1809 replies to this topic

[Mawai]

naterist, on 23 July 2017 - 01:13 PM, said:

https://www.unitedst...242820/1-0.html

that link has more info in it i think. that opr i failed to read the first link completely.

It was interesting to read. Unfortunately the images in paragraph 22 showing PGI vs HG have sufficient similarities that a reasonable person might well conclude that they are derivative works.

- the antenna/foil on the rifleman along with the dual cannon representation on each arm
- the large shoulder cannon and chunky arm weapons and torso shape on the marauder IIC
- the two upward extensions from the back of the phoenix hawk, the arm shields and the specifically humanoid look
- the smooth front features and missile bay covers on the archer
- the warhammer has some similarities in arm structure but at least the torso shape looks a bit different

The problem with "iconic" mechs is that there is often a specific aspect of the look that makes them "iconic" and in some cases that aspect is what HG owns the copyright for ... it will be interesting to see how this develops.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Metus regem, on 24 July 2017 - 06:58 AM, said:

One a second front, due to a Japanese court ruling, HG never actually had their rights in the first place, as they got their rights from a company that had no right to sell the rights in the first place. That came to a head when HG went to war with Big West and Studio Nu over Macross and HG lost.

Which is, if I'm not mistaken, the ruling that led us to getting Unseen mechs in MWO. There was much joy.

[Karl Streiger]

Mawai, on 24 July 2017 - 07:01 AM, said:

It was interesting to read. Unfortunately the images in paragraph 22 showing PGI vs HG have sufficient similarities that a reasonable person might well conclude that they are derivative works.

- the antenna/foil on the rifleman along with the dual cannon representation on each arm
- the large shoulder cannon and chunky arm weapons and torso shape on the marauder IIC
- the two upward extensions from the back of the phoenix hawk, the arm shields and the specifically humanoid look
- the smooth front features and missile bay covers on the archer
- the warhammer has some similarities in arm structure but at least the torso shape looks a bit different

The problem with "iconic" mechs is that there is often a specific aspect of the look that makes them "iconic" and in some cases that aspect is what HG owns the copyright for ... it will be interesting to see how this develops.

they should sue GW

[SMDMadCow]

Big Tin Man, on 24 July 2017 - 06:43 AM, said:

M$ owns Mechwarrior and the rights associated with that. Not Battletech.

Look at the bottom of the page?

[Big Tin Man]

SMDMadCow, on 24 July 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:

Look at the bottom of the page?

Someone, somewhere wrote up the entire situation of the Battletech/MW license situation. In short, it's complicated. IIRC HGL/Topps has Battletech for physical items and games, M$ has Mechwarrior as a subset within Battletech for digital rights.

[Natred]

Tell them your concept artist got inspiration from their art but im no way does that affect the final product? Often times artists are fans of both robotech and battletech. Who knows...

Edited by Natred, 24 July 2017 - 07:30 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Quote

It was interesting to read. Unfortunately the images in paragraph 22 showing PGI vs HG have sufficient similarities that a reasonable person might well conclude that they are derivative works.

- the antenna/foil on the rifleman along with the dual cannon representation on each arm
- the large shoulder cannon and chunky arm weapons and torso shape on the marauder IIC
- the two upward extensions from the back of the phoenix hawk, the arm shields and the specifically humanoid look
- the smooth front features and missile bay covers on the archer
- the warhammer has some similarities in arm structure but at least the torso shape looks a bit different

The problem with "iconic" mechs is that there is often a specific aspect of the look that makes them "iconic" and in some cases that aspect is what HG owns the copyright for ... it will be interesting to see how this develops.

thast all is common by Mechdesign , it give many many mechdesigns with Rifleman Atennas and Double Barelled arms ...thats not more iconic as 4 Wheels by a Car..and the Phönixhawk design is the most common Mechdesign to found by gundam ,Patlabor,Front Mission ...is the japanese standard mecha design

Bossmech from front mission 2 ...look similar the bT Scorpion or the Macross quad mech


real Life Megabot marketing Poster -Look very similar to a warhammer





WH40k Titan looks a little similar like a Blood asp




Wanzer from front Mission







90 %from all Mechs and wanzers from Amored Core or Front mission seeing like twins from Gundam or patlabor and Automiles have all 4 Round wheels, A cockpit with same instruments, Lights all by the same Position ...thats Prolem by Technical dDesign ...one Coffeemachine looks like a other, one toaster looks similar other toasters

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 24 July 2017 - 08:14 AM.

[Athom83]

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 12:58 PM, said:

ok marauder and i dont recognize that mech.
atlas is nothing like that, where are the shoulderplates?? legs are boxy while on art they are sleek. dafuq is that...
and shadowhawk with archer... really??

Those are the ones leveled against Battletech the new turn based title. The ones against PGI are on page 10-12 of the document, and are directly relating the designs (Rifleman-Defender, Archer-Spartan, etc).

[Lyoto Machida]

Scout Derek, on 23 July 2017 - 12:56 PM, said:

yes, as well as back then dealings with PGI over copyrights for the Unseen mechs, some of which are now in-game after such a long time.





