HG and Robotech Debates

[Seto Kaiba]

LET SAY THIS IS ALL TRUE. JUST FOR ARGUMENT..

We don't need to "say" it's all true, it IS all true... and just for yuks, I'll prove it.

Copyrights are protected internationally under a variety of treaties, including the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Big West and Studio Nue's copyrights on the intellectual property of the Macross series are honored in all 164 countries which honor the Berne convention, as well as other treaties. Both America and Japan are included in the list of countries that honor those treaties.

That the copyright on a derivative work only covers new material not present in the original work and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of the copyright protection for the original work is established by law... specifically, 17 U.S.C. § 103(b).

Carl Macek explained that Harmony Gold couldn't use the original character designs in an interview published in the August '95 run of Robotech comics. The pertinent excerpt from the interview is thus:

Q: Why were the characters from the Sentinels so different in appearance from those of the Macross series?

A: The reason that the characters look as they do in the Sentinels animation was simply that Harmony Gold could not use the character designs for the existing characters. Also, we didn't want to commision Haruhiko Mikimoto (character designer for Macross) to create a bunch of new designs for all of the new characters that appear in the Sentinels series.

There you have it... no assumptions necessary MEMO, I deal in hard facts.

WOULD IT NOT BE EASY FOR THE COURT DECISION TO BE OVERTURNED? OR SOMEONE OR COMPANY TO TRY?

WOULD MAKE THAT ARGUMENT..FEASIBLE?

Well, the only company that could conceivably attempt to overturn the Japanese court rulings would be Tatsunoko, and as the appeals on both sides are pretty much exhausted, the situation regarding who owns what rights to Macross won't change. Big West/Studio Nue still own the copyrighted intellectual property of the series and the franchise itself, while Tatsunoko owns only the footage they funded the creation of (but not the Big West/Studio Nue-owned IP it contains), and the rights they were granted under their initial contract with Big West/Studio Nue (merchandising and distribution outside of Japan).

As to whether someone could attempt to overturn Harmony Gold et. al. v. FASA et. al., it's certainly possible if the current owners of the Battletech/MechWarrior franchise want to make a fight of it. They'd lose horribly since there's no arguing that Harmony Gold's merchandising rights to the series in the US and abroad are exclusive and quite legitimately acquired. That whole Mechwarrior 5 thing has nothing at all to do with the intellectual property rights.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Seto Kaiba

[MEMO1DOMINION]

VF5SS

Court decisions cannot undo history. As Seto stated, Tatsunoko was never involved with the creation of Macross so all of the images used to create it and the IP rights are wholly owned by Big West.

HMMM...

SO WHAT THE COURT DECIDED IS NOT LEGAL? TALKING ABOUT THE U.S COURT SYSTEM HERE.

[MEMO1DOMINION]

SETO

We don't need to "say" it's all true, it IS all true... and just for yuks, I'll prove it.

I AM ASKING ONE THING...

DOES THE AMERICAN COURT LEGAL DECISION STAND? IN THIS COUNTRY OF THE U.S.A.?

[Seto Kaiba]

SO WHAT THE COURT DECIDED IS NOT LEGAL? TALKING ABOUT THE U.S COURT SYSTEM HERE.

Oh, what the court decided is legal enough, it's just concerned with a completely different, essentially unrelated set of rights to the original Macross series. Specifically, the Harmony Gold et. al. v. FASA et. al. court ruling concerns only the merchandising rights to the show. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the intellectual property in the show.

DOES THE AMERICAN COURT LEGAL DECISION STAND? IN THIS COUNTRY OF THE U.S.A.?

Yes, but as I have illustrated, the ruling does not contradict or in any way conflict with the Japanese court rulings because the US court ruling has nothing whatsoever to do with intellectual property rights. It's all about the merchandising rights Harmony Gold acquired from Tatsunoko in the 80s.

