War Park New Release in December -- The Old Guard Grenadiers (1 Viewer)

[cantinetozzo]

I'm a great fan of both companies, collect many ranges by FL and started collecting WP recently. I can't really understand FL position and i think WP apologized only to avoid legal issues, even if i think on these could win . There' s no patent on poses, or on art. Every, EVERY , toy soldier reproduces a pose or a picture or a work of art! Sometimes the issue is so stratified you can't go to the origins...a work of art (for example a Osprey plate) reproduces a picture and then a toy soldier's, or more than one, brand reproduces the picture or plate. The Imperial Guard marched that way!It's in every book or work of art, doing it differently is wrong. I can't really believe this is an issue for FL, probably they planned to re-release Imperial Guard (with the same pose and at a more expensive price) or they know this release from WP will destroy Dutch Guard sales. I can't really believe this is happening, because is a precedent very dangerous for the hobby. Here we are not talking about a rip off of the Nassauers (an army not very often portrayed) , here we have the Imperial Guard, and Imperial Guard marched that way, with colors in that poses. The size of the soldiers is the same with FL, but i can't understand...just because they are the same size WP must differentiate and make soldiers of a different size, with different size guns or accoutrements? Sacrificing realism and consistence with othere releases because chose to portray one of the corps most portrayed in TS history? Really can't believe this.

 

[The Military Workshop]

I'm a great fan of both companies, collect many ranges by FL and started collecting WP recently. I can't really understand FL position and i think WP apologized only to avoid legal issues, even if i think on these could win . There' s no patent on poses, or on art. Every, EVERY , toy soldier reproduces a pose or a picture or a work of art! Sometimes the issue is so stratified you can't go to the origins...a work of art (for example a Osprey plate) reproduces a picture and then a toy soldier's, or more than one, brand reproduces the picture or plate. The Imperial Guard marched that way!It's in every book or work of art, doing it differently is wrong. I can't really believe this is an issue for FL, probably they planned to re-release Imperial Guard (with the same pose and at a more expensive price) or they know this release from WP will destroy Dutch Guard sales. I can't really believe this is happening, because is a precedent very dangerous for the hobby. Here we are not talking about a rip off of the Nassauers (an army not very often portrayed) , here we have the Imperial Guard, and Imperial Guard marched that way, with colors in that poses. The size of the soldiers is the same with FL, but i can't understand...just because they are the same size WP must differentiate and make soldiers of a different size, with different size guns or accoutrements? Sacrificing realism and consistence with othere releases because chose to portray one of the corps most portrayed in TS history? Really can't believe this.

Nice picture but clearly not used by either WP or FL when researching their figures.

For a start in picture they are not marching.

Look at the legs. WP and FL both have left foot forward. Ok that is a 50/50 chance. Below the knee the private soldiers of WP and FL are the same. Totally different to private in your picture who has a tall brown boot to the knee. Compare WP and FL and just below the knee are two lines which are in same position. Officers are the same below the knee.

Consider the hands. Drummers of WP and FL both no gloves. No gloves on privates in your picture but WP and FL privates both have white gloves. Is this parade ground style ?

None of the above points can be seen in KC, TG or TM Old Guard. Those brands don't have white trousers either. TG is close with a few figures with cream.

Hats. Flagbearer hat in your picture is different type to WP and FL Flagbearer. Look at front of the hat and no coloured braid going across on hats in your picture. FL uses three different colours and WP pretty much the same except they have two privates with two different colours. There are no such braids in your picture, not even on the officer. This braid does not appear on KC, TG or TM Old Guard figures either.

These are just a few points. However if WP had copied the figures in your picture would have already been a number of differences.

if you remoulded KC, TG and TM as they are now into all marching figures they are very different in style, height and many details compared to these WP and FL figures. Both WP and FL have clearly not got into firing range yet as no casualties shown.

Some here are confusing this issue as being about depicting the Old Guard in genera and affecting other producers making them. This is not the issue at all here.

Perhaps some one others can come up with other points I have missed as I am mainly going on the artwork picture.

 

[cantinetozzo]

Nice picture but clearly not used by either WP or FL when researching their figures.

