I dont understand what the problem is. Does DC have their own branch where you can buy Batmobile replica's from that this guy is stealing the business of?
Your avatar fits this story nicelyDrNobody18 said:And he didn't think that DC might take exception to him making a fortune off their designs and logo's why, exactly? Seriously, how out of it do you have to be to think that you can get away with this, a full-size counterfeit bat-car selling business with website and all isn't exactly subtle.
It's a little more involved than that. The problem is that there is a licensed business already serving this market. Licenses don't come cheap. This other business has shelled out a ton of cash to acquire it. I am sure that part of their contract dealings with DC is that they will aggressively protect said license, otherwise it is valueless to the legitimate license holder. DC isn't necesarliy sending out C&D orders because they want to be dicks about it, or because they don't want people driving batmobiles. They are doing it because they are legally obligated to do so. It is just par for the course when protecting and licensing IP.manythings said:Because the message then is "Steal our stuff and we put you on the payroll" not "Steal our stuff and we put you on the streets".GeeksUtopia said:True that he shouldn't be making replica's based off of something that already has licensing and rights to, but what could instead, and stay with me now, instead of suing why not make this guy a part of the DC comic universe open a variety of shops like this across the U.S. and take a cut of his profit so it could be a win win on both sides of the case. Though i might be dreaming about a perfect world this should still be possible.
I'm willing to bet he could've gotten their stamp of approval if he'd looked for it, he chose not to do it.
I'd be surprised if they didn't send him a C&D demand. That's pretty standard in the industry.rayen020 said:Does DC have a batmobile dealership? How is this guy infringing on the rights of DC? He sells replicas. I don't see how they could sustain financial damage from a guy making cars in his garage. Also destruction of infringing vehicles would mean the willful destruction of other peoples property right? I don't think that would go over very well. just saying.
He didn't have permission but questions here are a) did he know he needed DC permission? and b)did he willfully copy something trademarked by DC?
A, if didn't they should have let him know before jumping straight to lawsuit. C&D order with a letter letting him know he needs a DC seal of approval for such things would have been much more cost effective and efficient.
B, Now this is where this case could get murky. Did he willfully copy trademarked by DC? In a sense yes he did he made batmobiles With batman symbols. The symbols are a trademark infringement i'll give DC that. But the Batmobiles themselves are not unless he copied plans or some sort of trademarked blueprints. He's basically a cover band. If he figured out how to make the music himself DC has no grounds to sue. IF he said DC made them when they didn't or somehow got hold of DC trademark blueprints and used those then he's got a problem.
I do see this lawsuit as somewhat frivolous, especially when there were better easier less bad PR inducing ways of dealing with it. However we may not be seeing the whole picture.
Their wealth is irrelevant. What matters is that he is breaking the law.Jack Macaque said:He's doing something he has a real passion for who cares, bloody rich bastards.
Isn't this a good thing? I don't see how a message that causes more talent to crop up which they can recruit and profit off is a bad thing. If untalented/dishonest/evil/whathaveyou people begin to take advantage of it then they can go back to business as usual; suing.manythings said:Because the message then is "Steal our stuff and we put you on the payroll" not "Steal our stuff and we put you on the streets".GeeksUtopia said:True that he shouldn't be making replica's based off of something that already has licensing and rights to, but what could instead, and stay with me now, instead of suing why not make this guy a part of the DC comic universe open a variety of shops like this across the U.S. and take a cut of his profit so it could be a win win on both sides of the case. Though i might be dreaming about a perfect world this should still be possible.
I'm willing to bet he could've gotten their stamp of approval if he'd looked for it, he chose not to do it.
Its the news dude, if its not misleading, its not newsTuqui said:The tittle was a little misgiving, I though someone who did it as a personal project being sued not someone who was selling with the name.
I would encourage people to start out in the clearly legal area rathet than the using other people's IP for profit and not giving a cut.Bags159 said:Isn't this a good thing? I don't see how a message that causes more talent to crop up which they can recruit and profit off is a bad thing. If untalented/dishonest/evil/whathaveyou people begin to take advantage of it then they can go back to business as usual; suing.manythings said:Because the message then is "Steal our stuff and we put you on the payroll" not "Steal our stuff and we put you on the streets".GeeksUtopia said:True that he shouldn't be making replica's based off of something that already has licensing and rights to, but what could instead, and stay with me now, instead of suing why not make this guy a part of the DC comic universe open a variety of shops like this across the U.S. and take a cut of his profit so it could be a win win on both sides of the case. Though i might be dreaming about a perfect world this should still be possible.
I'm willing to bet he could've gotten their stamp of approval if he'd looked for it, he chose not to do it.