ewilen

Aside from seeing some comic book covers, I had no experience of Shirow before the first movie, which I rather enjoyed after finally getting round to renting it on DVD. As a newcomer, though, I would have liked a little more exposition. I agree that it's somewhat heavy handed--as if many of the concepts in the story had never appeared anywhere else. But still, I liked it. On the basis of the general Shirow-mania I'd seen here, I picked up a set of the Black Magic manga at a yard sale, but it's practically unreadable. The serious stuff isn't interesting, and the funny stuff isn't funny. But then again, it was an early work. Also on the basis of the movie and lots of people here saying that GitS:SAC is great, I watched the first episode on Cartoon Network, but either it's not my cup of tea or the deficiencies of the dub are just too much to overcome. When/if it shows up at the video rental store, I may give it another chance.

More on the IHP: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...0347&hl=ihp+kit http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/models/ihp/ihp_main.htm It's a kit for kitbashing a Hasegawa, not a complete kit in itself.

Agreed, agreed. One small point, though--couldn't the media companies form a consortium or consortia, banding together to fight piracy? Isn't that what the RIAA is doing? Again, the article I pointed to upthread points out the legal obstacles to shutting down a bittorrent website if the website wants to fight. OTOH, the RIAA tactic of hitting individual downloaders will work as long as IP addresses can be tracked.

Well, DVD ripping and distribution is obviously illegal, so it's just a matter of time before the media companies ramp up their legal assault. Who knows if they'll succeed. If fansubbers go ahead and make timed scripts, though, maybe some people will buy the R2's and sub them for personal use. Even this is technically illegal for various reasons (e.g., most of the ways of doing this would violate the Digital Millenium Act, and translation of scripts is a violation of copyright) but I doubt that any studio would be upset by this. Anyway, I may be wrong about those two fansubber groups' websites going down. AnimeSuki forums says its just a coincidence, and indeed Wannabe Fansubs is back up. The AnimeSuki forums have quite a good discussion, amid all the flamage and trolling.

And just like that, both anime-keep and wannabefansubs are off the net. Click their names to see the Google caches of their sites, including declarations they'll ignore the MF C&D. Reminds me of a Union commander in the Civil War, General Sedgwick: "They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist---" Or maybe more appropriate, given the audience, I assume that whatever the fansubbers' legal/ethical opinions, their ISPs decided they didn't want to take any chances.

http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/news/news44_ihp1.jpg http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/news/news44_ihp2.jpg Seems the IHP came out after the models section stopped being updated, but the above links show pics of it from a model magazine. Anyway, "perfect" and "canon" transformation are arguably inconsistent with one another. Canonically, the legs remain in contact with the Valk at all times, but they have two different attachment points, one of which "extends" to transfer the legs to the other attachment point before detaching and retracting. It's hard to tell but from the pics above it looks like the IHP used a variation on the old-fashioned swingbar.

The reason is probably because they didn't, and for the most part, still don't care. I agree completely. But again, just because it's usually Amercian companies that end up doing the distribution, that doesn't mean a Japanese company would have no interest if it believed that fansubbing would negatively affect the value of its product to the licensee.

The judgment addresses this point and acknowledges that the treaty-making power of the government has some leeway even if it potentially conflicts with the constitution. This why it's not completely inconceivable that the Berne convention could be found by the Supreme Court to have self-executing aspects. But it's easy to see that in the general case, a treaty can't supersede the Constitution. E.g., suppose the President and the Senate entered into a treaty with a foreign country, by which the US agreed to suppress critical comments about that country. The First Amendment would obviously prevent the treaty from becoming the law of the land. Basically, there are two kinds of treaties: those that have the force of law automatically (self-executing) and those that are merely "understandings" between governments, thus requiring further legislation to bring the signatories into compliance. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty#Execut..._implementation ) E.g., the US has been found to be in violation of the WTO, a treaty organization of which we're a member. However, US courts aren't able to directly enforce the treaty; instead, the Congress has had to pass legislation to bring us into compliance. (Right now, the issue has to do with certain anti-dumping rules. http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/041126194845.x8zrx2li ) Edit: Take a look at this: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/packets/vol_2_no_2/002692.shtml It's a good example that shows: A treaty can require signatories to pass laws to bring them into compliance, rather than directly becoming laws in themselves. Congress's ability to make copyright law is limited by the Constitution. The second point is also illustrated by a recent Supreme Court case, Eldred vs. Ashcroft. Even though the judgment didn't strike down the law which was being challenged, the majority acknowledged the Constitutional limitations while finding that the law didn't exceed them. (The law was an act that extended the length of copyrights.)

