW should stop making the stuff in kit form, this would kill the so called 'after market parts' debate off.

In fact, exactly how do the US laws on third party parts effect plastic kits? These kits have nothing that would need replacing after use if put together properly, so it is hard to see how that bit of US law has any relevance.

The game belongs to Games Workshop, they can and should have all rights protected as to the intellectually property that belongs to it.

Theft is theft, and I am of the opinion that what CHS has done is just that.

[Renegade]

why do we wish gw to fail.. well lets see

for years gw didnt sell its products online and they found out that is was quite lucrative.. so what did gw do.. issued demands to all online retailers they werent allowed to have a shopping cart on their websites.... now one might ask wtf does that have to do with jack spit? i asked myself the same question...no answer has ever emerged from gw

Never happened in the UK, that is down to the US having a crappy legal system... and people complain about the rules GW puts out.


now they are telling individual online bitz sellers to stop selling bitz .. now gw stopped its own mismanaged bitz sales years ago...now there tactic is intimidation without force of law... if you do not do as we say we will not sell to you nor will we allow anyone who buys from us to sell to you which is a violation of law

GW can choose who they sell to and by whom their product is represented. They have the right not to sell their product to who ever they wish, and ban whoever from advertising their stock. Marmite did this to the BNP.


coupled with the fact they directly lied to retailers on black reach.. and continually raise prices and offer inferior product.. I WILL NOT DISCUSS THE lack of quality in their craptastic finecast line

Do like the product, don't buy it. But do stop crying about it, and go find something that you think does a better game and range.

[Mr Mystery]

GW have been online since at least 2000.... Quite possibly 1998. The clampdown came in 2003ish.

And clampdown came to support the indie stores who couldn't offer the same sort of discount.... Just because you don't like the reason, doesn't make it bunkum.

As for 'inferior product'........care to elaborate, or is it just more unquantified hyperbole?

[Magpie]

for years gw didnt sell its products online and they found out that is was quite lucrative.. so what did gw do.. issued demands to all online retailers they werent allowed to have a shopping cart on their websites.... now one might ask wtf does that have to do with jack spit? i asked myself the same question...no answer has ever emerged from gw

Online sales have an advantage over brick and mortar shops due to lower over heads. GW sees that B&M shops are better for the market long term rather than making a quick buck in the short term. GW, having been around since the 1980's thinks in longer time scales.


now they are telling individual online bitz sellers to stop selling bitz .. now gw stopped its own mismanaged bitz sales years ago...now there tactic is intimidation without force of law... if you do not do as we say we will not sell to you nor will we allow anyone who buys from us to sell to you which is a violation of law

Which law I'm intrigued to know what spin you can put on something to say a company cannot choose who it does and doesn't sell to, particularly when all it is wishing to do is enforce its terms of trade.

Stopping the bits trade came about because again the notion of "bits" was getting out of hand and whole kits were being sold, thus disadvantaging the B&M shops again.

We can either whine and sook about the formal bits trade being halted or we can look at it as an excellent opportunity for we as hobbyists to make a little bit back from our own bits boxes.


coupled with the fact they directly lied to retailers on black reach.. and continually raise prices and offer inferior product.. I WILL NOT DISCUSS THE lack of quality in their craptastic finecast line

If you call someone a liar it's a good idea to back that up with a valid reason to do so.

Finecast works just great. Sure there were some dramas early on but I've had nothing but A1 minis for the past 12 months.


one might get an idea why people hate the company but play the game

Yes one does, generally they are those who'd rather hate than take the time to think.

[dctimon]

Do like the product, don't buy it. But do stop crying about it, and go find something that you think does a better game and range.

This I always find just as whinny as the "GW **** just #%@# and explode" comments. People 'cry' (or some may somtimes call it criticize) because they do care what the company is doing to the hobby. Nobody can deny that GW has changed (a lot) with their growth. Many people find this direction bad (or to far). Thats what they are 'crying' about.

Also, they have done some rather annoying bully things like the (maybee a bit easy) example of 'spots the space marine'. By no means is this the only thing people judge GW by (their minis are much to nice for that) but it does tend to work as a catalyst for how they are already feeling.

Also: The argument also goes that if you dont like the crying, dont read the forums (by your logic).

[Caitsidhe]

I believe today was to be the last date before the Jury goes to deliberations. Hopefully we will get another update like after the first week. :)

[Sainhann]

Clear GW should stop making the stuff in kit form, this would kill the so called 'after market parts' debate off.

In fact, exactly how do the US laws on third party parts effect plastic kits? These kits have nothing that would need replacing after use if put together properly, so it is hard to see how that bit of US law has any relevance.

The game belongs to Games Workshop, they can and should have all rights protected as to the intellectually property that belongs to it.

Theft is theft, and I am of the opinion that what CHS has done is just that.

