Update on the SEGA/EA case

Ken wrote Sonic and Knuckles as published by Archie Comics for over 13 years. So anything Sonic and Knuckles goes here!

Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby BobR » Fri Oct 25, 2013 10:31 am

If you hadn't heard the news yet, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the dismissal of Ken's lawsuit against SEGA/EA by the lower court was proper. Exactly what happens in the future depends on the reasons the 9th used to determine their opinion. The initial dismissal of the SEGA/EA case by the judge we continue to feel was incorrect -- that the judge for the SEGA/EA case at the time didn't correctly understand that the two cases were separate and had different end goals as he kept asking why weren't the cases combined in New York. The Archie case was the argument about Ken's work being work-for-hire (Archie owns the copyrights) or that of an independent contractor (Ken owns the copyrights.) The SEGA/EA case involves infringement of those copyrights, not their ownership. Thus the Archie case needed to be settled first before the SEGA/EA case could proceed. Thus the SEGA/EA case should have been stayed, not dismissed.

With the settlement of the Archie case against Ken, Ken retained ownership of his copyrights. Archie may say they don't agree that he owns the copyrights, but the facts are they refused to oppose that ownership in court and the settlement they signed left the copyrights with Ken, effectively confirming his ownership. The question yet to be determined is whether SEGA/EA violated those copyrights, and that's still very much on the table.

*NOTE: Donning my administrator hat for the moment, all discussions of the SEGA/EA case should be done under this topic. Anything posted outside this area concerning SEGA/EA will be moved here or deleted at the discretion of the admin. Thank you for your support!*
Wearing my mask, looking like a bear! I'm a raccoon!!
User avatar
BobR
Site Admin
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:29 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Cheezmatt » Fri Oct 25, 2013 8:52 pm

Hard luck; sorry to hear it. I had a feeling that's how it was going to go upon listening to the recent hearing. For those interested the hearing back on the 11th is recorded on the Ninth Circuit website here: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view. ... 0000011455

The most lively thing about it is Judge Harry Pregerson who, in addition to the amazing record Ken notes in the other topic, is also a funny guy.
The official version of what Bob just said is filed on the website as well.

I have a few question marks about whether the suggestions offered by Sega's lawyer near the end of that hearing are reasonable or not, both now and back in 2011. But maybe it's a bit too sensitive to discuss the nitty-gritty here, which would be understandable.
Cheezmatt
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:02 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Ken Penders » Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:24 am

@Cheezmatt:

I have a few question marks about whether the suggestions offered by Sega's lawyer near the end of that hearing are reasonable or not, both now and back in 2011


I take it you're asking about the subject of mediation and/or combining the cases into the NY case or both.

Let's talk mediation first. My lawyers made it clear to one and all at the start they always preferred negotiation over litigation. It soon became a situation similar to Obama dealing with the Republicans. He wants to deal. They don't. So there's nobody to negotiate with, and thus we get a government shutdown and nearly collapse the economy over the debt ceiling. Had Speaker of the House John Boehner simply acted like the grown-up he's supposed to be and simply held a vote, there would have been no government shutdown as he would have had more than enough Republican and Democratic votes to keep the government open.

Just like Obama had to hold his ground in order to get a clean debt ceiling vote to reopen the government, I too had to hold my ground all the while backing up my position with reinforcement in order to find a resolution. Once Archie filed the lawsuit, the stakes became too high for me to simply capitulate at any time during the proceedings.

I would have preferred waiting until matters with Archie had been resolved before going after Sega and EA, but again, the law forced my hand due to a concept known as "statute of limitations". If the statute was five or six years as opposed to three, maybe my lawsuit isn't filed and we're able to negotiate. But as that option doesn't exist, I had no choice.

Sega's lawyer Jennifer Kelly was also being disingenuous when talking about mediation, as she really didn't have any desire to engage in serious discussions in NY anymore than Archie wanted Sega at any talks as Josh Paul makes perfectly clear in the court transcript. Jennifer Kelly really has no desire to settle when she can simply run up a tab at Archie's expense. Therefore, I have to continue the action in order to gain any resolution which puts all matters to bed once and for all. Whether or not Sega and/or EA is willing to come to the table without further litigation remains to be seen.

Combining the cases was never an option, as neither ACP or Judge Berman saw Sega - let alone EA - as a party to that case. Every time I tried to bring in Sega I was always shot down. So it's not like I didn't try.

