Recommend
377 
 Thumb up
 Hide
326 Posts
[1]  Prev «  1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [14] | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » BoardGameGeek Related » BGG News

Subject: Games Workshop and BoardGameGeek rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: gw_file_pull [+] tempest_in_a_teapot [+] IP [+] [View All]
Jorge Arroyo
Spain
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MikeBwithoutadot wrote:
Right now Games Workshop even states that it's illegal to get a tattoo of their artwork. I'd love to hear what happens when they sue someone with a Space Hulk tattoo.


Well. As ridiculous as the tattoo policy from GW seems, they do have a point. Basically they say that if you pay someone to tattoo an image you don't own the copyright to (or an image that the person you're paying to do the tattoo doesn't have a right to use) then they're making a profit by duplicating an image without permission from the rights holder.

As duplicating an image for personal use is usually within "fair use" laws, the only way to legally get a tattoo from a copyrighted image you don't own the rights for is by getting it as a gift from the person doing the tattoo.

At least in Spain, it works like this and it is similar to how photocopies work: A photocopy shop doesn't have the right to photocopy copyrighted works but if you do it for free at home or by using a public photocopy where no one gets payed for the service, then it's legal. At least if it's for personal use...

Anyway, there's no way the person getting the tattoo can get in trouble, just the person getting money for doing it...
5 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.L. Robert
United States
Sherman Oaks
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Follow me for wargames!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Aldie wrote:
The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4 specific items (which we acted upon), and after replying to GW's legal department, we were told to cover a broad range of all files on the site where it was our determination in what to remove based on their intellectual property rules (posted on their website).


Sorry, Scott, but this is a gross over-reaction by BGG and its staff.

If GW wants you guys to go through the work of purging files, make THEM go through the work to identify the specific files that need purging.

This wave of mass-deletions seems like the Admins here used a hand grenade to swat a fly. The frustrating part is the seemingly arbitrary and capricious nature of these deletions.

Now, I'm sure files were going to have to be deleted at the end of the day. But I'm also sure that those deletions could have waited a few days...even a couple weeks...while the Admins looked over each file to evaluate whether or not they can pass muster. OR until you received a specified list of files to delete from GW. Even then, you could have reviewed any such list to check the validity of any claims.

I don't mean to break up the love-in, Scott, but this was just a rash and rushed over-reaction on your part. You are the face of this site, and this action ultimately falls at your feet, even if you didn't press the delete button yourself. Time could have been taken; this was not a court order, but a request. BGG would not have been held liable for non-compliance if you were exercising due diligence by verifying the validity of claims on each file, or for requesting an itemized list from GW.

However, what's done is done. It's a real shame that the site chose to throw out the baby with the bathwater on this one.
75 
 Thumb up
1.18
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris
United States
Cheektowaga
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Blastpop wrote:


Currently I am looking for a new miniatures game to play with my son. I am sure there is at least one game company out there that won't mind my business...

Good Gaming!


AT-43 Initiation Set: Operation Damocles They fully support a free army creator and everything. They may be slow to release product but that is fine. They actually care if the game is fun to play unlike GW who changes the ruels to sell minis (Squats anyone?)
5 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
J.L.Robert wrote:
Aldie wrote:
The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4 specific items (which we acted upon), and after replying to GW's legal department, we were told to cover a broad range of all files on the site where it was our determination in what to remove based on their intellectual property rules (posted on their website).


Sorry, Scott, but this is a gross over-reaction by BGG and its staff.

If GW wants you guys to go through the work of purging files, make THEM go through the work to identify the specific files that need purging.

This wave of mass-deletions seems like the Admins here used a hand grenade to swat a fly. The frustrating part is the seemingly arbitrary and capricious nature of these deletions.

Now, I'm sure files were going to have to be deleted at the end of the day. But I'm also sure that those deletions could have waited a few days...even a couple weeks...while the Admins looked over each file to evaluate whether or not they can pass muster. OR until you received a specified list of files to delete from GW. Even then, you could have reviewed any such list to check the validity of any claims.

I don't mean to break up the love-in, Scott, but this was just a rash and rushed over-reaction on your part. You are the face of this site, and this action ultimately falls at your feet, even if you didn't press the delete button yourself. Time could have been taken; this was not a court order, but a request. BGG would not have been held liable for non-compliance if you were exercising due diligence by verifying the validity of claims on each file, or for requesting an itemized list from GW.

