[GW] Websites & GW art/rules/etc - some guidelines
Custserv
folks
in the UK on the subject of websites & our IP items (rules, artwork,
etc):
This is the policy we apply to fan-based web sites and represents a
compromise between what we are entitled to ask for and what will allow
hobbyists to get out there and share ideas and information. If someone
is
using our IP for their own financial or commercial benefit we apply a
stricter policy.
If a web site complies with the following five guidelines:
1. Makes it clear that they are 'unofficial' fan-based sites and
are in
no way affiliated with Games Workshop (this should be clear as soon as
someone logs onto the site);
2. Contains the appropriate trademark notice and disclaimer ("(list
of
trademarks featured on the site) are trademarks of Games Workshop
Limited.
Used without permission. No challenge to their status is intended");
3. Credits all Games Workshop-originating photographs with the
appropriate copyright notice;
4. Doesn't include any Games Workshop-originating artwork; and
5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
the
use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc (the exception to
this is
WH40K Chapter Approved Material which may be
re-printed);
we shall usually have no problem with that site. In our experience, the
above guidelines can be accommodated with little or no impact on the
quality
of the site. There is always a scenario that manages to fall outside
these
guidelines and so we always reserve the right to take any action against
a
site if we feel it is required.
A more detailed description of our IP policy can be found at:
http://www.games-workshop.co.uk/legal/ippolicy.htm
**
Hope this helps settle things a bit. If there are ever any questions or
anything, you can email the GW legal folks at:
le...@games-workshop.co.uk
(put attn: Ewan Hall in the subject)
or email me directly at
ti...@games-workshop.com
We want to ensure everyone can do as much cool stuff as possible on
their
websites, within the bounds of properly protecting our IP. Feel free to
post or
distribute it anywhere else it might be useful/applicable as well.
Happy Gaming!
Tim Huckelbery
Games Workshop USA Customer Service
Give us a call! 1-800-492-8820
And visit the Games Workshop Web Site:
http://www.games-workshop.com
Want to subscribe to the GW Newsletter?
Click here:
http://www.games-workshop.com/Newsletter.html
Note: please send Rules Questions to
mailto:rool...@games-workshop.com
And all other mail to:
mailto:cust...@games-workshop.com
Disclaimer: All answers are *unofficial* until they appear in White
Dwarf, etc!
Tom Beliech
Jimi <ji...@roguetrader.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:853jkf$6ip$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > It's just another example of the complete lack of any comprehension the
> > suits at GW have of the way the world works.
>
> Too many shareholders - not enough commonsense!!
> > Jimi
Yes, but this seems like one of those "rules" specifically designed by
lawyers for ease of THEIR use. Since they can translate the rule however
they want, whenever they want to, it's an easy way to take care of a
"problem." It's a little like the way the US busted those gangsters under
the innocuous charge of tax evasion.
Also, it's kind of like speed limit laws. One person might be driving double
the speed limit and not get caught, because it's not quota time, while
another may just barely violate the speed limit and get ticketed because the
enforcers have a quota to meet.
I think the point is that nobody's web site is going to get "hurt" unless
the web designer either steps on some toes, or does something that reduces
the corporation's flow of income. Frankly, I'm sure they don't care what we
say UNTIL enough people believe it to affect the company's sales. THAT, my
associates, is when these kinds of rules are invoked. Otherwise, there is
more than one of us here who would be getting a "notice" from the Suits.
Tom Beliech
Tom Beliech
Blank Dave <blank...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:hFbd4.42414$Ke.2...@news21.bellglobal.com...
> > 5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
> > the
> > use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc
>
>
> I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
> Blank Dave
I'm glad I'm not the only one to wonder about this question. I went to the
web site for clarification, and even there, this seemed like a rather
open-ended rule, one that was easily subject to any desired interpretation.
But then, I'm just a cynical English teacher.
Tom Beliech
D. Jones
> > 5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
> > the
> > use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc
>
> Damaging the image of the hobby....
>
> I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
>
So you can't have a Anti-Wargaming web site. Will you update us on your battle
to get rid of all the "Save your kids from violence" campaigns?
Tom Beliech
D. Jones <a...@webtv.com> wrote in message
news:38756F3A...@webtv.com...
Imagine GW trying to sue an American religious fundamentalist group for
trying to do that. Now that would be entertaining, to say the least...
Tom Beliech (GW vs. Billy Graham, live on Pay-Per-View!)
Philby
<snip>
>
>5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
>the
>use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc (the exception to
>this is
>WH40K Chapter Approved Material which may be
>re-printed);
>
<snip>
GW worried about someone ripping THEM off???
LOL!
Vampy
>Hi all. Here's some quick words from our Intellectual Property (IP)
>folks
>in the UK on the subject of websites & our IP items (rules, artwork,
>etc):
<SNIP>
>4. Doesn't include any Games Workshop-originating artwork; and
<SNIP>
Do they *really* mean that? This would of course include things like the 40k
logo etc. I think it's safe to say that this requirement would effect pretty
much every GW site out there, with little benefit to GW. Indeed, I believe
this clause would actually do more harm than good, not to mention stirring
up a lot of ill-feeling amongst the website creators (and probably the GW
net community in general).
Blank Dave
> the
> use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc
Damaging the image of the hobby....
I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
--
Blank Dave
Keep the gene pool clean: Kill an idiot!
Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea ...
Massive, difficult to re-direct, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source
of mind-boggling amounts of excrement, when you least expect it.
Gene Spafford
Kurt
>> 5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
>> the
>> use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc
>
>Damaging the image of the hobby....
>
>I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
>
I think they are trying to tell people you can't say things like "I don't
like 40K" on your website. It's that liberal use of the word "hobby" to
refer solely to GW games that makes it a bit ambiguous.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Actually, Roboute was writing the Codex, and he needed to make sure it
was up to scratch. So, for the entire Heresy, he had the whole *legion*
parading up and down on Ultramar, repainting their armour, parading,
designing laurel wreaths, parading, building statues to the Emperor,
parading - oh, and partaking of the traditional Ultramarine ritual of
group sodomy. Repeatedly. In companies. On the parade ground. In
formation.
-- RGMW outtake
Kurt
>
><SNIP>
>>4. Doesn't include any Games Workshop-originating artwork; and
><SNIP>
>
>Do they *really* mean that? This would of course include things like the
>40k logo etc. I think it's safe to say that this requirement would
>effect pretty much every GW site out there, with little benefit to GW.
>Indeed, I believe this clause would actually do more harm than good, not
>to mention stirring up a lot of ill-feeling amongst the website creators
>(and probably the GW net community in general).
>
what other companies think of gamers with artwork from their systems on
their websites. I'll bet most (probably apart from WotC) wouldn't care,
when you consider the gamers aren't profiting from it, and it just brings
more exposure to the company.
It's just another example of the complete lack of any comprehension the
suits at GW have of the way the world works.
--
Jimi
> suits at GW have of the way the world works.
Too many shareholders - not enough commonsense!!
Jimi
FREE 40k card buildings - http://welcome.to/the_astronomican/
40k3 list - http://www.egroups.com/group/40k3/info.html
Guard list - http://www.egroups.com/group/imperial-guard/info.html
Astartes list - http://www.egroups.com/group/adeptus_astartes/info.html
40k Fluff list - http://www.egroups.com/group/40k_fluff/info.html
Chaos list - http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/40k-chaos
P.G. & D.L. Connell
>
> Custserv wrote in message <21FB98CA92B3D211A15A0008C7CF58051D3D26@HORUS>...
> >Hi all. Here's some quick words from our Intellectual Property (IP)
> >folks
> >in the UK on the subject of websites & our IP items (rules, artwork,
> >etc):
>
> >4. Doesn't include any Games Workshop-originating artwork; and
> <SNIP>
>
> Do they *really* mean that? This would of course include things like the 40k
> logo etc. I think it's safe to say that this requirement would effect pretty
> much every GW site out there, with little benefit to GW. Indeed, I believe
> this clause would actually do more harm than good, not to mention stirring
> up a lot of ill-feeling amongst the website creators (and probably the GW
> net community in general).
I've heard a good explanation of this one from TSR. If say someone
makes a new codex, lets say White Scars, and they slap a WH40K logo on
it and start selling it, GW would have take legal action, to protect
their copyrights and trademarks and image. They couldn't allow someone
else to produce WH40K products without approval from them.
When I comes to a court case, the guy making the fake stuff can site
that GW has not protected their copyrite because they are allowing all
these websites to GW pictures and logos. I don't know what this effect
it would have on the case but the impression I got was that it would
harm GW case. Kind of like loosing exclusive rights because they showed
no interest in enforcing it.
Well the point of this is that although it seems rediculous for them to
not allow gamers to use their logos, there is acutally a legal (and
quite acceptable) reason for it.
TSR came up with a good solution by creating new logos for each of their
games for use on the 'net. As these wern't copyrighted, they could be
used freely. Some of them looked quite good and had the same effect as
using the original logos - indicating the purpose of the website.
Erik.
The Cheshire Cat
Tom Beliech wrote in message ...
>> > > the
>> > > use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc
>> >
>> > Damaging the image of the hobby....
>> >
>> > I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
>> >
>>
>battle
>> to get rid of all the "Save your kids from violence" campaigns?
>
>Imagine GW trying to sue an American religious fundamentalist group for
>trying to do that. Now that would be entertaining, to say the least...
>
>Tom Beliech (GW vs. Billy Graham, live on Pay-Per-View!)
even GW cant be *that* full of themselves...although it wouldnt surprise me.
