Yamato Lover Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 If it's BoK, the mods should delete this Yamato Lover account. If it is him, why should he be banned when you are not? It's not like this guy has done any flaming. As of now anyways. The Yamato Lover account. There's no reason people should have two accounts. Awww.... multiple accounts are FUN. I've got the name God registered on one board for occasional use, mainly for the sake of humor. Whoa, what the hell is this? What have I done to deserve a ban? All I was doing was offering my viewpoint on this legal case, and suddenly I'm being accused of trolling and someone with multiple accounts? Put the torches and pitchforks away...too many people have left this site because of crap like this. I don't know BoK or wrylac...nor do I agree with much of their rheteric about this case. But I simply gave my opinion based on what wrylac was saying. But if personal opinion is grounds for account suspension, then I suggest you all get ahold of a mod and take this to PM with me.
SuperOstrich Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 Nobody's banning you. Wrylac jumped the gun.
VF-19 Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 In a weak effort to get the topic somewhat back on track. I remember when the Macross Plus toys were going to be coming out back in 2000. I, like many other people, was quite pleased (quite an understatement) that these kick-*** toys were coming out over here. Then nothing happened. A while later, I discovered that HG claimed that they owned all things macross. However, I also noticed that two series bearing the Macross name (Macross Plus, and Macross 2) had been released without a peep from Harmony Gold. Hmm... I thought to myself, isn't it odd that they let two excellent (well... Macross 2 was ok) series be liscenced by Manga, who would be in competition with HG? I also find it odd that Manga didn't really object that the Macross Plus toys were coming out over here. After all, they did purchase the liscence for the two titles. Personally, I think that Harmony Gold had no right to stop the Macross Plus toys from coming out over here for a few reasons. 1) They let Macross Plus be liscenced by another company. 2) They didn't do anything to try and stop it. By my own crappy logic, I think they also lost out on any ability to challenge Yamato concerning the domestic release of the Macross Plus toys in North America. Just my 2 cents.
Druna Skass Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 I'm still finding DVDs and VHSs of Macross Plus and Macross II around in stores. Is hg doing anything to get them off the shelves? I'll see all four volumes of Macross Plus and the Macross II movie version, then the RT DVDs a bit further down the anime section.
wrylac Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 (edited) I'm still finding DVDs and VHSs of Macross Plus and Macross II around in stores. Is hg doing anything to get them off the shelves? I'll see all four volumes of Macross Plus and the Macross II movie version, then the RT DVDs a bit further down the anime section. HG probably won't do anything about them. Edited October 22, 2003 by wrylac
wrylac Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 Nobody's banning you. Wrylac jumped the gun. Hey, I wasn't the one who made the insinuation. Besides it was nothing Yamato Lover said that merited any bannings.
JB0 Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 I'm still finding DVDs and VHSs of Macross Plus and Macross II around in stores. Is hg doing anything to get them off the shelves? I'll see all four volumes of Macross Plus and the Macross II movie version, then the RT DVDs a bit further down the anime section. By US copyright law, they no longer have any legal recourse to take against Mac2 and Plus, regardless of what their contract with Tatsunoko may or may not say. If you ignore it, you lose it. Simple as that. And Yamato Lover: Why quote me? I wasn't making accusations, just offering a valid use for multiple accounts.
the white drew carey Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 (edited) I'm still finding DVDs and VHSs of Macross Plus and Macross II around in stores. Is hg doing anything to get them off the shelves? I'll see all four volumes of Macross Plus and the Macross II movie version, then the RT DVDs a bit further down the anime section. By US copyright law, they no longer have any legal recourse to take against Mac2 and Plus, regardless of what their contract with Tatsunoko may or may not say. If you ignore it, you lose it. Simple as that. And Yamato Lover: Why quote me? I wasn't making accusations, just offering a valid use for multiple accounts. But here's the tricky part, the statute of limitations could be altered, or not even apply here: 1- The statute of limitations, in regards to copyrights, allows for the possibility that a company is not always aware of when it's copyrights are being infringed. It clearly states that it is possible for the countdown on the statute of limitations to begin once the company has gained knowledge of copyright infringement and that it doesn't always begin on the actual date of infringement. In other words, HG could've attmpted to prove in court that A- They were "understaffed" at the time of infringement and therefore unaware of it, B- Now they "know" an infringing product has been released and C- Utilize the strong possibility that their newly found "knowledge" lands them within the timeframe of the statute of limitations, and therefore can litigate against Manga Video for said infringememt.* To our knowledge, this is something HG did not even attempt to look into. Why? Maybe because they actually don't own the rights they say they do and Manga wasn't infringing on anyone. 