Because of the various issues involved and the potential for overlap, it was always difficult to figure out what steps to take next as I worked my way through the maze. Both Judge Berman and Judge Pregerson make it clear the cases are a mess with no easy resolution.

Listen again to the Judge who asked Jennifer Kelly three very pointed questions. Notice how she dodged answering questions 2 and 3. There's a very good reason for this, and it's through those 2 questions this case may yet end up in the US Supreme Court if a resolution isn't found prior to that.

The bottom line is that until corporations begin to acknowledge that a problem can be dealt with without having to litigate, they leave guys like me no choice but to take the fight all the way. And as Bob made clear, I do own my copyrights, whether Archie agrees with that claim or not, as made clear in the hearing on the 11th by my lawyer.

And yes, THE LARA-SU CHRONICLES: NEW WORLD ORDER is working its way to becoming a reality because of my ownership of those copyrights.

As for what happens next, I'm working on that, but can't say anymore than that at this time.
Ken Penders
Site Admin
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 2:48 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Cheezmatt » Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:03 am

I see. You're right, that does thoroughly answer my question; thank you very much for the comprehensive response.

My ears did prick up when the question about clarifying the law was raised. Nice to know it could be as important as it seemed. Well, best of luck in further efforts - I imagine a legal battle such as this is a heavy burden financially and otherwise, even when there aren't any setbacks.
Cheezmatt
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:02 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Mavrickindigo » Sat Oct 26, 2013 3:02 pm

Why don't you announce that all topics about the SEGA/EA case will be deleted on an announcement instead of hiding it in one particular thread?
My Deviantart
If you like the Lara-Su Chronicles, I would like to hear why. I will genuinely listen to you
User avatar
Mavrickindigo
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:41 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby BobR » Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:33 pm

Mavrickindigo wrote:Why don't you announce that all topics about the SEGA/EA case will be deleted on an announcement instead of hiding it in one particular thread?

Because I would expect anyone who would be interested in the case would see the title of this thread and read it before they post anything -- like you just did. If want to administer forums, you're free to setup your own phpBB board.
Wearing my mask, looking like a bear! I'm a raccoon!!
User avatar
BobR
Site Admin
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:29 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Mavrickindigo » Sun Oct 27, 2013 7:34 am

BobR wrote:
Mavrickindigo wrote:Why don't you announce that all topics about the SEGA/EA case will be deleted on an announcement instead of hiding it in one particular thread?

Because I would expect anyone who would be interested in the case would see the title of this thread and read it before they post anything -- like you just did. If want to administer forums, you're free to setup your own phpBB board.

I had my hand at that once, didn't much care for it.

Don't say I didn't warn you when you have people talking about it in "Ask Ken" without having looked up the Sonic, Knuckles & SEGA board. I know I post things up there before I even take a look at the lower boards, so I don't doubt others do something similar.
My Deviantart
If you like the Lara-Su Chronicles, I would like to hear why. I will genuinely listen to you
User avatar
Mavrickindigo
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:41 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby beavercartoon » Wed Nov 06, 2013 9:16 pm

Sorry I didn't see this topic before. Like Mavrick, I tend to check the Ask Ken! forum first, but I did find my way here. Because this is the SEGA forum, it makes sense sense in a way. There are 3 details from this topic I would like to have further clarified (if that's possible. If not, I understand.)

Ken Penders wrote:I would have preferred waiting until matters with Archie had been resolved before going after Sega and EA, but again, the law forced my hand due to a concept known as "statute of limitations". If the statute was five or six years as opposed to three, maybe my lawsuit isn't filed and we're able to negotiate. But as that option doesn't exist, I had no choice.

1. When did the Archie case start, some time in 2010? Is that why you are filing against SEGA now, to be able to reference the previous Archie case?

Ken Penders wrote:Combining the cases was never an option, as neither ACP or Judge Berman saw Sega - let alone EA - as a party to that case. Every time I tried to bring in Sega I was always shot down. So it's not like I didn't try.

2. Neither SEGA nor EA could be used in a combined case against Archie Comics, if my understanding is correct. But can SEGA/EA both be combined in another lawsuit or would Ken have to file against BioWare, EA, and SEGA all separately?

