The Heavy Hand of Games Workshop - IP Rights

[Popisdead]

Is the IP change really as heavy handed as all content related is now removed?  Social media promotes the sky-is-falling feeling before anyone stops and thinks.  

i'm also confused why people feel they owned some democratic right to something they pay for as a consumer product (internet included).  The democratic right you have is to not buy it.  

[Laststand]

There's nothing particularly bad here. Try making an animation with Mickey Mouse and see what Disney do.  Also the guidelines are guidelines because its difficult or not possible for them to be infringements. Noone has to worry about review videos whatever they show. If i want to buy a codex and make a youtube video about it im covered by specific legal protections. UK law below, there are fair use provisions in US law too.

https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre/articles/fair-use-copyright-explained

As an exception to British copyright law, fair dealing is governed by Sections 29 and 30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, which outlines three instance where fair dealing is a legitimate defence:

• If the use is for the purposes of research or private study;
• If it is used for the purposes of criticism, review or quotation;
• Where it is utilised for the purposes of reporting current events (this does not apply to photographs)

 

[BadDice0809]

"Man who Reads Book" has a ****** name- Ash at Guerrilla Miniatures Gaming- sort of disrespectful to keep on using the meme. The man has done more to promote wargaming as a hobby, and even AoS, than literally anyone on this site. Full stop.

As for people saying "oh no no more review videos" NONE of the preview guys who get early copies WOULD if they didn't PREVIEW them. Saying those will stop now is completely idiotic. GW wants the free advertising.

As for battle reports, I doubt those will stop, both under fair use, and the fact that GW is unlikely to be making enough, at any quantity, to make monopolizing them worth the loss of free advertising. 

The new rules are squarely aimed at killing the free animators to make way for Warhammer Plus. Thats it. Whether you think that is good or bad is up to you but the world of IP law isn't changing anytime soon.

TLDR the channel is Ash at Guerilla Miniatures Gaming.

Edited July 22, 2021 by BadDice0809

[GrimDork]

1 minute ago, BadDice0809 said:

"Man who Reads Book" has a ****** name- Ash at Guerrilla Miniatures Gaming- sort of disrespectful to keep on using the meme. The man has done more to promote wargaming as a hobby, and even AoS, than literally anyone on this site. Full stop.

As for people saying "oh no no more review videos" NONE of the preview guys who get early copies WOULD if they didn't PREVIEW them. Saying those will stop now is completely idiotic. GW wants the free advertising.

As for battle reports, I doubt those with stop, both under fair use, and the fact that GW is unlikely to be making enough, at any quantity, to make monopolizing them worth the loss of free advertising. 

The new rules are squarely aimed at killing the free animators to make way for Warhammer Plus. Thats it. Whether you think that is good or bad is up to you but the world of IP law isn't changing anytime soon.

TLDR the channel is Ash at Guerilla Miniatures Gaming.

Others have done reviews as well. WargamerOnline to name just one. Don't think anyone means any disrespect by saying "man who reads book"

[ian0delond]

8 minutes ago, Popisdead said:

Is the IP change really as heavy handed as all content related is now removed?  Social media promotes the sky-is-falling feeling before anyone stops and thinks.  

i'm also confused why people feel they owned some democratic right to something they pay for as a consumer product (internet included).  The democratic right you have is to not buy it.  

It's not even a democratic right, simply of ownership.

They want ownership of the content they created so someone can't just claim it and stop making a profit. But then come the realization they don't have ownership because that someone else is actually the owner of the content theirs is based on, and they can remove so the original content can still make a profit.

[Overread]

7 minutes ago, GrimDork said:

Others have done reviews as well. WargamerOnline to name just one. Don't think anyone means any disrespect by saying "man who reads book"

+1 There are several who do the whole reading of the book so "man reads" kinda covers it. At least until we have women doing it then I guess we have to change the meme to "person reads" or "Geek reads". Yeah lets do that - change it to Geek Reads Book!

[NinthMusketeer]

Let's say I'm an indie animator who has created my own setting and characters. I've got a very popular YouTube channel which is my source of income. But I'm still just some dude and his mates putting original animations together.

