9 minutes ago, Arttemis said:

I absolutely love this idea. I'd really want this to be in some dark grey, semi-opaque acrylic with all the pertinent information of the stock cards etched and painted into the sheet, such as arcs, shield and attack dice values, ship name, cost, and squadron dice.

I'm assuming you're talking about the space in between the arc/hull lines, where the black star field is on the cardboard? If so, I personally would prefer a solid color rather than a semi-opaque (and of them all, black), as the semi-transparent stuff are a bit annoying.

1 minute ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

I'm assuming you're talking about the space in between the arc/hull lines, where the black star field is on the cardboard? If so, I personally would prefer a solid color rather than a semi-opaque (and of them all, black), as the semi-transparent stuff are a bit annoying.

I want shots and x-wing blowing around over a black star field.

PEWPEWPEW

1 minute ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

I'm assuming you're talking about the space in between the arc/hull lines, where the black star field is on the cardboard? If so, I personally would prefer a solid color rather than a semi-opaque (and of them all, black), as the semi-transparent stuff are a bit annoying.

Sure, I imagine if this becomes a thing, the color of the acrylic sheet could be chosen. I think opaque acrylic is more expensive, but I've seen some incredibly beautiful transparent acrylic with paint or high quality stickers on the bottom that look amazing through the material from the top. My X-Wing aftermarket tokens and templates are like that.

The best reason to want them semi-transparent would be to easily proof they are "official" imo.

My inner IP litigator is screaming.

Just be careful friends.

Just now, Eggzavier said:

My inner IP litigator is screaming.

Just be careful friends.

I have basically no knowledge of law that doesn't apply to privacy, computer crime, or security standards.

What would be the distinction between something like this and, say, the third-party rulers that are all over? Those are sized, marked... some of them even have silhouettes of the squadrons that go that speed on them. Or the bases and stands that can be had from other sources? Like, I can see how a project like this could open you up to litigation, of course, but... Why would it be any more vulnerable to such a suit than any of the numerous other products that are already out there and not already being actively sued?

I guess what I'm asking is, what do you think Darth S could do to avoid running into legal issues with something like this?

It occurs to me that if this should ever get off the ground and become something, it could also be applied to to create tokens for the ships at DA's and other custom card sites, to go along with Mel's models, so that we wouldn't have to create custom cardboard ones.

I just tought....would these be legit at tourneys? I mean, no one cares about command tokens and such, but these actually have vital game info on them (arc lines). Hmm....

18 minutes ago, Darth Lupine said:

I just tought....would these be legit at tourneys? I mean, no one cares about command tokens and such, but these actually have vital game info on them (arc lines). Hmm....

No, they would not, by the rules as written.

They are essential components.

The only things that get passed 3rd party are Range/Distance and some tokens.

but of course, the Leader of the tournament is the final arbiter in that matter.

13 hours ago, Eggzavier said:

My inner IP litigator is screaming.

Just be careful friends.

12 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

I have basically no knowledge of law that doesn't apply to privacy, computer crime, or security standards.

What would be the distinction between something like this and, say, the third-party rulers that are all over? Those are sized, marked... some of them even have silhouettes of the squadrons that go that speed on them. Or the bases and stands that can be had from other sources? Like, I can see how a project like this could open you up to litigation, of course, but... Why would it be any more vulnerable to such a suit than any of the numerous other products that are already out there and not already being actively sued?

I guess what I'm asking is, what do you think Darth S could do to avoid running into legal issues with something like this?

23 minutes ago, Darth Lupine said:

I just tought....would these be legit at tourneys? I mean, no one cares about command tokens and such, but these actually have vital game info on them (arc lines). Hmm....

What it all boils down to, and I think FFG has come to appreciate this with a good portion of their product, is that all 3rd party devices are NOT tournament legal. Simple fact is the Organized Play is how they make their numbers, and in order to play there you need licensed FFG materials. Anyone can fake their product in casual games, the Organized Play is what let's 3rd party vendors tinker around what would otherwise be VERY dangerous lines.

Strictly speaking these would be to preserve your official pieces by offering an accurate stand in for casual matches.

5 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

No, they would not, by the rules as written.

They are essential components.

The only things that get passed 3rd party are Range/Distance and some tokens.

but of course, the Leader of the tournament is the final arbiter in that matter.

Ninja'd me

Thanks for the responses....hmm. This puts a different spin on this. Will bear more consideration.