Ken Penders wrote:The bottom line is that until corporations begin to acknowledge that a problem can be dealt with without having to litigate, they leave guys like me no choice but to take the fight all the way. And as Bob made clear, I do own my copyrights, whether Archie agrees with that claim or not, as made clear in the hearing on the 11th by my lawyer.

3. By the 11th, do you mean a hearing on November 11th? I thought that was always Veteran's Day and thus a holiday when courts couldn't operate. Am I wrong in that regard?

Anyway I am very sorry if I seem ignorant or wasted Ken's time but I find this whole case really, really confusing. Too bad there isn't a "for dummies" version summarizing this whole thing.
User avatar
beavercartoon
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 12:45 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Tylinos » Wed Nov 06, 2013 9:53 pm

beavercartoon wrote:
Ken Penders wrote:The bottom line is that until corporations begin to acknowledge that a problem can be dealt with without having to litigate, they leave guys like me no choice but to take the fight all the way. And as Bob made clear, I do own my copyrights, whether Archie agrees with that claim or not, as made clear in the hearing on the 11th by my lawyer.

3. By the 11th, do you mean a hearing on November 11th? I thought that was always Veteran's Day and thus a holiday when courts couldn't operate. Am I wrong in that regard?

October 11th. That's when his hearing was.
User avatar
Tylinos
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:00 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Ken Penders » Fri Nov 08, 2013 11:57 pm

@beavercartoon:

When did the Archie case start, some time in 2010? Is that why you are filing against SEGA now, to be able to reference the previous Archie case?


The timeline is as follows:

Sept 2008 - BioWare releases SONIC CHRONICLES: THE DARK BROTHERHOOD, which infringes on my copyrights

Jan 2009 - I begin filing for the Copyright Registrations to my works

April 21, 2010 - After reviewing and approving the language in my Copyright Registration applications, the US Copyright Office notifies me by phone call and fax that they are sending by mail notifications to both Sega and Archie of my efforts to register my copyrights, offering both companies the opportunity to challenge my applications for registrations

May 21, 2010 - I receive notice from the US Copyright Office that neither Sega or Archie responded to their letters, thus clearly the way for them to complete the registration of my works (Incidentally, I've posted a number of documents detailing the correspondence between the US Copyright Office and myself elsewhere on this site - see: Class Is In Session 2)

June 1, 2010 - The US Copyright Office begins officially filing my registrations and mailing me the Certificates of Registration, the actual legal documents recording the details of my copyrights

July 2010 - I serve public notice of my copyright registrations

November 23, 2010 - ACP files a lawsuit against me, alleging breach of contract (My lawyers respond that I never signed any such documents)

May 2011 - Due to the Statute of Limitations, I am forced to file my lawsuit against Sega and EA at this time

July 2011 - Both sides submit to Discovery in the ACP v. Penders case

August 2011 - Depositions are taken in the ACP v. Penders case

September 26, 2011 - Despite my lawyers and Sega's lawyers agreeing to stay the Penders v. Sega/EA case, Judge Otis Wright dismisses the case

September 30, 2011 - My lawyers refile the Penders v. Sega/EA case

October 24, 2011 - New counsel steps in for me in the ACP v. Penders case and announce they're ready to go, but the trial, originally scheduled to begin October 31, is pushed back to January 31, 2012

January 17, 2012 - The trial for the ACP v. Penders case is again pushed back as Judge Berman hears arguments for summary judgment in the case

February 2012 - Judge Otis Wright again dismisses my case v. Sega and EA

May 2012 - My lawyers file an appeal with the CA 9th Appellate Court regarding my case against Sega and EA

July 16, 2012 - Judge Berman rules against summary judgement in the ACP v. Penders case

September/October 2012 - ACP replaces Matt Wagner with attorneys from Collen IP

November 29, 2012 - ACP and I sign a term sheet of agreement

June 26, 2013 - ACP and I formalize a Settlement Agreement

October 11, 2013 - Oral agruments are heard in the CA 9th Appellate Court concerning my case against Sega and EA

Late October 2013 - Things didn't quite go my way as the CA 9th Appellate Court upholds Judge Wright's initial ruling. Still, I didn't come away empty-handed and I still have options which are currently being explored

November 2013 - In addition to THE LARA-SU CHRONICLES script, I begin work on a book concerning my case against Sega and EA (since I can't talk about my case with ACP)

But can SEGA/EA both be combined in another lawsuit or would Ken have to file against BioWare, EA, and SEGA all separately?


