# Chapterhouse Miniatures VS Games Workshop - How did that turn out?



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

The title says it all. I know a while back Chapterhouse miniatures was being sued by GW for copyright infringement since they refused to change the names on some of their products (referring to thunderhammers and chimeras/ space marines as space marines and thunderhammers instead of the usual "Space Knight with lightning mace" bullshit)

So tell me, seeing as the chapterhouse miniatures website is still there, and is clearly listing what's what, how did the court case turn out? Anyone know?


----------



## Dawnstar (Jan 21, 2010)

Chapterhouse and GW are _still_ currently busy wading through the legal system

There's a pretty extensive thread over at DakkaDakka which is a good read 

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/355433.page


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

Holy Christ, they're STILL stuck in the legal quagmire?


----------



## Dawnstar (Jan 21, 2010)

Nicholas Hadrian said:


> Holy Christ, they're STILL stuck in the legal quagmire?


Indeed they are. It's kind of funny actually :laugh:


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Funny, except for the negative impact it will have on our future enjoyment of the game.

I *liked* getting things in Codexes that didn't have rules yet. I'm a modeller, it excited me.


----------



## Eetion (Mar 19, 2008)

TheKingElessar said:


> Funny, except for the negative impact it will have on our future enjoyment of the game.
> 
> I *liked* getting things in Codexes that didn't have rules yet. I'm a modeller, it excited me.


Maybe you could look forward to a range of 'Imperial Judiciaries' complete with scritures of infringement and power gabbles.


----------



## Midge913 (Oct 21, 2010)

TheKingElessar said:


> Funny, except for the negative impact it will have on our future enjoyment of the game.
> 
> I *liked* getting things in Codexes that didn't have rules yet. I'm a modeller, it excited me.


I don't see how this will negatively impact future enjoyment of the game. If you don't want to you a Chapter House kit, don't buy one. I don't see GW changing their motif because of this one company. There are still going to be codex selections that have rules but no official model.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

Meh, Chapterhouse took it a step to far, and I will not feel sorry for them even if GW brought the heavens themselves crashing down on them. 

I mean, Flesh Tearer Chapter Pads and similar stuff is a step or two too far onto GWs turf imo.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Midge913 said:


> I don't see how this will negatively impact future enjoyment of the game. If you don't want to you a Chapter House kit, don't buy one. I don't see GW changing their motif because of this one company. There are still going to be codex selections that have rules but no official model.


Actually, there won't.

They are changing the way the release models, so that everything in a Codex will have a model on release day, and they will release further units through WD exclusively (and presumably on the website after publication) instead of leaving gaps for other manufacturers to exploit.

See the Terrorgheist, as an example... sales of WD increased when they put rules in there for the Stormraven and the Night Spinner, they actually put 2+2 together and came up with a number close to 4 for once.

GW are a miniatures company, first and foremost. Anything that prevents them releasing their own miniatures will be curbstomped by the upper echelons of the business, and to be fair, it's an eminently logical reaction.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

From what I understand of the case, Chapterhouse are getting their asses handed to them as they cannot provide sufficient evidence that the models etc they have produced are their own design and so-forth...

Basically it boils down to just what GW IP is, but from everything I'm reading, GW are winning and frankly I'm glad. 

CH is quite frankly an asshole. You only have to look at his posts he'd made on the forum here, threatening to sue people who don't support him for slander to tell that. He went too far and he's too dumb to realise that. Pretty much its just a matter of when the judge decides to award GW the win from what I can tell.


----------



## the-ad-man (Jan 22, 2010)

GrizBe said:


> From what I understand of the case, Chapterhouse are getting their asses handed to them as they cannot provide sufficient evidence that the models etc they have produced are their own design and so-forth...
> 
> Basically it boils down to just what GW IP is, but from everything I'm reading, GW are winning and frankly I'm glad.
> 
> CH is quite frankly an asshole. You only have to look at his posts he'd made on the forum here, threatening to sue people who don't support him for slander to tell that. He went too far and he's too dumb to realise that. Pretty much its just a matter of when the judge decides to award GW the win from what I can tell.


i need to see these posts, they sound hilarious XD


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

the-ad-man said:


> i need to see these posts, they sound hilarious XD


I'd point you to them, but they seem to have been deleted or heavily edited... gee... I wonder why? :grin:


----------



## the-ad-man (Jan 22, 2010)

haha awr, damn shame


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

I say good for the small business for finally standing up to GW and telling him where to shove it. I do not like the asshole at CH as a person for some of his posts here on heresy but I am happy someone finally stood up to GW and made them rethink some things. eah it sucks now that we have to wait for releases (a by product of GW suing them by the way, so you can say it is their own damn fault).