The Cheshire Cat strikes again!
what do you get when you slap wings on a pig? a pigasus! HA!
member: SEC, BJFC, and TMFC, Grey Knight fluff nazi and the baddest 5 foot
five redhead on the planet.
come visit my Grey Knight site at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dunes/4226/
Blank Dave
> > > the
> > > use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc
> >
> > Damaging the image of the hobby....
> >
> > I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
> >
>
> So you can't have a Anti-Wargaming web site. Will you update us on your
battle
> to get rid of all the "Save your kids from violence" campaigns?
I fail to see your point. What I'm asking is to what extreme will GW try to
push that "harm the hobby" definition seeing as it's in with "ripping us
off" and using their IP material? Is "damaging to the hobby" printing their
material on your site? Saying "GW sucks and are a bunch of money grabbing
bastards"? Posting up pics of very demented and perverted GW conversions?
I'm curious what they mean by "damage the hobby"? Plus they must be careful
of that because they may go stepping on that Freedom of Speach that more
than one country believes in (or what ever it's called in the other
countries).
D. Jones
Do you think they'll give you an answer. I've yet to see one on anything like
this thread.
Geoff Kemp
> Do they *really* mean that? This would of course include things like the
40k
> logo etc. I think it's safe to say that this requirement would effect
pretty
> much every GW site out there, with little benefit to GW. Indeed, I believe
> this clause would actually do more harm than good, not to mention stirring
> up a lot of ill-feeling amongst the website creators (and probably the GW
> net community in general).
Logos are safe, what they mean is the drawn stuff like the actual artwrok
fro mthe codexes
Evil Homer
Where do they say that? Stylized logos (containing anything more than
plain-vanilla text) have been considered art in many legal cases, which
sets precedence.
--
Evil Homer, Mall-Shark Lawyer Wannabe.
Dares to present alternate opinions to yours. Because, face it, you're
wrong.
Evil Homer
blank...@sympatico.ca says...
> I'm curious what they mean by "damage the hobby"? Plus they must be careful
> of that because they may go stepping on that Freedom of Speach that more
> than one country believes in (or what ever it's called in the other
> countries).
>
>
At some point, if somebody pushed the issue, they'd be forced to legally
define "the hobby." This would, of course, result in them being laughed
straight out of any US courtroom. They do not have a lock on the
miniatures wargaming hobby, no matter how much they'd have you believe
so.
The wording used in their policy is so absurdly vague that, while they
have done so to allow themselves maximum latitude for pursuing anybody
whose site they don't particularly care for, they would be ripped apart
by even the wettest of Cunning Mall-Office Newbie Lawyer Sharks.
Nowadays, everybody feels like if they throw enough legal-looking
boilerplating on something the law aoutomatically favors them. They're
wrong. It just takes somebody with enough money to challenge them.
An example of this mentality is an ad brochure that has "not responsible
for typographical errors" printed at the bottom. Hmmm, they WROTE the ad,
assembled it, approved it in-house (usually several sets of eyes), it was
sent to a pre-press house who prepared it and sent back a finished proof
which was then RE-examined for accuracy (again, usually by several folks)
and signed off on as OK or to get fixed, (in which case ANOTHER proof is
sent out) and finally the printed piece is sent to the client before
shipping to distribution just in case anything slipped through all of
these steps. Yet they can't be held responsible if an error printed?
Yeah, right.
Can you tell I'm not real fond of legal stuff nowadays?
Anyhow, GW have, of course, stacked the mumbo-jumbo deck completely in
their favor. This is partially because the Internet is still "new"
legally and the kinks as to public usage of corporate material are still
being addressed, and partially because they're overbearing assholes who
want to dominate every conceivable aspect of the miniatures gaming
industry.
According to the guidelines, unless you draw it yourself, you can have NO
GW artwork on your site. Zip. And if you DO draw it yourself, you're
STILL not clear because they can claim that your utter-lack-of-talent
crayon sketch of Lemartes "damages the hobby" by, say, diminishing the
perceived level of quality associated with GW product (no matter how bad
the art is, it could never compete with Shane Hoyle's sculpting toward
diminishing GW's quality level...God, does that kid suck). See? They can
do whatever they want. Or so they think.
--
Evil Homer, Rant Mode On.
Blank Dave
like
> this thread.
Let's put it this way, I was wondering out loud, stating in my not so bated
breath, what would be the first victim of GW's definition of "damaging to
the hobby." I far from expcet an answer from GW, and in fact I agree whole
heartedly with Evil Homer's synopsis below, which I was trying to get at in
a goading kind of way.
Blackheart
<Cust...@Games-Workshop.com> wrote:
>Hi all. Here's some quick words from our Intellectual Property (IP)
>folks
>in the UK on the subject of websites & our IP items (rules, artwork,
>etc):
>
>This is the policy we apply to fan-based web sites and represents a
>compromise between what we are entitled to ask for and what will allow
>hobbyists to get out there and share ideas and information. If someone
>is
>using our IP for their own financial or commercial benefit we apply a
>stricter policy.
>
>If a web site complies with the following five guidelines:
>
>1. Makes it clear that they are 'unofficial' fan-based sites and
>are in
>no way affiliated with Games Workshop (this should be clear as soon as
>someone logs onto the site);
>
>2. Contains the appropriate trademark notice and disclaimer ("(list
>of
>trademarks featured on the site) are trademarks of Games Workshop
>Limited.
>Used without permission. No challenge to their status is intended");
>
>3. Credits all Games Workshop-originating photographs with the
>appropriate copyright notice;
>
>4. Doesn't include any Games Workshop-originating artwork; and
>
>5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
>the
>use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc (the exception to
>this is
>WH40K Chapter Approved Material which may be
>re-printed);
>
so in other words... you guys probably won't like it when I post the
Rogue Trader/2nd Edition hybrid rules i'm working on?
Blackheart
-----------------------------------------
Opinions stated are mine... deal with it.
Games Workshop Corporate Whore, Rogue Trader Fanboy, Anti-Enigma Heretic and all around really cool guy.
RGMW Special Forces Troll Slayer.
Official RGMM "Last Man Standing."
Disclaimer: The opinions stated above are mine. If you don't agree, or just generally don't like them... then it sucks to be you.
Tom Beliech
Evil Homer <ho...@mrplow.com> wrote in message
> The wording used in their policy is so absurdly vague that, while they
> have done so to allow themselves maximum latitude for pursuing anybody
> whose site they don't particularly care for, they would be ripped apart
> by even the wettest of Cunning Mall-Office Newbie Lawyer Sharks.
> Nowadays, everybody feels like if they throw enough legal-looking
> boilerplating on something the law aoutomatically favors them. They're
> wrong. It just takes somebody with enough money to challenge them.
Bingo. But I know that I certainly don't have that kind of money, even for
one of your Mall-Office lawyers...
>Yet they can't be held responsible if an error printed?
> Yeah, right.
> Can you tell I'm not real fond of legal stuff nowadays?
Besides, every typo is an opportunity for a new edition, or at least filler
for White Dwarf. What a system, eh?
Tom Beliech (who am I to break up a winning strategy?)
Vampy
>
>battle
>> to get rid of all the "Save your kids from violence" campaigns?
>
>trying to do that. Now that would be entertaining, to say the least...
>
>Tom Beliech (GW vs. Billy Graham, live on Pay-Per-View!)
Islamic human bombs at the Grand Tournament? Be on the look out for guys in
dark shades and suits with their figure cases handcuffed to their wrists...
Vampy
>
>Logos are safe, what they mean is the drawn stuff like the actual artwrok
>fro mthe codexes
I just checked their website and found this:
>You can also use our logos to add some colour to the rest of your site (not
>just on the front page) but please can you use them in their original form
>only and make them act as hypertext links to the appropriate sections of
our >web site.
So you can use their logos, but only if you link it to THEIR website. Don't
those arrogant fuckheads understand that people use their logos to link to
sections on their own site? That's the main reason I was surprised at the
directive in the first place, having seen dozens of sites that use GW images
as links.
Vampy
>
>>
>> I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
>
>web site for clarification, and even there, this seemed like a rather
>open-ended rule, one that was easily subject to any desired interpretation.
Especially when you combine it with this quote from GW's website:
>However: even if you follow all the guidelines we can't promise not to
object >to some or all of your website, fanzine, MUD, live roleplay
establishment, or >whatever. We always reserve the right to take action,
without notice, if we >feel it's necessary to do so.
Let's see, you're not allowed to reproduce their artwork or rules, all
trademarks must be used with the appropriate disclaimer, and all pics from
WD must have a copyright notice underneath. There really isn't anything left
that they could possibly object to, and even if they did, what are they
going to do about it? They've already denied the use of their images, and
asking you to remove advertisments of GW minis is hardly going to hurt you.
Now I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty confidant they can't do fuck to stop
people writing about GW products.
I suspect this is just GW's attempt at eliminating bad reviews and coverage
for older products using the same scare tactics they use on store owners.
I'm quite interested to discover just where their boundaries lie on what's
acceptable/not. Failing any sites being closed down or asked to remove
material I may have to start making a few pages of my own just to test their
limits.
Anyway, s'funny how this thing came a day after you updated the RTC...
David Prentice
"Blank Dave" <blank...@sympatico.ca> wrote
> Damaging the image of the hobby....
>
> I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
Maybe 40k site that features S&M, sexual fetishes, and torture devices for
people who want to go a little "further" with their personal
characterization and costuming of 40K fictional personalities.
It's sure a good thing that GW didn't include any armies in 40K that would
have anything to do with sexual fetishes, S&M, or torture. :)
David
Justin Taylor
of people have asked for clarification on what they can and cannot do and
they now have it.
