Ultra Forge’s first production miniature on sale May 15th

G

Garyo

New member
GW and the IP laws

Having gone through this myself already when I sculpted and attempted to sell 54mm versions of my Sister sculpt. Now I\'ll admit my fig steps much more firmly on the UK IP laws that protect GW the figure that Sophia has wonderfully created certainly has the look and feel of GW Nurgle figures. So go ahead and try your luck with it again, but be ready for court with GW.

This may not be agreeable to the fine folks posting, but it is the law.

Garyo
 
P

Prophet

New member
You guys are being absurd. Putting rot on a figure doesn\'t make it IP infringent. Sculpting big shoulder pads isn\'t going to get you a letter from the legal department It is a combination of many otherwise unique elements that combine to make the figure in question so similar to GW\'s. Anyone who has the least bit of familiarity with space marines is going to look at that and see a terminator.
Just take a look at the comments posted regarding the figure. How many of them make reference to Nurgle?
Remember that guy who used to sell all the epic scale \'nid sculpts? Taufortae or something like that... Anyway GW completely shut him down 2-3 years ago. That guy has dozens, maybe hundreds of sculpts, casts, molds, etc that are totally useless to him. If he sells them and GW finds out, they\'ll sue him.

I\'m not defending GW. They haven\'t had an original idea in 30 years. For whatever reason, their possible infringements have gone unchallenged.

But we\'re not talking about GW\'s rights. We\'re talking about the law. It wouldn\'t be any different if it was an unlicensed sculpt based on a Frazetta painting. It has the potential to get the sculptor in legal trouble. Bottom line=wasted work that can\'t be sold and figures you won\'t be able to buy. And nobody wants that.

Dammekkos2
Don\'t be an idiot. This is not a \"GW legal department\" issue. The same laws apply for people trying to sell unlicensed Mickey Mouse T-shirts. Disney has to go after everyone, even though it costs much more in legal fees than any potential lost sales, because if they decline to when they know there is existing infringement, their rights to defend their IP in the future erode.

Painted miniatures and one of a kind pieces are an accepted after market that all miniature companies are well aware of, accept, and often promote. Their is a big difference between selling a conversion, painted figure, or even a one of a kind sculpt versus producing and selling in quantity. Different areas have different laws regarding hand made v. mass produced pieces that sometimes protect cottage industries, but you\'d have to check with a local lawyer.
 
P

Prophet

New member
Originally posted by Spacemunkie
Sounds like a load of bollocks to me Mr Prophet:D

You certainly know how to get people onside in an arguement!!
Click to expand...

Tell that to IKore, who was succesfully sued by Rackham because the Celtos line was based on Rackham artwork. Why do you think Celtos is for sale? Because Urban Mammoth (who used to be IKORE) can\'t use the line without more legal hassles.

Hopefully Sophia won\'t be contacted by GW at all, but why take the risk?
 
D

Dammekkos2

New member
Originally posted by Prophet

Dammekkos2
Don\'t be an idiot. This is not a \"GW legal department\" issue. The same laws apply for people trying to sell unlicensed Mickey Mouse T-shirts. Disney has to go after everyone, even though it costs much more in legal fees than any potential lost sales, because if they decline to when they know there is existing infringement, their rights to defend their IP in the future erode.

Painted miniatures and one of a kind pieces are an accepted after market that all miniature companies are well aware of, accept, and often promote. Their is a big difference between selling a conversion, painted figure, or even a one of a kind sculpt versus producing and selling in quantity. Different areas have different laws regarding hand made v. mass produced pieces that sometimes protect cottage industries, but you\'d have to check with a local lawyer.
Click to expand...

Prophet, to me is is most definately a \"GW legal dept\" issue. Your point about Disney and Mickey mouse t-shirts is not a good comparison. Nobody is allowed to sell mickey mouse t-shirts, but as far as I understand it, they are perfectly ok to sell marvin mouse t-shirts, as long as they give him pointy ears and squinty blue eyes. It is obvious to everyone here that the piece in question was inspired by GW stuff, but that is all well and legal as it is SUFFICIENTLY different anything they sell atm.
 