I can file a case against one or multiple parties, the latter of which appears to be the likeliest option at this time. It's not a matter of me looking to create trouble as to finish what I started.

By the 11th, do you mean a hearing on November 11th? I thought that was always Veteran's Day and thus a holiday when courts couldn't operate. Am I wrong in that regard?


I very much appreciate Tylinos's response to your question.

Anyway I am very sorry if I seem ignorant or wasted Ken's time but I find this whole case really, really confusing. Too bad there isn't a "for dummies" version summarizing this whole thing.


You did not waste my time and you're not a bother. Even all the parties involved have trouble keeping the myriad details associated with the cases straight, as there is THAT MUCH information to absorb.

I hope I clarified your confusion up to this point.
Ken Penders
Site Admin
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 2:48 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Mavrickindigo » Sat Nov 09, 2013 8:45 am

You know, I gotta ask: In what way, exactly, does Dark Brotherhood infringe on the copyrights of your characters. They're an ancient branch of Enchidnakind so old that they are told by some ancient lorekeepr and their culture is totally different from the Dark Legion. I mean the part that DOES sound like its ripped from your stories (Evil group of echidnas banished to the Twilight [name] come back to conquer the [island/world] and a female member of their number defects for shaky reasons) is pretty superficial, if you ask me. Seems more of a homage than a blatant rip off.
My Deviantart
If you like the Lara-Su Chronicles, I would like to hear why. I will genuinely listen to you
User avatar
Mavrickindigo
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:41 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Gally » Sun Nov 10, 2013 8:05 am

Yeah, unlike Ken's story where an ECHIDNA on a FLOATING ISLAND is a GUARDIAN of some stuff on PLANET MOBIUS is totally not a copyright infringement :roll:
User avatar
Gally
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:21 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Ken Penders » Sun Nov 10, 2013 2:40 pm

@Mavrickindigo:

Seems more of a homage than a blatant rip off.


"Homage" is a polite way of saying "copy from" or "derived of" ore even, more crudely, "ripped off". Let's use the covers of SONIC #27 and #104 as great examples, which were derived from other source material, namely the covers to AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #56 and FANTASTIC FOUR #104, respectively, and which I was responsible for their design and execution.

Though they were done in a more innocent time with the best of intentions, in retrospect I shouldn't have done them. The SONIC #27 cover was both an acknowledgement of my mentoring by the great John Romita and my attempt to have SONIC be a stepping stone to the wider world of comics for the kids. If they recognized the layout, they understood I knew my SPIDER-MAN. With the SONIC #104 cover, you had two former Marvel freelancers essentially doing a take-off of the Marvel book they both worked on, namely GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY. So when I faxed in the cover layout featuring my adaptation of the classic FF #49 cover, Justin ran with it and had Patrick pencil it, which I inked.

SONIC #134 was a "homage" of the classic SPIDER-MAN #50 from back in the day.

The point to all of this is that we used other sources beyond Sega simply because Sega never gave us anything to work with. No character descriptions, no bible, no nothing. The bible to the SatAM series was not our bible. We never saw the games we were asked to adapt. Nothing. Any game source material we did did access to was solely because Patrick was such a gamer.

On the other hand, BioWare did have access to a lot of source material, acknowledged the rich SONIC mythos beyond the games including the comics, and utilized key aspects of my work when incorporating it into a seamless whole.

The fact that a number of fans consider my work the source material for a noticeable portion of the game is a counter-argument the courts take very seriously. That's why your arguments on this matter carry little weight.


@Lammy:

Yeah, unlike Ken's story where an ECHIDNA on a FLOATING ISLAND is a GUARDIAN of some stuff on PLANET MOBIUS is totally not a copyright infringement


THE LARA-SU CHRONICLES is about a set of characters and situations based on stories I created, set on a planetoid in outer space, concerning a young girl coming to grips with a great responsibility suddenly thrust on her shoulders after the destruction of the world she came from.

What part of that sounds like any of it originated with Sega?
Ken Penders
Site Admin
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 2:48 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Tylinos » Sun Nov 10, 2013 3:14 pm

You make it sound like you're saying it's okay when you did it to other properties because you didn't have much source material in Sonic and had to go elsewhere.

Ken Penders wrote:The fact that a number of fans consider my work the source material for a noticeable portion of the game is a counter-argument the courts take very seriously. That's why your arguments on this matter carry little weight.

