Midnight_Fox wrote:Metrosuplex, it's not bullying because that's how you determine if something is infringing or not, through court(to determine who actually owns the copyright, whether it is truly protectable, et al). Bullying in a legal sense would be something such as a company like Harmony Gold going after a company that doesn't have the funds to defend itself in court and thus MUST relent because they can't stand up to the monetary force being thrown at them. In this case, however, Hasbro is VERY capable of putting up a defense if they feel they are not in the wrong. As a metaphor, since we like the school yard imagery in this thread: This is like two jocks going at each other over a girl.
Most of these cases actually don't go to court because companies DON'T want to test the strength of their Copyrights and neither side wishes to take the time and funds to argue over legal points for several years just to sit in court for 2-4 weeks at some point 3 years in the future to hear a verdict, not because they don't have merit. In fact, most judges push for the settling because it's a waste of their time and tax payer money to do something the companies tend to do themselves on a daily basis. It mostly when neither side can agree on a mutual outcome that it goes to court.
Let me disagree a little here, Midnight_Fox. After all, you are claiming that it is IMPOSSIBLE to bully a big kid. Hasbro has the funds to defend itself, so it can't be bullying? No, I was talking about what's known as a nuisance suit - the kind of BS companies deal with and settle on.
While your explanation about copyright and the court systems is true in the college definition of such things, I still advocate that real world legalities play differently: if you don't KNOW you can win, then you are spending money on the roll of a dice - that's the court systems. If you disagree with this basic interpretation, you have no had the "pleasure" of being involved in a court case yourself. Because all the evidence in the world does not guarantee you a win (either as defense or prosecution). I'm saying that intelligent companies don't go to court based on this fact alone.
Of course, I completely agree with your points, too. Companies probably do NOT want to test the limits of their copyrights. I just don't think it's all that complicated, and I especially don't think court proceedings have much to do with "merit" or "evidence". At least not in regards to lawsuits. If a woman can sue McDonald's over hot coffee on her lap, and if she can win excessive punitive damages because McDonald's refuses to make the coffee cooler? Yeah, that's America and we have a problem. The first step is to admit the problem!
By the way, judges push for settlements to lighten their legal loads, as well. Don't forget that. They see hundreds of cases, so why not encourage parties to work it out amongst themselves? It's a waste of court time, as you said, if they can do so. But I guess your point is that these things go to court when both parties are so volatile as to be unable to sit through arbitration of any kind.
Two jocks vying for the same girl? Read my previous post: this is Harmony telling Hasbro not to touch its wife! Harmony owns Jetfire (physically, even if Hasbro/Takara changed the face/story). And I am not sure Harmony is a jock, if Hasbro is a jock...
GuyIncognito wrote: Metrosuplex wrote:
If I design my own jet with boosters, and it "sort of looks like" Robotech, am I in violation, too?
No, but if you clearly design it intentionally to resemble a Robotech design
, and you try to sell it commercially, you will probably get sued.
They're not suing because Hasbro made a jet with boosters; they're suing because Hasbro made a toy specifically designed to resemble one of their designs, without their permission.
How are you STILL not getting it?
Go back and read my wikipedia post. You're either lazy or decided to quit reading, mid-thread!
As things stand, historically speaking, Hasbro/Takara did not "design Jetfire to resemble" a Macross jet - JETFIRE IS MACROSS/ROBOTECH! It was originally a Macross toy, and Hasbro/Takara borrowed it for their TF line!
But seriously, are you the one that keeps saying stuff like, "How are you STILL not getting it?
Cause if you're going to insinuate I'm too stupid to understand your point of view (a big assumption, if you don't know me), then I'm going to counter and say, "Maybe I don't get it because you're being a douche?"