DC to reprint Valiant issues

[worldsbestcomics]

MOTA,

I actually think that both sides are suing each other. I could be wrong but I think the first legal maneuver was by VIP to prohibit VEI from using the character names that VIP claimed they had trademarked. That put a legal cloud over VEI's relaunch. I suspect that VIP then began negotiating with VEI over a price to drop the injunction and sell whatever rights VIP has to names. And I think VIP sued, or threatened to sue, over the release of the Harbinger HC.

In a case like this, the person who is alleging that they own the names (VIP) is required to demonstrate that they actually intend to use the names, otherwise their claim will lapse. The "publication" of the SD ashcan was no doubt motivated by that legal requirement. Once VIP used those names in the ashcan, VEI was obligated to sue or it would appear they were conceding to VIP's claim of ownership.

[worldsbestcomics]

But, regardless of all the legal mumbo jumbo. I think the point I was trying to make is that if we knew who was behind VIP, we could boycott their products to try and force them to abandon their legal action(s) so we can get some more Valiant comics sooner

[SnotDrip]

...

Dude! What you are doing is akin to trying to tempt a tornado away from your house by offering it a Twinkie.

Back away slowly, else that's a whirlpool you won't be able to escape.



-slym

So I'm wrong? VEI is not suing VIP? VIP did not release an ashcan during SDCC?

WTF?

...still backing away and looking for the door for a quick escape. No sudden moves. I might make it.

take the twinky and run...

[slym2none]

For Future reference - A Twinkie is a cream-filled golden sponge cake, and "twinky" is something that might be considered "gay."

Wait... a Twinkie is gay too, then.





-slym

[ManofTheAtom]

MOTA,

I actually think that both sides are suing each other. I could be wrong but I think the first legal maneuver was by VIP to prohibit VEI from using the character names that VIP claimed they had trademarked. That put a legal cloud over VEI's relaunch. I suspect that VIP then began negotiating with VEI over a price to drop the injunction and sell whatever rights VIP has to names. And I think VIP sued, or threatened to sue, over the release of the Harbinger HC.

In a case like this, the person who is alleging that they own the names (VIP) is required to demonstrate that they actually intend to use the names, otherwise their claim will lapse. The "publication" of the SD ashcan was no doubt motivated by that legal requirement. Once VIP used those names in the ashcan, VEI was obligated to sue or it would appear they were conceding to VIP's claim of ownership.

VIP suing VEI is like a horse with no legs trying to run the Kentucky Derby.

Under what basis is VIP suing VEI? What does VEI own that VIP claims is theirs? Or how has VEI illegally used VIP's property?

[worldsbestcomics]

MOTA,

I actually think that both sides are suing each other. I could be wrong but I think the first legal maneuver was by VIP to prohibit VEI from using the character names that VIP claimed they had trademarked. That put a legal cloud over VEI's relaunch. I suspect that VIP then began negotiating with VEI over a price to drop the injunction and sell whatever rights VIP has to names. And I think VIP sued, or threatened to sue, over the release of the Harbinger HC.

In a case like this, the person who is alleging that they own the names (VIP) is required to demonstrate that they actually intend to use the names, otherwise their claim will lapse. The "publication" of the SD ashcan was no doubt motivated by that legal requirement. Once VIP used those names in the ashcan, VEI was obligated to sue or it would appear they were conceding to VIP's claim of ownership.

VIP suing VEI is like a horse with no legs trying to run the Kentucky Derby.

Under what basis is VIP suing VEI? What does VEI own that VIP claims is theirs? Or how has VEI illegally used VIP's property?

VIP claims to own the rights to the Valiant character names. i.e. the name "Rai" the name "Harbinger" etc. The basis for their claim is best explained by an attorney with more knowledge of trademarks and copyrights than me.

[ManofTheAtom]

MOTA,

I actually think that both sides are suing each other. I could be wrong but I think the first legal maneuver was by VIP to prohibit VEI from using the character names that VIP claimed they had trademarked. That put a legal cloud over VEI's relaunch. I suspect that VIP then began negotiating with VEI over a price to drop the injunction and sell whatever rights VIP has to names. And I think VIP sued, or threatened to sue, over the release of the Harbinger HC.

In a case like this, the person who is alleging that they own the names (VIP) is required to demonstrate that they actually intend to use the names, otherwise their claim will lapse. The "publication" of the SD ashcan was no doubt motivated by that legal requirement. Once VIP used those names in the ashcan, VEI was obligated to sue or it would appear they were conceding to VIP's claim of ownership.

VIP suing VEI is like a horse with no legs trying to run the Kentucky Derby.

