The Heavy Hand of Games Workshop - IP Rights

[RexHavoc]

The fact that 'new' GW is praised and people are thinking that their dealings with IP laws are justified, yet it was 'new' GW that went after a very small company for having a name too similar to 'warhammer'. Not the same name, just 'Similar'. That tells me all I need to know about these changes.

The fact that GW built their games and universes on the backs of other IPs, pop culture, historic tales & fables and community input doesn't seem to even register with them any more.

I love the hobby. Its peaceful, relaxing, and its my one interaction with people that doesn't come with some ounce of responsibility attached to it, and I know there plenty of others like me in the same boat. I will continue to buy warhammer models that I like the look of and I will continue to enjoy playing in the warhammer sandbox.

But I don't give a damn about the company. There is no humanity or soul left in there. I'm as indifferent to them now as I would be amazon or sony or any other huge company that could up and vanish one day. I will go out of my to support other wargaming companies, but not GW. To me, its coincidental that they supply hobby products, they are a volume shifter. They exist to sell as much stock as they can, rinse and repeat. They could sell any other type of product and nothing would change with them.

I suspect they will pick and choose when to act on these new 'guidelines'. Someone reading every page from their most recent book on youtube disguised as a 'review' that has 100k subscribers is going to continue to do so, as long as they continue to agree that new hype product is BEST NEW PRODUCT BUY BUY BUY. I don't see the same leniency being given to a 300 sub hobbyist that happens to put up some points in the army list for a battle report, or someone doing painting videos that uses the warhammer logo on the thumbnail, or if they criticise any of the freebies they send out.

I would say that time will tell, but we've already seem multiple instances of them being heavy handed, so I already expect the worst to come from this. If I'm wrong, then it remains as it is now and its all good but if I'm right, I'm not going to be disappointed as I expected it.

I'm just glad that they are about 20 years too late to crack down on this completely. For now I'm happy to remember them as the company that once published rule articles like 'B'ufi the Vampire Slayer' and not get too caught up in their quest to make warhammer an all encompassing range of products with heavily guarded IP.
 

[ArkanautDadmiral]

52 minutes ago, RexHavoc said:

I will continue to buy warhammer models that I like the look of and I will continue to enjoy playing in the warhammer sandbox…
… I will go out of my to support other wargaming companies, but not GW.

You don’t consider buying and using their products as support?

 

58 minutes ago, RexHavoc said:

They exist to sell as much stock as they can, rinse and repeat. They could sell any other type of product and nothing would change with them..
 

What company with a product exists to do something other than sell that product?

Despite your contempt for GW, you still keep putting money in their pockets? Do you consider maybe you’re enabling the practices you disagree with?

[NinthMusketeer]

14 hours ago, stratigo said:

They should be paid more and have some controlling stake in what they create

Stop. You have no idea what that information is, and have no basis whatsoever for making this judgement. This is made up from your own assumptions, an extremely bad-faith argument. It reflects poorly on you and makes all of your arguments seem less legitimate by association, even if they are completely valid. Consider that.

[NinthMusketeer]

10 hours ago, RexHavoc said:

The fact that GW built their games and universes on the backs of other IPs, pop culture, historic tales & fables

That's how every fictional setting has been made ever. GW legitimately stole one thing; Moorcock's chaos star. But even the concept of Chaos that is so often called out at being lifted directly from Moocock is notably different to a degree that is rarely if ever faulted among other fictional settings. Personally I think it is like the Starcraft-40k connection; an urban legend that is so widely circulated no one stops to check if its true.

[Overread]

Almost everything is lifted and inspired by something else. The vast bulk of modern fantasy draws inspiration from mythologies and religions and real history. Heck a huge amount drew on inspiration from Lord of the Rings, meanwhile today I'd wager that World of Warcraft is having a similarly huge inspirational impact on visual fantasy mediums. 

That's often just how humans create things. New things have inspirations on things that people see, hear, experience, do and generally come into contact with. 