--
Justin Taylor
Veni Vidi Vici
Quality Transfers
http://www.3vwargames.co.uk
Big Al
Blank Dave <blank...@sympatico.ca> wrote in article
<hFbd4.42414$Ke.2...@news21.bellglobal.com>...
> > 5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
> > the
> > use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc
>
> Damaging the image of the hobby....
>
> I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
Using art and copyrighted material on second-rate shitty websites
perhaps? God knows there are enough of them out there.
--
Big Al, *coughinisfailcough*.
The Doctor is in.
One of the Twin Pasty-Fleshed Daemons of Pestilence
and Nauseous Abomination
"And Bristol!"
Kurt does get a token mention in this .sig file
Aphex Triplet
<snip de drivel>
How Games Workshop can have the affront to complain about people using
their material is beyond me.
The entire basis of the Warhammer world is founded purely in plagiarism
on GW's behalf.
The Skaven are stolen atraight out of that Fritz Leiber "Fafhred & the
Grey Mouser" story (can't recall the name) So what about Fritz's
(wormfood though he is) intellectual property? GW didn't seem to have
too many qualms about abusing it.
And who ever thought of Dwarves and ELves in the way we now do until JRR
Tolkien gave them form? They used to all be lumped together with gnomes
& fairies & pixies & goblins as the same undifferentiated whole. So
you've ripped him off there. Are GW paying the TOlkien estate any
royalties? I doubt it.
I don't know where the Space Marine idea came from, but going on GW's
track record, it must have been stolen from somewhere. That Dark Eldar
"Cenobite" guy is straight out of Hellraiser. That's a rip-off.
The short end of the stiok being that GW don't exactly have an
unblemished record in the theft department, so how they can wade in
throwing stones is unbelievable.
Anna Kournikova? I'll take 3 please.
Aphex Triplet
Tom Beliech
David Prentice <dpre...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:38767...@news.gci.net...
>
> "Blank Dave" <blank...@sympatico.ca> wrote
>
> > Damaging the image of the hobby....
> >
> > I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
>
> people who want to go a little "further" with their personal
> characterization and costuming of 40K fictional personalities.
>
> It's sure a good thing that GW didn't include any armies in 40K that would
> have anything to do with sexual fetishes, S&M, or torture. :)
>
> David
So, I guess my Renegade Slannesh/Dark Eldar Chaos Archon Wipzin Chaynz
wouldn't go over well with the censors?
Tom Beliech (How many Slanneshi Eldar does it take to change a light bulb?
Only one, but he/she has to give the socket a VERY close and personal
inspection first...)
Tom Beliech
Aphex Triplet <ang...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
news:38769C64...@alphalink.com.au...
> Custserv wrote:
> <snip de drivel>
>
> I don't know where the Space Marine idea came from, but going on GW's
> track record, it must have been stolen from somewhere. That Dark Eldar
> "Cenobite" guy is straight out of Hellraiser. That's a rip-off.
>
> The short end of the stiok being that GW don't exactly have an
> unblemished record in the theft department, so how they can wade in
> throwing stones is unbelievable.
>
> Anna Kournikova? I'll take 3 please.
> Aphex Triplet
The same way Bill Gates has a team of lawyers looking for anyone who even
looks like he's copying/stealing ideas from Windows, when Windows itself was
stolen from Steve Jobs, who in turn stole it from Xerox, ad nauseum...
Tom Beliech (hypocrisy - standard practice in business since there WAS such
a thing as business)
Tom Beliech
coverage
> for older products using the same scare tactics they use on store owners.
> I'm quite interested to discover just where their boundaries lie on what's
> acceptable/not. Failing any sites being closed down or asked to remove
> material I may have to start making a few pages of my own just to test
their
> limits.
>
> Anyway, s'funny how this thing came a day after you updated the RTC...
Were I a more suspicious and arrogant man, I'd say I was in trouble ;)
Tom Beliech (The latest in a long line of targets?)
Tom Beliech
Justin Taylor <jus...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:855s3m$488$2...@gxsn.com...
> I think you should read it as, "we have just told you what we think". A
lot
> of people have asked for clarification on what they can and cannot do and
> they now have it.
> Justin Taylor
> http://www.3vwargames.co.uk
The thing is, they didn't make a distinction between "what we don't like"
and "what will lead us to shut down your site and hunt you down." That's a
rather important distinction, don't you think?
Tom Beliech (Making that distinction every day)
The Man In The Iron Mech
: Tom Beliech wrote in message ...
:>
:>> Damaging the image of the hobby....
:>>
:>> I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
What? A Slanneshi demon based on the Overfiend perhaps? Hell, that isn't
a half-bad idea, actually...
<snip quote from GW website>
: trademarks must be used with the appropriate disclaimer, and all pics from
: WD must have a copyright notice underneath. There really isn't anything left
: that they could possibly object to, and even if they did, what are they
: going to do about it? They've already denied the use of their images, and
: asking you to remove advertisments of GW minis is hardly going to hurt you.
: Now I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty confidant they can't do fuck to stop
: people writing about GW products.
No kidding. Whatever happened to Viacom's attempt to squash Trek
fansites?
: I suspect this is just GW's attempt at eliminating bad reviews and coverage
: for older products using the same scare tactics they use on store owners.
: I'm quite interested to discover just where their boundaries lie on what's
: acceptable/not. Failing any sites being closed down or asked to remove
: material I may have to start making a few pages of my own just to test their
: limits.
You do that. I need to be entertained. :) Hell, if I could draw, you'd
see "Warhammer 40K comixxx" With the first being an Inquisitor's
"interrogation" session with a bound and gagged DE Wych. Just to test
those limits. Hell, even to protest. ;P (Damn, I really should stop
eating that much ramen. All that MSG is really taking its toll.)
But seriously. IIRC back in March, somebody (JasonALang?) posted
something about what Warner Brothers is doing. Something involving
herding fansites to an <ahem> "more controlled" environment called
Acmecity. GW might be thinking of going the same way. <shudders>
-Andrew.
--
===============================================================
--Memory is like an orgasm. It's a lot better if you don't have
to fake it.
-- Seymour Cray commenting on virtual memory
Tom Beliech
> But seriously. IIRC back in March, somebody (JasonALang?) posted
> something about what Warner Brothers is doing. Something involving
> herding fansites to an <ahem> "more controlled" environment called
> Acmecity. GW might be thinking of going the same way. <shudders>
Geocities for Games Workshop? Oh boy.
First it was the Rogue Trader Cult, then the 2nd edition Cult - will we need
a Free Internet Cult, too?
Tom Beliech (Freedom, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness - as long as they
don't annoy the guys with the money)
Kurt
cloning...
>Custserv wrote:
><snip de drivel>
>
>How Games Workshop can have the affront to complain about people using
>their material is beyond me.
>The entire basis of the Warhammer world is founded purely in plagiarism
>on GW's behalf.
>The Skaven are stolen atraight out of that Fritz Leiber "Fafhred & the
>Grey Mouser" story (can't recall the name) So what about Fritz's
>(wormfood though he is) intellectual property? GW didn't seem to have
>too many qualms about abusing it.
>
>And who ever thought of Dwarves and ELves in the way we now do until JRR
>Tolkien gave them form? They used to all be lumped together with gnomes
>& fairies & pixies & goblins as the same undifferentiated whole. So
>you've ripped him off there. Are GW paying the TOlkien estate any
>royalties? I doubt it.
>
You forgot how they lifted Chaos straight out of Moorcock's fiction,
basically without altering much at all (apart from the gods). I think the
Lizardmen were ripped out of Conan too (but I haven't read those for
years).
>I don't know where the Space Marine idea came from, but going on GW's
>track record, it must have been stolen from somewhere. That Dark Eldar
>"Cenobite" guy is straight out of Hellraiser. That's a rip-off.
>
I'd say it was close enough for Clive Barker to take them to court over.
>The short end of the stiok being that GW don't exactly have an
>unblemished record in the theft department, so how they can wade in
>throwing stones is unbelievable.
>
The funniest thing to do to them would be for everyone to post part of the
40K rules and codexes on their site under the "Fair Use" clauses of most
international copyright laws, and then set up a webring to link all the
sites.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Crocodile hunter???
A great deal of people on this NG are stupid kids who think they have
the world figured out. The rest are stupid adults who think they have
the world figured out . . .
-- RGMW outtake
Kurt
cloning...
>>
>> But seriously. IIRC back in March, somebody (JasonALang?) posted
>> something about what Warner Brothers is doing. Something involving
>> herding fansites to an <ahem> "more controlled" environment called
>> Acmecity. GW might be thinking of going the same way. <shudders>
>
>Geocities for Games Workshop? Oh boy.
>
>First it was the Rogue Trader Cult, then the 2nd edition Cult - will we
>need a Free Internet Cult, too?
>
I don't know if copyright law is Phil Bowles area of expertise, but if
anyone were being chased by GW, reposting the email here and seeing if it's
legal would be a good thing to do.
Have you thought of doing the equivalent of the "$cientology Kills" page
for GW Tom? :)
Tom Beliech
Kurt <doo...@nospam.mindless.com> wrote in message
news:8EB5BB6E7...@203.109.250.24...
> Nobody was prepared for the full horror of Tom Beliech's successful
> cloning...
What, I was cloned? No wonder those girls never called. At least the damn
clone could change places with me once in a while...
