HAHAHA... guys, please check it out.
- Thread starter G I B B O N
- Start date
Beelzebrush
Active member
Definitely too many similarities to be ethical. Especially given that you sent them pics.
The major difference that I can see is that your sculpt is something I would definitely like to own and paint. The FW model is especially bland and uninspiring.
Much lesser IP infringements have surely been contested and won.
The major difference that I can see is that your sculpt is something I would definitely like to own and paint. The FW model is especially bland and uninspiring.
Much lesser IP infringements have surely been contested and won.
Drake Farstrider
New member
What do you think you are some kind of Jedi?
Avelorn
Sven Jonsson
Interesting.. so you did start this process several years ago then? those giants must have been released 5 years ago at least.
If that is the case, then I must say yours have a very similar design without being inspired by it. What conclusion do you draw by that? j/k I understand your frustration though from your perspective, especially how GW treated you when you tried to contact them. Well.. it\'s their loss really. I can\'t however see this sculpt profiting from your idea for obvious reasons.
But this debate about GW is in total lack of perspective. Yes they have business policies that are not sound, like much of the other large companies based around the network-economy. (change the system) And yes the designers of GW is inspired by other fantasy and sci-fi worlds and of the world around us! Like I\'m inspired by a great deal of other painters when I paint. I think he might have been inspired by your work, but then you can\'t really blame the company in this case.. (though it would be nice) and really I wouldn\'t hold any grudge against him either.
What you should ask yourself is how come your giant is so similar to the giants of Albion and for that matter the stonetrolls, the concept of nurgle and undead. I don\'t think it\'s anything wrong with that, but if you\'d start for example casting up and selling that mini you\'d be in my point of view closer to a copyright issue than they are in this case, but I of course have more sympathic feelings towards you due to my personal relation to GW and their business policy.
I mean, Ultraforges lord of pestilence (wonderful model) was also clearly inspired by GW, it could have been a nurgle deamonprince. I saw it instantly and understood right there and then that GW would take measures if they sold it. If for example one Hasslefree miniature would be inspired by a GW one, would you care, would I care? Put your thoughts in a perspective.
I think some here are always so hesistant to allways take the other partys side if there is a conflict with GW. The enemy of my enemy is my friend perhaps. But I always try to be just especially since I can recognize that it is an individual person that has sculpted that giant, I can shift perspective. It is not a evil company that has fused that Giant into living. But it is always nice to have something to loath.. kind of brings us all together!
well that is my 2.5cent for tonight. wait shhh.. what was that.. a can of worms?
No really try to realise in what manner I am writing this and I hope you won\'t be provoked. good night, gentlemen.
Shawn R. L.
New member
I have no stake in either side. IMHO there are SIMILARTIES. That dosent necessarily mean plagerism. Both sculpts are nice but the pose is pretty generic. Some of the features are also pretty generic for what they are. If your fellow was in a crocidile suit standing on one hand and the other had an aligator suit on standing on the other hand then I\'d say you had a case. There is a huge amount of this stuff being produced and the limitations of what is do able within those constraints is almost guarenteed to produce some similarities. I do greeting cards. Drawing Santa has some things that will almost always be the same. Christmas has things that will almost always be the same. Greeting cards can, artistically speaking, be really stripped down. You can have some tight perameters you work within. That will sometimes narrow the diversity somewhat. For the past 13 years I have to come up with Santa at a swimming pool (the company I do them for does targeted marketing to the pool industry). There are other artists doing the same. Within those parameters there WILL be some cross over. That dosent mean plagerism.
All that to say - You MAY have been plagerised. BUT similarity dosent necessarily guarentee it.
All that to say - You MAY have been plagerised. BUT similarity dosent necessarily guarentee it.
Godlikebuthumble
New member
Well, the giants do look similar. But being as it is, that your giant looks a heck of a lot better, whereas the FW one looks worse than its predecessor (imho), that\'s a rather moot point. The difference in look and style don\'t exactly warrant \"plagiarism\". It is, however, obvious that MB took quite a few pages out of your book.
What this teaches us, kids, is: Unless you\'re participating in a Golden Demon (and thus actually giving up your IP and paying the ticket to it to boot), you should never, ever give pics of your stuff for free to GW and their likes.
What actually bothers me is that those bellends would prolly try to sue the pants off you if you were to cast and sell it, for violating their IP on giants...
Well, live and learn...
What this teaches us, kids, is: Unless you\'re participating in a Golden Demon (and thus actually giving up your IP and paying the ticket to it to boot), you should never, ever give pics of your stuff for free to GW and their likes.