For a start in picture they are not marching.

Look at the legs. WP and FL both have left foot forward. Ok that is a 50/50 chance. Below the knee the private soldiers of WP and FL are the same. Totally different to private in your picture who has a tall brown boot to the knee. Compare WP and FL and just below the knee are two lines which are in same position. Officers are the same below the knee.

Consider the hands. Drummers of WP and FL both no gloves. No gloves on privates in your picture but WP and FL privates both have white gloves. Is this parade ground style ?

None of the above points can be seen in KC, TG or TM Old Guard. Those brands don't have white trousers either. TG is close with a few figures with cream.

Hats. Flagbearer hat in your picture is different type to WP and FL Flagbearer. Look at front of the hat and no coloured braid going across on hats in your picture. FL uses three different colours and WP pretty much the same except they have two privates with two different colours. There are no such braids in your picture, not even on the officer. This braid does not appear on KC, TG or TM Old Guard figures either.

These are just a few points. However if WP had copied the figures in your picture would have already been a number of differences.

if you remoulded KC, TG and TM as they are now into all marching figures they are very different in style, height and many details compared to these WP and FL figures. Both WP and FL have clearly not got into firing range yet as no casualties shown.

Some here are confusing this issue as being about depicting the Old Guard in genera and affecting other producers making them. This is not the issue at all here.

Perhaps some one others can come up with other points I have missed as I am mainly going on the artwork picture.

Yes but the picture is only one of the many examples...

 

[FirstLegion]

I'm a great fan of both companies, collect many ranges by FL and started collecting WP recently. I can't really understand FL position and i think WP apologized only to avoid legal issues, even if i think on these could win . There' s no patent on poses, or on art. Every, EVERY , toy soldier reproduces a pose or a picture or a work of art! Sometimes the issue is so stratified you can't go to the origins...a work of art (for example a Osprey plate) reproduces a picture and then a toy soldier's, or more than one, brand reproduces the picture or plate. The Imperial Guard marched that way!It's in every book or work of art, doing it differently is wrong. I can't really believe this is an issue for FL, probably they planned to re-release Imperial Guard (with the same pose and at a more expensive price) or they know this release from WP will destroy Dutch Guard sales. I can't really believe this is happening, because is a precedent very dangerous for the hobby. Here we are not talking about a rip off of the Nassauers (an army not very often portrayed) , here we have the Imperial Guard, and Imperial Guard marched that way, with colors in that poses. The size of the soldiers is the same with FL, but i can't understand...just because they are the same size WP must differentiate and make soldiers of a different size, with different size guns or accoutrements? Sacrificing realism and consistence with othere releases because chose to portray one of the corps most portrayed in TS history? Really can't believe this.

Honestly, your post is just so incredibly misguided. Really, many of the posts in this thread are. You don't understand the issue because you don't want to understand the issue. And for the 100th time, patents are not applicable here, copyright is applicable. There is an absolute difference between presenting a release of Old Guard marching, which of course is not subject to any copyright protection, and having a sculptor re-sculpt exactly in every detail an existing sculpt owned by a different company. The issue comes down to this - every sculptor has their own unique style. We pay our sculptors incredibly well because they're incredibly talented. It's one of the hallmarks of our figures that they are sculpted so well. Had WP simply given reference material such as paintings, drawings, etc to their sculptor, the result would have been different and wouldn't look EXACTLY LIKE OUR FIGURES. But that's not what was done here. What was done was the sculptor was most likely not given reference materials but rather given our actual figures to resculpt. The details are just too exact in every way for it not to be the case. So from all of the available reference material we created our version of our unique figures and we did so completely originally by doing the research and working with our sculptor to get it exactly how we wanted it. The resulting sculptures are owned by us and subject to copyright protections. Now all of that work we did to present our figures exactly as we did is essentially being stolen. That is the issue and it's absolutely mind-boggling to me that you and a few others don't see that (or just don't want to see it or just have no understanding of copyright protection). As a company that makes what is essentially "art", copyright protection is what prevents our company, that we worked so very hard to build and have done so in a totally original way, from essentially being stolen out from under us.

