A Broke Fan Owes $5,400 For Pokemon-Themed Party Posters 212
Jason Koebler writes: A fan has been ordered by a Washington judge to pay the Pokémon Company International $5,400 for copyright infringement after attempting to throw a Pokemon-themed party earlier this summer. Even though he canceled the free event, the Pokemon Company successfully sued Ramar Larkin Jones, for using an image of Pikachu to promote the Unofficial PAX Pokemon Kickoff Party.
If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ketchum's response should not be to wimp out by trying to GoFundMe the ransom. Blare the whole thing on social media, concentrating on Pokémon fan sites, with the aim of turning fans off as much as possible. So long as he doesn't make anything up, there is no possibility of additional suits for such activity (this isn't Britain!). Make them wish they had never tried to pull such a tactic.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Lawl.
Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:5, Insightful)
Whoever posted that is a dick. According to the Gofundme page, he only charged $2, which was intended to cover the cost of prizes for the cosplay contest. No huge profit involved.
To the parent poster: you also are a dick, for posting this drivel, which misrepresents the situation.
Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:2)
Doesn't matter money is exchanged for a promotional event using other people's IP
Doesn't matter how you feel, that's pretty cut n dry in the eyes of the law and if you don't actively protect your IP when something real happens you loose basis of compliant
Re: (Score:2)
They could have phoned him, explained he needed to ask permission and told him he'd get it if he just applied nicely (and maybe drop the ticket fee). That would have served the same purpose of defending their IP.
But nooo... they had to litigate. They're dicks. And so is anyone who defends this as something that's right and proper.
Re: (Score:3)
Doesn't matter how you feel, that's pretty cut n dry in the eyes of the law
Fucking stupid laws that hurt society should be changed. Punishing stupid fan-hating companies that take advantage of such nonsense is a good start. Just because somethings technically legal, doesn't mean you're not a total dick for doing it.
Re: (Score:2)
do you know how much of a butthurt fanboi you sound like right now
this company has one simple goal, extract cash from as many peoples hands as possible while giving them absolutely worthless paper cards and trinket toys in exchance
Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
There's no such thing as intellectual property. There's nothing to defend.
Re: (Score:2)
Lawyers and lawmakers disagree with you and since they have money and power and you obviously do not, I'd say you're wrong and your opinion irrelevant.
i'd say he is right and his opinion is irrelevant (vs the global brainwash promoted by the intellectual property mafia)
Re: (Score:2)
But did he charge admission for the right to experience another company's IP? People didn't pay $2 apiece to see the posters. They paid $2 apiece to go to the party. So he didn't charge money for their IP in any meaningful sense. There's very little difference between this and suing some kid for printing out a picture of their IP and hanging it on his/her bedroom door.... It is, pedantically, a copyright violation, but it isn't
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have the benefit of your immense legal education, so please explain why that makes a difference.
Some citations would be nice.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have the benefit of your immense legal education, so please explain why that makes a difference.
Some citations would be nice.
Come on! This is /.! Where any half-wit suddenly becomes an expert in law, philosophy, finance, science, history, and any other subject under the sun. It's kind of like an on-line Rush Limbaugh program.
Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:5, Informative)
Truth of a statement is a valid legal defense against libel accusations in the U.S. And many other Western countries, but not in the UK. That is what the poster was referencing.
Re: (Score:2)
Asserting isn't a defense. Proving beyond doubt is. This can sometimes be very difficult to do - if you write that Dr Quack has been promoting a cancer treatment does doesn't actually work and he sues you for libel, you then need to provide absolute proof that his treatment really does not work - and if it hasn't been subjected to proper scientific study, how are you supposed to do that?
Re: (Score:2)
In Brittain, "telling the truth" is not an absolute defense in a defamation lawsuit. In the USA, it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Under US law, you can't be sued for libel if you stick to the truth. This is why deep-pocket libel plaintiffs in cases of international exposure will take the trouble to file in London, where it is effectively illegal to rake muck about a famous person if he/she decides to make a case of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, if crap behaviour could put a games hurt a company then EA would have been out of business a long time ago.
Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:5, Funny)
My wife and I divorced and my kids came to live with me after they figured out that I had the coolest toys. My son was into these things. He was still fairly young at the time. For a while I had him convinced that they got the name for the show from that period when you sit on the toilet and aren't actually able to go. He was convinced it was a "peek-a-pooh."
