Help support TMP


"GW being sued..." Topic


74 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Warhammer Message Board

Back to the Mordheim Message Board

Back to the 28mm Fantasy Message Board

Back to the 28mm Sci-Fi Message Board

Back to the Hobby Industry Message Board



3,878 hits since 7 Aug 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Pages: 1 2 

Dave Jackson Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 9:44 a.m. PST

Learned this today via Henry Hyde on Twitter:

link

Personal logo Pictors Studio Sponsoring Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 10:03 a.m. PST

I saw that earlier on r/Warhammer40K.

His arguments seem almost retarded in most cases. The one about the plastic figure cost/sales is particularly remarkable. Imagine what they would say about electronically distributed video games where the material cost is actually nothing or close to it and they try to sell them for $50 USD or more.

Winston Smith Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 10:06 a.m. PST

"Tortious Interference".
I learned a new word today. It's not as sexy as I thought it would be.
As for the price of a Grey Wolves Librarian… Well, that's why I play American Revolution. grin

One can be obnoxious without being illegal.

Personal logo Andrew Walters Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 10:08 a.m. PST

Those claims are a little tenuous. It takes very, very little to file a lawsuit like this. I guess we'll see where it goes.

Puddinhead Johnson07 Aug 2017 10:12 a.m. PST

Those claims are a little tenuous.

They're not just a little tenuous. They're ridiculous. It's just a bunch of legal terms mashed together.

Most if not all of the claims will be dismissed on a 12(b)(6) motion that GW's attorneys will almost certainly file.

dsfrank07 Aug 2017 10:18 a.m. PST

I suspect that the GW legal team will put a quick end to these accusations

YogiBearMinis Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 11:15 a.m. PST

These sorts of suits, by people who have no idea what they are doing, are sometimes harder to get rid of than you think because courts feel the need to bend over backwards so as to make sure they understand what the heck the lawsuits are saying before dismissing them. A well-written and argued lousy argument is easier to defeat than a poorly-phrased and organized mish-mash of legal and factual nonsense.

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 11:50 a.m. PST

This guy doesn't have to do business with GW, does he ?

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 12:07 p.m. PST

$62.5 USD million? I love it when people give such specific monetary figures on their outrageous demands.

Is that really how much they claim they lost because of GW's practices?

Dan

Personal logo Martian Root Canal Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 12:32 p.m. PST

This is the actual complaint:

PDF link

After reading it, in my opinion, much of it is 'speculative' on the part of the plaintiff. He does his case little good with the writing (e.g., 110% rip-off), but some of his claims have merit in light of FTC rules. You can read it and judge for yourself. Whenever I see these types of post, it's always best to go to the actual suit itself.

DisasterWargamer Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 12:45 p.m. PST

Then again sounds like he may have copied tactics from GW trying to protect their supposed unique Space Marine name. Along with all the other lawsuits over the years – it will be interesting to see how this turns out

link

link

While I totally abhor frivolous law suits – maybe GW has earned this one

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 1:12 p.m. PST

I suspect that the GW legal team will put a quick end to these accusations.

Yup, just like they handled the Chapterhouse Lawsuit, which really showed that they are better at being bullies than actually winning cases.

maybe GW has earned this one

You think?

They have a very longer history of playing the bully to FLGS's.

Psycho Rabbit Inactive Member07 Aug 2017 1:27 p.m. PST

GW's practices were a big reason I closed my doors. I still feel back-stabbed after all these years.

Rabbit

Oberlindes Sol LIC07 Aug 2017 2:44 p.m. PST

On style: Plaintiff in propria persona has an "LLM in law", but apparently has never done any serious legal writing.

No comment on substance: I'm not being paid for it!

JMcCarroll07 Aug 2017 2:58 p.m. PST

Well do to GW pricing we pay more for all miniatures!
How many companies now use GW business models?
Hoping they get hit for one or two of the smaller lawsuits.
No one likes a bully.

Personal logo Pictors Studio Sponsoring Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 3:19 p.m. PST

"How many companies now use GW business models?"

The ones that come to lead the industry and stay in business generally.

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 4:24 p.m. PST

Lol. So is GW going to get tons of money when the world's national space agencies start calling their troops on spacecraft "space marines"?

Dan

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 5:39 p.m. PST

but apparently has never done any serious legal writing

Neither has GW's from their Chapterhouse lawsuit.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 5:43 p.m. PST

"How many companies now use GW business models?"

The ones that come to lead the industry and stay in business generally.

Hmm, I only know of Battlefront and their Flames of War that uses the same Business model.

Don't like them either since Flames of War is not World War II gaming.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 6:02 p.m. PST

Here is a video on why they are being sued.

YouTube link

You need to read the comments.

GW has been playing the bully for years by stating certain things were theirs only.

Space Marine

They failed horribly when going up against Amazon and the author for.

They really have not had any original idea and have stolen most of what they claim is theirs.

Which is why after the Chapterhouse lawsuit they started to rename everything.

We will watch and see where this goes but GW was great with bully everyone but they have not been so great in the court room.

