Druna Skass Posted September 13, 2003 Posted September 13, 2003 OK maybe I missed it somewhere or something, but the thing that's been getting to me about this issues is this, who actualy owns the Macross storyline (or what ever term denotes its)? We all know Big West owns the designs but does anyone have info on who owns the story line that isn't a form speculation or anything? I mean like a contract or a court decision...
Radd Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 At some point in the past it was found that the Tokyo Courts specifically ruled that Big West owned the copyright that allows them to make sequels and derivatives. It'll take some digging, I'll try and find the actual posts about that, but if someone else could peek through the old thread that would help as I'm finding it very difficult to get online at all, especially long enough to get much done. *grumblegrumblegrumble*
the white drew carey Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 Why did TP allow the creation of derivative works based on a show they owned? Maybe they thought there was no overseas market for it, as RT had pretty much taken over the animation, maybe they since BW really didn't push it too hard on the overseas market which was their territory. Maybe because Tatsunoko knows that BigWest is completely in their rights to do whatever they want with the sequels they've created. Remember, HG is the one who suddenly, out of the blue, made a stink about anything Macross being released outside of Japan. Tatsunoko probably never would've been involved (or cared) if BigWest didn't suddenly feel the need to clarify, in the courts, who owns what. But, BW trying to release toys was like poking a stick at a bee hive. There's money in toys. Without seeing any market projections, I think this statement is a little premature. I'm sure none of us have seen how much money was earned by whom with the releases of DYRL, MacII and Mac+. There is money in toys, but there is also money in film licensing.
the white drew carey Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 Gaaaaaaaahhhhh-- WDC-- you said everything I was going to say on this topic, and said it better Gaaahhh!!! I'm an ass. What can I say?
wrylac Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 At some point in the past it was found that the Tokyo Courts specifically ruled that Big West owned the copyright that allows them to make sequels and derivatives. It'll take some digging, I'll try and find the actual posts about that, but if someone else could peek through the old thread that would help as I'm finding it very difficult to get online at all, especially long enough to get much done.*grumblegrumblegrumble* It'd be news to me if anyone here did make such a claim. I don't mean to provoke anyone, but I think you're remembering it wrong.
wrylac Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 OK maybe I missed it somewhere or something, but the thing that's been getting to me about this issues is this, who actualy owns the Macross storyline (or what ever term denotes its)? We all know Big West owns the designs but does anyone have info on who owns the story line that isn't a form speculation or anything? I mean like a contract or a court decision... It wouldn't be a single term or phrase. The way it would work would the court would describe each individual's responsibility toward the project. Then determine who that person worked for and how this specific show was put together.
Pat Payne Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 There is money in toys, but there is also money in film licensing. AFAIK, here are all the money streams that a show/movie/whatever can expect now: 1)TV Broadcast (network) 2)Syndication (the real gravy for a TV show -- after two seasons, any series becomes profitable in syndication) 3)Cable broadcast 4)Pay-per-View 5)Theatre re-releases 6)Internet Broadcast (That's LEGIT broadcast, not Kazaa, guys... ) 7)DVD, Laserdisc, VHS, Beta (wait a minnit... ) 8)Soundtrack albums 9)Merchandising licences 10)Licences for books, comics, other media tie-ins That is all the ways I can think of that a media property can make money. For SDF Macross, Realistically, Tat/HG have claim to 1-7 for the series itself. 8 has always been the province of JVC-Victor Music Industries-Victor Entertainment (and nobody seems to be questioning that). For 9 and 10 the jury's still out, and will be until someone can clear up the question of line art v. copyright to the show to satisfaction of a court.
wrylac Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 There is money in toys, but there is also money in film licensing. Everyone knows the real moneys in the toys.
