PDA

View Full Version : Facebook games are stealing Concept art from GW!



Poseidon_II_
19-01-2012, 01:05
Warcraft and starcraft was first when it came to stealing concept art from GW. But now Social empires (a facebook game). Is not just stealing but is copying.. and by copying I mean CTRL+C CTRL+V. Anyways just take a look at the picture and you get my meaning....
129833

Duke Ramulots
19-01-2012, 01:39
lol, nice... its like a Bratz version of warhammer.

Jack of Blades
19-01-2012, 01:40
Wait... no! those image-hogging thugs at GW HQ! how dare they steal the concept art of the ancient Necrot-err Egyptian sculptors?! a horde of angry forumites must be gathered to punish all of them for their blasphemy!

Poseidon_II_
19-01-2012, 01:44
LOL I know, but man... Can they really do that? I mean take a look at the tomb guard it's identical to the copy. The sword, shield, mask, beard, shield even the scale mail is the same! Like the Marine from starcraft atleast have the decency to no have the yellow trim and some originality... but this?

Jack of Blades
19-01-2012, 02:03
You are weak in the ways of marketing, cultist. Tzeentch and I will help you understand. You see, where there is a similarity there is recognition and where there is recognition, there is a mind at work. Where there is a mind at work there is also two hands and a keyboard. It is with such tools that these misled pawns of Social Empire can be herded into the arms of GW. The wheel of sales must turn. You can reap the rewards of the gods by becoming the chosen herald, enlightening the minds of the populace with this crucial connection.

Tzeentch has foreseen it. The Great Maw of Nurgle shall swallow them whole and... :evilgrin:





.... I'll go back to, err... reading about Chaos now :)

ooglatjama
19-01-2012, 02:09
Even the same colour scheme lol

Grimtuff
19-01-2012, 02:11
Soooo....

GW vs. Facebook? There's only one way to solve this.

FIIIIIGGGGHHHHT!!! Assemble the laywers. They're going in. ;)

Lester
19-01-2012, 02:15
The Sphinx isn't the same, but the other is very damn close.

I still think it is coincidence.

Brother Haephestus
19-01-2012, 02:29
I'm looking at $99 USD for a box of five Bloodknights and I'm really having a hard time being sympathetic ...

[/Snark]

redfury
19-01-2012, 02:34
Warhammer ripped off dungeons and dragons, warcraft ripped off warhammer and they all ripped off tolkein who got his ideas from various folklore therefore ripped of some bard who existed before the idea of copy right did..in the end no one really ripped off anyone, its just the fantasy genre.

lbecks
19-01-2012, 02:59
In the greater world GW stole from facebook games since GW doesn't advertise and no one but wargame hobbyists knows anything about GW!

wyglif
19-01-2012, 03:15
There was a post on the 40K forum a while back concerning a Facebook game using a tank that was the very spitting image of a Leman Russ. IIRC, it was shouted down as being a "coincidence"; that the Facebook tank and Leman Russ were probably both based on some sort of old WWI tank that, IMO, didn't really look anything like either of them. It was clearly a Russ.

Anyway, those look pretty clearly Tomb King inspired and not "traditional mythological art" inspired to me. Are there any other examples of sphinxes represented like that prior to the GW one (which, and perhaps I'm wrong with this, I thought was rather un-sphinxy")?

NTJ2010
19-01-2012, 03:20
Soooo....

GW vs. Facebook? There's only one way to solve this.

FIIIIIGGGGHHHHT!!! Assemble the laywers. They're going in. ;)

Let's see...when Cyanide and Gamesworkshop went into legal dispute we were left with a Blood Bowl Video Game....

So if Facebook and Gamesworkshop went to war...would we get a miniature war gaming Social Network.
I'd be okay with this.

Worship
19-01-2012, 04:08
lol wow... it's like a dead-on, cartoon parallel

Luigi
19-01-2012, 04:11
Am I the only who could not care less about people doing such things?

Lord Dan
19-01-2012, 04:27
I still think it is coincidence.

Seriously? I mean, really?

Lester
19-01-2012, 04:54
Seriously? I mean, really?
Indeed, I do believe it is coincidence. Undead Egyptians and Feathered Sphinxes are nothing new.

wyglif
19-01-2012, 05:10
Indeed, I do believe it is coincidence. Undead Egyptians and Feathered Sphinxes are nothing new.

