Codex: Space Marines | Multi-Part Intercessor & Vanguard Vet Teaser | Legends Culling

[Marshal Reinhard]

35 minutes ago, Antarius said:

I agree almost completely with your whole post and almost-almost completely with this. But I think there is an element of "lightning in a bottle" about 40K that is probably just impossible to sustain forever, especially since I think they originally came up with the "secret sauce" by a mix of deliberate design and happy accident and I'm not sure the recipe was ever precisely understood or written down by anyone.

It sounds very pessimistic, I know, but I think there is simply an element of time wearing away at the magic of the setting that probably can't be entirely avoided. Individual decisions can still be lamentable, of course and going corporate rarely does a lot of good for any artistic endeavour, but even without all that, I think keeping the setting fresh for 40ish years was always going to be a tall order.

I think the whole, keeping the magic alive prospect goes doubly for enjoyers of the hobby as well. To those of us who've been here a long time, the magic of certain things does indeed fade, while for newcomers, it may be as vivid as ever.

[Halandaar]

51 minutes ago, Griefbringer said:

Nowadays some companies even add what looks like intentional misspellings to some of their product names to establish even stronger (more distinctive) trademarks, though so far GW has not really strayed into that sector

 

Oh no, GW are definitely into this, see Orruks, Ogors, Fyreslayers and Aelves in AoS (and specific units like Null-Khemists), and in 40K in the Votann stuff like the Brokhyr, Hearthkyn, Arkanyst, and many more I've doubtless failed to reference.

[Bouargh]

7 minutes ago, Halandaar said:

 

Oh no, GW are definitely into this, see Orruks, Ogors, Fyreslayers and Aelves in AoS (and specific units like Null-Khemists), and in 40K in the Votann stuff like the Brokhyr, Hearthkyn, Arkanyst, and many more I've doubtless failed to reference.

 

Gosh, I was so mistaken! All that time I thought that the big K trend (Null-Khemist, Lord Kakophonist...)  was instead an attempt for luring Khloe and Kourtney Kardashian into the hobby... 

 

More seriously, for a company which main asset is its IP and associated Licences, trying out any trick and exploting legal gaps that allow getting renewal of your trademarks is an understandable and affordable strategy. Not that shocking per se. Depending of course if you use it as a purely defensive tool or if you are then taking th eopportunity for hammering all and any competitor with it (a.k.a. building a monopoly by drying out others' right to do).

[Antarius]

When it comes to trademarks and copyright, I think the name issue is probably both true (you can't trademark "eldar" but possibly/probably "aeldari") and somewhat overstated.

I mean they definitely want trademarks, don't get me wrong, but it's not like they actually have an effect on the issue where people mostly bring it up, namely 3rd party bits and miniatures, because no matter whether GW calls space elfs eldar or aeldari, they can't prevent anyone from creating their own "space elf" miniatures and bits that are compatible with GW games.

Edited 9 hours ago by Antarius

[deathspectersgt7]

Well lads , I retired my firstborn to the attic of the lost. And played taps and closed the door.

[Griefbringer]

1 hour ago, Antarius said:

When it comes to trademarks and copyright, I think the name issue is probably both true (you can't trademark "eldar" but possibly/probably "aeldari") and somewhat overstated.

 

Trademarks apply to specific products (and registered trademarks to specific product categories), and the strength of a trademark is always in relation to that category. If you check the UK government Intellectual Property Office registry, GW has actually once upon time registered Eldar as their trademark back in 1992 (for use in "Games; toys; board games; miniatures and models;" etc.) , though apparently decided to give it up in 2019 by not renewing the registration:

 

https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00001498855

 

The strength of the trademark depends on the product, and whether it is descriptive or not. Amongst general public (or at least the portion familiar with fantasy literature), the term eldar is generally associated with an elf (thanks to JRR Tolkien), and thus using the term for a space elf (or miniature presenting one) could be argued to be essentially descriptive, and thus not valid for trademark protection in that particular context. However, in some other context where it is not descriptive (e.g. strawberry ice cream) it could make for a strong trademark.

 

Technically, the product names can also enjoy copyright protection as a literary work, though claiming two words put together (even in particularly original form) as a literary work may not find much support in a court. On the other hand, graphic elements used as product identifiers (such as various Warhammer 40,000 logos over the years) tend to easily qualify for both copyright and trademark protection.

 

Halandaar made a good point about the wonky AoS names, kudos to him for that. Personally, I have been trying to pretend that AoS does not exist since late 2015 (the original AoS release was too shocking), especially when in a place like B&C which is dedicated to the 40K setting.

 

As for peculiar spellings, such as substitution of letters with K and Y, this may be partially attempt to make more distinctive terms for trademarks, but also an attempt to make terms that sound more arcane by giving them "Ye Olde Ynglish spellings" - at least to my eye arkanyst looks even more arcane than arcanist.

[Karhedron]

6 hours ago, Lathe Biosas said:

I had a thought. Maybe they are trying to make the vehicle style divide between the Space Marines and Imperial Guard wider.

