cwbrown

I apologize that I apparently read more into your statements than you meant. I've been following this issue for a long time and the uncalled for speculation has run rampant (starting with anime news networks first article). Guess my automatic reaction overdid it there.

I only put the quote up to demonstrate that whatever Tat owns, HG co-owns. It answers the question "How long is HG's license/contract?" The answer, in perpetuity. As I recall when I found the case, got it translated, tried to get an understanding, and posted it (yes, that was me), the case only dealt with the domestic (Japan only) rights. It did not address what rights Tat had outside Japan. My own belief (and this is just speculation) is that Tat wanted to do something with Macross inside Japan, which led to the lawsuit. Furthermore, neither you nor I know what BW's stance is. BW's licensee's have talked about releasing products, HG has done its C&Ds, the licensees back off. That doesn't demonstrate anybody's stance (other than HG's continuing belief it has the right to stop these licensees). As far as I know, BW has never made its "stance" regarding the international market public. And? Yes, there was a settlement, and it does apparently contain a confidentiality agreement. So what? Many, many settlement agreements contain confidentiality agreements of one form or another. Parties usually don't want their dirty laundry splashed all over the place. The settlement also means that HG can't disucss it either. But there is no "hidden" meaning behind it.

Ask and ye shall receive: 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 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. Harmony Gold, U.S.A., Inc. v. FASA Corp., 1996 WL 332689 (N.D. Ill. 1996). It's not a formal finding of fact, but should answer your question. And I still say, for the record, that we still don't know if it's Big West causing the problems. It could be HG wants $5 per item and its name on the box, and that's it. Big West could simply be balking at giving HG anything. We don't know and nobody should jump to any conclusions.

Tatsunoko has to fold for Big West to reacquire all rights. Remember, HG is licensed by Tatsunoko, not directly from Big West. 351201[/snapback] It's a lot more complicated than that. 1. HG is co-owner with Tat. It was originally a license, but htey eventually became co-owners. 2. Even if Tat and HG fold, that doesn't mean that BW automatically get the rights. Corporation law doesn't work that way. The assets of the company are distributed to the shareholders (i.e., Agrama and whoever are the shareholders of Tat). That, or the assets are liquidated, then distributed. 3. Even if Agrama is in trouble, that has nothing to do with HG. A company is a separate and distinct "person". If it has doesn't anything illegal, it can't be held responsible for anything Agrama might have done independently.

If you're really bored, I found it on EDonkey. It's a lousy copy, looks like it was recorded off of a tape. But it's there if you're interested.

Actually, my understanding is that there are no previous laws restricting sales of any games to children. All the laws so far have been struck down as against the First Amendment because they are content-based (it's complicated). For example, Illionois had a law banning games that were "too violent" for everybody. This was struck down. However, I do not believe that any state passed a law banning sales to children of M or AO games alone, which would probably hold up because "it protects the children" (it's a cute, but understandable, hole in the First Amendment jurisprudence).

Remember, Animeigo sublicensed it from HG. No one knows. HG refuses to show anyone their license. It's POSSIBLE that it already has, but we don't know. Just a quick question here, I'm sure there is an answer but I don't know exactly...but if HG cannot show a license, even if they claim they got one, how can they stop Macross merchanising in other states and countries? 325843[/snapback] Well, the thing is that it's never made it through the courts. The only case I know of that even came close was the Battletech suit. They settled out of court, with one of the conditions of the settlement being that they not talk about the case or settlement. So the guys from Fasa are the only people that MIGHT have ever seen the license, and they're legally bound to not speak about it. No one else has ever made it TO the courts. They usually cave when they recieve the first threats, because they can't afford to fight it. 325896[/snapback] Few things. Generally, most things won't need to go to court. Really, about three companies would ever need to have any knowledge of the actual terms of HG's license, and one of them only barely. Those three: HG, Tatsunoko, and Big West. And, as long as Tatsunoko and Big West are clear on what Tatsunoko took away from their deal, all Big West needs to know is that Tatsunoko gave HG a complete license. Second, HG has said its license is for perpetuity. Third, I think that eweilen (sp?) hit the nail on the head several pages back. Most of the fight really has to have been over the trademark of the name Macross. If HG got the mark registered (which it did), it has exclusive rights to the mark for its products (and related products) in the relevant channels of commerce. I haven't reviewed it entirely, but there's a pretty long history of the mark in the USPTO records. It would also explain how Macross Plus got through (done after the mark lost its registration while HG wasn't actively tracking, using, or renewing). It appears from those same records that Big West started opposing the most recent registrations, but then abandoned those challenges. So, something clearly happened between the companies, whether it was a beat down or a negotiation, can't really tell. It would also explain the lack of "court" cases. Trademark registration issues are resolved usually by the Trademark Board, not courts. So, there you go.