But once they sell me the figures they have no right in what the #$*& I do with them. If I want to buy their stuff and then break it down for resale as bitz they have no right in telling me that I can't do this.

But they are doing actually this.

They have also stated that we as buyers really don't have the right to convert them. Because they still believe that it is their product and not something that they have sold.

They are nothing but arrogant bullies and as I have already stated that is probably how they came across during the trial.

[Magpie]

But once they sell me the figures they have no right in what the #$*& I do with them. If I want to buy their stuff and then break it down for resale as bitz they have no right in telling me that I can't do this.

Yes they do if those are the terms under which you bought them. It would never apply to use as consumers but to the traders it does, there are a range of requirements they must meet to honour their terms of trade.


They have also stated that we as buyers really don't have the right to convert them. Because they still believe that it is their product and not something that they have sold.


Where have they stated this ?


They are nothing but arrogant bullies and as I have already stated that is probably how they came across during the trial.

They wear underpants with little bunnies on them too but your claim is as wild, without proof and ridiculous as mine.

[rle68]

Online sales have an advantage over brick and mortar shops due to lower over heads. GW sees that B&M shops are better for the market long term rather than making a quick buck in the short term. GW, having been around since the 1980's thinks in longer time scales.



Which law I'm intrigued to know what spin you can put on something to say a company cannot choose who it does and doesn't sell to, particularly when all it is wishing to do is enforce its terms of trade.

Stopping the bits trade came about because again the notion of "bits" was getting out of hand and whole kits were being sold, thus disadvantaging the B&M shops again.

We can either whine and sook about the formal bits trade being halted or we can look at it as an excellent opportunity for we as hobbyists to make a little bit back from our own bits boxes.



If you call someone a liar it's a good idea to back that up with a valid reason to do so.

Finecast works just great. Sure there were some dramas early on but I've had nothing but A1 minis for the past 12 months.



Yes one does, generally they are those who'd rather hate than take the time to think.

how about you look up restraint of trade... how about gw telling Aliance that if they sell to Company X they will stop selling to them.. dont say that didnt happen because i know it did

for those of you not in the US Aliance is a games distributor.. that buys from gw at b&m costs and sells to B&M stores...gw's threat to them violates the restraint of trade act.. and please do not come tell me GW is a UK company we all know that .. they do however do business in the US thus they are bound by US law here in the states

"""GW sees that B&M shops are better for the market long term"""

Really? then why are they closing down more b&m stores then they open?
when they pulled out of NC they said theyd make more off online sales then by having a store open.. they said this to us directly so spare me they care about b&m stores they dont.

you like the finecast line thats your opinion me personally im tired of miscast parts parts bent into pretzel shapes and entire legs missing off models due to bubbles etc. my last box of fire dragons were so miscast it looked like a monkey cast them..when the fire pike is a bent into a circle its bad casting and piss poor quality control

you can say think all you want... but maybe its time you pull your head out of where you sit?

[rle68]

The game belongs to Games Workshop, they can and should have all rights protected as to the intellectually property that belongs to it.

Theft is theft, and I am of the opinion that what CHS has done is just that.

by your way of thinking then.. that the after market car parts industry steals from ford and gm huh? same same

whats CHS has done isnt any different than that.. yes i think they should have marketed some of there kits better but to say they steal from GW shows a large lack of critical thinking and isnt anything more than spouting your opinion which is fine as thats what were all doing anyway

[lattd]

But if you agree that they should have marketed differiantly which is one of the issues don't you agree that they acted improperly in using GW's IP rights?.

When have GW ever said you cannot convert there models? I mean ps3 and Xbox are both treated as being on license in there terms and conditions which is why you cannot modify them but there's nothing GW say to imply this and as contract law states if the term isn't know it's not part of the contract.

[Magpie]

you can say think all you want... but maybe its time you pull your head out of where you sit?

Before you make comment like this do some research of actual facts.

The number of B&M shops has increased if you do a White Dwarf count up.

Restraint of Trade isn't an offence. It is an inclusion in a contract of sale of a business or employment that has to meet certain requirements to be legal. It has nothing to do with a contract of supply between a wholesaler and a retailer.

My view on Finecast is based on my experience of receiving good quality casts, it's not an opinion.

[Mr Mystery]

So what was CH's argument/ statement?

Was it reported and I've just missed it?

[Mr Mystery]

by your way of thinking then.. that the after market car parts industry steals from ford and gm huh? same same

whats CHS has done isnt any different than that.. yes i think they should have marketed some of there kits better but to say they steal from GW shows a large lack of critical thinking and isnt anything more than spouting your opinion which is fine as thats what were all doing anyway

Except taking copyrighted symbols and artwork to create their knock offs yes?

Oh sorry. Forgot we're not to use facts.

