Ghamak raising a GoFundMe for legal defence against GW lawsuit

[Evil Eye]

Just now, TheVoidDragon said:

 

And again: That you think it's "morally indefensible" for the creator of something to try and stop someone else from infringing on that that is quite strange.

Because it is. GW's existence or even success is not threatened by Ghamak. They do not stand to lose out by simply leaving him be. The only reason they're doing this is if they succeed they stand to gain the ability to monopolize the entire 28mm tabletop market. That is not a good thing. Maybe you like the idea of GW being able to do that. I don't.

[ThaneOfTas]

24 minutes ago, Wispy said:

i, mean there are levels to everything lol. Somethings are indistinct, like the basic and pretty generic Cadian Shocktrooper. On the other hand... 

Is that a Chimera? Or is is a stylised IFV like the BMP-3 or the M113?

 

Those second ones you've got a better argument, except that Kriegers are such a generic design that it would be incredibly difficult to draw a hard line on, where does Krieger start and WWI style scifi trench fighter with gasmask stop? Fot those particular models your strongest argument against them is that the Lasrifles that they're carrying seem to be direct copies of official ones. Everything else i would say could be argued.

[TheMawr]

3 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

Man, if GW wins and uses this as an excuse to get rid of Victoria Minis' Space Aussies, everyone Down Under might riot. Not sure how much more they can take after dealing with absurd GW markups, plus all the stress from hanging on to the bottom of the planet like koalas. 

 

To be serious: After looking at those unfair practices laws, it really does seem like GW's legal team is trying to establish a method for doing end runs around cases where they may not be able to prove IP infringement. If the spirit of the law really is there to protect from knock-off brands, then GW deserve to get denied just for trying to abuse that law. Gonna have to wait and see what actual evidence Ghamak is able to produce though.

 

But even in the gofundme he actually claims GW has been "reasonable" to other peoples work who he considers having almost identical GW designs, just not to him.

 

"In early 2023, Games Workshop (GW) reached out to many creators, including me. While GW asked most creators to change some models with details that were almost identical to their designs, Francesco received a different letter. GW demanded that I delete almost all the models in Ghamak catalogue claiming that my models were breaching their copyright."

 

With that sentence starts my skepticness regarding his side of the story, not the bigger topic at hand. He basically opens with being an individual victim of unfair treatment compared to worse others,. and feels personally prosecuted.

 

"Despite my willingness to find an amicable solution, offering to remove or heavily modify over 30% of Ghamak's catalogue, GW ignored all my letters. GW took almost 12 months to reply to my first letter, refused to provide a list of infringing models, refused to provide any guidelines for me to assess which models were supposedly infringing their IP"

 

Wich raises the question, if he considers his work to be not deriative and GW not providing any list at all... how did he chose the 30% of his models he would heavily modify ? random selection ? By his own words, he knew very well wich ones where and wich ones werent... or at least had a good idea what GW considered to infringe on their IP.. at least with 30% of his models.

 

And later he talks about a list again, with over 1000 models of wich he shows 4.. so apparently, eventually, he did get a list ( of wich I do agree, the 4 he has shown shouldnt need to be changed, nor do I think among his 1200 something models over 1000 models qualify.)

 

This is not a new sudden shocking thing GW is doing, this is a thing "we" all discussed earlier in 2023, and most creators complied and opinions aside, the deed was done. But he didnt, things escalated to a point we dont have all the clear details about. And.. Im not sure he has either, it really doesnt sound as if he had a lawyer involved in any of this. But he did the worst thing to do in the situation in almost the worst way I can imagine doing it. Since there is a third party involved, I wonder if myminifactory will come with a better insightful statement in the coming days... but they sound more corporate as well, and corporates rarely discuss these things publically.

 

Like I said before, there is this automatic assumption that you have to be for one side or the other and criticism on one automatically puts you in the other corner, but this isnt GW vs the world, at best this is incompetent vs incompetent. 

 

 

( btw shoutout to victoria lamb being one of the absolute great ones I referenced earlier :) she is a great person to work with, very helpful as I was just starting in the industry and one of the rare few overseas people I worked with I also met in person :) fully agreed there, may she never ever go under !  )

[Evil Eye]

Just now, ThaneOfTas said:

Is that a Chimera? Or is is a stylised IFV like the BMP-3 or the M113?

 

Hell, the Chimera itself is an unholy mashup of cold-war IFVs and late-WW1/interwar tank design, so...

[Mechanicus Tech-Support]

Ah yes the BMP-3 or the M113 famous for its side wall and hull mounted guns..wait

[phandaal]

22 minutes ago, NovemberIX said:

I mean, I could be playing one page rules, so why does GW get to decide what my dwarf guild looks like? 

