The Games Workshop and Ghamak lawsuit is an unfair competition case filed in January 2025 before the Tribunale di Catania in Italy, in which Games Workshop accuses the Palermo-based 3D miniature designer Ghamak of unlawfully competing with the Warhammer franchise by producing more than 1,000 printable models designed to be compatible with GW’s game systems. The suit does not rely on copyright or trademark infringement. It asks an Italian court to rule that making “proxy” miniatures for someone else’s tabletop game is, in itself, an unlawful business practice under Article 2598 of the Italian Civil Code.1Patreon. Why Games Workshop Sued Ghamak
What Ghamak Sells
Ghamak is a Palermo company that designs and sells STL files, the digital blueprints hobbyists use to 3D-print resin miniatures at home. Its catalog covers sci-fi and fantasy lines: armored troopers, tanks, skeletal warriors, and similar figures marketed as “proxy” or “counts-as” alternatives to official Warhammer miniatures. Files are distributed through subscription on Patreon and Tribes, with individual pieces available on the marketplace MyMiniFactory.2Ghamak. Ghamak Official Website The lead sculptor and public face of the company is Francesco Pizzo.3ArtStation. Francesco Pizzo Profile
How the Dispute Reached Court
The conflict began in March 2023, when an Italian law firm acting for Games Workshop sent Ghamak a demand letter. It alleged copyright infringement and misuse of GW trademarks in product tags, and it required Ghamak to remove at least 400 models, delete all trademark-related tags, hand over sensitive business data including revenue and supplier information, and pay €2,500 in legal costs, all within seven days.1Patreon. Why Games Workshop Sued Ghamak
Ghamak removed the disputed tags and asked GW to identify which specific models were said to infringe. According to Ghamak, no list ever arrived. A second letter came around March 2024, repeating the demands, raising the requested legal cost payment to €10,000, and broadening the scope to “hundreds, if not thousands” of models, still without itemization. GW also asked Ghamak to sign a contract that would have effectively barred it from creating new models and sought access to internal business records.4Patreon. Games Workshop vs Ghamak Statement Ghamak says it offered to remove or heavily modify more than 30% of its catalog and asked for a meeting; GW did not respond.5Spikey Bits. Games Workshop Sues Ghamak Over 3D Models
Before filing suit, GW tried to get Ghamak’s files pulled from the platforms carrying them. MyMiniFactory refused, saying GW had not supplied enough evidence to justify removal. There is no public confirmation that Patreon took anything down, and Ghamak’s Patreon page remained active with monthly releases through late 2025.4Patreon. Games Workshop vs Ghamak Statement When the platform route failed, GW filed in Catania in January 2025, naming over 1,000 models.6Patreon. Foundrise Update on Ghamak Case
The Unfair Competition Theory
The lawsuit is built on Article 2598 of the Italian Civil Code, which prohibits several forms of competitive misconduct. Its most cited branches cover “slavish imitation” of a competitor’s products where consumers may be confused about origin, the misuse of a competitor’s distinctive signs, and any conduct that violates principles of professional fairness.7OnTableTop Forums. GW Takes Ghamak to Court
According to Ghamak, GW’s core argument is that its miniatures use shapes, symbols, and design elements that lead consumers to associate them with Games Workshop, and that marketing models as compatible with Warhammer systems is itself an act of unfair competition.5Spikey Bits. Games Workshop Sues Ghamak Over 3D Models
Why Not Copyright
Industry observers have suggested GW chose unfair competition to sidestep the weaknesses of a copyright suit. A copyright case would force GW to identify which specific design elements it owns and prove Ghamak copied those elements. That kind of scrutiny risks a ruling that many GW motifs are too generic to protect, which is what happened in the earlier U.S. case against Chapterhouse Studios. An unfair competition claim shifts the focus to the overall impression of the product line and the alleged confusion it creates, rather than requiring element-by-element comparison.5Spikey Bits. Games Workshop Sues Ghamak Over 3D Models
What GW Has to Show
Under the slavish imitation branch of Article 2598, an Italian court generally requires the claimant to prove two things. Its product shapes must have a “distinctive character” that consumers recognize as coming from a specific source, and the accused products must be similar enough to create a genuine risk of confusion about origin.1Patreon. Why Games Workshop Sued Ghamak Italian case law has held that distinctiveness can be built from long market presence, advertising investment, and trade-show participation.8Jacobacci & Partners. Lessons in Unfair Competition and Misappropriation of Confidential Information
Italian courts have also stretched Article 2598 beyond strict confusion cases. The Court of Milan has applied the statute’s broader “professional fairness” clause to wide-ranging copying even where individual shapes would not, on their own, meet the distinctiveness threshold.9Unitesi – Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia. Article 2598 Slavish Imitation Analysis Whether the Catania court reads the statute narrowly or broadly may decide the outcome.