>
> Have you thought of doing the equivalent of the "$cientology Kills" page
> for GW Tom? :)
>
> --
> K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Oi, now that would be something. Maybe more in the style of those old
Driver's Ed or Home Ec/Reproduction Videos? "Games Workshop and YOU - Danger
in the Hobby Shop" "Why Little Johnny Is A Powergamer"
Tom Beliech ("Bub, you just picked two of my favorites" - Dan Akroyd, as Joe
Friday in DRAGNET)
St. Jason
>something about what Warner Brothers is doing. Something involving
>herding fansites to an <ahem> "more controlled" environment called
>Acmecity. GW might be thinking of going the same way. <shudders>
Yes, that was me..
God, I hope not though. Can you imagine GW.net? Where your Tech-Priest Approved
site *must* use Tech-Priest Approved artwork (between 2 and 5 pieces!) and is
monitored by the Tech-Priests?
GAH!!!
(****WARNING!! DO NOT READ BELOW THIS LINE IF YOU ARE ON ANY KIND OF MEDICATION
OR ARE EASILY UPSET****)
(****WE WARNED YOU!****)
Can you imagine this:
Ragnar
Aras!
An dol sios!
Angriff!
The Realm of Inisfail
http://www.gw.net/RoI/index.html
GW Net Featured Page!
GW Net Community Leader!
Makes me shiver...
_________________________
St. Jason o :^)
Patron Saint of RGMW, High Priest of Malal, Defender of the Squats, Troll
Evaluator, BJFC
"I have a hard time missing you babe,
With my pistol in your mouth..."
Justin Taylor
previous experience you can take it that GW are rather proactive.
Fog
St. Jason wrote in message <20000108051133.20896.00000612@ng->
(****WARNING!! DO NOT READ BELOW THIS LINE IF YOU ARE ON ANY KIND OF
MEDICATION
>OR ARE EASILY UPSET****)
>
>(****WE WARNED YOU!****)
>
>Can you imagine this:
>Ragnar
>Aras!
>An dol sios!
>Angriff!
>The Realm of Inisfail
>http://www.gw.net/RoI/index.html
>GW Net Featured Page!
>GW Net Community Leader!
>
>Makes me shiver...
>
Make me wanna barf.
b
Aphex Triplet
> You forgot how they lifted Chaos straight out of Moorcock's fiction,
> basically without altering much at all (apart from the gods). I think the
> Lizardmen were ripped out of Conan too (but I haven't read those for
> years).
Ahhh, so that's where Chaos came from! I never got into Moorcock (much
to my own misfortune I'm sure).
You're probably right about the lizards too. That "pre-human reptilian
civilization" thing was a consistent theme in Conan and King Kull
stories, and the Cormac mac Art ones too...dunno about Soloman Kane
though.
> The funniest thing to do to them would be for everyone to post part of the
> 40K rules and codexes on their site under the "Fair Use" clauses of most
> international copyright laws, and then set up a webring to link all the
> sites.
*LOL*
Now that would have GW screaming incoherently wouldn't it!
I feel ashamed that I didn't think of that myself. 1-0 to Sydney.
Chaos Dwarfs?
Who said anything about Chaos Dwarfs?
Aphex Triplet.
Kurt
cloning...
>
>> You forgot how they lifted Chaos straight out of Moorcock's fiction,
>> basically without altering much at all (apart from the gods). I think
>> the Lizardmen were ripped out of Conan too (but I haven't read those
>> for years).
>
>Ahhh, so that's where Chaos came from! I never got into Moorcock (much
>to my own misfortune I'm sure).
>
variety of genres. I think his best series is Hawkmoon though, I just
about read that whole thing non-stop.
>You're probably right about the lizards too. That "pre-human reptilian
>civilization" thing was a consistent theme in Conan and King Kull
>stories, and the Cormac mac Art ones too...dunno about Soloman Kane
>though.
>
IIRC, they were the Ophidians or something like that - unless I'm thinking
of something else...
>> The funniest thing to do to them would be for everyone to post part of
>> the 40K rules and codexes on their site under the "Fair Use" clauses
>> of most international copyright laws, and then set up a webring to
>> link all the sites.
>
>*LOL*
>Now that would have GW screaming incoherently wouldn't it!
>I feel ashamed that I didn't think of that myself. 1-0 to Sydney.
>
But we got stuck with the Olympics, so that makes it 1-1...
>Chaos Dwarfs?
>Who said anything about Chaos Dwarfs?
Grrr.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Vampy
>
>I think you should read it as, "we have just told you what we think". A lot
>of people have asked for clarification on what they can and cannot do and
>they now have it.
The only problems people had before that I know of is whether it was okay to
reproduce chapter approved, which simply required a straight Yes/No from GW.
They've given an answer to that but created new confusion with this whole
'damaging the hobby' thing.
Vampy
>
>> Damaging the image of the hobby....
>>
>> I'm rather curious what they would say does that?
>
>people who want to go a little "further" with their personal
>characterization and costuming of 40K fictional personalities.
They might be doing us a favour here, if such a site existed it would only
be a matter of time before we started getting "y0 n e 1 got NE n3cR0n
h0rSe-fUcK mPegZ ??!!??!" posts.
Kurt
cloning...
>Kurt <doo...@nospam.mindless.com> wrote in message
>news:8EB5BB6E7...@203.109.250.24...
>> Nobody was prepared for the full horror of Tom Beliech's successful
>> cloning...
>
>What, I was cloned? No wonder those girls never called. At least the
>damn clone could change places with me once in a while...
That's the problem with clones. They always seem to turn out evil (or
eviller, depending on who is cloned).
>> Have you thought of doing the equivalent of the "$cientology Kills"
>> page for GW Tom? :)
>>
>Oi, now that would be something. Maybe more in the style of those old
>Driver's Ed or Home Ec/Reproduction Videos? "Games Workshop and YOU -
>Danger in the Hobby Shop" "Why Little Johnny Is A Powergamer"
>
You don't like the 90's "investigative journalism" style? I always love
that stuff: "We ask a Buddhist monk from Tibet why South Park is evil!"
You could do a brilliant expose on "GW - Satanic Drug Cult, or Lesbian
Communist Infiltrators?"
Tom Beliech
Shim <sh...@shimgray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:38768c53...@news.freeserve.net...
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2000 21:48:08 -0600, "Tom Beliech" <pont...@pcola.gulf.net>
> expounded:
>
> >I'm glad I'm not the only one to wonder about this question. I went to
the
> >web site for clarification, and even there, this seemed like a rather
> >open-ended rule, one that was easily subject to any desired
interpretation.
> >
>
> Back to that again, Tom? I thought you'd escaped...
>
> -Shim.
Escaped? I'm teaching four sections of Composition II and one Creative
Writing course this semester. I'm just not at Auburn anymore.
Just imagine, somewhere, somehow, 100+ students must face a semester under
the most sanctified tutelage of yours truly. Now, imagine me teaching
Hamlet.
Tom Beliech (Get Thee To A Nunnery, O Mad Donna!)
Tom Beliech
> Nobody was prepared for the full horror of Tom Beliech's successful
> cloning...
> >What, I was cloned? No wonder those girls never called. At least the
> >damn clone could change places with me once in a while...
>
> That's the problem with clones. They always seem to turn out evil (or
> eviller, depending on who is cloned).
I'll have to get my genetic structure patented.
> You don't like the 90's "investigative journalism" style? I always love
> that stuff: "We ask a Buddhist monk from Tibet why South Park is evil!"
> You could do a brilliant expose on "GW - Satanic Drug Cult, or Lesbian
> Communist Infiltrators?"
"Bertha Bestraufung: Savior of Mordheim, or Neurotic Occult Bimbo? Next, on
Rikkius Lakeheim!"
Tom Beliech (with a name like Bertha, no wonder she looks pissed)
Tom Beliech
Vampy <th...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:QMOd4.5332$lN.1...@nnrp3.clara.net...
Well, at least they'd set a record for must usage of the word "Slannesh" in
one day.
Tom Beliech (Keep Slannesh alive in your town! Worship Dennis Rodman today!)
Shim
Shim
>>First it was the Rogue Trader Cult, then the 2nd edition Cult - will we
>>need a Free Internet Cult, too?
>
>I don't know if copyright law is Phil Bowles area of expertise,
Phil? How'd you feel about specialising in a new & vibrant modern niche of
the legal market...
>but if
>anyone were being chased by GW, reposting the email here and seeing if it's
>legal would be a good thing to do.
>
>Have you thought of doing the equivalent of the "$cientology Kills" page
^^^^^^^^^^^
RTC... say no -more-.
-Shim.
The Man In The Iron Mech
:>But seriously. IIRC back in March, somebody (JasonALang?) posted
:>something about what Warner Brothers is doing. Something involving
:>herding fansites to an <ahem> "more controlled" environment called
:>Acmecity. GW might be thinking of going the same way. <shudders>
: Yes, that was me..
Heh, sorry. I'm lousy with names. (Spot the newbie, anyone?)
<snip nightmarish scenario from GW hell>
: GAH!!!
: (****WARNING!! DO NOT READ BELOW THIS LINE IF YOU ARE ON ANY KIND OF
MEDICATION
: OR ARE EASILY UPSET****)
Too late.
: (****WE WARNED YOU!****)
: Can you imagine this:
: Ragnar
: Aras!
: An dol sios!
: Angriff!
: The Realm of Inisfail
: http://www.gw.net/RoI/index.html
: GW Net Featured Page!
: GW Net Community Leader!
: Makes me shiver...
Makes me lose my lunch. Scary thing is, I think Setzers might be the
kind of pricks GW would want to monitor their sitez.
Kurt
cloning...
>Kurt <doo...@nospam.mindless.com> wrote in message
>news:8EB65883E...@203.109.250.24...
