Commercial use of the term "Oldhammer"

[illuminatus]

Side step the issue using "Oldhammer Forum Approved" (the community). Then license the endorsement officially for a £1/$1/€1 donation to the site's upkeep for approved ranges/figures/merchandising (i.e. voted on positively as in the current thread). If the branding starts to carry any commercial value there is a much stronger case that the community 'owns' it and has exclusive use more than just one word "Oldhammer" - someone could even come up with a little logo that would be copyrighted by definition.

 

[Orlygg]

Side step the issue using "Oldhammer Forum Approved" (the community). Then license the endorsement officially for a £1/$1/€1 donation to the site's upkeep for approved ranges/figures/merchandising (i.e. voted on positively as in the current thread). If the branding starts to carry any commercial value there is a much stronger case that the community 'owns' it and has exclusive use more than just one word "Oldhammer" - someone could even come up with a little logo that would be copyrighted by definition.

A very sensible idea this, but is it right to suggest that the Oldhammer Community is represented by this forum only? There are other groups out there, some far larger in membership than here, who will not have a say in such a decision. Is it right to exclude others who do not post here?

The Oldhammer Community has exploded in size and has spread across a growing chunk of webspace. Many members of that community are ignorant that this forum even exists. It seems clear to me that a lot more networking needs to be done to help maintain the sense of community and include new members in discussions as Zhu did by linking this to the FB page, or taking the effort to use a translation program and post on one of the non-English language Oldhammer groups. The community does not begin and end here and believing so is very shortsighted.

As for the logo. Don't we have Zhu's already? He created the design. He should be entitled to copyright it, especially as he has a commercial interest in the brand already. As should anyone else who wants to do the same with a design of their own doing.

 

[Zhu Bajie]

As for the logo. Don't we have Zhu's already? He created the design.

I released it under a Creative Commons, non-commercial, share alike, so anyone can use it for whatever non-commercial purposes without asking me. I might have mentioned attribution at some point, but I'm not that bothered if it is attributed or not.

That aside, I think there are risks in attaching the "Oldhammer" label to a miniatures product - certainly one that parodies the trade dress of Citadel Miniatures (everyone gets that Oldhammer is a parody? ). I mean I like the idea of an "Oldhammer Approved" label, I like the concept, and I like the idea of small miniatures companies banding together to create an "Oldhammer" super-brand. But I think there could be dire consequences. To delve into my paranoid delusions / potential risks - GW could claim that customers mistook it for "Warhammer Approved" and that these figures were somehow given their blessing - there are all sorts of brand dilution and passing off issues that could be raised.

Is it right to exclude others who do not post here?

Nobody else has running costs, and AFAIK no other platform has voting capabilities, so in terms of decision making and donations as Illuminatus suggests, then there isn't really a viable alternative at this point. Membership here is free, doesn't invade your privacy and doesn't spam you with adverts for Russian Brides, so there's no reason anyone who has more than a casual interest in Oldhammering can't join up.

 

[axiom]

This is an interesting thread I've been keeping an eye on from its initiation. I still haven't voted as it seems to be an ever increasingly complex set of issues; commercialisation of a loose concept, IP & proportional representation.

I think the latter is a tricky issue, especially as the Oldhammer community is a loose amalgam of broadly aligned individuals using several different platforms. I would observe that ~30 votes and ~20 individuals responding in the thread seems a low proportion aware of or engaged in this discussion...

 

[Orlygg]

[/quote] Membership here is free, doesn't invade your privacy and doesn't spam you with adverts for Russian Brides, so there's no reason anyone who has more than a casual interest in Oldhammering can't join up. [/quote]

But they don't join up. Well, certainly not in the numbers they do elsewhere, especially when you consider that this forum is made up of, as you say, about 70 active members. And that is after all this time. The foreign language groups, especially the Spanish one, have slightly less than 70 active members after a much shorter time frame. This forum is not growing as fast as other areas of the community. In fact, many members that are new to oldhammer are not even aware that this forum even exists. How can any descision made here be applicable to the community as a whole if a large number of them don't read this board and are not interested in doing so?

It seems to me there are two communities.

1) Those who consider this forum to be the centre of the Oldhammer experience.
2) Those who consider FB or a group of followed blogs to be the centre of the Oldhammer experience.

For whom are the rules, regulations and edicts for? And how can they even be enforced?

 

[axiom]

Orlygg, I think there's also an option 3 for folks who pick & mix all 3 platforms; forums, FB & blogs. I see FB as an immediate but transient feed of what people are doing here & now. Blogs are repositories / showcases for individuals' hobby interests and the forums are a more static but offer a broader spectrum of content & opportunity for more in-depth discussion.