[Psychosplodge]

Plus your right to maintain your car is what allows that.
Correctly used you should never need a replacement part for a GW model. Desiring one for a conversion isn't the same.

[lattd]

I do not think it has been reported i do believe cross examination will be more interesting, such as why there was no disclaimer and why they refused to change their naming scheme until sued, tbh if CHS just changed names when asked they would be fine they wouldn't be getting sued and everyone would be happy, and we wouldn't have internet lawyers and GW talking out their donkey.

[Magpie]

by your way of thinking then.. that the after market car parts industry steals from ford and gm huh? same same

If you take a break from hate rants and do a little research, only 30 seconds or so, you'll find plenty of case law about Ford, GM and other car manufacturers suing aftermarket parts manufacturers for patent breachs.

[Caitsidhe]

If you take a break from hate rants and do a little research, only 30 seconds or so, you'll find plenty of case law about Ford, GM and other car manufacturers suing aftermarket parts manufacturers for patent breachs.

And for the most part... losing. :D

[daboarder]

And for the most part... losing. :D

you don't see many after market car parts sticking the ford logo on them though either.

[Caitsidhe]

you don't see many after market car parts sticking the ford logo on them though either.

I see plenty of them saying "for use with" not only Ford products but even the specific make and model of cars. Ford Logo? No. Ford name, make, and model? Yes.

[daboarder]

I see plenty of them saying "for use with" not only Ford products but even the specific make and model of cars. Ford Logo? No. Ford name, make, and model? Yes.

Give it a few days and it will all be over, then one side can rub the othersides proverbial face in the dirt.

It is the,

!!THUNDERCOURT!!

2 parties enter, one party leaves. the other party shall suffer ridicule for the sake of "I told you so"

[Mr Mystery]

I see plenty of them saying "for use with" not only Ford products but even the specific make and model of cars. Ford Logo? No. Ford name, make, and model? Yes.

How about lifting unique terminology?

Say ford had invented a gangleflange, which is like any other hinge, but sufficiently different, and own all rights to the gangleflange.

Other could produce a hinge 'to replace gangleflange'. But not an actual gangleflange.

CH? Tervigon? GW name and artwork....whoops!

[daboarder]

How about lifting unique terminology?

Say ford had invented a gangleflange, which is like any other hinge, but sufficiently different, and own all rights to the gangleflange.

Other could produce a hinge 'to replace gangleflange'. But not an actual gangleflange.

CH? Tervigon? GW name and artwork....whoops!

well GW didn't make a tervigon for years, so totally serves them right!!!

/silly

NB: In hindsight, huge waste of money for those who bought one, considering the awesome that is the GW tervigon (its even better with the "fleshborer hive" arms.

[Mr Mystery]

You're thinking of the Tyrannofex there....

[daboarder]

nah I mean the tervigon with the tyranofex arms. Personally I think they look way better than the Scything talons or the claws

[Magpie]

I see plenty of them saying "for use with" not only Ford products but even the specific make and model of cars.

Which GW have said they have no problem with, in fact if the specific kit is mentioned they are fine with it.

[Mr Mystery]

Oh I see!

But yeah, it is a really nice model. Shame about CH's....shonky, too small...looked terrible.

Then there's the Jetbike they did. You know, the ropey looking diddy one...the one the sculptor told the judge CH sent him some GW proprietal artwork to reproduce (badly) in 3D form?

See, this is the thing. CH might we get away with the odd thing here and there, like shoulder pads, which may or may not be copyrightable (I say that because I lost track of that particularl argument). But GW symbology used? Sticky Wicket. GW names used, without permission? Sticky Wicket. Admission that artwork they didn't own was used to generate a 3D representation? Very stick wicket.

GW likely won't get it all their own way. And it's really hard to say with the one sided reporting (in so far that nobody has heard CH's defence, which matters quite a lot). But I still don't see CH walking away from this one with business and reputation intact.

[DrLove42]

Oh I see!

But yeah, it is a really nice model. Shame about CH's....shonky, too small...looked terrible.

Then there's the Jetbike they did. You know, the ropey looking diddy one...the one the sculptor told the judge CH sent him some GW proprietal artwork to reproduce (badly) in 3D form?

See, this is the thing. CH might we get away with the odd thing here and there, like shoulder pads, which may or may not be copyrightable (I say that because I lost track of that particularl argument). But GW symbology used? Sticky Wicket. GW names used, without permission? Sticky Wicket. Admission that artwork they didn't own was used to generate a 3D representation? Very stick wicket.

GW likely won't get it all their own way. And it's really hard to say with the one sided reporting (in so far that nobody has heard CH's defence, which matters quite a lot). But I still don't see CH walking away from this one with business and reputation intact.

In the Uk maybe. This is 'merica. This probably wouldn't have even got to court in the UK.