>> Nobody was prepared for the full horror of Tom Beliech's successful
>> cloning...
>> >What, I was cloned? No wonder those girls never called. At least the
>> >damn clone could change places with me once in a while...
>>
>> That's the problem with clones. They always seem to turn out evil (or
>> eviller, depending on who is cloned).
>
>I'll have to get my genetic structure patented.
>
>> You don't like the 90's "investigative journalism" style? I always
>> love that stuff: "We ask a Buddhist monk from Tibet why South Park is
>> evil!" You could do a brilliant expose on "GW - Satanic Drug Cult, or
>> Lesbian Communist Infiltrators?"
>
>"Bertha Bestraufung: Savior of Mordheim, or Neurotic Occult Bimbo? Next,
>on Rikkius Lakeheim!"
>
>Tom Beliech (with a name like Bertha, no wonder she looks pissed)
>
That will be interesting, Jeremiah Springus has an interview with "Marneus
Calgar, Master of Discipline" and revealing the Lion El'Jonson story "I was
dumped by Leman, the bitch"
Robert Singers
"Tom Beliech" wrote
>
> Oi, now that would be something. Maybe more in the style of those old
> Driver's Ed or Home Ec/Reproduction Videos? "Games Workshop and YOU -
Danger
> in the Hobby Shop" "Why Little Johnny Is A Powergamer"
LOL. That's really funny.
--
No, not the don't be such a Rob, Rob.
I'm the other one. The popular one!
Holder of Green Hat blah blah blah.
Robert Singers
"Aphex Triplet" wrote
> And who ever thought of Dwarves and ELves in the way we now do until JRR
> Tolkien gave them form? They used to all be lumped together with gnomes
> & fairies & pixies & goblins as the same undifferentiated whole. So
> you've ripped him off there. Are GW paying the TOlkien estate any
> royalties? I doubt it.
<pedant>Poul Anderson</pedant>
Robert Singers
"Aphex Triplet" wrote
[snip]
> Ahhh, so that's where Chaos came from! I never got into Moorcock (much
> to my own misfortune I'm sure).
They've all been reissued recently. Most series as one book. A must is
"Gloriana". If you also play fantasy RPGs it gives you some interesting
ideas for adding depth to characters.
Alien
<pont...@pcola.gulf.net> writes:
>> I suspect this is just GW's attempt at eliminating bad reviews and
>coverage
>> for older products using the same scare tactics they use on store owners.
>> I'm quite interested to discover just where their boundaries lie on what's
>> acceptable/not. Failing any sites being closed down or asked to remove
>> material I may have to start making a few pages of my own just to test
>their
>> limits.
>>
>> Anyway, s'funny how this thing came a day after you updated the RTC...
>
>Were I a more suspicious and arrogant man, I'd say I was in trouble ;)
>
>Tom Beliech (The latest in a long line of targets?)
I highly suggest you don't answer the door when black-suited men with
gun-shaped bulges in their shirts come by.
But that's just a suggestion.
Alien
-my computer just crashed. I have GW scans on them. Coincidence? I think
not...-
---
members.aol.com/alien164
St. Alien - Ancient Order of the Undertall
Most liked, 2nd most sane 12/12/99
Most sane, liked member 11/17/98
StPF, GNL, RFC, RTC 1st Lt.
Heretic Seal of Approval
Tyranid Tim Fanboy
Founder - 5'3" Club
Aphex Triplet
> I'll have to get my genetic structure patented.
You'd better be quick. I read about one Doctor in Iceland, who like a
weasel, patented the genes of Icelandic people who were his patients, as
they have a resistance to some form of cancer or other...so who knows
what your local GP's done already.
I doubt anyone has patented *MY* thieving murderer convict scum genes
<yay!>
Aphex Triplet.
Aphex Triplet
> But we got stuck with the Olympics, so that makes it 1-1...
Yes, I'll take that point.
> >Chaos Dwarfs?
> >Who said anything about Chaos Dwarfs?
> Grrr.
Oh, I'm still selling them. At the same time, I am denying all knowledge
of them in an Orwellian act of double-think.
Like Mayor Quimby in the Simpsons, in that episode where he is going
off...."Let it be stricken from the record"..."I have flip-flopped on
the issues, and I will flip-flop again".
I ALWAYS hated the Chaos Dwarfs. Those previous posts under my name
articulating their glories were FORGED!
It's a Conspiracy!
Aphex Triplet.
Shim
expounded:
>> >But then, I'm just a cynical English teacher.
>>
>> Back to that again, Tom? I thought you'd escaped...
>
>Escaped? I'm teaching four sections of Composition II and one Creative
>Writing course this semester. I'm just not at Auburn anymore.
What's the diff. betwixt Compos. & Creative Writing, then? (/me is no
literati...)
>Just imagine, somewhere, somehow, 100+ students must face a semester under
>the most sanctified tutelage of yours truly. Now, imagine me teaching
>Hamlet.
I can imagine you doing Macbeth. How about Death Of A Salesman?
-Shim.
James R. Kratzer
[CLIPPED]
> It's just another example of the complete lack of any comprehension the
> suits at GW have of the way the world works.
>
> --
> K *Kill the nospam to reply*
>
> Actually, Roboute was writing the Codex, and he needed to make sure it
> was up to scratch. So, for the entire Heresy, he had the whole *legion*
> parading up and down on Ultramar, repainting their armour, parading,
> designing laurel wreaths, parading, building statues to the Emperor,
> parading - oh, and partaking of the traditional Ultramarine ritual of
> group sodomy. Repeatedly. In companies. On the parade ground. In
> formation.
> -- RGMW outtake
Just a thought from here across the pond--
GW has a rather British (as in Empire) attitude about business, profit, and
Imperialism in general; just look at their favorite game, Warhamer 40,000.
The GOOD GUYS are the Imperium, a decaying, putrescent corpse of an Emperor
who has been kept alive for centuries by infusions of ... whatever.
This carries over into their business practices.
I mean, COME ON!!!!!
$210.00 for a G-D chunk of resin, cast to look like some kind of a joke of a
tank?
ROFL!!!!!!
Unfortunately, they DO own the Intellectual Rights & Properties to the
entire Warhammer 40K Universe.
Also unfortunately, with the demise of support for stuff like Battletech,
there just isn't much else available in mass-produced tabletop wargames.
There IS the GHQ line of MicroArmor, and a couple of small houses make
1/1200-scale naval stuff, but WHERE is the game system for it?
Duh!
Here endeth my rant for the day.
Jim Kratzer
The Rabble-Rouser Yank from Maryland
Tom Beliech
> >Writing course this semester. I'm just not at Auburn anymore.
>
> What's the diff. betwixt Compos. & Creative Writing, then? (/me is no
> literati...)
Well, Comp. I is just being given a bunch of different types of essays to
write. Comp. II is sort of a cross between a very broad introduction to
literature and writing essays based on it. In both of these, the writer is
supposed to actually write the types of stuff one might see in an editorial
section or literary journal (i.e. expository essays, the "Why Hamlet was a
Dweeb" type of essay). Creative Writing actually allows one to make up stuff
and get away with it, as long as it is entertaining.
> >Just imagine, somewhere, somehow, 100+ students must face a semester
under
> >the most sanctified tutelage of yours truly. Now, imagine me teaching
> >Hamlet.
>
> I can imagine you doing Macbeth. How about Death Of A Salesman?
Wow, you nailed the second one. I am indeed teaching Death of a Salesman
this semester (it was also part of my Master's exams). Macbeth can be fun,
but I'd rather do Othello (Iago is one nasty bastard)
Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
Justin Gaskins
> > I can imagine you doing Macbeth. How about Death Of A Salesman?
>
> How about 'Death Of A Fake SEAL' ?? :P
Give it up, Jimi. It is boring now.
Tom Beliech
Jimi <ji...@roguetrader.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:85dv2r$igg$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > I can imagine you doing Macbeth. How about Death Of A Salesman?
>
> How about 'Death Of A Fake SEAL' ?? :P
They actually have a version of that. It's called "Tartuffe" by Moliere.
Iago, from Othello, was probably an ancient ancestor of the Setzers.
(Fie UPON it, FIE! Thou KNOWEST not OF the SEALs, gentle Jimi! SO taketh it
UPON thyself TO flutter AWAY or I shall ENDEAVOR to report YOUR sinister
actions TO my WORTHY FAMILY)
Are we back on the appropriate thread discussions, now?
Tom Beliech
Justin Gaskins
> Shim <sh...@shimgray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:38768c53...@news.freeserve.net...
> > On Thu, 6 Jan 2000 21:48:08 -0600, "Tom Beliech" <pont...@pcola.gulf.net>
> > expounded:
> >
> > >I'm glad I'm not the only one to wonder about this question. I went to
> the
> > >web site for clarification, and even there, this seemed like a rather
> > >open-ended rule, one that was easily subject to any desired
> interpretation.
> > >
> > >But then, I'm just a cynical English teacher.
> >
> > Back to that again, Tom? I thought you'd escaped...
> >
> > -Shim.
>
> Escaped? I'm teaching four sections of Composition II and one Creative
> Writing course this semester. I'm just not at Auburn anymore.
>
> Just imagine, somewhere, somehow, 100+ students must face a semester under
> the most sanctified tutelage of yours truly. Now, imagine me teaching
> Hamlet.
>
> Tom Beliech (Get Thee To A Nunnery, O Mad Donna!)
Frightening, yes. Amusing, definitely. You should teach here, then I might get
off academic probation.
Justin Gaskins
> Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
It's Conan the Librarian. "This book is overdue, now you have to pay the fine."