 

Bold of GW to think they are safe, selling their knock off Bolt Action kits like that. So what if they made a few aesthetic changes to their IFVs and infantry platoons? People could be confused if they aren't experts on that kind of thing.

[TheVoidDragon]

24 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

Because it is. GW's existence or even success is not threatened by Ghamak. They do not stand to lose out by simply leaving him be. The only reason they're doing this is if they succeed they stand to gain the ability to monopolize the entire 28mm tabletop market. That is not a good thing. Maybe you like the idea of GW being able to do that. I don't.

 

If someone creates something and it does well, that doesn't mean they no longer deserve to have it and it instead becomes perfectly fine for others to just infringe on. 

 

Claiming that this is because of some intention to "monopolize the 28mm tabletop market" rather than simply stop these specific designs is quite a leap.

[Evil Eye]

4 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

If someone creates something and it does well, that doesn't mean they no longer deserve to have it and it instead becomes perfectly fine for others to just infringe on. 

Counterpoint: If someone else is able to capitalize on the success of a thing and is not causing any harm to the original creator*, what right does the creator have to stop them?

 

*Though given 99.9% of the original GW talent is long gone from the company, one could argue that GW the company in its present form cannot be considered the creator of 40K. And that's before we get into the INCREDIBLY derivative nature of the property itself; a certain Mr. Moorcock could, if he so desired, deprive GW of the right to the concept of Chaos.

Edited 16 hours ago by Evil Eye
Minor typo.

[Lord_Ikka]

=][=Reminder- keep posts on topic. Discussion about GW's legal strategies and 3rd party producers' possible infringement on IP is fine, attacks on other frater due to their personal viewpoints is not. This is a warning to all, keep on topic. =][=

[SalamandersBro]

Good luck to him as a creator

[ThaneOfTas]

17 minutes ago, Inquisitor lorr said:

As I said before, if it were your products in these scenarios, can you honestly say you would be okay with other people doing this to you? 

if the alternative is making IP law more restrictive and beneficial to established companies then yes I would rather put up with a tiny fraction of my potential sales being lost and would instead focus on making sure that my product is better than my competitors. 

 

49 minutes ago, Mechanicus Tech-Support said:

Ah yes the BMP-3 or the M113 famous for its side wall and hull mounted guns..wait

I listed two of the most well known IFVs, both of which have a broadly similar silhouette to the Chimera to illustrate that GW does not those design elements. Is the Chimera the only IFV in history or fiction to have front and side mounted guns?

[Wispy]

2 hours ago, ThaneOfTas said:

.

GW will just effectively own the rights to models of a certain size and number featuring large pauldrons and power packs. I don't personally like that outcome but unless I'm misunderstanding some of your positions others of you are effectively okay with that.

 

I'm circling back on this one because I think the existence of a variety of distinct 'power armored soldiers' in fiction proved there's a lot more effort proxy sculptors could be doing to make their designs distinct.  The Fallout Knight, Star Craft's Terran marine, Iron Man, and the Star Wars Mandalorian all have shared elements while managing to look distinct from an Adeptus Astartes.

 

Proxy modelers aren't designing "I can't believe it's not 40k" because they're helplessly repeating these designs by accident, they're repeating these designs because their own visually distinct models won't sell to a clientele that wants to print Astartes-that-look-like-Astartes.

Edited 15 hours ago by Wispy

[ThePenitentOne]

So I don't have a lot of dogs in this fight- this is going to be a thread of strong opinions, and I can see how it might escalate... So I'm not likely to check back in often. I also didn't read all six pages, so someone's probably already said everything I'm about to say.

 

40k has been a part of my life since I was 16 years old, and I'm 52 right now. They built an empire, and they cornered the market, and they are the most successful miniature company of all time, full stop. It took lots of very hard work, lots of luck, lots of investment and there are people who have literally given the better part of their lives to make that happen. They recognize their place in their county's economy, and they are pretty damn loyal to it.

 

The "maker" movement and proliferation of platforming has changed the way the world works... And we can argue about whether that's good or bad, because there are both pros and cons to it. It democatizes creativity in a way that gives everyone with skills and willpower the ability to succeed... Which is incedibly liberating.

 

But the thing I love about GW is that in another 20 years, they'll still be here, because their "old school" business model required them to build infrastructure that has since become part of an institution. People talk about all the games that are better than GW, and I won't dispute it, but my response is still the same: I'm using models in games today that I bought in 92, and in 2037, I expect to still be using them alongside the models I plan to buy next week and the models I buy in 2036.