I can tell they take it seriously, based on how the case was dismissed again. Or, if you didn't present the information at the hearing, maybe you should have, considering part of your current problem came about from your old lawyer not presenting information when he needed to.

And again, it's not "a noticeable portion of the game", which makes it sound like you're saying the plot was copied. It's "Evil techno-Echidnas (of a completely different design than the Legion) get sealed in slow-time world (for completely different reasons than the Legion) and also have a female member who sides with Knuckles (for completely different reasons than Julie-Su)." Clearly inspired, but not something where your storylines were actually outright copied.
User avatar
Tylinos
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:00 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Ken Penders » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:12 am

@Tylinos:

You make it sound like you're saying it's okay when you did it to other properties because you didn't have much source material in Sonic and had to go elsewhere.


Even though I was addressing but a couple of examples, what part of "Though they were done in a more innocent time with the best of intentions, in retrospect I shouldn't have done them." sounds like I was giving myself a pass?

I was giving Sega and ACP way too much material without an agreement as it was, so this was a battle I was constantly fighting against myself all the time I was working on the book. In order to meet the deadlines on all levels, I had to make certain everyone knew what I was trying to get across, and sometimes that was literally translated into what ended up in the books as opposed to being a reference point to guide the interpretation.

I can tell they take it seriously, based on how the case was dismissed again. Or, if you didn't present the information at the hearing, maybe you should have, considering part of your current problem came about from your old lawyer not presenting information when he needed to.


The dismissal of the case had nothing at all to do with the legal merits of my claims and everything to do with how the case is fought. Judge Pregerson clearly recognized what the problem was with Judge Wright's initial dismissal of my case. Attorneys for both sides had agreed to stay the lawsuit instead of fighting to dismiss it. Judge Wright, on the other hand, saw it as a case that wasn't quickly and easily resolved and wanted it off his desk, so he dismissed the case both times without prejudice so that I'd still be able to refile the case, oblivious to the fact of the statute of limitations claims in our filing.

I suspect had Judge Wright dismissed my case with prejudice, I'd have seen a better outcome as it would have been easier for the CA 9th Appellate Court to rule Judge Wright had abused his discretion by taking such a draconian action. Notice that none of the legal proceedings thus far had anything to do with my specific claims of infringement, which were preserved by all parties.

There are many aspects to a legal case outside the actual details of my claims of infringement, that I'm surprised you would comment the way you did, given that when presented with facts that contradicted your previous beliefs, you seemed to rethink your position. Here, it appears you're taking the stance that if my appeal was dismissed, I must have no case, when quite the opposite is true. None of the Judges didn't think I had a case as none of the Judges even knew enough of the case to make a decision on that basis.

There are so many moving parts to this whole thing that I've decided to write a book about my case against Sega so everyone can see for themselves that none of this is as open and shut as they think. Nobody outside of those who are part of the story actually has a clue there were several key points where this could have been resolved in a friendly manner, but due to corporate arrogance and a legal system geared to work a certain way, that didn't happen.

Go back and read Archie's initial lawsuit against me. Check out the part where they specifically state their business relationship with Sega was in jeopardy - that Sega wouldn't renew the licensing agreement unless the matter of my copyrights was resolved. Also check out the part where Archie was claiming I owe them a quarter of a million dollars in damages in the lawsuit as a result of my harming their relationship with Sega.

When you got something like that hanging over your head, you have to go in swinging back hard.

Sega was by no means the innocent party here, and plenty of fans have yet to learn how little regard Sega has for them. These same fans would be stunned to learn - at least during the time I was dealing with time - half the company wanted nothing to do with Sonic, claiming he had outlived his usefulness,

Sonic has the potential to be a much bigger property than it is, but it'll never achieve that potential as long as Sega has the last say.

So like I said, lots of moving parts and a long way to go. In the meantime, it's back to work on THE LARA-SU CHRONICLES.
Ken Penders
Site Admin
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 2:48 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Mavrickindigo » Mon Nov 11, 2013 8:02 am

Bold words about Sonic and SEGA, considering how it seems the company can hardly go without shoving Sonic into everything they make.
My Deviantart
If you like the Lara-Su Chronicles, I would like to hear why. I will genuinely listen to you
User avatar
Mavrickindigo
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:41 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Tylinos » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:02 pm

Ken Penders wrote:Even though I was addressing but a couple of examples, what part of "Though they were done in a more innocent time with the best of intentions, in retrospect I shouldn't have done them." sounds like I was giving myself a pass?