However, what's done is done. It's a real shame that the site chose to throw out the baby with the bathwater on this one.


J.L. - how do you get this from what Aldie wrote? The way I read his words, BGG did in fact review files versus GW's IP rules as posted on their site, and deleted files that appeared to violate those rules. At least, that's what I thought I read. You are saying this isn't what they did?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Aldie - one more question, if you please. Could you be a bit more specific regarding the files other than the four specific files you note in your description of the C&D from GW? Your words:

The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4 specific items (which we acted upon), and after replying to GW's legal department, we were told to cover a broad range of all files on the site where it was our determination in what to remove based on their intellectual property rules (posted on their website).

Per the bolded wording, I am reading that BGG was told to cover a range of files, review them, and determine which ones violated Games Workshop's intellectual property rules as posted on their website. I am presuming that you guys did in fact review these other files, compared each to the GW posted rules, and for each made a determination, as best you could, if the file violated one or more of GW's rules, and that for those that you could determine did violate one or more of GW's rules, you proceeded to delete those files. Am I correct?

I am assuming this is what happened, and if so, I believe you have acted in the most responsible manner possible, and I can not support the claims of others who believe you and the BGG staff overrreacted and simply did a mass-deletion of so many GW files. One reason I believe this to be true is that if you hadn't reviewed individual files, I believe there would no files under any of these games right now - the fact that there are still files (9 under Space Hulk 3rd Edition for example) would seem to indicate some review and discretion was applied to which files would go, and which would remain.

Sorry to badger you on this, but the issue has inflamed feelings on the site to quite a degree.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So hopefully everybody who submitted retaliatory ratings against Space Hulk will remove/re-adjust them now? Space Hulk has already dropped from 7th to 133rd in a few days, and as Aldie pointed out, this is NOT constructive and hurts the validity of the database.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Webb
United Kingdom
Canterbury
Kent
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Bagherra wrote:

Actually, the rating system set forth by Aldie, et al, sort of implies that a company's action might be taken into account.

If Reebok gets in cohoots with Terrorists, I'm going to stop buying Reebok product and actively encourage my friends to do so as well, also, my "likelihood" of using Reebok products goes way down.

So someone who rated Space Hulk a 10, but is now "boycotting" because they are angered by their actions, may very well have no desire to play the game warranting a 3 or 4 rating.


This is a fair argument, and a 3 or 4 rating is at least consistent with the rating criteria. A rating of '1' however is clearly stated as meaning that This game is broken and as such is a criticism of the designer as much as (or more than) the publisher. In this context, rating games a '1 is reactionary spite that is aimed at the wrong person.
4 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hunter Shelburne
United States
San Marcos
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Check out Weaponsgrade Tabletop on Youtube!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zaphod wrote:
So hopefully everybody who submitted retaliatory ratings against Space Hulk will remove/re-adjust them now? Space Hulk has already dropped from 7th to 133rd in a few days, and as Aldie pointed out, this is NOT constructive and hurts the validity of the database.


Yeah right, the people that changed their ratings are here thanking Aldie for being the White Knight taking the blow from the old meanie GW.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Will
United States
Fresno
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
joedogboy wrote:
Aldie wrote:
The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4 specific items (which we acted upon), and after replying to GW's legal department, we were told to cover a broad range of all files on the site where it was our determination in what to remove based on their intellectual property rules (posted on their website).


So GW demanded/asked that FOUR specific files be removed, and left everything else up to BGG's own good judgment.

Let's just make sure that this is clear to everyone, since they will probably be a lot less upset that BGG decided to remove files, because they are predisposed to like BGG.


This is the 3rd post I've come across of that exact same copy paste job from you in 3 differant threads.

I'll type up my thoughts again, although I won't copy and paste.

Re-read what you quoted. GW replied to them after those 4 were removed and said they needed to go through all files.

