The trial for Games Workshop vs Chapterhouse is under way, and its a new week starting today. In fact its underway as we speak right now. If you missed this, or are just getting started, here is your chance to get going on it.

Of course the outcomes of this trial will be greatly scrutinized, and I personally think it will open the doors to new business's to jump into the market when this case is decided.

Here is all the information from last week, courtesy of Larry Vela over on Bols who is watching this very closely. Note that this trial is supposed to end tomorrow or Wednesday at the latest. So this is something we will keep an eye on.

via the Bols Lounge
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 [insert exact GW kit title]"

-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)
Attachment 4198

66 Comments:

  1. WOW

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

    -CHS disclosed that its total gross revenue before expenses for a roughly 4 year period in question was @$400,000


    kinda a big thing those 400k
    if you take into account almost nothing CHS make is original


    if GW wins we should see 200 more lawsuits

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

    ReplyDelete
  2. "allowed customers to perform their "favorite hobby activity; buying things from Games Workshop"."

    Since when was THAT my 'favorite' part?
    lolz!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought the same thing! I hope this was just out of context, or badly worded... It would be real strange if that's how they really perceive the fan base!

      Delete
    2. My favourite part of the hobby is buying warhammer from OTHER retailers because its cheaper ;)

      Delete
    3. But I thought it was common knowledge that GW only saw us as walking, talking money bags?

      Delete
    4. "Buying things from Games Workshop". B-b-b-b-but muh eBay!

      Delete
    5. Its badly worded. What it means to say is this:

      "Allows GW customers to perform their favorite hobby AND by stuff from GW".

      Thats why theres a semicolon in the original quote :-)

      Delete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have to admit, I feel GWs pain on this subject. I know many in the community like to think of GW as a huge faceless organisation, but they aren't THAT big. The other model companies can try to pull the wool over the eyes of others by giving their products similar names, but we hobbiests know full well that they are just cashing in on selling things that GW invented but don't yet make - surely that's morally wrong?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't have any problem with making parts that are compatible with GW products--I don't think there's anything morally wrong about that. However, making whole models and then naming them as units that GW created rules and names for already I have an issue with.

      Even GW stated that generic 28mm scifi miniatures labeling is fine with them, even if it irks them that they are siphoning off sales.

      Delete
    2. Whether it's morally wrong is an open question. The point of contention here is whether it's legal, in other words compliant with the rules of order determined to apply in the absence of objectively defined moral rules. That said...

      I think there is something to be said for secondary companies being allowed to cater to a market created by, and not catered to, a primary company. For example, as a publically owned, incorporated entity Games Workshop benefits from managing its release schedule to even out its quarterly income in order to manage investor expectations.

      This creates an opportunity for companies like Chapterhouse to step in, and to step on the toes of a company like GW: One of GW's complaints, so I've heard, is about how the Chapterhouse Tervigon kit interfered with the release of their own Tervigon kit. But that kit, as I understand it, was completed and held back in order to avoid the spike in revenue such a release would have generated.

      The thing is, while that benefits consumers, it creates a disincentive to create and bookmark these markets using intellectual property law, and the point of intellectual properties laws are to create incentives to economic activity; though where the long-term good of the market conflicts with the short-term interests of the participants is also an open question.

      Delete
    3. Compatible parts is less objectionable certainly, but its often still things like chapter logo shoulder pads and such.

      Original design compatible parts, yeah sure - no worries on that front. Ones based on existing GW stuff, not so much.

      Delete
    4. I certainly don't think it's "morally wrong". GW's business practicies drive hobbyists to other companies, and drive independent shops to carry others' miniatures. And competition is good for the most part. So it's hard for me to feel sorry for them. That being said, it would be wrong for someone to purposefully make miniatures and call them by GW names, like "Space Wolf Commander", but "Space Viking Leader" would be acceptable I think. Certainly using unique copyrighted character names would be illegal.

