What's all this Hasbro suing everyone thing?
Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2017 10:36 pm
Is it some weird meme or have they gone mental or what?
This is a Transformers discussion forum run by fans, for fans.
https://tfarchive.com/forums/
DC. Disney are the other lot.inflatable dalek wrote:The Disney thing
Copyright covers intellectual property/conceptual stuff. A written piece, a film, the design of something, an image.We need Nevermore back to clarify the trademark/copyright difference like the old days.
Ah, bugger.Brendocon 2.0 wrote:DC. Disney are the other lot.
Because you're trademarking the word itself, for exclusive use in a certain purpose. That purpose being toy sales.Clay wrote:I wonder about these things. Specifically, how can trademarks carry weight when Hasbro's own interpretations of its characters can be so elastic?
Nah, trademarks are done by category. And, handily, are a matter of public record and are searchable online.So the theoretical trademark for Starscream should be watered down to the point of meaninglessness, right?
And that's not even getting to the subjective reaction of whether a given figure looks like a character enough to persuade a consumer to buy the thing.
So long as they get that trademark, sure. Why not.Also, it'd be funny if DC just changed their Bumblebee to red instead of yellow and called her Cliffhopper.
Ah, okay. I wasn't making the distinction between the word/name and the physical product and was assuming they were linked instead of being under separate spheres of legal protection. Now it makes a lot more sense that Hasbro would sue DC for making Bumblebee toys in violation of trademark. That the characters are easily distinguishable isn't the point, but rather that the word "Bumblebee" is the same. Got it.Brendocon 2.0 wrote: The distinctions between the different physical toys of Starscream would fall under either copyright/patent/design law/whatever.
...
Nah, trademarks are done by category. And, handily, are a matter of public record and are searchable online.