Also, for myself, before anyone else (re)mentions it:

7 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

It occurs to me that if this should ever get off the ground and become something, it could also be applied to to create tokens for the ships at DA's and other custom card sites, to go along with Mel's models, so that we wouldn't have to create custom cardboard ones.

****, time to buy some CW content from Mel and get some legit templates to play with.

18 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

I have basically no knowledge of law that doesn't apply to privacy, computer crime, or security standards.

What would be the distinction between something like this and, say, the third-party rulers that are all over? Those are sized, marked... some of them even have silhouettes of the squadrons that go that speed on them. Or the bases and stands that can be had from other sources? Like, I can see how a project like this could open you up to litigation, of course, but... Why would it be any more vulnerable to such a suit than any of the numerous other products that are already out there and not already being actively sued?

I guess what I'm asking is, what do you think Darth S could do to avoid running into legal issues with something like this?

Will respond to this after work.

Stay tuned.

So @Ardaedhel and @Darth Sanguis:

Firstly, this does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion.

So a general tenant of copyright law is the idea v. expression distinction.

Ideas are not copyrightable - the expression of those ideas are.

For example, the idea of space marines are not copyrightable. Plenty of content providers have made 'space marines' a thing.

GW's expression of space marines, on the other hand, are copyrighted.

The way that this relates to a range ruler versus a ship plate is this:

A range ruler is pretty dang close to the idea of "measure the distance here by x amount," so even if FFG decided to make a stink about 3rd parties creating different versions of range rulers it would be a close case in at least that regard (not even going to take a look at the fair use factors in this instance.)

On the other hand, a ship plate has many other features that are closer to expression than simply for an idea. Stuff like the arrangement, the angles, the information printed on it, the location, etc.

As for fair use, its highly unlikely that a use would be classified as 'fair use' if you're able to purchase the original item from the rights holder for substantially the same purpose, if you take more of the copyrighted work than is necessary (i.e. potentially all of it in this instance), if you're selling it, and you're not doing it for a transformative purpose (i.e. a purpose different than the original use of the copyrighted work - not sure how that would all shake out in this instance because the purpose is to preserve the game / stop damaging original pieces).

Anyways, I would say idea v. expression is the main reason why a range ruler might be okay but the ship plates are somewhat less clear cut.

Don't take this to be a bucket of cold water - I certainly didn't mean to dissuade you. Just be careful guyz.

Just now, Eggzavier said:

So @Ardaedhel and @Darth Sanguis:

Firstly, this does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion.

No, that's a Super Star Destroyer.

Just now, Ardaedhel said:

No, that's a Super Star Destroyer.

Ha derp.

Derpin hard from another forum XD

@Ardaedhel@Darth Sanguis

Updated.

If you have any specific qs, feel free to pm me.

12 minutes ago, Eggzavier said:

@Ardaedhel@Darth Sanguis

Updated.

If you have any specific qs, feel free to pm me.

Thanks man. Translating what you do/know professionally into lay terms is never easy, but that made sense to me.

What about taking an approach similar to the Vassal module: leave enough information off of the template that you'd still need the expansion (token/ship card) as reference to actually play? So you might leave off shield values, dice, AA, etc.--distill the information in the token down to only the bare arc, LoS dots, and a reference of what ship it's for.

That sounds like it would be significantly less likely to draw attention.

Good thinking!

2 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

No, that's a Super Star Destroyer.

Also:

3 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

What about taking an approach similar to the Vassal module: leave enough information off of the template that you'd still need the expansion (token/ship card) as reference to actually play? So you might leave off shield values, dice, AA, etc.--distill the information in the token down to only the bare arc, LoS dots, and a reference of what ship it's for.

What if you etched the possible dice/AA so that people buying the tokens could either leave them as-is or fill in with paint (with whatever ship version they wanted)? I.E. etch the 8 possible dice of the front arc of an ISD and people can paint in whatever ISD version they want that token to be. That might also be interesting for players that enjoy custom ships.

8 minutes ago, Ken-Obi said:

What if you etched the possible dice/AA so that people buying the tokens could either leave them as-is or fill in with paint (with whatever ship version they wanted)? I.E. etch the 8 possible dice of the front arc of an ISD and people can paint in whatever ISD version they want that token to be. That might also be interesting for players that enjoy custom ships.

That's an option. My thinking is, the less information you can put on the product, the better you can respect FFG's IP and the less likely you are to run into legal issues.

It's up to DS whether he thinks the risk is worth the functionality trade-off, of course.