      Delete
    5. Competition is good, certainly - but this is just taking someone elses ideas and profiting. I just feel like naming something 'space vikings' and then making it all but the same model as a space wolf is theft. If they are only making it *just* different enough for the law, but essentially the same thing then its still stealing someone elses idea to make your own cash.

      Do GWs business practices change the fact that someone there work hard to come up with the concepts/designs for these units/models only to have some 3rd party come out with a knock off...? Personally, I don't think it excuses it.

      Delete
    6. So - making aftermarket parts for cars, computers, ipads/pods/etc is OK for other companies, just not for GW?

      Does not compute... GW will lose this case.

      Delete
    7. This is a niche product, hardly comparable to items like cars and iPods.

      Ask yourself this - would chapter house even exist if it wasn't for GW's IP?

      Delete
    8. They are certaonly eager to make it hard for themselves.

      It is established that the copyrights are held in the UK, and that the US branch is left with very little say. The US branch is the one pursuing this, and does not have possession of moulds or anything. It os all made in the UK, then shipped wherever, and boxed up in that country,

      They also have been fined for forcing CHS to make requests for GW to supply information, then stop them get that information.

      And let us not forget that their lawyer got the judge to rule they held the copyright for shoulder pads, then the copyright office on the US had told them no. They then tried to make the judgement stick with the copyright office.

      GW have made this a disaster for themselves, because all their corporate structures and practices are much clearer now.

      It is easier to go for CHS than the Polish manufacurers, because of anti-monopoly laws in the EU.

      Delete
    9. I find this attitude too common in the states; you stand up for businesses at the expense of the consumer.

      As a consumer, I feel like I should have the right to spend my money on whatever I damn well like. If that extends to purchasing a set of mk1 shoulder pads produced by CHS but not GW, then so be it. If GW had produced it first, I probably would have bought it from them first.

      Delete
    10. Ultimately it boils down to a question of consumer choice. Why on earth would a consumer campaign against that?

      Delete
    11. The reason that we in the US stick up for companies (or, rather, the reason I stick up for companies) is because it isn't about consumer choice. It is about what is morally right.

      If you have a million dollar idea then you deserve a million dollars. The idea was yours. Take any IP and then ask, "If whomever came up with this idea didn't come up with it, would the market exist?" The answer is no. If George Lucas hadn't invented Star Wars, then Star Wars wouldn't exist. The same applies to all creative IP.

      For someone else to then take that idea and profit from it is wrong. If George Lucas had published ideas for Episodes I-III, but never made them into movies that doesn't entitle somebody else to do so. That is theft. The same reasoning applies to your argument about mkI shoulder pads. Games Workshop came up with the idea. They drew art showing what they looked like. Then they didn't feel like they had the money or the time or whatever to produce them immediately. That doesn't give somebody else the right to steal their idea and make money from it.

      This isn't about consumer choice at all. It is about theft and the fact that theft is wrong.

      Delete
    12. I have to disagree on your premise that this is about morality... Morality is subjective. It is based on a number of values attained by both upbringing and environment. To say this is about morality is to suggest that your morality supersedes all others. This is about the law. Several judgements have come down on this case over the past 4 years. Some for GW, some for CHS. If you find CHS morally lacking, then by all means, you should not buy from them. To suggest that because you find them morally lacking then they are in the wrong is just plain wrong.

      As to products themselves, I have seen in several posts statements about entire model kits. That is false, at least it was when I perused the site. Even the afore mentioned Tervigon kit is not a kit. It specifically states a GW Carnifex kit is REQUIRED to use with CHS kit. Near as I can tell, even the jetbikes require piecemeal construction.

      I remember when this started. Every single offering by CHS was "for use with" GW. They had not one complete kit. Every single entry stated you needed a specific GW kit to make use of their products.

      With the many judgements in this case, I can only assume that any actions CHS is currently using on their site is based on those judgements. I know several things were sited by 2 judges that allowed CHS to retool their operation. Including allowing them to reference GW names for their kits. Check their site for yourself. Just because it doesn't "feel" right, doesn't mean its not legal.