What actually bothers me is that those bellends would prolly try to sue the pants off you if you were to cast and sell it, for violating their IP on giants...
Well, live and learn...
I used a Forgeworld Tarantula turret to convert a Razorback once, posted pics of the paintjob on the web and took it to a Grand Tournament. About 2 years later FW makes new Tarantulas and markets them as Razorback conversion kits.
Did they rip my idea off? I dunno, it would be cool but it makes no difference in the end. They did a lot of work to produce the kits where I simply had a cool idea and showed it off everywhere.
While we\'re on the subject of ripped off ideas I could bring up the fact that I had the idea for anti-skip for portable CD players long before it appeared on the market, but none of the adults I talked to took me seriously. Honestly, that someone would consider rubber shock absorbers to be sufficient anti-skip surprised me even at age 6
<edit>
Here\'s a copy of a message I posted on Warseer at the same time as this post. Thought it only fair to post it in both places.
\"I don\'t think you can copyright striding gait bipedalism, nor can you copyright a giant with his mouth open. The pose is similar, but the idea of pudgy giants with bigass clubs is nothing new. The Albion giants were done in this style a long time ago. The date given by Gibbon puts his Giant out at least 3 years after the Giants of Albion were released (1999 is the earliest date I\'ve seen for them, which sounds right to this 5th edition DoW collector). I bet the Albion concepts for those were done a good while in advance, as well. For someone who \"hate those who steals concepts\" he sure does lean heavily on these old figures by Trish Morrison.
The first major difference: the face itself. I\'ve heard a lot of people talk about how similar they are... are you kidding me? The one(s) done by Gibbon is/are definitely Chaotic human style. As someone who has taken courses on primatology, I can\'t even consider the Bedford face to be hominid. It looks to be derived from pongids, to be precise. Pongids are a different family of species from hominids, and the family includes gorillas, orangutans, chimps and (ironically) gibbons
The detailing and style of the giant is totally different as well... one is classic GW concept for clothing and scrap armor. The Gibbon one is highly Nurglesque. The rotting areas look almost identical to the new and old GW Zombie Dragons actually.
The pose is the only thing I consider to be remotely similar, but again it\'s a bloody giant taking a step forward. Seriously. If that\'s all you\'ve got then stop wasting everybody\'s time with another GW-bashing rant.\"
Gibbon says he hadn\'t seen any Dogs of War stuff yet which I didn\'t pick up on the first time around, but still the idea had been around for at least 3 years before his model was done. It\'s not anything new.
I\'ll go to the grave insisting that the pose of the legs is similar, and that\'s about it. Both are great models for sure, but the controversy is IMO unwarranted.
</edit>
Did they rip my idea off? I dunno, it would be cool but it makes no difference in the end. They did a lot of work to produce the kits where I simply had a cool idea and showed it off everywhere.
While we\'re on the subject of ripped off ideas I could bring up the fact that I had the idea for anti-skip for portable CD players long before it appeared on the market, but none of the adults I talked to took me seriously. Honestly, that someone would consider rubber shock absorbers to be sufficient anti-skip surprised me even at age 6
<edit>
Here\'s a copy of a message I posted on Warseer at the same time as this post. Thought it only fair to post it in both places.
\"I don\'t think you can copyright striding gait bipedalism, nor can you copyright a giant with his mouth open. The pose is similar, but the idea of pudgy giants with bigass clubs is nothing new. The Albion giants were done in this style a long time ago. The date given by Gibbon puts his Giant out at least 3 years after the Giants of Albion were released (1999 is the earliest date I\'ve seen for them, which sounds right to this 5th edition DoW collector). I bet the Albion concepts for those were done a good while in advance, as well. For someone who \"hate those who steals concepts\" he sure does lean heavily on these old figures by Trish Morrison.
The first major difference: the face itself. I\'ve heard a lot of people talk about how similar they are... are you kidding me? The one(s) done by Gibbon is/are definitely Chaotic human style. As someone who has taken courses on primatology, I can\'t even consider the Bedford face to be hominid. It looks to be derived from pongids, to be precise. Pongids are a different family of species from hominids, and the family includes gorillas, orangutans, chimps and (ironically) gibbons
The detailing and style of the giant is totally different as well... one is classic GW concept for clothing and scrap armor. The Gibbon one is highly Nurglesque. The rotting areas look almost identical to the new and old GW Zombie Dragons actually.
