Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

"The rights are complicated and Hasbro doesn't want a lawsuit" is fair and reasonable speculation. "Bandai owns the likenesses of the toys" is a false statement. Whether it's for business strategic reasons, conservative legal opinions, or something else, we will almost certainly never see a major GoBots toyline.

AcademyofDrX wrote:"The rights are complicated and Hasbro doesn't want a lawsuit" is fair and reasonable speculation. "Bandai owns the likenesses of the toys" is a false statement. Whether it's for business strategic reasons, conservative legal opinions, or something else, we will almost certainly never see a major GoBots toyline.

Well that much is true but what is also true that Hastak appear to tread incredibly carefully with any Gobot use that could be to near to the Bandai eye of Sauron.

I need to clarify: I meant to say "Bandai does not EXCLUSIVELY own the toy likeness." They do own the characters and likenesses under the Machine Robo brand, which does not limit Hasbro's rights under GoBots.

I'm inclined to believe Sorensen in that thread where he says it's less about legal exposure than building up a brand which Bandai could exploit, but either way, they're steering clear.

Grahf_ wrote:

o.supreme wrote:

TF-fan kev777 wrote:

Nemesis Primal wrote:

o.supreme wrote:With ER I believe when the Galactic Odyssey sets were announced we knew there would be 5 (and some if not most of the contents). I know some of the contents of the Golden Disk line have been leaked, but do we know exactly how many sets there will be?

Amazon and Pulse say there are 4 packs, and we had 4 listings (Terrorsaur, "Ranger/Puffer", Jackpot, & Tigatron) but this one was the only one to mention multiple figures in the listing, so if they are all multipacks then we only know at most half of each set's contents.

Actually, I think this reveal along with the packaging show us the other 3 may end up being single figures, or figures with extras. Look at the photo of the 4 packages making up the golden disc. This set is by far the largest box by area on the side they are using. I would expect the others to be single figures, but possibly with extras.

Unfortunately, looking at them altogether now I fear you may be correct. I've ordered many Selects, and the size of the deluxe box has been the same since the first 2 (Ricochet & red Swoop) in 2019. However with the Centurion Drone last year, and Tricranius this year, we see they can add a whole accessories pack, and still not change the size of the box. The box for deluxes could *technically* be smaller. I would not be surprised if we saw that change occur starting with any future Selects after WFC is done.

But the first box (bottom right) is definitely the biggest. The 2 on the left will be deluxes, and the one on top-right will be the Voyager. Oh well...so much for these all being multi-packs

Going by box sizes compared to each other, I'm guessing that numbers two and four might be voyager figures and number three is a deluxe + something else. One voyager would be Tigatron. The other would hopefully be Terrorsaur as some sort of extensive retool of Airazor like Ravage from Cheetor. The deluxe would be Jackpot. The addition with Jackpot could be Sights from Pteraxadon.

It just looks to me that boxes two and four are wider than half the width of box one (two deluxes) which could accommodate a voyager. Box three is wider than boxes two and four but obviously not as wide as box one which is why I think a deluxe with a Battle Master. They'd give the Battle Master display room within the box and not just be crammed into a smaller box as with the extras with Centurion Drone and Tricranius. Which would make the space needed larger than a voyager (boxes 2 and 4) but smaller than two deluxes (box 1).

Or it could also be that two and four are just deluxes, Jackpot and Terrorsaur, with three being Tigatron as O.Supreme said.

I'm pretty sure they will end up being some type of set. I just compared the GO Paradon Medics box to other selects and Kingdom boxes for deluxes, and the individual deluxe boxes are too small to be either of the other 3 sets. I can't see Terrorsaur being a voyager retool of a deluxe figure, that just doesn't make sense. Possible a new mold based on the same engineering like Tigratron compared to Cheetor, but I doubt they would actually share any parts as the scale would be off.

I was able to find a site with screenshots of the original Amazon AU Listings and that is where things get weird.

Terrorsaur and Ranger/Puffer were not listed with a price. Golden Voyager Tigratron was listed at $38.96AU while the set with Jackpot was listed at $58.09AU. For comparison, Kingdom deluxes are listed at $34.78AU. So Tigratron says he is a voyager but is barely priced higher than a deluxe? Meanwhile the Jackpot set is over twice a single deluxe.

AcademyofDrX wrote:"The rights are complicated and Hasbro doesn't want a lawsuit" is fair and reasonable speculation. "Bandai owns the likenesses of the toys" is a false statement. Whether it's for business strategic reasons, conservative legal opinions, or something else, we will almost certainly never see a major GoBots toyline.