< draws huge sword >
Justin Gaskins
> In article <s7l5o3...@corp.supernews.com>, "Tom Beliech"
> <pont...@pcola.gulf.net> writes:
>
> >>
> >> I can imagine you doing Macbeth. How about Death Of A Salesman?
> >
> >Wow, you nailed the second one. I am indeed teaching Death of a Salesman
> >this semester (it was also part of my Master's exams). Macbeth can be fun,
> >but I'd rather do Othello (Iago is one nasty bastard)
> >
> >Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
> >
>
> I have to wonder why I can't get lucky and get a teacher like you. All of my
> teachers either hate me or are deathly boring...
What is really weird is when you realized the drag queen hitting on you is
actually your Physics professor.
Justin
- "Dr. Hatcher?"
Jimi
How about 'Death Of A Fake SEAL' ?? :P
Jimi
FREE 40k card buildings - http://welcome.to/the_astronomican/
40k3 list - http://www.egroups.com/group/40k3/info.html
Guard list - http://www.egroups.com/group/imperial-guard/info.html
Astartes list - http://www.egroups.com/group/adeptus_astartes/info.html
40k Fluff list - http://www.egroups.com/group/40k_fluff/info.html
Chaos list - http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/40k-chaos
Alien
>>
>> I can imagine you doing Macbeth. How about Death Of A Salesman?
>
>Wow, you nailed the second one. I am indeed teaching Death of a Salesman
>this semester (it was also part of my Master's exams). Macbeth can be fun,
>but I'd rather do Othello (Iago is one nasty bastard)
>
>Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
>
I have to wonder why I can't get lucky and get a teacher like you. All of my
teachers either hate me or are deathly boring...
Alien
-and they're keeping me from posting here. How DARE they?!-
Alien
writes:
>imi wrote:
>
>> > I can imagine you doing Macbeth. How about Death Of A Salesman?
>>
>> How about 'Death Of A Fake SEAL' ?? :P
>
>Give it up, Jimi. It is boring now.
I'll REPORT you TO your ISP!!!
Alien
-unable to do it before, so doing it now...-
Kurt
cloning...
>Tom Beliech wrote:
>
>> Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
>
>It's Conan the Librarian. "This book is overdue, now you have to pay the
>fine."
>< draws huge sword >
>
<BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
"Don't you know your Dewey decimal system?"
</BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Kurt
cloning...
>Also unfortunately, with the demise of support for stuff like Battletech,
>there just isn't much else available in mass-produced tabletop wargames.
>There IS the GHQ line of MicroArmor, and a couple of small houses make
>1/1200-scale naval stuff, but WHERE is the game system for it?
>
Dirtside II is pretty good for micro scale stuff, and I think that FASA are
trying to push Battletech again, after Vor sucked big nuts. But if I
couldn't play 40K I'd probably stick to Laserburn and get into something
like Stargrunt or other generic rules (the Rules with no name look prety
cool).
Justin Gaskins
> Nobody was prepared for the full horror of Justin Gaskins's successful
> cloning...
>
> >Tom Beliech wrote:
> >
> >> Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
> >
> >It's Conan the Librarian. "This book is overdue, now you have to pay the
> >fine."
> >< draws huge sword >
> >
> <BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
> "Don't you know your Dewey decimal system?"
> </BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
That's the line! Sorry, I screwed up. What the hell is that from?
Paul de Quant
>Hi all. Here's some quick words from our Intellectual Property (IP)
>folks
>in the UK on the subject of websites & our IP items (rules, artwork,
>etc):
>
>This is the policy we apply to fan-based web sites and represents a
>compromise between what we are entitled to ask for and what will allow
>hobbyists to get out there and share ideas and information. If someone
>is
>using our IP for their own financial or commercial benefit we apply a
>stricter policy.
>(.....)
Let's see...
>3. Credits all Games Workshop-originating photographs with the
>appropriate copyright notice;
Any one forgot putting the copyright notice on their page?
>4. Doesn't include any Games Workshop-originating artwork;
So, here's a good point! Let's see...
If I include Games Workshop-originating artwork of Battlefleet Gothic in my Web Site, I'm
NOT VIOLATING their IP items & policy. Why? you all ask.
Because
1. My site is in Spanish &
2. There's no Spanish version of Battlefleet Gothic
So, I can buy an English copy and use the artwork legally thanks to the Spanish Laws &
the only ones whom benefits are the Spanish people & GW!
>5. Doesn't rip us off - by re-printing our rules, profiting from
>the
>use of our IP, damaging the image of the hobby etc (the exception to
>this is
>WH40K Chapter Approved Material which may be
>re-printed);
If I translate rules in spanish, I don´t rip them because some of them aren' t printed in spanish
Again,he only ones whom benefits are the Spanish people & GW
Paul de Quant
paul_d...@hotmail.com
Tom Beliech
> Nobody was prepared for the full horror of Justin Gaskins's successful
> cloning...
>
> >Tom Beliech wrote:
> >
> >> Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
> >
> >It's Conan the Librarian. "This book is overdue, now you have to pay the
> >fine."
> >< draws huge sword >
> >
> <BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
> "Don't you know your Dewey decimal system?"
> </BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
Here in Florida, it would be:
"What do you MEAN, you don't know how to use LUIS! AAAR!"
Tom Beliech
Tom Beliech
Justin Gaskins <me...@purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:387B67F3...@purdue.edu...
> Kurt wrote:
>
> > Nobody was prepared for the full horror of Justin Gaskins's successful
> > cloning...
> >
> > >Tom Beliech wrote:
> > >
> > >> Tom Beliech (REAL LIFE Conan-The-Grammarian)
> > >
> > >It's Conan the Librarian. "This book is overdue, now you have to pay
the
> > >fine."
> > >< draws huge sword >
> > >
> > <BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
> > "Don't you know your Dewey decimal system?"
> > </BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
>
UHF, with Weird Al Yankovic.
Tom Beliech ("Stoopid! You so Stoopid!")
Peter Cowderoy/PSYCHO
Tom Beliech wrote in message ...
>Here in Florida, it would be:
Obligatory question: you wouldn't happen to live anywhere near Jacksonville
would you?
--------------------------------------------------
psy...@nthfen.demon.co.uk
'In Ankh-Morpork even the shit have a street to itself...
Truly, this is a land of opportunity' - Detritus, Men at Arms
Kurt
>> >It's Conan the Librarian. "This book is overdue, now you have to pay
>> >the fine."
>> >< draws huge sword >
>> >
>> <BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
>> "Don't you know your Dewey decimal system?"
>> </BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
>
>That's the line! Sorry, I screwed up. What the hell is that from?
>
UHF, the Weird Al movie. I love the Ghandi 2 trailer, where he goes into
the restaurant and says "Gimme a steak. Medium rare" then guns down a
bunch of guys.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
It's not silly. You did spell glair wrong. Just because there's no such
word as glair, doesn't mean you didn't spell it wrong...
-- RGMW outtake
Kurt
fine...
>
>Tom Beliech wrote in message ...
>>Here in Florida, it would be:
> ^^^^
>
>Obligatory question: you wouldn't happen to live anywhere near
>Jacksonville would you?
>
I was just thinking that. We could get Tom to pay the Shitzers a visit and
tell them some of his old RTC war stories.
Tom Beliech
Peter Cowderoy/PSYCHO <pe...@nthfen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:85g8ft$14r$1...@nthfen.demon.co.uk...
>
> Tom Beliech wrote in message ...
> >Here in Florida, it would be:
> ^^^^
>
> Obligatory question: you wouldn't happen to live anywhere near
Jacksonville
> would you?
Nope, I live 5 hours' drive west of there, right at the tip O' the
Panhandle.
Tom Beliech (or 3 hours, if you drive like most of my friends do...)
Tom Beliech
> It's the end of the world as we know it, and Peter Cowderoy/PSYCHO feels
> fine...
>
> >
> >>Here in Florida, it would be:
> > ^^^^
> >
> >Obligatory question: you wouldn't happen to live anywhere near
> >Jacksonville would you?
> >
and
> tell them some of his old RTC war stories.
Well, I will be visiting Tallahassee at the end of this month. Perhaps, for
an agreeable donation, I might be persuaded to drive out there and, ahem,
reeducate the poor chaps in proper pontification.
Tom Beliech (Then again, maybe I won't)
Robert Singers
Paul de Quant wrote
> If I include Games Workshop-originating artwork of Battlefleet Gothic in
my Web Site, I'm
> NOT VIOLATING their IP items & policy. Why? you all ask.
Do want to explain that again it made no sense at all. If I understand what
you're actually saying then you're wrong, and I not sure that I do.
Translating something into a different language would not constitute enough
of a derivative product to not be protected by GW IP.
Sticking the copyright on the images is hardly a problem, put it in the
*alt*. It's not visible on the page but I'm sure that it would stand up in
a court of law if GW challenged it.
i.e.
<img border="0" src="GWImage.gif" alt="GW Copyright">
I don't know why you're all getting so uptight. GW has to be seen to be
protecting it's IP.
Steve Coath
My favourite one (showing my age here) was from a cheesy 70s film called
"Kentucky Fried Movie".
Cue voice over.
"He was a short hassedic jew,-- she was a busty negro temptress. While he
kindled the sabbath flame, she burned the ghettos to the ground. --
Cleopatra Shwartz
Kurt <doo...@nospam.mindless.com> wrote in message
news:8EB96D162g45...@10.2.2.1...
> It's the end of the world as we know it, and Justin Gaskins feels fine...
>
> >> >It's Conan the Librarian. "This book is overdue, now you have to pay
> >> >the fine."