All 3 work for me differently; I tend to read blogs once a week, FB in small bite-sized chunks of 30 secs or so and the forums when I have the odd 15 mins spare. It is somewhat disingenuous to pitch people as forums v FB/blogs, I think, even if I do agree with the broader sentiment regarding validity of true representation.

 

[Orlygg]

Orlygg, I think there's also an option 3 for folks who pick & mix all 3 platforms; forums, FB & blogs. I see FB as an immediate but transient feed of what people are doing here & now. Blogs are repositories / showcases for individuals' hobby interests and the forums are a more static but offer a broader spectrum of content & opportunity for more in-depth discussion.

All 3 work for me differently; I tend to read blogs once a week, FB in small bite-sized chunks of 30 secs or so and the forums when I have the odd 15 mins spare. It is somewhat disingenuous to pitch people as forums v FB/blogs, I think, even if I do agree with the broader sentiment regarding validity of true representation.

You are quite correct on this point and I agree totally that there should be a third tier. However, it makes me think about the validity of judgements such as the poll above. Say, for example, I was a miniature manufacturer who wanted to do a line of old school style minis. I post on an oldhammer blog that is not well known or in one of the non english language groups about my interest in using the oldhammer brand. I am told that it is fine there as its a community that no-one owns and that the term, and the logo, are not trademarked and can be used freely. I go about producing the models and start selling them online and at shows. There has been no contact here on the forum, yet the community has been consulted. Would this consultation be therefore invalid as there was no poll here?

 

[axiom]

Gah! life was easier before the question was posed I think

I think the main difficulty is that a broad alignment of forums, groups, blogs or whatever can't operate in the same manner as a formal membership body who can make decisions on behalf of the community. Even when you have that kind of organisation, such as the NAF representing Blood Bowl (with over 6000 registered & paid-up members), there can be considerable disharmony; in the case of NAF, there are deep-seated polarised arguments about value received, perceived nepotism and a focus on tournament rather than league play. You then add representation into the mix; recent elections for the NAF president polled a tiny percentage of the membership; NAF barely registers on the largest and most widely recognised Blood Bowl forum (Talk Fantasy Football), and that's before we've even thought about non-English speaking forums.

I'm starting to think that strategic-type decisions, such as the question posed on the poll, are either going to be considered invalid (because of the difficulties of true representation/wide engagement), ignored, or simply unenforceable because of the very loose nature of the community.

As I said, life was easier before

 

[Zhu Bajie]

You're quite right Axiom. I'm perfectly sure that those that vote against the commercial use would continue to oppose it's commercial use, and ignore the majority that agree with it, it's not really enforceable in any real sense, but it can be pointed to as a sample.

About representation, it's a best-efforts thing, we can try to reach as many people as possible to get their opinions, so posting that there is a vote on Facebook or whatever is a move in that direction. No political system is perfect, but the alternative of petty dictatorships is, IMHO, the worse option.

the logo, are not trademarked and can be used freely.

That is 100% incorrect. One reason that relying on individuals opinions in making strategic decisions is risky.

 

[axiom]

I always thought we were more of an artists commune than a dictatorship. Perhaps that's what I'm supposed to think

 

[Asslessman]

Then maybe we just don't need to make that a brand. I mean, obviously if an "oldhammer group" tells one of its members it's ok, it only means this particular group agreed. Getting approval by the whole community is a completely impossible idea now the comunity is divided in many bits( though many of them are linked by 3rd parties as Axiom said who pick a bit of everything.

The only thing is to either let anyone use the term as they will or noone (don't think this is even possible). In the end if anyone wants to add "oldhammer" on its products, they can but if they put the name on soulless crap, well we'll know better than this. Let's keep on doing what we know best which is to talk about modelling, painting, gaming and all sorts of game related stuff.
If someone comes up with oldhammer mugs, I'll probably get one, if the same people come up with oldhammer computer aided plastic crap to use for tournaments, well, I'll just have a laugh and walk away...
Now miniatures makers really don't need to add "oldhammer" to their products for us to decide if we like them or not. It's up to everyone's taste so labelling them "oldhammer" or not is a) impossible to make with everyone's agreement as we saw previously, b) completely useless.
Mike' minis are "de facto" oldhammer friendly because he has involved the community in the process just like Fimm, Axiom, Diego Serrate, Clam, White Knight, Dave King and many others before, none of which have had to add "oldhammer" in the name to make us love their work so why not keep things this way?

