Hasbro Shares Takara's Notes on Making Legacy Road Rocket a Female Ninja

Goddamn it, Takara robbed us of Femboy representation by making Road Rocket a kunoichi.

JomasterII wrote:Goddamn it, Takara robbed us of Femboy representation by making Road Rocket a kunoichi.

Eh, intent and interpretation are two different things. I'm not seeing the female in Road Rocket's figure and there is fiction depicting Road Rocket as male, so he'll be a guy on my shelves.

AcademyofDrX wrote:

Emerje wrote:Exactly. Movie designs used in the movies tend to belong to studios so the only way Hasbro can do non-movie line figures with them is either original designs or movie inspired redesigns that aren't all that accurate.
Emerje

I can't imagine that's true. I could see if there were real-world vehicle licensing issues, but where is this idea coming from?

Edit: I guess I could also imagine that Hasbro couldn't license out movie figures to FunPub, but I can't imagine any reason that Hasbro could use movie character designs in, say, Studio Series but not Legacy. SS and Buzzworthy Bumblebee are both lines that mix movie and non-movie characters, since SS86 is independent of Paramount.

It's a combination of Paramount licensing the robot mode designs, and the car manufacturers licensing the models to Hasbro, and each comes with a set of Terms of Use, just like any license.

Jelze Bunnycat wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:

Emerje wrote:Exactly. Movie designs used in the movies tend to belong to studios so the only way Hasbro can do non-movie line figures with them is either original designs or movie inspired redesigns that aren't all that accurate.
Emerje

I can't imagine that's true. I could see if there were real-world vehicle licensing issues, but where is this idea coming from?

Edit: I guess I could also imagine that Hasbro couldn't license out movie figures to FunPub, but I can't imagine any reason that Hasbro could use movie character designs in, say, Studio Series but not Legacy. SS and Buzzworthy Bumblebee are both lines that mix movie and non-movie characters, since SS86 is independent of Paramount.

It's a combination of Paramount licensing the robot mode designs, and the car manufacturers licensing the models to Hasbro, and each comes with a set of Terms of Use, just like any license.

Is the suggestion here that Hasbro is giving Paramount a cut of all their movie toy sales? I don't know what was in the contract, but this doesn't make sense as a general principle of derivative works IP as I understand it, "robot mode designs" would not be protected material separate from Hasbro's rights to the characters. As a point of comparison, IDW designs are not the property of IDW or comics artists, but become Hasbro's property to use as they see fit.

The movie itself is Paramount's property, certain assets involved in the production would be too, but "robot mode designs" wouldn't make sense to be a property for the licensee when the licensor's whole business is selling robot toys. I would really like to see some primary source info to back this up. I'm also not aware of any case of a licensor being prohibited from using new designs from a licensee, though there have been uncertified rumors of that with Masters of the Universe and She-Ra. I would be shocked if that's not cared for in modern contracts.

Yeah, I'm not feeling the Axer head for the Prime Universe Arcee mold either. I'll still get it if it ever happens but it wouldn't do anything for me. I like the thought of Axer being the alt head for any new Lockdown they might do again. Circuit too. Or they can just lame out and make them all from Wheeljack instead as it's the closest to looking like RotF Lockdown in robot mode. Or at least, the alt mode parts line up in robot mode.

As for Flamewar, I'm glad it happened but I just don't get why they used that deco for the Shattered Glass version. I would've went with the Prime Cyberverse Legion deco for SG and the Botcon deco as either the regular deco for something like Generations Selects or as he said in the interview, SG Arcee. The Prime deco of Flamewar is far less evil/aggressive looking as it's only dark blue with orange and grey instead of the black with red and yellow. I guess at this point they can base a new deco SG Arcee on Prime Flamewar.

