1809 replies to this topic

[DFM]

Dee Eight, on 13 June 2018 - 10:26 AM, said:

I always felt it looked more like a hybrid of an AV-98 Ingram and an AV-XO than a Valkyrie.

I'm still trying to figure out why the bug head was axed? Was it from something other than macross? Cuz i just trolled through s couple of macross sites and looked at 900 bajillion versions of like 10(more really, but after a while you go "this one's different cuz it's blue with gold stripes...") different big stompy's I still haven't seen it.

[Der Geisterbaer]

AzureRathalos, on 13 June 2018 - 08:15 AM, said:

Just throwing a quick refresher here for those who joined the party late:
Originally Battletech/Mechwarrior was owned under one company, FASA.
FASA went down.
Wizkids got the Battletech license.
Microsoft got the Mechwarrior license.
PGI sub-licenses Mechwarrior and makes MWO.
Topps bought out Wizkids, which included Battletech. They did nothing with it for years because Topps doesn't deal with tabletop minis.
Catalyst sub-licenses Battletech and revives the tabletop.
Harebrained, which contains some original members of FASA, through means that I'm not exactly sure of, gets the Battletech license for a video game.

Your dipiction is still a simplification and not quite correct in the details. Most importantly: The IP split and partial transfers of IPs occurred well before FASA Corporation ceased its publication operations in 2001.

[AzureRathalos]

Still a simplification? It is a simplification. I didn't want it to be paragraphs long.

[Der Geisterbaer]

AzureRathalos, on 13 June 2018 - 11:40 AM, said:

Still a simplification? It is a simplification. I didn't want it to be paragraphs long.

I was tempted write over-simplification there but seem to have not typed it. I consider details like Microsoft actually owning both the Battletech and MechWarrior IPs for computer games important, just like I consider it important that TOPPS didn't do "nothing" with the IP or that TOPPS itself by now actually is owned by a different company ... even when making a simplified list.

[Brain Cancer]

AzureRathalos, on 13 June 2018 - 08:15 AM, said:

Just throwing a quick refresher here for those who joined the party late:
Originally Battletech/Mechwarrior was owned under one company, FASA.
FASA went down.
Wizkids got the Battletech license.
Microsoft got the Mechwarrior license.
PGI sub-licenses Mechwarrior and makes MWO.
Topps bought out Wizkids, which included Battletech. They did nothing with it for years because Topps doesn't deal with tabletop minis.
Catalyst sub-licenses Battletech and revives the tabletop.
Harebrained, which contains some original members of FASA, through means that I'm not exactly sure of, gets the Battletech license for a video game.

Add to the end: Harebrained is bought out by Paradox, who now owns the Battletech videogame and it's studio at this point. Fortunately, HBS being dropped from the lawsuit meant the sale could go through with minimal entanglements.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Dee Eight, on 13 June 2018 - 10:26 AM, said:

I always felt it looked more like a hybrid of an AV-98 Ingram and an AV-XO than a Valkyrie.

I would agree, but we can still see that there is major differences between the two that shows the Incubus to be a new work of art rather then a derivative.

[PheonixStorm]

Der Geisterbaer, on 13 June 2018 - 07:46 AM, said:

It's more like that CGL operates under the rules laid out in the original deal struck between HG and FASA back in the day. Trying to actually go after them would be a waste of time and not so much a matter of fear of going against an entity like TOPPS.

The difference here is that FASA at the time had more money than Catalyst (and spent a large sum in FASA v Playmate) so they couldn't afford another lawsuit.

Catalyst OTOH probably couldn't afford this lawduit, or at the very least took what they thought was the cheapest way out (hoping PGI would drive a stake through the heart of HG) and in the end their strategy (if you can call it that) of defaulting right out the gate was seriously stupid. Now that PGI may actually come to a settlement with HG means Catalyst is screwed. They might not have to pay much in attorneys fees, but they will still be on the hook for a few hundred thousand in damages most likely. Though it is anyones guess which is worse. Court imposed damages and costs or what FASA might have payed out in its settlement with HG back in the 90s.

In any event, Catalyst has a very very low chance of having the default overturned. Even the hope PGI will save them in the settlement is laughable. HG is going to want money, and CGL is the last piggy bank on the table.