Edit:
LOL I see you copy/pasted that crosspost 5 times so far in 5 differant threads:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270880#4270880

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270852#4270852

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270844#4270844

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270774#4270774

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270678#4270678

If I was a conspiracy theorist...
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Filipe Vianna
Brazil
Rio de Janeiro
rio de janeiro
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
desertfox2004 wrote:
The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4 specific items (which we acted upon), and after replying to GW's legal department, we were told to cover a broad range of all files on the site where it was our determination in what to remove based on their intellectual property rules (posted on their website).

Per the bolded wording, I am reading that BGG was told to cover a range of files, review them, and determine which ones violated Games Workshop's intellectual property rules as posted on their website. I am presuming that you guys did in fact review these other files, compared each to the GW posted rules, and for each made a determination, as best you could, if the file violated one or more of GW's rules, and that for those that you could determine did violate one or more of GW's rules, you proceeded to delete those files. Am I correct?


What I understand of the "The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4" : If you are not sure about the violation, delete the post.
1 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Speare
United States
Bedford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
tee hee, that tickles!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zaphod wrote:
So hopefully everybody who submitted retaliatory ratings against Space Hulk will remove/re-adjust them now? Space Hulk has already dropped from 7th to 133rd in a few days, and as Aldie pointed out, this is NOT constructive and hurts the validity of the database.


Whether or not this is constructive, it has a much more immediate and visible impact than pretty much any other action. I doubt the ratings will go away quickly. (Plus, I have a feeling this is not the only case where "external" factors are affecting a game's rating...)


4 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Alden
United States
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
admin
badge
Aldie's Full of Love!
Avatar
mbmbmb
MikeBwithoutadot wrote:

I'm sorry, I'm very disappointed in the way this has been handled so far.
I find the way BGG reacted to Games Workshop email very weak. Giving a reaction only after days of howls of injustice is pretty lame as well.


I was on vacation.
  • [+] Dice rolls
spearjr wrote:
joedogboy wrote:
Aldie wrote:
The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4 specific items (which we acted upon), and after replying to GW's legal department, we were told to cover a broad range of all files on the site where it was our determination in what to remove based on their intellectual property rules (posted on their website).


So GW demanded/asked that FOUR specific files be removed, and left everything else up to BGG's own good judgment.

Let's just make sure that this is clear to everyone, since they will probably be a lot less upset that BGG decided to remove files, because they are predisposed to like BGG.
And you want to stir up trouble, right? That certainly seems to be your bent in many of your posts.

Many of us would much rather see BGG be overly cautious than get involved in a lawsuit they can't possibly afford.


I guess some people think it is "stirring up trouble" to try to see both sides of a situation before joining the angry mob.

My point is this: GW asked/demanded that four files be removed. I'm fairly certain that there were four files that most of us would agree clearly violate GW's IP, and BGG's own rules for posting files.

GW did not remove any files, or even demand that any other files be removed.

This means that if you are going to be angry about the file removal, you need to be angry with the people who actually decided to remove the files.

Personally, I'm not angry with BGG for doing that. I also think that many people who are angry about it will be willing to forgive Aldie/BGG.

I do wish that Aldie would have posted this topic about two days ago, to head off some of the hysterical posts - including calls for attacks on FFG - that we have seen as a result of spiteful rumors filling the information vacuum.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Alden
United States
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
admin
badge
Aldie's Full of Love!
Avatar
mbmbmb
The specific files were:

Mordheim Roster Sheet
Bretonnian Army Reference Guide
Blood Bowl 7 Rules Article
Unlicensed Translation of Blood Angels Codex

In addition they stated: "Please remove any remaining images, text and files which infringe Games Workshop's intellectual property rights."

When I first received the letter, we had about 4 days to comply based on their deadline. We removed those 4 files, and I replied via email to the legal department about complying with their demand. Matthew Monin was tasked with removing other files and manually went through and reviews over 700 files.

I apologize if you think we handled this wrong, but I believe we acted in the best possible manner for BoardGameGeek.
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morgan Dontanville
United States
Charlottesville
VA
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Plate of Shrimp.
badge
Here we are folks, the dream we all dream of.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm not trying to speak for Aldie here, but who here is going to cough up the money for legal defense fees if GW decides to go to court. Anyone willing to commit should let Derk and Aldie know so that they can draft up a contract and not have to worry about being sued into bankruptcy over something simple enough to nip in the bud now.
33 
 Thumb up
0.27
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph
United States
Ewing
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Christmas Card Exchange: 2009 - 2014
badge
I play at EPGS on the 1st and 3rd Saturday of the month and if you live in Eastern PA, Western NJ or Northern DE ... you should too!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Aldie wrote:
MikeBwithoutadot wrote:

I'm sorry, I'm very disappointed in the way this has been handled so far.
I find the way BGG reacted to Games Workshop email very weak. Giving a reaction only after days of howls of injustice is pretty lame as well.