 

[Warfiend]

20 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Stop. You have no idea what that information is, and have no basis whatsoever for making this judgement. This is made up from your own assumptions, an extremely bad-faith argument. It reflects poorly on you and makes all of your arguments seem less legitimate by association, even if they are completely valid. Consider that.

This is just your opinion, just like what you quoted was his. And the way you’re stating it is extremely rude and makes you come off as extremely immature, get your act together.

[ArkanautDadmiral]

None of these content creators are creating their own fictional entities that have been influenced by Warhammer (and by extension any other fantasy or sci-fi trope), they’re monetising content that contains GWs specific IP, their universe, characters etc

There’s a big difference between me putting a yellow bald man in an animation to putting Homer Simpson in it and setting it in Springfield with the rest of the cast.

[NinthMusketeer]

1 hour ago, Warfiend said:

This is just your opinion, just like what you quoted was his. And the way you’re stating it is extremely rude and makes you come off as extremely immature, get your act together.

So either;

-You believe that Stratigo does, in fact, know the salaries and stock options of GW employees.

-Understand that isn't true and are claiming I am 'assuming' under unreasonable pretense. If I say the sky is blue, I am assuming that's true; after all I could be colorblind and not know it. But people acting in good faith know that isn't sound reasoning.

 

[Warfiend]

1 hour ago, NinthMusketeer said:

So either;

-You believe that Stratigo does, in fact, know the salaries and stock options of GW employees.

-Understand that isn't true and are claiming I am 'assuming' under unreasonable pretense. If I say the sky is blue, I am assuming that's true; after all I could be colorblind and not know it. But people acting in good faith know that isn't sound reasoning.

 

Or you’re now making up a false narrative in your head to justify your aggressive demeanor. 

I was merely commenting on your post and the way you presented yourself. Which goes against the guidelines this forum is build on. You’re free to disagree with someone but keep it civil.

Since this is all OT I won’t respond further. 

 

[NinthMusketeer]

4 hours ago, Warfiend said:

Or you’re now making up a false narrative in your head to justify your aggressive demeanor. 

I was merely commenting on your post and the way you presented yourself. Which goes against the guidelines this forum is build on. You’re free to disagree with someone but keep it civil.

Since this is all OT I won’t respond further. 

So the second one then.

[EccentricCircle]

I wonder if part of the problem lies in the way we as a fanbase interact with the product. All fandon revolves around consumer products to a greater or lesser extent, but how we engage with those products can vary substantially. Consequently the degree of ownership we have over them does too.

Some elements of fandom are what I would term "passive". You absorb and enjoy media, as it is presented to you, but even if you're really into it, you're still only engaging with the text as presented.
Other kinds are active. You absorb the product, and engage in transformative activities related to it. Tabletop games in particular fall into this latter category, but of course so do things like Cosplay and Fanfiction.

 

So when we become fans of something like warhammer, it isn't just to sit there are read the books that have been written. Its to play our own games, using the rules. And most of us go beyond that, because the hobby aspect is so important. We spend hundreds of hours painting, crafting, and generally creating within the framework of the game. Even a lot of the actual game play is about telling our own stories within that world.

 

So its no surprise that we feel a lot of ownership over that IP, and to a large extent this has historically been encouraged. Its always been about customising, crafting, making your models your own and telling your own stories.

And so its only natural that some folks will want to take that much further, and make fan films, and write warhammer stories, and generally engage with the IP in a much more transformative way than perhaps the people who own that IP would like.

Indeed, in the twenty years I've been in the hobby, I reckon there has been a shift from a general encouragement of custimisation and transformation, to a tacit acknowledgement of it, and perhaps to tactic discouragement. We have seen GW dial down on their IP to try to make their setting unique, and in the process have turned a toolbox for playing fantasy battles into a very specific and prescriptive setting and a game that supports that.

However, I feel like the community is still stuck in a bit of a limbo between these two paradigms. We still feel ownership of something which legally speaking is not ours.