[Bri]

Don't see any legal angle in the US really. The only issue States side is HG clinging to the trademarks on the name Macross preventing Macross releases by other companies. Afaik the HG claim to the name Macross is legal. As Azreal discribed earlier, the US trademark system has a peculiarity that puts use before registration. HG could claim the name Macross as it used it in the US before IP holder Big West did.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Bri

[RedWolf]

SETO

LET SAY THIS IS ALL TRUE. JUST FOR ARGUMENT..

WOULD IT NOT BE EASY FOR THE COURT DECISION TO BE OVERTURNED? OR SOMEONE OR COMPANY TO TRY?

WOULD MAKE THAT ARGUMENT..FEASIBLE?

I suggest you read up Tsuburaya vs Chaiyo over the Ultraman franchise. The court battle went for years Tsuburaya still won in courts of both China and Thailand.

In copyright cases prior court decisions do bear weight. The Berne Convention and the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty make it unlikely for a court decision to be overturned by another court.

Thing is countries are not isolationist islands they do have treaties and trade agreements.

[MEMO1DOMINION]

SETO

Oh, what the court decided is legal enough

HUH?

but as I have illustrated, the ruling does not contradict or in any way conflict with the Japanese court rulings because the US court ruling has nothing whatsoever to do with intellectual property rights. It's all about the merchandising rights Harmony Gold acquired from Tatsunoko in the 80s.

COURT RULING

http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/

http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-4.txt

First, and most importantly, Harmony

Gold and Tatsunoko are joint owners of the copyrights to the Macross [*7]

designs in the United States. "The legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive

right under a copyright is entitled... to institute an action for any

infringement of that particular right committed while he or she is the owner of

it." 17 U.S.C. § 501

17 U.S.C. § 501

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_s...01----000-.html

[MEMO1DOMINION]

REDWOLF

I suggest you read up Tsuburaya vs Chaiyo over the Ultraman franchise. The court battle went for years Tsuburaya still won in courts of both China and Thailand.

In copyright cases prior court decisions do bear weight. The Berne Convention and the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty make it unlikely for a court decision to be overturned by another court.

Thing is countries are not isolationist islands they do have treaties and trade agreements.

THEN IT WOULD BE EASY TO GET THE RULING CHANGE.

THE RULING STANDS TILL IT IS OVERTURNED.

SO FAR, THE SAMPLES YOU BRING ARE QUITE VALID AND ONLY APPLY IF SOMEONE GOT THE COURT CASE OVERTURNED.

SO FAR.... NO ONE HAS STEPPED UP TO THE PLATE TO CHANGE IT.

Edited December 10, 2009 by MEMO1DOMINION

[azrael]

Memo, I know you don't have to, but since quite a few of the rt.com members you and Maverick helped ban are here, this should be a good place, especially since the topic can be discussed freely.

Actually, this is not a good place. If they got banned at rt.com, that ain't our problem and we'd like it to stay that way. Now, banning people from here...well then that's our problem.

[Bri]

COURT RULING

http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/

http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-4.txt

First, and most importantly, Harmony

Gold and Tatsunoko are joint owners of the copyrights to the Macross [*7]

designs in the United States. "The legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive

right under a copyright is entitled... to institute an action for any

infringement of that particular right committed while he or she is the owner of

it." 17 U.S.C. § 501

17 U.S.C. § 501

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_s...01----000-.html

The way I read it, according to the document. Tats gave HG co-ownership of it's designs. However Tats never owned these designs as confirmed by the Japanese lawsuits between BW and Tats. The judge just acknowledged this information as Fasa did not question it. I guess at the time both Tats, Fasa and HG thought Tats was the rightsholder but in hindsight they are not.

[MEMO1DOMINION]

BRI

The way I read it, according to the document. Tats gave HG co-ownership of it's designs. However Tats never owned these designs as confirmed by the Japanese lawsuits between BW and Tats. The judge just acknowledged this information as Fasa did not question it. I guess at the time both Tats, Fasa and HG thought Tats was the rightsholder but in hindsight they are not.