      Delete
    13. I think the bigger issue is some of the "TO be used with" kits were for things GW had yet released, meaning that CHS would then hold the copyright to the model, even though GW invented it. I think this was the issue with the Thunderwolf.

      Sure it is good for the consumer to be able to get the Thunder woles. But is it right for CHS to be allowed to make money of something that GW obviously creaated?

      Delete
    14. I may be wrong, but I do recall Chapterhouse selling at least a doom of malan'tai figure named as such. Not an add-on to a GW figure, a complete figure. Obviously it was since taken down but it was that and possibly thunder wolves (too many third party TWs to remember who did/does it) which drew attention to Chapterhouse in the first place for GW.

      @ Isaiahs dad: I personally would liken it more to Chapterhouse producing an 'apples iMusic player' rather than generic headphones or a case for a real iPod.

      Delete
    15. Oops, must refresh page before writing a comment!
      TheAurgelmir has the crux of what this is really about in terms of IP protection, well done

      Delete
    16. Chapterhouse's whole kits are mostly a weird marine-ish true scale attempt, they really aren't that similar to Space Marines, no moreso than many other power armored scifi models.

      It seems like most of this is related to pauldrons and the tervigon kit, which was not a standalone kit, it required a Carnifex model.

      They do make a Mycetic spore I suppose, but the only real problem with that model is the name, they shouldve just called it a spore pod.

      Delete
  5. It will be interesting to see CHS's side. Since GW is threatening Kromlech, Maxmini and Scibor. I wonder if they can be brought in to argue their case. Kromlech does amazing quality while Scibor is so different.

    Or how to congratulate fan communities while for years drawing back any community support. (Games Day) wish I could... they used to provide it. Now only community run events carry the hobby.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Treatning??? have you looked at their model ranges like ever!!!
      How do you not see that they are based on GW existing Figs?

      Ofc some of kromlech figs arent but most of the stuff is just a copy past


      I susspect the outcome of this trial will show us if either the looters or GW disapears from the market.

      Delete
    2. Neither will disappear from the market. This trial isn't even close enough to damage GW on the large scale, and if the worst case for CHS happens and they close, I don't expect it to effect any of the other 3rd party companies. They already operate within GW's above established standards, so it would take a judgement from this case that changes how people approach IP law to make them change their business model.

      Delete
    3. well not the case
      but the effects of the case

      if copy pasting GW stuff is OK
      all the mentioned company and new others will try to loot some too. If CHS can make a 100k a year and you multiply that by 10 or so company... that gets to the point were it cuts into GW biss in a way that forces them to cut qualtiy or something

      and on the other hand if GW wins. They will surelly sue all the others aswell. With their biss based on riding on the warhammer hype its going to put them out of biss!

      Delete
    4. GW wouldn't cut quality, they'd raise prices to plug to gap of where they're being undercut by alternate miniatures. Maybe that's what they're already doing (which is stupid because it drives more people to cheaper products!)

      Delete
    5. yes
      but at a certain point of loseing customers you cant hike prices anymore to make up for it. And if everything GW makes gets copyed in cheap they have to go to snapfit or lower quality plastic or cut staff or something.

      Delete
    6. GW have never understood that though warlord so they will just combine it with other cost saving methods.

      Delete
  6. Although I have always felt that GW's practices could be drastically better than they are, I'm actually for their side in this case. I don't have an issue with 3rd party companies making compatible parts for GW models, but when you explicitly use GW's name and products in your marketing I have an issue with that.

    If GW were to go after other 3rd party parts producers who don't cross the line and use GW names for things I would side with the little guy, but Chapterhouse's pushback on this is pretty awful I think.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How exactly does one produce a product, say a set of arms, for a model, market it as a conversion piece, and not mention what its a conversion piece for?

      Many mentions above of cars and computers and such. Would anybody in fact walk into the auto store and as for just any fuel pump they got, or would you want the one that is compatible with your car?