Oh and yes they are guilty of several of the things this individual is claiming.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 6:08 p.m. PST

This guy doesn't have to do business with GW, does he?

He does with he wants to sell GW Products and as a FLGS he just might.

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 6:18 p.m. PST

I also wonder how many FLGS really turn over $62.5 USD million.

YogiBearMinis Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 6:33 p.m. PST

There are at least two distinct issues here: (1) whether GW engages in some business practices which are illegal; and (2) whether this looney and his "manifesto" of a legal pleading will get anywhere. The answer to the first is perhaps "Maybe," but the answer to the second is almost assuredly, "No."

DesertScrb07 Aug 2017 6:57 p.m. PST

This petition is wrong on so many levels--legally, factually, grammatically ….

Oh, it's Florida Man. That explains it.

Lion in the Stars07 Aug 2017 7:08 p.m. PST

RICO is a big stick to beat a company with, the Feds love it. Especially since the RICO statute says 'three legal violations in the last 10 years' and anyone who has been through an OSHA inspection has at least that many. But it allows for triple damages.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 7:16 p.m. PST

The answer to the first is perhaps "Maybe," but the answer to the second is almost assuredly, "No."

No the answer to your first question is

Yes

&

The second is

Maybe

But either way this will need to be decided in a courtroom.

DesertScrb07 Aug 2017 7:16 p.m. PST

It's not RICO: link

Mitochondria07 Aug 2017 8:48 p.m. PST

A GW thread and Pictors is in here white knighting as usual.

May they lose and lose big.

YogiBearMinis Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2017 8:52 p.m. PST

Guys, before you start analogizing too closely to the results in the Chapterhouse case, be aware that Chapterhouse was able to get a huge corporate law firm, Winston & Strawn, to represent it pro bono--a firm as good or better than the firm representing GW. Our friend du jour has no such corporate allies helping him against GW, and unless a white knight appears, don't hold your breath waiting for his victory.

Crazyivanov07 Aug 2017 9:36 p.m. PST

Honestly, having had long and illuminating conversations with FLGS owners in my homeland (Midwest USA), this actually makes sense. I mean sure, the lawsuit is a bit mental, but honestly, this is a good thing! It's going to force GW to defend their IP and make changes.

Personally I hope they are forced to admit every time they lost a license and just re-released the same minis in a new line (Morcock and Runequest literally creating Warhammer Fantasy for one).

cherrypicker08 Aug 2017 1:28 a.m. PST

Can I say one thing, I am not surprised this has come from America, people seem to sue for anything, (my coffee was hot, I was not expecting that).

Jules

Personal logo Patrick R Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 2:09 a.m. PST

This whole thing sounds like a disillusioned fanboy who thinks he can take revenge on GW and is going to have his ass handed him on a platter.

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 6:09 a.m. PST

I suppose if they lost GW could just withdraw from the market place completely in the USA and supply everything by mail order from Canada. Or Mexico.

TheDesertBox Inactive Member08 Aug 2017 6:56 a.m. PST

Let's look at the facts of the strongest charge (i.e. most likely to succeed) in the suit: price-fixing.

GW is absolutely engaged in vertical price fixing. The current "15% off MSRP" policy is all the proof necessary. However, in State Oil Co vs. Khan, the Supreme Court basically said vertical price fixing is sorta-kinda-illegal. It all comes down to the judge and the respective legal teams proving whether the scheme affects competition in the industry or not. As previously stated, unless the plaintiff gets some better legal counsel, I do not think this is going far.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 7:11 a.m. PST

who thinks he can take revenge on GW and is going to have his ass handed him on a platter.

Really, GW legal team does not have a great track record.

Oh they were great at being Bullies but winning in the courtroom that is different.

So many individuals here who are jumping right to defending GW when they know that GW has been doing many of the things that this individual is claiming.

link

PDF link

How GW will have to defend their practices in court and if they are as successful as their Chapterhouse defense…

Well you need to go back and see just how they did if it.

link

Personal logo Pictors Studio Sponsoring Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 7:12 a.m. PST

"Hmm, I only know of Battlefront and their Flames of War that uses the same Business model."

That isn't surprising. It seems that you know frightfully little about the gaming industry.

"This whole thing sounds like a disillusioned fanboy who thinks he can take revenge on GW and is going to have his ass handed him on a platter."

Yes, that seems to happen a lot, especially online.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 1:13 p.m. PST

But this will happen in a courtroom and GW has not done well in that environment.

From the PDF link:

Each United States Trade Account must maintain a stockholding of the Products of no less than U.S. $500 USD in value

So GW is forcing small stores to keep on hand $500 USD of GW product. This means at all times so if they drop below $500 USD they will need to order more and with GW that means ordering more than what they actually need.

Now given GW prices it not all that hard to keep $500 USD of GW product on hand.

But this does mean that if you only want to have less than $500 USD GW will not do business with you.

This only benefits GW and not the small business owner, since they may be forced to have products taking up valuable inventory space that either do not sell well or they can't sell.

So given GW practices and how they ended up in that Chapterhouse lawsuit, GW could end up losing big with this.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 1:18 p.m. PST

That isn't surprising. It seems that you know frightfully little about the gaming industry.