THEN, THE SECOND TIME AROUND, FASA COULD HAVE PULLED THE ACE CARD WHICH IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

BUT SOMETHING HAPPENED WHERE AS THE COURT DECISION STILL STANDS.

[Bri]

BRI

THEN, THE SECOND TIME AROUND, FASA COULD HAVE PULLED THE ACE CARD WHICH IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

I doubt it, as Fasa thought they had bought the rights from Tats as well through a second party arrangement. Fasa can't win if the rights are BW's.

"FASA claims to have acquired the rights to these model kits and images from Twentieth Century Imports ("TCI"), which allegedly acquired them from Tatsunoko".

Edited December 10, 2009 by Bri

[MEMO1DOMINION]

FROM SAME PAGE AS WELL

On January 15, 1984, Tatsunoko granted plaintiff Harmony Gold U.S.A., Inc.

("Harmony Gold") a license to market all products in the United States based on

the Macross designs except for Japanese plastic model kits. Harmony Gold

subsequently acquired co-ownership of the copyrights in both the original

Macross designs and any [*3] derivative works. Harmony Gold has incorporated

the Macross designs into an animated television series entitled "Robotech."

Additionally, Harmony Gold has marketed, through its sublicensees, a broad array

of "Robotech" products including publications, actions figures and toys.

[*3] derivative works.

THIS COURT RULING SURE SAYS A LOT.

[Robelwell202]

Okay... let me see if I can distill this down to an idiot's perspective...

With me being the idiot...

HG owns the footage rights to SDF:Mac, in partnership with Tatsunoku.

BW/SN own the characters, mecha, and other IP stuff that was used to make Macross.

So, because HG and TATSU DO NOT own the IP stuff, HG cannot legally use Macross Elements except in distribution of the original animated series.

No alteration of them, no useage of them outside of SDF:Macross and RT:Macross Saga. Am I getting this right, so far?

Now... FASA comes along, and leases the rights to certain Macross designs, but HG pulls the plug, so no more 'Warhammer'.

HG's got the MERCHANDISING rights to the stuff inside SDF:Macross, but they still cannot alter or use them in thier own productions.

Does that fit?

Please help.. I feel awfully confused.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Robelwell202

[EXO]

VFTF1,

EVEN MW IS RESTRICTIVE. OPEN UP THIS THREAD TO THE WHOLE PAGE LIKE BEFORE THEN ITS A WORLD OF A MESS.

THEN AGAIN, THIS IS A MACROSS PAGE.

HUH?

What's restrictive? That we try to keep the HG license debate to one thread instead of all over the place because it becomes a world of mess??? What do you mean by a Whole Page? So having having the argument run rampant thru the entire forum is much better than allowing an ongoing argument where anyone can say anything that they want in one thread??? (within the TOS that's enforced thruout the forums) You're bitching about something for the sake of being able to bitch about something that wont do anything significant for your own cause. It's like saying what's up with that movie Dances with Wolves.... He never really danced with any wolves...

[Seto Kaiba]

Don't see any legal angle in the US really. The only issue States side is HG clinging to the trademarks on the name Macross preventing Macross releases by other companies. Afaik the HG claim to the name Macross is legal. As Azreal discribed earlier, the US trademark system has a peculiarity that puts use before registration. HG could claim the name Macross as it used it in the US before IP holder Big West did.

Yeah, right now the only thing keeping Macross out of the US is a trademark beef centering around Harmony Gold's ethically-questionable but at least nominally legal trademark on the name "Macross".

COURT RULING

http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-4.txt

Had you actually read the document in question, you would know full well that it isn't a court ruling on the case... and that as such it has no weight whatsoever. What you have here is the outcome of FASA's motion for summary judgment in the case (denied), and as you know the case concluded with a confidential settlement rather than a ruling.

THIS COURT RULING SURE SAYS A LOT.

If only it were a ruling on the case, you might have had a point. Too bad it isn't one.