Suddenly, Disney starts creating animations using my setting and characters. And they start making a considerable amount of money thanks to building off the popularity and appeal I generated.

Everyone who says GW is in the wrong would logically support Disney in the above scenario. They are saying that I would be out of line in protecting my IP and asking Disney to stop making content based off it.

But obviously that is not the side they would support because for so many it isn't about what is legal or even morally right, it's just about opposing a corporation because it's a corporation. Here's the thing; we live in democracies. We elect the people who write corporate law. If those laws say that corporations exist to make money without concern for morality then no ****** they are going to act the way they do, that is how we told them to behave.

[BadDice0809]

Not to make this a whole "thing" but the meme started in the same place other tiresome memes in the AoS community started (bin and sin guy, etc) and it was explicitly directed at Ash at GMG. It might have evolved (and thats a reach there are maybe three video content creators whom consistently reviewed AoS books for the life of the game) but it started as a snide swipe at him.

It was kinda pathetic when the same people dismissing him with a meme still watched the videos to see the new stuff too...

[BadDice0809]

4 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Let's say I'm an indie animator who has created my own setting and characters. I've got a very popular YouTube channel which is my source of income. But I'm still just some dude and his mates putting original animations together.

Suddenly, Disney starts creating animations using my setting and characters. And they start making a considerable amount of money thanks to building off the popularity and appeal I generated.

Everyone who says GW is in the wrong would logically support Disney in the above scenario. They are saying that I would be out of line in protecting my IP and asking Disney to stop making content based off it.

But obviously that is not the side they would support because for so many it isn't about what is legal or even morally right, it's just about opposing a corporation because it's a corporation. Here's the thing; we live in democracies. We elect the people who write corporate law. If those laws say that corporations exist to make money without concern for morality then no ****** they are going to act the way they do, that is how we told them to behave.

I think a lot of the angst comes from people feeling that these content creators were filling a niche that GW, for the longest time, had either zero interest or ****** poor ability to fill. It kinda seems like turning around and slapping the people who through their own efforts were expanding aspects of the hobby GW abandoned.

That might seem morally wrong. But morality has zero to do with what the law is. IP law is was it is, so these are the facts.

As for the bit about corporate law, let's not pretend citizens had any meaningful input in crafting IP laws. In the case of many "developing countries" and the WTO, it was also a case of accept western IP and trademark laws, or you are not let in full stop. Hardly 'democratic.'

[Golub87]

5 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Let's say I'm an indie animator who has created my own setting and characters. I've got a very popular YouTube channel which is my source of income. But I'm still just some dude and his mates putting original animations together.

Suddenly, Disney starts creating animations using my setting and characters. And they start making a considerable amount of money thanks to building off the popularity and appeal I generated.

Everyone who says GW is in the wrong would logically support Disney in the above scenario. They are saying that I would be out of line in protecting my IP and asking Disney to stop making content based off it.

But obviously that is not the side they would support because for so many it isn't about what is legal or even morally right, it's just about opposing a corporation because it's a corporation. Here's the thing; we live in democracies. We elect the people who write corporate law. If those laws say that corporations exist to make money without concern for morality then no ****** they are going to act the way they do, that is how we told them to behave.

Absolutely not.

I will always side with the little guy over the corporation. In the case you state, Disney is impacting your ability to make a living for yourself, by hogging the marketplace and making you look like you are stealing from them.

And using Disney as an example is kinda bad because Disney is an exceptionally evil and exploitative entity that should be broken up anyway.

Bottom line is, corpos get away with this because people do not make a fuss. Making a fuss is good. It is healthy and nice and creates positive change in the world. No one should defend any corporate entity except if it is under assault from the bigger corporate entity.

Current IP laws are laws, the overlords made sure of that, but that does not mean that corpos are free to exploit them to their full extent - as long as negative publicity is involved.

[HollowHills]

19 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Let's say I'm an indie animator who has created my own setting and characters. I've got a very popular YouTube channel which is my source of income. But I'm still just some dude and his mates putting original animations together.