I was on vacation.


Why did you need a vacation, didn't you just have a nice relaxing 5 days at the Westin Hotel? devil
9 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Will
United States
Fresno
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MikeBwithoutadot wrote:
In contrary to all the "thank you, Aldie" sayers, I'm not so happy with the explanation:

1. About time we got an explanation after days of silence.
...

2.
...
I can personally attest that various files had NOTHING to do with Games Lawshops claims. So I still say Aldie & co overreacted quite a bit.

Aldie wrote:
The contents of the cease and desist highlighted 4 specific items (which we acted upon), and after replying to GW's legal department, we were told to cover a broad range of all files on the site where it was our determination in what to remove based on their intellectual property rules (posted on their website).


Ok, so just remove those 4 specific items. No reason at all to withdraw a lot of fanmade material that helps a lot of GW-buyers to more fun with their games. I think that was a pretty bad decision. YES BGG shouldn't be in a legal battle, NO BGG shouldn't withdraw a lot of fanmade material without proper reason.

4. Aldie refers to the file submission rules. I guess he means the "NO Copyrighted material without permission! " part.
Well, IT'S NOT GAMES WORKSHOP WHO DECIDES WHAT IS COPYRIGHTED AND WHAT'S NOT! That's what copyright laws are for. Right now Games Workshop even states that it's illegal to get a tattoo of their artwork. I'd love to hear what happens when they sue someone with a Space Hulk tattoo.

I'm sorry, I'm very disappointed in the way this has been handled so far.
I find the way BGG reacted to Games Workshop email very weak. Giving a reaction only after days of howls of injustice is pretty lame as well.


1)
You may not be aware of this since you are not from USA, but this happened during a holiday week with thanksgiving and then black friday sales. He likely didn't have time to respond.
Edit: I was correct, I just read his reply that he was on vacation.

2)
Are you willing to personally attest and assume all legal costs and damages too?

GW told them they had to apply thier legal guidelines to ALL files.
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=...
There's the link.
Here's a few quotes after a brief skim:
Quote:
WHAT YOU CANNOT DO WITH GAMES WORKSHOP'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
...
- Make any direct copies and/or scans of Games Workshop publications, images, or other materials.
...
- Use our intellectual property in relation to any third party products or third party intellectual property.

So any fan made files with GW art/logo is out.
That mission logbook I really liked? It used a picture of SH box, and it used the GW logo, and it got deleted.
That file that had nice SH end caps integrating infested looking graphics with the purple arrow (to make the boards cleaner looking), those used GW art or similar.

Also this caught my eye:
Quote:
Avatars

Avatars and similar monikers are now commonplace on nearly every forum or chat program that you come across. As cool as they may be, they can cause problems if the use our trademarks since we need to maintain the distinctiveness of our trademarks in relation to their origin.

Avatars with GW art/logos or anything like that is out.
That image/avatar that was a protest one saying GW required this image to be removed? It used GW trademark logo font, so that itself should probably be removed.

And this:
Quote:
Photos of Painted Models

We encourage fellow hobbyists to show off their painting skills by taking photos of their miniatures and putting the on the site. Please remember to correctly credit the IP - "miniature © Games Workshop 2003. All rights reserved. Used without permission - model painted by xxxxxxx"


So all those photos of painted SH 3e models? I didn't see any one of them that correctly credited GW. They probably should be removed to be on the safe side.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/images/thing/54625

4)
Actually it IS gw who states how they want thier copyrighted stuff to be used. You can basically state anything you like in relation to how you want others to use your IP. For instance, those GPL and copy left and creative common liscenses, they are all forms of copyright. Now our USA laws have specific exemptions in them for "fair use", but the only way to determine that is to have a court battle, since EACH and EVERY fair use case is individually determined IN COURT based on several factors. For instance Parody is a well established exception, and yet there have been lots of law suits against parodies.