2- How could the statute of limitations not even apply here? The law where copyright infringement is concerned is used for when someone utilizes an aspect of your copyright without permission. HG has never copyrighted any aspect of Macross Plus. Manga has. If HG's claims are correct, then Manga has illegally copyrighted something that is not their's. The law requires that situations like this be settled. The problem for HG is that it's hard to settle a copyright infringement case when you don't even have a copyright to infringe. And the statute of limitations will not come into play here because Manga's release of Mac+ wasn't a one-time deal. They are still producing copies and distributing them for sale. *Some people argue that if HG was short-staffed, then they couldn't possibly afford a lawyer to go after Manga at the time of the Mac+ release or even once they found out. The simple business and legal fact remains that if they could prove they actually owned those rights (as they say they do), then it would've been a legal slamdunk and they would've received damages and, it's strongly possible, that Manga would've had to cover their legal fees. 3 lawyers I've talked to about this (one is in IP law) said ,that if their claims were as solid as they think, a lawyer might've gone for the "no up-front fees" route (because HG was so poor and weak at the time) and take a cut from the final winnings. edit: spelling and punksuashion Edited October 22, 2003 by the white drew carey
Sumdumgai Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 (edited) Hi, another newbie to the forums here. I was looking around and found this on the Macross Official Homepage. I'm not sure if anyone's posted it in here before, and I honetly don't wanna go through all the posts on this topic. So here you go, an announcement from the Big West president on who owns the copyright for Macross. http://www.macross.co.jp/macross/contents/index.html (edit: forgot to post the link) Sorry if its already old news! Edited October 22, 2003 by Sumdumgai
wrylac Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 (edited) Hi, another newbie to the forums here. I was looking around and found this on the Macross Official Homepage. I'm not sure if anyone's posted it in here before, and I honetly don't wanna go through all the posts on this topic. So here you go, an announcement from the Big West president on who owns the copyright for Macross. http://www.macross.co.jp/macross/contents/index.html (edit: forgot to post the link) Sorry if its already old news! To Whom It May Concern Big West Co., Ltd. We brought a lawsuit against Tatsunoko Production to confirm our copyright ownership of TV anime "The Super Dimension Fortress-1 Macross" which has been broadcast in Japan since 1982. Consequently, on February 25, 2002, the Tokyo District Court accepted our assertion and ruled that we are copyright owner of all character patterns attached hereto as lists No.1 to No. 41. It is an inevitable ruling by the court that made a thorough examination on production process of "The Super Dimension Fortress-1 Macross." We will take advantage of the copyright to develop more "Macross" products. Kaya Ohnishi President Big West Co., Ltd. Funny how misleading this statement is...I hadn't looked at it in a while. BW did not bring up a lawsuit regarding 'to confirm our copyright ownership of TV anime "The Super Dimension Fortress-1 Macross."' Their lawsuit only involved the design elements. It was TP that brought the lawsuit regarding SDF Macross it's self, and BW lost that case. Edited October 22, 2003 by wrylac
wrylac Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 *Some people argue that if HG was short-staffed, then they couldn't possibly afford a lawyer to go after Manga at the time of the Mac+ release or even once they found out. The simple business and legal fact remains that if they could prove they actually owned those rights (as they say they do), then it would've been a legal slamdunk and they would've received damages and, it's strongly possible, that Manga would've had to cover their legal fees. 3 lawyers I've talked to about this (one is in IP law) said ,that if their claims were as solid as they think, a lawyer might've gone for the "no up-front fees" route (because HG was so poor and weak at the time) and take a cut from the final winnings. 1- The statute of limitations, in regards to copyrights, allows for the possibility that a company is not always aware of when it's copyrights are being infringed. It clearly states that it is possible for the countdown on the statute of limitations to begin once the company has gained knowledge of copyright infringement and that it doesn't always begin on the actual date of infringement.In other words, HG could've attmpted to prove in court that A- They were "understaffed" at the time of infringement and therefore unaware of it, B- Now they "know" an infringing product has been released and C- Utilize the strong possibility that their newly found "knowledge" lands them within the timeframe of the statute of limitations, and therefore can litigate against Manga Video for said infringememt. At the same time Tommy was making that "understaffed" remark he was pretty much acknowleding that those animes have passed them by, I very much got the feeling that they're not going to do anything about those releases. He said something about not letting any futher infringments occur. To our knowledge, this is something HG did not even attempt to look into. Why? Maybe because they actually don't own the rights they say they do and Manga wasn't infringing on anyone. Maybe, but you're still making that huge leap that I mentioned earlier. 2- How could the statute of limitations not even apply here? The law where copyright infringement is concerned is used for when someone utilizes an aspect of your copyright without permission.HG has never copyrighted any aspect of Macross Plus. Manga has. If HG's claims are correct, then Manga has illegally copyrighted something that is not their's. The law requires that situations like this be settled. The problem for HG is that it's hard to settle a copyright infringement case when you don't even have a copyright to infringe. Except that Manga's copyright extends only to the elements involved to release videos here in the States. They by no means can copyright the animation it self and neither could TP, as far as I can understand. BW created M+ and therefore own the copyright. The questions are: should they hve been allowed to create M+ with out TP involvement? And, does the memorandum affect int'l distribution of M+?