Suddenly, Disney starts creating animations using my setting and characters. And they start making a considerable amount of money thanks to building off the popularity and appeal I generated.

Everyone who says GW is in the wrong would logically support Disney in the above scenario. They are saying that I would be out of line in protecting my IP and asking Disney to stop making content based off it.

But obviously that is not the side they would support because for so many it isn't about what is legal or even morally right, it's just about opposing a corporation because it's a corporation. Here's the thing; we live in democracies. We elect the people who write corporate law. If those laws say that corporations exist to make money without concern for morality then no ****** they are going to act the way they do, that is how we told them to behave.

This isn't really the same. My principle is that laws should protect the weak against the powerful, not keep the powerful powerful.

IP rights protecting a debut hit author to ensure a movie studio can't just snap their book, chop it and change it then make a million dollars is great. You're protecting the rights of a single individual who has dedicated their life to a creative work.

IP rights being used by a massive corp to smash fans who just want to create something fun for other fans is not the same at all. Even if said fan has patreon I doubt they are earning enough from it to really compensate the massive amount of work they out into these passion projects.

[Overread]

And just where will you draw the line? GW are nothing compared to the likes of Disney in power. Is GW big enough? What about Game of Thrones? That's 1 author's work is he big enough or small enough (or just well known enough) for protection? What about Witcher? 

 

Bringing scale into it just complicates matters, but also shows that its not a simple thing. In the end GW are tiny compared to other mega-firms. All GW is doing is protecting their IP, they aren't stopping fans creating videos, just videos of the GW IP and Trademarks. If those people want to make a video about big men in hulking space suits shooting aliens they can do just that. They just can't do it using all the material GW has put into the market and such. Same as they can't make a Witcher film or a Game of Thrones. 

Copyright isn't evil. It's a system that protects and allows creators to release products and creations to the market and be able to earn off them without the risk of others stealing their work. Heck disable copyright and Disney would grow in power because they could bring superior resources, market reach and everything to fan works. They'd honestly love nothing more than to poach anything they want. 

 

Plus lets not forget GW isn't just shutting these people down; GW is offering many of them JOBS. These dedicated fans are getting the opportunity to work officially for the brand and firm and world that they utterly love. That's a freaking dream-on-a-plate right there for many of them to work with the firm; to release official products; to be part of the thing they love. 

[NinthMusketeer]

Ultimately my point is that GW is acting exactly as it has been told to do. All corporations have been explicitly told to make money before anything else. Faulting them for doing it is pointless. It would be like complaining how ambulances don't respect traffic lights in an emergency, or bemoaning how buildings get wet when firefighters are suppressing fires.

If we want corporations to not put profit above all else we need to stop telling them to put profit above all else. And don't try to feed me the 'but all politicians bad we have no choice' line because we all saw how that worked out in 2016.

[FlatTooth]

Now, I love dunking on GW as much as anyone but a large company having fairly tight IP rules is very standard. I know there are plenty of arm-chair lawyers out there who have strong opinions but this is pretty reasonable. Go on YouTube and post every page of a NY Times best seller book and I imagine you’ll hear from someone. Gamers have a unique concept of ownership when it comes to their hobby so we tend to see this as a bit more nefarious then I think it is (believe me I think there are plenty of nefarious things GW does elsewise) but, well, it isn’t. 

[FlatTooth]

1 hour ago, HollowHills said:

This isn't really the same. My principle is that laws should protect the weak against the powerful, not keep the powerful powerful.

IP rights protecting a debut hit author to ensure a movie studio can't just snap their book, chop it and change it then make a million dollars is great. You're protecting the rights of a single individual who has dedicated their life to a creative work.

IP rights being used by a massive corp to smash fans who just want to create something fun for other fans is not the same at all. Even if said fan has patreon I doubt they are earning enough from it to really compensate the massive amount of work they out into these passion projects.

I’d love to know who gets the pleasure of writing this particular set of IP laws. Like, I am all on-board with eating the rich but I’m not sure we can write a law that is basically “IP protection unless you make a certain amount of money”. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, IP laws need so much work but even the lawyers I’ve spoken to who specialize in copyright always say they can only give “maybe yes” or “maybe no” as answers. 

