Discussions in Rants & Raves
 Community Forums General Forums Rants & Raves Thoughts on the GW v Chapterhouse verdict |
Listing 1 to 6 of 6 Replies PAGES: 1 | |
| Jbickley00 |  Thoughts on the GW v Chapterhouse verdict |
 Member Since: May 13, 2013  RK: 1 MP: 0   | Wednesday June 19, 2013 11:33 PM  For more information about the GW vs CH Verdict, check out these links: LEGALWATCH: Games Workshop vs Chapterhouse Verdict GW vs Chapter House Verdict Games Workshop vs. Chapterhouse 1st Wave of Testimony The Shell Case: More GW vs Chapter House News Ok, I have some big picture thoughts on the GW v CHS verdict. Basically, GW is responsible for creating the market conditions that allow third parties to move in on their market. First, GW created the gold standard for tabletop wargames, in terms of quality of minis and supporting intellectual property (the game. It so much, but the mechanicas are not really an issue). Of course this is a good thing, it's a game that people like, and play and spend money on-so their success makes them a target. But GW also engages in movie theatre pricing, which means that they greedily an exploitable affordability gap, which lets 3d parties move in. CHS sells stuff because they sell it as a cheaper alternative. Gw's response to competition is Litigation ( you have to sell a lot of models and codexs to pay for all this litigation, we lawyers don't work cheap). Also GW does not sell bits in an accessible fashion, and has focused its business on initial purchasers. This is an acceptable strategy (though not always the best), but it does mean its impossible for retailers to carry things like chapter shoulder pads. They can be ordered from gw, but this is not really well advertised. Thus there is a market for supplemental and conversions bits. Finally, there are those who seek to add more or different flavor to their armies-they wish to expand by adding chapters or providing interesting variants-this is actually a healthy sign-it means people are playing the game. So the existence of a 3d party market is gw's own doing. If they reduced costsn to be more competitive, CHS would have less reason for being. Also, if gw sold bits and alternate bits for reasonable prices, then they would undercut the need for bits makers. The only thing they can't do is satisfy people who want different stuff, but that market share will always be lost to them. The sad end result is that gw has chosen to litigate rather than to compete-maybe they are looking for a sale to Hasbro-because this is the first step in losing your edge. [Edited to add links and break up one huge paragraph] (thanks for the edit, I just cut and pasted the original, and it deparagraphed from the notepad, also I appreciate the links!) [[Edited by DreamKnight on Friday June 21, 2013 3:16 AM]] [[Edited by Jbickley00 on Friday June 21, 2013 7:26 AM]] |
| lazypug | RE: Thoughts on the GW v Chapterhouse verdict |
 Member Since: May 7, 2013 RK: 1 MP: 0 | Thursday June 20, 2013 9:16 AM We can all say together that Game Workshop has not really cared about their consumers for a very long time. The evidence is there from stopping bit selling, the middle finger to on line retailers, and the poor quality of White Dwarf for example. I agree with all the points you have brought up. Game workshop's own doing has allow their competitors to take advantage. Probably everyone was done to maximize profit, cut costs, and keep their shareholders happy because if I am not mistaken, producing just bits increases the overall cost of production. While I have no idea what the fook happened to white dwarf. I would not mind that they are using it as a catalog of their own products if they did not stupidfy its content to the point where it is now. I do understand that their target market has shifted to target more newcomers in kids or maybe their target never changed and I just got older. Still many of their decisions on white dwarf has been poor. Whoever has been running the magazine should be fired to be honest and yes, I know that they already fired everyone once or twice already. The thing with chapter house is funny. I would have thought making an alliance with 3rd parties would be more beneficial to everyone. By outsourcing or give production contracts for their more "custom" products would not only keep GW happy, because they get a cut, it would also keep us, the non-kids gamers, happy and the Chapter House happy as well. It is a win-win-win scenario and how I see it, the only reason why this was not done was probably because GW is being too greedy or just childish. I do understand that protecting your own IP is top priority and giving in to certain things can be a slippery slope. However, the way that GW is doing it is just simple strange. If the rumors are true and GW is looking to maximize its short term profits to make them look more profitable to potential investors, then it has already failed. If you and I, the ordinary people who do not play with millions of pounds and dollars can see right through what GW is doing, wouldn't mean that people who actually do play with millions would see it as well and probably even more in depth than we can even comprehend? Wouldn't this strategy or fattening up the pig simply put investors even more cautious in purchasing the company? It is as if GW is relying on stupid e-bay sale tactics of putting in words like "pro-painted" to boost up prices. It works sure but the person who actually falls for it are, well, naive and investors anything but naive. Like many of us have said, GW's actions are odd and sometimes do not make any sense, no matter if its from a business, ethical, or financial perspective. The question of "why" will always be a mystery to us commoners. In the end though, companies like Chapter House will always be players in the industry and will probably grow even stronger from, in many eyes, this legal victory against Games Workshop. - Fear thy Howl, Fear thy Fang, Fear thy Pug - |
| Kane856 | RE: Thoughts on the GW v Chapterhouse verdict |
 Member Since: May 15, 2013 RK: 1 MP: 0 | Friday June 21, 2013 6:04 AM The court case should have cleared up some muddy waters and make it a bit easier for third party producers to make and market add ons suitable for GW kits. |
| Jbickley00 | RE: Thoughts on the GW v Chapterhouse verdict |
