ewilen

HG and/or Toynami was thinking of reissuing the Matchbox/Exo squad destroids, but they later cancelled the plans and claimed the molds had deteriorated to the point that they were unusable. I don't know if they were ever planning on doing the other Matchbox/Exo stuff (Zentradi pods, N-Ger [botoru/Quadrono], hovertank, bioroids, Invid, etc.).

Sorry, I should have written ASS-1 above, not SSF-1. The reference to OT in the F-14's from M0 comes from the Compendium:

Over at animeondvd, people are up in arms because ADV shipped the Southern Cross set with severe glitches on a couple of disks. When people complained, ADV had them send the ENTIRE box set back (the sender had to pay for shipping). And then when the replacement sets arrived, the glitches were still there.

Okay, I have to correct myself--the source is apparently Robert Woodhead of Animeigo. Even so, from the reports I've seen, it could well be that the main obstacle has always been a HG/BW dispute, rather than the difficulty of tracking down the rights holders. Here's what I saw on the animeondvd forum: (--Thanatos; original post is here.)I think it's likely that two of the three companies are HG and BW. The third may be the distributor of the VHS dub, or possibly Tatsunoko. (We've always assumed TP and HG have no disagreements, but that may not be the case. Historically, HG may have been none too pleased about TP's selling model rights to other US companies, which forced HG into a deal with Revell and eventually--it seems--a legal dispute with FASA.

The funny thing is, thanks to your new avatar, I'm starting to read all of your posts in a Chris Rock voice. Those two lines work especially well.

Never happen. BigWest/Studio Nue's U.S. Copyright to Macross Plus is still in effect and, to my knowledge, has never been officially challenged by HG. Sorry Drew, I'm not big on the whole ownership debate... what would have been a better example? Macross 2 or Macross 7 valks. I mean they are working off the whole we own the Macross name outside of Japan aren't they? Or the fact that Tatsanuko hada part in DYRL??? I guess it's all just speculation what their claim is, and it's too much to hope that we would find out. From a legal standpoint, the DYRL Valks are qualitatively the same as the M+ Valks. That is, unless there's something in the BW/TP contract which would treat DYRL as a special case. But the M+ Valks would be a more blatant example of the same principle. I want to emphasize that if HG doesn't have an agreement with BW, if they do enjoy exclusive rights to Macross derivatives in the US, that means that they can block other companies from releasing DYRL, M+, etc. stuff here. It may mean that they can create their own derivatives (toys, comic adaptations, even animated sequels). But unless the BW/TP contract gives away far more than we've assumed, it doesn't mean that they can simply "take" Macross derivatives in Japan and distribute or merchandize them here in the US without BW's permission.

This definitely doesn't have to be bad news. Since we know absolutely nothing about the deal, including whether it exists, allow me to engage in some wild speculation... Push has finally come to shove, and Big West/Bandai are ready to assert their rights in the US Since they don't want to be bothered by legal hassles, they've thrown HG a bone: don't bother us, and in exchange we'll give you the right to release a line of DYRL superposables. But that's it. After said agreement, BW/Bandai may decide to play ball with HG on further Macross video distribution and merchandising, but they'll be completely free to go to another distributor and to import Yamato toys, etc. Again, this is pure speculation. I'm simply trying to illustrate the fact that if these superposables are a sign of a settlement, it by no means indicates that BW is giving away the farm.

The events shown in "Rainy Night" postdate the arrival of the SSF-1. However, while SDF Macross has various fictional pre-VF fighters (not only the Karyobin and the Dragon II, but also very briefly the FL-200 Mistral), Macross Zero takes a more up-to-date approach. BTW, the M0 specs say that the F-14s at the beginning incorporate Overtechnology.

Rodavan, I doubt I could improve on that decal scan. All I can offer are pictures from various TIA books and Macross Perfect Memory. In fact, I'm saving that decal scan for when I get around to refurbing my Exosquad Glaug. Great job, Tetsujin!

I hate to bug you about this, but you've implied in another thread that Yamato no longer believes it has the right to make Macross toys for the U.S. market. (Macross II toys were the topic of discussion.) Is this something you can elaborate on?

I keep reading that the rights to DYRL were all tied up in obscure ways which is why nobody's done a US release. But the source for this claim is Harmony Gold, isn't it? If so, isn't it possible they were fudging the facts? I can easily imagine that what was really going behind the scenes was that HG was trying to get the DYRL rights from BW, while blocking BW from dealing with anyone else.

No. India = Bharati

Um er. Kinda busy to do any scanning right now. But your CG Glaug looks awesome! Congrats!