This is why you should read the whole document before attempting to use it as evidence.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Seto Kaiba

[Bri]

FROM SAME PAGE AS WELL

On January 15, 1984, Tatsunoko granted plaintiff Harmony Gold U.S.A., Inc.

("Harmony Gold") a license to market all products in the United States based on

the Macross designs except for Japanese plastic model kits. Harmony Gold

subsequently acquired co-ownership of the copyrights in both the original

Macross designs and any [*3] derivative works. Harmony Gold has incorporated

the Macross designs into an animated television series entitled "Robotech."

Additionally, Harmony Gold has marketed, through its sublicensees, a broad array

of "Robotech" products including publications, actions figures and toys.

[*3] derivative works.

THIS COURT RULING SURE SAYS A LOT.

Not really, it just states the relationship between HG and Tats. At the time the judge could not have been aware of the fact that Tats could not pass these rights over to HG as Tats never owned them. The legal rights on the designs were only confirmed in Japan post 2000.

Okay... let me see if I can distill this down to an idiot's perspective...

With me being the idiot...

HG owns the footage rights to SDF:Mac, in partnership with Tatsunoku.

So HG claims, the ownership rights of the footage by Tats are not in doubt though.

BW/SN own the characters, mecha, and other IP stuff that was used to make Macross.

Correct

So, because HG and TATSU DO NOT own the IP stuff, HG cannot legally use Macross Elements except in distribution of the original animated series.

Yes, except Hg can also use them in toys, videogames and comic books and whatever else in US legal terms is defined as merchandise. ( see the trademarks for the accurate description)

No alteration of them, no useage of them outside of SDF:Macross and RT:Macross Saga. Am I getting this right, so far?

Aye, not in any animation or live action movie at least

Now... FASA comes along, and leases the rights to certain Macross designs, but HG pulls the plug, so no more 'Warhammer'.

Yup

HG's got the MERCHANDISING rights to the stuff inside SDF:Macross, but they still cannot alter or use them in thier own productions.

Yup, but as stated before they can use the images from SDFM for toys, comics and other mechandise.

Does that fit?

Please help.. I feel awfully confused.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Bri

[MEMO1DOMINION]

COOL BRI.

SO FASA DID GET HANDED. YEAH, FASA LOST.

SETO

Had you actually read the document in question, you would know full well that it isn't a court ruling on the case... and that as such it has no weight whatsoever. What you have here is the outcome of FASA's motion for summary judgment in the case (denied), and as you know the case concluded with a confidential settlement rather than a ruling.

A U.S. COURT RECOGNIZES HG LEGAL PAPERS. QUOTED ABOVE.

AND STILL.. WHY NO ONE HAS CHALLENGED THE COURTS.

[Bri]

COOL BRI.

SO FASA DID GET HANDED. YEAH, FASA LOST.

SETO

A U.S. COURT RECOGNIZES HG LEGAL PAPERS. QUOTED ABOVE.

AND STILL.. WHY NO ONE HAS CHALLENGED THE COURTS.

Because there wasn't a ruling, as Seto stated. Fasa backed off and settled. And even if FASA would start a new case they can't win.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Bri

[Seto Kaiba]

COOL BRI.

SO FASA DID GET HANDED. YEAH, FASA LOST.

I guess you could say that FASA "lost", in that they decided it would be less costly to settle rather than fight it out in the courts.

A U.S. COURT RECOGNIZES HG LEGAL PAPERS. QUOTED ABOVE.

No matter how much of a fuss you make about it, it's still not a ruling on the case so it doesn't mean squat.

AND STILL.. WHY NO ONE HAS CHALLENGED THE COURTS.

Because there's nothing to challenge? The business with FASA was settled confidentially and by the look of things the current Battletech and MechWarrior license holders don't think it's worth it to go back to court when they know they'll lose on the grounds that Harmony Gold has exclusive merchandising rights to Macross (outside of Japan) obtained under license from Tatsunoko.

