New Games Workshop NDA for influencers UPDATE 2: The document appears to be real.

[novakai]

20 minutes ago, yukishiro1 said:

If it's the new NDA for playtesters, they're going to have tremendous trouble getting people to sign up. Having to forgo selling anything to any GW customers for 3 years after you receive your last playtesting info without getting GW's written permission rules out basically any content creator, and that's not even getting into why anyone would possibly sign a no-fault indemnity provision. Asking people to be free labor and at the same time give up any right to make money in any other way that touches on GW customers and to pay GW no-fault indemnity in the event of any sort of leak strikes me as truly absurd, and frankly, I wouldn't trust the playtesting judgment of anyone who was willing to take that "deal." 

It's almost as if they should be using professional playtesters who they pay a living wage, not trying to utilize free labor from the community...

I mean do playtester sell anything to GW customer to begin with. most of the content creator get by on patreon or YouTube membership program which GW seem ok with.

I mean Duncan was able to launch his own paint range less then 3 year after he left GW

then again outside this thread I don’t think there much traction for GW to care since a lot of  content creator that people trust say it not the NDA they signed

[Nos]

I continue to be unsurprised by GW doing the things that companies with rapidly growing profits and increasingly popular products do. I don't moraly condone it, I'm just not surprised by it. 

What's been interesting to me over the past month has been discovering how wrong I have been in one of my continous assumptions, that GW make the best models out there. There is now ample completion of equal quality for far less money.

In some ways I think this is another reason why GW are pushing all the + stuff at this point in time and building an increasingly punitive legal structure behind their product promotion - they need to capitalise on all the benefits and goodwill attached to their lore and make that more profitable, because returns on models are going to diminish as their monopoly of model quality gets eroded. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by Nos

[yukishiro1]

11 minutes ago, novakai said:

I mean Duncan was able to launch his own paint range less then 3 year after he left GW

What Duncan did with his paint line is 100% prohibited by this NDA. He'd have to get GW's written permission for every product he wanted to sell that GW customers might buy, and he'd also have to get a written variation on the clause that prohibits you doing anything that encourages people to buy less GW product, because telling people to buy his paint line would obviously result in them buying less GW paints too.

Content creators almost all sell stuff to GW customers, whether it's swag, coaching services, or whatever. Does GW care if a youtuber sells t-shirts to GW customers? Probably not. But it's technically a violation of the NDA to do so without getting written permission first. Nobody with any sense is going to sign something like that that prevents them from earning a livelihood without getting GW's advance permission first. Even a Patreon arguably violates the NDA without advance written permission. Again, does GW likely care? No. But who knows what it might do in the future. Entrusting your livelihood to GW doesn't seem like a very smart business move. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Kodos der Henker]

15 minutes ago, novakai said:

I mean do playtester sell anything to GW customer to begin with.

Frontline Gaming does for example

[novakai]

10 minutes ago, Kodos der Henker said:

Frontline Gaming does for example

True but I though they are more of an independent vendor like element gaming so they would have more of a official business contract with GW

Edited September 27, 2021 by novakai

[RuneBrush]

5 minutes ago, yukishiro1 said:

Content creators almost all sell stuff to GW customers, whether it's swag, coaching services, or whatever. Does GW care if a youtuber sells t-shirts to GW customers? Probably not. But it's technically a violation of the NDA to do so without getting written permission first. Nobody with any sense is going to sign something like that that prevents them from earning a livelihood without getting GW's advance permission first. Even a Patreon arguably violates the NDA without advance written permission. Again, does GW likely care? No. But who knows what it might do in the future. Entrusting your livelihood to GW doesn't seem like a very smart business move. 

At the risk of going off at a slight tangent, I do have one question that's risen to the surface of my mind.  Do people see a distinction between a content creator and hobby business?  I'll pre-empt that I suspect there's actually quite a bit of nuance and not one defined answer to this 😊

[Kodos der Henker]

might be different in each country, but a content creator here would be usually a Freelancer/Self-Employed while a hobby business has a company (even if it is a one man business)

of course someone can be employed and do content for the business but this is like the difference between Duncen making videos for GW and his YT Channel now

[Orbei]

With regards to selling things to "restricted customers", per the wording of this NDA signees can't sell or do business to GW customers in any capacity. This extends beyond competing in a traditional sense, like selling them paint or minis. A signee cannot sell them ANYTHING, including a ham sandwich. They also have to reimburse GW for legal costs in enforcing the contract. So, to be safe, a signee simply has to avoid doing business with anyone who could possibly be a GW restricted customer. All humans on earth should cover it. 