ewilen Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 At the same time Tommy was making that "understaffed" remark he was pretty much acknowleding that those animes have passed them by, I very much got the feeling that they're not going to do anything about those releases. He said something about not letting any futher infringments occur. Any idea how Macross 7 Trash managed to get released internationally (in French, German, and Italian translation) then?
tom64ss Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 This might be an old question, but if HG/TP owns the animation rights to SDF Macross, and BW owns the lineart, than couldn't BW just say that DYRL was created from the line art (since so many plot and design elements were changed) and that all the sequels and prequels were derivatives of DYRL and not the TV series? IMHO there is very little that connects Mac plus, 7, and 0 to the TV series as far a design elements (example: In Mac plus, helmets, flightsuits, and the Macross itself all look like the DYRL versions and not the TV series ones). If accepted, wouldn't that kill any claim that HG has on the derivatives?
wrylac Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 At the same time Tommy was making that "understaffed" remark he was pretty much acknowleding that those animes have passed them by, I very much got the feeling that they're not going to do anything about those releases. He said something about not letting any futher infringments occur. Any idea how Macross 7 Trash managed to get released internationally (in French, German, and Italian translation) then? Probably much the same way Manga got by HG in the U.S. But, we don't know how long it's been since HG was aware of those releases. Tommy did speak of those releases at ComicCon this year. All that would mean is that HG could not claim exclusive license in the regions that BW granted to those distributors. All other regions could still be enforced by HG.
wrylac Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 This might be an old question, but if HG/TP owns the animation rights to SDF Macross, and BW owns the lineart, than couldn't BW just say that DYRL was created from the line art (since so many plot and design elements were changed) and that all the sequels and prequels were derivatives of DYRL and not the TV series?IMHO there is very little that connects Mac plus, 7, and 0 to the TV series as far a design elements (example: In Mac plus, helmets, flightsuits, and the Macross itself all look like the DYRL versions and not the TV series ones). If accepted, wouldn't that kill any claim that HG has on the derivatives? The success of DYRL? has too much to do with the success of SDF Macross to not be considered a derivative. The fact that they named the movie after the show and the fact that TP did have involvement in DYRL? (however small) indellibly links the two.
the white drew carey Posted October 23, 2003 Posted October 23, 2003 Any idea how Macross 7 Trash managed to get released internationally (in French, German, and Italian translation) then? Probably much the same way Manga got by HG in the U.S. But, we don't know how long it's been since HG was aware of those releases. Tommy did speak of those releases at ComicCon this year. All that would mean is that HG could not claim exclusive license in the regions that BW granted to those distributors. All other regions could still be enforced by HG. Could you clarify your statement here? It seems to me like your saying that HG cannot claim exclusivity if BigWest has granted a license to these distributors. But they can claim exclusivity in regions where BigWest has not granted a license. In other words: Once BigWest does grant a license in a previously untapped region, HG can no longer claim exclusivity. Or: Only regions where licenses were granted before HG claims that they "wised up" are allowed to keep those licenses? As to Tatsunoko's involvement in DYRL? Well, that hasn't exactly been cleared up for us yet, now has it? Certain people who were employed by TP at the time were involved, but they could've simply been involved independent of TP. This was discussed in the past on the old boards and, IIRC, no one had found Tatsunoko specifically listed in the credits for DYRL. As to my "huge leap"? I don't see it as so. I believe it's a logical conclusion based on the evidence available. Show me where the huge leap is: -Since as early as 1988, DYRL, MacII, Mac+, as well as the Macross II RPG, Macross comic books and other Macross merchandise are licensed and released in North America and other countries outside of Japan without Tatsunoko or HG's involvement. -During this same time, HG and Tatsunoko work on the Robotech II: Sentinels production. HG is also involved in releasing productions, distributing Japense anime, licensing of RT-based comic books and development of an RT video game for the N64. They are also involved in a joint lawsuit against FASA in regards of the use of Macross mecha in the Battletech franchise. -Tatsunoko, as well, continues it's business in the Japanese anime market during this time. -In 2000, HG, for the first time ever, claims a blanket ownership to everything Macross outside of Japan. A claim that neither they, nor Tatsunoko has ever made in the past. Furthermore, when asked how Mac+ was released without HG or Tatsunoko, the only excuse HG can make is that the company was understaffed at the time. This explanation, though, doesn't explain the any of the other Macross projects that have been licensed and released internationally well before, and well after, Macross Plus was released. -In 2002, HG attempts to block the importation of Macross Valkyrie toys. When their claims that importation of these toys are challenged, they refuse to provide proof of their ownership. -As of yet, HG has not provided any further elaboration of why other Macross projects aside from Mac+ have been released outside of Japan without them. And they have never unequivocally proven that what they say is true. This leads me to either of three conclusions: A- HG is telling the truth. Although they are not telling the whole story. They must've been "understaffed" for much longer... probably from around 1988 (when DYRL was released as Clash of the