Dat Pinche Haro! Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 (edited) OK maybe I missed it somewhere or something, but the thing that's been getting to me about this issues is this, who actualy owns the Macross storyline (or what ever term denotes its)? We all know Big West owns the designs but does anyone have info on who owns the story line that isn't a form speculation or anything? I mean like a contract or a court decision... It wouldn't be a single term or phrase. The way it would work would the court would describe each individual's responsibility toward the project. Then determine who that person worked for and how this specific show was put together. So what your saying is that potentialy several diffrent companies own the diffrent elements? If that's the case how is any one of the partner companies able to make other projects based off the original with out any sort of involvment of the other? If that isn't what your saying could you provide some sort of example of what you are saying? Damnit I accidently logged with my friend's ID... Druna Skass Edited September 14, 2003 by Dat Pinche Haro!
Abombz!! Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 There is money in toys, but there is also money in film licensing. Everyone knows the real moneys in the toys. Not necessarely. While you can get alot of money from toys.... its from licensing your show/movie around the world that really brings in the fat cows. While shows can be broadcast around the globe, that doesn't necessarely mean that the toys will get the same treatment. Very rarely do toys follow TV shows, unless theres a huge demand for them (doesn't happen ofte). Sure theres importing... but its just not the same as it will only appeal those who have the money and means to get to the toys.
wrylac Posted September 14, 2003 Posted September 14, 2003 OK maybe I missed it somewhere or something, but the thing that's been getting to me about this issues is this, who actualy owns the Macross storyline (or what ever term denotes its)? We all know Big West owns the designs but does anyone have info on who owns the story line that isn't a form speculation or anything? I mean like a contract or a court decision... It wouldn't be a single term or phrase. The way it would work would the court would describe each individual's responsibility toward the project. Then determine who that person worked for and how this specific show was put together. So what your saying is that potentialy several diffrent companies own the diffrent elements? If that's the case how is any one of the partner companies able to make other projects based off the original with out any sort of involvment of the other? If that isn't what your saying could you provide some sort of example of what you are saying? Damnit I accidently logged with my friend's ID... Druna Skass Actually, it's more like following the chain of command to the top and where the money came from for the production. The person at the top is the one ultimately responsible, having carried most of the risk.
the white drew carey Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 So what your saying is that potentialy several diffrent companies own the diffrent elements? If that's the case how is any one of the partner companies able to make other projects based off the original with out any sort of involvment of the other? If that isn't what your saying could you provide some sort of example of what you are saying? Damnit I accidently logged with my friend's ID... Druna Skass Frankly, things are still a tad unclear and everyone is basing their opinions on the matter as to how they interpret the whole situation. As of yet, to my knowledge, no challenge and, hence, no ruling has been made as to ownership of the whole franchise. One could safely assume that the ultimate goal of the legal wrangling in Japan is BigWest's attempt to discern whether or not Tatsunoko had the ability to transfer the rights to everything Macross over to HG, and whether or not HG's claim of blanket ownership is hot air, or if they have a leg to stand on. Only the future will tell as to the final status of this conlict. As quoted in Game Informer, for Bandai to publicly state that they are considering releasing the new Macross game in the states might mean that some sort of impass may have been cleared, or that maybe they're just saying that simply for the hell of it.
Druna Skass Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 As of yet, to my knowledge, no challenge and, hence, no ruling has been made as to ownership of the whole franchise. Ahh, thank you, that's what I wanted to know...