 

Ghamak, by then, will be long gone and forgotten, replaced by the next "cutting edge" fella with a printer, a kickstarter, and social media skills because he never had to build an institution to do what he does. And the hotshot with the 3d printer that replaces him will be replaced 3 years after that. And the entire industry will be just kickstarters and printers and social media platforms- all flash in the pan stuff that looks great at the time but creates no legacy, history or lasting value and leaves behind no trace. Just like record "Albums" are a lost artform because the world is now just samplers hopped up on autotune and AI trying to get one song to go viral on socials so it sells on itunes so they can make money and disappear from history leaving behind nothing of lasting value.

 

And the thing is, if GW hadn't spent 36 years, millions of dollars in investment capital and employed THOUSANDS of people from artists to sculptors to retailers to webdesigners to writers, Ghamak and all the other folks that have generated income off their backs- the videogame companies, animators, content creators would never have made a dime.

 

The models are okay, and the fact that you all know who Ghamak is means he's probably made enough money to pay his own legal bills, but he'd much rather you pay them for him, so once again, crowd source... Yay! Another platform. Shock the Algorithms on the socials, push it out, play the "everyman v. evil corp" outrage loop while GW pay their own legal bills, build more factories, employ more Brits, create new careers for emerging novelists, illustrators and license more content so that companies like Joy Toy can become successful businesses in their own right. Ask any of THEIR employees whose side they're on in GW v Ghamak.

 

And don't get me wrong: I wanted to buy some W Artel Grotesques when GW chose not to make them in plastic this edition.... But of course, GW removed them from the dex... Likely because they KNEW that I and others like me would buy Artel's Grotesques (or the Raging Heroes Knock-offs, or the Ghamak Knock-offs, or Knock-offs by any of a dozen other start-ups, kickstarters or makers. And yeah, I was upset about that at first and put ALL the blame for it on GW, but would they have pulled the card from the dex if all of these "disruptors" weren't waiting in the wings to make a buck off the infrastructure GW spent four decades building and the backs of the thousands of people that GW and their legitimate licensees employ? 

 

It's not a simple issue. There are valid arguments on both sides. I'm gonna back the guys who have been with me for 36 years in hopes that my support will help them be here in another twenty. Because IF GW falls? So do all the companies that rely on their licensing and everyone employed by any of those companies.

 

I know I'm an old Grognard screaming at teenagers to get off my lawn and lamenting the loss of a business model that has ceased to exist... But in doing a bit of research, I came across that May 2025 announcement that GW was giving 20 million GBP back to their employees as a bonus and I put that up against Ghamak asking other people to pay his legal bills and had to ask myself who I thought was more selfish and entitled.

Edited 14 hours ago by ThePenitentOne

[NovemberIX]

11 minutes ago, Wispy said:

I'm circling back on this one because I think the existence of a variety of distinct 'power armored soldiers' in fiction proved there's a lot more effort proxy sculptors could be doing to make their designs distinct.  The Fallout Knight, Star Craft's Terran marine, Iron Man, and the Star Wars Mandalorian all have shared elements while managing to look distinct from an Adeptus Astartes.

 

Proxy modelers aren't designing "I can't believe it's not 40k" because they're helplessly repeating these designs by accident, they're repeating these designs because their own visually distinct models won't sell to a clientele that wants to print Astartes-that-look-like-Astartes.

The problem is that's not what this issue is about, it's about saying you can't compete directly with GW by making models that fit their (and other) game system.

[TheTrans]

After trawling through that slog, I think honestly, while there are pros and cons to the intricacies of this -particular- case and parties, the concern, and I'm no legal-eagle or anything like that, but as far as I can tell, many laws or decisions made in courts rely on previous 'precedents' set by previous courts or cases, essentially allowing a judge to sort of not have to make a decision and rely on a decision (right or wrong) that was made in a similar case prior.

So I think the concern for me here is, sure maybe Ghamak (legit never heard of him until today and i print a heap of :cuss:!) may be pushing too far into the 'pretty confusable line'.. but thats not the problem here.. if GW win on this pretty nebulous claim, then the next claim, which may be  a few steps more steps removed gets though.. then the next... etc, until, all of a sudden people Wargames Atlantic get shut down due to their Sci-Fi ranges.

Also to be perfectly honesty, I don't see how this is fair to argue that the models could be confused from a consumer standpoint.

Ghamak's models are only STLs he provides, GW do not provide STLs in any format. Ghamak has random imagines up, GW has a proper website, with boxed physical models that are plastic etc. If you put the two order portals side by side, how could you be confused between the two?

Hell lets put a GW box of models on a table next to a Box of models that Ghamak produces on a table next to it. Unsure how someone can confuse a printed, nice box with warhammer all over it, with an empty table.. but sure. 

If someone one down the line is spray painting Ghamak's printed models, putting them box that is similar to a GW box, then flogging them off as GW, then yeah, sure, thats dodgy as hell, but currently, and as far as the internet has led me to believe that GWs core audience are 'transitory players' that find out about warhams, buy some :cuss: for a few years then leave, aren't going to be running into the deep dark web of 3d printing immediately. 

