3D"'print-a-like" shut down by GW

[lorelorn]

I didn't see a thread on this, and GW general seems like the right place to discuss 3D printing and its implications for GW and every other miniatures manufacturer.

Short version: 3d models are now at the level of detail that can trigger a DMCA response from GW's US arm. It's just happened.

Here's the Wired story: http://www.wired.com/design/2012/05/...ing-patent-law

If first saw this on ICv2 here: http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/23026.html

Here's my very brief write up written for my gaming club if you're interested: http://qlegs.wordpress.com/2012/06/0...-print-a-like/

Summary:
This is going to be complex. As a consumer I feel little other than optimism at the way this technology is coming along. The idea of being able to design, swap and build items including terrain seems great to me.

Obviously a company like Privateer Press or Games Workshop would feel differently. My first thought is that the bigger threat is to makers of historical miniatures, since you can copyright your own specific figures, but not a viking, WW2 German, or whatever. For the likes of GW this opens up another front where they have to be vigilant. It also opens up a massive opportunity, but we'll see if they feel the same way.

[zoggin-eck]

Fair enough for them to shut him down, id all he did was copy their designs and post them up. They'd want to be on top of this right now.

[lorelorn]

According to the articles the model in question was similar in look and feel rather than a direct copy of a specific model.

From the ICv2 write-up "Since Valenty’s designs were in the Warhammer style rather than actual copies of existing figures, there is no telling what the outcome of this case would be if it were adjudicated. "

[iamfanboy]

What reading that article reminded me of is an old sourcebook for Shadowrun, The Neo-Anarchist's Guide to North America, where they talk about how the technology exists to manufacture anything that a human could need, independent of megacorporations (3-D printers are actually mentioned!) but are suppressed BY the megacorporations to prop up their ancient business model.

And the book was published in 1991.

Still, according to the article, he didn't scan in his 40k stuff; instead, he worked and designed his own, that could have fit thematically with GW's designs (which are, let's be honest here, pretty generic), and the predictable C&D came down the pike.

[Sean_OBrien]

Two things.

First, I don't think there is actually a law suit in play here. GW sent in their suits to issue a C&D to the host site, and the host site complied with the C&D. I had been following the story for awhile, and I had not seen anywhere that they actually filed a suit against the designer. As a result, unless the designer or the host site decide to contest GW's claim - there won't be any resolution to the question.

Secondly, the easy work around is to post components. Normally the way that things like models are protected under copyright is in their completed form. The various constituent parts are not generally copyrighted on their own, unless they make up a significant portion of the work (significant is highly subjective and has been interpreted in different ways over the years). If you create one file which is the tracks, another file which is the turret and a third file which is the body - each part is less than what would be considered significant, however added together it would make a whole item.

While that might sound like an underhanded way of doing things - the entire process is underhanded. Between lawyers sending out C&D letters to scare compliance to the manner in which IP holders have lobbied to extend their copyrights on their cash cows well beyond their original intended periods. The big companies were the ones who wrote the laws (with lawyers and politicians who were bought and paid for). You would just be playing by their own rules.

[Hendarion]

Still, according to the article, he didn't scan in his 40k stuff; instead, he worked and designed his own

Well, even if he designed his own, he obviously *tried* to make a copy of GWs tanks. To make a copy, you don't always need to use a scanner. Some hand-made-things are better copies than a machine would be able to put out. That said, I won't claim his design is too close to justify a C&D and neither do I claim he was too far from the GW design that a C&D won't be justified. I'm just saying that even if he's doing the design-process manually, the result still could very well be a copy. But seen from an untrained eye without any knowledge about law: The main hull's side looks damn close to a Leman Russ.

[DarkLordBelial]

GW have a bit of cheek - aren't all their tank designs ripped off from real world tanks?

[Tresidentevil]

Can't blame GW here. They have the right to defend their patents/copyrights/intellectual property. I think there's a difference between taking inspiration from actual tanks and just copying them and changing 1 or 2 things. Expect new laws to deal with 3D printing I guess.

[Senbei]

GW have a bit of cheek - aren't all their tank designs ripped off from real world tanks?

Nope... Rhinos, a bit, but most of their tank designs are so stupid that they wouldn't run on roads, never mind battlefields. No suspension on the IG ones for a start.

