Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Shinespider said:

The best parallel might be... vehicle manufacturers trying to crack down on third-party aftermarket parts? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. 

he's not selling after-market products. he's selling replacement products. Shoulder pads, weapons, backpacks... those are after market products. We're talking full on 1:1 replacements of Eradicators, Raptors, Brôkhyr Iron-master kits with uncanny design similarities. I'm not a legal guy but as just a basic integrity thing I don't like what Ghamak is doing here and he's "not passing the sniff test" as Vassakov put it.

 

12 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

When you start out replying to my original comment the way you did, you do not actually deserve any benefit of the doubt. So he is giving you more than you deserve already.

 

Notice that my original comment was not directed towards you in any way until you made your comments about me, because apparently you feel personally insulted by my opinions about Ghamak's sculpts.

 

Do not start something if you do not want people to finish it for you. Happy to just move on if you can stop getting worked up about my opinions.

Oh brother. You said "Ghamak is not one of those guys who makes blatant ripoffs." Own it, quit scurrying around trying to dodge accountability because people posted photos showed it was very much otherwise. Don't get pissy at me for simply holding you to what you said.

Edited by Wispy

Also digging around, Ghamak doesn't have a great reputation? So far I've seen;

  • caught stealing and re-selling some of The Maker's Cults' old Knight-Titan models, with new armour sculpted over the top.
  • alleging he had no response from Games Workshop at first, then that they didn't respond to his letter for nearly a year; whilst other creators have highlighted the company is generally extremely responsive once you've gotten in touch via legal representation.

I'm not certain I'd trust anything out of Ghamak after the first point. But allegedly being DMCA'ed, choosing to ignore it, and then uploading near 1-to-1 copies of another companies product after the fact is... really stupid?

 

Yeah, none of this is passing the sniff test in the slightest.

4 minutes ago, Wispy said:

he's not selling after-market products. he's selling replacement products. Shoulder pads, weapons, backpacks... those are after market products. We're talking full on 1:1 replacements of Eradicators, Raptors, Brôkhyr Iron-master kits with uncanny design similarities. I'm not a legal guy but as just a basic integrity thing I don't like what Ghamak is doing here and he's "not passing the sniff test" as Vassakov put it.

 

You said it wasn't blatant, own it, quit scurrying around trying to dodge accountability because people posted photos showing otherwise.

I'm still waiting to see if anyone can actually substantiate the claims they're aggressively defending in honesty.

 

Atm it's very "this guy makes stuff I like and is cheaper than GW, its cool to bash on them and the guy said they're doing a bad thing" energy

4 minutes ago, Wispy said:

You said it wasn't blatant, own it, quit scurrying around trying to dodge accountability because people posted photos showing otherwise.

 

For my edification before this gets deleted, because this is actually funny and interesting to me now, what accountability are we talking about here? Am I going to be incarcerated because some people disagree with my opinion and posted pictures to show why they disagree? I want to know what is going on in this thought process. :laugh:

Legally? Some of that stuff might be ruled illegal. That said, that’s the thing with jurisprudence — the dirty little secret lawyers don’t like to tell you. It’s all informed interpretation at the end of the day.

 

I don’t care about IP morally, and I think a lot of people agree. It’s a stifling concept that chokes the life out of everything from culture to academic and scientific pursuits at universities and in industry. Obviously, people should be fairly compensated for their labor, but do they have the right to profit (these are not the same thing) off it in perpetua? I’m not sure, myself.

 

I don’t like the stuff he does, if I’m to give my personal opinion. Straight proxies aren’t my thing. I’m a big Greytide/Trollet enjoyer. Those cats have their own distinctive, inimitable styles that really add character to the sculpts. That said, I think Ghamak has the right to produce this stuff.

6 minutes ago, Wispy said:

he's not selling after-market products. he's selling replacement products. Shoulder pads, weapons, backpacks... those are after market products. We're talking full on 1:1 replacements of Eradicators, Raptors, Brôkhyr Iron-master kits with uncanny design similarities. I'm not a legal guy but as just a basic integrity thing I don't like what Ghamak is doing here and he's "not passing the sniff test" as Vassakov put it.

 

Oh brother. You said "Ghamak is not one of those guys who makes blatant ripoffs. Own it, quit scurrying around trying to dodge accountability because people posted photos showed it was very much otherwise. Don't get pissy at me for simply holding you to what you said.


But see that’s the thing. It obviously DID pass the sniff test bc none of what you are talking about is what GW sued him over.  Not one single item you or anyone has brought up about copyright infringement is what the lawsuit, the topic of this post, is about. 
 