There's a book on dioramas by Shepherd Paine published by Kalmbach. I got a copy on eBay pretty cheaply and it shows up there frequently. It has a great chapter on wrecks. I think his book on scale model armor also has a section on wrecks.

The problem is that rights to the designs have pretty clearly been distinguished from rights to the animation. HG's rights to the designs, such as they are, derives from the Big West/Tatsunoko memorandum which gave TP the overseas merchandising rights for...something. If there hasn't been a settlement, then HG is basically asserting that "something" includes "all toys based on Macross and its derivatives". As others have noted, the Strike Cannon is in no way part of SDF Macross.

It seems HG was always willing to have other Macross stuff come in, provided they got their name on it and received royalties. That's what they tried to do with M7 Trash and also apparently with the Toycom M+ Valks. So they may have conceded something, but it wasn't that.

Well, whoever they are, they probably only have video distribution rights, not merchandising rights.

There aren't any strikes on TV. Only supers. (Strike=has the gun on the right FAST pack.)

Well, you always hear about something somewhere first. The settlement could have happened last week and HG rushed to make the preorder announcement. And the settlement may have had a nondisclosure clause to avoid embarassment. Or at any rate, HG may not have felt like publicizing the fact that there was a dispute. I doubt it. If BW refused to let Toycom pay tribute to HG, and later pulled M7 trash for the same reason, I don't think they'd take this sitting down.

There are a lot of possibilities here, but one is indeed that a settlement has been reached. Another is that the the contracts between Big West and Tatsunoko say more than most of us have been willing to admit. Take a look at this thread: Macross 2 Valks. Graham wrote "Yamato cannot legally make Macross toys for the US market." I don't know if this was an inexact paraphrase of the legal standoff, or if it accurately represents Yamato's current understanding of their rights. If so, it represents a turnaround from what Yamato reportedly told George Sohn back in 1999. From http://www.valkyrie-exchange.com/news/toynami/1242001.html :

Most space ships are smaller than planets. Even if they can be seen, the resolution of sensors may not be enough to discriminate between ships and asteroids, etc. Furthermore, unless you have some kind of hyperspace sensors, by the time you see a ship, it's already somewhere else. Besides, most battles aren't a case of "let's you and me fight". Usually, the weaker fleet is going to avoid contact with the stronger, unless there's an overriding objective to attack/defend. Due to the inability of sensors to provide up to date information on a distant enemy's location and speed, catching an uncooperative enemy is very much a guessing game.

That's exactly what I'm saying. It falls under fair use and most people would argue that its for "educational purposes" and own use. Gray area there for you. In that case, you are mistaken. Copying and distributing complete unaltered videos without permission of the copyright holder is copyright infringement, period. It doesn't matter if the video was made in Japan or made in the U.S. You might as well argue "fair use" when copying domestic DVDs or sharing music over Kazaa. Good luck. Here's the first item that came up when I Googled copying "fair use". Read it, and if you have further questions, I'd suggest additional web searches or consulting a lawyer or law professor. Edit: here's the item-- http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/ency/article...312FE5C119B5806

I think you meant to write "Animeigo's master". AgentONE yes there was a thread about it, and it overflowed briefly into the HG/BW legal debate thread, but unless I'm mistaken the conclusion in both cases was that ADV was going to use the Animeigo master. The point of controversy was whether HG had the right to simply "claim" the Animeigo master and hand it over to ADV. The news that ADV didn't use the Animeigo master (if true) suggests that they didn't.

Okay, again, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been reading up on Japanese copyright law and a bit on US copyright law. If you're saying that distributing the videos without editing them would be okay, I'm afraid you're mistaken. (I don't think you're saying that but I want to be clear.) In my opinion, even if the script were not independently copyrighted, a translation of the script of a work would fall under clauses of laws and treaties governing translation and adaptation. ("Translation" means not only converting to another language, but reproducing in a different medium.) Even if you didn't directly translate the script and instead wrote a short story based on the original work, you would be creating an unauthorized adaptation. One example from film history is the first vampire movie, Nosferatu. A silent movie produced in German, it was an adaption of the British novel Dracula, with various details altered in a transparent attempt to get around copyright law. The owners of the Dracula copyright won an infringement case and it's only by luck that any prints of Nosferatu have survived. (The Bela Lugosi version of Dracula was produced years later.) Basically, fansubs, fan-translations, even fan fiction are "allowed" to be distributed because the copyright holders of the original works don't feel like bothering to clamp down.

Unlikely, because we just don't need a big expensive BVR assassin anymore. (Hopefully we never will.) Even the F-22 is a questionable use of funds. And it's already been decided not to bother with an ATF replacement for the Tomcat--that's why we have the Super Hornet.