Member Since: May 13, 2013 RK: 1 MP: 0 | Friday June 21, 2013 7:45 AM I hope it does make stuff easier for third party compatability issues. While I don't advocate Chinese knock-offs, there are some really nice bits out there that meaningfully add a different look to the basic gw stuff. I'm a believer in specialized bits-I have just placed an order for 70 bucks worth of shoulder pads for my girlfriend's dark angles, and I love what gw oes with stuff like this, and forge world. But there is a lot of room out there for alternatives, and I think GW would benefit from embracing the alternatives. Let not forget that he fundamental purpose of intellectual property is not to protect commercial interests, but rather to ensure that consumers as a whole benefit from creative or innovative works. By allowing creators to profit from these works, the theory is that people will be encouraged to produce more works. GW is actually facilitating this with the popularity of the game system, but is at the same time, stifling this with it's IP bullying. Again-I'm not suggesting no infringement occurred, but GW goes after everything as MCA Hogarth can tell you (Spots the Space Marine). So what we have here is a case where third parties producing supplemental materials are actually fulfilling the purposes of intellectual property, a set of shoulder pads still requires the underlying space marines, after all. What is most absurd to me, however, is forge world. Here GW has now pit itself in a position where it is it's own biggest competitor. Yes forge world marines are more expensive than the plastic ones (though not the finecast veterans) but the FW product is all around superior. I can only wonder what it would be like if GW made forge world more mainstream and accessible (and unsed FW resin instead if finecast). |
| Typhus | RE: Thoughts on the GW v Chapterhouse verdict |
 Member Since: May 23, 2013 RK: 1 MP: 0 | Tuesday June 25, 2013 6:55 AM GW remind me in many ways of Lucasfilm - market leader and bully. Move in on our turf and we'll see you in court.Having collected Star Wars stuff for 20 odd years LF decisions and manner over this time left me with my own decision to make and thus much of my collecting has stopped. I can't and won't support a group with such ethics that literally get me angry, its a hobby and supposedly fun.Looking for a new hobby I fell back in love with wargaming and primarily GW, as that's all I know really. Lets just say that love affair of 6 months or so has hit the rocks already - but I'm glad there are so many alternatives out there these days compared to when I used to collect and game. Thank goodness for the likes of Wyrd, a company I can take joy in supporting, I hope they don't go down this bullying route and that they continue to listen to their fans. I may be in the minority but I won't mindlessly follow a company just because their products are "the best" its my choice and I will base that on what makes ME happy.  [[Edited by Typhus on Tuesday June 25, 2013 8:12 AM]] Some say the end is near. Some say we'll see armageddon soon. I certainly hope we will. I sure could use a vacation from this |
| Jbickley00 | RE: Thoughts on the GW v Chapterhouse verdict |
Member Since: May 13, 2013 RK: 1 MP: 0 | Tuesday June 25, 2013 12:16 PM I'm not simply bashing games workshop, and that isn't the point-if gw had not spent thirty years developing the intellectual property, then there would be no market for gw-relayed stuff. I like gw, yes their pricing policies have driven me to forge world, and severely limited my ability and interest in just committing to an army (you can buy a whole istorical army for under 300 bucks), which makes my historical gaming now my dominant interest) but GW has built an innovative and vibrant universe. We should appreciate that. I know lucasfilm and Disney can be aggressive in protecting intellectual property, maybe even unreasonably so, but by and large I am comfortable with them, because they protect intellectual property they have invented. GW becomes a bully, in my opinion, when it seeks to enforce ip rights on things that it cannot possible hold rights in, like the word space marine, or the eight pointed chaos star, or the word chaos, or demon. You want to enforce a trademark on the word adeptus astartes, then I am all, for it, but try and claim "space marine" and you are crossing a line. GW would probbly assert ip rights over the term "miniature wargame" if they thought they could get away with it. So one big issue I think bears thinking on, is just how much of GWs universe do they actually own. (they spell Orc with a "k" and claim they own the copyright to orcs for all sci-fi wargames. Gw overreaches, and this court decision reflects that. It was shocking reading some of the testimony. The other thing is the fact that the miniature wargame hobby (not simply the GW hobby-perhaps the most offensive thing they have done is to try an appropriate a hobby) is different than collecting star wars toys, in that there is intended to be a level of modification and customization to the end product, in a way that there is not with star wars figures. It's gw's mini, but it's my base, and my paint job, and sometimes even my conversion. Derivative works are an intended consequence of the hobby. GW has certainly recognized there is a market for bits, and at one time even sold them. The fact that they have chosen to move away from this market, does not mean it goes away. By creating and then leavi the market, GW has, in a way, given up its right to object (they have unclean hands, sort of). Again, I'm not talking about pirates who make exact duplicates of Gw stuff, I'm fine if they hammer some pirate reproducing gw's dark angels, but I am talking about their assertion that mentioning GW in the ad or a description of a related, compatible project, is a violation of GW IP. It's like an auto parts company of being allowed to say this part fits Mazadas. Also, just because something is an alternative to a gw product does not make it a rip-off. If my alternative dark angles shoulder pads are radically different from gw ones in terms of design, then they are not rip offs (especially if I call them the black seraphim). If GW suddenly finds that people are buying the cheaper alternative to thier shoulder pads then it mean they are not competitive, and need to re-examine quality and price. This for me is the biggest probel, GW has sought to be dominant in a competitive hobby, and they have moved from being one player to sticking their head in the sand and thinking no one else exists (hence its the GW hobby and not mini wargming to them). The problem is that they are part of a larger hobby, and cannot ignore the truths and realities of that hobby by pretending other games and miniatures don't exist. Their deliberate ignorance has put them in this boat, and this verdict gives them a little shot of reality. |
Listing 1 to 6 of 6 Replies PAGES: 1 | |