[Mr Mystery]

No idea.

But those predicting GW won't win....seriously?

As for 'they won't win because they didn't get it dismissed'....neither did CH...which means CH remain with a case to answer.

And really? Nobody has a transcript of CH's defence?

[Herzlos]

But those predicting GW won't win....seriously?

I don't think GW will win. Not because I think CHS haven't done anything wrong (they were pretty brazen with their use of GW terminology and some sculpts may be a bit too similar), but because GW has done everything so badly you'd think they were trying to throw the case.

[Mr Mystery]

In what way?

As I said, we know nothing of CH's actual defence. We know they have ripped off GW, and have admitted as such tacitly.

All comes down to their defence. GW don't need to prove every little thing if CH's defence is bobbins. Like the aforementioned Jetbike and Tervigon. GW art used in their creative process. Then named using GW owned terms....not looking good there.

[Caitsidhe]

Sadly, I don't think it will be a slam dunk win for either side. I would prefer it that way (regardless of who wins) because I like nice, clean legal lines. The verdict and subsequent rulings are likely to be very split, providing neither side anything lucrative but allowing both to crow about their victory. As I predicted all those months ago (and will repeat now in fairness) I expect:

1. Chapterhouse to get a slap on the hand for name use and instructed not to do it again. Since the problem is already dealt with I expect no actual damages.

2. I expect most of Games Workshop IP infringements to fail and a strong reinforcement of the after market legality. This is likely a very bad thing for Games Workshop and why they never should have brought the case in the first place as it WILL open the door wide for all the other companies to ratchet up production.

3. I do not expect damages of any significant amount levied against either side since showing damages is difficult to impossible.

Both sides will spin the mixed rulings as a victory. The only real winners will be all the OTHER third party companies who will now have a clear road to doing what they want and the crystal clear guidelines on how to avoid legal ramfications. Games Workshop will lose the ability to act as a boogie man because the legal precedent will be on the books. Things are only scary as long as there is a hint of the unknown. There is one other winner, i.e. the consumer. With the road clear and ambiguity gone, increased competition should continue to lead to a wider variety of bits, models, and vendors to choose from.

[Mr Mystery]

Again, do remember CH have admitted to using copyrighted material to produce several designs, none of which they had the authority to do so.

I can see that being enough to sink them as a company.

BTW....I know I've asked this before, but.....in this sort of case, does the loser have to pay the court fees of the other half? If so, how does Pro Bono work in that regard?

[Caitsidhe]

Again, do remember CH have admitted to using copyrighted material to produce several designs, none of which they had the authority to do so.

I can see that being enough to sink them as a company.

BTW....I know I've asked this before, but.....in this sort of case, does the loser have to pay the court fees of the other half? If so, how does Pro Bono work in that regard?

It depends entirely on the whim of the Judge. Legal fees being awarded is part of potential damages. The Pro Bono team CAN get paid because if Chapterhouse wins solidly and the Judge feels the case should not have been brought in the first place. He can award the legal fees of the Pro Bono team to be paid by Games Workshop. Likewise, it is possible that the legal fees of Games Workshop could be awarded against Chapterhouse.

However, I consider it unlikely in this case. If Games Workshop gets "anything at all" it will be legal fees only and those (of course) to to their lawyers.

[lattd]

Again the argument that they said they are "for use with" is only valid since the litigation before that it was tervigon kit or salamander shoulder pads. In fact some of the shoulder pads still say iron hand chapter shoulder pads.

Yea the general rule in England is the loser pays costs under CPR 42. Pro bono will be on a win agreement fee of anything up to 100% of normal costs, although this amount should be told to GW.

GW will seek an account of profits, injunction to prevent further releases and delivery up of all offending goods and then destroy them.

Again can we clarify this is a conversion piece not an after market replacement big difference.

[Magpie]

There is one other winner, i.e. the consumer. With the road clear and ambiguity gone, increased competition should continue to lead to a wider variety of bits, models, and vendors to choose from.

How are we going to benefit?

There already a large number of people out there making alternative models and bits that go with 40k, that hasn't changed things at the check out for us ?

If Chapterhouse is successful all that will happen is than an additional overhead will be placed on GW to maintain it's IP and that overhead will be passed on to us. GW raising it's prices will allow the other manufacturers to raise theirs as they maintain relative price points to GW.

[Wolfshade]

There is already competition, Warhamchine, Flames of War, Infinity etc.

Remember the hobby is table top wargaming, not Warhammer or Warhammer 40k.

[Caitsidhe]

Heh. Despite our differing viewpoints, I think we all agree that it is time for this thing to come to a close. I would prefer (even if my side doesn't win), as I would hope you do too, that it does end in a slam dunk so that we are not having to watch ten or twenty more of these cases over the next few years.