wrylac Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) Let me pose this question to you all: If it were clear that TP does have the copyright to the story of SDF Macross, meaning BW doesn't, could TP have rightfully made claim against BW for infringing on their property by using the name Macross? I'm not talking about the character designs, I'm talking about using the Macross name and following the general story line, even in one animation keeping the same characters and using them to create a new animation. Also, for arguements sake, although I know they played a small role, let pretend TP had nothing to do with DYRL?. I'm just trying to use this as an example. Edited September 15, 2003 by wrylac
Radd Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 That really depends, Wyrlac, if you mean in Japan then the answer could quite possibly still be no. I'm still trying to find the specific discussion over this in the old forums, but the topic of different sorts of ownership came up. Apparently there are several different kinds of copyrights in Japan. While one might give someone 'ownership' of a story, someone else might have the copyright that allows them to create sequels and derivatives. At some point in the old thread it was stated that Big West got the copyright that allows them to make derivatives while Tatsunoko got a different copyright to the series, so even if that copyright ownership extended to the story then they still couldn't make any derivatives while Big West would be in the clear to do so. I apologize profusely for not having a link to that post, I'm still looking for it. I remember someone made a diagram to explain this. Can't remember who it was, though. If, on the otherhand, you meant that Tatsunoko did have the copyright over the story that allowed for derivatives, and Big West didn't and there was no exceptions made in the contract between the two companies, than I believe they could, if I understand what you're saying.
wrylac Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) Japanese Copyright Law and Charts Actually, I'm remembering the post you're talking about now. It was a misinterpertation of a chart that was only to exlempify the types of works that are protected as an author's right. Looking at the top chart, BW was only granted the Moral Right of authorship, the author's Moral Right gives no economic rights. TP were granted the rest of the copyright. EDITED graphic to represent Drew's note. To clarify, they each own seperate portions of the Author's Right. Edited September 15, 2003 by wrylac
the white drew carey Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Ummm, Wrylac... The part you circled clearly has ECONOMIC RIGHTS coming off of the AUTHOR'S RIGHTS, which you've circled and marked with BW's right. ???
wrylac Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) Ummm, Wrylac... The part you circled clearly has ECONOMIC RIGHTS coming off of the AUTHOR'S RIGHTS, which you've circled and marked with BW's right.??? Search animenewsnetwork.com archives for Macross related news. You'll find this: Dated Jan. 20, 2003 Source:Mainichi Shimbun.In a serious legal blow to Studio Nue, widely perceived as the original creators and rightful owners of Macross, the Tokyo district court today ruled that the rights associated with authorship, the "author's right," for the first Macross series, belong to Tatsunoko Productions, not Studio Nue. Head judge Toshiaki Inamura explained, "After Studio Nue planned the project, the general director was engaged creatively in producing the series entirely. Tatsunoko made a contract with each staff member and managed the production." Japanese copyright law gives ownership to the company when the body of work is created by its employees (or by people under contract) as a part of their duties. Therefore, the property right are guaranteed to the production company, not the planner(s) nor the director(s). In October 2002 the Tokyo district court ruled that the rights to the design of the Valkery belong to Studio Nue. Edited September 15, 2003 by wrylac
Radd Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Look a little more and you'll find this: Dated Jan. 21, 2003 Monday's ruling in favor of Tatsunoko Productions, originally considered a serious legal blow to Studio Nue, may in fact have little impact on the status of Macross in Japan or internationally. Although details are still incomplete, ANN will attempt to provide a comprehensive analysis of the decision.Perhaps the most significant question--that of derivative and merchandising rights--remains unanswered. The rights to Macross II, Macross Plus, "Do You Remember Love?" Movie, and other spin-off animation, as well as related merchandise, were not addressed by this ruling. The status of international merchandise also remains unclear. Furthermore, the merchandising rights of Bandai, Yamato/Sunwards, and Hasegawa were not mentioned. This court decision regards domestic copyright only; it is not believed that international copyright was ever in question. As a district court case, this verdict may (and likely will) be appealed twice. It should be stressed that Big West remains the legal copyright holder of the SDF Macross design elements, including characters and mecha. At this time, it is believed that Big West may continue to produce Macross shows using those and inspired designs without interference from Tatsunoko. This earlier ruling has already been appealed--unsuccessfully--by Tatsunoko. Noboru Ishiguro, series director, was not a member of either Big West or Studio Nue's staff, and production was completed primarily by Tatsunoko. Under Chapter 2, Section 2, Article 16 of the Japanese copyright law, Tatsunoko is granted copyright by default. However, Big West may claim in appeal that direction of the Macross series was also headed by Shoji Kawamori--who works for Studio Nue--and as such would take precedence over the animators. It is not known if any Tatsunoko personnel were involved in story direction. Few have argued that Tatsunoko Productions did not have the rights to the original "Super Dimensional Fortress Macross" television animation because it had been confirmed that they aided both in funding and production. As a result, this court ruling confirms that Tatsunoko was within its rights to license the series to Harmony Gold for distibution in the United States. The ruling's impact on the US market is expected to be minimal if any; in Japan, the production of several SDF Macross-inspired models may be delayed or canceled, but no further immediate repercussions are anticipated. The rights to Macross spin-off series and merchandise will remain in question until Big West or Tatsunoko proceeds with further litigation or an international distributor (other than Harmony Gold) attempts to license other Macross products.