I think it's not that copyright laws were unenforceable against fansubbers, rather that they have been unenforced because the Japanese companies didn't bother to try to enforce their rights, for whatever reason.

I thought the big ones were generally radar-guided, while the little ones (like Stinger) were heat-seekers. Don't have time to look up the details right now, so someone else will probably set me straight if necessary.

I took a look at their forums and it seems like they've decided that the intent of the C&D letters really had to do with Akane Maniax, and for that and other reasons they've decided, by whatever code of ethics they adhere to, that it's "okay" to continue with their project. But this part has little to do with the law. What does have to do with the law is their belief that, essentially, the technology of bittorrent is enough to insulate their website from liability. (Here is a timely article related to the issue.) Here's the thread in their forum: http://www.wannabefansubs.net/tenma/index....p=296entry296 Essentially, they appear to be hoping that the C&D letters were a broadbrush response to the Akane Maniax issue, and they're going to keep doing what they do until they're convinced that Media Factory really means to shut down the School Rumble project. If they're right, then maybe this should just be seen as a warning to fansubbers who get ahead of the Japanese DVD releases, and things can continue more or less as they have.

I don't know if it would have been effective, but if it was, I think it would have been worthwhile in the original context the fighter was designed for. That is, in a high-intensity conflict with the Soviets, where you really want to see and kill the other guy beyond visual range, instead of worrying about visual ID and other sorts of restrictive ROE more typical of low-intensity conflict, it's worth sacrificing a little maneuverability for the sake of stealth. Even moreso given that things like helmet-mounted sights and off-boresight targeting seem likely to reduce the importance of basic airframe maneuverability even in WVR dogfighting. (However, as I've stated before, between the F-22 and F-23, the F-22 is probably marginally better for the world as it is, not only because it seems that the F-22 costs less than the F-23 would have, but also because we're in a low-intensity world for at least the next couple decades.)

Thanks. These links appear to contain all or most of the judgment: http://www.corbis.com/professional/copyright/docs/bridge.htm http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases...FSupp2d_191.htm And this link has a summary with commentary, about halfway down the page: http://www.asil.org/ilib/ilib0206.htm The important point, from our perspective, is that the court believes that Berne is not "self executing". This means that the treaty didn't become US law because the US signed it. Rather, the provisions of the treaty were executed by a new law passed by Congress, the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988. So the main issue for fansubbers is American copyright law as amended by the BCIA. This means, basically, that the US gives the same protection to foreign-created works as it does to those made in America, not that the US applies foreign protections to foreign works. Now, it's pretty obvious that if an American created a work in, say, Spanish, and then some other Americans took the work, subtitled it, and redistributed it for free, they'd be guilty of copyright violation. Continuing this line of reasoning, there's really very little doubt as to the outcome of a lawsuit against fansubbers, even if they could afford lawyers. The court does admit that the Supreme Court hasn't ruled whether Berne is "self executing". If it is self-executing, that could mean that the treaty itself obligates the US to apply foreign laws and/or the provisions of Berne directly, instead of just implementing them through the BCIA or similar acts. The probabilty of this seems rather remote, though, for very clear and compelling reasons (see paragraph 15 of the Cornell text). In any case, this would really only be an issue if fansubbing violated Japanese law but not US law. And although I'm not a lawyer (and nothing I've written here should be construed as legal advice), it's obvious to me that fansubs are illegal under US law.