Contrary to popular opinion, I don't hate Games Workshop. I haven't been rooting for their butt to get kicked because of any weird angst. I don't care about Games Workshop. They mean no more to me than a blob of gum under a desk or a convenience store on the corner. The only people I care about are the consumer (myself first among them of course). I like competition, lower prices, and a wide selection. I prefer a BUYER'S market over a seller's market. Does Games Workshop service my current needs? No. Would I buy just from Games Workshop if they did? Yes. I hope that clarifies my position a bit.

[Caitsidhe]

There is already competition, Warhamchine, Flames of War, Infinity etc.

Remember the hobby is table top wargaming, not Warhammer or Warhammer 40k.

Different kind of competition. :) I'm not talking about "game system" competition. I'm talking about models competition, i.e. models I can use (and bits) to build my conversions and use in whatever game I like. :D I'm talking about competition which drives DOWN prices and expands choices for the consumer.

[lattd]

Just a quick thought on something that I haven't seen mentioned but as people have discussed the tervigon, under English law it is copyright infringement to make a 3D product from a 2D work....

[Magpie]

Heh. Despite our differing viewpoints, I think we all agree that it is time for this thing to come to a close. I would prefer (even if my side doesn't win), as I would hope you do too, that it does end in a slam dunk so that we are not having to watch ten or twenty more of these cases over the next few years.

Yep for sure. The sooner it is all wound up the better

[Caitsidhe]

Just a quick thought on something that I haven't seen mentioned but as people have discussed the tervigon, under English law it is copyright infringement to make a 3D product from a 2D work....

Nobody has been talking about it because it doesn't really matter in this case. For Chapterhouse to be guilty fo making a 3D product from a 2D work of Games Workshop, their Tervigon would have to be a clear copy of some photograph. It isn't. Moreover, using the name isn't a copyright issue. It woudl be a Trademark issue. This is the problem as we move forward into a brave new world. The lines of copyright and trademark are being blurred. It causes significant issues.

[Psychosplodge]

What about the HH Jetbike?

Or the Iron snake symbols?

[lattd]

Well it is a copyright issue but what would I know I'm only studying it at masters level :rolleyes:. You can infringe copyright by using a significant part in the case the name and style of the tervigon. 1 frame in a 1:30 minute film is a significant amount according to the court so I cannot see how the name and 3D design of a model will not be a significant amount.

[Caitsidhe]

Well it is a copyright issue but what would I know I'm only studying it at masters level :rolleyes:. You can infringe copyright by using a significant part in the case the name and style of the tervigon. 1 frame in a 1:30 minute film is a significant amount according to the court so I cannot see how the name and 3D design of a model will not be a significant amount.

And yet, what you are talking about hasn't been part of the Court case. There are lots of dirty little devils in the details which you (as a Masters level student) know full well. If Games Workshop had a case along those lines it would have been a huge part of first week issues to address. They didn't go into it because it is a loss on its face. I don't want to get int a long argument over something that is going to be cleared up shortly by people far more qualified than either of us, but it suffices to say that the rules governing copyright of going from 2D to 3D would only apply in the case of a COPY. Like or similar is not enough. The difference between inspired by and stolen (in the legal sense) is clearly defined and the reason what your are talking about didn't enter into the case is because Chapterhouse didn't cross that line.

[Caitsidhe]

What about the HH Jetbike?

Or the Iron snake symbols?

I don't know. When I don't know, I don't venture a guess unless I can make an educated one.

[lattd]

I think this case has been botched from the start, so poorly run. They have missed obvious things. Can we get a picture of the tervigon artwork and compare it to the chapter house model. There are also passing off issues and we haven't seen the full arguments put forward we only got the brief summary.

[Caitsidhe]

I think this case has been botched from the start, so poorly run. They have missed obvious things. Can we get a picture of the tervigon artwork and compare it to the chapter house model. There are also passing off issues and we haven't seen the full arguments put forward we only got the brief summary.

On that we agree. I think Games Workshop's legal representation has served them very poorly. That being said, we have to wait for the proverbial fat lady to sing. The only thing that matters in court cases is the outcome and no matter how badly a legal representation may appear to be doing, a victory vindicates them. :)

[40kGamer]

But I still don't see CH walking away from this one with business and reputation intact.

For a company that earns a living off the creative efforts of another I don't see reputation being a big deal... The business may also survive if the penalties aren't too severe.

[40kGamer]

There is already competition, Warhamchine, Flames of War, Infinity etc.

Remember the hobby is table top wargaming, not Warhammer or Warhammer 40k.

+1

And some alternatives are arguably superior products :)

[Herzlos]

In what way?