wrylac Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Look a little more and you'll find this:Dated Jan. 21, 2003 Monday's ruling in favor of Tatsunoko Productions, originally considered a serious legal blow to Studio Nue, may in fact have little impact on the status of Macross in Japan or internationally. Although details are still incomplete, ANN will attempt to provide a comprehensive analysis of the decision.Perhaps the most significant question--that of derivative and merchandising rights--remains unanswered. The rights to Macross II, Macross Plus, "Do You Remember Love?" Movie, and other spin-off animation, as well as related merchandise, were not addressed by this ruling. The status of international merchandise also remains unclear. Furthermore, the merchandising rights of Bandai, Yamato/Sunwards, and Hasegawa were not mentioned. This court decision regards domestic copyright only; it is not believed that international copyright was ever in question. As a district court case, this verdict may (and likely will) be appealed twice. It should be stressed that Big West remains the legal copyright holder of the SDF Macross design elements, including characters and mecha. At this time, it is believed that Big West may continue to produce Macross shows using those and inspired designs without interference from Tatsunoko. This earlier ruling has already been appealed--unsuccessfully--by Tatsunoko. Noboru Ishiguro, series director, was not a member of either Big West or Studio Nue's staff, and production was completed primarily by Tatsunoko. Under Chapter 2, Section 2, Article 16 of the Japanese copyright law, Tatsunoko is granted copyright by default. However, Big West may claim in appeal that direction of the Macross series was also headed by Shoji Kawamori--who works for Studio Nue--and as such would take precedence over the animators. It is not known if any Tatsunoko personnel were involved in story direction. Few have argued that Tatsunoko Productions did not have the rights to the original "Super Dimensional Fortress Macross" television animation because it had been confirmed that they aided both in funding and production. As a result, this court ruling confirms that Tatsunoko was within its rights to license the series to Harmony Gold for distibution in the United States. The ruling's impact on the US market is expected to be minimal if any; in Japan, the production of several SDF Macross-inspired models may be delayed or canceled, but no further immediate repercussions are anticipated. The rights to Macross spin-off series and merchandise will remain in question until Big West or Tatsunoko proceeds with further litigation or an international distributor (other than Harmony Gold) attempts to license other Macross products. That second article was written by ANN themselves and was not from a "serious" news source. It is basically the compilation of the speculative arguments that were presented on the old message board when the news was released.