Okay so which other gaming companies are changing up their rules every 2-4 years.

We are on the 8th Edition of 40K and in 2-3 years there will be a 9th Edition.

Within 2 years there will be 2nd Edition of Age of Sigmar.

GW makes a large chunk of it money by releasing new Editions – thus forcing their customers to spend around $150 USD – $200 USD every 3-4 years.

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 4:57 p.m. PST

Okay so which other gaming companies are changing up their rules every 2-4 years.

Seems like the car companies bring out a new model every year….

Ivan DBA08 Aug 2017 5:00 p.m. PST

If any of you knows a lawyer who could use a good laugh, email them a copy of the Complaint for their amusement. From a legal standpoint, it's a joke. Which is not to say that GW has always been a saint, but the law requires more than just showing that a company has been a jerk.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 5:20 p.m. PST

Seems like the car companies bring out a new model every year….

But you do not have to buy one until it is needed.

But for GW rules if you want to stay up to date and be able to play games with others you are forced to buy the latest Edition.

So with 8th that means.

Rulebook
Index
Codex

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 5:26 p.m. PST

but the law requires more than just showing that a company has been a jerk.

But this will end up as a Civil Action and not criminal court. Though GW has probably done many things that are illegal.

They just got away with them by being Bullies.

Oh and in Civil Court you actually have to prove that you did not do the things you are said to have done.

The Burdened will be on GW not the individual bringing the lawsuit.

I take it not many of you have ever been sued before.

Personal logo Frank Wang Sponsoring Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 6:03 p.m. PST

Honestly, i don't like GW. Warhammer is a very good game and it could be better, but see what GW has done since 2011, he ruined it.

Personal logo Pictors Studio Sponsoring Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 6:31 p.m. PST

"But for GW rules if you want to stay up to date and be able to play games with others you are forced to buy the latest Edition."

I play 3rd edition still and find others to play with.

"Oh and in Civil Court you actually have to prove that you did not do the things you are said to have done."

Wow, you know the law less well than you know gaming.

"The Burdened will be on GW not the individual bringing the lawsuit."

The burden is a balance, it isn't like criminal law where the defendant is assumed to be innocent and the prosecution has to prove its case. In civil suits it is based on preponderance of evidence.

So the "Burdened" will not be on GW. The "Burdened" will be on both sides to show their case has more merit than the other side.

Personal logo Pictors Studio Sponsoring Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 6:41 p.m. PST

"Okay so which other gaming companies are changing up their rules every 2-4 years."

Warmachine 1: 2003, 1.5: 2007, 2: 2010. 3: 2016

Bolt Action 1: 2012 2: 2016

Infinity 1:2005, 2: 2012, 3: 2014, 3.5: 2016

X-Wing: 1: 2012, 2: 2015

Looks like even Fantasy Flight is following the GW model.


"GW makes a large chunk of it money by releasing new Editions thus forcing their customers to spend around $150 USD USD $200 USD USD every 3-4 years."

I'm one of their customers. I don't spend that much on rules every 3-4 years. I haven't bought a space marine codex, for example, since 1998, although I might buy the new one.

You aren't forced to buy anything.

Only people who have been brain washed by GW like you feel forced to buy stuff.

DesertScrb08 Aug 2017 6:50 p.m. PST

The burden of proof will not be on Games Workshop (if by a longshot this case actually made it to trial). In civil suits the burden is on the plaintiff to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant did wrong. This plaintiff can't even string coherent sentences together, much less put forth a winning legal argument.

Lion in the Stars08 Aug 2017 8:16 p.m. PST

Can I say one thing, I am not surprised this has come from America, people seem to sue for anything, (my coffee was hot, I was not expecting that).

No, the damages were 3rd Degree Burns (as in, total loss of skin) to a grandmother's crotch because the styrofoam cup literally melted under the heat of 200degF coffee. Ok, a contributing factor was the lack of cupholders in the (IIRC, brand new) car, which lead to the injured grandmother holding the cup between her legs while she needed both hands to pull the top off the cup to add cream and sugar.

The temperature the coffee was served at was dangerously high AND the cup was inadequate to hold any liquid at that temperature. Also, that was at least the 5th case of emergency-room trips for burned skin from spilled McDonald's coffee *that year*.

Which is why that granny won a really big lawsuit.


Tortious Interference with Business is a pretty simple case to make, though. It can be done by something as simple as changing contract terms, though the usual method is to offer someone more money to do their thing at a different location when they already had a contract to do their thing at your place.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 8:33 p.m. PST

ecause the styrofoam cup literally melted under the heat of 200degF coffee

No she was stirring the coffee as she was driving.

Know the real story.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 8:33 p.m. PST

ecause the styrofoam cup literally melted under the heat of 200degF coffee

No she was stirring the coffee as she was driving.

Know the real story.

Personal logo Pictors Studio Sponsoring Member of TMP09 Aug 2017 11:22 a.m. PST

So the real story finally comes out:

link

Pages: 1 2