[ArkanautDadmiral]

1 hour ago, yukishiro1 said:

At this point, if it is somehow some elaborate fake, GW really needs to come out with a statement that it is fake. Anything short of that and people are reasonably going to look at the situation - particularly NQA flip-flopping from claiming it's fake to admitting it's real after getting an unedited version - and conclude that yeah, on balance, it looks like it's real. 

 

 

I’ve missed a bunch of what’s gone on, can you explain the NQA flip-flopping and unedited version stuff?

I know she doxxed the guy which was really disappointing. 

[yukishiro1]

The tl;dr is that NQA was originally one of the "this has to be fake! there's no way this is real!" people. Then the guy who actually got asked to sign the NDA sent the unedited version (i.e. with his name on it, not edited out like the one that was originally leaked) to her to prove it was real, at which point she (1) admitted it was real and (2) doxxed the guy at the same time.

The fact that she now seems to think it's real doesn't necessarily mean it is - it still could be some elaborate hoax I guess - but at least to me, it substantially raises the chance of it being real that one of the doubters has changed her position because she got actual proof with an actual name attached. 

 

 

Edited September 27, 2021 by yukishiro1

[yukishiro1]

47 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

At the risk of going off at a slight tangent, I do have one question that's risen to the surface of my mind.  Do people see a distinction between a content creator and hobby business?  I'll pre-empt that I suspect there's actually quite a bit of nuance and not one defined answer to this 😊

There's probably a difference in general, but not for purposes of the NDA. It's not limited in any way - there's nothing that says it's ok to sell non-hobby related stuff to GW customers. It's all banned by the agreement without getting GW's prior written approval. 

If you meant just more generally...it gets fuzzy at the edges, but I'm sure there's people you could say are not a hobby business. Creators who don't do anything besides post videos, for example. Then there's people like AOW40k that do a youtube channel with 40k batreps, but they also offer paid coaching services. Is that a hobby business? I'd say yes, but I guess some people might say no since it's just selling services, not products. Then there's someone like Byron at Artis Opus, who is clearly both a hobby business and a content creator. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by yukishiro1

[ArkanautDadmiral]

2 minutes ago, yukishiro1 said:

The tl;dr is that NQA was originally one of the "this has to be fake! there's no way this is real!" people. Then the guy who actually got asked to sign the NDA sent the unedited version to her to prove it was real, at which point she (1) admitted it was real and (2) doxxed the guy at the same time.

The fact that she now seems to think it's real doesn't necessarily mean it is - it still could be some elaborate hoax I guess - but at least to me, it substantially raises the chance of it being real that one of the doubters has changed her position because she got actual proof with an actual name attached. 

 

 

How was the original one that miscast and GTH posted edited though I guess is my question? What was different about that to the version the guy sent to NQA?

Is there any screenshots of her posts for context? I don’t understand why she would admit it’s real and maliciously dox the guy at the same time? If she had an agenda why not just stop talking or keep up the claim it’s fake? Seems like a really odd set of actions from her.

I’ve no reason not to believe the guy who got doxxed actually received it. I’d hope some other people came forward in support of him and the YouTube community banded together with them. 
 

Let’s say it is real though and a lot of people’s assumptions are proven true. What next? What does everyone do with that information?

[Gaz Taylor]

2 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

Let’s say it is real though and a lot of people’s assumptions are proven true. What next? What does everyone do with that information?

Whatever they want to do. It boils down to (in this case of content creators) do you want to have an “edge” and chance to show off new stuff but you may have to phrase some stuff carefully or have total control. Again with some of the stuff in there it’s how would it effect you. So if I had a YouTube channel as my main job, I would get legal advice but as a hobby I would be less likely to do that. 

Ive loss track of the saga now as the weekend has been and gone (I got to go out and see Russell Kane at a comedy show like how it used to be!!), but for me the stuff I’d be concerned about is selling stuff. Not so much about saying my thoughts on things as I think you can do that without resorting to being insulting.