Again, it's not that simple. Bandai does own the rights to the original Machine Robo toys, which were sold in the US, complete with their trademark stamps on those figures. Hasbro cannot recreate exact copies of those toys without expecting legal action from Bandai. I would also postulate that Hasbro didn't want to promote Bandai's brand in the Japan via selling similar products in the US (although that hasn't stopped them selling Jetfire toys).

primalxconvoy wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:If you're using "identical" narrowly to refer to counterfeiting, that's fundamentally different. But honestly, even the original designs could probably be remade, because the patents are expired, but I don't know why anyone would want to do that.

In context, though, I'm talking about reengineered Generations-style updates. There are no toy rights restrictions to something like that.

Like I've said, there's no clear answer for this. It's why Apple and Samsung have gone to court over reverse engineering, and many other similar lawsuits. I daresay Hasbro doesn't want to suffer any potentially legal or financial problems linked to it.

Not too long ago, Bandai released new neo-generations style Machine Robo toys, so there's definitely something to the 'can't make toys in the likeness of the Bandai figures' thing.

sol magnus wrote:

primalxconvoy wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:If you're using "identical" narrowly to refer to counterfeiting, that's fundamentally different. But honestly, even the original designs could probably be remade, because the patents are expired, but I don't know why anyone would want to do that.

In context, though, I'm talking about reengineered Generations-style updates. There are no toy rights restrictions to something like that.

Like I've said, there's no clear answer for this. It's why Apple and Samsung have gone to court over reverse engineering, and many other similar lawsuits. I daresay Hasbro doesn't want to suffer any potentially legal or financial problems linked to it.

Not too long ago, Bandai released new neo-generations style Machine Robo toys, so there's definitely something to the 'can't make toys in the likeness of the Bandai figures' thing.

No, there isn't. Just because Action Toys can make Machine Robo toys under license from Bandai doesn't mean that Hasbro can't make Go-Bots. There are two different sets of IP. If Hasbro's IP didn't include the likenesses, and Bandai's rights work the way people claim here, then the IDW comics series would have infringed on Bandai's rights, but that's not how any of this works.

AcademyofDrX wrote:

sol magnus wrote:

primalxconvoy wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:If you're using "identical" narrowly to refer to counterfeiting, that's fundamentally different. But honestly, even the original designs could probably be remade, because the patents are expired, but I don't know why anyone would want to do that.

In context, though, I'm talking about reengineered Generations-style updates. There are no toy rights restrictions to something like that.

Like I've said, there's no clear answer for this. It's why Apple and Samsung have gone to court over reverse engineering, and many other similar lawsuits. I daresay Hasbro doesn't want to suffer any potentially legal or financial problems linked to it.

Not too long ago, Bandai released new neo-generations style Machine Robo toys, so there's definitely something to the 'can't make toys in the likeness of the Bandai figures' thing.

No, there isn't. Just because Action Toys can make Machine Robo toys under license from Bandai doesn't mean that Hasbro can't make Go-Bots. There are two different sets of IP. If Hasbro's IP didn't include the likenesses, and Bandai's rights work the way people claim here, then the IDW comics series would have infringed on Bandai's rights, but that's not how any of this works.

You're saying 'that's not how any of this works,' but evidently it's not been working how you think it does. Clearly, when Hasbro uses the "Go-Bots" characters they change them into "Transformers" toys for a reason. Something is being sidestepped, and it appears to be reference to the original toy from here. Otherwise, why NOT make Leader-1 as we know him? Why NOT make Turbo? Why NOT make Scooter (okay, I can think of a few reason why to not make Scooter), etc.?

Now, it COULD be they just don't want to compete with their own brand, but honestly, Go-Bots was never any competition to begin with, so I reject that as a reason.

sol magnus wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:

sol magnus wrote:

primalxconvoy wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:If you're using "identical" narrowly to refer to counterfeiting, that's fundamentally different. But honestly, even the original designs could probably be remade, because the patents are expired, but I don't know why anyone would want to do that.

In context, though, I'm talking about reengineered Generations-style updates. There are no toy rights restrictions to something like that.

Like I've said, there's no clear answer for this. It's why Apple and Samsung have gone to court over reverse engineering, and many other similar lawsuits. I daresay Hasbro doesn't want to suffer any potentially legal or financial problems linked to it.