Bionoids) until around 1999/2000 when someone at HG finally realised that they actually DO own the rights to all of Macross outside of Japan. Even though, during that whole time, they apparently weren't "understaffed" enough to continue to release products, distribute Japanese anime and to develop and grant RT-related licenses. B- HG might have been understaffed, or might not have been. They just didn't realise that so much of their possible profits were being made by other companies. Nor did they try to litigate for a portion of those profits once realisation was achieved. But any company that so readily lets their rights of ownership be trampled for over 10 years without attempting to remedy those infractions must be incredibly stupid. C- HG was lying the whole time and actually never even thought that they own the rights they claim they do. I'm sorry, but I tend to believe C/b]. And I haven't even touched on all of the varying and contradictory statements made over the years by HG and their employees. If this is what you consider a "huge leap", than so be it. I find it to be a much more reasonable explanation for the events than what HG, or you, have been able to provide.
wrylac Posted October 23, 2003 Posted October 23, 2003 Any idea how Macross 7 Trash managed to get released internationally (in French, German, and Italian translation) then? Probably much the same way Manga got by HG in the U.S. But, we don't know how long it's been since HG was aware of those releases. Tommy did speak of those releases at ComicCon this year. All that would mean is that HG could not claim exclusive license in the regions that BW granted to those distributors. All other regions could still be enforced by HG. Could you clarify your statement here? It seems to me like your saying that HG cannot claim exclusivity if BigWest has granted a license to these distributors. But they can claim exclusivity in regions where BigWest has not granted a license. In other words: Once BigWest does grant a license in a previously untapped region, HG can no longer claim exclusivity. Or: Only regions where licenses were granted before HG claims that they "wised up" are allowed to keep those licenses? It's most likely that HG can't lay claim to regions and products that they have let slip by. As to Tatsunoko's involvement in DYRL? Well, that hasn't exactly been cleared up for us yet, now has it? Certain people who were employed by TP at the time were involved, but they could've simply been involved independent of TP. This was discussed in the past on the old boards and, IIRC, no one had found Tatsunoko specifically listed in the credits for DYRL. When I speak with HG people at conventions other places we always talk about DYRL? like TP being involved is a given. As to my "huge leap"? I don't see it as so. I believe it's a logical conclusion based on the evidence available. Show me where the huge leap is: -Since as early as 1988, DYRL, MacII, Mac+, as well as the Macross II RPG, Macross comic books and other Macross merchandise are licensed and released in North America and other countries outside of Japan without Tatsunoko or HG's involvement. -During this same time, HG and Tatsunoko work on the Robotech II: Sentinels production. HG is also involved in releasing productions, distributing Japense anime, licensing of RT-based comic books and development of an RT video game for the N64. They are also involved in a joint lawsuit against FASA in regards of the use of Macross mecha in the Battletech franchise. -Tatsunoko, as well, continues it's business in the Japanese anime market during this time. -In 2000, HG, for the first time ever, claims a blanket ownership to everything Macross outside of Japan. A claim that neither they, nor Tatsunoko has ever made in the past. Furthermore, when asked how Mac+ was released without HG or Tatsunoko, the only excuse HG can make is that the company was understaffed at the time. This explanation, though, doesn't explain the any of the other Macross projects that have been licensed and released internationally well before, and well after, Macross Plus was released. -In 2002, HG attempts to block the importation of Macross Valkyrie toys. When their claims that importation of these toys are challenged, they refuse to provide proof of their ownership. -As of yet, HG has not provided any further elaboration of why other Macross projects aside from Mac+ have been released outside of Japan without them. And they have never unequivocally proven that what they say is true. This leads me to either of three conclusions: A- HG is telling the truth. Although they are not telling the whole story. They must've been "understaffed" for much longer... probably from around 1988 (when DYRL was released as Clash of the Bionoids) until around 1999/2000 when someone at HG finally realised that they actually DO own the rights to all of Macross outside of Japan. Even though, during that whole time, they apparently weren't "understaffed" enough to continue to release products, distribute Japanese anime and to develop and grant RT-related licenses. B- HG might have been understaffed, or might not have been. They just didn't realise that so much of their possible profits were being made by other companies. Nor did they try to litigate for a portion of those profits once realisation was achieved. But any company that so readily lets their rights of ownership be trampled for over 10 years without attempting to remedy those infractions must be incredibly stupid. C- HG was lying the whole time and actually never even thought that they own the rights they claim they do. I'm sorry, but I tend to believe C. I lean towards B, I mean this is Macross we're talking about. It seems to be plagued as an "also ran" to Gundam. Everyone keeps underestimating it's appeal to the int'l markets. That is something that I hold HG responsible for. And I haven't even touched on all of the varying and contradictory statements made over the years by HG and their employees. If this is what you consider a "huge leap", than so be it. I find it to be a much more reasonable explanation for the events than what HG, or you, have been able to provide. Just because they may be varying doesn't mean that they're contradictory. I'd like to see some examples.
