[Archive] has anyone sculpted and cast a conversion kit?

Archive [Archive] Chaos Dwarf Discussion
21

snowblizz:

Or one could put a symbol there that is quite similar but has one extra line... which could be easily filed of if anyone would choose to do so ;)

Khunag
Ummm, yeah I don't think you'll be able to pull that off. Unfortunately that's something that likely ends up in court. And GW can afford that better than most people doing the "infringement".

Is it really worth it to test the limits?
22

Khunag:

I did put a " :wink: " there, didn’t i? :smiley:

23

snowblizz:

I did put a " ;) " there, didn't i? :D

Khunag
Oh yeah, but sometimes it is difficult to interpret them. :P
24

Firehammer:

Some folks at Warseer got the official permit by GW to do a small limited run of female Cadian Infantry (40k Imperial Guard). Evil Dwarfs are too generic to be copyrighted (they appear in the Nibelungen saga!), so non-big-hat heads in pig-iron-style conversion kits are no problem. Bighats would need a permit though.

Personally I can’t see a problem with selling/buying commissioned conversions, done extensively everywhere, but I am no lawyer.

25

jolpis:

how tha hell can games workshop own big hats!, why not go back to abraham lincon and make him show them who owns the hats!

26

GRNDL:

Its their connection and style to Chaos Dwarves. That is what makes a CD a CD under GW copyrights. If you give an evil dwarf a similar style of hat, you might have some issues. A different kind of hat would help though: a la Scibor’s Moscal dwarves.

27

slev:

Or you could just make generic 25mm scale ornate hats, with no model underneath them.

28

Thommy H:

Beards are the way to go, people. If someone made a Dwarf heads (mask, hat, whatever) with the distinctive Chaos Dwarf curly beard, I’d be on them like a shot.

29

Kera foehunter:

need better boots too

30

snowblizz:

Beards are the way to go, people. If someone made a Dwarf heads (mask, hat, whatever) with the distinctive Chaos Dwarf curly beard, I'd be on them like a shot.

Thommy H
Once again I feel I must agree with Thommy H. Maybe he is an alternate personality. Or maybe I am... boggles the mind!
31

two_heads_talking:

Bighats would need a permit though.

Personally I can't see a problem with selling/buying commissioned conversions, done extensively everywhere, but I am no lawyer.

Firehammer
if you are no Lawyer, and forgive my bluntness here, then what the hades do you know about needing a permit (wrong word, but I'll use your verbage..)?   Those bighats are clearly babylonian, and last I checked, GW doesn't have a patent on Babylonian imagery..
So, what would we want? Hats, Helms, or Masks?

dedwrekka
The simple answer to your multi-tiered question is....Yes!! and to not be too much of a wise ass, why should we choose? I'm sure there will be people that want all 3, or just some.. Trading what we don't need for what we do, is a nice thing too..
32

Thommy H:

Once again I feel I must agree with Thommy H. Maybe he is an alternate personality. Or maybe I am... boggles the mind!

snowblizz
It's you.
33

Khunag:

I’d like to point out, that a head with a hat and a beard is not a chaos dwarf. Just don’t mention dwarfs. Call it “fantasy Babylonian head” or something.

34

two_heads_talking:

Shoot, call it a big hat… the term big-hat is fan driven and quite frankly, everyone knows what it is too.

35

snowblizz:

Once again I feel I must agree with Thommy H. Maybe he is an alternate personality. Or maybe I am... boggles the mind!

snowblizz
It's you.


Thommy H
Eerie, I was going to say the same thing about you.:o

Either way it is not so much what GW owns or not, the question is can one defend the position that they do not in court?
You don't have to be a lawyer to figure out that something that closely resembles existing GW product, and even fits on existing kits would look very much like an infringement. A lot of sales channels will just shut you down, eg ebay, if there is any uncertainty, they are not gong to get involved.
Don't get me wrong I'd love something like that but I'd hate to see GW shut it down. Keep in mind the talk of IP GW's been spouting for the last few years. And also their crackdown on fake miniature casting.
I don't know if there are pictures of the Ultraforge Poo-deamon (as I call it) that was changed (not radically though) because GW claimed IP-likeness with the GUO. The comparison there was quite enlightening actually.
36

Thommy H:

Yeah, you’d have to be careful. The thing is, whether it would stand up in court or not is almost immaterial - it’ll never get that far. GW has deep enough pockets that they can bankrupt a small company just by taking it as far as legal action, should they choose. So really all they need to do is threaten. Everyone backs down, because fighting a big company is too expensive.

What I’d like to see is something like the things in this thread with curly Chaos Dwarf beards attached.

37

dedwrekka:

I’m pretty sure something like this, though a curly bearded dwarf with a big hat, would still be outside GW’s jurisdiction.



It’s all about how it’s approached and the overall look. Sure, Scibor’s Moscals may not look like your normal CD, but it has all the elements.

So, what would we want? Hats, Helms, or Masks?

dedwrekka
The simple answer to your multi-tiered question is…Yes!!   and to not be too much of a wise ass, why should we choose?  I’m sure there will be people that want all 3, or just some… Trading what we don’t need for what we do, is a nice thing too…


two_heads_talking
Just wondering, because producing one type with variety, but enough ingenuity to get away with it, would be something of a challenge, but producing three types with all the variants there-in is more-so.

38

Baggronor:

Yeah, you'd have to be careful. The thing is, whether it would stand up in court or not is almost immaterial - it'll never get that far. GW has deep enough pockets that they can bankrupt a small company just by taking it as far as legal action, should they choose. So really all they need to do is threaten. Everyone backs down, because fighting a big company is too expensive.
Yup, but you can do a lot of cheeky stuff and get away with it. Heresy for example, has lots of figures that are almost blatant.
39

Thommy H:

Heresy went a step over the line with the Blights, yeah - Andy sells the heads separately now so that, technically, he’s no longer flogging Plaguebearer rip-offs, just the parts to assemble something that looks very much like a Plaguebearer. Also, in his defence, the Blights are loads better than GW’s current blobby, fat Plaguebearers. If they’re not going to make decent figures with their IP, someone’s got to do it, right?

Amusingly, apparently the ghouls that Heresy sells (by Paul Muller, who used to sculpt for GW and is most well known for doing those 40K Chaos Cultists from a while ago) which were kind of an extrapolation of GW’s ghouls from the previous edition (and, again, much better than them) caused the direction of the current VC ghouls to be changed, because they were planning to do exactly the same kind of figures. So you can thank Heresy for those rubbish hunched-over Crypt Ghouls :slight_smile:

40

dedwrekka:

Heresy went a step over the line with the Blights, yeah - Andy sells the heads separately now so that, technically, he's no longer flogging Plaguebearer rip-offs, just the parts to assemble something that looks very much like a Plaguebearer. Also, in his defence, the Blights are loads better than GW's current blobby, fat Plaguebearers. If they're not going to make decent figures with their IP, someone's got to do it, right?

Thommy H
Actually the blights are very generic as zombies or ghouls go. I would point more towards his heroes section for IP issues from Firefly, Riddick, Fifth Element, Dr Who, ect.