Odd, though, that both the tomb guard model and Social Empire's Not-A-Tomb-Guard are posed exactly the same - left handedness and all. I've not heard anything about Egyptians being famous for being lefties, so I'll just assume this indicates that more than mere coincidence is at work.

Also, I've never seen sphinxes represented quite like GW's - generally they've been a bit more lithe and not stock, with the wings/feathers being on the body and not attached to the forearm.

Reticent
19-01-2012, 05:59
Well, look at the bright side- if SOPA or PIPA pass we'll be able to get Facebook knocked off the internet for violating GW's IP.

Duke Ramulots
19-01-2012, 06:08
Am I the only who could not care less about people doing such things?

Nope, I'm in the not caring side as well.

Urgat
19-01-2012, 06:48
The Sphinx isn't the same, but the other is very damn close.

I still think it is coincidence.

Up to the patterns on the shield, alternating red/blue strips and all? The toucan-shaped handle of the sword? :p

Schmapdi
19-01-2012, 07:59
Whats the name of the facebook game? Are there any other eerie parralells to GW stuff? If it's just the skeleton warrior (the Sphinx isn't that close IMO) then whoever the artist was who made it might have just googled skeleton warrior and hit upon some GW art or something.

Poseidon_II_
19-01-2012, 11:29
Well for everyone thinking this is a coincidence. The Egyptian traditional sword, the kopesh dosen't look like the sword from GW. Egyptian war helms looks more like the skeleton warriors helm then the tomb guard helm. And serisouly the sphinx is a lion with a humans head..... Not a centaur looking lion/scorpion/human. And I got another pickture of stolen concept art. They took a crossbow gun from Warhammer Online: Age of Reconing. And the corssbow gun diden't exist in egypt, the very design of it is impractical.

http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/406930_3093054602563_1149973126_33466668_128428579 7_n.jpg

StygianBeach
19-01-2012, 12:13
If it's just the skeleton warrior (the Sphinx isn't that close IMO) then whoever the artist was who made it might have just googled skeleton warrior and hit upon some GW art or something.

Yeah... I reckon something like this happened. Although, Undead Egyptians is hardly a fresh concept.

Can facebook just chalk it up to parody?

lbecks
19-01-2012, 12:24
Yeah... I reckon something like this happened. Although, Undead Egyptians is hardly a fresh concept.

Can facebook just chalk it up to parody?

GW would never win in this particular case even though it's clear as day where the artist for the facebook game got their inspiration from. Generally similar? yes. Infringing, no!

Is this thing a mad cat?
http://exosquad.virtue.nu/proto1.jpg
Court said no!

Corvus Corone
19-01-2012, 13:09
GW would never win in this particular case even though it's clear as day where the artist for the facebook game got their inspiration from. Generally similar? yes. Infringing, no!

Is this thing a mad cat?
http://exosquad.virtue.nu/proto1.jpg
Court said no!

Do you know what the legal tests are for this kind of thing?

English intellectual property law would likely catch this.

lbecks
19-01-2012, 13:16
Do you know what the legal tests are for this kind of thing?

English intellectual property law would likely catch this.

They compared the individual parts of the mad cat design to the exo squad toy and determined they were different. The case is kind of crazy because Playmates, makers of exo squad, actually had been communicating with FASA to make Btech toys so they had mad cat designs and knew what it looked like. That deal obviously fell through. Playmates lawyers for the win!
It's probably the reason GW never sued Blizzard even though Blizzard's orcs clearly looked like GW's green, axe wielding, big jawed orcs.

ihavetoomuchminis
19-01-2012, 14:04
But this is good for GW. Free ads. "oh look, a model like the one i like in social empires. Oh, what's this? A tabletop game? Coool. I'm buying it"

red_zebra_ve
19-01-2012, 14:09
Am I the only who could not care less about people doing such things?

I do care. . . I want to see Dark Elves ! ! ! :D

Zaustus
19-01-2012, 14:17
It's clearly a new piece of art, not copied. Obviously (IMO) it's inspired by the GW models, but there's nothing illegal about that folks. It's similar, but it's not a copy. Thus, no copyright is involved.