      It works the same way. Every company that is making a conversion part is a small business riding a coat tail. Hell, GW did it whey they were Citadel. They are making parts for GW models. Everybody knows it. There is not one person who goes to CHS, Puppetswar, Kromlech, etc. that is looking for a GW product. They dont sell them. They sell bits. GWs whole premise of confusion goes right out the door on that one fact.

      Example: I went looking for a Bloodbowl team. I didn't want just any team, I wanted something good. Try finding a Blood bowl team with google. You go everywhere that GW's name is. But not to a single 3rd party maker. Look for fantasy football team and you end up looking at that nonsense from the 90s.

      As to quality. I have bought from CHS, Puppetswar and Secretweapon. They are every bit as good as GW, and much better than finecast.

      Delete
    2. Difference is that most of the other products don't make their money from selling parts for the cars os computers and such. It's something they offer because the consumer needs it.

      GW on the other hand make money from selling both kits and conversion parts it's a part of their business model.

      Sure you might WANT something different, but YOU are not the judge on what is right and wrong in this case.

      Bloodbowl is currently not a product GW is focusing on, but does that make it right for other companies to plainly make money of it?
      Who then holds the right to produce Bloodbowl products? GW or the other guy?

      A better example than car and electronic parts are videogames. All consoles since the days of Nintendo have issued lisences to game creators in order to create a game for the console. Releasing a game without this lisence is illegal. This is a way for the developer to make money from the sales of games.

      Right now the only "lisence holders" of GW products are Forge World and Black Library. (actually there are tons of other game creators out there, that make GW lisenced games)
      The others are releasing product without said lisence, and therefore are infringing on GWs IP.

      Delete
    3. "Difference is that most of the other products don't make their money from selling parts for the cars os computers and such. It's something they offer because the consumer needs it."

      Definitely don't think you can back that up with any sort of data, let alone the law. Manufacturers absolutely make parts for their cars (ever try to get a BMW fixed in the US? Watch the parts costs skyrocket) and make profit off them. That's the reason 3rd party part sellers exist, because they can offer a compatible part that's different/better/cheaper than the original manufacturer. This is protected by law, so there's no evidence Chapterhouse can't make arms and guns in a 28mm scale.

      Hell, most of the big CHS kits are upgrades to existing models, extending the Storm Raven so it doesn't suck, making a different style of Land Raider, which require a GW kit to even use. I would imagine CHS makes GW revenue in a lot of cases, I know I wouldn't have bought a storm raven without the CHS kit, let alone 2 of them.

      Delete
  7. I hate going into gamesworkshop I very rarely go in as most of the stuff I want is out of stock and I can get it cheaper else where so going into store is certainly not my favourite part of the hobby

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. they only interviewed people ""inside"" the store when they did that marketing research :D

      Delete
    2. If you're buying GW product, they don't care where you get it.

      Delete
  8. I hate going into gamesworkshop I very rarely go in as most of the stuff I want is out of stock and I can get it cheaper else where so going into store is certainly not my favourite part of the hobby

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Conversly, my games workshop is the only store i like going in. All of the staff a brilliant, they almost always have everything in stock (including heaps of tau stock, they had everything except longstrike) and its generlly a really freindly atmosphere. In comparison my lgs is a horrible dull environment and never gets enough stock.


      On a related note i hope gw wins this, as chs is in the wrong here. Compatible is one thing, designed for is another

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

    That doesn't really make sense. The stormraven upgrade kit requires you to buy the stormraven from GW, and then use the CHS kit to make it look better. They aren't taking away any sales (at least in this case) they're just making the customers happier with the product they buy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also with the shoulder pads, you need the models, and the Tervigon kit requires you to buy a Carnifex. Their new models that came out after this started could be argues close to that, although they named those very different, but those models are hideous and I personally wouldn't buy them.

      Everything I have personally bought from CHS required a GW kit, which actually just made me buy more from GW. I really feel that GW is going after CHS instead of the other companies since they are mostly Polish companies and CHS is significantly easier to target.

