More on 3D Printing, the Law and GW

Wired Magazine has a good article updating the legal case of Games Workshop vs. Thomas Valenty.  Of course, the big bad company vs. the little guy is a scenario we have seen before with GW jealousy protecting its IP.  And GW ha every right to.  The question is when does Games Workshop step over the line and try and assert rights it doesn't have.

I have done a previous article on 3D printing and the law (and you can see all the articles I wrote on 3D printing here).

The relevant part is that Michael Weinberg, a senior staff attorney with Public Knowledge, a group that advocates for consumers’ digital rights, isn’t even sure Valenty infringed on Warhammer’s copyrighted designs, because Games Workshop is accusing him of creating miniatures in the style of the game, and you can’t copyright style.

The questions involved in Games Workshops case against Chapterhouse Studios also show GW potentially over-reaching in its interpretation of the law.  And while Chapterhouse certainly were sloppy and careless in their use of GW trademarks/copyrights, and may suffer because of it, GW also seems to like to assert more rights than are apparent in the law.  But then again, that is a legal tactic, always ask for the moon and let the judge/jury cut you back.

The 3D litigation is potentially a losing issue for GW because once 3D printers are ubiquitous and everyone is making their own models, GW will have to adjust its business model.  They may even decide to sell their kits' 3D files so you actually print out your models if you have a 3D printer.  As it is, players are getting tired of the ridiculous price increases and are looking for alternatives.  The hobby has to get cheaper, because the economy just doesn't justify GW's price increases and players are all getting tired and looking for alternatives.

So a lot of issues at play here.  

Loken.