So instead of getting indignant, just enjoy it for what it is. Or don't, that's up to you.

loveless
19-01-2012, 14:22
It's clearly a new piece of art, not copied. Obviously (IMO) it's inspired by the GW models, but there's nothing illegal about that folks. It's similar, but it's not a copy. Thus, no copyright is involved.

So instead of getting indignant, just enjoy it for what it is. Or don't, that's up to you.

So if I draw my own deformed version of Batman and call him a "Nocturnal Avenger" and have him go up against a deformed clown with green hair in a purple suit (that I also drew) called "the Laugher", then DC would never even try to stop me?

dwarfhold13
19-01-2012, 14:27
Ok, a few years back, Gibson guitars sewed the pants off PRS for having a 'single cutaway' guitar that looked like theirs, and won. Even though the guitars were completely different in aesthetics, they still won.
I see this as the exact same thing, though I'm not going to be quick to side with GW, they have a case.
Also, this isn't advertising for G-dub, there is nothing affiliated with the company name-wise, and how often do you walk by a random table somewhere and see a model painted like this and make the direct connection. It just isn't going to happen.
And for the chap on the first page who said it was a coincidence... I'm with Lord Dan on this one.. This is pretty obvious where they drew the inspiration from.

Daniel36
19-01-2012, 14:30
So instead of getting indignant, just enjoy it for what it is. Or don't, that's up to you.

How could I possibly enjoy a Facebook game? Especially when it's called Social Empires and there is nothing social about it.

Harrassing-my-friends-through-annoying-emails-telling-them-to-join-me-in-this-lame-ass-game Empires...

Diggedeboom KaPUSH!

LotusCorgi
20-01-2012, 06:57
So if Facebook and Gamesworkshop went to war...would we get a miniature war gaming Social Network.
I'd be okay with this.

...hrm...warseer?

Lester
20-01-2012, 07:31
...hrm...warseer?

WarSeer is a forum. A miniature wargaming social network would be something similar to what Beasts of War is developing called Tabletop Nation.

Charax
20-01-2012, 07:40
Or MyBattalion, which is already up and running.

Also, incidentally, the first google result for "wargaming social network"

wizbix
20-01-2012, 14:47
Facebook hasnt stolen anything as they have nothing to do with making those games; they are seperate companies altogether.

SunTzu
20-01-2012, 15:11
Nope, I'm in the not caring side as well.

I care so little I can't even be bothered to finish this sen

Liber
20-01-2012, 15:44
Seriously? I mean, really?


Beat me too it.

This is the most blatant example of artistic thievery I've ever seen.

This video game should at the least have contacted GW and asked permission, that way GW could have said "yup, if you include our logo and give us credit" thus generating more awareness of ther IP.

I was expecting to be very unimpressed when I clicked this thread, I've seen a few of these and they are usually pretty bogus like "oh hey you know those generic GW knights? Well look, this company also makes generic looking knights therefore they are copying GW" - but this is different, its painfully obvious that the artists simply cartoonified GW sculpts for their own purposes.

Corvus Corone
20-01-2012, 15:53
It's clearly a new piece of art, not copied. Obviously (IMO) it's inspired by the GW models, but there's nothing illegal about that folks. It's similar, but it's not a copy. Thus, no copyright is involved.

So instead of getting indignant, just enjoy it for what it is. Or don't, that's up to you.

The legal reality is not so simple as merely taking the literal meaning of the word copy. Fact.

Col. Tartleton
20-01-2012, 15:57
So if I draw my own deformed version of Batman and call him a "Nocturnal Avenger" and have him go up against a deformed clown with green hair in a purple suit (that I also drew) called "the Laugher", then DC would never even try to stop me?

Seeing as DC and Marvel both have a character called "Captain Marvel"...

No I'm pretty sure the comic book industry isn't that petty. Naturally there were suits about the aforementioned, but it worked out that it was okay for them both to have one since they looked different and it was just a shared name. You'd be fine under the protections for parody fair use.

Urgat
20-01-2012, 15:59
This video game should at the least have contacted GW and asked permission, that way GW could have said "yup, if you include our logo and give us credit" thus generating more awareness of ther IP.