Not too long ago, Bandai released new neo-generations style Machine Robo toys, so there's definitely something to the 'can't make toys in the likeness of the Bandai figures' thing.

No, there isn't. Just because Action Toys can make Machine Robo toys under license from Bandai doesn't mean that Hasbro can't make Go-Bots. There are two different sets of IP. If Hasbro's IP didn't include the likenesses, and Bandai's rights work the way people claim here, then the IDW comics series would have infringed on Bandai's rights, but that's not how any of this works.

You're saying 'that's not how any of this works,' but evidently it's not been working how you think it does. Clearly, when Hasbro uses the "Go-Bots" characters they change them into "Transformers" toys for a reason. Something is being sidestepped, and it appears to be reference to the original toy from here. Otherwise, why NOT make Leader-1 as we know him? Why NOT make Turbo? Why NOT make Scooter (okay, I can think of a few reason why to not make Scooter), etc.?

Now, it COULD be they just don't want to compete with their own brand, but honestly, Go-Bots was never any competition to begin with, so I reject that as a reason.

It's most likely a business reason and not a legal reason. Here's a link to a forum discussion on this same topic shared earlier in the thread today by user Coptur:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200808175 ... try3159052

Here's a key comment from Jim Sorensen:
"At least, they wouldn't use anything too close to any of the actual GoBots characters that were based on a Bandai license, because again, they'd not want to boost Bandai's MachineRobo line. A Cy-Kill toy that looks like Cy-Kill is probably off the table forever (pending some fortuitous merger). On the other hand, a Cy-Kill with a different color scheme and silhouette would be entirely possible. See, in fact, the actual Cop-Tur and Bug Bite toys produced by Hasbro licensee Fun Publications. A non-toy Cy-Kill would STILL almost certainly need to be heavily redesigned, not because of a potential lawsuit, but because of the free advertising issue."

If Hasbro launches a Go-Bots subline with the original designs, which I contend is completely in their rights, Bandai could make their Machine Robo line complimentary or in competition. Hasbro has no inclination to build up a secondary IP that someone else could make toys of.

Why change the colors and designs? To keep the characters active independent of what Bandai has. Think of it this way: which is more valuable to Hasbro, a yellow beetle named Bug Bite with a funny head or a white mercenary with the same name?

And of course Sorensen was wrong about the non-toy visual representation, as IDW's Go-Bots did in fact feature a Cy-kill who was visually identical to the classic version.

AcademyofDrX wrote:

sol magnus wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:

sol magnus wrote:

primalxconvoy wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:If you're using "identical" narrowly to refer to counterfeiting, that's fundamentally different. But honestly, even the original designs could probably be remade, because the patents are expired, but I don't know why anyone would want to do that.

In context, though, I'm talking about reengineered Generations-style updates. There are no toy rights restrictions to something like that.

Like I've said, there's no clear answer for this. It's why Apple and Samsung have gone to court over reverse engineering, and many other similar lawsuits. I daresay Hasbro doesn't want to suffer any potentially legal or financial problems linked to it.

Not too long ago, Bandai released new neo-generations style Machine Robo toys, so there's definitely something to the 'can't make toys in the likeness of the Bandai figures' thing.

No, there isn't. Just because Action Toys can make Machine Robo toys under license from Bandai doesn't mean that Hasbro can't make Go-Bots. There are two different sets of IP. If Hasbro's IP didn't include the likenesses, and Bandai's rights work the way people claim here, then the IDW comics series would have infringed on Bandai's rights, but that's not how any of this works.

You're saying 'that's not how any of this works,' but evidently it's not been working how you think it does. Clearly, when Hasbro uses the "Go-Bots" characters they change them into "Transformers" toys for a reason. Something is being sidestepped, and it appears to be reference to the original toy from here. Otherwise, why NOT make Leader-1 as we know him? Why NOT make Turbo? Why NOT make Scooter (okay, I can think of a few reason why to not make Scooter), etc.?

Now, it COULD be they just don't want to compete with their own brand, but honestly, Go-Bots was never any competition to begin with, so I reject that as a reason.

It's most likely a business reason and not a legal reason. Here's a link to a forum discussion on this same topic shared earlier in the thread today by user Coptur:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200808175 ... try3159052

Here's a key comment from Jim Sorensen:
"At least, they wouldn't use anything too close to any of the actual GoBots characters that were based on a Bandai license, because again, they'd not want to boost Bandai's MachineRobo line. A Cy-Kill toy that looks like Cy-Kill is probably off the table forever (pending some fortuitous merger). On the other hand, a Cy-Kill with a different color scheme and silhouette would be entirely possible. See, in fact, the actual Cop-Tur and Bug Bite toys produced by Hasbro licensee Fun Publications. A non-toy Cy-Kill would STILL almost certainly need to be heavily redesigned, not because of a potential lawsuit, but because of the free advertising issue."