the white drew carey Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 It's most likely that HG can't lay claim to regions and products that they have let slip by. Then North America would be one of those regions, wouldn't it? When I speak with HG people at conventions other places we always talk about DYRL? like TP being involved is a given. Well, considering that I take much of what HG says concerning with a grain of salt, I'm still waiting for something more concrete. But that's just me. I lean towards B, I mean this is Macross we're talking about. It seems to be plagued as an "also ran" to Gundam. Everyone keeps underestimating it's appeal to the int'l markets. That is something that I hold HG responsible for. Regardless, Macross II and Macross Plus were considered very big releases here in NA, and they were widely publicized within the industry here. For HG to be ignorant of those releases would be a testament to the company's stupidity. But you chose B, and I'm going to give up my $1200 to see what's behind door #3... Just because they may be varying doesn't mean that they're contradictory. I'd like to see some examples. Without finding the specific interview, although it has been quoted either here or on the old forums, around 1996 Carl Macek stated in an interview that Sentinels looked different because neither Tatsunoko, nor HG, had the rights to use any of the designs from Macross. From 2000 on, HG starts claiming that it owns all things Macross. That's contradictory right there. And don't try to say that HG was just "making a general statement". They were trying to convince everyone that everything Macross (outside of Japan*) was theirs to do with as they wish. *do I really need to keep saying "outside of Japan", or do we kind of assume that's part of the statement?
bsu legato Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 Regardless, Macross II and Macross Plus were considered very big releases here in NA, and they were widely publicized within the industry here. For HG to be ignorant of those releases would be a testament to the company's stupidity. Yeah, people take the anime industry for granted today. Back in '94, there was very little comming over here, certainly not in the quantities we have on the shelves today. Back then, Manga was one of the real pioneers of today's anime industry and Macross Plus helped blow the doors open for all the stuff we have today.
wrylac Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 It's most likely that HG can't lay claim to regions and products that they have let slip by. Then North America would be one of those regions, wouldn't it? I'm talking about specific products and the regions they have been released in. When I speak with HG people at conventions other places we always talk about DYRL? like TP being involved is a given. Well, considering that I take much of what HG says concerning with a grain of salt, I'm still waiting for something more concrete. But that's just me. So, besides the fact that TP executives are listed in the credits and besides the fact that people who would know speak about it that way, I guess you're allowed to feel the way you feel. Just because they may be varying doesn't mean that they're contradictory. I'd like to see some examples. Without finding the specific interview, although it has been quoted either here or on the old forums, around 1996 Carl Macek stated in an interview that Sentinels looked different because neither Tatsunoko, nor HG, had the rights to use any of the designs from Macross. From 2000 on, HG starts claiming that it owns all things Macross. That's contradictory right there. And don't try to say that HG was just "making a general statement". They were trying to convince everyone that everything Macross (outside of Japan*) was theirs to do with as they wish. *do I really need to keep saying "outside of Japan", or do we kind of assume that's part of the statement? HG has never claimed the designs, I don't see how that's inconsistent. BW are the ones who went to court to confirm their rights to it, true. However, I've never seen an instance where HG or TP did anything to infringe on BW's design copyright. In fact, they both specifically avoided those designs in the Sentinels. I'd like to see a contextual quote of this "own all things Macross," because as you just brought out in your own post it can be confusing if you don't add the tag "outside Japan." Despite the fact that you don't make the distinction doesn't mean a distinction can't be made that HG was speaking in a general sense to a group of fans not a group of lawyers or even wanna be lawyers like us. Trust me, whenever HG starts talking about legal issues at conventions most of the fans get restless and are uninterested.