[Golub87]

52 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Ultimately my point is that GW is acting exactly as it has been told to do. All corporations have been explicitly told to make money before anything else. Faulting them for doing it is pointless. It would be like complaining how ambulances don't respect traffic lights in an emergency, or bemoaning how buildings get wet when firefighters are suppressing fires.

If we want corporations to not put profit above all else we need to stop telling them to put profit above all else. And don't try to feed me the 'but all politicians bad we have no choice' line because we all saw how that worked out in 2016.

No, this is incorrect. The reason why corporations put profit over anything else is because they are literally entities that are made for accumulation of wealth. No one 'told" corporations that this is what they should do. The ruling class tells us what the laws will be.

The ruling class shapes the laws of society in order to maintain and reproduce its power. Under the ideology of liberalism, capitalism is the only possible economic system and under capitalism, accumulation of wealth is the only way to achieve and maintain power.

There is no fantasy land where a class other than the ruling one could override its interests without removing its power altogether and replacing it. That is simply not how the real world works. Best you can hope for are minor concessions that they deem too costly to fight against. Again, this is part of maintenance and reproduction of power, we do outnumber them and they need us to work for them, create their wealth and police each other.

That said, IP laws are entirely unnecessary outside the bounds of liberal ideology and capitalist economy. The problem is not in the fact that without IP Disney will swoop in with its superior resources and steal from you, the problem is that Disney exists in the first place. Creative people worked and thrived long before IP was a thing and will work and thrive long after IP is a forgotten relic of a barbaric age.

[yukishiro1]

There's no rule that companies exist solely to maximize profit for their shareholders, that's actually a relatively modern idea that propagandists have certainly tried their best to backdate into history and pretend was the case all along, with some success in the popular sphere. But it has no historical basis, nor any actual legal basis. You will not find any Corporations Code anywhere that states that corporations have a legal duty to maximize profits to shareholders. It's completely up to the individual company's management (and therefore ultimately to its shareholders) what it chooses to prioritize. 

Now modern GW is certainly run on the basis of shareholder profit maximization. But that's not an inevitability, it's a choice. 

Edited July 22, 2021 by yukishiro1

[BadDice0809]

1 hour ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Ultimately my point is that GW is acting exactly as it has been told to do. All corporations have been explicitly told to make money before anything else. Faulting them for doing it is pointless. It would be like complaining how ambulances don't respect traffic lights in an emergency, or bemoaning how buildings get wet when firefighters are suppressing fires.

If we want corporations to not put profit above all else we need to stop telling them to put profit above all else. And don't try to feed me the 'but all politicians bad we have no choice' line because we all saw how that worked out in 2016.

Its such an oversimplification to say "well we told them to put money above all else" and just nod our head like that answers every decision.

If GW should just put "make money above all else" why the hell is any production still done in the UK? Literally nothing should be made there. Move it all to China (maybe India). Lord knows that if FW is any judge, the quality would skyrocket. 

For that matter, why have a Warhammer World and Bugmans? Most of GWs profits come from NA and only a fraction of NA purchasers (or even European, or Asian) will visit. Seems like a waste of money that could increase my share price.

Why develop their own apps and Warhammer Plus? Frankly, the 40k app was a laughable, pathetic dumpster fire on launch. Battlescribe is still out there, and free. A lot of the 'official' 40k animations, which seemed to be using assets from a game almost 10 years old, looked like trash next to Astartes and Exodites. Why suddenly invest capital in a streaming service anyway? This lowered my share's price and reduced my dividends.

Corporations have every right to make money. Some fans (and shareholders like myself) might be questioning if attacking these fan made productions (and frankly Warhammer Plus all together) is the best way to go about it.

 I'm getting ugly flash backs to early 2000s GW, flush with cash from the success of LotR, over extended. Then the wall hit, a bunch of places got closed (Battle Bunkers anyone?) and GW basically abandoned any community presence in NA. While I don't think if/when Warhammer Plus  flops it will that bad, it just seems like a middle management good idea run amok.