The Japanese court rulings concerning ownership of the copyrighted intellectual property of the Macross series and ownership of the copyright on the footage have been appealed several times, and I believe both sides have run out of appeals... so the rulings stand as they are.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Seto Kaiba

[VFTF1]

HUH?

What's restrictive? That we try to keep the HG license debate to one thread instead of all over the place because it becomes a world of mess??? What do you mean by a Whole Page? So having having the argument run rampant thru the entire forum is much better than allowing an ongoing argument where anyone can say anything that they want in one thread??? (within the TOS that's enforced thruout the forums) You're bitching about something for the sake of being able to bitch about something that wont do anything significant for your own cause. It's like saying what's up with that movie Dances with Wolves.... He never really danced with any wolves...

Maybe it's because I've lived in foriegn countries and heard people speaking twisted english in so many possible variations that it would make your head explode that I'm finding myself quite good at translating Memo into comprehensible english.

Memo says:

EVEN MW IS RESTRICTIVE. OPEN UP THIS THREAD TO THE WHOLE PAGE LIKE BEFORE THEN ITS A WORLD OF A MESS.

THEN AGAIN, THIS IS A MACROSS PAGE.

Pete's Translation:

Macrossworld is not a place where anybody can do what they want (therefore it is restrictive).

The way in which Macross world is restrictive is that it doesn't allow the contents of this thread to become an open topic in on the entire webpage because that would create a mess. Also, I guess since this is a Macross forum, then the topic of this thread (Robotech) would have no place in a Macross forum outside of this specific thread, and therefore Macrossworld is restrictive insofar as it restricts itself to Macross - except in this thread.

That's how I understood what Memo wrote

Pete

[azrael]

Not really, it just states the relationship between HG and Tats. At the time the judge could not have been aware of the fact that Tats could not pass these rights over to HG as Tats never owned them. The legal rights on the designs were only confirmed in Japan post 2000.

Also keep in mind FASA never presented the evidence to the court. And with the burden of proof on FASA, they would have needed needed to show that TCI got a license for the designs from BW.

Not really, it just states the relationship between HG and Tats. At the time the judge could not have been aware of the fact that Tats could not pass these rights over to HG as Tats never owned them. The legal rights on the designs were only confirmed in Japan post 2000.

Again, true. That blurb is just background information about the case.

HG owns the footage rights to SDF:Mac, in partnership with Tatsunoku.

Yes.

BW/SN own the characters, mecha, and other IP stuff that was used to make Macross.

Yes.

So, because HG and TATSU DO NOT own the IP stuff, HG cannot legally use Macross Elements except in distribution of the original animated series.

Yes. Their usage only applies to distribution of media, merchandising (toys, games, printed media, clothing, that sorta stuff).

No alteration of them, no useage of them outside of SDF:Macross and RT:Macross Saga. Am I getting this right, so far?

Define "alteration" (We know what the word means, but clarify for the sake of clarity). They can reproduce those images but they cannot create derivative works because they do not own the copyright to those images.

Now... FASA comes along, and leases the rights to certain Macross designs, but HG pulls the plug, so no more 'Warhammer'.

This was WAY back in the 1990s. Before BW v. Tatsunoko.

HG's got the MERCHANDISING rights to the stuff inside SDF:Macross, but they still cannot alter or use them in thier own productions.

Again, what do you mean by "alter". They cannot use them in derivative works.

I guess you could say that FASA "lost", in that they decided it would be less costly to settle rather than fight it out in the courts.

The court also told them to "F*ck off" because it came to the point about arguing about who's gonna pay the attorney fees.

[MastaEgg]

That court case between HG and FASA concerns Macross merchandising rights, not Macross intellectual property rights. They should of mentioned it, because there's a BIG difference. It's probably why people are so confused by it.

[RedWolf]

REDWOLF

THEN IT WOULD BE EASY TO GET THE RULING CHANGE.

THE RULING STANDS TILL IT IS OVERTURNED.