AcademyofDrX wrote:

Jelze Bunnycat wrote:

AcademyofDrX wrote:

Emerje wrote:Exactly. Movie designs used in the movies tend to belong to studios so the only way Hasbro can do non-movie line figures with them is either original designs or movie inspired redesigns that aren't all that accurate.
Emerje

I can't imagine that's true. I could see if there were real-world vehicle licensing issues, but where is this idea coming from?

Edit: I guess I could also imagine that Hasbro couldn't license out movie figures to FunPub, but I can't imagine any reason that Hasbro could use movie character designs in, say, Studio Series but not Legacy. SS and Buzzworthy Bumblebee are both lines that mix movie and non-movie characters, since SS86 is independent of Paramount.

It's a combination of Paramount licensing the robot mode designs, and the car manufacturers licensing the models to Hasbro, and each comes with a set of Terms of Use, just like any license.

Is the suggestion here that Hasbro is giving Paramount a cut of all their movie toy sales? I don't know what was in the contract, but this doesn't make sense as a general principle of derivative works IP as I understand it, "robot mode designs" would not be protected material separate from Hasbro's rights to the characters. As a point of comparison, IDW designs are not the property of IDW or comics artists, but become Hasbro's property to use as they see fit.

The movie itself is Paramount's property, certain assets involved in the production would be too, but "robot mode designs" wouldn't make sense to be a property for the licensee when the licensor's whole business is selling robot toys. I would really like to see some primary source info to back this up. I'm also not aware of any case of a licensor being prohibited from using new designs from a licensee, though there have been uncertified rumors of that with Masters of the Universe and She-Ra. I would be shocked if that's not cared for in modern contracts.

I don't know the specifics, but the Live Action Movies can be considered a group project, with certain companies maintaining copyright of certain aspects of that project. The overview of who owns what can be quite convoluted, but we can agree Hasbro owns the toy designs and molds, and Paramount owns the movie itself and all assets thereof, including character designs. Because of licensing, everything legal turns into a spaghetti bowl with everyone tied together: Paramount can't do anything with the movie without Hasbro's say-so, and Hasbro can't release toys based on the movies without Paramount's say-so.

Jelze Bunnycat wrote:[... but we can agree Hasbro owns the toy designs and molds, and Paramount owns the movie itself and all assets thereof, including character designs....

I don't agree with that, but we can agree to disagree. It's complicated, it's governed by legal agreements none of us will ever see, and we can only speculate on the impacts like if these considerations factor into product decisions like non-movie movie characters.

Razorbeast88 wrote:I was on the fence about cosmos but after watching the review, I definitely want him

I think I may be needing mental help, because I'm the only one who isnt over the moon about cosmos. Honestly, I'm more excited for lio convoy. Maybe it's because I spent way too much on a tr cosmos... CRAP EBAY!!!!!!!

Sabrblade wrote:

RodimusPrimeUkraine1 wrote:

Razorbeast88 wrote:I was on the fence about cosmos but after watching the review, I definitely want him

I think I may be needing mental help, because I'm the only one who isnt over the moon about cosmos. Honestly, I'm more excited for lio convoy. Maybe it's because I spent way too much on a tr cosmos... CRAP EBAY!!!!!!!

You're not alone. I'm mostly indifferent towards Cosmos too.

I have a feeling that eBay TR Cosmos futures are going to plummet. I might end up just throwing mine in the trash, even though it's a perfectly fine figure.

Wolfman Jake wrote:None of the Velocitron figures have been spotted in-store at U.S. Walmarts yet, correct? I assume there must be a street date on them of 8/1/2022 or thereabouts. Does anyone know for certain? I’m going to have to start checking Walmart stores daily if I’m to find Cosmos, because he’s the only one that was sold out before I got the alert that preorders were live.

Not a bad idea, but I would also recommend staking out the Pulse page. Many partner exclusives from Walmart and Amazon will have small quantities available after Pulse gets stock and fulfills pre-orders. Even the Terrorsaur pre-order came back in eventually. It will most likely happen much later than the Walmart retail availability, so that might just be a Plan B option.