 

[Overread]

GW is certainly outreaching with the cash they've got. One big benefit though is that GW never takes on debt (they even paid back 100% of their government loan money for the furlough scheme). So if their Warhammer + fails GW can cut it loose and not suffer long term costs. A lot of firms often expand by taking out loans and then if the project fails (or things take a downturn) they are left with high interest rates and a big loan they can't just abandon, even if the original thing they used the loan for has failed and been abandoned. 

It's a move that has left GW in a robust position. It perhaps means they aren't potentially as big as they "could" be. They could have expanded far faster by taking on big investors and loans; however it also means that they have a more solid foundation and more direct control over their outgoings. 

 

 

 

As for the whole "companies only for profit" thing. Lets not start to make companies out to anything that they aren't. Companies are simply collections of people who work together to produce an end result. Most often companies work to maximise profits as best they can in a general sense because the more money the more you can do. However there are many individuals within firms who are not in it just for the money; who are passionate and keen and really fired up over what they do. It's easy to demonise companies as a faceless monster, but in doing so we forget that behind that company face are real people just working their job. And for a firm like GW most of them are working a job they want to do; that they perhaps dreamed of doing and that they get satisfaction out of. So sure they'd all love more money; and sure GW will work toward ensuring that its investments are made in ways that they hope will generate more money and strengthen their position in the long and short term. But its not just about money -- as noted above if it was GW would be doing things very differently. 

Heck GW isn't just shutting down these fan content creators; they are offering them jobs ontop of the jobs GW is already paying people to do to make stuff for them. GW is INVESTING in a portion of their fanbase. Bringing them into the fold. 

And again I'll remind people that patreon and other payment systems mean that fan creations can generate significant income for creators. It's a wonderful thing that allows creators to create and get paid for it; however when their creations are based fully or heavily on the works of others, then it is something that can be challenged by the rights holders. Be they 1 guy who wrote a book or a company or a multinational. 

 

 

[Golub87]

1 minute ago, Overread said:

 however when their creations are based fully or heavily on the works of others...

This is really funny in the context of this particular company.

That said, yes, by law GW has the capability to pursue and shutdown a lot of people. Might, however, does not make right.

The question is not if they CAN, but if they SHOULD. Most importantly, this conversation is raising awareness of these developments, because when the company CAN do something by law, the only resort a community has to stop it is raising awareness and public outcry.

[Overread]

Just now, Golub87 said:

This is really funny in the context of this particular company.

That said, yes, by law GW has the capability to pursue and shutdown a lot of people. Might, however, does not make right.

The question is not if they CAN, but if they SHOULD. Most importantly, this conversation is raising awareness of these developments, because when the company CAN do something by law, the only resort a community has to stop it is raising awareness and public outcry.

Consider that GW is currently in deals with firms to produce animated productions.

Consider that video game companies currently pay a licence fee to GW to produce a game with GW's IP. If GW never shut down a fan made game; then those companies that paid GW for the licence might turn around and question the contract. Why should they be paying a fee when "fans" are making a product and selling it (or getting donations) or even just releasing it for free ot the market. Suddenly that fan creation is having a real world impact on the legal agreements of the official content. 

The same is true of the videos. I don't actually know if GW are paying them or if they have licenced to work within the GW IP (I would assume GW is paying them right now but it could even be a mix of both). GW can't be seen to allow others to profit "for free" whilst others can't. 

 

And furthermore on the can/should angle - GW can shut them down; they should because of agreements with other animation firms. However at the same time GW doesn't have to offer the fan creators jobs - but they have. GW has gone out of their way to not just shut down the competition, but to absorb them into their ecosystem. To me that's  a best of both worlds situation - a win win. GW is protecting their IP and their current and future animation and TV production contracts (that means we fans have more chance of official bigger budget productions); and GW are offering jobs to talented fan creators who then then earn and work for the firm who's lore and games and product, they are so passionate about.

 

 

So far the only fall out is that some "fans" have attacked at least one content creator who took their videos down to work with GW. Attacking that person to the point where they openly said they will just walk away from the whole deal and 3D animation of warhammer stuff. GW didn't do that, "fans" within the community did that. 

