Spiderman, Sony vs Marvel 250
Posted
by
CmdrTaco
from the legal-web-slinging dept.
from the legal-web-slinging dept.
|
|
|
"If it's not loud, it doesn't work!" -- Blank Reg, from "Max Headroom"
Sony? (Score:2, Funny)
EXLUSIVE DRUDGE REPORT (Score:2, Interesting)
Ie; "The loss of SPIDERMAN could affect all of SONY's future financial plans for its U.S. entertainment company"
Yeah, I'm sure sony has no other way of making money and will file chapter 7 because of a little spiderman tiff.
more careful reading (Score:4, Informative)
Re:more careful reading (Score:3, Informative)
I strongly object (Score:5, Funny)
Drudge has worked very hard to ensure that everything he reports is a great big load, and your comments cast aspersions on his efforts.
Shame. SHAME!
Re:EXLUSIVE DRUDGE REPORT (Score:4, Insightful)
Most of drudge's stories are just links to articles in other publications, most of whom get their news through AP or Reuters (their validity is an entirely separate argument). What you're complaining about is the focus he chooses to use for compiling his articles.
sensationalistic? yes. but that doesnt mean he's wrong. the bigger problem is the same one that plagues
Oh yeah... (Score:3, Funny)
... As opposed to Slashdot, which gets all of the stories right.
Re:EXLUSIVE DRUDGE REPORT (Score:3, Insightful)
Easy way out (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Easy way out (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Easy way out (Score:3, Funny)
Why does *every* superhero have to wear skin-tight suits? Decreased wind resistent *can't* be the only reason...
Re:Easy way out (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Easy way out (Score:2)
Re:Easy way out (Score:2)
Re:Easy way out (Score:2, Funny)
Skin-tight? It's fairly obvious (Score:3, Funny)
In some cases, literally.
Re:Easy way out (Score:2)
Re:Easy way out (Score:2)
well, it didn't hurt batman and robin
Re:Easy way out (Score:4, Interesting)
As much as I think Spiderman is a great superhero concept, the Sunday comic strip (which Stan Lee supposedly does himself) is *lame*!
I guess he's trying to make sure it's ok for younger kids to read and everything, but come on! The stilted conversations are almost unbearable. There's much more suspense and sense of believability in the dialog of "Brenda Starr", for crying out loud!
Stracyznki, et al, kind of did that.. (Score:2)
"Well, we knew there was something you were keeping from us, and you were always so clumsy around girls. There was obviously something in the closet, I didn't know it was spandex rather than taffeta.."
She's clear that she's not extremely opposed to it (something like "we'd
I'm confused... (Score:5, Informative)
This is a really horrible report, so Google News comes to the rescue and I found a fanboy site with a lot more information. [superherohype.com]
Hope it helps, because the Drudge report was just confusing.
Re:I'm confused... (Score:5, Informative)
"Spiderman" by Sony Entertainment. No mention of Marvel anywhere. At least, that is what I get from "MARVEL is accusing SONY of doing everything it can to disassociate SPIDERMAN and MARVEL in the minds of retailers."
Re:I'm confused... (Score:3, Interesting)
When I think of Spider-Man, I now think of $10,000 Sony Plasma displays
Re:I'm confused... (Score:2, Funny)
This is just sad... ;-)
Re:I'm confused... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I'm confused... (Score:3, Informative)
On the other hand Harry Knowles says this is nothing. (Not that his track record is that great, mind you) Ain't It Cool News [aint-it-cool-news.com]
Re:I'm confused... (Score:3)
Since Spider-Man is arguably Marvel's hottest property, and that Spider-Man has appeared alongside the Marvel logo on and off for years they are probably getting nervous that their ace is getting played by another company and its mostly Sony seeing the profits.
Then again the powers that be a
Sony vs Marvel (Score:5, Funny)
Sony's next big console game....
Re:Sony vs Marvel (Score:2)
Re:Sony vs Marvel (Score:2)
Capcom, Inc., sues Sony, claiming its newest game, Sony vs. Marvel, violates its trademarks and dilutes its market share. The game, featuring Sony character "Spider-Man" and other properties tag-team fighting members of Marvel's legal teams, was first developed by Capcom. Since then, Sony has "relatively taken over the game, branded it as theirs, removed all ties to Capcom and used the characters to market other Sony products," an insider at Capcom claimed.
I remember the day... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I remember the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I remember the day... (Score:2)
Wasn't there Ghost Rider merchandising in the 70s? I could swear that I had a G.R. Lunchbox at one time. Though he was never the type to be hyped in every home
Re:I remember the day... (Score:5, Funny)
I remember when trademarks weren't legal. (Score:5, Insightful)
This takes money, and if Marvel doesn't recieve the fat royalties that come from having a lucrative franchise (are people allowed to have those anymore on
I remember when someone could be protective of their own intellectual property, and not be sanctimoniously lectured about it.