> >> >< draws huge sword >
> >> >
> >> <BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
> >> "Don't you know your Dewey decimal system?"
> >> </BAD AUSTRIAN ACCENT>
> >
> >That's the line! Sorry, I screwed up. What the hell is that from?
> >
> UHF, the Weird Al movie. I love the Ghandi 2 trailer, where he goes into
> the restaurant and says "Gimme a steak. Medium rare" then guns down a
> bunch of guys.
>
Kurt
>My favourite one (showing my age here) was from a cheesy 70s film called
>"Kentucky Fried Movie".
>Cue voice over.
>"He was a short hassedic jew,-- she was a busty negro temptress. While he
>kindled the sabbath flame, she burned the ghettos to the ground. --
>Cleopatra Shwartz
>
ROFL. I think I've seen a bit of that movie, is that the one where Julie
Andrews gets her tits out?
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
I am *not* a prostitute. Not a professional one, anyway.
-- RGMW outtake
Paul de Quant
>Hi all. Here's some quick words from our Intellectual Property (IP)
>folks
>(snip)
Hello again Folks!
This is Paul de Quant from Spain with another message about
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intellectual Property (IP of websites & Games Workshop IP items (rules, artwork,
etc)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a very long one)
In my message posted on Tue, Jan 11,2000; I've wrote that:
>3. Credits all Games Workshop-originating photographs with the
>appropriate copyright notice;
>>Any one forgot putting the copyright notice on their page?
>4. Doesn't include any Games Workshop-originating artwork;
>So, here's a good point! Let's see...
>>If I include Games Workshop-originating artwork of Battlefleet Gothic in my Web Site, I'm
>NOT VIOLATING their IP items & policy. Why? you all ask.
>Because
>>1. My site is in Spanish &
>>2. There's no Spanish version of Battlefleet Gothic
>>So, I can buy an English copy and use the artwork legally thanks to the Spanish Laws &
the only ones whom benefits are the Spanish people & GW!
Robert Singers wrote:
>Do want to explain that again it made no sense at all. If I understand what
>you're actually saying then you're wrong, and I not sure that I do.
Well, I'm only a Canadian who lives in Spain many years. I don't have any Knowlege
of US laws or UK laws, but I have some knowlege about some European laws & directives , and some
Spanish laws. Of course this is not the place (nor group) to discuss laws & Internet.
This is what I mean:
- The only ones can benefit are those people who do not have access of GW stuff & GW (this is
because some fans from other countries, in this case, can use "new" artwork for their sites & of
course, it's a FREE advertisement for GW in THAT country).
Okay, yesterday with my friend (a lawyer) & today with another (who works in the GW shop here in
Valencia (yes there's one!)), I talked about this matter. Of course, my friend from the GW shop
agreed with the IP policy & my friend the lawyer (we three play GW games) says that part of the IP
policy was a real nonsense.
OK, then, here's more about what I think about it and my own analysis of the whole matter hours
after talking with my friends.
Evil Homer wrote the following:
>"According to the guidelines, unless you draw it yourself, you can have NO
>GW artwork on your site. Zip. And if you DO draw it yourself, you're
>STILL not clear because they can claim that your utter-lack-of-talent
>crayon sketch of Lemartes "damages the hobby" by, say, diminishing the
>perceived level of quality associated with GW product (no matter how bad
>the art is, it could never compete with Shane Hoyle's sculpting toward
>diminishing GW's quality level...God, does that kid suck). See? They can
>do whatever they want. Or so they think."
Evil Homer is quite right. But here we can see a "blind point":
"...if you DO draw it yourself...". Here, as my friend the lawyer stated, is that
IF the artwork is under IP policy, AND COPYRIGHTED, then you CANNOT draw any Space Marine, Ork,
Eldar, etc. Also you cannot draw ANY GW symbols on your drawings, as stated on GW page
(http://www.games-workshop.co.uk/legal/ippolicy.htm), so forget drawing the 8 point CHAOS star.
The same thing happens if you make a symbol for your chapter with the Imperial 2-headed Eagle.
But...
If we read the copyright, trademarks & commercial trademarks on the WD & CJ, the chaos star symbol
and the eagle are not under copyright. GET THE IDEA?
What does this bul....t means?
You can't draw Lemartes because he's copyrighted, but you can draw a guy and paint a chaos star on
his head if you wish.
More nonsense: Legally you CANNOT put on your Web site something like: My 10000 point ELDAR
Army; because the word (& concept) "ELDAR" is a trademark of Games Workshop
Limited! So, in this legal concept, to refer to ELDARS, we must say:
My 10000-point "tall & handsome pointy eared guys from space" army.
As you can appreciate, there are very stupid things...
Blank Dave wrote:
>Is "damaging to the hobby" printing their material on your site?
No if you live in a country that didn't publish some GW stuff.
>Saying "GW sucks and are a bunch of money grabbing bastards"?
No, saying that can harm GW company & not the hobby itself. One example, a friend, David B, plays
Blood Bowl. He did not BUY the game. Someone (not me!) lend him the rulebook, the DZ rulebook,
handmade the cards, & he made a photocopy of the board. Is that damaging to the hobby'? No. Only GW
pockets. BTW, he uses plastic toy soldiers as players.
>Posting up pics of very demented and perverted GW conversions?
No. Only "Posting up pics of very demented and perverted scratch build GW themed un-official
miniatures" can damage GW pockets and not the hobby itself.
All this goes to the folowing:
Tom Beliech wrote:
>I think the point is that nobody's web site is going to get "hurt" unless
>the web designer (...) does something that reduces
>the corporation's flow of income. (...) they don't care what we
>say UNTIL enough people believe it to affect the company's sales.
Tom is right. GW IS AFRAID of those sites can do something (usually saying it's own opinion about
GW) that reduces the corporation's flow of income.
On Fri, 7 Jan 2000, I received an E-mail from GW Universe telling me about changing their domain's
name. Well, most of you know the story. But if you don't, I'll send you a copy of the GW Universe
e-mail if you want.
All this is that the fan-based web sites in GW Universe are so "anti-GW" & so popular. And harms GW
popularity in the newbies minds & souls. I suspect this is just GW's attempt at eliminating bad
reviews and coverage for older products using the same scare tactics they use on store owners.
AND NOW WE REACH THE REAL REASON OF THE IP MESSAGE!
>bad reviews and coverage
Here's the point.
We all know that GW doesn't publish /sells well tested games. If they did, nobody will try and
improve the rules. I'll try to explain: Why making 3 editions of WH40k? Of course the first edition
vehicles rules aren't good & realistic. But why didn't they fix them before selling the rules?
Answer: If the rules were perfect, they lose money because they won't sell "companions".
So, bad reviews can influence people to press GW to make perfect products, so imagine this: One
rulebook and ONE book with all the armies. Of course, choosing between $15 X 10 codex = $150 & a $50
or less codex, GW prefers $150. Catch the idea?
WAIT! THERE'S MORE!
Tom Beliech wrote:
> (...) they don't care what we
>say UNTIL enough people believe it to affect the company's sales.
I believe that GW is afraid of rec.games.miniatures.warhammer because with our "rants" can affect
the company's sales. And (almost) all the news groups are very powerful.
A web page can have thousands of visitors, but in the news are millions. There are more than 35
thousand of newsgroups, so just imagine the power of the news...
DEFENDING GW
I agree on IP policies & copyrights terms. I've finished a Blood Bowl site, & my policy is
respecting the work of others. My web is in Spanish, how many visitors I'll get? Okay, I've
translated Jervis Johnson's DungeonBowl article in Spanish BECAUSE the Spanish WHITE DWARF didn't
published the article yet. I did not translated from the original WD, I've found it
on a web site. What's more, all the GW images & artwork I use on my site comes from OTHER WEB SITES
and not from the GW site. So illegally I got stuff from others page & I didn't challenge the GW
status (What ever is it). Of course, my policy is recognizing the authorship of the translated
articles putting a link to the author's page & recognizing were did I got the artwork putting links
to that web site.
Of course, all this bla, bla, bla is my opinion, & this does not mean that I don't respect GW.
And GW is a Company. And its goal is making money. Everybody loves money, me too! But there are
manners & manner to make money. Clear enough?
BUT, there are people & people. An example: my friend Andreu from Valencia works for GW in the GW
store in Valencia, & what's more, he thinks like Tom, Dave, Kurt, Evil Hommer (to mention a few),
people who loves paying GW stuff. Selling miniatures is only a job.
What I mean is that there are many people who have a job in GW, but think like us. Understand what I
mean now?
It's the OWNER of GW & not the worker who makes the IP policy.
It's unacceptable the term "damaging the image of the hobby". Get a dictionary & see the meaning of
the word "HOBBY".
This term is like a boomerang. Our hobby is WARGAMING, so GW is "damaging the image of the hobby".
Anyone had seen a real living Ork? Were there Historical wood elf armies in the History?
Another thing would be if GW use the term "damaging the image of GW". If they put this on their IP,
they would have a legal reason.
But here's the tricky thing. Let me explain with examples:
If I own a company, my goal is having happy customers. Right? If anyone makes bad press of my
company, he/she can damage the image of my company. Right? Why that guy makes bad press of my
company? IT'S BECAUSE I'M DOING SOMETHING THAT UPSETS MY CUSTOMERS! Get the point?
So then, if we here are upset with GW is because GW is doing something wrong.
I don't have the Magic Formula of Success, & I'm no expert, it's just an opinion.
If GW wants to protect their rights, they can create or sponsor OFFICIAL GAMMING CLUBS.