[yukishiro1]

11 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

How was the original one that miscast and GTH posted edited though I guess is my question? What was different about that to the version the guy sent to NQA?

Is there any screenshots of her posts for context? I don’t understand why she would admit it’s real and maliciously dox the guy at the same time? If she had an agenda why not just stop talking or keep up the claim it’s fake? Seems like a really odd set of actions from her.

I’ve no reason not to believe the guy who got doxxed actually received it. I’d hope some other people came forward in support of him and the YouTube community banded together with them. 

The original one was edited to removed his personal information so it wouldn't be clear who was leaking it. The version he sent to NQA was the unedited version, to prove he had really been sent it.

There are screenshots floating around of her twitter from before it was banned where she doxes him and then responds to someone saying "does this mean it's real?" by saying "this one [the unedited one] is." I'm not going to post them because I don't want to spread the info around further than it already has been. 

It is odd, but then doxxing someone like that is an odd, irrational thing to do. People behaving irrationally often behave, well, irrationally. 

 

[yukishiro1]

5 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

but for me the stuff I’d be concerned about is selling stuff.

Yep. That and the bit about agreeing to pay GW's legal fees and indemnify GW even without any showing of fault on your part. 

[Kodos der Henker]

46 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

I’ve missed a bunch of what’s gone on, can you explain the NQA flip-flopping and unedited version stuff?

I know she doxxed the guy which was really disappointing. 

this video covers it without spreading the name of the leaker

 

[GrogTheGrognard]

11 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

How was the original one that miscast and GTH posted edited though I guess is my question? What was different about that to the version the guy sent to NQA?

Is there any screenshots of her posts for context? I don’t understand why she would admit it’s real and maliciously dox the guy at the same time? If she had an agenda why not just stop talking or keep up the claim it’s fake? Seems like a really odd set of actions from her.

I’ve no reason not to believe the guy who got doxxed actually received it. I’d hope some other people came forward in support of him and the YouTube community banded together with them. 
 

Let’s say it is real though and a lot of people’s assumptions are proven true. What next? What does everyone do with that information?

The only difference I can see is the one sent to NQA had the person's real name as they had signed the NDA. It still has the fact that the NDA is confidential information and therefore illegal to share in any form without prior GW written consent. Still has the odd definition of restricted customer that included anyone who was a client employee or in the habit of dealing with GW. It has the weird noncompete clauses from the original. Also the indemnity clause from the original as well.

 

If you want to find the screenshots of the doxing and other events I found a link to them on reddit which is also where I found people trying to get NQA Pateron removed (which is extremely terrible behavior and I whole heartedly condemn). It seems like from the screenshots I saw Goobertown Hobbies may have been pushing NQA buttons to the point she doxed the guy (still doesn't excuse what she did as doxing is a horrible thing).

 

On the point of assuming it's real. I say the next action to take depends on GW's action. If GW decides to go after the whistleblower I would say to help the whistleblower's legal defense through crowdfunding and let GW know that it is not okay to go after whistleblowers like that. If GW instead comes out and admits the NDA is real, but they are not going to try and enforce it and will change the NDA to be much better I would say to keep a close eye on GW and maybe even ask to see what this new NDA would look like just to make sure they aren't trying to pull a fast one of admitting they will change and then doing nothing to actually change the NDA.

[Kodos der Henker]

23 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

Ive loss track of the saga now as the weekend has been and gone (I got to go out and see Russell Kane at a comedy show like how it used to be!!), but for me the stuff I’d be concerned about is selling stuff. Not so much about saying my thoughts on things as I think you can do that without resorting to being insulting.

it is the 36 months period, 4.1.2 (no business with restricted customers without permission) and 4.1.4 (being exclusive to GW)

witch would be normal for direct employees like model or game designers, but not for reviewers or painting channels
so either GW was that stupid to just use their employee NDA for independent content creators or they really try to control the influencer scene thru the backdoor

 

1 minute ago, GrogTheGrognard said:

It seems like from the screenshots I saw Goobertown Hobbies may have been pushing NQA buttons to the point she doxed the guy (still doesn't excuse what she did as doxing is a horrible thing).

it was Goobertown Hobbies who got the original leak and shared it with NQA to confirm that it is real and not fake

Edited September 27, 2021 by Kodos der Henker

[ArkanautDadmiral]

13 minutes ago, yukishiro1 said:

The original one was edited to removed his personal information so it wouldn't be clear who was leaking it. The version he sent to NQA was the unedited version, to prove he had really been sent it.