This is not a troll, though it will likely be modded as such.
ILLegal, I meant to say ILLegal (Score:2)
Re:I remember when trademarks weren't legal. (Score:2)
Ah, but one could argue that this all happened in a different age, before Marvel became a publicly traded corporation, before corporate raider Ron Perelman decided to ream the company out for quick profits, dragging it into bankruptcy. Only after a [amazon.com]
Re:I remember when trademarks weren't legal. (Score:3, Interesting)
I do too. It was back when it wasn't called intellectual property.
I feel a rant coming on....
The problem is, Sony didn't make a Spiderman movie, make some money, and that's that. They are trying to establish the Spiderman Franchise. Nothing is "normal" anymore, everything has to be pushed way too far. You can't just get something good and then appreciate it for that - you ha
Re:I remember the day... (Score:2)
Hmm (Score:4, Funny)
Actually... (Score:2)
he just changed clothes and put his glasses back on and instantly became unrecognizable.
Oh, wait...
Marvel's next superhero (Score:5, Funny)
And he never loses. Well, maybe he loses every so often to make things interesting, but he always wins on appeal ;-)
Re:Marvel's next superhero (Score:2, Funny)
Literally kidnapped? (Score:5, Funny)
MARVEL accuses SONY of literally kidnapping Spidey.
SONY literally kidnapped Spiderman? What, a bunch of Sony exectuves have Spidey chained up in the basement of their corporate HQ? This sounds like a good plot for the next comic book... sure, Spidey can defeat the Green Goblin, but does he stand a chance against capitalism run amok?
Re:Literally kidnapped? (Score:2)
Re:Literally kidnapped? (Score:3, Funny)
I think he was speaking figuratively when he said Sony literally kidnapped Spiderman.
I've said it before.. (Score:5, Insightful)
The basic gist of the complaint is that they are attempting to rebrand Spiderman as a Sony product. Though I don't have any opinion as to whether they're guilty here or not as I don't have enough info to base an opinion on, I do know that Sony's been complained about before. Anybody remember when they were developing the Super NES CD that never arrived? It fell through because Sony wanted this to be a Sony branded machine. They basically wanted to take over Nintendo's well developed market. Fortunately, Nintendo had the balls to stand up to them. That's indirectly how Sony came around with the Playstation.
Slashdot really should be eyeballing Sony. Sometimes you guys pay too much attention to Microsoft.
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, Sony is quite broken up compared to most companies. They have their movie division, their music division, their computer division, their video games division, etc. So though I really hate Sony's music and movie division, I still like their video game division.
Also, offering linux for PS2 can't hurt.
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, they don't oppose and even encourage Linux on the PS2. That's important around here.
Also, they sell (sold? haven't seen one recently) CD-RW drives, DVD-RW drives, MP3 players, etc. even though they are into producing content in a BIG way.
Their laptops are cool (but pricey) and run Linux pretty well.
They just seem to "get it". They may be bare knuckled when dealing with competitors and collaborators, but they make/sell and support things that people want
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2, Interesting)
You mean the $200 Linux kit that doesn't allow you to burn your apps to disc for others to play with? I guess I can give them credit for kissing Slashdot's ass. It's not so interesting when you read the FAQ and realize it's not near as interesting as it could be. Sega had it right with their Dreamcast.
"Also, they sell (sold? haven't seen one recently) CD-RW drives, DVD-RW drives, MP3 players, etc. even though
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean like the CD Mavica that writes directly to 8cm CD-R disks? Or were you thinking of the FD Mavica that writes directly to floppies?
Actually, I agree with your general point that Sony likes using technology that doesn't always interoperate well, going back at least to the days of VHS vs. Beta. I'm not sure, though, that it's necessarily an issue of trying to lock users in. Sony just doesn't seem to get the id
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2)
Your one CD player. Go do a little more research.
"I see absolutely nothing proprietary about my Sony MP3 CD player. "
Yes, you're right. You'll find other Sony products that couldn't get away with it either. That does not negate my point. Sony couldn't make any money if they tried to enter a highly competitive market with proprietary garabe. Go do a search for "MagicGate" and you'll start to see what I'm talking about.
"Look, all
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2)
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2)
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2, Insightful)
This is hardly a surprise. My HP2 desk calendar mentions Quidditch(tm), Hogwarts(tm), Hagrid(tm), and others, with fine print at the bottom stating that "characters...are trademarks of and (c) Warner Bros."
Wonder what JKR thinks of all this...