They would have said no. Anybody would have said no. People like us know where it comes from because we know wharhammer, nad that has zero impact on GW (on the other hand some might try that game). Those who don't know Warhammer still wouldn't know Warhammer after playing it. There's only one side gaining from it, and it's not GW.

loveless
20-01-2012, 16:17
Seeing as DC and Marvel both have a character called "Captain Marvel"...

No I'm pretty sure the comic book industry isn't that petty. Naturally there were suits about the aforementioned, but it worked out that it was okay for them both to have one since they looked different and it was just a shared name. You'd be fine under the protections for parody fair use.

Funny you mention Captain Marvel, as that particular character's (at least the DC version) history is so buried in copyright and trademark debate and lawsuits that it's laughable. For instance, Marvel Comics has the rights to have a Captain Marvel title, part of the reason why DC's Captain Marvel tends to appear in Shazam! when he takes a starring role. DC (National at the time) had gone after Fawcett (Captain Marvel's initial publishing house) given that Captain Marvel was effectively "Superman-lite" - the resultant court adventures went back and forth until Fawcett finally stopped making Captain Marvel comics. Years later, DC licensed the character from Fawcett, created the Shazam! title, and eventually completely purchased the Marvel Family in the early 90s.

I'm relatively sure that only scratches the surface as well...

Mind you, there are parodies of several characters out there, but there's a difference between "parody" and "carbon copy" or "slightly altered copy".

Cragum
20-01-2012, 16:25
The situation at hand is a smidge bit awkward admittedly but if theres no copyrighting on the character designs then GW have nothing in their power to stop them. As a graphic designer/ illustrator, you can imagine that things like this are something rather bit of an annoyance. Copyrighting imagery is a bitch and sometimes I have seen elements from some of my characters in others. But I then have seen something I have done and then seen someone elses piece and gone 'Oh Crap...' sometimes it can be just by chance that it happens.


But in this case my god someone has dipped their finger too deep in the fountain of GW...

Poseidon_II_
20-01-2012, 20:36
Theres the newest art "theft". Not so seriouse this time I guess, but think they will do more warhammer things ><
129832

Quinzy
20-01-2012, 21:11
Now this is just blatant.

madden
20-01-2012, 22:48
^your links not working!
On the others that is taking the Micky, there's generic Egyptian warriors and beasts but they just plane copyed the style, colours and even made up snake surfers.(so far as seen on here)

Murdoch
20-01-2012, 22:58
lego warhammer ftw....

The Death of Reason
21-01-2012, 09:54
Isn't this just a waste of forum space?

@OP if you care so much, then notify GW. Noone on warseer has neither the interest, nor the power to do anything about this :)

Luigi
21-01-2012, 16:06
lego warhammer ftw....

then... enjoy!
http://www.brikwars.com/ ;)

Liber
21-01-2012, 18:21
Theres the newest art "theft". Not so seriouse this time I guess, but think they will do more warhammer things ><
129832


I wonder if anyone can continue to think 'coincidence' or 'maybe' about this now lol.


@Urgat - sure maybe GW would have said no, that would be their right. but i when i said 'give them credit' i assumed this would include a link to the GW website, so that would obviously take care of the 'nobody knowing what warhammer was' problem.

scarletsquig
21-01-2012, 19:06
OMG, they are stealing 5000-year-old Egyptian imagery that GW worked so hard to create all by itself back in the year 3000 BC!

"Cobras" - COPYRIGHT GW

"Sphinx" - COPYRIGHT GW

Scalebug
21-01-2012, 19:08
The situation at hand is a smidge bit awkward admittedly but if theres no copyrighting on the character designs then GW have nothing in their power to stop them. As a graphic designer/ illustrator, you can imagine that things like this are something rather bit of an annoyance. Copyrighting imagery is a bitch and sometimes I have seen elements from some of my characters in others. But I then have seen something I have done and then seen someone elses piece and gone 'Oh Crap...' sometimes it can be just by chance that it happens.


Think you are doing the ol' confusion of "copyright" and "Trademark" here... everything you do you hold the copyright for, not everything is trademarked. In this case it is really about the makers of this Facebook game blatantly copying designs owned by GW, but I'm not sure if GW must show that they are suffering from it. Like, if they were actually planning to make a similar game, or if it is enough for it to be within reason that they could in the future want to make such a game.

