62 replies to this topic

[AdamBaines]

I mean if PGI could swing that? They would get HUGE sales from a package that had a Wasp, Warhammer, Archer, and Marauder in it. i would buy one, and then the reinforcement package that would come after that with the Riffleman, Stinger, Crusader and Longbow.

Hell Ill pay now :-)

[JadeTimberwolf]

IraqiWalker, on 12 January 2015 - 10:50 PM, said:

Are you familiar with Games Workshop's Pauldrons lawsuit?

*snip*

Yes I am familiar with the lawsuit and how GW got no where near the outcome they wanted.

Also I know considering copyright law here in the US and from what I can tell in Canada too it doesn't exactly matter how closely those designs are to the original they are protected as independent works. Yet to answer your question about the first spoiler only the first one is truly close enough in design for HG to even lift an eyebrow at.

SpiralFace, on 13 January 2015 - 08:26 AM, said:

*snip*
HG can sue on the notion that they are derivative work of works from an IP that they hold the western rights to soley because those images in of themselves are derivitave of the images that came before.
*Snip*

Again the Derivative work is protected against a lawsuit from HG by US copyright law. Here is an excerpt from the link I posted earlier regarding US copyright law in regards to Derivatives.

Quote

To be copyrightable, a derivative work must incorporate some or all of a
preexisting “work” and add new original copyrightable authorship to that work.

Also it isn't that HG and Catalyst came to an understanding, Catalyst promised to re-release the UNSEENs and started to do so, HG sent a C&D then Catalyst complied and went back to using the RESEENs. then HG shut up. As for the original lawsuit between HG and FASA, it never went to judgement, after 2 documents were provided to court HG dropped suit and settled out of court with FASA.

[IraqiWalker]

JadeTimberwolf, on 13 January 2015 - 04:31 PM, said:

Yes I am familiar with the lawsuit and how GW got no where near the outcome they wanted.

Also I know considering copyright law here in the US and from what I can tell in Canada too it doesn't exactly matter how closely those designs are to the original they are protected as independent works. Yet to answer your question about the first spoiler only the first one is truly close enough in design for HG to even lift an eyebrow at.



Again the Derivative work is protected against a lawsuit from HG by US copyright law. Here is an excerpt from the link I posted earlier regarding US copyright law in regards to Derivatives.



Also it isn't that HG and Catalyst came to an understanding, Catalyst promised to re-release the UNSEENs and started to do so, HG sent a C&D then Catalyst complied and went back to using the RESEENs. then HG shut up. As for the original lawsuit between HG and FASA, it never went to judgement, after 2 documents were provided to court HG dropped suit and settled out of court with FASA.

I don't think you're getting the point we're trying to convey here:

Simply put. HG can and will sue for any products even remotely close to the ones they guard. It doesn't matter if they can't win. It never gets to that point, because no one has the millions needed to carry a case all the way through. HG can still make the claim that these are their copyrighted works, and regardless of how ludicrous or unfounded it is, PGI will have to go to court to prove that these models aren't indeed similar to HG's. That's all HG needs to do to win. You can't take them in court simply because it's a massive money sink for their opponents. It's an even riskier move for PGI.

The case would never get to the stage where a verdict would be delivered. PGI, much like several firms before it, will have to drop the lawsuit, and give up on that project, because it's too much money, for too little a reward.


EDIT: The reason I brought up the GW case wasn't the end result, but the methodology. The pauldrons were /somewhat/ similar, and GW still went to court. Same with HG, the mechs don't even have to be similar that much. They're still called by the same names, and they'll take you to court, where you have to argue that the mechs don't violate the laws, and you'd lose because you can't spend as much money combating them, as they can drowning you.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 13 January 2015 - 05:30 PM.

[WonderSparks]

Answering the question in the poll, yes I wish to see the remaining Reseen 'Mechs, however for the reasons that have been pretty thoroughly explained here I highly doubt PGI could ever bring them in.

_{Ah, if only HG could just disappear. The world would be so much happier in general, am I right? ;P}

[Tarogato]

Question: what's the difference between MWO selling digital property featuring an unseen design and NGNG selling physical shirts featuring an unseen design?

[JadeTimberwolf]

IraqiWalker, on 13 January 2015 - 05:28 PM, said:

I don't think you're getting the point we're trying to convey here:

Simply put. HG can and will sue for any products even remotely close to the ones they guard. It doesn't matter if they can't win. It never gets to that point, because no one has the millions needed to carry a case all the way through. HG can still make the claim that these are their copyrighted works, and regardless of how ludicrous or unfounded it is, PGI will have to go to court to prove that these models aren't indeed similar to HG's. That's all HG needs to do to win. You can't take them in court simply because it's a massive money sink for their opponents. It's an even riskier move for PGI.