 

Possibly more the Sisters of Battle who also wear power armour and ride in Rhinos. 

[Griefbringer]

2 hours ago, Bouargh said:

More seriously, for a company which main asset is its IP and associated Licences, trying out any trick and exploting legal gaps that allow getting renewal of your trademarks is an understandable and affordable strategy. 

 

Renewing registered trademarks does not to my knowledge require any particular legal trickery - you just need to fill in some paper work every 10 years and pay a renewal fee to the registry. For the process in UK, see the governmental website:

 

https://www.gov.uk/renew-your-trade-mark

[DemonGSides]

2 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

Possibly more the Sisters of Battle who also wear power armour and ride in Rhinos. 

 

And also making distinction between Loyalist and Chaos.   Chaos Space Marines are still very visually obviously Space Marines, as are Loyalists, while not being just "Daniel" and "Evil Daniel".

[MoriyaSchism]

1 hour ago, DemonGSides said:

 

And also making distinction between Loyalist and Chaos.   Chaos Space Marines are still very visually obviously Space Marines, as are Loyalists, while not being just "Daniel" and "Evil Daniel".

Shouldn't Chaos Space Marines for the most part be raiders? Even most of their recruitment comes from outside and someone else's geneseed. The only thing I'd change about Chaos vehicles would be the Aquila on the tank treads, just get rid of that. The idea that Chaos Space Marines should all have Heresy and Crusade era equipment in M42 is a ridiculous idea. Many chapters went renegade in the past 10,000 years and surely they would have raided, captured, occupied Imperial manufacturing facilities and brought their old Imperial gear with them. Members of the original traitor legions having access to some old pattern equipment I can see, it's reflected in the common armour marks and unique vehicles (Plague Crawler) of the main four cult legions. Red Crosairs and recent warbands rolling around in Deimos vehicles, having completely corrupted Dreadnoughts and tons of Daemon Engines would be seriously lacking in flavour. 

[Indy Techwisp]

18 minutes ago, MoriyaSchism said:

Shouldn't Chaos Space Marines for the most part be raiders? Even most of their recruitment comes from outside and someone else's geneseed. The only thing I'd change about Chaos vehicles would be the Aquila on the tank treads, just get rid of that. The idea that Chaos Space Marines should all have Heresy and Crusade era equipment in M42 is a ridiculous idea. Many chapters went renegade in the past 10,000 years and surely they would have raided, captured, occupied Imperial manufacturing facilities and brought their old Imperial gear with them. Members of the original traitor legions having access to some old pattern equipment I can see, it's reflected in the common armour marks and unique vehicles (Plague Crawler) of the main four cult legions. Red Crosairs and recent warbands rolling around in Deimos vehicles, having completely corrupted Dreadnoughts and tons of Daemon Engines would be seriously lacking in flavour. 

 

I would rather have actual vehicles to use in my Chaos army rather than thematically unwitting weird fleshy disappointments that is GW's attempt at doing something "like" Armour support for Chaos.

 

The entire vibe of my faction is that 90% of the people in it are literally just sand in smooth clean armour.

Why can't my vehicles also have nice clean armour?

[Laurence]

9 hours ago, Griefbringer said:

 

Actually, the unit-naming sub-department of corporate lawyer demi-company is not really interested in copyright issues when it comes to unit names, but about how strong trademarks they can establish.

 

Ideally, a strong trademark is distinctive and non-descriptive of the product (in the minds of general public), as you cannot claim effective trademark to descriptive terms. If you ask a member of general public about what they associate term "Primaris Intercessor" (or whatever you had in mind) with and they answer is "Absolutely nothing!", then you have probably come up with a strong trademark.

 

Nowadays some companies even add what looks like intentional misspellings to some of their product names to establish even stronger (more distinctive) trademarks, though so far GW has not really strayed into that sector - unless you count some of the Orky names, but those kind of names have been part of Orkyness at least since early 1990's, well before corporate lawyers started to meddle with the product names.

 

"With the chainsword ... we wil purge!"

I'm still wondering whether or not Necromunda's Palanite Enforcers were the result of a typo or not.

[Rhavien]

58 minutes ago, Indy Techwisp said:

The entire vibe of my faction is that 90% of the people in it are literally just sand in smooth clean armour.

Why can't my vehicles also have nice clean armour?

Should have thought about that before you signed with the god of change 

[Mazer Rackham]

1 hour ago, Indy Techwisp said:

The entire vibe of my faction is that 90% of the people in it are literally just sand in smooth clean armour.

 

9 minutes ago, Rhavien said:

Should have thought about that before you signed with the god of change 

 

*People going down to the beach, burying each other, playing ball, letting the dog have a widdle, minding own business*

 

Indy Techwisp: 'No, you brutes!' *thumps fist onto ground* 'Sand is people! Sand is PEOPLE!'

 

[Indy Techwisp]

49 minutes ago, Rhavien said:

Should have thought about that before you signed with the god of change 

 

Tbf the "Change" side of the faction is more realistically the "Just play AoS/TOW" side of it the Daemon Engines still don't fit.