That's cool
Just had a quick browse on the site and was wondering if your no longer doing the tech marine conversion beamer. I couldn't find it. I'm sure it was you guys that made it.
That's cool
Just had a quick browse on the site and was wondering if your no longer doing the tech marine conversion beamer. I couldn't find it. I'm sure it was you guys that made it.
http://paintingplasticcrack.blogspot.co.uk
Thanks for the more detailed explanation. I'm a current 2L, so I am (I promise) more familiar with the Federal Rules than it might have appeared from the very sketchy explanation I provided in the earlier post. I haven't had a chance to read the JMOL motions yet, so apologies in advance if the question I'm about to ask is something that is covered more there.
Do you have any thoughts on if/how the jury verdict interacts with the judge's earlier decision on the copyright eligibility of the space marine shoulder pad itself? As I read the SJ order, the judge found that despite a copyright office ruling to the contrary, the shoulderpad itself is copyright eligible. The jury found that a number of Chapterhouse's shoulderpads infringed GW's copyrights, including Chapterhouse's versions of the generic shoulderpad. However, the jury also found that a number of the Chapterhouse shoulderpads were not infringing. That jury decision strikes me as definitely confusing and possibly inconsistent.
Thanks.
Then quit whinging and buy them?
Oh you wanted cheap stolen knock offs....
Out of curiosity could you explain why it made no sense?
Or is this just a case of they disagreed with you therefore "it made no sense"
If you cannot due to you pending appeal then that's fine.
Last edited by daboarder; 07-03-2013 at 05:41 PM.
Morbid Angels:http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?7100-Morbid-angel-WIP
I probably come across as a bit of an ***, don't worry I just cannot abide stupid.
There never will be anyway to determine lost or gained sales. I think this was a special case though. I can't remember a more polarising issue in recent gaming times.
It’s been good to hear from one of the involved parties directly as it provides a perspective that isn't normally available to the internet rabble like me
Thanks again for taking the time to reply and all the best.
There was no other product out there like it either in artwork or in miniature form before we conceptualized ours. GW claimed our product infringed on their FW Astral Claws character, even though ours existed a good year before that mini ever saw the public eye. That they claimed it infringed the idea of a conversion beamer was their only motion to the jury.
When I say GWs idea, I mean the text or rules talking about a weapon that gets more powerful dependent on the range. I dont think there is any artwork of a GW conversion beamer that in any way resembles our version of the beamer.
So how the jury ruled that the Conversion Beamer and Harness kit infringed GWs text and rules about one puzzles me.
Morbid Angels:http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?7100-Morbid-angel-WIP
I probably come across as a bit of an ***, don't worry I just cannot abide stupid.
Less than six months, actually. Based on the various new product announcement, you released yours mid-to-late June, 2011. I ordered FWs figure that had one in mid-December of that year.
In terms of the infringement, while I was (obviously) not on the jury, I suspect that the rest of the harness had a lot to do with things. Especially the lifting claw, which seems to be remarkably similar to the ones that come with a number of the GW techmarines and servitors.