Off the top of my head: Not providing any clear information on what's actually infringing, including images of their own products instead of those of CHS, filing applications for copyrights/trademarks after the case had started, claiming for things they don't have any actual copyright to (Moor***** 8-pointed chaos star, words like "Plasma", Shoulder pads), trying to trick artists into signing away copyright after the case starter, "forgetting" to disclose that the copyright office had already refused copyright on shoulder pads because it wasn't unique enough.

Then there's the other legal behaviour from GW which casts them in a bad light, like the "Spots the Space Marine" incident. It's as if they're going out of their way to be unlikeable.

I also don't want them to win because they'll use this precedent to threaten more garage companies into oblivion, which will only be detrimental to the entire hobby.

[Herzlos]

Again, do remember CH have admitted to using copyrighted material to produce several designs, none of which they had the authority to do so.

Intent to copy only works if you have an actual copy. If you sit down to copy something and you get it wrong, it's not a valid argument. Seeing existing works with which to take inspiration from is fine, and somewhat necessary for conversion parts. The "Dirty Hands" principle might also apply because most of GW's current IP is pretty blatantly ripped off from previous IP.

"Design something like an X" isn't automatically a copyright violation.

[lattd]

Except spot was amazons fault not GW and in England you do not have to register copyright and as both England and the US are part of the Berne convention and WIPO registering the copyright is a none point. They didn't trick anyone to assigning copyright they did a deal, it was probably a confirmation more than anything. And copyright is specific I have a copyright in the collective of my work here but that's not to say these words are my copyright.

[lattd]

Actually it is as I said earlier using a a drawing to make a 3d picture is copyright infringement, and showing intent and specifically using items does suggest that they knew copyright existed and where infringing it. Remember the difference has to be substantial as per inter-Lego an immaterial increase in size or colour will still infringe.

Those who seek equity must come with clean hands which never party has done, again a non-point as CHS refused to acknowledge that some unregistered trademarks had sufficient good will such as tyranid to be passing off if used.

And the oh GW copied people 25 years ago so they cannot moan is a stupid and desperate argument. As now all the development and changes mean they have something unique.

Remember copyright does not protect ideas it protections the expression of those ideas.

[40kGamer]

Except spot was amazons fault not GW.

From working with companies that sell on Amazon I can vouch that they are quite trigger happy at pulling products, suspending accounts and overreacting in general. However GW is fully responsible for starting the fiasco when they pulled the trigger and sent the infringement notice in the first place.

I would like to see the court define clear rules on what after market companies can/can't do so that the insanity around all of this comes to an end. Personally I would prefer companies use there creative efforts to market alternatives rather than find legal ways to piggy back on the work of others.

[Herzlos]

Except spot was amazons fault not GW and in England

GW sent Amazon a DMCA request, so whilst Amazon brought it down without investigating GW instigated it using a copyright request which wasn't even valid.


They didn't trick anyone to assigning copyright they did a deal, it was probably a confirmation more than anything.

No, they sent out letters to previous artists saying that they "lost the paperwork" and asked if they could fill in the attached and return them. That's definitely more trickery than deal making.

There have been artists mentioning these odd requests and I'm sure one of them has even submitted testimony towards the practice. I'm sure I can find the blog posts containing the letters if you want.

[lattd]

Again this isn't an after market product you should never need a replacement shoulder pad this is a competitor for parts which Forgeworld and GW provide to some extent. Just looking at some of my notes the CHS guy saying I got told to look at the visions book is a massive self shot, having knowledge and access to the claimants work shifts the presumption GW no longer have to prove CHS copied CHS have to prove they didn't, which when you are marketing the goods as they did that's a lot harder than it sounds.

On the spot part it was a valid request in the EU which is where they asked for spot to be withdrawn while they investigated, amazon chose to do a global take down. Remember GW has space marine trademarked in the books category in the EU.

[Herzlos]

And the oh GW copied people 25 years ago so they cannot moan is a stupid and desperate argument. As now all the development and changes mean they have something unique.


Indeed if GW modified it enough to make it their own then it is, just like Chapterhouse has done. It's just somewhat hypocritical for GW to complain about ripping off stuff that GW directly ripped off to at least the same extent.

[Herzlos]

Again this isn't an after market product you should never need a replacement shoulder pad this is a competitor for parts which Forgeworld and GW provide to some extent. Just looking at some of my notes the CHS guy saying I got told to look at the visions book is a massive self shot, having knowledge and access to the claimants work shifts the presumption GW no longer have to prove CHS copied CHS have to prove they didn't, which when you are marketing the goods as they did that's a lot harder than it sounds.

Inspiration != copying or copyright violation.

[lattd]

The use of it as inspiration creates a presumption of copying, meaning CHS need to prove there items do not copy a substantial part, the expert witness was horrible he should not have broken down the designs the way he did, he should have taken the whole design into account which he failed to do, how that was allowed is beyond me.