Here's a page from the document of them trying to claim copyright over generic features;




Like, I think HG just has a mental issue that their IP is failing whilst ours grows in interest for many years.

Lol...they didn't even bother to choose the right images for the infringing mechs.



Harmony Gold just seems to be phoning it in now. Doesn't seem like they have their head in the game anymore...they should just give it up already.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Karl Streiger, on 24 July 2017 - 07:04 AM, said:

they should sue GW

Why not, everyone else does.

GW gets around this by only making the BODY of that model. The arms are made by Forge World, a partner company which is technically a legally separate entity. Copyright shenanigans, basically.

[Athom83]

Lyoto Machida, on 24 July 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

Lol...they didn't even bother to choose the right images for the infringing mechs.

Athom83, on 24 July 2017 - 07:36 AM, said:

Those are the ones leveled against Battletech the new turn based title. The ones against PGI are on page 10-12 of the document, and are directly relating the designs (Rifleman-Defender, Archer-Spartan, etc).

[1453 R]

Karl Streiger, on 24 July 2017 - 07:04 AM, said:

they should sue GW

This, the Rifleman, and many other 'derivative' designs are based on the quad-barreled anti-aircraft artillery guns used in World War II. People see those guns and they think anti-air, on top of the design being (obviously) serviceable in the anti-aircraft role.

So what Harmony Gold should actually be doing is suing {Godwin's Law}. And/or possibly the entirety of World War II.

Or, more amusingly, World War II should sue Harmony Gold for infringing on its patents.

I would watch that legal case.

[Metus regem]

Big Tin Man, on 24 July 2017 - 07:22 AM, said:

Someone, somewhere wrote up the entire situation of the Battletech/MW license situation. In short, it's complicated. IIRC HGL/Topps has Battletech for physical items and games, M$ has Mechwarrior as a subset within Battletech for digital rights.

MS owns:

"Mech Warrior" and digital rights to anything to do with "Mech Warrior"

CGL/Topps owns:

"Battle Tech" and physical rights, not counting minautures, to all things pertaining to that.


Iron Wind Metals owns:

The rights to produce miniatures to be used with "Battle Tech".


That is the dumbed down version of things anyways, there a lot of "if's, Ands or buts" in the long version.

[Lyoto Machida]

Athom83, on 24 July 2017 - 07:42 AM, said:

OK...so they still chose the wrong images for the HBS mechs, no?

[SMDMadCow]

Big Tin Man, on 24 July 2017 - 07:22 AM, said:

Someone, somewhere wrote up the entire situation of the Battletech/MW license situation. In short, it's complicated. IIRC HGL/Topps has Battletech for physical items and games, M$ has Mechwarrior as a subset within Battletech for digital rights.

Yes, but we're playing a MechWarrior game, so MS should have some skin in the game with them owning the licence.

[Athom83]

Lyoto Machida, on 24 July 2017 - 07:48 AM, said:

OK...so they still chose the wrong images for the HBS mechs, no?

Because they don't have those mechs in the game XD. They just want to level a claim period so they used any artwork they could find that looked "similar enough".

[Metus regem]

SMDMadCow, on 24 July 2017 - 07:52 AM, said:

Yes, but we're playing a MechWarrior game, so MS should have some skin in the game with them owning the licence.

They do, as PGI is leasing the rights from MS, I'm not sure that HG has banked on having to fight MS as well... Microsoft has rather deep pockets... And I'm sure that they are getting something from PGI for letting PGI use the IP....

[1453 R]

Recall that in the U.S., a company is often almost forced to pursue any potential copyright case it can if it wishes its copyright to stand. Our copyright laws are so phenomenally ****** up that McDonald's once sued a charity fundraiser event for calling itself "Mc***"...because the girl running it had a last name 'starting with 'Mc'. McDonald's replied with "of course we don't want to stand in the way of charity, but if we don't defend our copyright every time it's infringed, even on matters where we don't particularly care or are worried about the infringement, then that weakens our ability to deal with actual infringement."

Considering Harmony Gold exists solely and exclusively because of its illegitimate copyright on Macross (and the systematic brutalization of that franchise and its poor, abused fanbase), I'm honestly surprised we didn't see action on this issue sooner. Maybe they figure they can put the squeeze on Harebrained, which doesn't have Microsoft's active support since they're not technically "MechWarrior", more than they can PGI on the MechWarrior issue.

Not that I feel any damned sympathy for those jokers at all. McDonald's still (rightly) took it in the rump for trying to step on charity, and I'm completely and totally ready for the Star League of Piranha, Harebrained, Microsoft, and everyone else to finally stamp Harmony Gold into dust. Trial of F***ing Refusal time. We bid every lawyer and every dollar at our disposal against your corrupt, pernicious and poisonous regime, HG. Declare your forces and prepare to finally lose that copyright you've never had a right to in the first place.

Edited by 1453 R, 24 July 2017 - 09:03 AM.

[MechaBattler]

Given that HG screwed up PGI/Jordan's chances of making MW5 instead of MWO. It would be sweet revenge to make their hold on the rights all the more shaky by really seeing this through.

[Creovex]

In before lock....

This is old news...