One thing I've noticed is that over email there has been an outpouring of support for our position and outrage over what WP has done here. However, on this forum, some people just don't want to see reality for whatever reason they have or simply fail to understand the issue no matter clearly it's explained. I bet it's these same people who have no issue buying illegal copies of other brands unpainted figure kits to save $15 or whatever from the known illegal resin kit re-casters. It's one of our biggest concerns we have about further expanding into unpainted figure kits - they're brazenly recast and sold illegally out of places like Ukraine and China behind hidden identities. It's a huge problem in the kit market. But think about this - if sales of unauthorized resin figure kits for example hurt the sales of the original makers, say Pegaso or Andrea or even First Legion, to the point where they stop making such products, then the people who make these illegal recasts have nothing further to copy and now there are no figure kits to buy. That's the danger. This is why copyright exists. No one would ever create anything original if it could just be stolen. It's one thing to emulate a style of another companies products, but you have to do it with original work. You can't just take someone else's work and sell it as your own.

 

[Mike97]

Very well stated...time for me to get back to my collecting and dio-play

 

[jazzeum]

I’m not really convinced by Matt’s arguments that there was a copyright infringement nor should we accept at face value his arguments because he is setting forth his company’s position on the matter. Doing so does not mean that he has established a case for infringement. He is solely arguing his case to the court of public opinion.

The FL figures may have been the inspiration for the sculpts but that doesn’t mean they were exact copies. There are differences and while some may think the differences insignificant, in a court of law, they may be significant; WP’s attorneys, as set forth in WP’s post, thought there were differences. Moreover, do we know that the only source material were the FL figures, or did WP also use source material (maybe the same source material that FL used when they sculpted their figures several years ago). Alleging that WP used the FL figures to make theirs is speculation and an unknowable unless we have more facts.

Copyright infringement is indeed actionable but in determining whether there was an infringement in this matter, the facts need to be established and they have not yet been conclusively established.

One thing we should not forget is that when you boil this dispute down to its essence is that it’s a dispute about market share between two like companies. WP are the new kids on the block, jostling the neighborhood.

 

[zblang]

The best evidence of infringement to me is that within 8 hours, war park pulled the line. If you’re in the right, have all that money invested, why do that?

 

[jazzeum]

The best evidence of infringement to me is that within 8 hours, war park pulled the line. If you’re in the right, have all that money invested, why do that?

From my perspective, as a PR move, that was a huge mistake. It showed a guilty conscience. I would have forced FL to send a cease and desist letter (and maybe they did, unbeknownst to us) and let them litigate the matter.

Incidentally, FL has no damages here; their line sold out years ago so they have suffered no losses.

 

[The Military Workshop]

I’m not really convinced by Matt’s arguments that there was a copyright infringement nor should we accept at face value his arguments because he is setting forth his company’s position on the matter. Doing so does not mean that he has established a case for infringement. He is solely arguing his case to the court of public opinion.

The FL figures may have been the inspiration for the sculpts but that doesn’t mean they were exact copies. There are differences and while some may think the differences insignificant, in a court of law, they may be significant; WP’s attorneys, as set forth in WP’s post, thought there were differences. Moreover, do we know that the only source material were the FL figures, or did WP also use source material (maybe the same source material that FL used when they sculpted their figures several years ago). Alleging that WP used the FL figures to make theirs is speculation and an unknowable unless we have more facts.

Copyright infringement is indeed actionable but in determining whether there was an infringement in this matter, the facts need to be established and they have not yet been conclusively established.

One thing we should not forget is that when you boil this dispute down to its essence is that it’s a dispute about market share between two like companies. WP are the new kids on the block, jostling the neighborhood.

Brad,
Actually no it is not about market share. It is about obvious copying. But hey your opinion is that it was a bad PR move but at least you note it indicated a guilty conscience. Yet you are still expressing your lawyerly opinion that there is no issue unless somehow proven in a court of law. Unfortunately in this case the court of public opinion is made up of a biased jury mainly concerned with cheap prices.