That'd be the part where you give rationalizations to why you did it and said the point was Sega gave you very little to work from, but then put it as a bad thing (whether worded intentionally that way or not) that BioWare did the same from having quite a bit of Sonic source material.

Ken Penders wrote:(Stuff about dismissal)

The question here is "Why was it dismissed again?" If it was an appeal to show that you believe the case has merit and shouldn't have been dismissed in the first place, it's reasonable to assume it would involve showing something to make it look like that's true, like other information the old judge could have been given that would've changed his mind if he knew. Otherwise, it's an open invitation to the judges to say "Doesn't look like your case has any ground."

EDIT: Actually, better question. Was it more "Was Judge Wright wrong in dismissing the case until the Archie case was done?" and not an actual question of the hearing being about continuing the case, or simply "Should the case simply be reopened now that the Archie case is done?"

Ken Penders wrote:There are many aspects to a legal case outside the actual details of my claims of infringement, that I'm surprised you would comment the way you did, given that when presented with facts that contradicted your previous beliefs, you seemed to rethink your position.

...I did? When was this?

Ken Penders wrote:Also check out the part where Archie was claiming I owe them a quarter of a million dollars in damages in the lawsuit as a result of my harming their relationship with Sega.

Yes, that honestly was pretty silly.

Ken Penders wrote:Sega was by no means the innocent party here, and plenty of fans have yet to learn how little regard Sega has for them. These same fans would be stunned to learn - at least during the time I was dealing with time - half the company wanted nothing to do with Sonic, claiming he had outlived his usefulness,

Trust me, there are parts of the community which already know this. Yes, that includes the last part there.
User avatar
Tylinos
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:00 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby beavercartoon » Mon Nov 11, 2013 8:24 pm

I remember the 134 cover. It was quite striking, and everybody I showed it to recognized it as being Spider-Man inspired. I personally thought that was less of a gray area than some of the Super Special stories (the ones that had Ally McBeal and Sailor Moon references.) It's very difficult to tell sometimes what is homage, what is parody, and what is using another work without consent. I like that the Archie staff at least talked about whether issue content was okay if they were unsure instead of just writing and drawing whatever.

I'm not really sure what BioWare's intentions were when they designed Sonic Chronicles. I think it would have been a good idea for them to talk to Ken first if they got ideas from the Knuckles comics. They used the SWATBots too, which I believe came from the SatAM cartoon and I don't recall ever being in the video games before. As a fan, I thought it was cool to see continuities merge, but if any of those characters had been my intellectual property and something was being published as official (not simply a fan project) I might have felt differently. I also think Archie comics made some mistakes in handling the lawsuit. Countersuing for a damaged reputation seems excessive to me, but I'm not a comic book insider in any way so my judgment might be faulty.

I still don't understand everything going on with the court case, but I feel I have a slightly more accurate picture of the proceedings now, so thank you.
User avatar
beavercartoon
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 12:45 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Gally » Mon Nov 11, 2013 10:10 pm

THE LARA-SU CHRONICLES is about a set of characters and situations based on stories I created, set on a planetoid in outer space, concerning a young girl coming to grips with a great responsibility suddenly thrust on her shoulders after the destruction of the world she came from.


Oh, you want to play like that ? Fine.

SONIC CHRONICLES is about a set of characters and situations based on the SEGA SONIC licence, set on a different version of Earth, concerning a hedgehog and his friends meeting a group of evil ant-eaters from another dimension who want to steal a powerful gem for their leader.

Tell me how it's an infringement on your stories again ?
User avatar
Gally
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:21 am

*

Postby Paul-Agnew » Mon Nov 11, 2013 11:11 pm

*
Last edited by Paul-Agnew on Mon Jul 28, 2014 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
*http://www.echidnaenclave.net/*
*thepaulagnew@gmail.com*
*@paulstralia*
Paul-Agnew
 
Posts: 331
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:22 pm
Location: Up, Over, And Gone

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby BobR » Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:54 am

Lammy wrote:
THE LARA-SU CHRONICLES is about a set of characters and situations based on stories I created, set on a planetoid in outer space, concerning a young girl coming to grips with a great responsibility suddenly thrust on her shoulders after the destruction of the world she came from.