There was this polish (I think) game company a few years back that was showing works in progress of a game they were developing, and they had taken actual passages of text from warhammer for their background (slightly re-written, but in places as little as "Khorne" being named something a few syllables differently but the sentence it was in was the same), as well as images that were direct copies of artwork from armybooks and such (which was weird in itself, since they were obviously drawn from scratch by what looked like a talented artist who no doubt should have been able to make something original, but they were copies 90% close to the GW artwork...). They got told to stop it, have not seen anything of them since.

In this case here, I think we can give people the benefit of the doubt and not attribute to malice what is just ignorance... I doubt the makers of this facebook game is out for a free ride on established imagery, it is probably just them not knowing how copyright works...

In any case, expect them to re-design after a stern letter from GW, or companies paying for licences to GW for using their imagery in computer games, I doubt they actually "need" to plagerize like this, there is easy enough to make a sphinx-monster or snake-rider different enough from an existing design for it to be considered something not a copy.


Scarletsquig; It simply doesn't work that way... :rolleyes:

Quinzy
21-01-2012, 19:30
OMG, they are stealing 5000-year-old Egyptian imagery that GW worked so hard to create all by itself back in the year 3000 BC!

"Cobras" - COPYRIGHT GW

"Sphinx" - COPYRIGHT GW

I must say, in my time I have never once seen any Egyptian art depicting snake surfers, nor winged-sphinx mounted warriors. There is a difference between the being inspired from undead mummified Egyptians, and taking the aesthetic and concepts directly from another business. Kopesh? Sure. Head-dress? Sure? But snake surfers? Come on. Don't be so naive.

zam2
22-01-2012, 06:59
Let's see...when Cyanide and Gamesworkshop went into legal dispute we were left with a Blood Bowl Video Game....

So if Facebook and Gamesworkshop went to war...would we get a miniature war gaming Social Network.
I'd be okay with this.

I for one welcome our new wargaming social media overlords.

Cragum
22-01-2012, 12:16
has anyone tried contacting the company to engage them about this?

Poseidon_II_
22-01-2012, 13:00
has anyone tried contacting the company to engage them about this?

Don't thinks so... But Im gonna do it when they have released all their units for the "tomb kings" uppdate. There gonna be more units released so I think Its best to have as much proof of their concept art theft as possible.

Urgat
22-01-2012, 13:08
OMG, they are stealing 5000-year-old Egyptian imagery that GW worked so hard to create all by itself back in the year 3000 BC!

"Cobras" - COPYRIGHT GW

"Sphinx" - COPYRIGHT GW

So if someone did exactly the same, but, say, with starwars ships and droids, with a cartoonish red and white X+wing or a blue and white whistling suppository, you'd make some smartass comment such as

"robots" COPYRIGHT LUCAS FILMS
"spaceships" COPYRIGHT LUCAS FILMS

?

shelfunit.
22-01-2012, 15:14
So if someone did exactly the same, but, say, with starwars ships and droids, with a cartoonish red and white X+wing or a blue and white whistling suppository, you'd make some smartass comment such as

"robots" COPYRIGHT LUCAS FILMS
"spaceships" COPYRIGHT LUCAS FILMS

?

If he did, it would be a perfectly accurate statement. These are cutting it close, but again, GW do not have exclusive rights to skeletons with head dresses, skeletons riding snakes or (especially) sphynxs.

Urgat
22-01-2012, 16:53
Huh? Because Lucas has not invented droids, it means people can steal the design of R2D2? If you can't pick that skeleton, compare it to the GW mini, and realize it's a carbon copy of the shield design, sword design, etc, just because GW didn't invent skeletons, well, d'uh, there's no helping you. Nobody's talking about legality or not here, but how plain it is they copied the design. But heh. I should be copying books, because current authors didn't invent books :rolleyes:

Commissar_Kahl
22-01-2012, 18:10
My vote is for copyright infringement. I am no expert but I believe one of the litmus tests is whether the imagery is reconizable as Gw artworok. Since several of us in this thread see the resemblence a definite case could be made. the more artwork that comes out that is similiar the more damning it becomes for the Facebook game makers. having one image similiar can be a coincidence but I believe it is now 3 images that have been shown? That helps build the case.

I am assuming this game generates revenue so GW has a vested interest in pursuing this. And if there is one less annoying FB game in the world it's a win for all of us.