the white drew carey Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 Wrylac- One could take this statement into account (pertinent section highlighted): To all Robotech and Macross fans: A number of rumors have arisen during the past week as a result of legal proceedings in Japan. The original Macross television series was the result of a monumental collaborative effort involving several companies of creative individuals. We at Harmony Gold appreciate all the hard work these combined talents put forth to make Macross possible. We are proud to have worked closely with AnimEigo to provide fans with a faithful subtitled release of Macross in its original format. The litigation in Japan involving Tatsunoko, Big West and Studio Nue does not affect Harmony Gold or its licensees. Harmony Gold is not a party to any legal proceedings. Furthermore, the lawsuit, which was tried in front of a Japanese court, only relates to rights in Japan. Since Harmony Gold’s worldwide rights to Macross exclude Japan, a Japanese judgment does not apply to us. We continue to be very excited about our Macross projects with Toynami and AnimEigo and look forward to a bright future for Robotech and Macross. Sincerely, Alan Letz Executive Vice President Business Development No matter how you look at it, you cannot deny that this is a statement which, at the very least, is calculated to imply that all of Macross is HG's (once again, outside of Japan). There have been other examples which were posted on the old boards, but since they are down at the time, I cannot access them. For that I do apologize.
bandit29 Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 (edited) Since Harmony Gold’s worldwide rights to Macross exclude Japan Well those rights must exclude Korea as well http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12114 http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12116 these were released on 10/13/03 These are legal region 3 DVDs. Japanese/Korean with Korean subs The single disc version have been released throug out the last year. And those are Region 2 Bandai Visual covers. http://koreandvds.com/search_result.html?s...&stitle=macross edit added link Edited October 24, 2003 by dejr8bud
wrylac Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 Wrylac-One could take this statement into account (pertinent section highlighted): To all Robotech and Macross fans: A number of rumors have arisen during the past week as a result of legal proceedings in Japan. The original Macross television series was the result of a monumental collaborative effort involving several companies of creative individuals. We at Harmony Gold appreciate all the hard work these combined talents put forth to make Macross possible. We are proud to have worked closely with AnimEigo to provide fans with a faithful subtitled release of Macross in its original format. The litigation in Japan involving Tatsunoko, Big West and Studio Nue does not affect Harmony Gold or its licensees. Harmony Gold is not a party to any legal proceedings. Furthermore, the lawsuit, which was tried in front of a Japanese court, only relates to rights in Japan. Since Harmony Gold’s worldwide rights to Macross exclude Japan, a Japanese judgment does not apply to us. We continue to be very excited about our Macross projects with Toynami and AnimEigo and look forward to a bright future for Robotech and Macross. Sincerely, Alan Letz Executive Vice President Business Development No matter how you look at it, you cannot deny that this is a statement which, at the very least, is calculated to imply that all of Macross is HG's (once again, outside of Japan). There have been other examples which were posted on the old boards, but since they are down at the time, I cannot access them. For that I do apologize. This statement was made right after the confirmation of the design copyright to BW. HG never claimed to have those rights in the first place so no, that ruling didn't affect their "worldwide rights to Macross." Meaning a their rights weren't affected. Calculations and implications not withstanding, this statement is true. The lawsuit filed in Japan regarding the design copyright did only affect the copyright of the designs and a Japanese ruling in that case doesn't affect HG.
wrylac Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 Since Harmony Gold’s worldwide rights to Macross exclude Japan Well those rights must exclude Korea as well http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12114 http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12116 these were released on 10/13/03 These are legal region 3 DVDs. Japanese/Korean with Korean subs The single disc version have been released throug out the last year. And those are Region 2 Bandai Visual covers. http://koreandvds.com/search_result.html?s...&stitle=macross edit added link Just because some one does something doesn't mean it's not an infringment. Perhaps too, HG is unaware of these releases. HG could be working right now to get those releases shut down. There's too much we don't know about this to draw any inferences.
j_wong00 Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 Since Harmony Gold’s worldwide rights to Macross exclude Japan Well those rights must exclude Korea as well http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12114 http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12116 these were released on 10/13/03 These are legal region 3 DVDs. Japanese/Korean with Korean subs The single disc version have been released throug out the last year. And those are Region 2 Bandai Visual covers. http://koreandvds.com/search_result.html?s...&stitle=macross edit added link Just because some one does something doesn't mean it's not an infringment. Perhaps too, HG is unaware of these releases. HG could be working right now to get those releases shut down. There's too much we don't know about this to draw any inferences. Your right in the regaurd that we don't know what's happening. However, by the same argument, they are out because HG can't do anything about it either, and that no copywrite has been infringed at all.