Likely a similar group to those who sent death and violent threats to those who authored the childrens book series. 

 

To me that is the most horrible thing of this whole affair. The open and increasing display that the casual GW hate has gone on so long and promoted iteslf so much that there is a small, but significant group of the fanbase who are so hostile to GW that they attack those who work for GW directly. Who are willing to turn their hate that GW "charges too much" or "doesn't write rules right" into death threats. 

[Sleboda]

3 hours ago, Overread said:

All GW is doing is protecting their IP, they aren't stopping fans creating videos, just videos of the GW IP and Trademarks. If those people want to make a video about big men in hulking space suits shooting aliens they can do just that. They just can't do it using all the material GW has put into the market and such. Same as they can't make a Witcher film or a Game of Thrones. 

Perfectly summed up. It really is that simple. You think you're good enough to make films? Then make them using your own work and creations, not someone else's.

👍

[RuneBrush]

+++ MOD HAT +++

OK folks, can I ask you please to rein it in a bit please?  Have read some pretty confrontational comments in here so far and not particularly impressed.  Appreciate that some people have some very strong beliefs and it's natural to want to defend those beliefs.  But let's put a bit of context here, we're talking about a shared hobby and there's no need to be aggressive when somebody's beliefs and opinions differ from your own.  In short, stay civil.

[Sarouan]

All of this because GW updated their IP Guidelines section. Guidelines.

Most of the debate isn't about this anymore. It's about political beliefs and the distorted way some perceive GW because it fits their political narrative.

The problem lies with people here, not GW. When you see the world in Black and White, it can only goes that way.

A good example is here :

16 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

Their market cap is currently sitting around £3.6 billion. Market cap is generally accepted as a shorthand for company value in the absence of any other data. The value of a company certainly isn't measured by its annual revenue, which is the number you seem to be quoting. 

GW might or might not "actually" be worth £3.6 billion, but it's certainly worth well over a billion pounds by any serious valuation. 

So because there is a set found somewhere about the speculative "value" of a company is enough to categorize it as a "billion dollar company". Even though none of GW profits is close enough to a billion - meaning the actual money they have in surplus and could invest back in the company or its employees for the better.

In comparison to Activision, a video game company that makes predatory video games on children with lootboxes and true microtransactions, that makes indeed billions dollars in profit every year, that could be used to upgrade their lowest employees salary but instead is given massively to their top management like Bobby Kotick, infamously known as being one of the billionaires. Like, true billionaires - meaning he doesn't need any more, he already has way more than enough to live at least a thousand lives in luxury.

But no, both are billion dollar companies, you see. Both are "Black". They're the same, you see.

 

Facts don't matter when you have a political agenda. What only matters is how you spin them your way so that it becomes a consolidation of your beliefs. Guidelines aren't guidelines anymore - they're an imminent threat forewarning a plague of legal actions against the poor fans who make animation videos on GW IP. No question, no Grey...the world is simple in Black and White.

Edited July 23, 2021 by Sarouan

[Beliman]

Every country has diferent IP laws but all of them are focused in two things: The creator and the rights to use it.

In Spain, you are the owner of your own creation, it never expires and it's hereditary. If there isn't any contract that says that someone has your creation's exploitation rights, it's the artist that has them: make money, copy, diffusion, manufacture, distribute, etc... If you work for a company, you are still the creator of your own work, but the rights to exploit it are subject to your contract with that company.

Others countries don't have exactly the same laws (even if they follow the same principles). As an example, in NA, you can lose the rights if you don't exploit your product!!!

Laws already stop you to exploit other's IPs rights (note: you don't need to earn money to exploit it, just use it without any permision). But the owner of this rights is the one that needs to take legal action to defend them, and this guidelines are just to mark the red line for everyone that uses GWs IPs without pemision.

That doesn't mean that GW will sue everyone, that just means that if you are crossing that red line, maybe they will contact you to see how it can be solved without going to the court. 

90% of this cases don't even end on to court. Negotiations and/or investigations (if it's needed) can close the case before it even started. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Beliman
Grammar