      Delete
    2. I think that statement is only really applicable to products that compete with GW's own, not items that GW don't produce.

      Delete
    3. At the time that legal actions were taken, all of CHS's products fit that with the exception of the Tyranid Spore/drop pod thing. Their Eldar looking model and their other full kits (with the exception of the Tau super heavy vehicle) came after the start of this whole thing.

      Delete
    4. and the farseer, and the doom, combibolters, etc... they have allot of stuff they should have at least changed the name on.

      Delete
    5. Wasn't there also the whole deal of Thunder wolves and other things, that prevented GW from releasing theirs for quite a while?

      Either way if you can buy a set of 5 Space marines and a cheap wolf from CHS, you are removing sales from the actual Thunder Wolves kit.

      Delete
  10. GW has every right to pursue this. CHS wouldn't have anything if not for piggy-backing on GW's product, and they flat-out stole their IP.

    What I get a kick out of, is how much people always point the finger at GW, but completely ignore rival company PP, and that whacko from Battlefoam have all been FAR more ridiculous when it comes to suing everyone and everything over similar squabbles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Im so glad ive finally read a comment that makes sense to. I really dont understand why its such a big deal that GW is trying to protect the IP they have every right to do so its just the same for every company out there who IP has been used without there permission

      Delete
    2. Just a quick point here, PP models really don't convert. Everything is pretty much a set character and actually has a model.

      Delete
  11. "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".

    So let's recap this: GW doesn't care to spend a single penny to advertise their products. Instead there's some fan operated websites like BOLS and (should've been mentioned) Faeit 212 who does all the work for them, without earning money to do that. In return GW doesn't give any help to these sites and the people that work to maintain them, but THEY TRY TO SHUT THEM DOWN... That's so very clever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget the fact they quit Facebook and Twitter after all the complaints from the "Spots" debacle.

      Delete
    2. well from GW pov they are liveing off of them!

      GW wants to controll public opinion. Its not good for them if a site postes something about a unit being bad in game or a dex being a ripp off. Or the company (GW) sueing left and right (even if true.
      Besides the puplishing/reviewing of WDs doesnt help selling Issues. Or would you bye what you allready read?

      Blogs and sites dont bring in new customers. Who google searches 40k without knowing it before hand? Its mainly the stores and flgs and word of mouth that bring in new players. Its just no benefit for GW to let indipendend websites live. Its not like you cant find out about their releases on the GW site WITHOUT negativ opinions.


      If someone does a blog or anything hobby related like painting guids for FREE on the web he always lessens the value of someone els who is trying to make a dollar. So its not logic to complain GW should help people that WANT to do this for Free. Besides the bigger sites do run ads.
      Also its pretty easy to use comman sence & not to do certain things... like reposting stole conntent

      Delete
    3. BTW, I am still getting Warhammer 40k on my Facebook feed. I think they are back up.

      Delete
    4. warlord, it's not me that is saying that they use the internet independent operated sites for advertising. it seems to be a GW statement (according to this post): mr. Merret said that "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".

      Actually, blogs and sites DO bring a lot of costumers. Or maybe i'm the only one who buys stuff (or at least, used to buy stuff) thanks to the info and feedback posted on sites like Faeit and BOLS... but i don't think so.

      Delete
  12. This thread, like every other thread about this subject, is plagued by illogical arguments. Let's try to look at this from a logical perspective.

    Yes, Games Workshop has some truly deplorable business strategies. In fact, they may be actively killing themselves. This point is granted, supported, and applauded. However, that doesn't make Games Workshop in the wrong in the case of this lawsuit.

    Look at Chapter House's products. Most are designed to either modify or replace a Games Workshop product. This is theft. Let me explain in terms of the after-market automobile industry. Ford manufactures the Focus, this is fact. Now, let's say that somebody else really likes the Ford Focus, but feels it would look much better with a spoiler, so they manufacture an entire range of spoilers for the Ford Focus. This is perfectly acceptable legally and even morally, but this is not what Chapter House studios is doing, with a few exceptions, such as the Storm Raven kit.