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

Djinn.. your forgetting though that CH flat out used GW IP to sell his products. Standing up to them is one thing, stealing their work and calling it your own is another. Thats why GW are suing him. Not because their an evil corporation, but because someone was using Dark Angel, Salamander and Space Wolves icons etc GW had designed on products fo profit.


----------



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

If I remember correctly, the one thing that CH had going for it had to do with US copyright laws. If you are the first to create something then anything after it is copying you. CH was the first to create the Tervigon for instance. So if GW came out with the kit, they would be breaking US copyright laws. But there is a loop hole in the sense that CH used GW terms when naming the product. This may be the reason why the Tervigon kit has not come out. As far as I can see, they would be making a lot of money off that kit, so why wasn't it out earlier? Maybe this reason.

This will probably end in GW's success and I hope it does. As said above I'm glad that someone made GW rethink the way they work, but they have the right to the spectacular game they have created.


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

KaosHerald said:


> If I remember correctly, the one thing that CH had going for it had to do with US copyright laws. If you are the first to create something then anything after it is copying you. CH was the first to create the Tervigon for instance. So if GW came out with the kit, they would be breaking US copyright laws. But there is a loop hole in the sense that CH used GW terms when naming the product. This may be the reason why the Tervigon kit has not come out. As far as I can see, they would be making a lot of money off that kit, so why wasn't it out earlier? Maybe this reason.
> 
> This will probably end in GW's success and I hope it does. As said above I'm glad that someone made GW rethink the way they work, but they have the right to the spectacular game they have created.


Agreed.

I have no idea with GW getting some competition, but simply put, this is not the guy, from what I have seen of him, he refuses to believe that this was a bad idea or in any way wrong, he stole ideas from another company, slapped a model together and had the gall to sue the other company for copyright infringement.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

I like how people on here are trying to defend GW in all of this, and yet they seem to forget that GW steals more IP than all of these small companies put together.

How the hell GW can claim certain things are their property, I do not know. If someone is using GW's specific terminology for their own product, then they are stupid and will lose. If they didn't and just made a model that 'looks like' something GW could conceivably have made but didn't, then fuck GW.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Baltar said:


> I like how people on here are trying to defend GW in all of this, and yet they seem to forget that GW steals more IP than all of these small companies put together.
> 
> How the hell GW can claim certain things are their property, I do not know. If someone is using GW's specific terminology for their own product, then they are stupid and will lose. If they didn't and just made a model that 'looks like' something GW could conceivably have made but didn't, then fuck GW.


Go on then i will bite what IP have GW stolen latey


----------



## Rems (Jun 20, 2011)

I too am on GW's side in this.

There's a huge difference between a third party manufacture like Maxmini studios compared to Chapter House. CH almost solely makes things for 40k, and worst, uses actual 40k terminology and GW copyrighted material to do so. Maxmini by contrast is careful to never use any GW related terms and has a wide range of products, only a few of which are blatant 40k tie ins (the rest of which can be but are suitably vague to fit any sci fi or fantasy game).


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Lately? Why does it need to be lately?

Anyone who's seen the original Hormagaunt models will know exactly what I mean. 

Zoanthropes are pushing it.


















It's not as though the Necrons are lacking a particular likeness.

Anyone remember the Scorpion King? The army of Anubis, for example:










Tomb kings of Khemri aren't exactly subtle, are they... hmm...










And the Grey Knights....









(from the Matrix)

Not to mention the version from Avatar.










