Joseph Riggs (josephriggs@earthlink.net)
Sat, 09 Dec 2000 18:16:11 -0800


Neil Baumgardner wrote:

> Brett Jensen wrote:
>
> > Neil Baumgardner wrote:
> >
> > > Oh come on. Bandai (or Tatsunoko, I cant remember who it was originally) was stupid enough to
> > > grant HG the license for Macross and all Macross-related products in the US in perpetuity. HG
> > > is simply defending its rights.
> >
> > sigh,
> >
> > First off: Big West is the rights holder for Macross. Out of the Robotech shows Tatsunoko only
> > produced Southern Cross.
>
> Did Big West exist in 1983, or whatever year it was HG acquired the rights? I could be wrong, but I
> dont think so.
>
> > Second: Apperently Big west doesn't agree that they gave up international rights to all sequels
> > and sidestories or they wouldn't be fighting HG.
>
> Yes, and all indications are it will be shortly resolved. However, one only needs to look at the
> FASA-PlayMates/HG disputes to see where this one is likely headed.
> FASA sues PlayMates/HG over use of 'Battletech' designs in the new PlayMates Robotech toyline. FASA
> suit denied. PlayMates/HG countersue, and win. FASA promptly discontinues any acknowledgement of the
> original Macross designs in Battletech. It would seem, HG does have an exclusive right to Macross
> products in the US. Note the current BigWest/Toycom-HG dispute is not in court, but in negotiations.
> I wonder why....

Don't know how reliable this is, but what I had heard regarding the countersuit was that FASA decided to
let the issue drop as legal fees would have been too expensive for basically a handful of mechs. Even
if you're in the right in a court case, it doesn't always matter if your opponent has the necessary
money to keep the case going into perpetuity.

junior

-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Dec 10 2000 - 10:58:48 JST