[Herzlos]

Correct it creates an intention of copying, but only if the result is deemed to be a copy. If it's too dissimilar then it's not a copy even with intent. If it is deemed to be a copy then there's no defence of independent creation though. But I don't believe it's actually similar enough to be regarded as a copy?

I'm not sure what's so wrong with breaking the design down into elements?

[Caitsidhe]

You know there really isn't any point in rehashing any of this stuff. I'm all for talking about interesting side points but all in all getting into an argument all over about it is silly. We could get a result one way or the other (or both ways most likely) as early as today or a month from now. :) Relax. Ease back. We are among friends here, or at the very least, among peers. We wouldn't be on this site if we didn't have an interest in the hobby of wargaming. This circus is merely a diversion which grew stale a good while back.

[lattd]

Because you are meant to take the product as a whole and consider the impression that gives you rather than the individual parts, the sum is greater than the whole.

That's the bit the court needs to decide I'm in the camp saying they really have not done enough to make the parts different.

Could be a year if GW appeal. Be interesting to get a full breakdown though.

[40kGamer]

You know there really isn't any point in rehashing any of this stuff. I'm all for talking about interesting side points but all in all getting into an argument all over about it is silly. We could get a result one way or the other (or both ways most likely) as early as today or a month from now. :) Relax. Ease back. We are among friends here, or at the very least, among peers. We wouldn't be on this site if we didn't have an interest in the hobby of wargaming. This circus is merely a diversion which grew stale a good while back.

I'm hopeful that there will be a swift and decisive resolution, but given my experience with the legal system I will be surprised if it happens. :)

[Bigred]

The Jury is deliberating, now we wait.

They have a lot of counts to go through.

[Mr Mystery]

Anything on CH's defence/testimony?

And interesting etymology! Testify comes from the Roman equivalent of swearing on the Bible. Rather than swear on a holy text, you'd cup your 'twig and berries'. And I'm under the impression perjurs would have their meat and two veg forcibly deprecated from the general groinal area!

[Caitsidhe]

The Jury is deliberating, now we wait.

They have a lot of counts to go through.

Yep. That is probably the only thing which is going to stretch thing thing out over a few days. We should have put up all the Counts on a table and bet on them, i.e. see who gets the most results right. :)

[templarboy]

In the Uk maybe. This is 'merica. This probably wouldn't have even got to court in the UK.Um, I really hate this implication that the USA is somehow inferior to the UK. This "'merica" garbage is insulting and bigoted. Please cut this crap out. It isn't friendly.

Now on to the topic-I think that no one will be pleased with the outcome of this trial. There will be pyrrhic victories on both sides. Juries can be flaky though. I await the verdict with baited breath.

[daboarder]

Um, I really hate this implication that the USA is somehow inferior to the UK. This "'merica" garbage is insulting and bigoted. Please cut this crap out. It isn't friendly.

Now on to the topic-I think that no one will be pleased with the outcome of this trial. There will be pyrrhic victories on both sides. Juries can be flaky though. I await the verdict with baited breath.

Hey maybe if you guys could sort out your gun laws and health care you wouldn't be looked down upon :p

Personally I don't see this being the end of it, it will depend on how far CH is willing to take it of course, but if GW loses you'll hear more about this.

[rle68]

Hey maybe if you guys could sort out your gun laws and health care you wouldn't be looked down upon :p

Personally I don't see this being the end of it, it will depend on how far CH is willing to take it of course, but if GW loses you'll hear more about this.

personally keep your opinions to yourself.. your smilyish face not withstanding that post was offensive thus my response as is

+++CENSORED BY THE INQUISITION+++

[templarboy]

On to the topic-Can one of the legal eagles here tell me about the appeal process in civil trials? What are we looking at if GW loses.

[rle68]

and im a bit perplexed by some posts in here claiming chs copied gw directly.. last time i looked at chs site they dont sell units of ultra marines or dire avengers

and the post that said your never supposed to need parts.. obviously you have never dropped your models and had them break..

let me see did gw say anythign to the numerous sites that were producing drop pods? nope.. they didnt have the model thus they couldnt say anything

lets see does gw make a farseer on jetbike model? no they dont.. without parts you cant make one, and since the game is now wysiwyg im supposed to not play with certain units because gw cant be bothered to make them?

or is your contention im supposed to buy 3 or more boxes of models for the 1 -2 parts i need to make a model; gw doesnt produce?

[DarkLink]

Hey maybe if you guys could sort out your gun laws


Don't make me derail this thread.

[Magpie]

and since the game is now wysiwyg

Whoa there podner, more reading less hating.
Find me a SINGLE reference to WYSIWYG in the 6th Edition rulebook.
I'll give you a hint, there isn't one.