Yeah, GW can go and fuck itself.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Rems said:


> I too am on GW's side in this.
> 
> There's a huge difference between a third party manufacture like Maxmini studios compared to Chapter House. CH almost solely makes things for 40k, and worst, uses actual 40k terminology and GW copyrighted material to do so. Maxmini by contrast is careful to never use any GW related terms and has a wide range of products, only a few of which are blatant 40k tie ins (the rest of which can be but are suitably vague to fit any sci fi or fantasy game).


Precisely. CHS made the error of literally producing products that already existed in GW's range, such as Flesh Tearer shoulder pads. Providing the legal team are worth their salt, they should be able to wrap CHS up through this, and that bellend can go back to being a nobody.

The only sad thing really is that mycetic Spores, Tervigons, the Doom of Malan'Tai, and Thunderwolf Cavalry are almost certainly never ever going to be released, as GW no longer possess the rights to these models. Though, I believe the Tervigon product was an 'upgrade sprue' not a real kit, so that one might be okay.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Doom of Malan'Tai is just a repainted Zoanthrope, surely...


----------



## Samules (Oct 13, 2010)

Um, last I checked the ancient Egyptians weren't interested in modern copyright law. Anubis has existed for 3000-7000 years, you can't copyright him.

Aliens with elongated heads and huge powered armor date back to the days when sci-fi magazines and short stories were everywhere and everyone got ideas from everyone else. There is no clear copyright holder.

GW owns "Tyranid Zoanthrope" "Tomb Kings of Khemiri Ushabti" " and "Ordo Malleus Grey Knight Dreadknight". They do not own every idea that lead up to their current models. That's why companies that don't call their products exactly what they are in the GW version get away just fine. Chapter house has been unsubtle to say the least.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Still cant see any examples of IP theft


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

Okay Baltar.... lets sets you straight on a few things.

The Alien Design by Geiger was origional inspired by teh works of Salavdor Dali and teh nightmarish imagry of Cthulu mythology by Lovecraft... Therefore if your gonna call GW's Tyranids an IP rip off, you hav eto call Geigers creations one too.

Secondsly.. Khemri and the Anubis warriors... well they're directly inspired by Egyptian mythology and the Usabti tomb guardians they created thousands of years ago... Your going to tell us Scorpian King was ripping off the IP of Rameses the second or something like that?

And then the Exosuit? lol Thats been around in concept since Starship Troopers.... The 1959 origional novel, not the movie.

Point is they are 'Inspired By' Not copies of. Theres a huge difference and I suggest you learn it. 

Directly taking parts and designs made by GW and claiming them as your own like CH has done? Thats theft. Looking at the ideas of others and using them to create your own unique creations that aren't direct copies of the origionals... thats inspired by.


Seriously.. troll fail Baltar.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

The Dreadknight, while clearly inspired by the APU and whatever they called the suits in Avatar, predates those massively too...that's the kind of thing that inspired the Space Marines in the first place, from 50s Sci-Fi!

EDIT: And the DoM is fluffwise a Zoe, that has no bearing on it's legal status, which is as a unique entity.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

My point is that you can pretty much blatantly copy someone elses ideas (as GW does rigorously), and not manage to breach any laws. Whether or not it's theft is another question entirely, and not worth going into. 

It seems that CH thought it wouldn't be completely stupid to use actual names etc from codices printed by GW. They were wrong.

However, if they hadn't done that, and had given everything totally unique names, then I personally don't think they would have done anything wrong.

They would just have done what GW does on a regular basis.... Take someone elses idea and make a model, and then copyright a new name for it...

But, as it is, they were completely retarded in giving their models names that GW already owns the rights to.

Everyone making out GW are angels. Lol. Their stuff is about as original as rickrolling.


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

Samules said:


> Aliens with elongated heads and huge powered armor date back to the days when sci-fi magazines and short stories were everywhere and everyone got ideas from everyone else. There is no clear copyright holder.


I also might add that the entire MOVIE of Alien was a blatant ripoff of TONS of other sources.

TO quote Cameron himself on the subject, "I didn't steal from anybody. I stole from everybody."


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

It was more then just that... they used the actual chapter icons designed by GW on their products too, as well as displaying them on GW models and saying that they were specifically intended to be X model or Y part for that model.