No doubt you remember the previous time this has arisen. It was 7 years ago in Dec 2012. (24 pages back in this thread in case anybody interested to look). In that case it involved Country Honour and WW2 German produced by FL. Note the name of the company. Last name of K&C and first name of Honour Bound. A mere co-incidence I am sure just plucked out of thin air.

Here are two posts you made in that thread (prior to the actual evidence being put up) :



Originally Posted by trooper
A pose cannot be copyrighted. This whole question seems to have been based on conjecture and seems rather weird to me. Trooper

Jazzeum
As a matter of law, that's not correct. A pose is a type of sculpture and sculptures are protected by copyright law. Copyright generally protects creative works and this is a creative work.


Re: Treefrog and Minutemen No Longer Carrying Country Honour
Originally Posted by trooper
Fair enough. Fifty years ago I made a figure standing firing. Can you now guarantee me compensation from every maker who has made a figure in that position since? If you can I will cut you in for 50% of the total. Of course you can't, BUT you could if someone took that figure of mine, put it in a mould and reproduced it as their own. You are correct in saying that a creative work is protected, but only the original work not the POSITION of that figure. If that were true then the model soldier industry would have only existed for less than a year. Trooper
How much are we talking? I'm always looking for some extra compensation

Jazzeum

Seriously, I do see your point as how many possible poses can there be. Thus, it must be the pose plus something that to the naked eye suggests copying. Not very lawyerly I know. Many years ago Justice Potter Stewart (of the United States Supreme Court), in an obscenity case, said something to the effect that he couldn't define it but he knew it when he saw it.


Brad

I might be wrong but you seem to be arguing in favour of FL in general in that case although the evidence had not been shown at that stage. Look at your comments in this thread and you are pretty much saying brands should copyright figures in multiple countries and case not proven despite a mistaken PR move admission of guilt.

 

[ExRanger]

Maybe we should ask how Warpark and Eagle Designs can produce fine figures and vehicles and keep them at an affordable price? I started collecting FL WW 2 at the start but when single figures hit 80 bucks and vehicles are 400 plus it’s time to rethink collecting. Gotta say I need to make this affordable and Warpark and Eagle do this. Sorry FL but your pricing collectors right out of the ballpark. Yes you have a great product but after attending many shows and speaking to collectors they just can’t justify spending that much money when there a companies making compatible products for a lot less. Plus affordable figures give the collector more opportunities to purchase more figures.

 

[Rutledge]

High prices harms the continuity of our hobby in the medium or long term.

I totally agree. Understand the need to make money but not price out the collectors who carry this wonderful hobby.

incredibly naive and silly comments. I suppose then that expensive watches, homes, cars, TVs, etc etc harm their respective industries? Of course not.

If a company produces a product that is too expensive for the perceived value, they won’t sell. Simple. And if they do sell successfully at a higher price point, that leaves room for competitors at lower price points. You know, that’s why there is Kia, Ford, BMW and Rolls Royce. Different value propositions meet varying client needs and wherewithal. It’s basic market stratification, Economics 101.

Low priced knockoffs are ubiquitous in almost every industry. There is Hellman’s Mayo, an organic primo version, and a store brand generic label. There is room for all. But each has their own niche. As do War Park and First Legion.

War Park and other low cost providers will be fine if they stay in their lane. If they don’t, they risk harming the high end makers who have the financial resources to be creative and innovative. That would harm the industry. The Chinese are infamous for such tactics in everything from pharmaceuticals to Apple phones to furniture to food.

And also, these are toy soldiers, not food and water. We can all live without, and surely will if the prices are out of whack.

I like a good deal as much as the next person. But you have to maintain a fair and orderly market structure or it all breaks down. That’s the teal threat.

 

[cantinetozzo]

I’m not really convinced by Matt’s arguments that there was a copyright infringement nor should we accept at face value his arguments because he is setting forth his company’s position on the matter. Doing so does not mean that he has established a case for infringement. He is solely arguing his case to the court of public opinion.