SO FAR, THE SAMPLES YOU BRING ARE QUITE VALID AND ONLY APPLY IF SOMEONE GOT THE COURT CASE OVERTURNED.

SO FAR.... NO ONE HAS STEPPED UP TO THE PLATE.

You're misunderstanding international copyright law. For that matter I think you never went to court ever. Court shopping to get a favorable descision over one lost often never works because a court decision with premises and evidences of the case can already influence the judges or the juries of the case.

The reason why I brought up Tsuburaya vs Chaiyo is that the case of HG hampering Macross goods in the US is almost a direct fit to the actions Chaiyo Ltd did, who tried to block the international release of Ultra series by Tsuburaya Productions, claiming they own the Ultraman brand.

HG vs FASA is a merchandise dispute. Same thing happened with the Jetfire Transformers toy of Hasbro.

The Tokyo Court gave the IP rights to Big West and Studio Nue because they were involved in the creation of SDF Macross. Tatsunoko is a late comer in the production. (Episodes 28 to 36)

Tatsunoko also has minor production credit to DYRL. On those the court granted merchandising rights to Tatsunoko for only SDF Macross TV (the cartoon, and merchandise outside Japan) and DYRL (toys merchandise only). The character designs, mecha designs and storyline belong to Big West. By the same logic Big West does not have the IP rights to Southern Cross because it is the creation of Tatsunoko's sister studio Amonite. Thus if we go to the logical conclusion the license which HG obtained is only applicable to the SDF Macross TV cartoon/merchandise and DYRL merchandise. HG does not have any legal right to the Macross IP rights or any of its derivative works.

If push came to shove Big West could file a lawsuit against HG for profiteering over their Macross property. The TokyoPop Macross 7 Trash manga US release where HG got a underserved credit is a clear one. Blocking Big West other Macross merchandise is another.

For the moment Big West does not have the same drive of protectiveness of their IP rights as Tsuburaya Productions when it comes internationally.

[Robelwell202]

What I mean by 'alter' might be something of a 'wrong word' situation. I guess what I mean is, HG cannot use the Macross IP elements in stuff that they do themselves (RT:TSC, RT:SR, etc.)

I hope this makes it a bit clearer.

Remember, I am one of the resident idiots of the board, so be easy...

[MEMO1DOMINION]

azrael

This was WAY back in the 1990s. Before BW v. Tatsunoko.

JUDGES:

Wayne R. Anderson, United States District Judge

OPINIONBY:

Wayne R. Anderson

OPINION:

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

SETO

The Japanese court rulings concerning ownership of the copyrighted intellectual property of the Macross series and ownership of the copyright on the footage have been appealed several times, and I believe both sides have run out of appeals... so the rulings stand as they are

IF THAT IS THE CASE...

WHY NO ONE HAS CHANGED THE COURT ORDER. IT STILL A U.S. OF A. COURT ORDER

Edited December 10, 2009 by MEMO1DOMINION

[Einherjar]

For the moment Big West does not have the same drive of protectiveness of their IP rights as Tsuburaya Productions when it comes internationally.

And with that thinking, BW may not see the Robotech LAM as big a threat to their rights at the moment to go pursue anything.

[azrael]

I guess what I mean is, HG cannot use the Macross IP elements in stuff that they do themselves (RT:TSC, RT:SR, etc.)

That is correct. They can make comics and toys using stuff from SDFM because that's merchandising and falls with their trademark. But the moment they attempt to create a derivative work (like the works you mentioned) using those designs, then it gets very messy.

[Seto Kaiba]

JUDGES:

Wayne R. Anderson, United States District Judge

OPINIONBY:

Wayne R. Anderson

It's still not a ruling on the case MEMO, all that document pertains to is the court's decision not to grant FASA's motion for summary judgment. Its only relevance is in that it establishes that the court didn't think FASA had the grounds to file for summary judgment. No matter how much you quote it, the fact that it is not a ruling and has no force will not change.

IF THAT IS THE CASE...