So, essentially the only possible responses to GW are to submit, or legally fight them (probably starting with a lawyer's letter back). Since legally fighting takes lots of money and time away from BGG, do we really want Aldie going down that road? If they are going to submit, the safest course of action is to submit in such a way as that there's no question that theres any possible violation left (otherwise anything further could be wilful with serious legal repercussions and costs), and thats what they've done.

I don't know about you, but I'm not anxious to have my years of donations go towards legal battles with GW.

BTW, IANAL, and this is just subjective opinions.
20 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hahn Arama
United States
flag msg tools
I had a guide, a Bedouin man, who called me 'Abu el Banat'. And whenever we'd meet another Bedouin, he'd introduce me as Abu el Banat. And the Bedouin would laugh and laugh and offer me a pint of beer. (cont below)
badge
And I'd go to pay them for the beer and they wouldn't let me. "Abu el Banat" means "Father of daughters." They thought the beer was the least they could do.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Aldie and the boyz had no choice but to comply. BGG, while requiring a FT job's worth of effort, is not their FT job. No need to go to court and lose $ over a hobby/labor of love.

I've read reams of how outraged everyone is and how they are going to write angry letters of burn their copies of Space Hulk. That just won't get GW's attention. You need to have a unified plan. Just stop buying ANY GW stuff. I don't know how much of a dent it would make but it is worth a try.

Hell if I were Aldie I would remove EVERYTHING from the site. Listings pictures the whole enchilada. See what happens one someone wants info on an over priced GW title and they can't find it listed here.

8 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
desertfox2004 wrote:

I don't read it quite the same way, Joe. What I read was that BGG admin was tasked to remove four specific files, and then any and all additional files that could be considered to violate GW's stated intellectual property rules as posted on their website. Sounds like BGG administration had to review each file, consider it against GW's posted IP rules, and determine for each if the file potentially violated any of those rules. If it was unclear that a given file would or would not violate one of those rules, I'd reasonably assume BGG administration would err on the side of deletion, since to do otherwise would put the entire site in legal jeopardy. I think BGG administration has acted prudently to this point, given the circumstances. Do you disagree?


I find it hard to equate asking someone to take down four files, and then have the common courtesy to check other files with the way that this has been described.
During the delay in sharing this information, people around here have been making all sorts of wild claims, including:

GW somehow "raided" BGG and removed files.
GW attacked BGG and is attempting to close BGG down.
GW demanded that all files relating to any GW game (including games only peripherally related to GW) be removed.
GW demanded that all reviews of their products be removed.
GW demanded that all negative reviews of their products be removed.
GW demanded that all photos of their products be removed.

There have also, evidently, been a bunch of angry and badly misinformed letters that are being sent to GW that purport to be representing BGG and the BGG community. Some of these letters certainly make BGG look like a community that doesn't deserve any consideration. I just hope that someone at GW HQ is aware that BGG is a great community for gaming - including GW games (in or out of print), and ignores some of those bizarre and angry rantings.

It seems that the BGG staff acted prudently in removing the four cited files (especially if they first reviewed them and agreed that they seemed to violate GW's IP), and in contacting GW to make sure that there was an understanding between the two organizations about what is and is not acceptable.
After that, Aldie could have made an announcement like the one at the start of this thread, and when people's files were removed, the message could have said something like: "This file has been removed pending review for possible IP violations. If you think the file was removed in error, please be patient, we are putting a process in place to allow you to make any needed changes, or to appeal this decision. We are doing this to protect the BGG community, and out of respect for GW's IP rights." This is what a good PR adviser would have told him to do.
He could even have asked for volunteers to help review the files, just as the community has mods and GMs who are community members.

If BGG members think of it as BGG's decision, they are much more likely to accept it without ramping up their anger, because they like BGG - many of them don't even realize that BGG is a business at all. If they continue to think of it as an attack on the community, imposed by GW, then they will continue to stoke each others anger,

It could well be that Aldie listened to a lawyer, rather than a PR adviser, and that is why there was a delay. It could be that he wanted to enjoy his weekend, and didn't think that the geekmob would explode into geekrage over this.

Unfortunately, we live in a world where "prudent" PR and "prudent" legal advice are often at odds.