Yes, yes he does sometimes abhor my very existence but I don't regret it one bit. I am still waiting for the right time. for my daughter to be around a few of her friends, so that I can ask her to explain what "twerking" is.
This is my parental obligation. They're both adults now but I still have my job to do. I can't wait until they have children. I'm going to buy them each a drum kit and spoil them beyond belief. That part is not my obligation. That part is purely revenge. If you have kids, you might understand.
Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:4, Insightful)
Nintendo has a long history of treating its fans with contempt. Take for example how it issues DMCA notices to anybody who posts a video showing themselves playing their games. Honestly I stopped giving a shit about Nintendo after the SNES because as of the N64 and onward they basically gave the middle finger to both the developers and fans of third party titles of their systems. If they ever go belly up, I'd just say good riddance.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but a cease-and-desist would have been sufficient for defending the trademark.
Re: (Score:2)
Except Nintendo is practically the only game developer that does this. Search for "let's play" videos on youtube; there are TONS of them, from current generation games no less. If you upload a let's play for a nintendo game, they'll DMCA you and either demand you insert ads and they keep all of its revenue, or you have to remove it completely.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/a... [gamesindustry.biz]
If you want Nintendo to share the ad revenue, you have to delete all of your videos of non-Nintendo games from youtube:
http://recode.n [recode.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Since my kid has started playing a lot of games because of "Let's play" youtube videos (mostly from Pewdiepie but also a lot of others nowadays), this is like Nintendo taking a revolver, filling 5 out of 6 chambers with live ammo, and saying "let's see what happens!".
If I had shares, I'd sell them fast. There isn't going to be much value left in them a few years from now.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Ramar Larkin Jones isn't a "fan" - he's a event organizer [facebook.com] who was running a Pokemon themed event for which he was selling tickets [scribd.com]. The selling tickets parts got left out of the linked article somehow - I wonder why. (Actually, I don't need to wonder - the article is slanted all to hell and back.)
Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:4, Insightful)
It really doesn't matter. Once you start collecting money, the whole nature of the thing changes. If he wanted to pass the hat and beg for donations he could probably have got away with that, but actually charging admission is another thing. Having a pot for the costume contest prize would probably have been acceptable as well.
The truth is that Nintendo has always aggressively defended their trademarks, often to the detriment of their fans, to the extent that it doesn't make sense to be one because why should you worship something which abuses you? Which reminds me of another subject... I guess you could say these people belong to the church of Mario. Suckers.
Re: (Score:3)
For profit or not, once you start accepting money and running it through a business... you've crossed a line. It's no longer just a "fan party". (IMO of course.)
Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:2)
Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Defending your trademark" does not mean "suing anyone who doesn't pay you to use it". As long as there's no brand confusion being caused it doesn't need to be defended. As per the Wikipedia article: "It is not necessary for a trademark owner to take enforcement action against all infringement if it can be shown that the owner perceived the infringement to be minor and inconsequential."
Arguably, you can even let infringement go in many larger instances as long as they're not believed to cause brand confusion. Look at Star Wars - George Lucas has allowed fan-made works to do a helluvalot that would get them sued by just about any other IP-based company out there. He's even commented on fan works, showing that he is quite aware of them. None of this permissiveness with his trademarks has ever led to him coming even close to losing the brand.
Wonder (Score:2)
I wonder if Disney will be as lenient as Lucas was. Disney certainly isn't as picky or discriminating in what they will license for Star Wars, i.e. read anything or anyone who will pay a buck...
Re: (Score:2)
You need to ask DeVry for a refund on that JD course.
Re: (Score:3)
Defending a trademark can be as simple as asking nicely to stop using it. A formal cease-and-desist letter will work as well. You don't need to sue for damages to defend it if the abuser responds to the requests to stop.
Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score:4, Informative)
It's means it is.
Not always. It's been fun proving you wrong.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Always. Good try, though.
So you think what GP say was "It is been fun proving your wrong."?
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit you dummmmmmm
Hahahahahahaha (Score:5, Funny)
Gotta catch them all!