I have no interest in getting into the broader debate as to whether this should be the state of affairs. Maybe its fine for the big corporation to have ownership over their employees creations, or maybe we should all be trying to sieze the means of production, and put the ownership in the hands of the creatives. Where exactly my opinions fall on that scale is irrelevant to the discussion, because for better or worse we live in a capitalist culture.

Thus GW does get to defend their IP, and whether their ability to do so is proportionate to their merit doesn't really enter into it. If they want to shut down fan films, they have the power to do so, and there isn't much we can do about it, because no amount of pressure we could collectively apply to them to do so would be enough.

The problem lies in that we've always had things like fan films, and have felt entitled to be able to produce that kind of transformative work. I know I for one prefer to engage with the hobby in that way, and really enjoy creating things more than I do "following the rules as written" at least where lore is concerned.

However, I recognise that if I want free rein to be able to do that, I have to enjoy their IP for what it is, take inspiration from it, and then go and put the effort and dedication into working on my own creations, within a space which is entirely my own IP. Not everyone is going to want to do that though.

But until the revolution comes, I don't really see the trajectory changing back towards a more open "toolboxy" approach which supports transformative fan engagement. GW have made the big bucks by dialling down on the uniqueness of their IP, and making sure that they have control over it, and that isn't going to change.

 

[Sleboda]

20 hours ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

You don’t consider buying and using their products as support?

As a side note (maybe another thread?), I've always scratched my head over this use of "support."

The company needs to "support" the game.

A customer needs to "support" a YouTube channel.

A gamer "supports" a business by purchasing its products.

To me, these are all nonsense.

Entity X produces an item (model, podcast, airplane, article, whatever). People pay for it or they don't. There is no connection beyond that.

It's especially irksome when a YouTube channel - almost always a thing making money or trying to - asks for support. No, I will not "support" you. Make a thing I value enough to purchase and I'll purchase it. Transaction over. If you fail, that's not because you were not "supported." It's because what you produced was not worth me buying. End of story.

In this context, buying and using a product from GW is not supporting them. It's buying something under the terms the seller proposed.

I support my mom when she's emotionally troubled.

I support my friend by helping him move.

I support my junk with nicely fitting undies.

I buy a product when the manufacturer creates a thing I value enough to buy. It's a transaction. Incidentally, this is why I believe gamers are entitled whiners when they get mad at a company for not "supporting" a game system. When the game comes out, you buy it for, say, $100. The company owes you ZERO "support" for the game after that. You got what you paid for, and that's it.

 

My lawn has too many people on it.

 

[Golub87]

3 hours ago, EccentricCircle said:

However, I feel like the community is still stuck in a bit of a limbo between these two paradigms. We still feel ownership of something which legally speaking is not ours.

The technical, scientific term for this social phenomenon would be "alienation".

Unrelated, I have to admit it is kind of funny, in a very morbid way, that most people are so engulfed by the hegemony of the liberal ideology, that they are unable to even recognize the basic mechanisms of capitalism. For instance, that corporations do not ever produce anything, labor does. I can't believe that is such a mind blowing concept.

[ArkanautDadmiral]

12 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

As a side note (maybe another thread?), I've always scratched my head over this use of "support."

The company needs to "support" the game.

A customer needs to "support" a YouTube channel.

A gamer "supports" a business by purchasing its products.

To me, these are all nonsense.

Entity X produces an item (model, podcast, airplane, article, whatever). People pay for it or they don't. There is no connection beyond that.

It's especially irksome when a YouTube channel - almost always a thing making money or trying to - asks for support. No, I will not "support" you. Make a thing I value enough to purchase and I'll purchase it. Transaction over. If you fail, that's not because you were not "supported." It's because what you produced was not worth me buying. End of story.

In this context, buying and using a product from GW is not supporting them. It's buying something under the terms the seller proposed.

I support my mom when she's emotionally troubled.

I support my friend by helping him move.

I support my junk with nicely fitting undies.

I buy a product when the manufacturer creates a thing I value enough to buy. It's a transaction. Incidentally, this is why I believe gamers are entitled whiners when they get mad at a company for not "supporting" a game system. When the game comes out, you buy it for, say, $100. The company owes you ZERO "support" for the game after that. You got what you paid for, and that's it.