What does the sniff test even mean? What are you trying to determine? Whether it’s a copy? Again- the copyright holder doesn’t even think they have a claim there. And if your response is- well they just don’t think they can win in court- do you approve of companies threatening people with non-legally cognizable complaints? 
 

Much of this discussion is such a strawman, and I’m not sure why. Do you think GW should be able to sue someone for making models usable in Warhammer? If yes, why. 

5 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

For my edification before this gets deleted, because this is actually funny and interesting to me now, what accountability are we talking about here? Am I going to be incarcerated because some people disagree with my opinion and posted pictures to show why they disagree? I want to know what is going on in this thought process. :laugh:

You quite regularly assert your opinion as fact and then hand wave and whataboutism if you're wrong. By all accounts you still believe GW internalised the tarriffs and the price rise was entirely regular and unrelated to a recent large global impact on their profit margin per sale.

1 minute ago, caladancid said:


But see that’s the thing. It obviously DID pass the sniff test bc none of what you are talking about is what GW sued him over.  Not one single item you or anyone has brought up about copyright infringement is what the lawsuit, the topic of this post, is about. 
 

What does the sniff test even mean? What are you trying to determine? Whether it’s a copy? Again- the copyright holder doesn’t even think they have a claim there. And if your response is- well they just don’t think they can win in court- do you approve of companies threatening people with non-legally cognizable complaints? 
 

Much of this discussion is such a strawman, and I’m not sure why. Do you think GW should be able to sue someone for making models usable in Warhammer? If yes, why. 

Do you have the lawsuit details so we can read them?

Edited by Mogger351
4 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

You quite regularly assert your opinion as fact and then hand wave and whataboutism if you're wrong.

 

Just pretend I add "in my opinion" before my posts then, if that helps. It is possible for two people to look at the same thing and have two different conclusions.

 

5 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

By all accounts

 

What accounts? Am I being monitored? Is Wispy in on this too? Gonna have to cover my tracks better. I won't go back to prison!

 

:ph34r:

17 minutes ago, caladancid said:


But see that’s the thing. It obviously DID pass the sniff test bc none of what you are talking about is what GW sued him over.  Not one single item you or anyone has brought up about copyright infringement is what the lawsuit, the topic of this post, is about. 

 

i could also say "GW taking legal action at all implies he did not pass the sniff test" ... But I don't, because I admittedly don't have a solid legal understanding about this and have repeatedly admitted that and avoided talking about . I think about the artistic integrity of Ghamak's business model and his work vs the legality of that are two things we talk about independent of each other. If it turns out he's doing legal things, that's cool, i still don't think that makes it moral. If you're not interested in discussing artistic integrity with me because you don't think it's pertinent or for whatever reason, that's fine, don't. 

Edited by Wispy
9 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

 

Do you have the lawsuit details so we can read them?

This is such a bad attempt at a gotcha. If you think he’s lying, just say that. All we can do is go on the information we have now, which doesn’t make it reasonable to come into the thread and make up what you believe (with just as much evidence) is the real basis. 

3 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

Just pretend I add "in my opinion" before my posts then, if that helps. It is possible for two people to look at the same thing and have two different conclusions.

 

 

What accounts? Am I being monitored? Is Wispy in on this too? Gonna have to cover my tracks better. I won't go back to prison!

 

:ph34r:

Phanadaal, I understand it's uncomfortable to have your words ("Ghamak is not one of those guys who makes blatant ripoffs.") challenged openly and repeatedly with such strong photographic evidence to the contrary, but there is no need to take it so personally. It's not a personal attack. I used aggressive language myself and I see that put you on the edge, I'm sorry for that. For you, accountability could be something like, "Aw gee, I didn't realize he was selling stuff so uncanny, I'm sorry guys I retract my previous statement on him not being blatant." 

18 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

Atm it's very "this guy makes stuff I like and is cheaper than GW, its cool to bash on them and the guy said they're doing a bad thing" energy

 

This seems to be the default community response whenever situations like this occur, really. It's as if some look for any excuse to go "gw bad!" regardless, but then usually it turns out there was more to it that meant it wasn't quite as it was claimed initially. 

5 minutes ago, Wispy said:

 

i could also say "GW taking legal action at all implies he did not pass the sniff test" ... But I don't, because I admittedly don't have a solid legal understanding about this and have repeatedly admitted that and avoided talking about . I think about the artistic integrity of Ghamak's business model and his work vs the legality of that are two things we talk about independent of each other. If you're not interested in discussing artistic integrity with me because you don't think it's pertinent or for whatever reason, that's fine, don't.

I guess we could talk about artistic integrity. But it’s not really the topic, and GW doesn’t come off as a white knight that has kept their hands clean if you’ve been around the hobby for much time at all. 