Re: (Score:2)
Business (Score:5, Informative)
The big piece of information that always gets neglected in these articles is that they didn't sue because he was throwing a party, but because he runs a business which hosts party events and then used Pokémon to promote such an event. Here is the company's trashy Facebook page. "Fans" and "Businesses" are NOT the same thing. https://www.facebook.com/Rucku... [facebook.com]
Re: (Score:3)
/. left the broken scribd link In from firehose for some reason.
Pokemon is owned by Nintendo which explains a lot.
The guy has setup a go fund me page to try to pay off Nin- I mean Pokemon. The comments so far aren't very nice;
Here's one for example:
"David Rustles 2 hours ago Not only were you illegally hosting an event, but you were charging for tickets and serving alcohol. TPC is completely in the right and you deserve everything that happened."
And here's a link to the gofundme in question https://www.g [gofundme.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your eloquent discourse and calm demeanor have swayed me to your side.
Nah. Just kidding. You got your panties all in a wad because you chose to be offended by a factual statement. Now you're just trying to justify it.
Re: (Score:2)
Americans are ridiculously prissy about alcohol, but I see the point here.
If you were in charge of a brand aimed at children would you want that association?
Re: (Score:2)
Pokémon was a brand aimed at children, what, 20 years ago? Those kids done growed up. It's an adult thing as much as anything these days, just like most of gaming, superheroes, and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That word does not mean what you think it does.
Re: (Score:2)
I read that as, "What I'm saying is that [Jones' actions were] not particularly egregious and [it was] super fucking petty of Pokemon Int'l to sue for something so piddly".
But of course it'd be better if people would take the time and effort to ensure that their words accurately reflect what they're trying to say.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't detect any grammatical errors as such, just a bit of confusion in the pronoun/antecedent department.
But, hey, it's the weekend, and I'm not perfect, either.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Business (Score:4, Informative)
If they're suing for trademark, then they kind of have to.
Actually, they don't, that's a myth created by assholes that don't want to look like assholes. Other valid defenses of the mark include sending a letter granting a one time only limited license and cautioning the person not to do it again, offering a license for $1, granting a revocable continuing license, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Overlook it
Contact the promoter asking for a different wording on promoti
Re: (Score:2)
if you know the law then you should also know that if a company doesn't proactively protect its copyrights, they risk it being classified as abandoned and losing it to the public domain.
Incorrect. First off, you cannot lose copyright for not defending it - that's trademarks. Secondly, you are not required to "proactively protect" your trademark against all infringement in order to risk losing it; only against major infringements. In most cases, major infringements are meant to mean something that would cause confusion as to which company actually owns the trademarks. Unless you're arguing that people would have thought Ramar Larkin Jones was the actual owner of Pokemon because he was throw
Re: (Score:2)
That must be why it's the sixth word on the poster and the second in large type. Just after "poke'mon" [sic].
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-... [arstechnica.net]
Re: (Score:2)
A new franchise is born: (Score:3)
Brokemon
What about the alcohol ... (Score:2)
The organizer seems to be focussing on ticket sales as his source of revenue, but there is also mention of serving themed shots and drinks. Alcohol is expensive and surely he was not giving that away for free. It can also be a good revenue generator. I wonder how that fits into how much revenue he would have, and whether it would end up being profitable?
(Note: I'm not saying that this would be a hugely profitable event because of those drinks. I am suggesting that there are important details being left
Professional event organizer abuses Pokemon IP (Score:2)
That would be a more appropriate headline. The $2 admission their company charges is basically the cover charge to get into a party with sale of alcoholic beverages. Does this sound like your typical fan gathering?:
Defendants boast that the "5th Annual Unofficial Pokemon PAX Kickoff Party" will feature among other things, "Pokemon themed shots and drinks - Smash Bros. Tournament with cash prize - Dancing - Giveaways - Cosplay Contest and more," and an "AMAZIN POKEMON MASHUP."
This sounds like a typical commercial "theme night" that bars and clubs might have, only instead of using a generic unprotected theme like Halloween they made a Pokemon party. Not surprised their lawyers got angry, They managed to put a very good media spin on it though, clearly they as event or
Lawyers need to be outlawed. (Score:2)
Because old lawyers become judges... and it perpetuates the "good ol boy" club.
Bankrupcy (Score:2)
Chapter 7 bankruptcy can be done for a few hundred bucks and has the added benefit of burning your credit cards in the process.