As said though... if they'd not used them, displayed them on GW models or used GW names and instead done something like 'Death Angel Pauldrons' instead of 'Dark Angel Shoulder Pads', Gw wouldn't have given a monkies and we'd not be having this debate right now and CH wouldn't be on its way to getting closed down and having to pay GW a fortune as it is doing right now as the guys too dumb and arrogant to step down as he should.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

Nicholas Hadrian said:


> I also might add that the entire MOVIE of Alien was a blatant ripoff of TONS of other sources.
> 
> TO quote Cameron himself on the subject, "I didn't steal from anybody. I stole from everybody."


Heck, he even said that he lifted the Cargo Lifter exosuit idea from Starship Troopers, and made the colonial marines read it to get into the part before filming. lol.


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

GrizBe said:


> It was more then just that... they used the actual chapter icons designed by GW on their products too, as well as displaying them on GW models and saying that they were specifically intended to be X model or Y part for that model.
> 
> As said though... if they'd not used them, displayed them on GW models or used GW names and instead done something like 'Death Angel Pauldrons' instead of 'Dark Angel Shoulder Pads', Gw wouldn't have given a monkies and we'd not be having this debate right now and CH wouldn't be on its way to getting closed down and having to pay GW a fortune as it is doing right now as the guys too dumb and arrogant to step down as he should.



Meh, checked out the site, his stuff looks like crap anyway.


----------



## Samules (Oct 13, 2010)

Baltar said:


> My point is that you can pretty much blatantly copy someone elses ideas (as GW does rigorously), and not manage to breach any laws. Whether or not it's theft is another question entirely, and not worth going into.
> 
> It seems that CH thought it wouldn't be completely stupid to use actual names etc from codices printed by GW. They were wrong.
> 
> ...



In the end everything is inspired from everything else. There are maybe a handful of original people in history. More than a few of them were Greeks. However without slight variations on everything the world of fiction woud be a bland place wouldn't it. Without all the work inspired from tolkien where would the fantasy section be? There is no problem with making work inspired from something else as long as you are not ONLY copying but adding new variety. Eventually the series of inspirations diverges so immensely from its beginnings no one can tell the similarity. Bam, "new idea". Cracking down on GW for doing this is just hatred for the company rather than protecting IP.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

I look at it this way if someone sold you a dell power lead for a dell laptop and it turned up and was crap quality and turns out it wasnt a genuine dell lead you would be pissed off,but surely then you would expect a genuine GW product if you buy a warhammer 40k tyranid teryvigion conversion kit? That is the essense of IP for me.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Agreed B&K, and I'm pretty sure that's a cornerstone of their case.

Griz - oh, they'd care. But they wouldn't legally be able to touch them.


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

You know if GW would actually produce half the crap they have ideas for places like CHS would not have business and GW would have more of a leg to stand on. They are producing for the most part add on kits that you have to buy GW stuff to add on too. This would be just like Ford suing people making body kits for Mustangs.


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

bitsandkits said:


> I look at it this way if someone sold you a dell power lead for a dell laptop and it turned up and was crap quality and turns out it wasnt a genuine dell lead you would be pissed off,but surely then you would expect a genuine GW product if you buy a warhammer 40k tyranid teryvigion conversion kit? That is the essense of IP for me.


That would be true if they were saying they were a GW company selling stuff which they are not. try again. It is called aftermarket kits, been around in the car market for ever. Only issue with CHS vs someone like Scribor is CHS called the emblems by name instead of coming up with some stupid named like Scribor does.


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

djinn24 said:


> You know if GW would actually produce half the crap they have ideas for places like CHS would not have business and GW would have more of a leg to stand on. They are producing for the most part add on kits that you have to buy GW stuff to add on too. This would be just like Ford suing people making body kits for Mustangs.


Um... wrong.

The difference here is that Chapterhouse is claiming the idea of these concepts in model form, meaning that GW cannot MAKE them in model form.
This is more like Ford suing people who make body kits for Mustangs, only the people who made the body kits then own the right to Mustangs in car form and Ford only owns the idea of Mustangs in a nonspecific sense.