If Hasbro launches a Go-Bots subline with the original designs, which I contend is completely in their rights, Bandai could make their Machine Robo line complimentary or in competition. Hasbro has no inclination to build up a secondary IP that someone else could make toys of.

Why change the colors and designs? To keep the characters active independent of what Bandai has. Think of it this way: which is more valuable to Hasbro, a yellow beetle named Bug Bite with a funny head or a white mercenary with the same name?

Okay, so we're on the same page. I said there's something to it. I did use the word 'can't', which I should have said 'won't.'

AcademyofDrX wrote:And of course Sorensen was wrong about the non-toy visual representation, as IDW's Go-Bots did in fact feature a Cy-kill who was visually identical to the classic version.

In regards to the Go-Bots comic book, that's slightly different IP. The toys are the toys. The stylized images that represent the characters in print are just that - no different than the Diaclone/Transformers toy/character split except in that instance Hasbro/Takara share ownership of all it.

sol magnus wrote:In regards to the Go-Bots comic book, that's slightly different IP. The toys are the toys. The stylized images that represent the characters in print are just that - no different than the Diaclone/Transformers toy/character split except in that instance Hasbro/Takara share ownership of all it.

I think this is a meaningful distinction, but I also think it's basically backwards. The rights to the characters are more extensive than the rights to the toys. I went into this in some detail in the TFW post, but the short version is that you can't copyright a toy or its design. You can patent it, but those rights are more functional than decorative. More importantly, patents generally expire in twenty years. So yes, the rights are different, but "toy rights" don't really exist here. In terms of your metaphor, even if Takara didn't own Diaclone, Hasbro could still release a white Sunstreaker.

AcademyofDrX wrote:

sol magnus wrote:Not too long ago, Bandai released new neo-generations style Machine Robo toys, so there's definitely something to the 'can't make toys in the likeness of the Bandai figures' thing.

No, there isn't. Just because Action Toys can make Machine Robo toys under license from Bandai doesn't mean that Hasbro can't make Go-Bots.

Action Toys did not get the license to make Machine Robo toys from Bandai. They got the license from Tatsunoko Production, the production company that animated the Machine Robo: Revenge of Cronos anime. The Action Toys line is based on the animation models of that series rather than the original Bandai toys that the cartoon models were based on.

Sabrblade wrote:Action Toys did not get the license to make Machine Robo toys from Bandai. They got the license from Tatsunoko Production, the production company that animated the Machine Robo: Revenge of Cronos anime. The Action Toys line is based on the animation models of that series rather than the original Bandai toys that the cartoon models were based on.

Now that is interesting. That suggests that Bandai either didn't retain ownership when they had the anime made--which we know is different from Tonka/Hasbro and Go-Bots--or they just let the Machine Robo IP expire. I noticed there weren't any copyright protection marks on the "Machine Robo" name, but I didn't want to read anything into it. This is all further argument against Bandai owning anything Hasbro should worry about, while reinforcing "it's complicated and not worth the trouble."

Edit: I wonder if this is also how people became convinced that Warners owns the cartoon character designs, which I don't believe is true.

In most WFH contexts, the IP generated during the production of a licensed work is retained by the licensor. For example, if Marvel introduced a new character in their Transformers comics, that character would become property of Hasbro. Accordingly, they would introduce these characters in their own comics to retain ownership.

AcademyofDrX wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Action Toys did not get the license to make Machine Robo toys from Bandai. They got the license from Tatsunoko Production, the production company that animated the Machine Robo: Revenge of Cronos anime. The Action Toys line is based on the animation models of that series rather than the original Bandai toys that the cartoon models were based on.

Now that is interesting. That suggests that Bandai either didn't retain ownership when they had the anime made--which we know is different from Tonka/Hasbro and Go-Bots--or they just let the Machine Robo IP expire. I noticed there weren't any copyright protection marks on the "Machine Robo" name, but I didn't want to read anything into it. This is all further argument against Bandai owning anything Hasbro should worry about, while reinforcing "it's complicated and not worth the trouble."