 

My lawn has too many people on it.

 

I agree with your deeper points here but I think the ‘support’ thing is a bit of an argument about semantics which doesn’t have a huge impact on the underlying point.

But you’re right as consumers were offered a choice to buy the product or not. GW don’t force us. We’re free to spend or not spend. I can’t wrap my head around how someone can have such utter contempt for company X but still put money into their product, perpetuating the cycle. Especially when their biggest gripe is company X only cares about profits; yes, maybe, but you’re giving them to them!

Some seem to be trying to separate the product from the company that makes it here (evidenced by one users “GW don’t make things, they just own them…’ stance) which seems like a convenient way of trying to disassociate themselves from their spending relationship with the business that gives them the ability to act in ways they don’t find desirable.

EA and the Fifa series are another good example of this, every year people buy the game and complain it’s poor or nothings changed etc, but every year they still buy it!

They also ignore that maybe some people like the game doesn’t change much, maybe they’re happy to pay for just the updated kits etc, some might not think it’s worth the price, but the money being spent proves otherwise.

This has gone a little off topic though, sorry.

Im confident we won’t see any channels get shut down. If you’re making fan art the loss of monetisation (and that’s all they’ll lose) on that shouldn’t be an issue. Fan art is supposed to be a labour of love, not a revenue stream. If more channels took that approach we’d probably see more interesting content instead of the same rehashed videos amongst numerous creators. 

Just look at the entitlement of Squidmar:

His content is 99% Warhammer, he has 322k followers, he makes Warhammer painting videos for a living… I know who the main beneficiary of this relationship is and it’s not GW, no one is landing on his channel without already being a Warhammer fan already. The painting channels tend to push people towards alternate paint brands rather than Citadel. Climb down Squidmar, you’d have nothing without GW. Yet they’re the leeches? Imagine the level of arrogance…

There’s literally some channels monetising nothing but complaints about GW.

This turned out ranty for me but I’ll actually post instead of delete this time.

[Golub87]

9 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

We’re free to spend or not spend. I can’t wrap my head around how someone can have such utter contempt for company X but still put money into their product, perpetuating the cycle.

Let's say you like miniatures and painting and want to do wargaming as well. You go to your local place where likeminded folks are congregating and you find 10 people that are all playing GW games. You have a choice - you can essentially bet $500-600 on a different game, hoping that someone will like it enough to bet that much money themselves in the hope that there will be a community OR you can put that money on a sure bet that you will have people to play with.

This is not always the case - larger cities usually have a number of clubs, with variety of games represented, but GW has cornered the market and even in the most diverse of gaming communities, GW games will get you the most people to play with because of this inertia - you need people to play with, so you will join the largest group, thus making it even larger, perpetuating the cycle.

How to handle this "support"? If I feel the need for any GW models in my life, I take care to make sure that my money does not end up in their pockets. Buying second hand works great for that and is significantly cheaper, third party manufacturers are also an option. Elf is an elf and dwarf is a dwarf after all.

As for Squidmar tangent - yes, GW are the leeches in this case. Squidmar does benefit from making the videos, sure. But it takes skill, dedication. It is labor. It creates value for the viewer. Unlike the corporate shareholders who get money for not doing anything.

Yes, he uses GW products, but he paid for those (and paid a lot, let's not pretend that GW margin is not insane). Also, circling back to GW cornering the market - it is not like he has a choice in what space will he operate as painting guy. By virtue of controlling such a share of the market, GW forces painters to operate on their territory.

[Sleboda]

38 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

His content is 99% Warhammer, he has 322k followers, he makes Warhammer painting videos for a living… I know who the main beneficiary of this relationship is and it’s not GW, no one is landing on his channel without already being a Warhammer fan already. The painting channels tend to push people towards alternate paint brands rather than Citadel. Climb down Squidmar, you’d have nothing without GW. Yet they’re the leeches? Imagine the level of arrogance…

There’s literally some channels monetising nothing but complaints about GW.