[Shadowomega1]

I don't think PGI would likely allow that, as it is very likely that the judge could just as easily rule in favor of dismiss with prejudice totally screwing HG over, as it would prove HG is only in it for the money not the IP. If it continues to court then their plans for a movie are totally shot (if it isn't already) and their likely to lose there as well.

[Horseman]

Shadowomega1, on 15 June 2018 - 10:05 PM, said:

I don't think PGI would likely allow that,

PGI is not in the business of defending CGL. They have no joint defense and no power of attorney there.
As such, they have NO legal right to negotiate for ANY concessions in CGL's favor in the first place.

Quote

as it is very likely that the judge could just as easily rule in favor of dismiss with prejudice totally screwing HG over, as it would prove HG is only in it for the money not the IP.

Not really, unless HG does something truly stupid he will most likely take their arguments on face value and the only question is what will he award to HG in the end.

Quote

If it continues to court then their plans for a movie are totally shot (if it isn't already) and their likely to lose there as well.

This lawsuit does not impact the movie's development in any way.
HG is not producing the movie, they licensed the rights to Sony Pictures.
If PGI took HG to trial and proved they had no right to the designs, it might impact the extent of the license that HG sold to Sony IF those were a part of it.

[Shadowomega1]

Horseman, on 16 June 2018 - 01:18 AM, said:

PGI is not in the business of defending CGL. They have no joint defense and no power of attorney there.
As such, they have NO legal right to negotiate for ANY concessions in CGL's favor in the first place.
Not really, unless HG does something truly stupid he will most likely take their arguments on face value and the only question is what will he award to HG in the end.

This lawsuit does not impact the movie's development in any way.
HG is not producing the movie, they licensed the rights to Sony Pictures.
If PGI took HG to trial and proved they had no right to the designs, it might impact the extent of the license that HG sold to Sony IF those were a part of it.

Yet CGL bought/licensed the designs in question from PGI. Most of the new Battletech artwork is being done by PGI not CGL.

The judge actually did threatened HG if their just mucking about it would be their arse, and so far they have done nothing but muck about nor provide any legitimate claim to the art in question, and has scene the ruling of their arbitration which states the artwork is owned by Big West/Studio Nue.

While HG isn't producing they will still be listed as Film Producer in the credits, furthermore Sony itself is in dire straits and another law suite will likely lay a killing blow to the company. So if they even feel that there could be one their not likely to go for it. Not to mention Sony the Parent company is base in Japan which will open them up for suite there from Big West if they do use any of the Big West characters; and you can't really have a Macross movie without those characters. (At least the original Macross which HG did get the license to distribute.) As for Robotech they could but HG will have to pay to make all new Designs which HG has proven their not willing to do as they haven't bothered with their own IP in how many years?

[jss78]

Shadowomega1, on 16 June 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

Yet CGL bought/licensed the designs in question from PGI. Most of the new Battletech artwork is being done by PGI not CGL.

Wait, what? Are you confusing HBS (creators of BattleTech the video game, which does use PGI 'mech models) with CGL (creators of BattleTech the board game? Or are you thinking of the latest redesigns of some "unseen" 'mechs for the board game (which are in cases aesthetically similar to PGI's, but still different designs and by different people).

[Shadowomega1]

If you look at the new artwork on CGLs products they use the new Atlas, Hunchback, Mad Cat MK II (Not the MW4 version), Griffon, Warhammer, etc their all the based on the Concept art done by PGI.

[Horseman]

Name products and page numbers.

[Pain G0D]

I wont take sides . I loved Robotech as a kid and I loved the fact that I saw robotech mechs in Mechwarrior games.

All i see is a missed opportunity for both company,s cooperate in some sort of venture and share the profits.

[Adridos]

Shadowomega1, on 16 June 2018 - 12:40 PM, said:

If you look at the new artwork on CGLs products they use the new Atlas, Hunchback, Mad Cat MK II (Not the MW4 version), Griffon, Warhammer, etc their all the based on the Concept art done by PGI.

They are visually similar, but they're still different and made by Shimmering Sword, as opposed to Flying Debris.
Plus, it goes both ways. MW:O Marauder or Rifleman were first drawn by Shimmering Sword and the MW:O versions were based largely on his designs with some adjustments.