The FL figures may have been the inspiration for the sculpts but that doesn’t mean they were exact copies. There are differences and while some may think the differences insignificant, in a court of law, they may be significant; WP’s attorneys, as set forth in WP’s post, thought there were differences. Moreover, do we know that the only source material were the FL figures, or did WP also use source material (maybe the same source material that FL used when they sculpted their figures several years ago). Alleging that WP used the FL figures to make theirs is speculation and an unknowable unless we have more facts.

Copyright infringement is indeed actionable but in determining whether there was an infringement in this matter, the facts need to be established and they have not yet been conclusively established.

One thing we should not forget is that when you boil this dispute down to its essence is that it’s a dispute about market share between two like companies. WP are the new kids on the block, jostling the neighborhood.

Completely agree. I want to point also to some other figures, i'd say only "tyw" and "kp". But i believe it's only bullying. Starting a legal issue is not always convenient, even if apparently you are in the right. The cost of retiring what , 100,150 figures is more cheap than paying lawyers and so. I'm eager to see how will be the modified figures by WP...

 

[Desertkiwi]

incredibly naive and silly comments. I suppose then that expensive watches, homes, cars, TVs, etc etc harm their respective industries? Of course not.

If a company produces a product that is too expensive for the perceived value, they won’t sell. Simple. And if they do sell successfully at a higher price point, that leaves room for competitors at lower price points. You know, that’s why there is Kia, Ford, BMW and Rolls Royce. Different value propositions meet varying client needs and wherewithal. It’s basic market stratification, Economics 101.

Low priced knockoffs are ubiquitous in almost every industry. There is Hellman’s Mayo, an organic primo version, and a store brand generic label. There is room for all. But each has their own niche. As do War Park and First Legion.

War Park and other low cost providers will be fine if they stay in their lane. If they don’t, they risk harming the high end makers who have the financial resources to be creative and innovative. That would harm the industry. The Chinese are infamous for such tactics in everything from pharmaceuticals to Apple phones to furniture to food.

And also, these are toy soldiers, not food and water. We can all live without, and surely will if the prices are out of whack.

I like a good deal as much as the next person. But you have to maintain a fair and orderly market structure or it all breaks down. That’s the teal threat.

Well said sir I couldn't agree more. WP's apology and quick withdrawal says it all. It's disappointing that they chose to try it on and hopefully have learnt from the experience and will move forward.

 

[joesgis]

From my perspective, as a PR move, that was a huge mistake. It showed a guilty conscience. I would have forced FL to send a cease and desist letter (and maybe they did, unbeknownst to us) and let them litigate the matter.

Incidentally, FL has no damages here; their line sold out years ago so they have suffered no losses.

Brad,

I think what FL is arguing is although there are no losses associated with this specific sold out line, there are potential losses on current and future products if buyers decide not to purchase FL and just wait for someone else's cheaper imitations to appear (much like folks do when it comes to original unpainted kit figures by Andrea, Pegaso, etc) which could decrease FL's market share even as they are the entity performing the research and development (assuming their work is being modeled from directly).

Joe

 

[cantinetozzo]

Imho the silly comments that betray great ignorance of legal matters are those who say "if WP was right didn't apologize". Sometime people don't want to start a legal issue, it's not always so neat the limit between black and white, specially in legal matters. It's some months that the clash between WP and FL is in the air, we know this. Evidently WP is attacking a market share of the FL products and FL can't elaborate a winning strategy because it settled the prices far too high. WP has found a good price to enter the market and another thing i find silly is "the price is high because of the research behind the products..."...c'mon guys! We are not talking of nuclear fission! The inspiration is all there! Pictures, books, art. I find it surreal to remark it. It's not that i'm underestimating the work behind a toy soldier, it's only that some brands are paranoid about "recasting" or tend to be "racist" towards new brands. In economics this is called "barriers to entry" on the market. FL fixed a price (the price someone is willing to pay is not always a price correct) and pretends that all the buyers will pay that price for every miniatures, or that every brand will produce at that cost to sell then at that price.