Suggested means of protest. (Score:2)
Time to spread some Rule 34 Pokemon art around! Dare them to sue, and invoke the Streisand Effect.
Conspiracy! (Score:2)
What is Julian Assange doing at that Pokemon party?
Re:Is it a good game? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Is it a good game? (Score:2)
The way copyright works, the holders are just about forced into suing over every little transgression.
Re: Is it a good game? (Score:2)
You're thinking of trademark law. You don't lose a copyright automatically for failing to sue over it.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't lose the copyright, but lax enforcement may affect damages awarded in later cases.
Re: (Score:2)
The $5400 consists of a $400 filing fee and $5000 lawyer bills. The copyright holders are getting NOTHING. It's a virtual certainty that the lawyers persuaded the copyright holders to sue, just so that the lawyers could have a nice payday.
If the GP truly wants justice out of this, find the lawyer's car and fill it with manure.
Re: (Score:2)
Trademark law you need to defend it or you could lose it. The Pokemon trademark is very valuable.
Re: Is it a good game? (Score:4, Informative)
True. If we didn't fine people who put up pokemon posters, we'd rapidly slide into anarchy!
Re: (Score:3)
You don't actually need the Gateway. Modern custom firmware runs (on the same firmware that a Gateway will run on) without needing anything except possibly a cheap DS flash card or a place to host web files.
Re:Marketing 101 (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, wait... you're serious?
As long as there are MBAs looking how to squeeze the last dime out of every potential customer and there are lawyers concerned about the loss of trademark through failure to defend that trademark there will be these kinds of lawsuits.
Quite honestly, I'm amazed that armies of lawyers haven't descended upon ComiCons and other fandom gatherings to sue the shit out of all of the artists and merchants selling unlicensed comic book derivative works. You wander around the dealers' rooms at the big cons and there are booths upon booths of artists with their own takes on Phoenix or The Hulk or Supergirl or any other hot comic book character of the moment. Based on current law I'm amazed that the continued creation of these unlicensed derivative works hasn't given the trademark holders panic that they could lose control over their characters. Indeed, it appears that they already have lost control over them, it simply hasn't been declared through trial yet.
Given what lawyers cost, I'm really surprised that the judgement against him is as small as it is. From the lawyers' perspective this is chump-change even if it would bankrupt half the households in the country to suddenly owe $5400.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Smart franchises that aren't run by
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you think that is bad take a look at bronies.
Re: (Score:3)
No, don't look at bronies. That's something you can't unsee.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because they enjoy the game
More specifically, some things you grow out of because you grow into other, more mature, interests.
Re: (Score:2)
For the record, I don't play Pokemon and was never really that into it. I get irritated at folks who look down their noses at other folks' hobbies because it's "not something adults do". Who made you arbiter of what's appropriate?
Re: (Score:2)
And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?
Anything who's second-most identifiable character isn't a pre-teen (Ash Ketchum).
Who made you arbiter of what's appropriate?
My opinion is my own, and I have the right to write it. Your opinion is your own, and you have the right to ignore it.
Re: (Score:3)
And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?
Sports, evidently. Sporting is what adults do. Pokemon video-gaming, bad. Football video-gaming, good. What? Children also play football video-games? Oh, but that's just them wanting to grow up, so it's fine!
Also, cosplaying. True adults don't cosplay. I mean, they don't cosplay Pokemon team's uniforms. Hockey team uniforms, now, those are fine to cosplay.
Also, let's not forget that only children write Pokemon games. Adults never do that. And those rare that do, they hate every single minute of their day. T
Re: (Score:2)
Sporting is what adults do.
Sports change with age.
Hockey team uniforms, now, those are fine to cosplay.
Send me multiple links of many people wearing complete hockey uniforms (including stick) at a hockey-con, since that would be hockey cosplay.
Otherwise, it's just wearing a jersey.
only children write Pokemon games. Adults never do that.
Adults write children's books. That doesn't mean they obsess over them.
Re: (Score:2)
And just such an adult wrote
Critics who treat "adult" as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.
Grow up kid, and put aside your fears.
Re: (Score:2)
You're the second person to quote that to me. My reply to you is the same as to him: Amazingly, C.S. Lewis isn't the arbiter of opinion either.