[rle68]

the way the game is now played... not set in stone in the book .. jeez get over yourself will ya

[Magpie]

the way the game is now played... not set in stone in the book .. jeez get over yourself will ya

The way the game is played? by who? Certaily no one I know nor by anything in the Rulebook.
So why are you spewing your bile all over GW about wysiwg when they don't require it?

I'll "get over myself" if you stop ranting crap

[rle68]

how about you walk in to most tournaments and they require wysiwyg .. you dont like that fact to bad and im not ranting crap your just too dense to realize the fact

oh and now you want to come back and say well i dont play tournaments.. then thats fine for you but those of us that do face wysiwyg at almost all tournaments

or are you the type to let soda cans with straws be used for dreadnaughts? or flamers used for plasma guns?

[Magpie]

how about you walk in to most tournaments and they require wysiwyg .. you dont like that fact to bad and im not ranting crap your just too dense to realize the fact
oh and now you want to come back and say well i dont play tournaments.. then thats fine for you but those of us that do face wysiwyg at almost all tournaments
or are you the type to let soda cans with straws be used for dreadnaughts? or flamers used for plasma guns?

So really it's the Tournament Organisers who are the bad guys in this one as they are nerfing your army by not letting you run "counts as" for units that don't have models for them.
Bit silly to insist that you play a model that doesn't exist.

[rle68]

maybe your right in that sense. but it is the way the game is played.. personally in pick up games idc what you use as long as you use a mini to be close as possible

hell we use pieces of paper after a new dex comes out before we go buying new models if we dont have them

[scadugenga]

BoK has yesterday's 100 page court transcript up on the site.

TT has highlighted some amusing quotes on his website. GeeDub's not looking so hot from the quotes, but I haven't gone through all 100 pages yet, and likely won't try to tonight.

Link: http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/gov.uscourts.ilnd_.250791.388.2.pdf

[eldargal]

Are we actually squabbling over world war 2 and politics in a legal thread about our plasticy overlords legal goings on?
Well, why not? It's more interesting than the usual armchair lawyer 'CHS is evil!' "nuh uh, GW is evil' debate that has raged for the past year or so.:p

[Caitsidhe]

I've been reading the pages and all I can say is... "damn is Team Pro Bono good or what?" I don't expect to be involved in any civil litigation anytime soon, but I sure as hell know who I'm going to call if it comes to pass.

[rle68]

Q. so your accusing chs of infringing on 83 of your UNregistered trademarks....

they should have stopped right there lol

A. No, actually. If I've got -- I don't quite understand what
7 you're saying. If I sell a product which has a title on it and
8 I'm using that as market trade for several years and
9 establishing prior use, then that's a trademark

wow.. just wow

[rle68]

Q. Okay. And so, there are a lot of terms here on this list.
16 So, I just want to make sure that I got a few things correct.
17 Okay? You didn't show today that Chapterhouse has used the term
18 Striking Scorpion in any of its products or advertisement. You
19 didn't show that, did you?
20 A. I'm trying to remember. We've been through so many things.
21 I don't think we did, actually. I don't think we talked
22 specifically about Striking Scorpion.
23 Q. And I just want to make sure again. You didn't show today
24 that Chapterhouse has ever used the term Eldar Farseer in any of
25 its products or on any of its advertising

nailed him

[rle68]

. Okay. So, let me just phrase it again for you to get an
4 answer to this question, which is you haven't shown anywhere
5 where Chapterhouse has used the phrase Eldar Farseer together on
6 a product or in any descriptions of its products. You haven't
7 shown that, have you?
8 A. No, I don't think we have, and I don't think that's the
9 point.

then wtf is the point fool?

[rle68]

Q. Okay. We'll get into the individual e-mails.
7 Has Games Workshop done a consumer survey to find out
8 if any consumers are likely to be confused by Chapterhouse's
9 products?
10 A. No, but we got evidence of actual confusion, so --
11 Q. Well, and we'll get to that in a minute, but my question is
12 as to the survey.
13 A. No, we didn't do a survey.
14 Q. And any survey to determine whether consumers are likely to
15 be confused by the way Chapterhouse references the terms

my god did they just think they could walk and bs their way through this trial?

[Bigred]

Ladies and Gentlemen

We are discussing the CHS vs GW legal case here and have over 100 pages of trial testimony to keep up busy.

Please take lend-lease, Battle of Britain, and other off top conversations to the Oubliette.

[Caitsidhe]

Ladies and Gentlemen

We are discussing the CHS vs GW legal case here and have over 100 pages of trial testimony to keep up busy.

Please take lend-lease, Battle of Britain, and other off top conversations to the Oubliette.

Ditto what he said. And talking about that 100 pages of testimony, there is some damn funny stuff in there.

[rle68]

Ditto what he said. And talking about that 100 pages of testimony, there is some damn funny stuff in there.

i cant believe they were so unprepared they proved nothing