the white drew carey Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Look a little more and you'll find this:Dated Jan. 21, 2003 Monday's ruling in favor of Tatsunoko Productions, originally considered a serious legal blow to Studio Nue, may in fact have little impact on the status of Macross in Japan or internationally. Although details are still incomplete, ANN will attempt to provide a comprehensive analysis of the decision.Perhaps the most significant question--that of derivative and merchandising rights--remains unanswered. The rights to Macross II, Macross Plus, "Do You Remember Love?" Movie, and other spin-off animation, as well as related merchandise, were not addressed by this ruling. The status of international merchandise also remains unclear. Furthermore, the merchandising rights of Bandai, Yamato/Sunwards, and Hasegawa were not mentioned. This court decision regards domestic copyright only; it is not believed that international copyright was ever in question. As a district court case, this verdict may (and likely will) be appealed twice. It should be stressed that Big West remains the legal copyright holder of the SDF Macross design elements, including characters and mecha. At this time, it is believed that Big West may continue to produce Macross shows using those and inspired designs without interference from Tatsunoko. This earlier ruling has already been appealed--unsuccessfully--by Tatsunoko. Noboru Ishiguro, series director, was not a member of either Big West or Studio Nue's staff, and production was completed primarily by Tatsunoko. Under Chapter 2, Section 2, Article 16 of the Japanese copyright law, Tatsunoko is granted copyright by default. However, Big West may claim in appeal that direction of the Macross series was also headed by Shoji Kawamori--who works for Studio Nue--and as such would take precedence over the animators. It is not known if any Tatsunoko personnel were involved in story direction. Few have argued that Tatsunoko Productions did not have the rights to the original "Super Dimensional Fortress Macross" television animation because it had been confirmed that they aided both in funding and production. As a result, this court ruling confirms that Tatsunoko was within its rights to license the series to Harmony Gold for distibution in the United States. The ruling's impact on the US market is expected to be minimal if any; in Japan, the production of several SDF Macross-inspired models may be delayed or canceled, but no further immediate repercussions are anticipated. The rights to Macross spin-off series and merchandise will remain in question until Big West or Tatsunoko proceeds with further litigation or an international distributor (other than Harmony Gold) attempts to license other Macross products. That second article was written by ANN themselves and was not from a "serious" news source. It is basically the compilation of the speculative arguments that were presented on the old message board when the news was released. Hah! Things that don't say what you want them to aren't considered "serious" news sources. Secondly, I don't think ANN would report speculation from a fan board as news. I think before you make any claims such as that you should e-mail them and ask them directly whether or not that is the case. Other than that, it's simply a baseless accusation.
the white drew carey Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Ummm... I may be an idiot, but it seems to me that all info regarding Macross 7 Trash (including the press release) is gone from TokyoPop's site. I did a search with their in-site engine and Macross only came up when they mention another Kawamori project. Has Macross 7 Trash been sidelined?
SuperOstrich Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Wrylac, do you consider yourself a "serious" news source? If we are to believe anything that you have said in this arguement, then we should also take note of ANN's interpretation. Both you and ANN are simply coming up with a possible scenario based on facts of the case. Neither of you know for sure what is going to happen. Period. And quite frankly, I'd be more inclined to believe ANN's interpretation given that they are simply a news-reporting agency. I haven't seen anything that would suggest they are biased to either side.
cwbrown Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) Secondly, I don't think ANN would report speculation from a fan board as news. I think before you make any claims such as that you should e-mail them and ask them directly whether or not that is the case. Other than that, it's simply a baseless accusation. I don't trust ANN for anything. Remember that article they printed that said that "HG lost everything"? I think that ANN prints only fan speculation and discussion boards. Edit: I would also agree that ANN is potentially no more or less reliable than anyone here, but I do think ANN is more ignorant (as in doesn't know as much) as the people here to make intelligent speculation. Edited September 15, 2003 by cwbrown
wrylac Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) Wrylac, do you consider yourself a "serious" news source? If we are to believe anything that you have said in this arguement, then we should also take note of ANN's interpretation. Both you and ANN are simply coming up with a possible scenario based on facts of the case. Neither of you know for sure what is going to happen. Period. And quite frankly, I'd be more inclined to believe ANN's interpretation given that they are simply a news-reporting agency. I haven't seen anything that would suggest they are biased to either side. In no way should you take me more seriously than ANN. I'm just pointing out that they aren't really any more reliable than any of us. Also, when that article popped up the next day I remember saying to myself this is point by point what was on the MW message boards yesterday. But really, that's not the point. Edited September 15, 2003 by wrylac
wrylac Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Ummm... I may be an idiot, but it seems to me that all info regarding Macross 7 Trash (including the press release) is gone from TokyoPop's site. I did a search with their in-site engine and Macross only came up when they mention another Kawamori project.Has Macross 7 Trash been sidelined? It's still on the RT.com website.