    Instead, what they are doing is like if Ford were to release concept art of a new sports car they were planning on making. They don't announce the year because they aren't sure when it will be ready. Some other company sees this concept art and makes a body kit designed for the Focus, to make it look like this new sports car. This isn't okay, it is theft. They have stolen an idea. Not only that, but it doesn't even make a Focus into that new sports car, just a poor imitation. This is what Chapter House studios did with the Tervigon conversion kit.

    Some of their other products take existing products and simply imitate those. The "Doomseer", for instance, is nothing other than a female farseer. The car analogy breaks down here because there are competitors that produce very similar models of cares (Focus, Camry, Accord, etc.), but it should be noted that these are distinct, self-contained products. The Honda Civic does not need Ford to exist in order to be a legitimate product. Without Games Workshop's IP of the Eldar and the infrastructure they have created to use the Eldar this "Doomseer" wouldn't be able to exist as a product. Again, this is theft.

    Quite simply, whether or not we like Games Workshop does not give others the right to steal from them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True enough, and very thoughtful analogy. It does breakdown a bit more though, as if this were cut and dry, the suit would not have been drug out for 4 years, had a few summary judgements (in which CHS was proved in the right on several points) and CHS would not have been pro bono'd by an IP lawfirm with national credentials.

      The question isn't whether GW has the right to defend its IP or not. That is a given under most countries laws. The question is how much IP does GW actually own? There have been so many companies that have been smacked down by GW CaD that we just assume they own everything they say they do. I think CHS is proving that is a fallacy. Go back to BoLS and look at some of the past judgements in this case. GW is getting slapped down over and over with only minor recriminations to CHS.

      Delete
    2. I fully agree with you. The case GW has has been stripped down with every session. They cannot claim IP on arrows, Roman numerals, piles of skulls... The list goes on.

      They should never have allowed Moskins to defend them.

      Delete
    3. Why does providing an alternative that you can't buy from GW amount to stealing? And if you think GW IP is original then your knowledge of Sci-Fi is pretty shallow.
      I think the real issue is the use of the names rather than anything else.
      If I make a roof-rack and say- "fit's medium SUVs" what IP am I stealing, especially if it fulfills a niche the SUV manufacturer is not addressing.

      What GW does that is worth protecting is the 40k universe. The fluff. And making different "after-market" add-ons like combi-weapons is something GW should be all over. Instead they go for mass market and cut their ranges. Where are my noise-marines? Gone. Plague-marines? Gone. Replaced with resin addons CHS-style..

      Delete
    4. Ashley Stevens, there are a lot of armchair lawyers commenting here, and I laugh at them. Because they clearly have not been reading transcripts of sessions or anything. This case is not about theft. It is about copyright infringement, and GW being questioned by a recipient of a cease and desist order.

      The crucial detail is that the judge has submitted evidence himself, of a space marine miniature game datimg from 1980. GW protested, and got slapped down.

      Thus, it makes it hard at best to determine if they have any original IP...

      Delete
  13. "-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 [insert exact GW kit title]""


    But product that interact with their product needs their say to do so? That paragraph confused me as I thought the whope oint is that the last description was not acceptable for GW...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not the a compatible part that's the issue. The storm raven kit would be allowed under this.
      The IP theft is when CH put a Spacewolf/Salamander/(insert GW SM chapter name here) logo on the kit, lifted strait from the codex, shoulder pads of old models or descriptions in the fluff like they have done on many shoulder pad and vehicle doors.

      or when the conversion kit is like the Tervigon that then replaces a release GW wanted.

      Delete
    2. No no, in fact, most of the symbols for space marine chapters were upheld as open game for CHS, especially the Ultramarines "U" since it is essentially a latin or greek letter. I forget which. Salamanders got slapped down because you cant copyright a frickin lizards head.

      Delete

 
Top
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...