[PheonixStorm]

Shadowomega1, on 16 June 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

Yet CGL bought/licensed the designs in question from PGI. Most of the new Battletech artwork is being done by PGI not CGL.

That would be HBS. The CGL art was done by CGL and has nothing to do with PGI.

Quote

While HG isn't producing they will still be listed as Film Producer in the credits, furthermore Sony itself is in dire straits and another law suite will likely lay a killing blow to the company. So if they even feel that there could be one their not likely to go for it. Not to mention Sony the Parent company is base in Japan which will open them up for suite there from Big West if they do use any of the Big West characters; and you can't really have a Macross movie without those characters. (At least the original Macross which HG did get the license to distribute.) As for Robotech they could but HG will have to pay to make all new Designs which HG has proven their not willing to do as they haven't bothered with their own IP in how many years?

It wouldn't take much for Sony to create new art for the Veritechs OR license the characters from BW/Studio Nue just like Warner Brothers did when they were looking into producing a Robotech movie. Your entire post just doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Shadowomega1]

Adridos, on 17 June 2018 - 03:10 AM, said:

They are visually similar, but they're still different and made by Shimmering Sword, as opposed to Flying Debris.
Plus, it goes both ways. MW:O Marauder or Rifleman were first drawn by Shimmering Sword and the MW:O versions were based largely on his designs with some adjustments.

Not talking about Shimmering Swords work, as I found his work on his Deviant page a long time ago. I am referring to is the concept art for the reimagine PGI Isographs . Then other artists like Shimmering Sword base their artwork from the new reimagined concept art.

PheonixStorm, on 17 June 2018 - 11:32 AM, said:

It wouldn't take much for Sony to create new art for the Veritechs OR license the characters from BW/Studio Nue just like Warner Brothers did when they were looking into producing a Robotech movie. Your entire post just doesn't make a lot of sense.

Sony making an HG product after licensing characters from BW/Studio Nue would end in likely lead to more confusion in who owns what; as HG would say see we own the product cause we made the movie. Trying to think from HGs screwed up prospective on how to wessel rights. As for new art or should say Designs I doubt they have talented enough people to create something that looks different enough from any other work out there without stepping on someone else's design. The only way to do that is step away from Humanod designs or designs that look like current/futuristic aircraft. (Look at some of the Ace combat futuristic Designs)

Edited by Shadowomega1, 17 June 2018 - 12:30 PM.

[Sereglach]

Shadowomega1, on 17 June 2018 - 12:29 PM, said:

*snip*

You can think whatever you want here, but the reality is that the CGL reimagined classics are copyrighted by CGL under the Battletech license from Topps just as the PGI reimagined classics are copyrighted by PGI under MechWarrior license from Microsoft.

In no way is PGI using any of CGL's artwork just as CGL isn't using any of PGI's artwork. The only artwork that's crossed companies is the mech artwork that HBS licensed from PGI and is using for their Battletech tactical game while PGI has licensed vehicle artwork from HBS that they're using for MW:5 Mercenaries.

Your opinions and whatever people think from visual observation is pointless. There's only one thing that matters, and that's the law. The law states that the two companies own distinct artwork that's copyrighted by their respective companies. That's why HG went after both companies, as separate plaintiffs in the lawsuit, and targeted each of them for two different sets of artwork.

Edited by Sereglach, 17 June 2018 - 01:49 PM.

[BadgerWI]

Well.. I guess this is good for PGI and MWO but bad for battletech in general.
https://youtu.be/YiWjKXroQf0

[Sereglach]

BadgerWI, on 19 June 2018 - 03:34 AM, said:

Well.. I guess this is good for PGI and MWO but bad for battletech in general.
https://youtu.be/YiWjKXroQf0

I thought this had new information, at first. Apparently they're just speculating on the potential settlements, as well.

Also, this guy seems to be assuming that HG is getting paid in these settlements. To me, it seems HG should be approaching the settlement table with their tail between their legs, because they've had their butts handed to them on the evidence side of things.

I'd rather wait for actual information instead of speculating on settlement terms and just assuming the worst of everything.