1st Border Red Devil Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) Things that don't say what you want them to aren't considered "serious" news sources. I hate myself for getting back into this...but as to ANN's credibility....they have none. They are blatantly Anti-Harmony Gold and have little journalistic integrity. While it is ok to have an opinion (even a strong one), you aren't supposed to let it become personal. ANN let it be personal. EDIT: And to back up what others are saying...none of us has credibility either. All of our rantings are based on fan perceptions. Edited September 15, 2003 by 1st Border Red Devil
Effect Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Ummm... I may be an idiot, but it seems to me that all info regarding Macross 7 Trash (including the press release) is gone from TokyoPop's site. I did a search with their in-site engine and Macross only came up when they mention another Kawamori project.Has Macross 7 Trash been sidelined? Strange. I just checked myself and your right. Maybe it was pulled. Could be due to the part in the press release about them working with HG. Maybe that got back to BW.
Apollo Leader Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 http://www.robotech.com/news/viewarticle.php?id=175 The news release is still on the front page of Robotech.com I searched Tokyo Pop's site myself and find absolutelty nothing about Macross 7. I wouldn't be surprised if Big West got in touch with them over this deal.
SuperOstrich Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 I don't trust ANN for anything. Remember that article they printed that said that "HG lost everything"? I think that ANN prints only fan speculation and discussion boards. Edit: I would also agree that ANN is potentially no more or less reliable than anyone here, but I do think ANN is more ignorant (as in doesn't know as much) as the people here to make intelligent speculation. ANN is no more or less ignorant to the facts than anyone here. However, I believe their information is more reliable because they don't appear to be biased to either side. I think you're exaggerating the "HG lost everything" statement, although I can't remember exactly how it was presented. IIRC, they reported the court case decision and speculated that this PERHAPS meant HG may lose a great deal of power regarding the Macross franchise.
SuperOstrich Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Also, when that article popped up the next day I remember saying to myself this is point by point what was on the MW message boards yesterday. Heh, are you serious? I think you're seeing things the way you want to see them.
Apollo Leader Posted September 15, 2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Things that don't say what you want them to aren't considered "serious" news sources. I hate myself for getting back into this...but as to ANN's credibility....they have none. They are blatantly Anti-Harmony Gold and have little journalistic integrity. While it is ok to have an opinion (even a strong one), you aren't supposed to let it become personal. ANN let it be personal. EDIT: And to back up what others are saying...none of us has credibility either. All of our rantings are based on fan perceptions. If you frequently keep your eyes on ANN, they have many a time posted Robotech and Harmony Gold related items in a non-slanted, unbiased way.
wrylac Posted September 16, 2003 Posted September 16, 2003 Also, when that article popped up the next day I remember saying to myself this is point by point what was on the MW message boards yesterday. Heh, are you serious? I think you're seeing things the way you want to see them. Interesting, that whole days posts were deleted but justvinnie made this comment: Dated Jan. 21, 2003 Seems like someone at ANN reads MacrossWorld. The Jan 20th ruling article was almost a direct copy of the thread in the Series forum. At least someone is paying attention. Link
SuperOstrich Posted September 16, 2003 Posted September 16, 2003 Interesting, that whole days posts were deleted but justvinnie made this comment: I don't think they were deleted. They were probably lost due to a server crash or something. Happened 4 or 5 times on the old boards.
Apollo Leader Posted September 16, 2003 Posted September 16, 2003 There's also been a few times turing that thread's life where no one posted to it for days if not even a week or two.
.thumb.jpg.bc0aa3d6a43314c42575bd21a0963db5.jpg)
Recommended Posts