Either way, it means that Ford can't make any mustangs, ever, again, and will have to start making new cars that are incompatible with the body kits, disowning Mustangs as ever having been made by Ford.

In other words, trying to claim the IP and copyright, even in the end Chapterhouse are shooting themselves in the foot because next edition, if they don't hold the rights to them, GW will be forced to write out the things that Chapterhouse claimed, and with no GW supported rules, Chapterhouse won't have a reason or need to sell them anymore.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

djinn24 said:


> You know if GW would actually produce half the crap they have ideas for places like CHS would not have business and GW would have more of a leg to stand on. They are producing for the most part add on kits that you have to buy GW stuff to add on too. This would be just like Ford suing people making body kits for Mustangs.


Well, unfortunately they're going to stop releasing rules for units that don't have models, so...


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

Nicholas Hadrian said:


> Um... wrong.
> 
> The difference here is that Chapterhouse is claiming the idea of these concepts in model form, meaning that GW cannot MAKE them in model form.
> This is more like Ford suing people who make body kits for Mustangs, only the people who made the body kits then own the right to Mustangs in car form and Ford only owns the idea of Mustangs in a nonspecific sense.
> ...


For the record, a few years ago Ford did issue cease and desist orders to aftermarket manufacturers to stop using names such as Mustang, Thunderbird, and Bronco. Ford didn't succeed in this attempt. Chapter House sounds like they were in violation of some IP where GW is concerned. Chapter House doesn't have a leg to stand on where as automobile aftermarket states 'this kit will fit 99-04 Mustangs'. Besides, those aftermarket places remove Ford and Mustang emblems for pics. Chapter House sounds like they had a degree of failure in this aspect. Besides, hasn't GW stated that a model must have X% of it as GW material?


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

Its 50% and you all do realize that GW sued CHS because of the after market kits. The entire deal about the models not being able to be made was due in part to a judgement on that issue. So the fact that GW can not make kits because another company has made one is GWs own fault. If they had not been so damn sue happy none of this would have came forward and CHS would have not gotten 1/3rd of the traffic that they are now getting.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

Well, seems like if GW wanted to make an attempt to out the aftermarket for their products they would up the % of GW in a model to 100% and leave the rest of the market to customization for other purposes.


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

Jace of Ultramar said:


> For the record, a few years ago Ford did issue cease and desist orders to aftermarket manufacturers to stop using names such as Mustang, Thunderbird, and Bronco. Ford didn't succeed in this attempt. Chapter House sounds like they were in violation of some IP where GW is concerned. Chapter House doesn't have a leg to stand on where as automobile aftermarket states 'this kit will fit 99-04 Mustangs'. Besides, those aftermarket places remove Ford and Mustang emblems for pics. Chapter House sounds like they had a degree of failure in this aspect. Besides, hasn't GW stated that a model must have X% of it as GW material?


I only used that example because he gave it. And yes, the 90% rule is GW's thing. silly, but, meh.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

Nicholas Hadrian said:


> I only used that example because he gave it. And yes, the 90% rule is GW's thing. silly, but, meh.


Well, I took it and ran... best explanation I have for you on that front. 90% eh?


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

To my knowledge, I admit I could be wrong. I don't make it a habit of frequenting GW stores, I get them from my local hobbyshop (20% discount on all things GW, it's bitchin. )


----------



## Rems (Jun 20, 2011)

djinn24 said:


> Its 50% and you all do realize that GW sued CHS because of the after market kits. The entire deal about the models not being able to be made was due in part to a judgement on that issue. So the fact that GW can not make kits because another company has made one is GWs own fault. If they had not been so damn sue happy none of this would have came forward and CHS would have not gotten 1/3rd of the traffic that they are now getting.


But under English copyright law they do in fact have to (or should) sue, otherwise they lose their copyright. If they do not enforce their ownership of it they can lose it, and it then comes under public domain and any one, or any company could use it. GW would lose a hell of a lot of money, probably go broke if that happened. 

I'm vastly simplifying this (this thread isn't the time or the place nor do i have the inclination to really properly explain it) but the above is the essence of it.