13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
panzer-attack wrote:

Joe's not been stirring up trouble in any of his posts. He's just not let himself get caught up in the mob hate that's been poisoning this site, all before the facts of the matter became apparent.

Thanks for the update Aldie.


Thank you, Jim. I have been trying to put things into perspective for people.

As I suspected, no one seems to be up in arms about Aldie deciding to take down files (from his own site), they are just a bit frustrated and disappointed.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Will
United States
Fresno
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
joedogboy wrote:
During the delay in sharing this information, people around here have been making all sorts of wild claims, including:
...
GW demanded that all files relating to any GW game (including games only peripherally related to GW) be removed.
...
GW demanded that all photos of their products be removed.
...
After that, Aldie could have made an announcement like the one at the start of this thread, and when people's files were removed, the message could have said something like: "This file has been removed pending review for possible IP violations. If you think the file was removed in error, please be patient, we are putting a process in place to allow you to make any needed changes, or to appeal this decision. We are doing this to protect the BGG community, and out of respect for GW's IP rights." This is what a good PR adviser would have told him to do.
He could even have asked for volunteers to help review the files, just as the community has mods and GMs who are community members.


Actually those two things you listed would be the safest from a legal standpoint. We are fortunate that BGG didn't do that.

And Aldie DID mention in the OP that they are going to try and do something like that, so people can say they are thier own work, thus putting the legal onus on them and not BGG.
Aldie wrote:
In the near future, BoardGameGeek plans to put a process in place that will allow users to contest the removal of their content if they believe their removed content does not in fact infringe upon the rights of any third parties.


Also, volunteers is a BAD idea for something like this. Then you are putting the future of BGG at stake on a random volunteer who might even want to hurt BGG for some reason. That volunteer would have to be an IP lawyer to ensure that his decisions didn't violate GW's IP. And even then, thats no gauruntee. GW could decide to sue them anyway even if GW was in the wrong.
And if they required the volunteer to assume all legal liabilities from thier decisions, who would volunteer for that?
Now volunteering to point out potential problem files could have reduced thier initial pass workload, but in the end, they would have had to check every file anyway.
And based on the GW's guidelines, if I was a volunteer, I would have done an alert on all pictures of painted models, since I didn't see any of them following GW's guidelines on that. Flagging all of them wouldn't really have cut down on the work in that area.

IANAL and this is just opinions.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike B
Netherlands
Utrecht
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Aldie wrote:
MikeBwithoutadot wrote:

I'm sorry, I'm very disappointed in the way this has been handled so far.
I find the way BGG reacted to Games Workshop email very weak. Giving a reaction only after days of howls of injustice is pretty lame as well.


I was on vacation.


Thanks for answering that. And off course everybody needs to be on vacation every now and then.

But I still think it's weird none of the other admins responded to this.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yargo wrote:


This is the 3rd post I've come across of that exact same copy paste job from you in 3 differant threads.

I'll type up my thoughts again, although I won't copy and paste.

Re-read what you quoted. GW replied to them after those 4 were removed and said they needed to go through all files.

Edit:
LOL I see you copy/pasted that crosspost 5 times so far in 5 differant threads:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270880#4270880

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270852#4270852

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270844#4270844

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270774#4270774

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4270678#4270678

If I was a conspiracy theorist...


I posted it to every thread I could find on this topic, because so much of the problem was people jumping to the worst possible conclusions due to lack of information, and having this information would stop some of the more ridiculous conjecture.

Spreading good information is the best way to control the spread of rumors.

I'm sorry if you had to read it more than once, but I think it bears repeating that GW only asked that four files be taken down, they didn't try to take down BGG, or try to remove reviews or discussions about their games, or any of the other things that they have been accused of doing here. Aldie took some files down, and Aldie will come up with a process to allow most of them (probably just about every one whose creator wants to put it back up badly enough to go through the review process) back up.

You can now all return your GW hatred to a low boil.


12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike B
Netherlands
Utrecht
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yargo wrote:

1)
You may not be aware of this since you are not from USA, but this happened during a holiday week with thanksgiving and then black friday sales. He likely didn't have time to respond.
Edit: I was correct, I just read his reply that he was on vacation.

I just read that as well, and I'm glad he responded.