Under what basis is VIP suing VEI? What does VEI own that VIP claims is theirs? Or how has VEI illegally used VIP's property?

VIP claims to own the rights to the Valiant character names. i.e. the name "Rai" the name "Harbinger" etc. The basis for their claim is best explained by an attorney with more knowledge of trademarks and copyrights than me.

See, that's the misconception.

VIP doesn't own anything, all they've done is go after the trademarks and then used them BEFORE they were assigned to them.

In their zeal to use something that they still didn't own, they used a trademark that VEI owned lock and stock, which opened them to a lawsuit.

There is no defense to what VIP did, they knowingly used a trademark they did not own, which proves intent to defraud the rightful owners.

I could go after the tms, you could go after the tms, greg could go after the tms... and we could all put out an ashcan... it would not mean that we own the tms.

[The Harbinger]

For Future reference - A Twinkie is a cream-filled golden sponge cake, and "twinky" is something that might be considered "gay."

Wait... a Twinkie is gay too, then.





-slym

It's also an asian that acts white in Harold and Kumar go to White Castle

[ManofTheAtom]

with a little Miracleman-style skirting around Magnus and Solar for copyright purposes

That's the part that bothers me the most and the most telling in the story.

VEI did not have to resort to Miracleman-style skirting for the appearance of Doctor Solar in the Harbinger HC, so why would they need to in future reprints?

[Cyberstrike]

They wouldn't be reprinting Deathmate, would they?

I don't think they could sell a reprint when the originals are still easily available for next to nothing.

They might be trying to negotiate some kind of DC/Valiant crossover with VEI that would give both companies a chance for some Deathmate type hype. But reprints of any Valiant work by DC doesn't make sense.

A Deathmate TPB would also require the permission of Rob Liefeld and Top Cow as well since characters that are both owned by Liefeld and
Top Cow are in the story. IIRC isn't "Deathmate" is one of names being sued over anyway?

Remember though that Jim Lee was an integral part of Deathmate and he now works for DC. He also did the Hard Corps #1 cover. So anything is possible.

I think that Jim Lee has exclusive contract with DC/Wildstorm.
Jim Lee drew the cover to Hard Corps #1 years before he sold Wildstorm to DC

[cjv]

VIP doesn't own anything, all they've done is go after the trademarks and then used them BEFORE they were assigned to them.

How does trademark law work? If VIP files, what time frame doe VEI have to file a opposition motion? If VIP considered to have them, pending the motion, or are the trademarks in limbo?

If it is the latter, than I see absolutely that VIP broke some laws by releasing the new material in the ashcan, but did VEI do the same by releasing NEW material in the Harbinger HC, right (instead of just reprinting the issues)? Or is it different for some reason? If so, why? As I said, I don't know the law, I am curious.

Chris

[ManofTheAtom]

VIP doesn't own anything, all they've done is go after the trademarks and then used them BEFORE they were assigned to them.

How does trademark law work? If VIP files, what time frame doe VEI have to file a opposition motion? If VIP considered to have them, pending the motion, or are the trademarks in limbo?

If it is the latter, than I see absolutely that VIP broke some laws by releasing the new material in the ashcan, but did VEI do the same by releasing NEW material in the Harbinger HC, right (instead of just reprinting the issues)? Or is it different for some reason? If so, why? As I said, I don't know the law, I am curious.

Chris

I don't know much either about the tms in dispute.

The problem is this.

VIP jumped the gun and released an ashcan that contained a TM that was not in dispute, Bloodshot.

That opened the door for VEI to file suit over the gross misuse of their intelectual property.

VIP's use of the Bloodshot TM shows reckless intent on their part to defraud the rightful owners of an established Trademark, which surely must weaken their case.

[Steve Topper]

VIP's use of the Bloodshot TM shows reckless intent on their part to defraud the rightful owners of an established Trademark, which surely must weaken their case.

MOTA,
Are you a lawyer? Not wanting to be too argumentative or insulting here, but stating a company "shows reckless intent" and "defraud the rightful owner" is strong language and could be construed as libel.

Also, throughout this thread and others, you've jumped into legal positions that appear spurious. VIP can sue VEI for use of what they perceive as their TMs. I can sue them for that matter. Whether it holds up in court is another thing entirely.

As far as we, the unknowing public, knows nothing has been settled in court and we, the unknowing public, have only our own speculation to base our opinions on. Right now, the legal facts are murky and we need to wait and see how it plays out in court.

We can support our favorite side by buying the Harbinger and X-O Manowar HCs or even by buying the VIP trashcan, but we won't know who is legally right until the court verdicts and any appeals are finalized.