The case would never get to the stage where a verdict would be delivered. PGI, much like several firms before it, will have to drop the lawsuit, and give up on that project, because it's too much money, for too little a reward.


EDIT: The reason I brought up the GW case wasn't the end result, but the methodology. The pauldrons were /somewhat/ similar, and GW still went to court. Same with HG, the mechs don't even have to be similar that much. They're still called by the same names, and they'll take you to court, where you have to argue that the mechs don't violate the laws, and you'd lose because you can't spend as much money combating them, as they can drowning you.

It isn't that I don't get the point, I see that the point is without legal standing which I have pointed out more than once and even provided evidence to. As to similar it doesn't matter if they are similar, according to copyright law HG has no grounds period.

Tarogato, on 13 January 2015 - 06:19 PM, said:

Question: what's the difference between MWO selling digital property featuring an unseen design and NGNG selling physical shirts featuring an unseen design?

Absolutely nothing is different about the two cases. However I am proposing not using the unseen, I am proposing the reseen which HG has no copyright to regardless of similarity.

Edited by JadeTimberwolf, 13 January 2015 - 06:27 PM.

[SpiralFace]

Oh they have plenty of grounds.

To get the copy write protection that you are highlighting, they need to prove the piece of work must be the byproduct of a totally original idea, Or failing that (which it would given the history of those mechs as being originally derived from their macross roots,) it needs to be proven that there is enough distinction and enough separation from the original work to not have it fall under derivative work and there for worthy of a copy-write protection.

This is an aspect that is not as clear cut as you are making it sound like it is. The very designs of those mechs where derived from the existence of another property. And even the original artwork for the Reseens themselves could be argued to have been influenced by the original properties just like the loadouts of the mechs where derived from the original properties art.

This might not be grounds to actually WIN as I agree there is enough distinctions that derivative work shouldn't be an issue.

But HG is MORE then willing to argue this point in court.

Its why they threw a cease and desist against Hasbro despite the fact that Jetfire was re-designed in its art for their promotional piece,

Its why they are threatening any importer company from bringing any other macross television series into the states (despite them only having the rights to the original series,)

And its why they are threatening PGI with the same.

They are IP trolls. They are leveraging their superior resources as a video importer and a high class real estate firm in one of the richest parts of LA to strong arm ANYONE from ever using the license property.

They have been struck down in japanese and american court for only having the rights to the original macross series. Doesn't stop them from threatening ANY importer from releasing any of the newer series in the west. Even if they have no legal right to do so.

If you deal with HG, you best be prepared for the same fight they bring to EVERY other entity that draws their Ire. Which is why it is ALWAYS going to be a cost prohibitive proposition in regards to bringing them out.

It doesn't matter if they are in the wrong. There is enough history and bagadge with those Unseen mechs that they have plenty of ground for them to claim they are derivative work off of their property to at least drag your ass to court about it. And they have an extensive history of doing just that.

Which is why it will never matter if PGI is in the right to use those mechs or not. Because it will always come back to the same legal fight that Big West and Tatsunoko have to face if they ever want a newer Macross series to come to the west. So if your going to use those mechs, you better believe that you are going to have to show up willing to fight for your ability to use them.

[VinJade]

I think the only way any MW game could get away with bringing back the unseens would have been M$ when they owned FASA as they would have buried HG or ran them into the ground as they would have been one of the few companies no one F'ed with and not lose more than they would have gained.

though because M$ no longer owns it we don't have any chance of seeing the unseens short of HG going under.

though I would love to see the old unseens stroll across the battlefield once again.

[IraqiWalker]

JadeTimberwolf, on 13 January 2015 - 06:25 PM, said:

It isn't that I don't get the point, I see that the point is without legal standing which I have pointed out more than once and even provided evidence to. As to similar it doesn't matter if they are similar, according to copyright law HG has no grounds period.

and we're saying we know that, and HG doesn't care. Since they'll still push for a suit, and cost people tons of money arguing an empty point.

[Mordric]

could PGI redesign the unseen or reinvent them? woud that be pointless?

[VinJade]

thats would be nice if they could.
the old War hammer I always thought they could use the clan hellbringer as a template and work from there as they look so much alike.

[Duke Hector]

JadeTimberwolf, on 13 January 2015 - 06:25 PM, said:

It isn't that I don't get the point, I see that the point is without legal standing which I have pointed out more than once and even provided evidence to. As to similar it doesn't matter if they are similar, according to copyright law HG has no grounds period.