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2)
Sony v. Nintendo is a case of evil v. evil. No real love lost either way.
I knew that Sony made Playstation as a result of the Nintendo CD game system deal falling apart. Because it is almost a cheap romance novel gone amok (i.e. he said, she said), I've never found any clear corroboration as to _why_, just speculation, and I've seen a few theories.
Re:No lie, Sony's a bunch of jerks (Score:2)
I've had some not-so-pleasant experiences with them myself. I used to be a video game salesman. My first xmas was spent selling their defective Playstations. We had like 1 in 4 machi
is that why they paired with Verant? (Score:5, Interesting)
I feel sympothy for them but they should be professional. I and my wife decided we would like to get back into the game of MMOG so I did a bit of research at that time on the various MMOG's out then. What I came across was a varied array of horror stories dealing all with customer service. I read about how players had their accounts suspended and then terminated often when they were actually the victim of hacking attacks. (it was hard to filter through the BS, but some presented their cases very well to include providing what evidence they had and Verant/SOE responses.
I was warned by some that in the unlikely event that my account was somehow compromised through no fault or negligence of my own then by reporting it there was a high probability that my account would be permanently deleted. I thought that was odd and so decided to verify the policy with Sony.
Looking online at their site, I did multiple searches through the knowledge available and perused everything from the FAQ's and posted legal mumbo jumbo. However, it appeared that all that was ever mentioned was, "We are not responsible for securing your computer or network." OK, that doesn't sound unreasonable at all. However, past experience also knew that this could easily be just an ambigious coverall attempt to justify stupid decisions upon their part. I needed hard facts so why not ask their friendly customer service reps (that was before the trend to call it "customer care" appeared I believe).
What happened next seemed at first to be sadly just another fine example of dealing with customer service and tech support today. I first stated my question. Then stated after that more specifics about it, including what I was NOT asking. I also pointed out clearly at the beginning that I had read as much info as I could find on their site and included the relevant FAQ portions that I felt did not fully answer my question. First response back? Noise. It appeared that an automated system went through and mined my question with the customer rep only reading the scripts output. He responded that I look at the FAQ and restated what I myself had quoted in my email regarding their "responsibility." (BTW, my questions were basically "If I take precautions of firewall, anti virus, spyware checking, yadda yadda yadda, what would happen if someone somehow managed to crack my account?" and also "In such a case as this, would Verant and SOE's policy allow banning of the victim's (me) account?")
I responded with a generic statement up front of "please read this email in its entirety as the original query was not addressed" and proceeded to then quote my original question. I really could not think of another way to post it.
This time it seems he read a bit more. He then proceeded to quote from the FAQ how each banning case goes through a review process... yet did not say that it was possible. Time for response numero dos.
This time he addressed the portion of my query about the compromised account review policy... but still did not give a concrete answer as to whether their policy allowed them to ban the victims account. (I had explicitly asked this every time). Well I guess I will fire up another response.
This time I apparently had worn him down a bit (and I refrained from calling him a turdstain or anything else like that) and he testily responded that the security of the accounts was solely the responsibility of the user. He then seemed to use his own words to paraphrase the parts of the FAQ about, "don't give yo
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2)
He'll seem like a superhero, but before long DC will come up with a superhero that has more depth and fewer weakenesses. So Sony will fight back by flooding the market with tons of rushed derivitive stories about their superhero.
Re:I've said it before.. (Score:2)
I take it you didn't buy the Spiderman soundtrack that you couldn't put into your computer without using a Sharpie?
more info (Score:2, Informative)
Knowles Knows (Score:5, Informative)
Great post... (Score:2)
Thanks for the link... at least Harry bothered to talk to a real person before conclusion jumping (which should be an Olympic sport these days)
Spiderman is dead, Long Live Spidey !
Lots of accusations but no proof. (Score:5, Funny)
Dance with the devil... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not news. It's Sony. So, while I hope Marvel comes out ahead through all this (either by gaining more money, correcting the situation, or taking Spiderman from Sony altogether) I still can't help but wonder what exactly Marvel expected from Sony?
Contracts? In the hands of an evil entity like Sony, contracts don't mean anything that money can't change.
Ethics? There is no ethics in business.
Plain old common sense? HAHAHAHAH
You know what they say about dancing with the devil....
Re:Dance with the devil... (Score:2, Informative)
Spiderman should be in the public domain by now (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Spiderman should be in the public domain by now (Score:3, Insightful)
Trademark doesnt expire, it gets diluted, and this is probably one of the driving reasons behind this lawsuit.
in my next life... (Score:2, Insightful)
This sounds familiar.. (Score:2, Funny)
"It was mine first, give it back!"
"Nuh uh, you gave it to me!"
"Did not!"