 

[jazzeum]

Brad,

I think what FL is arguing is although there are no losses associated with this specific sold out line, there are potential losses on current and future products if buyers decide not to purchase FL and just wait for someone else's cheaper imitations to appear (much like folks do when it comes to original unpainted kit figures by Andrea, Pegaso, etc) which could decrease FL's market share even as they are the entity performing the research and development (assuming their work is being modeled from directly).

Joe

Joe,

You can only receive monetary damages when there are actual damages. What you are arguing for are possible losses based on some possible action that WP may take. Those are by their nature speculative and cannot be compensated. Some specificity is required. That just won’t work. There are no losses and therefore no damages.

If FL is concerned that WP may repeat these conduct, they could, if they conducted business in a common law country (US and the UK) ask for equitable remedies, i.e., ask the court to take certain action not in the nature of monetary remedies. For example, a temporary restraining order or an injunction are equitable remedies. However, I don’t know if equitable remedies are a part of Chinese law.

 

[PhoebeFe]

To be honest, this is more than ‘alike’, WP’s new figures look exactly like FL’s Old Guards.

Clearly WP was trying to copy FL’s work, WP’s quick apology only makes it more obvious. I can’t believe there are many ridiculous comments saying FL is wrong about defending their work, isn’t it common sense?

You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. So true.

 

[fmethorst]

I'm a little late to this conversation.

How does copying even work? Are the originals 3D scanned and then new molds created? Are unscrupulous producers in China, who have access to the original molds, producing additional figures and selling them on the side? Considering just how similar the WP and FL figures are, it strikes me as improbable that the WP figures were sculpted from scratch.

I have very little insight into figure production cost but I suspect the sculpt is a tangible portion of the overall cost. If someone is able to bypass this step it would likely create a financial advantage. I've seen the same figure sculpts appear from numerous Russian studios. For instance, Aeroart figures that have also been released as Russian Vityaz. I don't know if there is licensing involved in regards to the sculpt or shady business practices.

The fact that cheap knock offs are still produced, despite the information being readily available on the internet, indicates there is a market for people who just don't have a holistic view of the impacts of their purchasing decisions.

 

[joesgis]

Joe,

You can only receive monetary damages when there are actual damages. What you are arguing for are possible losses based on some possible action that WP may take. Those are by their nature speculative and cannot be compensated. Some specificity is required. That just won’t work. There are no losses and therefore no damages.

If FL is concerned that WP may repeat these conduct, they could, if they conducted business in a common law country (US and the UK) ask for equitable remedies, i.e., ask the court to take certain action not in the nature of monetary remedies. For example, a temporary restraining order or an injunction are equitable remedies. However, I don’t know if equitable remedies are a part of Chinese law.

Brad,

Thank you for explaining the facets of law regarding speculative claims, specificity requirements as well as potential equitable remedies. It's very interesting to learn how such things are viewed from the perspective of the law.

Joe

 

[Rutledge]

I'm a little late to this conversation.

How does copying even work? Are the originals 3D scanned and then new molds created? Are unscrupulous producers in China, who have access to the original molds, producing additional figures and selling them on the side? Considering just how similar the WP and FL figures are, it strikes me as improbable that the WP figures were sculpted from scratch.

I have very little insight into figure production cost but I suspect the sculpt is a tangible portion of the overall cost. If someone is able to bypass this step it would likely create a financial advantage. I've seen the same figure sculpts appear from numerous Russian studios. For instance, Aeroart figures that have also been released as Russian Vityaz. I don't know if there is licensing involved in regards to the sculpt or shady business practices.

The fact that cheap knock offs are still produced, despite the information being readily available on the internet, indicates there is a market for people who just don't have a holistic view of the impacts of their purchasing decisions.

Absolutely 100% on target. FL would have no cause if the War Park figures weren’t blatant duplicates. Maybe WP outsourced the sculpting to a third party who, unbeknownst to them, copied the FL sculpts, perhaps even using an inside source. I don’t know but clearly a company that doesn’t defend its original work will quickly be out of business.

Some people just don’t care what goes on behind the scenes as long as it’s cheap to them. Thus why there are human sweat shops galore all over the third world. Also in the US why industrial farming operations treat their animals so inhumanely. Who cares as long as my wallet comes out ahead.