Yargo wrote:

2)
Are you willing to personally attest and assume all legal costs and damages too?
Yes, I'll chime in my share if needed! I hate false use of copyright legal crap.
Yargo wrote:

GW told them they had to apply thier legal guidelines to ALL files.
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=...
There's the link.
Here's a few quotes after a brief skim:
Quote:
WHAT YOU CANNOT DO WITH GAMES WORKSHOP'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
...
- Make any direct copies and/or scans of Games Workshop publications, images, or other materials.
...
- Use our intellectual property in relation to any third party products or third party intellectual property.

So any fan made files with GW art/logo is out.


No it's not. Maybe I'm too stupid to understand legal talk but fan made files aren't third party products. I read it as "you may not combine our artwork with products produced by other companies"

Yargo wrote:

Also this caught my eye:
Quote:
Avatars

Avatars and similar monikers are now commonplace on nearly every forum or chat program that you come across. As cool as they may be, they can cause problems if the use our trademarks since we need to maintain the distinctiveness of our trademarks in relation to their origin.

Avatars with GW art/logos or anything like that is out.
That image/avatar that was a protest one saying GW required this image to be removed? It used GW trademark logo font, so that itself should probably be removed.

And this:
Quote:
Photos of Painted Models

We encourage fellow hobbyists to show off their painting skills by taking photos of their miniatures and putting the on the site. Please remember to correctly credit the IP - "miniature © Games Workshop 2003. All rights reserved. Used without permission - model painted by xxxxxxx"


So all those photos of painted SH 3e models? I didn't see any one of them that correctly credited GW. They probably should be removed to be on the safe side.


Are you serious? I really don't want to waste my time going into an argument about this.

Yargo wrote:

4)
Actually it IS gw who states how they want thier copyrighted stuff to be used. You can basically state anything you like in relation to how you want others to use your IP. For instance, those GPL and copy left and creative common liscenses, they are all forms of copyright. Now our USA laws have specific exemptions in them for "fair use", but the only way to determine that is to have a court battle, since EACH and EVERY fair use case is individually determined based on several factors. For instance Parody is a well established exception, and yet there have been lots of law suits against parodies.

So, essentially the only possible responses to GW are to submit, or legally fight them (probably starting with a lawyers letter back). Since legally fighting takes lots of money and time away from BGG, do we really want Aldie going down that road? If they are going to submit, the safest course of action is to submit in such a way as that there's no question that theres any possible violation left, and thats what they've done.

I don't know about you, but I'm not anxious to have my years of donations go towards legal battles with GW.

BTW, IANAL, and this is just subjective opinions.


Yes, it's as subjective as my opinion. I can quote from GW too "For example, whilst most companies would not allow you to convert their products, we think that conversions are an integral part of the hobby, so we love them!" comes from that link you kindly supplied.

Copying artwork is copyright infringement. Making something new out of it is not. And if it must, I wouldn't mind if my donations had to go towards legal battles with GW. I'd be willing to donate some more. In my opinion most of these files were "fair use".

They probably get away with their crap everytime by threatening. Just like the bully in the schoolyard that goes "gimme your candy or else" every day. If you don't stop behaviour like that it keeps going.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Will
United States
Fresno
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MikeBwithoutadot wrote:
Aldie wrote:
MikeBwithoutadot wrote:

I'm sorry, I'm very disappointed in the way this has been handled so far.
I find the way BGG reacted to Games Workshop email very weak. Giving a reaction only after days of howls of injustice is pretty lame as well.


I was on vacation.


Thanks for answering that. And off course everybody needs to be on vacation every now and then.

But I still think it's weird none of the other admins responded to this.


Actually they did, and I even posted about it in the SH forum:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/4256396#4256396

Octavian wrote:
Without being positive about exactly what details I can share, we recently received a broad ranging Cease and Desist order from GW. In response we have deleted the majority of files from their game pages and prohibiting future file submissions to their game pages.

-MMM


Without getting guidance from Aldie (who was on vacation) he didn't want to take a chance of doing anything that could hurt BGG. And that was smart. Oftentimes talking about a legal issue that you are in the middle of CAN get you into trouble.
39 
 Thumb up
0.29
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
[1]  Prev «  1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [14] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.