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

Rems said:


> But under English copyright law they do in fact have to (or should) sue, otherwise they lose their copyright. If they do not enforce their ownership of it they can lose it, and it then comes under public domain and any one, or any company could use it. GW would lose a hell of a lot of money, probably go broke if that happened.
> 
> I'm vastly simplifying this (this thread isn't the time or the place nor do i have the inclination to really properly explain it) but the above is the essence of it.


Actually there was no "judgement" that said GW cannot make their kits. In ho AMERICAN copyright law works (yes, I know it's stupid and broken) Chapterhouse holds the intellectual property right to Tervigons and Thunderwolf cavalry as related to miniatures because they created the models first, according to them. GW only holds the IP to Tervigons and Thunderwolf Cavalry as related to books since they were in the codex, In short it's part of what is making this thing one whole mixed up mess.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I hope GW comes out on top in this one.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

djinn24 said:


> That would be true if they were saying they were a GW company selling stuff which they are not. try again. It is called aftermarket kits, been around in the car market for ever. Only issue with CHS vs someone like Scribor is CHS called the emblems by name instead of coming up with some stupid named like Scribor does.


I think I might start my own Gaming shop, hmm I need a name....I know I'll call it Geek Chique (I know I've spelt Chic wrong but that's half the charm). I think I'll setup a painting service as well, I know i'm a pretty bad painter but that's where the genius is I'll call it 'Djinn24's models workshop'. 

It's going to be great.

I have this nagging feeling I should come up with my own names for things, so I'm not trading of other peoples good name or something, but I'm sure i'm just being silly there.


----------



## Nicholas Hadrian (Mar 20, 2011)

Aramoro said:


> I think I might start my own Gaming shop, hmm I need a name....I know I'll call it Geek Chique (I know I've spelt Chic wrong but that's half the charm). I think I'll setup a painting service as well, I know i'm a pretty bad painter but that's where the genius is I'll call it 'Djinn24's models workshop'.
> 
> It's going to be great.
> 
> I have this nagging feeling I should come up with my own names for things, so I'm not trading of other peoples good name or something, but I'm sure i'm just being silly there.


Meh, just call em 28mm compatible parts for Cyber-space Knights or some shit like that and you're good.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Nicholas Hadrian said:


> Meh, just call em 28mm compatible parts for Cyber-space Knights or some shit like that and you're good.


Exactly, and as much and GW would hate it there's not a thing they can do about it. People seem to confusing the fact that GW cannot do something with GW not caring about something.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

djinn24 said:


> Its 50% and you all do realize that GW sued CHS because of the after market kits. The entire deal about the models not being able to be made was due in part to a judgement on that issue. So the fact that GW can not make kits because another company has made one is GWs own fault. If they had not been so damn sue happy none of this would have came forward and CHS would have not gotten 1/3rd of the traffic that they are now getting.





Rems said:


> But under English copyright law they do in fact have to (or should) sue, otherwise they lose their copyright. If they do not enforce their ownership of it they can lose it, and it then comes under public domain and any one, or any company could use it. GW would lose a hell of a lot of money, probably go broke if that happened.
> 
> I'm vastly simplifying this (this thread isn't the time or the place nor do i have the inclination to really properly explain it) but the above is the essence of it.


Rems is correct here. And, Djinn - GW doesn't actually lose out here. WE do, the players, because GW will now write things like TWC out of future Codexes. In addition (as I keep saying) it means less variety and innovation in future Codexes, and irregular and probably even more poorly playtested units released through WD.


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

I'm pretty certain most of what is said on the dakka thread and some of the stuff here is all conjecture. Neither legal team nor GW are saying anything, adn there dont appear to be any public court papers saying anything either. This means we only have guess work and what CH have said themselves about the issue. 

I would like the whole thing to be cleared up, and I suspect an out of court settlement may be on the cards. But that just what I think would suit both parties, unless CH think they are going to win, in which case it will go to court and we shall see who has the deepest pockets and the best lawyers (I cant imagine if the case drags on CH will be able to get pro bono forever).


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Yeah hes gonna wanna go back on tour with U2 at some.point


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

bitsandkits said:


> Yeah hes gonna wanna go back on tour with U2 at some.point


HA!


----------