Hell if GW's stuff wasn't so bloody expensive, recasters and 3d modellers wouldn't have had such a gaping chasm to grow and prosper in. 

[dalmer]

(apologies, info already posted by someone else)

Edited 13 hours ago by dalmer
already posted

[Osteoclast]

Wonder how many of the “AI art is theft!” people are defending these sort of knockoffs. 
 

Aside from my general stance of “He who seeks the court of public opinion is probably wrong,” the models appear to fail any claim of originality. They’re very clearly based upon GW’s models and are blatantly marketed and sold that way. This isn’t an innocent error or convergent evolution. There’s a combo of de minimis “legally distinct” blanding and some objectively bad sculpting, but it’s very clearly not original and not transformative enough to survive a challenge imho. 
 

This is exacerbated by the fact that the company in question (and it is a company, smaller than GW though it may be) has a known history of blatantly stealing the work of other sculptors, so there isn’t exactly room for benefit of the doubt. 
 

Lastl, he is bald, and if Warhammer has taught us anything, it’s that bald=evil. 

[MoriyaSchism]

I don't care who is wrong or right, I just want to see GW lose in court. Pretty petty reasons, but I'm too invested in the 3rd party stuff I already buy from other places. Never heard of this guy before and his stuff certainly looks like something I'd never print, but if him losing in court leads to other places slowly falling like dominoes I'll be out of 3rd party versions of things GW itself chose not to manufacture anymore (old Mark III armour, the Horus Heresy Death Guard helmets or most of the FW catalog). It's not even a money issue, because I've never bought from recasters. It's simply GW's choice to replace an old good design with a terrible substitute in my opinion. If GW makes it I'll buy it and if they don't I'll just look elsewhere. 

[Orange Knight]

I haven't read the whole conversation - I can see we're already 7 pages in and things might be heated.

 

All I'll say is that in my experience situations like this are rarely as one sided or as black and white as one party might present them.

 

I also don't particularly like it when these things are presented as a battle of morality, or a campaign to "protect the weak" when in reality there could be legitimate copyright infringments or problems that need to be addressed.

 

GW do strongly protect their IP, but they are also a British company that employs people in the UK and shares profits with the staff - they aren't some devil making buck in some East Asian economy on the back of child labour.

[siegfriedfr]

Imo Ghamak naming of things is too close to GW.

 

It's ok to sell toy soldiers you designed yourself. It is not ok to obviously go for the 40k crowd looking for cheaper proxies by playing tricks with the naming convention. 

 

If he was smart, he would have named them after OPR units. 

 

As for GW's claim of «unfair competition», if that's actually the word they used, this is ludicrous and needs to be fought in court. 

[Mogger351]

3 minutes ago, siegfriedfr said:

Imo Ghamak naming of things is too close to GW.

 

It's ok to sell toy soldiers you designed yourself. It is not ok to obviously go for the 40k crowd looking for cheaper proxies by playing tricks with the naming convention. 

 

If he was smart, he would have named them after OPR units. 

 

As for GW's claim of «unfair competition», if that's actually the word they used, this is ludicrous and needs to be fought in court. 

As has been repeated ad nauseam at this point, unfair competition has a legal definition in Italian court and the GW legal team appear to be operating within those confines, regardless of whether people agree to them doing so or otherwise.

[Silas7]

19 hours ago, Robbienw said:

That's a bit weird.  Many things could be judged as compatible on a very vague basis. 

 

Don't see how they could argue this in their favour in court to actually shut people down.  I suspect they are using it to target small groups or one man operations that they have calculated don't have the money to defend themselves.  Probably in a lot of people's interests to support this chap.

A rock could be compatible. A rock.

[Mogger351]

1 minute ago, Silas7 said:

A rock could be compatible. A rock.

Yeah, but it doesn't show me rocks when I search for GW units

[Orange Knight]

1 hour ago, MoriyaSchism said:

I don't care who is wrong or right, I just want to see GW lose in court. 

 

This is a kind of unhelpful and reductive sentiment that unfortunately obfuscates things like this once they are pushed more into the public.

It's why the court of public opinion is the wrong avenue to persue, and in doing so, I ultimately think Ghamak is probably in the wrong on some level. As I mentioned above, it's an emotional appeal to some sort of undefined morality.

[Silas7]

10 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

Yeah, but it doesn't show me rocks when I search for GW units

Because an algorithm is trained on peoples data, of course it isn't going to show you pictures of rocks because no one is using rocks; the point being that it's so broad anything could be used as a physical substitute.

All I know is that greed is involved; Has anyone heard of other model companies having legal disputes like this?