I just want to know what they needed the flood equipment for in Iraq. That's all. The Tigris and Euphrates Rivers flow pretty much the length of the country. Huge historical flood plain. Iraq Map Reading in the Geography section it says "Natural hazards: dust storms, sandstorms, floods".

I'll probably get the Xbox 360 first, then some time down the line the PS3. Oddly, more than the next gen gaming system, I'm looking forward to the Media Center Extender abilities. I've been thinking about picking up the parts for that for my XBox, but if it will appear in the next 8 months, I can wait a little longer. It'll be nice to have the media capabilities with music and movies streamed to my living room, plus the (rumored?) detachable hard drive to act as an MP3 player. I just hope that MS embeds a wireless connection after learning of it in the PS3. Really, I don't see my XBox having worn out its hardware though, so I still think MS has been a little fast bringing out its next gen. But, that's the nature of it since the PlayStation2 has probably pushed its hardware limit by this point. Odd part there is that I haven't really noticed that either. Although I probably will when the new systems come out.

The main point of my post was to say, yes, you will get a hold of a product now and for the foreseeable future. And well, I want one of those new Ford Shelby Mustangs. Doesn't mean I can get one legally right now (i.e., other than stealing it). To quote them Stones, "You can't always get what you want". Life's tough. According to the jury, Sony broke the law. It's paying for it. You might want. At this point, you can still get. And for the foreseeable future, you will be able to get. Doesn't mean you always get to get.

Time to calm down boys and girls. Few things to keep in mind: 1. Sony was found to infringe. 2. Damages were about 90 mill. 3. The court granted an injunction to prevent Sony from selling the controllers and games listed. 4. The court immediately put a stay on that order until after an appeal is complete. This means that Sony can keep on doing what it's doing. 5. If Sony loses on appeal, it will just set up a licensing agreement. Sony has already said so in a CNN article on this subject. Immersion is not interested in stopping the PS2. That would only hurt it with sales as strong as they are. Immersion just wants to get paid for the use of its inventions. The injunction is just a nice big hammer to make Sony pay up. Any questions?

Yeah, I guess posting a picture with Dooku with both hands chopped off with Anakin standing before him wasn't a spoiler or anything. And excuse me and the others who don't want the movie experience ruined for them. Standing orders are no spoilers in this thread that aren't common knowledge. Anybody has a problem with that, go to the other thread. The only question I have is what is "common knowledge"? It's only a somewhat dumb question. I knew coming into this thread I was going to have parts of the movie spoiled. I had no idea who General Grevous was, didn't know any ship types, etc. In fact, I didn't even know Dooku was even in the movie. Since my lack of common knowledge is probably a lot more common, this thread is just one big spoiler. The only real "common knowledge" is that Anakin becomes Vader at some point in the film. Fortunately, now there is a separate thread that you won't complain anymore. But I think your understanding of what "everyone" knows is a little skewed.

How did you get it for $55? I just went there and it's listed at $76.87. Extended Trilogy

I ended up ordering it online through Best Buy for $72.99. It was sold out everywhere I tried here in Portland. With the online system, I ordered it with "store pickup", got an email later saying that it was not available, and it had an offer for free shipping. Ordered it Tuesday, I think I will get it Monday.

Yeah, Jolly's got it right. Any of the dealers could, but it's probably prohibitively expensive. In case you didn't know, just a cheap, run-of-the-mill lawsuit can easily cost $20,000 to prosecute. A Dec Action requires the filing of a complete complaint, with all the requirements of service of process. At $250 an hour for billing, and it takes about 20 hours to investigate, draft, and file, that's $5,000 just to get started. The folks around here were trying to scrounge up something like $1,000 just to respond to the cease and desist letter. I don't think any one of them would have been ready to file a declaratory action.