I don't really have heroes (other than Darth Vader, Spider-man, and TV's Lucifer), but if I did, you'd be in the running just for this. I haaaaaaate ego and arrogance. Hate. I like squid's content, but hot damn you nailed it perfectly.

[ArkanautDadmiral]

Edit: on reflection this was all about ranty and off topic so I’ve removed it. Hopefully someone can get the thread back on track.

Edited July 25, 2021 by ArkanautDadmiral

[Beliman]

7 hours ago, Golub87 said:

Squidmar does benefit from making the videos, sure. But it takes skill, dedication. It is labor. It creates value for the viewer. Unlike the corporate shareholders who get money for not doing anything.

Dedication and work has nothing to do with IP rights.

7 hours ago, Golub87 said:

Yes, he uses GW products, but he paid for those (and paid a lot, let's not pretend that GW margin is not insane)

Buying a product doesn't allow you to gain it's rights.

Let's be honest, do you think that buying Infinite War (Jim Strarlin's comic) gives you the rights to use Thanos or the Infinite Stones in your products/content? No, you can't!!

Of course you can draw your fan-made comics, series or whatever, and probably Disney will never know about that (as 80% of fan-made products). But if one of their legal department see that someone is making money using their IP (doesn't matter if it's true or not, that's something for the court) and convince their boss to go for them...

Btw, I support all Warhammer channels and content-creators. I hope that this guidelines are just that, guidelines, and not the reason to start a witch-hunting.

[RuneBrush]

+++ MOD HAT +++

Having just caught up, I think we're at the point where we're largely going round in circles and we're largely just discussing differing opinions.  Will keep an eye on the thread, but if it doesn't look like it's going anywhere will lock it

[NinthMusketeer]

I do think there is an important distinction to be made--much (if not all) of the defense for GW here comes from the fact that these content creators were making money off the IP. That is the key. Creating in-universe content and putting it out there for the community to enjoy becomes very different in both a moral and legal sense when it becomes a source of income.

Edited July 26, 2021 by NinthMusketeer

[Kadeton]

This thread was really depressing to read. There's so much misunderstanding about intellectual property, and it's genuinely sad to see how effectively misinformation and confusion has been propagated and weaponised by corporate interests in the broader IP conversation, as evidenced here in microcosm.

[ArkanautDadmiral]

Just now, Kadeton said:

This thread was really depressing to read. There's so much misunderstanding about intellectual property, and it's genuinely sad to see how effectively misinformation and confusion has been propagated and weaponised by corporate interests in the broader IP conversation, as evidenced here in microcosm.

Then please explain it for everyone who’s got it wrong?

[NinthMusketeer]

28 minutes ago, Kadeton said:

This thread was really depressing to read. There's so much misunderstanding about intellectual property, and it's genuinely sad to see how effectively misinformation and confusion has been propagated and weaponised by corporate interests in the broader IP conversation, as evidenced here in microcosm.

I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this; corporate interests could never weaponize misinformation to even half the degree of plain old foolishness.

Edited July 26, 2021 by NinthMusketeer

[Sarouan]

38 minutes ago, Kadeton said:

This thread was really depressing to read. There's so much misunderstanding about intellectual property, and it's genuinely sad to see how effectively misinformation and confusion has been propagated and weaponised by corporate interests in the broader IP conversation, as evidenced here in microcosm.

This thread was really depressing to read. There's so much misunderstanding about corporations, their real costs given their size and logistics and the false equivalency of putting them all in the same bag - and it's genuinely sad to see how effectively misinformation and confusion has been propagated and weaponised by extremists that want to build a narrative fitting their beliefs that "GW is evil" on the internet, as evidenced here in microcosm.

Edited July 26, 2021 by Sarouan

[Overread]

And that's enough. When we've dropped proper debate and sharing of ideas/opinions and started making passive aggressive comments toward each other its a clear sign that any will to debate and discuss has been lost.