"Did too!"
"Did not!"
"Did too!"
Pulp fiction (Score:2)
With great power... (Score:5, Funny)
Sir Walter Scott was right (Score:2)
This had interesting parallels (Score:5, Funny)
Mr.Lee is very obviously Xerox.
The short(s) of it (Score:2)
To put it briefly, buy your movie-themed Spidey Underoos and Spidey
Marvel to employ Iraqi Information Manager ... (Score:5, Funny)
"Those infidels at Sony don't even have the rights to the character at all. If they think they do, it's all in their minds"
"I feel safe from Sony, so should you"
"They are going to surrender or burn inside their little rice burners"
"Sony has never made a Spiderman film! This I tell you!"
"We will welcome them, with lawyers and taunts!"
"they are nowhere near completion on the sequel
Who cares? (Score:2)
Its all about the money. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Its all about the money. (Score:2)
It is about revenge... Last time they got a % of net - which the $400M gross netted $0 after accounting. Whoops! Bet they want % of gross this time...
Hyphen (Score:2)
Somebody who used to work at Marvel said (on a previous Slashdot article) that they take the hyphen very seriously - for an employee to call it "Spiderman" is a terminable offense. Dilution of trademark.
Losing Money Over Spiderman?!?!? (Score:3, Funny)
Root of the problem (Score:2)
Studio Math 101 (Score:3, Interesting)
Studios arbitrarily state that a movie must make 3xCost to make a profit; if a movie costs $10million, it must make $30million to break even.
The expenses are the cost of the production, the cost of advertising/promotion, and the cost of distribution.
What the public does _not_ know is that promotion is an arbitrary figure, and distribution is a set amount established each year when the NATO Group (National Association of Theatre Owners) say how ma
Spiderman? (Score:2)
giant screw up (Score:3, Insightful)
Stan Lee should have said everything SM related, ever, has my name on it, and I get x%.
Ditto for Marvel (with Stan's agreement intact).
Whoa, /. gonna get sued next (Score:2)
I do believe this dispute started during the early trailers for the movie "Spider-Man". For awhile there the Sony movie website was spiderman.sony.com
Anybody noticed... (Score:2)
Sony's got a track record for this, no?
Spider-man, not Spiderman. (Score:3, Funny)
Hmmmm...... (Score:2, Funny)
Money and Property (Score:2)
Unfortunately, in the public's eyes, Spider Man might be a Sony character. I'm guessing, but the movie probably made more money than the last 10 years of Spider Man comic books. Technically, Spider Man belongs to Marvel, but if courtrooms are won by whoever buys the most lawers, then Sony could win this.
Re:About what I would expect from Sony (Score:2, Informative)
Or something like that.
Anyways, dont get to riled up
Re:About what I would expect from Sony (Score:2)
And gaming goodness ensued.
OK, i'll bite (Score:2)
So what's up with HAL (the Smash Brothers / Earthbound people?) are they an owned subsidiary of Nintendo or what? Or does nintendo just have an unlimited license to use their IP?
Also, what's up with the Rare IP? Microsoft owns Rare now, or whatever, but Smash Brothers Melee, a current product, still contains characters and situations from StarFox. Who owns the StarFox characters
Re:New fighting game? (Score:2)
What do you think that'd be like? The X-Men vs. a bunch of Japanese lawyers with legal pads, and really big pens? Would the Sony guys hurl affidavits and contracts? Could you stop them with some well-placed sushi? Would the have cell-phones with massive amounts of radiation?
Re:By The Steps: (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's quite possible that Marvel has a case. Pretty probable too... big companies tend not to go up against bigger better companies that could buy their ass out unless they happen to be faltering *coughSCOcough*.
Marvel's doing better than ever. Movie exposure is enticing more and more people to read superhero comics and it seems to have moved once again away from the stereotypical fanboy and more into the traditional playgrounds of childhood fantasy.
Marvel wouldn't cut the rug out from underneath them by ending a contract with SONY without good reason. Obviously there's tension between the two companies and Marvel wants out of the contract so they can build a better relationship with a different company.
Fine. No real harsh damage done to anything really except that Sony doesn't get a third Spidey movie. I don't even know if Sam Raimi's going to want to touch a third Spidey movie, and most likely there's going to be lots of FUD around a third movie any ways, cuz frankly I don't know if people have forgotten about Batman Forever and Batman and Robin yet.
Re:By The Steps: (Score:2)
Not that that ever really happens, but hey, a man can dream.
Re:By The Steps: (Score:2)
5. ???
6. Profit!
Re:Today must be a really slow news day (Score:2)
Re:Today must be a really slow news day (Score:2)
Re:Drudge Report reported as news?! (Score:2)