[ManofTheAtom]

VIP's use of the Bloodshot TM shows reckless intent on their part to defraud the rightful owners of an established Trademark, which surely must weaken their case.

MOTA,
Are you a lawyer? Not wanting to be too argumentative or insulting here, but stating a company "shows reckless intent" and "defraud the rightful owner" is strong language and could be construed as libel.

Also, throughout this thread and others, you've jumped into legal positions that appear spurious. VIP can sue VEI for use of what they perceive as their TMs. I can sue them for that matter. Whether it holds up in court is another thing entirely.

As far as we, the unknowing public, knows nothing has been settled in court and we, the unknowing public, have only our own speculation to base our opinions on. Right now, the legal facts are murky and we need to wait and see how it plays out in court.

We can support our favorite side by buying the Harbinger and X-O Manowar HCs or even by buying the VIP trashcan, but we won't know who is legally right until the court verdicts and any appeals are finalized.

No I'm not, but common sense is common sense.

If I marketted a soft drink and called it Coca Cola, I'd be opening myself to be sued by the rightful owners of the trademark.

It's been said by those who do know more about the subject that Bloodshot, being a registered trademark, belongs to VEI.

Common sense says that if VEI rightfully owns the Bloodshot tm, then VIP can't use it.

[The Harbinger]

but we won't know who is legally right until the court verdicts and any appeals are finalized.

I'll know whose MORALLY right regardless of the court

[Steve Topper]

The Harbinger wrote

I'll know whose MORALLY right regardless of the court

You're correct about that, Harbinger, but unfortunately MORALLY right doesn't necessarily equate to LEGALLY right.

I would like to think they were the same but I've seen otherwise too often in dealing with courts and lawyers.

MOTA Wrote

. . .common sense is common sense.

Again, I wish this were the case in court, but it isn't. And that's why VIP can be suing VEI and vice versa. If common sense prevailed, a VIP lawsuit would never make it pass an attempt to file the lawsuit.

In the end, all we have are our opinions and those opinions are very ill-informed. When the verdicts come out, we can all celebrate the legal system confirming what we morally believe to be correct, or we can complain about how morally right should equal legally right and boycott the carpetbaggers and the fake products.

[ManofTheAtom]

The Harbinger wrote

I'll know whose MORALLY right regardless of the court

You're correct about that, Harbinger, but unfortunately MORALLY right doesn't necessarily equate to LEGALLY right.

I would like to think they were the same but I've seen otherwise too often in dealing with courts and lawyers.

MOTA Wrote

. . .common sense is common sense.

Again, I wish this were the case in court, but it isn't. And that's why VIP can be suing VEI and vice versa. If common sense prevailed, a VIP lawsuit would never make it pass an attempt to file the lawsuit.

In the end, all we have are our opinions and those opinions are very ill-informed. When the verdicts come out, we can all celebrate the legal system confirming what we morally believe to be correct, or we can complain about how morally right should equal legally right and boycott the carpetbaggers and the fake products.

When did VIP sue VEI? I don't remember anyone here ever say that happened. Far as I knew VEI was suing VIP.

Did VIP counter sue?

[Steve Topper]

When did VIP sue VEI? I don't remember anyone here ever say that happened. Far as I knew VEI was suing VIP.

Did VIP counter sue?

Personally, I don't know . . . part of the point I was making. With legal proceedings, nobody really knows anything until the end.

What I do know is that many times when a party gets sued, one of their first defenses is to countersue. I'm assuming VIP is suing or countersuing VEI in order to strengthen whatever claims they think they may have on any Valiant properties. Whether they are or not, I don't know. Just an assumption.

[ManofTheAtom]

When did VIP sue VEI? I don't remember anyone here ever say that happened. Far as I knew VEI was suing VIP.

Did VIP counter sue?

Personally, I don't know . . . part of the point I was making. With legal proceedings, nobody really knows anything until the end.

What I do know is that many times when a party gets sued, one of their first defenses is to countersue. I'm assuming VIP is suing or countersuing VEI in order to strengthen whatever claims they think they may have on any Valiant properties. Whether they are or not, I don't know. Just an assumption.

Don't assume... you know the cliche

Had VIP countersued, I'm sure we would have heard about it by now.

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court- ... id-312415/

Anyone wanna sing up to PACER to learn about the case?

[slym2none]

For Future reference - A Twinkie is a cream-filled golden sponge cake, and "twinky" is something that might be considered "gay."

Wait... a Twinkie is gay too, then.





-slym

It's also an asian that acts white in Harold and Kumar go to White Castle

Brown on the outside, and white in the middle?

Also known as the "coconut..."





-slym