Re: (Score:2)
Sports change with age.
Yes. And once you've grown enough, after decades of effort at adulting, you finally reach the ultimate level: a pretty good dominoes player. Not to mention a regular at the local bingo parlor.
Send me multiple links of many people wearing complete...
Yay! Let's play No true Scotsman [wikipedia.org] as the adults we are!
Adults write children's books. That doesn't mean they obsess over them.
And as an adult, I allow myself to obsess over books written by other adults.
You're the second person to quote that to me.
I was the first. As for him not being an arbiter of opinion, actually he is. That isn't an "opinion". That's his expert advice as one of the foremost scholars in the field of English litera
Re: (Score:2)
Let's play No true Scotsman
I don't see how asking for evidence for your claim that "people cosplay hockey" is the NTS fallacy.
That's his expert advice as one of the foremost scholars in the field of English literature.
Since English Literature has no actual bearing on Pokemon, I'll throw the Argument from authority fallacy at you.
But then, who am I to prevent someone from being of an opinion
Since my statement was not adults should stop playing games where the hero is prepubescent, but rather it was the question why are adults still playing with Pokemon?, what you could have done is try and convince me.
But you didn't. Instead, you got all defensive.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how asking for evidence for your claim that "people cosplay hockey" is the NTS fallacy.
Cosplay goes from partial to theatrical production with full makeup. You restricted your side to complete outfits, playing on the fact I randomly mentioned hockey. Other sports, let's say, soccer, use simpler outfits whose fans completely emulate.
But the point you're trying to avoid is this: the delimitation between what is proper adult behavior and what is child behavior is cultural. Sport fans act in every single way exactly like anime, video-game, sci-fi etc. fans, but no one thinks it strange because th
Re: (Score:2)
Sport fans act in every single way exactly like anime, video-game, sci-fi etc. fans
But those sports fans wear the jerseys of other adults, not of teenagers (or worse, pre-pubescents).
It's the same reason why a man cosplaying Worf isn't weird, but a man cosplaying as his son Alexander Rozhenko is creepy.
The teenage boy
Or the 10 year old.
The teenage boy catching big-eyed cute pseudo-monsters in an all-primary-colors world
When I was young, I hated broccoli and squash. As I matured, I started liking them. Why? My tastes literally changed.
The difference in setting, tone and style are fluff, a matter of taste and preference, and little more.
Adults playing a game with a 10 year old protagonist is a creepy as old men staring at little girls.
This is completely different from both adults and ch
Re: (Score:2)
More specifically, some things you grow out of because you grow into other, more mature, interests.
"Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is
Re: (Score:2)
Amazingly, C.S. Lewis isn't the arbiter of opinion either.
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly enough, RMS depends upon the very same copyright laws in order to validate the GPL. Without those laws, so that everything would be in the public domain, people would be able to get anything and everything free for all eternity. On the other hand, they would lose some of the rights that the GPL grants. That includes access to the source code. That would be a world in which someone could publish a program with source code, then a third party could modify the source code and only ship binaries. In
Re: (Score:2)
The example that I gave assumed that copyright law does not exist. That is to say that everything is in the public domain. The GPL could not exist in that world since the GPL requires copyright law. If you don't have the GPL, you can't force people to distribute the modified source code.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Get real, the next time Mickey Mouse is about to expire, copyright will be extended again. Are you that naive you believe congress won't pass infinity-1 sooner or later? Nothing will come into the public domain ever again. Never. Get it?
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy. That's 5 hours for an IP lawyer.
Even for a garden variety lawyer, it's only 10 hours at a partner level. The fresh-outs are billing at $250-350/hr. There's two hours just to check conflict of interest and set up your file ($500). Send one of those briefs to go look up case law and type up a briefing for a half a day ($1000-1400), let the partner review it and consult for 2 hours with the client ($1000), then write and opinion (2 hours, $1000) and then send a brief to type/proof/file it with the c
Re: (Score:2)
I love it. "We decided to hire a lawyer, now you must pay for it." Nevermind that they could've simply picked up the phone and asked the dude to take down the posters.
Here's what I wonder: Why not simply not pay them? Even if they went to court and won, it's usually impossible to enforce this kind of stuff.
Re: (Score:2)