[ehlijen]

Isn't this more about the open sharing of the component designs rather than creating them? I mean I doubt GW would have cared if he'd kept them to himself and some friends. But he openly shared them on the internet and that's arguably copyright infringment even if he doesn't ask for money.

[iamfanboy]

copyright infringement on what?

You can't copyright the look and feel of a fictional universe, only specific components OF that fictional universe; half-a-dozen high profile cases have established that.

If he had made a copy of a Rhino, that's definitely copyright infringement. Even if he made his own designed APC with an Imperial Eagle (though GW lifted that from the royal crest of a now-dead actual empire), that'd be arguably copyright infringement.

But making a mecha-walker that could fit in with GW's Warhammer 40k universe? Not copyright infringement.

[IJW]

I suspect it was the Russalike that was attracting attention, not the mecha.

[jack da greenskin]

I can see why GW did it, but legally, I'm not sure where they stand.

The model was created to look something like the leman russ - Surely that's legal? What about phone covers, pretend phones, replacement parts etc? A leman russ was not scanned - This model is completely the mans own work.

Creating a design and printing it, in his bedroom, is completely legal. As I've said, he made it himself... no different from making a scale model of the eiffel tower, or of a car. So what GW are in a fit about is that he uploaded it with the intention to share it? Well, he made the file, I think it's within his rights to distribute it as he sees fit.

This could be incredibly interesting in the next few years, as the article says, its not copyright in this case, its patent law.

Obviously, if I was a manufacturer, I'd not want copies of my models being distributed like this...

[Steam_Giant]

Food for thought comparing the two side of this issue to the music industry.

Programs like garage band and reason (old programs now) didn't ruin the music industry, and actually help produce some excellent bedroom musicians.

However the free distribution of music has resulted in the market domination of sterile bland X factor pop, where "real" music is more and more sidelined.

What about miniatures?

I guess 3D printers could help the rise of small time artists who are likely to be more creative, and certainly able to take bigger risks than GW. However this may cause a downturn in the creativity of GW and PP, etc.

Personally Im one of those bedroom creative types that welcomes the move. If this really takes off I think GW has more to worry about than IP infringement, I think the right creative people with a fresh idea and a good business model, could supplant them over night.

[shelfunit.]

For a direct copy I can understand this, but a [insert imperial vehicle name here] tank in 40k is essentially a WW1 or WW2 tank with slightly different guns. The only way he could/should have been prevented making these is by using GW vehicle names for them.

[yabbadabba]

For a direct copy I can understand this, but a [insert imperial vehicle name here] tank in 40k is essentially a WW1 or WW2 tank with slightly different guns. The only way he could/should have been prevented making these is by using GW vehicle names for them.

GW haven't prevented him from making them, they have asked the host site to take down the posts.

[The bearded one]

Do we have pictures of the mecha? I assume the picture of the russ look-alike on the wired story is the 3d-design in question?

[Ebon]

Legally, this depends a lot on how close the designs are to GW's actual models. If they were actual copies (and the one in the Wired article appears to be), then that's obvious copyright infringement and GW has every right to issue C&Ds, file suit and so on. If the guy is making designs which are just "in the style of", then they don't have a leg to stand on. You can't copyright a style, only specific elements of it. And let's be honest, almost everything GW produce is inspired/ripped-off (depending on how kind you're feeling) from something else anyway. Fantasy is a mash-up of Tolkien and medieval Europe. 40k steals everything from WWI (most Russ variants), Vietnam (Catachans), the Terminator, Stargate and BSG (Necrons), the Roman Empire (the Aquila device)... Virtually everything GW produce draws inspiration from something else.

And that's fine. That's what artists do. But it does mean that legally, they have very little recourse when someone else uses the same design elements. DC can't copyright the Greek Gods just because they use them in Wonder Woman and GW can't copyright common design aesthetics.

[lorelorn]

I noted the image in the Wired article was uncaptioned. That was not necessarily his tank alike.

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:18205

The above link points to a dread copy on Thingiverse which is still up. I found it through the ninja-like method of going to thingiverse and typing 'Warhammer' into the search field. One of the first comments is from the guy who's dread generated the DMCA notice, saying how similar it is to his version.

edit: here's an image from thingiverse - fascinating stuff:

[Tresidentevil]

Isn't this more about the open sharing of the component designs rather than creating them? I mean I doubt GW would have cared if he'd kept them to himself and some friends. But he openly shared them on the internet and that's arguably copyright infringment even if he doesn't ask for money.

This. Well said.