Oh, you want to play like that ? Fine.

SONIC CHRONICLES is about a set of characters and situations based on the SEGA SONIC licence, set on a different version of Earth, concerning a hedgehog and his friends meeting a group of evil ant-eaters from another dimension who want to steal a powerful gem for their leader.

Tell me how it's an infringement on your stories again ?

Show me where this storyline appeared before Ken wrote it, and I'll agree with you. Until then, you just described why it's an infringement of Ken's storyline for Knuckles. And as far as Lara-Su is concerned, it's not copyright infringement if you take from yourself.
Wearing my mask, looking like a bear! I'm a raccoon!!
User avatar
BobR
Site Admin
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:29 pm

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Tylinos » Sat Nov 16, 2013 3:22 am

BobR wrote:
Lammy wrote:
THE LARA-SU CHRONICLES is about a set of characters and situations based on stories I created, set on a planetoid in outer space, concerning a young girl coming to grips with a great responsibility suddenly thrust on her shoulders after the destruction of the world she came from.


Oh, you want to play like that ? Fine.

SONIC CHRONICLES is about a set of characters and situations based on the SEGA SONIC licence, set on a different version of Earth, concerning a hedgehog and his friends meeting a group of evil ant-eaters from another dimension who want to steal a powerful gem for their leader.

Tell me how it's an infringement on your stories again ?

Show me where this storyline appeared before Ken wrote it, and I'll agree with you. Until then, you just described why it's an infringement of Ken's storyline for Knuckles. And as far as Lara-Su is concerned, it's not copyright infringement if you take from yourself.

It looks like all Lammy was trying to do there is show that if Ken can word the basis of TL-SC with vauge terms in a way to distance it from any claim of it being linked to another property, the same can be done with Chronicles. (You may have missed the part where Ken was responding to Lammy noting the story involves "an ECHIDNA on a FLOATING ISLAND is a GUARDIAN of some stuff on PLANET MOBIUS", and that he was rewording the situation.)

Also, I fail to see how any of what Lammy said shows it being an infringement of Ken's Knuckles stories. Unless you mean the part about Echidnas from another world wanting the Master Emerald, a part which is just as vauge (if not moreso) than the bit Lammy described. (And, from what I'm aware, is just about the extent of any similarities between Ken's stories and Chronicles, as the plot itself and characters are entirely different, not counting the actual Sega characters being present, of course.)
User avatar
Tylinos
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:00 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Mavrickindigo » Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:33 am

Let's not forget that Ken didn't want anything to do with the Master Emerald and it was forcibly shoved into the comics to fit Sonic Adventure in
My Deviantart
If you like the Lara-Su Chronicles, I would like to hear why. I will genuinely listen to you
User avatar
Mavrickindigo
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:41 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Gally » Sat Nov 16, 2013 4:45 pm

Exactly what Tylinos said.

Show me where this storyline appeared before Ken wrote it


We all know that there have been alternative dimensions since Sonic 1 (the Special Stages) (and even the character Nack comes from one of those dimensions). As for "more echidnas", Ken is not the first one to do it. The French Sonic Adventures comic had a whole hidden echidna society on Angel Island, led by Princess Aluçion. Sonic the Comic also had Knuckles waiting for the other echidnas to return from the stars to his island, and Dr Zachary appeared a bit later.
The idea of "echidnas in another dimension waiting to return" is not new, Ken didn't create that. It's easy to think about that just with the elements from the games.

And as far as Lara-Su is concerned, it's not copyright infringement if you take from yourself.


Riiiight, not at all :

an ECHIDNA on a FLOATING ISLAND is a GUARDIAN of some stuff on PLANET MOBIUS


Totally not an idea stolen from Sega. Honest.
User avatar
Gally
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:21 am

Re: Update on the SEGA/EA case

Postby Mavrickindigo » Sun Nov 17, 2013 8:51 am

Oh wait, Lammy, don't forget

Ken Penders wrote:Who said they were Echidnas?


Remember when Ken said that when the first batch of images were released? :roll:
My Deviantart
If you like the Lara-Su Chronicles, I would like to hear why. I will genuinely listen to you
User avatar
Mavrickindigo
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:41 am

Next

Return to Sonic, Knuckles, & SEGA



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BobR and 3 guests