Among many advantages, likes discounts, free stuff & like, a member of the official club can have a
GW sponsored Web page & USE GW artwork. EVERYBODY WILL HAVE BENEFITS!
And the best way having benefits is knowing what does the people wants & not creating the needs.
AND WHAT DO WE GET?
I don't think that all this is an IP policy problem; I think that all this is a COMMERCIAL POLICY
PROBLEM.
(Any ways I think that the IP message posted on the news is a manner to see how we, the
rec.games.miniatures.warhammer reacts & see what we think. So here was my opinion)
Sorry if this message is quite long (about 3 pages), but wanted to say all what I think at once, so
I can save time for viewing more websites.
Well this is all from Valencia, Spain. (I promise you that there will be more...)
Paul de Quant(paul_d...@hotmail.com)
Wise men can make mistakes...Me too, but not today.
This message was made with an illegal copy of Word 2000 from the Office 2000 Premium package and
saved in .txt format. Bill Gates lost 60000 pesetas (600 US dollars more or less)
paul_d...@hotmail.com
Someone lend him the rulebook, the DZ rulebook, handmade the cards, &
he made a photocopy of the board. Is that damaging to the hobby'? No.
Only GW pockets. BTW, he uses plastic toy soldiers as players.
>Posting up pics of very demented and perverted GW conversions?
No. Only "Posting up pics of very demented and perverted scratch build
GW themed un-official miniatures" can damage GW pockets and not the
hobby itself.
Tom Beliech wrote:
with our "rants" can affect the company's sales. And all the news
groups are very powerful.
A web page can have thousands of visitors, but in the news are
millions. There are more than 35 thousand of newsgroups, so just
imagine the power of the news...
DEFENDING GW
I agree on IP policies & copyrights terms. I've finished a Blood Bowl
site, & my policy is respecting the work of others. My web is in
Spanish, how many visitors I'll get? Okay, I've translated Jervis
Johnson's DungeonBowl article in Spanish BECAUSE the Spanish WHITE
DWARF didn't published the article yet. I did not translated from the
original WD. I've founded
on a web site. What's more all the GW images & artwork comes from
OTHER WEB SITES and not from the GW site. So illegally I got stuff
from others page & I didn't challenge the GW status.(What ever is it).
all what I think at once, so I con save time for viewing more
paul_d...@hotmail.com
>Hi all. Here's some quick words from our Intellectual Property (IP)
>folks
>in the UK on the subject of websites & our IP items (rules, artwork,
>etc):
Vampy
>On Thu, 6 Jan 2000 18:44:53 -0500 , Custserv <Cust...@Games-Workshop.com>
wrote:
>
>"...if you DO draw it yourself...". Here, as my friend the lawyer stated,
is that
>IF the artwork is under IP policy, AND COPYRIGHTED, then you CANNOT draw
any Space Marine, Ork,
>Eldar, etc. Also you cannot draw ANY GW symbols on your drawings, as stated
on GW page
>(http://www.games-workshop.co.uk/legal/ippolicy.htm), so forget drawing the
8 point CHAOS star
GW didn't invent the chaos star (actually a compass). The same goes for most
of their symbols and artwork. As much as they'd like you to believe
otherwise, most of their names are also ripped off from history or other
fiction.
Kurt
>Paul de Quant wrote in message <387e1866...@10.10.0.1>...
>>On Thu, 6 Jan 2000 18:44:53 -0500 , Custserv <Custserv@Games
>>-Workshop.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>Evil Homer is quite right. But here we can see a "blind point":
>>"...if you DO draw it yourself...". Here, as my friend the lawyer
>>stated,
>is that
>>IF the artwork is under IP policy, AND COPYRIGHTED, then you CANNOT
>>draw
>any Space Marine, Ork,
>>Eldar, etc. Also you cannot draw ANY GW symbols on your drawings, as
>>stated
>on GW page
>>(http://www.games-workshop.co.uk/legal/ippolicy.htm), so forget drawing
>>the
>8 point CHAOS star
>
>GW didn't invent the chaos star (actually a compass). The same goes for
>most of their symbols and artwork. As much as they'd like you to believe
>otherwise, most of their names are also ripped off from history or other
>fiction.
>
That's fine if they want to try anything. I'll produce some eight-pointed
stars of chaos, a single arrow of law, the eye of Ra, skull and crossbones,
and laugh at anything I'd receive from their suits.
"GW copyright? You mean those symbols from Moorcock, Egyptian mythology,
and the pirates flag? Yeah, and I designed the Great Seal of the United
States (no, I don't mean Setzer)"
Their IP mewlings are a joke when you consider that virtually nothing they
are copyrighting is original work, or in some way not derivative of another
work.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Oh, come on! You've been here before! You know we don't actually
DISCUSS anything around here. We just trade insults, semi-coherent
rants, off-topic opinions, and snappy .sig lines.
-- RGMW outtake
Tom Beliech
> "GW copyright? You mean those symbols from Moorcock, Egyptian mythology,
> and the pirates flag? Yeah, and I designed the Great Seal of the United
> States (no, I don't mean Setzer)"
>
> Their IP mewlings are a joke when you consider that virtually nothing they
> are copyrighting is original work, or in some way not derivative of
another
> work.
This probably explains why few, if any, sites have been victimized by the
enforcement of such a policy.
Tom Beliech
Big Al
Vampy <toms...@theuk.freeuk.com> wrote in article
<Herg4.12507$lN.3...@nnrp3.clara.net>...
> Paul de Quant wrote in message <387e1866...@10.10.0.1>...
> >On Thu, 6 Jan 2000 18:44:53 -0500 , Custserv
<Cust...@Games-Workshop.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >Evil Homer is quite right. But here we can see a "blind point":
> >"...if you DO draw it yourself...". Here, as my friend the lawyer
stated,
> is that
> >IF the artwork is under IP policy, AND COPYRIGHTED, then you
CANNOT draw
> any Space Marine, Ork,
> >Eldar, etc. Also you cannot draw ANY GW symbols on your drawings,
as stated
> on GW page
> >(http://www.games-workshop.co.uk/legal/ippolicy.htm), so forget
drawing the
> 8 point CHAOS star
>
> GW didn't invent the chaos star (actually a compass). The same goes
for most
> of their symbols and artwork. As much as they'd like you to believe
> otherwise, most of their names are also ripped off from history or
other
> fiction.
Yeah, like 'Priestley'. Blatant lampoon of a great British chemist.
--
Big Al -- if Priestley discovered oxygen, what the fuck did he
breathe beforehand??
The Doctor is in.
Email: chan...@cenobite.com
You have the right to free speech
As long as you're not dumb enough
to actually try it
One of the Twin Pasty-Fleshed Daemons of Pestilence
and Nauseous Abomination
"And Bristol!"
Kurt does get a token mention in this .sig file
Shim
>> GW didn't invent the chaos star (actually a compass). The same goes
>for most
>> of their symbols and artwork. As much as they'd like you to believe
>> otherwise, most of their names are also ripped off from history or
>other
>> fiction.
>
>Yeah, like 'Priestley'. Blatant lampoon of a great British chemist.
>
>--
>Big Al -- if Priestley discovered oxygen, what the fuck did he
>breathe beforehand??
Phylostigen. (sic)
-Shim.
Big Al
Shim <sh...@shimgray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in article
<3882756a...@news.freeserve.net>...
Fucking geek...
--
Big Al
Vampy
>
>> GW didn't invent the chaos star (actually a compass). The same goes
>for most
>> of their symbols and artwork. As much as they'd like you to believe
>> otherwise, most of their names are also ripped off from history or
>other
>> fiction.
>
>Yeah, like 'Priestley'. Blatant lampoon of a great British chemist.
And Nigel Stillman's preferred name was ripped off from the female
genitalia.
Kurt
>>Big Al -- if Priestley discovered oxygen, what the fuck did he
>>breathe beforehand??
>
>Phylostigen. (sic)
>
Phlogiston?
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
All we need are quad combiweapons to solve all of our differences.
-- RGMW outtake
Paul de Quant
>wrote:
>
>"...if you DO draw it yourself...". Here, as my friend the lawyer stated,
>is that
>IF the artwork is under IP policy, AND COPYRIGHTED, then you CANNOT draw
>any Space Marine, Ork,
>Eldar, etc. Also you cannot draw ANY GW symbols on your drawings, as stated
>on GW page
>(http://www.games-workshop.co.uk/legal/ippolicy.htm), so forget drawing the
>8 point CHAOS star
OK. Once again
a Canadian
living in Spain
post a message under the rain.
-- or --
A New Rant
Well, what I didn't post on my rant is that Logos, artwork, symbols are GW copyright & it's printed
in the copyright stuff of the Spanish Version of the White Dwarf Magazine.
Paul de Quant
paul_d...@hotmail.com
"Paint names like "Jervis" and "Nigel" on your Imperial guard figures. When the guards are taken
out, yell loudly, "YES! I FINALLY killed them!""
copyright:Tom Beliech-How To Annoy GW Sales Clerks
(cool note: "How To Annoy GW Sales Clerks" tips WORKS in Spain(at least in Valencia!) !)
Shim
>> >Big Al -- if Priestley discovered oxygen, what the fuck did he
>> >breathe beforehand??
>>
>> Phylostigen. (sic)
>
>Fucking geek...
Hey, they're lovely people...
-Shim.
Shim
expounded:
>It's the end of the world as we know it, and Shim feels fine...
>
>>>Big Al -- if Priestley discovered oxygen, what the fuck did he
>>>breathe beforehand??
>>
>>Phylostigen. (sic)
>>
>Phlogiston?
Closer, I think.
-Shim.