K

Klute

New member
Originally posted by Prophet
Originally posted by Spacemunkie
Sounds like a load of bollocks to me Mr Prophet:D

You certainly know how to get people onside in an arguement!!
Click to expand...

Tell that to IKore, who was succesfully sued by Rackham because the Celtos line was based on Rackham artwork. Why do you think Celtos is for sale? Because Urban Mammoth (who used to be IKORE) can\'t use the line without more legal hassles.

Hopefully Sophia won\'t be contacted by GW at all, but why take the risk?
Click to expand...


I think you might be wrong here.
AFAIK Ikore won the appeal and is allowed to preduce the Celtos range and particularly the Swordmaidens.They wont sell them in france though out of good will.
I think it was said that Rackham dont own the IP to barbarian woman with top nots and tattoos.
Which is funny because the \"concept\" art Kev White got from Ikore was actually a pic of a Fianna with a few words along the line of change that and that.
UM is selling off Celtos to concentrate on Urban War and upcoming variants.Its the name I kore (and subsequantly UM) that is tainted not Celtos.


I think if Sophia changes the name and any reference to GW then she will be fine.
 
S

Spacemunkie

New member
Originally posted by Klute
Which is funny because the \"concept\" art Kev White got from Ikore was actually a pic of a Fianna with a few words along the line of change that and that.
Click to expand...

I think it\'s probably this that was being objected to Prophet! Even so, there is no law against doing it as long as the end product is sufficiently different! GW openly admit to basing half their Ogre stuff on Froud, but you can guarantee that they paid him fuckall!
 
M

marineboy

New member
Ha, Ha! Got my packet from Sophia today, and the figs are great! Very discreet mold line, almost non-existant actually. very few and very small bubbles, parts fit together beautifully, almost (almost!) not worth filling the gap between the body and one of the arms.

Because I screwed up on the ording and paid shipping charges twice, I was very kindly recompensed by the gracious Sophia with an extra figure which was slightly miscast....so slightly actually that I can\'t even see the flaw.

Good value, good figs, good grief why doesn\'t something like this come around more often?!

Thanks, Sophia, make yourself heard and send those other models out soon!:D
 
QuietiManes

QuietiManes

New member
Sorry...show me where exactly it shows it to be so obviously and no way around it a games workshop intellectual property infringement? I see NO real hard 40k/nurgle\'esque qualities. Power armor? I cant even think of an example there\'s so many in my head right now. Guts and decay all over the place? Oh, geeze, Michael Jackson \"thriller\" video? Shawn of the dead, brains...mmmmm. Big weapon? OMG...GW IP right there! SEW HER!!!

Suggesting that it could proxy as a 40k figure isnt IP infringement is it? I used my sons lego as space marines the other day...I\'d like to see the legal dept take me or lego on. G\'luck.

Yeah, it could pass for an EXTREAMLY modified 40k figure...it could also pass for about 25 other gaming system figures. Perhaps a figure from 4500 various role play, sci fi and fantasy genre books. You people need to rip your head out of your toosh and look around some. GW isnt the only company out there making overpriced metal/plastic toys. Just because the ONLY stuff YOU ever look at obviously must only be GW, doesnt mean that\'s all there is NOR does it mean that anything similar is clearly infringing upon their domain.

I remember the size comparison picture, I dont remember the text on the website. If it refered to GW IP then fine. That\'s one thing. A completely seperate issue from Sophia\'s sculpt being unoriginal or \"stolen\" from anothers IP. That\'s going too far. Lets get a little perspective here. GW stole their idea from someone else anyway, so it\'s not their f\'in IP to begin with regardless of their \"legal\" position. There\'s countless sources of inspiration and oportunity for theft out there. Nothing is original anymore. It\'s all been done. Unless there\'s some chaos marine iconography on the figure GW is SOL.

Time will tell I suppose. Not that I know anyone here at all, you could all be theivin scabs for all I know. I think I\'ve pissed and moaned enough now :D
 
M

marineboy

New member
Originally posted by QuietiManes

Time will tell I suppose. Not that I know anyone here at all, you could all be theivin scabs for all I know. I think I\'ve pissed and moaned enough now :D
Click to expand...

Damn! He\'s got us pegged...lollollol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back To Top
Top