  

9 minutes ago, caladancid said:

I guess we could talk about artistic integrity. But it’s not really the topic,

 

given we have an incomplete picture of the lawsuit, i think its relevant. It's certainty very tangential and, well, it's not really for you to police what you think should be on or off topic. 

  

9 minutes ago, caladancid said:

GW doesn’t come off as a white knight that has kept their hands clean if you’ve been around the hobby for much time at all. 

 

no one argued this though.

Edited by Wispy
10 minutes ago, caladancid said:

This is such a bad attempt at a gotcha. If you think he’s lying, just say that. All we can do is go on the information we have now, which doesn’t make it reasonable to come into the thread and make up what you believe (with just as much evidence) is the real basis. 

No, I believe would go after Ghamak, I believe Ghamak would put a statement piece out.

 

The details seem sketchy and no, I don't trust an internet entity asking for money on a "trust me bro". They're both stating they're accused of a crime and counter claiming for victimisation. They're asking for supporters to volunteer money to fight against claims they haven't shown anyone.

 

What I've said is not a strawman, nor unreasonable. If you don't think so I can send you my PayPal because I need funds for my dogs treatment, he's lost 4 legs and both ears. Trust me bro.

 

Was going through their catalog and while there's a bunch there that seem innocuous, I then come across other things that make me go "ah bit on the nose there". I'm sure someone more versed in legalese can tell me why these are perfectly fine and transformative, but in my opinion, as has been stated elsewhere here: doesn't pass the sniff test 


Ancient Sarcophagus

Spoiler

image.jpeg.a08ab2c36a127c55451a133624c0abea.jpeg

 

Martian Sand Walker
 

Spoiler

image.jpeg.be94c4b521c57e632246e0663bd30ab1.jpeg

 

Not knights
 

Spoiler

image.jpeg.b586d73225bc4e24da3dbf86a98531ad.jpeg

 

Not GK or Templars

Spoiler

image.jpeg.2018ada4f90ab0f8a1beedba836877b8.jpegimage.jpeg.e9810cb33d25f1336ab3862dbcfbe599.jpeg

  

 

 

Edited by Mechanicus Tech-Support
14 minutes ago, caladancid said:

This is such a bad attempt at a gotcha. If you think he’s lying, just say that. All we can do is go on the information we have now, which doesn’t make it reasonable to come into the thread and make up what you believe (with just as much evidence) is the real basis. 

 

From what I have seen, the only actual evidence provided in the thread are screenshots of the minis being sold; evidence of the defendants activity in the marketplace.

 

The defendant has asserted that they are being sued.  Evidence of the lawsuit or  content therein has not been provided.

 

Any opinions from either side of the debate are 'what you believe".

 

If you feel it is worthy of support and financial contribution, fair enough.

 

However, not everyone will share your opinion (based on the information and evidence provided so far) and unless a moderator disagrees, are able to express their opinion in the thread.

27 minutes ago, Wispy said:

For you, accountability could be something like, "Aw gee, I didn't realize he was selling stuff so uncanny, I'm sorry guys I retract my previous statement on him not being blatant." 

 

I already know what he makes, and I came to a different conclusion. That is the point. So you will not get any "aww gee" from me today, unfortunately. My opinion of his models is different than yours.

 

In my opinion, they are not blatant ripoffs. It is this word, blatant, that seems to really be the point of contention, because you seem to define it as "this picture I showed you."

 

I don't really like his models myself, because they are too "busy", but when I see them it looks to me as if he has made an effort to not run into trouble. In my opinion, Ghamak is taking deliberate steps to comply with IP when making his proxies.

 

So yeah, Ghamak is not one of the guys making blatant rip-offs of GW minis. Believe me (this is not a demand, more of an invitation or even a request), there are guys out there making things that do not even have the pretense of being different. Their models are so similar that even a blind person would look at them and say "yeah, that seems like infringement." Ghamak's models are not that.

 

Edited by phandaal
IM MY OPINION - THESE STATEMENTS ARE NOT UNIVERSAL TRUTHS. ANY RESEMBLANCE TO REAL FACTS IS PURELY COINCIDENTAL.
3 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

I already know what he makes, and I came to a different conclusion. That is the point. So you will not get any "aww gee" from me today, unfortunately. My opinion of his models is different than yours.

 

In my opinion ( @Mogger351 this is for you), they are not blatant ripoffs. It is this word, blatant, that seems to really be the point of contention, because you seem to define it as "this picture I showed you."

 

I don't really like his models myself, because they are too "busy", but when I see them it looks to me as if he has made an effort to not run into trouble. In my opinion ( @Mogger351 hope this helps :laugh:), Ghamak is taking deliberate steps to comply with IP when making his proxies.

