http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/jul/14/pow-battle-over-batman-figurines-lands-federal-cou/news-breaking/

DC will win big time. Even his disclaimer is not viable. Claiming the figures are representing the actors and are not DC characters will not hold up. As soon as you slap those costumes on them, makes them DC characters. He will be shut down.

Already done.


http://johnnysresin.com/


Still, Would be interesting to see the quality of his work. Closer then what the picture shows.

ummmm, what's done? Looks the same to me.

johnnyresin must have a mighty distorted view of copyright law and/or how things work in the real world. its actually funny that on the one hand his "disclaimer" says that he is not treading on dc's trademarks, yet the subtitle of his site calls it a source for "batman collectibles"!

dc has tried to play nice with him by giving him c&d orders which he has obviously ignored. the fact that the site is still up pretty much says that the only way they are going to be able to stop him is to make him incapable of producing and selling more kits, in other words, ruining him financially. and when i say ruin, i mean take everything he's got as well as everything he will ever get.... money, home, possessions, the lot.

before someone starts in with the "big bad greedy corporation slapping around the little guy" song, the fact is that being a free country, our government provides for private ownership of intellectual property, by either you, me, or a large company, and dc/warner owns these characters. if you, the hobbytalk member reading this, come up with a character, copyright or trademark it, and then attempt to sell it in some form, you would have the same rights and protections as dc has with these characters, and an equal right to stop someone from ripping you off. johnnyresin has his hand in dc's cookie jar, without permission, and has refused to remove it when asked politely. when the inevitable happens, he has no one to blame but himself.

When I first read the story, I went to the site and it was closed. It said that they would no longer make any more kits of anykind. Guess he changed his mind. Oh well, I love having egg on my face.....Especially when they're scrambled!...lol.

That's not egg on your face if that's what happened. That's just him being a bit delusional to think he can continue with that product. Or, maybe he worked a deal after all. But, nope, no egg here.....just smile and wave boys.....just smile and wave ;)

How would he feel about recasting?

There is a joke about recasting other actors and the roles and what not.....but, it sure alls flat in typed format ;)

Copyright infringement is pretty much cut and dry, and some people think that one copy of a character isn't infringement, and it is. If there is no legal agreement between the copyright holder and the producer, no matter the medium, it's considered infringement, cut and dry.

I'm not sure it is so cut and dry. On the DVD Commentary for the film THE LIFE AND DEATH OF PETER SELLERS, the writers talked about some changes they had to make from their earlier drafts. They originally wanted a scene where the characters Peter Sellers had played sat around the DR. STRANGELOVE war room and discussed his life. The producers explained that if they used the characters like that, they would need to get the permission of the owners of each character. However, if they show Peter Sellers playing a particular character, they wouldn't have that problem.

In other words:

Geoffrey Rush playing Dr. Strangelove: Copyright violation.

Geoffrey Rush playing Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove: Not a copyright violation.

It looks like johnnyresin is relying on a similar principle. I guess this is why lawyers make the big money.

I guess this is why lawyers make the big money.We're in the wrooong business.

I'm not sure it is so cut and dry. On the DVD Commentary for the film THE LIFE AND DEATH OF PETER SELLERS, the writers talked about some changes they had to make from their earlier drafts. They originally wanted a scene where the characters Peter Sellers had played sat around the DR. STRANGELOVE war room and discussed his life. The producers explained that if they used the characters like that, they would need to get the permission of the owners of each character. However, if they show Peter Sellers playing a particular character, they wouldn't have that problem.

In other words:

Geoffrey Rush playing Dr. Strangelove: Copyright violation.

Geoffrey Rush playing Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove: Not a copyright violation.

It looks like johnnyresin is relying on a similar principle. I guess this is why lawyers make the big money.

apples and oranges. the distinction you mention is one of context, which is explained in the actual narrative of the film. (the play is the thing, as it were.) a figurine has no such narrative context. no matter what the producer says that context is, someone, seeing the figure on its own, would never be able to glean that from the figure.

That's not egg on your face if that's what happened. That's just him being a bit delusional to think he can continue with that product. Or, maybe he worked a deal after all. But, nope, no egg here.....just smile and wave boys.....just smile and wave ;)




:wave:

How would he feel about recasting?
well, guess what? since it seems he does it, he probably feels fine about it. check out the last few posts in this thread over at the clubhouse:
http://theclubhouse1.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=66494
by the way folks, slide over to wikipedia and look up trademark. it will answer a lot of questions and clear up a bunch of misconceptions about why these characters are protected for as long as they are, and why their owners act in the way they do. the upshot is that if they find out about an infringement, they MUST act upon it, or risk losing their trademark.