wrylac Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 (edited) If you look further the back jackets of the individual discs have a TP copyright and say that the discs are presented by MBS, TP and Anime Friend. Looks to me like a legit release by TP done outside the jurisdiction they've given HG. Hmmm. Makes me wonder why BW never did anything about it since this release was done just before the ruling on the designs' copyright. Maybe they knew they really didn't have a leg to stand on. Edited October 24, 2003 by wrylac
Effect Posted October 24, 2003 Posted October 24, 2003 If it was done by TP then this could put an end to who has the rights to the story, maybe. It says "Original Story Created By Studio Nue". Or maybe that tells us nothing I don't know. This would be outside of Japan and as to the agreement they had to with BW, TP could release the series outside of Japan. I thought this was already agreed upon? No one doubt TP and as a result HG had rights to SDF Macross. It was everything that came after that was the problem.
ewilen Posted October 25, 2003 Posted October 25, 2003 Effect, I think the point is that Tatsunoko Productions supposedly gave Harmony Gold worldwide distribution rights (i.e., everywhere but Japan). So the question is, why is TP or anyone other than HG releasing SDF Macross in Korea? Wrylac's answer is that Korea is outside the area granted to HG by TP, but I don't know where he gets that from. This strikes me as a nonsequitur: Makes me wonder why BW never did anything about it since this release was done just before the ruling on the designs' copyright. Why should BW do anything about it? BW should no more care about TP releasing SDF Macross in Korea than they should about HG granting Animeigo rights to release it in the US.
wrylac Posted October 25, 2003 Posted October 25, 2003 Effect, I think the point is that Tatsunoko Productions supposedly gave Harmony Gold worldwide distribution rights (i.e., everywhere but Japan). So the question is, why is TP or anyone other than HG releasing SDF Macross in Korea? Wrylac's answer is that Korea is outside the area granted to HG by TP, but I don't know where he gets that from. I don't get it from anywhere except that we know that TP and HG have a close relationship and that TP wouldn't be releasing something like that with out some sort of understanding from HG. This strikes me as a nonsequitur:Makes me wonder why BW never did anything about it since this release was done just before the ruling on the designs' copyright. Why should BW do anything about it? BW should no more care about TP releasing SDF Macross in Korea than they should about HG granting Animeigo rights to release it in the US. When you consider the timing of the release compared to the timing of BW's lawsuits and their claims in that lawsuit, making the leap that some here make, you would think that they would have done something about the release at the time, unless they knew they couldn't do anything about it at a time when they were claiming that they could.
the white drew carey Posted October 25, 2003 Posted October 25, 2003 Since Harmony Gold’s worldwide rights to Macross exclude Japan Well those rights must exclude Korea as well http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12114 http://koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=12116 these were released on 10/13/03 These are legal region 3 DVDs. Japanese/Korean with Korean subs The single disc version have been released throug out the last year. And those are Region 2 Bandai Visual covers. http://koreandvds.com/search_result.html?s...&stitle=macross edit added link I think this is simply a case of Tatsunoko exercising their rights to distribute the SDF: Macross TV series internationally wherever, and to whomever they want. It is interesting, though, that HG is not listed ad therefore (presumably), not involved with this release. One would think that if HG had bought into the worldwide rights, that they would also be part of all international Macross releases.
the white drew carey Posted October 25, 2003 Posted October 25, 2003 Effect, I think the point is that Tatsunoko Productions supposedly gave Harmony Gold worldwide distribution rights (i.e., everywhere but Japan). So the question is, why is TP or anyone other than HG releasing SDF Macross in Korea? Wrylac's answer is that Korea is outside the area granted to HG by TP, but I don't know where he gets that from. I don't get it from anywhere except that we know that TP and HG have a close relationship and that TP wouldn't be releasing something like that with out some sort of understanding from HG. Dude, you keep saying how you know so much about the entertainment industry, and yet seem to think it's perfectly acceptable that a company would willingly let someone else profit off of their product. If HG owns (or co-owns with Tatsunoko) the int'l rights to SDF: Macross, they wouldn't just say "OK, Tatsunoko, go ahead and release our product all by yourself and make the money off of it." If they did have any int'l stake in releasing SDF: Macross, HG's name would be on the box. Considering that after the ruling on the Memorandum which solidified the fact Tatsunoko has the right to distribute SDF: Macross outside of Japan, I don't think they'd really give a damn if HG cared or not. This strikes me as a nonsequitur:Makes me wonder why BW never did anything about it since this release was done just before the ruling on the designs' copyright. Why should BW do anything about it? BW should no more care about TP releasing SDF Macross in Korea than they should about HG granting Animeigo rights to release it in the US. When you consider the timing of the release compared to the timing of BW's lawsuits and their claims in that lawsuit, making the leap that some here make, you would think that they would have done something about the release at the time, unless they knew they couldn't do anything about it at a time when they were claiming that they could. Seriously, don't play stupid. You know as well as any of us that BigWest has never contended Tatsunoko's right to distribute the SDF: Macross program overseas. So is there a reason you are suddenly asking why BigWest didn't do anything to stop Tatsunoko from distributing SDF: Macross outside of Japan? Tatsunoko's ability to distribute the program overseas is one of the things no one here has ever questioned. It's HG's empty claims of ownership that are the problem. The fact that Tatsunoko has released SDF: Macross somewhere without HG, AND the fact that AnimeIgo was only granted a license to release Macross in North America (Region 1) lends credibility to the theory that HG does only possess a license for SDF: Macross in North America. I don't doubt that HG slipped by the Macross footage as Robotech into the international market because it was re-copyrighted as Robotech. I bet that if HG tried to release something as Macross outside of R1 without obtaining a license for it, they'd fetch some kind of trouble for it.