WHY NO ONE HAS CHANGED THE COURT ORDER. IT STILL A COURT ORDER

What court order? That document has no relevance whatsoever outside of the court case it pertains to, and specifically FASA's motion for summary judgment in that case. There's no need to change it because there's nothing to change. The case is over, has been for ages. It wasn't ended with a judgment by the court, it ended in a confidential settlement.

Just so we're clear here... "changing" that decision to deny FASA's motion for summary judgment would accomplish one thing, granting FASA's motion for summary judgment in a case that was settled a decade ago. (In short, it would accomplish NOTHING)

Edited December 10, 2009 by Seto Kaiba

[MEMO1DOMINION]

SETO

It wasn't ended with a judgment by the court, it ended in a confidential settlement.

WELL YEAH. THEY COULD NOT FIGHT THE COURT DECISION AND ORDER ON THE DOCUMENT.

TILL THIS CHANGES, U.S. COURT STILL SEE NO PROBLEM. BW COULD JUST CHANGE THAT EASILY.

[Seto Kaiba]

My god... do you have to TRY to be this ignorant? Seriously man.

WELL YEAH. THEY COULD NOT FIGHT THE COURT DECISION AND ORDER ON THE DOCUMENT.

Again, the only thing that document establishes is the court's rationale for denying FASA's motion for summary judgment. The ONLY effect it had on the case was that they would have had to actually argue the case instead of just skipping right to the judgment. That document has no bearing on the actual substance of the case itself.

TILL THIS CHANGES, U.S. COURT STILL SEE NO PROBLEM. BW COULD JUST CHANGE THAT EASILY.

Again, THIS IS NOT A RULING ON THE CASE. The ONLY affect it had on the case was that FASA's motion for summary judgment was denied. That's all. NOTHING ELSE. Nothing NEEDS to be changed because it DOES NOT ESTABLISH ANYTHING REGARDING THE CASE. IT IS NOT A RULING.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Seto Kaiba

[azrael]

For the masses to review.

http://terrania.us/hg-fasa/legal-4.txt

DISPOSITION:

[*1] Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.

12© or, in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56

is denied.

...

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This case is before the Court on the motion of defendants FASA Corporation ("

FASA") and Virtual World Entertainment ("VWE") for judgment on the pleadings

pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12© or, in the alternative, for summary judgment

pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the following reasons, the motion is denied.

...

CONCLUSION

For all of the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion for judgment on the

pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12© or, in the [*11] alternative, for

summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 is denied.

It is so ordered.

Wayne R. Andersen

United States District Judge

Dated: June 12, 1996

That's all this document is about.

My god... do you have to TRY to be this ignorant? Seriously man.

Seto, stop before you blow that vein. It ain't worth it.

[Bri]

If push came to shove Big West could file a lawsuit against HG for profiteering over their Macross property. The TokyoPop Macross 7 Trash manga US release where HG got a underserved credit is a clear one. Blocking Big West other Macross merchandise is another.

For the moment Big West does not have the same drive of protectiveness of their IP rights as Tsuburaya Productions when it comes internationally.

I'm not sure about this, BW actively intervened when HG filed for the Macross trademarks so it's hard to say BW doesn't care.

SETO

WELL YEAH. THEY COULD NOT FIGHT THE COURT DECISION AND ORDER ON THE DOCUMENT.

TILL THIS CHANGES, U.S. COURT STILL SEE NO PROBLEM. BW COULD JUST CHANGE THAT EASILY.

Why would BW want to have that text changed? It doesn't affect them in the slightest.

[MEMO1DOMINION]

SETO.

ALL I KNOW IF ONE GOES AGAINST A JUDGES ORDER, YOU IN A WORLD OF HURT.

It is so ordered.

Wayne R. Andersen

United States District Judge

Dated: June 12, 1996

THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO CHANGE THAT IS BY GOING TO COURT.

Edited December 11, 2009 by MEMO1DOMINION

[jenius]

Did HG and FASA have their legal tango before or after FASA's legal tango with Playmates?