 

So yeah, Ghamak is not one of the guys making blatant rip-offs of GW minis. Believe me (this is not a demand, @Mogger351, more of an invitation or even a request), there are guys out there making things that do not even have the pretense of being different. Their models are so similar that even a blind person would look at them and say "yeah, that seems like infringement." Ghamak's models are not that.

Appreciate the effort, appreciate the humour too.

 

Yeah we'll have to agtee to disagree on the level of blatant, I'm not really sure how anyone can look at "ancient sarcophagus" as cited above and think "wow this isn’t a blatant copy of a leviathan dread".

 

But hey, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and if segmented leg plates and a "not helldiver 2 automaton" skull in the chest is enough to make you think it's totally different, those are your brain patterns I guess.

The mental gymnastics on display here to find ways to decry GW (on a forum for GW games) for this approach is honestly hilarious. 
 

Whether Ghamak is strictly ‘infringing copyright’ (or however else you want to frame it, which largely varies by jurisdiction) is one issue. But no-one in their right mind can say with a straight face that he is not deliberately creating models which very closely mimic equivalent models which GW make. He very clearly would have no market or customers if GW did not exist. It’s not like these are standalone products which some imaginative customers have chosen to use as proxies. They are made with that sole intention in mind. He is therefore entirely dependent on GW’s game systems, customer base and standing in the market. Putting aside the legal position for now, why shouldn’t GW reasonably take umbrage at that?

 

The ‘unfair competition’ allegations are probably a relatively novel attempt to challenge what could be seen as a ‘passing off’ type argument - I.e. creating products designed to leverage the goodwill of another company. 
 

Good move for GW or not, I can’t say I have any sympathy at all for Ghamak and wouldn’t ever even contemplate funding his defence.

23 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

No, I believe would go after Ghamak, I believe Ghamak would put a statement piece out.

 

The details seem sketchy and no, I don't trust an internet entity asking for money on a "trust me bro". They're both stating they're accused of a crime and counter claiming for victimisation. They're asking for supporters to volunteer money to fight against claims they haven't shown anyone.

 

What I've said is not a strawman, nor unreasonable. If you don't think so I can send you my PayPal because I need funds for my dogs treatment, he's lost 4 legs and both ears. Trust me bro.

 


So what is your opinion if he is telling the truth? Should Gw be able to sue someone for making models compatible with their games? 
 

@Wispy @Rusted Boltgun @Inquisitor lorr same for you.

 

You’ve made your opinions clear on infringement. What are your opinions without changing the hypothetical? 

28 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

I already know what he makes, and I came to a different conclusion. That is the point. So you will not get any "aww gee" from me today, unfortunately. My opinion of his models is different than yours.

 

In my opinion, they are not blatant ripoffs. It is this word, blatant, that seems to really be the point of contention, because you seem to define it as "this picture I showed you."

 

I don't really like his models myself, because they are too "busy", but when I see them it looks to me as if he has made an effort to not run into trouble. In my opinion, Ghamak is taking deliberate steps to comply with IP when making his proxies.

 

So yeah, Ghamak is not one of the guys making blatant rip-offs of GW minis. Believe me (this is not a demand, more of an invitation or even a request), there are guys out there making things that do not even have the pretense of being different. Their models are so similar that even a blind person would look at them and say "yeah, that seems like infringement." Ghamak's models are not that.

 

well then you can't get mad for people arguing this point against you. I think the visual evidence posted is quite strong evidence to the contrary that his designs are quite blatant ripoffs, and it seems the 'respectfully disagree' reactions you're getting now indicates more than a few see it the same way. "It's just my opinion!" is great but it's not a hall-pass to go unchallenged on a public forum. anyways, i have nothing else to say. I'm sorry it got heated, its not indictment against you personally and I admittedly was over-aggressive myself.

Edited by Wispy

 

23 minutes ago, caladancid said:


So what is your opinion if he is telling the truth? Should Gw be able to sue someone for making models compatible with their games? 
 

@Wispy @Rusted Boltgun @Inquisitor lorr same for you.

 

You’ve made your opinions clear on infringement. What are your opinions without changing the hypothetical? 

for someone who previously insinuated i was being bad faith, boiling away the nuance of everyone's respectives argument to a blanket statement characterized this as "making models compatible for their games" is very bad faith. He's not making models for personal use to use in their games, he is selling 1:1 replacement products of GW kits depicting characters strongly reminiscent of GW designs. I dunno, I don't like what he does, I don't think he should do it, that its unworthy and unwise to go down this path. That's not saying I think people should be legally forbidden allowed to do it... There might be a world where the designs become creatively distinct enough that it becomes okay. I haven't properly considered the ramifications of that and aren't prepared to stick a flag in the sand definitively.

Edited by Wispy

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.