Absolutely nothing is different about the two cases. However I am proposing not using the unseen, I am proposing the reseen which HG has no copyright to regardless of similarity.

ok so since you don't understand OR get it watch this video from 6:10 to 7:05 and stop asking for what your not going to get

http://youtu.be/OXM6MoiILPA?t=6m9s

this is them saying EXACTLY what i just said not even a few posts up

Edited by Dan the Ice Man, 14 January 2015 - 12:07 AM.

[SpiralFace]

VinJade, on 13 January 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

I think the only way any MW game could get away with bringing back the unseens would have been M$ when they owned FASA as they would have buried HG or ran them into the ground as they would have been one of the few companies no one F'ed with and not lose more than they would have gained.

though because M$ no longer owns it we don't have any chance of seeing the unseens short of HG going under.

though I would love to see the old unseens stroll across the battlefield once again.

Microsoft still owns the digital rights to the property. This game and PGI's license is a sublicense of Microsoft.

PGI is simply renting the rights that MS owns until 2020 when their license with them expires. (This number can always be negotiated into an extension with MS if they wanted to. Its already happened once.)

Read the fine print in the boot up screen and you will see. This game is actually built off of a sublicense from microsoft.

Microsoft could have fought this point years ago, but for a company like HG, the cost benefit is still very low when they are essentially threatening you to add hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees just to prove your point.

Unless you seriously think that those unseen mechs can justify not only the cost to develop them and earn a profit for the company to keep the lights on, but also pay for the legal fight across YEARS in court, possibly in multiple countries, your going to loose more in the court battle then you are selling the product itself.

And THAT is the real reason why the unseens are untouchable.

[SpiralFace]

Mordric, on 13 January 2015 - 09:04 PM, said:

could PGI redesign the unseen or reinvent them? woud that be pointless?

Nope.

As long as you name them Warhammer, Marauder, Crusader, etc. HG is going to wheel out in court that once upon a time, they did represent designs that derived from the Macross franchise that they are willing to argue they own. (Or at least have more legal right to them then anyone else.)

It doesn't matter how much different they look. The fact that those names once upon a time represented Macross designs will basically allow them to argue that they are "derivitave work" of the original macross properties. (As Marauders / warhamers, etc, wouldn't exist in the state they are today without the previous work that was used directly from the macross series.)

Again, you can probably make enough visual distinctions from them to move them away from derivative work. But its a point that would have to be taken up in court and the legal battle would be costly given that HG is known for defending stuff that doesn't belong to them tooth and nail.

The only way those mechs are going to end up in game is if there is NOTHING there to tie them to the original mechs that referenced the work.

That means the mechs cannot:

- Carry the same look
- Carry the same names (As it can be argued that the names are still tied to the original macross work,)

So your essentially left with a completely different mech with identical hard points, but no visual or named similarities.

Sadly, that's not what most people want or will ever accept.

[VinJade]

I could have sworn they sold the rights to smith & tinker after they made the MC games freeware.

but if that is the case then maybe M$ should help and beat HG into the ground, show them which bully is bigger.
think of what they could do with those mechs if they got their hands on them and allow others such as this company to use them.

In the end I think it would be worth it for M$ as they could do so much with them and then be able to allow other companies to use them in other things like the TT games through IWMs as they would sell like hotcakes and renting the rights would net M$ some more money.

Edited by VinJade, 14 January 2015 - 07:21 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

SpiralFace, on 14 January 2015 - 07:14 AM, said:

Again, you can probably make enough visual distinctions from them to move them away from derivative work.

Which is going to be a problem, because people want to pilot the ICONIC warhammer, not a different mech with a completely different look, named Warhammer. This would be like the reseen Marauder. PGI can probably implement it, but I can tell you right now that they would get almost diddly for that model. No one wants that model, they would want the spindly marauder, or some of the redesigns from the art I posted in Page 1, and that one gets very tricky, and dicey, more than the rest.

---

At the end of the day, what we're trying to say is that it costs too much to try and prove that you did nothing wrong in court, and so companies won't bother to touch them. Not unless HG either gets hit with a stroke of common sense, or the company proceeds to choke on it's own brain dead stupidity and die.

[VinJade]

@Walker
the only way that we would see those mechs again is if M$ got involved and crushed HG by burying them in debt or HG goes under.

[Mordric]

Ah,, I forgot Microsoft got there hands on Fasa, But Even with out the Unseen or Reseen I'm sure PGI could invent some new tech to Add in the game and story. I would hve thought Copy right expired also..

[IraqiWalker]

VinJade, on 14 January 2015 - 09:41 AM, said:

@Walker
the only way that we would see those mechs again is if M$ got involved and crushed HG by burying them in debt or HG goes under.

Hence the "choke on it's own brain dead stupidity and die." part.

[VinJade]

@ IraqiWalker
aye, and its a real shame M$ doesn't go after those images and knock HG down a few pegs(or force them to go under).