Ghamak’s Defense
Pizzo’s central argument is that both companies draw from the same pool of shared creative tropes: sci-fi androids, skeletal warriors, ancient Egyptian imagery, armored transports, and other motifs that predate Warhammer and belong to no single company.5Spikey Bits. Games Workshop Sues Ghamak Over 3D Models Ghamak also contends that GW has never demonstrated that its designs are distinctive enough to warrant protection or that actual consumer confusion exists.1Patreon. Why Games Workshop Sued Ghamak
As part of its public case, the company has published side-by-side comparisons of contested models, such as tank and skeleton figures, placed next to their real-world inspirations, arguing the features GW claims are distinctive actually derive from common sources.5Spikey Bits. Games Workshop Sues Ghamak Over 3D Models Procedurally, Ghamak points to GW’s refusal to identify specific infringing models, its unanswered offers of concessions, and what it calls the unreasonableness of demanding an entire catalog be withdrawn without particulars.4Patreon. Games Workshop vs Ghamak Statement
Funding the Defense
To pay for the litigation, Ghamak opened a GoFundMe campaign titled “Defend Creative Freedom Against Games Workshop Threats.” Pizzo has estimated total legal costs could exceed €100,000. The campaign set an initial goal of €50,000, and as of mid-2026 it had raised over €46,000 from more than 1,500 donors, earmarked for attorney fees, defensive briefs, court hearings, research, data collection, and digital forensics.10GoFundMe. Defend Creative Freedom Against Games Workshop Threats
Why the Case Matters
The ruling in Catania could set a meaningful precedent for the 3D-printed miniatures market across Europe. If GW wins, a court will have accepted that selling proxy miniatures compatible with a dominant game system is legally actionable on its own, a result that would put pressure on hundreds of small creators working in the same space.4Patreon. Games Workshop vs Ghamak Statement If Ghamak wins, the court will have affirmed that compatibility alone is not unfair competition and that shared genre tropes cannot be monopolized, widening the legal room for independent designers.5Spikey Bits. Games Workshop Sues Ghamak Over 3D Models
The case is also being watched because of its legal theory. A copyright case names specific works and specific alleged copying. An unfair competition case that asks a court to condemn an entire product line, and by extension the practice of building proxies for another company’s game, is a much larger claim, and one whose outcome would apply well beyond Ghamak’s own catalog.
Where the Case Stands
As of mid-2026, the Catania case is still pending. Games Workshop has not publicly commented on the specifics of its claims. Ghamak continues to sell files through MyMiniFactory and Patreon and has said it spent six months preparing its legal filings before the litigation moved forward.6Patreon. Foundrise Update on Ghamak Case
A separate GW enforcement action should not be confused with this one. In April 2025, Games Workshop filed a “Schedule A” trademark suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against roughly 280 online sellers of 3D-printed items bearing Warhammer trademarks, and secured a final judgment exceeding $10 million by August 2025.11Spikey Bits. Games Workshop Freezes Assets Amid World Wide Seller Takedown That case targeted sellers of items carrying GW marks, which is conventional trademark enforcement. The Ghamak case is different in kind: the models in question use Ghamak’s own designs, and the legal question is whether making them compatible with Warhammer is enough, by itself, to be unlawful.