wrylac Posted October 25, 2003 Posted October 25, 2003 Effect, I think the point is that Tatsunoko Productions supposedly gave Harmony Gold worldwide distribution rights (i.e., everywhere but Japan). So the question is, why is TP or anyone other than HG releasing SDF Macross in Korea? Wrylac's answer is that Korea is outside the area granted to HG by TP, but I don't know where he gets that from. I don't get it from anywhere except that we know that TP and HG have a close relationship and that TP wouldn't be releasing something like that with out some sort of understanding from HG. Dude, you keep saying how you know so much about the entertainment industry, and yet seem to think it's perfectly acceptable that a company would willingly let someone else profit off of their product. If HG owns (or co-owns with Tatsunoko) the int'l rights to SDF: Macross, they wouldn't just say "OK, Tatsunoko, go ahead and release our product all by yourself and make the money off of it." If they did have any int'l stake in releasing SDF: Macross, HG's name would be on the box. Considering that after the ruling on the Memorandum which solidified the fact Tatsunoko has the right to distribute SDF: Macross outside of Japan, I don't think they'd really give a damn if HG cared or not. See, when I say "understanding" I also mean some sort of compensation. This strikes me as a nonsequitur:Makes me wonder why BW never did anything about it since this release was done just before the ruling on the designs' copyright. Why should BW do anything about it? BW should no more care about TP releasing SDF Macross in Korea than they should about HG granting Animeigo rights to release it in the US. When you consider the timing of the release compared to the timing of BW's lawsuits and their claims in that lawsuit, making the leap that some here make, you would think that they would have done something about the release at the time, unless they knew they couldn't do anything about it at a time when they were claiming that they could. Seriously, don't play stupid. You know as well as any of us that BigWest has never contended Tatsunoko's right to distribute the SDF: Macross program overseas. So is there a reason you are suddenly asking why BigWest didn't do anything to stop Tatsunoko from distributing SDF: Macross outside of Japan? Tatsunoko's ability to distribute the program overseas is one of the things no one here has ever questioned. It's HG's empty claims of ownership that are the problem. The fact that Tatsunoko has released SDF: Macross somewhere without HG, AND the fact that AnimeIgo was only granted a license to release Macross in North America (Region 1) lends credibility to the theory that HG does only possess a license for SDF: Macross in North America. I don't doubt that HG slipped by the Macross footage as Robotech into the international market because it was re-copyrighted as Robotech. I bet that if HG tried to release something as Macross outside of R1 without obtaining a license for it, they'd fetch some kind of trouble for it. I'm just basing my comments off of what BW said in the open letter to Macross fans after the Feb02 ruling and then applying the same logic being used here against HG. That's all. Are you saying that the comments BW made in that letter are perhaps not entirely true, even misleading?
Radd Posted October 25, 2003 Posted October 25, 2003 Maybe I'm just tired, but I don't see what Wyrlac posted has anything to do with this letter. Please explain. To Whom It May ConcernBig West Co., Ltd. We brought a lawsuit against Tatsunoko Production to confirm our copyright ownership of TV anime "The Super Dimension Fortress-1 Macross" which has been broadcast in Japan since 1982. Consequently, on February 25, 2002, the Tokyo District Court accepted our assertion and ruled that we are copyright owner of all character patterns attached hereto as lists No.1 to No. 41. It is an inevitable ruling by the court that made a thorough examination on production process of "The Super Dimension Fortress-1 Macross." We will take advantage of the copyright to develop more "Macross" products. Kaya Ohnishi President Big West Co., Ltd. Enclosure
the white drew carey Posted October 25, 2003 Posted October 25, 2003 I think Radd;s got you there, Wrylac. The letter isn't misleading because it explicitly states that BigWest will be using the design rights that they own to develop more Macross products. In fact, unlike Alen Letz's letter quoted earlier, which is very vague, this letter quickly and clearly sums up the facts using no uncertain terms.
.thumb.jpg.bc0aa3d6a43314c42575bd21a0963db5.jpg)
Recommended Posts