Luigi
25-01-2012, 14:09
I may actually joing the game to support them and then suggest that they take ehm... inspiration from Dwarfs as well :p

Yunaris
26-01-2012, 01:37
The games on facebook aren't made by facebook, they're made by a company with a rep for selling mobile numbers to spam companies. Is anyone really surprised by this latest incident?

Urgat
26-01-2012, 07:10
Actually, the games on facebook are made by a gazilion different companies, like Zinga and co.

defunct
26-01-2012, 09:43
Hahahaha. That is just ridiculous. So many of the details are exactly the same. The one who copied the designs, didn't even try to cover his tracks.
Maybe should've chosen different colors in more places at the least?
"Nah, no one will notice anyway" :D

Righthandedtwin
26-01-2012, 10:00
I support the pro-copyright infringement side, if it's clearly identifiable as being a GW product then it's clearly ripped off, you could show anyone a necrosphinx, then show them that image and they'd say right away that the image was stolen from GW.

malisteen
27-01-2012, 15:39
I could care less about GW's intellectual property, but...

The lack of artistic integrity on the part of the social empires 'designers' is staggering. Especially the tomb guard lookalike, the sphinx is different enough for my book. But the tomb guard? It's an exact copy, just chibified. What, they couldn't bother to change up the colors, or the design of the shield, or anything? No, that's BS. There's taking inspiration from, and there's drawing from the same sources, but this is neither. It's just outright copying. I hope they do get sued.

StygianBeach
27-01-2012, 19:31
I could care less about GW's intellectual property, but...

The lack of artistic integrity on the part of the social empires 'designers' is staggering. Especially the tomb guard lookalike, the sphinx is different enough for my book. But the tomb guard? It's an exact copy, just chibified. What, they couldn't bother to change up the colors, or the design of the shield, or anything? No, that's BS. There's taking inspiration from, and there's drawing from the same sources, but this is neither. It's just outright copying. I hope they do get sued.

Yeah, the other things are different enough, but the Tomb guard is really quite identical though. I hope they dont get sued though, just asked to change the shield or something.

loveless
27-01-2012, 19:34
Yeah, the other things are different enough, but the Tomb guard is really quite identical though. I hope they dont get sued though, just asked to change the shield or something.

I didn't think GW was in the business of "asking" so much as "threatening with lawsuits instantly" :p

While the Tomb Guard is just a chibi version, I also find the Sphinx to be too close for comfort - Sphinxes with scorpion tails aren't that common in my experience.

As an aside, has anyone directed any of this information to GW?

Quinzy
27-01-2012, 19:40
I'm sure that the Games Workshop legal team have been notified.

TheMav80
28-01-2012, 03:15
Huh? Because Lucas has not invented droids, it means people can steal the design of R2D2? If you can't pick that skeleton, compare it to the GW mini, and realize it's a carbon copy of the shield design, sword design, etc, just because GW didn't invent skeletons, well, d'uh, there's no helping you. Nobody's talking about legality or not here, but how plain it is they copied the design. But heh. I should be copying books, because current authors didn't invent books :rolleyes:

Actually Lucas has a trademark on the word "Droid". Motorola had to get permission to use it as a name for their phone. :/

Urgat
28-01-2012, 07:18
Actually Lucas has a trademark on the word "Droid". Motorola had to get permission to use it as a name for their phone. :/

Well I HAD to go and pick an exception :p ignore the word and only think of the designs :p

Dr.Zahnfleisch
28-01-2012, 14:53
It's obviously "inspired" by Khemri, no doubt.
If GW wants to do something about it remains to be seen. If they can do something about it...any law students in here?

Trasvi
16-04-2012, 09:13
Huh? Because Lucas has not invented droids, it means people can steal the design of R2D2?

Funny thing about that... Lucasfilm does actually own the trademark 'Droid'. Motorola, maker of the Droid series of Android phones, have to license the name off Lucasfilm. :)

As for the actual thread: I think the copying is blatant, but I'm not sure that it meets the legal criteria for copyright. Each image is a substantially original piece of artwork, even if its subject is a GW model. (but I am not a lawyer...)

edit: ninjad

Darnok
16-04-2012, 11:26
Unnecessary threadomancy...

Thread closed.


Darnok [=I=]
The WarSeer Inquisition