 

[tp_1983]

Oh, I'm going to revive this thread as I have a question that links to it.

I also am starting up a small miniatures line, Bolt Thrower Miniatures, you may have seen some posts about it on here. I have no intention of officially linking the line with this forum or the Oldhammer movement in general: The movement means different things to different people and I have no interest in hijacking others work for commercial gain (not that I'm saying this is what Eastern Front was doing, they weren't).

But... I'm planning a promo vid to talk about the first miniature I'm releasing, and the project in general. Would people here have any objections to the following question:

'Q: Would you consider these miniatures 'Oldhammer.'
A: No, not really...'

And then go to explain that they are not 'Oldhammer Miniatures' as 'Oldhammer' is a term that not even the movement can properly explain, but people in the movement may like these miniatures are they share some of the ethos.

 

[Leromides]

I can't see how anyone could reasonably object to that.

 

[Orjetax]

Why wouldn't you consider your stuff oldhammer?

By the way, it's a tangent, but I just have to say I love all the 'private production/small batch production stuff thats cropping up.

 

[Mr Papafakis]

Quick everyone, lynch him!!!!!

 

[tp_1983]

Because I think the term is too loosely defined to say categorically 'this is Oldhammer.'

It's a movement shaped by hundreds of people and while some people might say 'yes, this is 100% Oldhammer,' for other people, they are not old minis, they are not GW and they will not be considered Oldhammer. There are some people here who feel very strongly about keeping Oldhammer very separate from any commercial entities and I respect that. It's a fan driven community and I'd like to see it stay that way.

Yes, I love all the small projects. In some ways it seems like a silver age for wargaming. Back in the golden age I like to think the rules writers and sculptors did stuff because they thought it was cool, not because it fitted into some larger marketing strategy, I think that's why the passion and sense of fun still shines through in the products all these years later. It seems now there is a similar thing happening, not through a central company but through dozens of smaller ones.

 

[mbh]

Oldhammer.co.uk

Has this been discussed?

 

[Zhu Bajie]

Because I think the term is too loosely defined to say categorically 'this is Oldhammer.'

It's a movement shaped by hundreds of people and while some people might say 'yes, this is 100% Oldhammer,' for other people, they are not old minis, they are not GW and they will not be considered Oldhammer. There are some people here who feel very strongly about keeping Oldhammer very separate from any commercial entities and I respect that. It's a fan driven community and I'd like to see it stay that way.

Yes, I love all the small projects. In some ways it seems like a silver age for wargaming. Back in the golden age I like to think the rules writers and sculptors did stuff because they thought it was cool, not because it fitted into some larger marketing strategy, I think that's why the passion and sense of fun still shines through in the products all these years later. It seems now there is a similar thing happening, not through a central company but through dozens of smaller ones.

That's a really nice sentiment. Just note that through the vote and the comments that the cats who expressed a preference don't really care about its commercial use at all.

I'm not sure asking the question "Would you consider these miniatures 'Oldhammer.'?" would mean much to the vast majority of your potential customers, it's not really got more than a few hundred people globally who would identify it as a term, and none of those really agree 100% what it is! I think "Old school" would have a wider resonance, and would give you an opportunity to talk about the specific influences on your range without getting bogged down.

Oldhammer.co.uk

Has this been discussed?

It was mentioned when looking for a new home for the BLOOD forum (which is when we oldhammer.org.uk) But otherwise, not much. Gavin Syme of Alternative Armies registered it a while ago, and it now points to the Alternative Armies site, but he doesn't promote the address as far as I can see. I suppose he could claim some kind of trademark over it as it is technically being used in business, but as the mark is not being established in peoples minds with his business (it's just a technical redirect, it's not building goodwill or awareness through the use of the mark) I'm not sure that would stand up to scrutiny. Not saying he would make such a claim at all, just looking at the theoretical, oh and I am not a lawyer, so there may be case law that proves me wrong on that.

 

[mbh]

I was a bit surprised when it went to alternate armies

 

[Zhu Bajie]

Yes, I was a bit surprised too. But as I say they're not publicising it, or using it a quick google shows they have nothing: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site% ... mmer.co.uk the redirect is in place to avoid that.

Does the Oldhammer.co.uk -> Alternative Armies bother you, or anyone else? Perhaps a Poll could guage the temperature.

We could look at offering to buying it off Gavin, I don't know if he'd be willing to sell it, and we'd have to agree on the value and raise the funds.