The pose is the only thing I consider to be remotely similar, but again it\'s a bloody giant taking a step forward. Seriously. If that\'s all you\'ve got then stop wasting everybody\'s time with another GW-bashing rant.\"
Gibbon says he hadn\'t seen any Dogs of War stuff yet which I didn\'t pick up on the first time around, but still the idea had been around for at least 3 years before his model was done. It\'s not anything new.
I\'ll go to the grave insisting that the pose of the legs is similar, and that\'s about it. Both are great models for sure, but the controversy is IMO unwarranted.
</edit>
More of the same
I hate to point his out but you copied my last name....
Look at the similarities:
My Last Name -Your Username
Gibbon................G I B B O N
I don\'t recall sending you pictures, but I may have in the past... I am thinking of suing but I will wait to hear from my lawyer...
Also, Jericho I have been called a lot of things but Pongoid (?!?). PM me our address so I can stop by and kick your a**... :moon:
(BTW I am just lightening the whole thing up)
I hate to point his out but you copied my last name....
Look at the similarities:
My Last Name -Your Username
Gibbon................G I B B O N
I don\'t recall sending you pictures, but I may have in the past... I am thinking of suing but I will wait to hear from my lawyer...
Also, Jericho I have been called a lot of things but Pongoid (?!?). PM me our address so I can stop by and kick your a**... :moon:
(BTW I am just lightening the whole thing up)
Legacy Account
Active member
I can\'t believe people are unable to see the distinct likeness of the two sculpts.
The people pointing out that they are not alike are going into minutiae to prove their differences....
Cast it and sell it. The acid test will be if GW stop you!! (They would do too!)
The people pointing out that they are not alike are going into minutiae to prove their differences....
Cast it and sell it. The acid test will be if GW stop you!! (They would do too!)
well, i think you\'re not right in saying they plagiarised you. To be honest, although your giant is a lovely piece of work, it\'s pose is a generic walking pose, that wass done way borfore you did your giant(look at the older version of the FG giant for instance, their new one resembles that more than it does yours). The faces look nothing alike(apart from having their mouth open, like about 75% of all miniatures), and your giant is basically different in every single detail. I think you should jusy be proud that you made it, instead of getting worried about what generic, hardly detailed stuff FW come out with.
Infidel Castro
New member
It\'s the lines that are the same. The form of the FW piece is very similar to the G I B B O N job, and the stuff that happened before FW made their piece does throw a little suspicion on the affair.
And what\'s all this bollocks about nurglesque/undead? How the hell else is someone going to make something look rotting and deadish? GW never invented rotting flesh for feck\'s sake! The idea of pestilence and death is millennia old. Just because GW make wee little figures it doesn\'t mean they invented those concepts. Tits who say otherwise.
G I B B O N, can\'t blame you for being pissed off. They\'re too similar in form for any comparisons to be brushed aside. Stick to your guns mate.
And what\'s all this bollocks about nurglesque/undead? How the hell else is someone going to make something look rotting and deadish? GW never invented rotting flesh for feck\'s sake! The idea of pestilence and death is millennia old. Just because GW make wee little figures it doesn\'t mean they invented those concepts. Tits who say otherwise.
G I B B O N, can\'t blame you for being pissed off. They\'re too similar in form for any comparisons to be brushed aside. Stick to your guns mate.
Infidel Castro
New member
I\'m not on about specific stuff you daft bugger lol
I\'m on about the concept of rotting stuff :moon:
I\'m on about the concept of rotting stuff :moon:
Legacy Account
Active member
The BIG difference is that GIBBONs effort was a personal, non-profit sculpt.
GW are making wonga from theirs. They\'d stamp on it if the roles were reversed....
And I\'m dumbfounded that people can\'t spot the visual cues that have been knicked here...
GW are making wonga from theirs. They\'d stamp on it if the roles were reversed....
And I\'m dumbfounded that people can\'t spot the visual cues that have been knicked here...
Infidel Castro
New member
Have you got your bib on? You\'re dribbling ice-cream lol
Legacy Account
Active member
Is it brown ice cream??
lollollol
Look, everything is stolen from everyone, honestly. the whole war machine stuff looks severely familiar if you\'ve seen the early Jes goodwin dreadnought sketches, living saint against pythia, a whole host of reaper minis look like gw\'s, black tree design when they were still harlequin...nuff said.
Look, everything is stolen from everyone, honestly. the whole war machine stuff looks severely familiar if you\'ve seen the early Jes goodwin dreadnought sketches, living saint against pythia, a whole host of reaper minis look like gw\'s, black tree design when they were still harlequin...nuff said.
Legacy Account
Active member
That\'s irrelevant.....