There are screenshots floating around of her twitter from before it was banned where she doxes him and then responds to someone saying "does this mean it's real?" by saying "this one [the unedited one] is." I'm not going to post them because I don't want to spread the info around further than it already has been. 

It is odd, but then doxxing someone like that is an odd, irrational thing to do. People behaving irrationally often behave, well, irrationally. 

 

No of course, not asking you to post them was just trying to get context of her actual posts.

If the only thing edited out was his personal  information I don’t understand how that changes anything for her? How can one be fake just because it doesn’t have the guys name on it?

Irrational is definitely the keyword there, I don’t understand her thought process at all.

[ArkanautDadmiral]

7 minutes ago, Kodos der Henker said:

this video covers it without spreading the name of the leaker

 

Isn’t this ArchWarhammer? As in the hard right guy who’s said a bunch of racist and derogatory stuff? If so I don’t care about his opinion on it.

[yukishiro1]

4 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

No of course, not asking you to post them was just trying to get context of her actual posts.

If the only thing edited out was his personal  information I don’t understand how that changes anything for her? How can one be fake just because it doesn’t have the guys name on it?

Irrational is definitely the keyword there, I don’t understand her thought process at all.

Her original position was it had to be fake because it's so sloppily drafted. GW not being a defined term, the address not being complete, etc. When someone then actually came forward to her saying he got the document from GW, and gave her the unedited version of the document that contained his info, I can see why she might change her mind and say "ok, hmm, maybe it is real."

It could obviously still be a hoax - the guy in question could be perpetrating it, someone other than GW could have sent it to him and he could have been fooled, etc. But I do think it raises the chance of it being real to have someone who came forward (privately, until that privacy was betrayed) to make clear that no, it was really something he had gotten. 

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, Nos said:

What's been interesting to me over the past month has been discovering how wrong I have been in one of my continous assumptions, that GW make the best models out there. There is now ample completion of equal quality for far less money.

Genuinely curious - who?

I get that on a personal opinion level,  we might lie this or that model from Random Company better than X model from GW, but I get the vibe from your comment that you believe there are many ("ample") companies making ranges of models of equal quality for much cheaper ("far less") than GW.

Who are these companies?  I would like to check them out to see if they can offer the full hobby experience, at scale, that GW does at a fraction of the cost. 

[Kodos der Henker]

8 minutes ago, ArkanautDadmiral said:

Isn’t this ArchWarhammer? As in the hard right guy who’s said a bunch of racist and derogatory stuff? If so I don’t care about his opinion on it.

don't know, I don't follow any of the YT/Twitter/Reddit flame wars these days

but he does not share any opinion in that vidoe but only the fact without naming the leak, so it does not matter who he is or what he might have done

 

2 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Who are these companies?  I would like to check them out to see if they can offer the full hobby experience, at scale, that GW does at a fraction of the cost.

I am very happy with my Victrix Saxons I got recently, less than 1€ per model and better than the Stormcast I bought regarding mold lines and options (still monopose though)
Perry Miniatures are have been always good, yet both these companies make only historicals (yet perfect for a CoS Army)
Mantic Games Halflings also look very well, same as Wargames Atlantic

Edited September 27, 2021 by Kodos der Henker

[CommissarRotke]

2 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

The only thing I'd add to that is we still have multiple other content creators saying that isn't the NDA that they personally signed. So it seems it is either a new one GW just started sending around, or they have several different ones they send to different groups. 

If it really is real, as it now seems to be...it's pretty worrying and embarrassing that GW legal is producing documents that sloppy, not even getting into the oppressively one-sided substantive provisions. I mean the people on the "this is fake" side were even pointing to the sloppiness as a reason why it couldn't be real...

considering some of the mistakes (AND TYPOS) in the new Stormcast battletome, I'm not even surprised... Don't take typos as singular proof that something is fake, IMHO. Even outside GW you'll see typos in press releases or published documents.

[Orbei]

Arch Warhammer posted a video 3 days ago with the click bait picture saying "GW Are Evil!" No one should be relying on him as a source of information or analysis.