But doesn't Shin have a point in that the later EF2000's are designed for surface attack, while the initial bunch aren't? Not that this means the later ones'll be any less capable in air-air role than the first bunch (though for all I know, it might).

It doesn't matter. If the existence of fansubs reduces the potential revenue of a US release(*), then potential licensees won't pay as much in fees for distribution rights. Thus the fansubs would reduce the value of the of the property to the original Japanese animation house, and it would be very much in their interest to crack down on fansubbers. (* I'm agnostic on whether this is really the case.)

I didn't know there was controversy over the constitutionality of the Berne Convention, although your summary of the makes sense. This is an interesting topic. Can you point to any references?

This is a great idea. It would also be nice to get more TV (including cable and potentially other legal broadband) exposure, although it would also be a good idea to provide the viewer the option of viewing with sub or dub. (For example, use SAP for the original Japanese, and a closed caption signal for the subtitle.) Otherwise, the only stuff I would buy sight unseen would be Miyazaki movies and Macross stuff, unless the price is really low. Perhaps they could sell vol. 1 of a series or OAV for a nominal price, or sell cheap (or give away) "samplers".

I wouldn't wait if I were you. There was some buzz last summer when HG announced they were releasing toys based on DYRL--people thought maybe they'd acquired the US distribution rights to the movie. But nothing materialized, and if they had the rights, or even thought they'd get them soon, they'd probably delay a toy release until after the movie. So even as a rumor, an R1 DYRL release is pretty much dead. An R1 MZero release is more likely, though still pretty iffy at this point. See the pinned legal debates thread in the Other Anime and Science Fiction forum for all the reasons why American releases are fraught with doubt.

There's one on eBay right now if you have the cash. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...me=STRK:MEWA:IT

Bug away, but mind you--I'm not an expert. I just figure out how to do the stuff I need with the setup I have available (Mac OS X-based), and then I stop. The links in my sig should take you to the real experts.

So far, no. BTW, if you like cancelled planes, I can recommend that book I mentioned upthread a couple pages, which I got the Curtiss F-14C info from. (Huh, just found the picture online.) But it only goes up to about 1960.

Started with Robotech, later saw DYRL (probably without subtitles), then a several-year hiatus before I saw a couple eps. of M+ at a college anime club. M+ didn't really grab me at the time. Much later, I noticed the reappearance of Valk toys and discovered this site, along with learning that the original Macross had finally been released in unadulterated form in the US.

I got the FX Perfect edition from Kevin and I'm happy with it in nearly every respect. The only nitpick I'd have would be with some vague dialogue--not ungrammatical, but not as clear as it could be compared to what I was able to find in a fan-created script on the web. There is a fansub of DYRL done by Newlife Anime which is available on bittorrent. There was a thread about it not long ago. People who watched it reported that it had slightly better subs than the FX version but I don't remember how it fared otherwise. The only reason I would get the MZero boots would be for the box art. I can't believe I paid $30+ for eps. 1-2, with horrible subtitles and a video problem in the ep. 2 disk. But the latest boots, with all five episodes, may be a reasonable last resort if you don't have the ability to download fansubs and burn them to DVD or VCD. (For help with which, see my signature.)

Ah. Best I can find is this: http://web.archive.org/web/20030504171309/...-1/Asf-14cp.jpg From a now-dead page whose link was titled "Cockpit mockup of the ASF-14". I've emailed the owner of the site asking if he has any other photos, and if he does, I'll be sure to post them.

A quick read of what I found through Google suggests that the ASF-14 would have looked pretty much like the F-14 (i.e., not much more different than the (A)ST-21) even though the internals would have been so different as to preclude upgrades and require entirely new aircraft to be built. You might be thinking of the navalized Raptor proposal pictured here: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0132.shtml