I feel like it's less about Hasbro "not being allowed to make toys based on designs owned by Bandai" and more about Hasbro "feeling uneasy about making toys based on designs that originated from one of Takara's rivals since it would feel like giving free advertisement to said rival."

Like, as far back as Movie Fracture, when Joe Kyde designed her Crasher-based deco, he had to convince Hasbro that it was based on the colors of a real-life race car (which did exist at the time) rather than the obvious GoBot homage.

I saw that Kyde anecdote on the wiki and don't have any reason to question it, I just never understood how that could even make a difference.

I think we're all basically in agreement on the results if not the specific reasoning: the rights are complicated and at best Hasbro is sharing them, so they'd sooner not bother with more than the occasional homage.

Well... that was fast

https://hasbropulse.com/products/transf ... ith-sights

Jackpot!

Curse you Hasbro for yet again throwing a Battle Master in with a toy I have no interest in...

*edit*

Amazon Pre-Order Link

https://www.amazon.com/dp/b08tqb3z3l?ps ... formers-20

o.supreme wrote:Well... that was fast

https://hasbropulse.com/products/transf ... ith-sights

Jackpot!

Thus confirming that the original prices for Jackpot and Tigatron from the Amazon Australia listings were in error. Jackpot was the most expensive, and now looks to be the cheapest.

Was it being a repaint/ head retool of SS86 Jazz the obvious choice? I thought other fans predicted it might be something else?

o.supreme wrote:Was it being a repaint/ head retool of SS86 Jazz the obvious choice? I thought other fans predicted it might be something else?

It's the obvious choice to me. I always liked Jackpot, but if they really want to impress, they'll make Rad since we have two Lionizers already.

So the next ogolden disk collection us up for pre-order. Did anyone want some action master love?

https://hasbropulse.com/collections/new/products/transformers-generations-war-for-cybertron-golden-disk-collection-chapter-2-autobot-jackpot-with-sights

whoops was beat to the punch. oh well.

I was assuming it would be a Jazz retool/redeco and I think most others were as well. That is the recent mold that best fits the robot mode and seemed like the obvious choice.

What I did just notice is that, so far, these sets are actually below retail in the US. Jackpot is at the current Deluxe price, but comes with an extra battlemaster. Ranger and Puffer are $4 cheaper than 2 deluxes on their own. Contrast that with the GO sets last year that were all at retail with only the Botropolis set giving us the extra missile from Doubledealer versus normal retail price.

TF-fan kev777 wrote:I was assuming it would be a Jazz retool/redeco and I think most others were as well. That is the recent mold that best fits the robot mode and seemed like the obvious choice.

What I did just notice is that, so far, these sets are actually below retail in the US. Jackpot is at the current Deluxe price, but comes with an extra battlemaster. Ranger and Puffer are $4 cheaper than 2 deluxes on their own. Contrast that with the GO sets last year that were all at retail with only the Botropolis set giving us the extra missile from Doubledealer versus normal retail price.

with toys starting to finally circulate and becoming easier to find, scalpers are starting to loose their lunch money, so they are lowering the price a hair to help out

in all seriousness, this could be an indication that these are waaay behind schedule. Given that they will be shipping well into the new lines first couple of waves, but be "last year's model" they may be reducing the price to try and sell as much as they can to help recoup any possible losses from kids and collectors that have "moved on"

I wouldn't read that much into Amazon's multipack prices. There was that whole weird think with the Sideswipe two-pack price, too.

Immortal Starscream wrote:

TF-fan kev777 wrote:I was assuming it would be a Jazz retool/redeco and I think most others were as well. That is the recent mold that best fits the robot mode and seemed like the obvious choice.

What I did just notice is that, so far, these sets are actually below retail in the US. Jackpot is at the current Deluxe price, but comes with an extra battlemaster. Ranger and Puffer are $4 cheaper than 2 deluxes on their own. Contrast that with the GO sets last year that were all at retail with only the Botropolis set giving us the extra missile from Doubledealer versus normal retail price.

with toys starting to finally circulate and becoming easier to find, scalpers are starting to loose their lunch money, so they are lowering the price a hair to help out

in all seriousness, this could be an indication that these are waaay behind schedule. Given that they will be shipping well into the new lines first couple of waves, but be "last year's model" they may be reducing the price to try and sell as much as they can to help recoup any possible losses from kids and collectors that have "moved on"

You might be onto something. These are weird when compared to the GO sets last year. They are being announced at about the same time, or even earlier, but the first sets aren't due until March versus December when the GO sets started shipping.