Stefanie Fogel, Variety; Bethesda Sues Warner Bros., Calls ‘Westworld’ Game ‘Blatant Ripoff’
"Bethesda Softworks
is suing Warner Bros. Entertainment and Canadian game developer
Behaviour Interactive for allegedly using code from its “Fallout
Shelter” game to create a new “Westworld” mobile app.
Bethesda filed the suit in a District of Maryland court on Thursday,
Jun. 21. It’s accusing Behaviour of breach of contract, copyright
infringement, unfair competition, and misappropriation of trade secrets.
It’s also suing Warner Bros. for allegedly persuading Behaviour to
breach that contract. It now wants both companies to remove each and
every version of the “Westworld” mobile game from distribution and to
stop developing and supporting it. They are also asking for undisclosed
statutory and punitive damages."
Showing posts with label Warner Bros. Entertainment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Warner Bros. Entertainment. Show all posts
Monday, June 25, 2018
Saturday, July 2, 2011
The Fans Own the Magic; New York Times, 7/1/11
Manohla Dargis and A.O.Scott, New York Times; The Fans Own the Magic:
"Prof. Henry Jenkins of the University of California, an enthusiastic champion of fan power, has framed the fight in near-revolutionary terms, writing on his Web site that PotterWar “may have been the first successful movement of fans to challenge the rather blanket copyright assertions of the major media producers.” Certainly it was a striking moment for plugged-in Potterites, yet it’s debatable whether the type of fan triumph that Professor Jenkins and others celebrate is as radical as sometimes suggested. Warner Brothers, after all, still owns the film rights."
"Prof. Henry Jenkins of the University of California, an enthusiastic champion of fan power, has framed the fight in near-revolutionary terms, writing on his Web site that PotterWar “may have been the first successful movement of fans to challenge the rather blanket copyright assertions of the major media producers.” Certainly it was a striking moment for plugged-in Potterites, yet it’s debatable whether the type of fan triumph that Professor Jenkins and others celebrate is as radical as sometimes suggested. Warner Brothers, after all, still owns the film rights."
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Tattoo Artist Settles Tyson Dispute With ‘Hangover 2’; New York Times, 6/21/11
Noam Cohen, New York Times; Tattoo Artist Settles Tyson Dispute With ‘Hangover 2’ :
"A lawsuit by a Missouri tattoo artist that threatened to stop the distribution of the blockbuster sequel “Hangover Part II” has been settled, the movie’s studio, Warner Brothers Entertainment, announced this week."
"A lawsuit by a Missouri tattoo artist that threatened to stop the distribution of the blockbuster sequel “Hangover Part II” has been settled, the movie’s studio, Warner Brothers Entertainment, announced this week."
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Court Rules DC & WB Didn't Violate Superman Licensing Agreement w/ Siegels; ComicBooksResources.com, 7/9/09
ComicBooksResources.com; Court Rules DC & WB Didn't Violate Superman Licensing Agreement w/ Siegels:
"Another court decision has been made in the Siegel family’s tense relationship with DC Comics. By virtue of previous decisions, the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel have been co-owners with DC Comics of the Superman copyright from 1999 until now. In 2008, the Siegels alleged that DC, in licensing the Superman characters to Warner Bros. Entertainment for audiovisual projects including “Smallville” and “Superman Returns,” violated the terms of their profit-sharing agreement.
The plaintiffs felt that because Warner Bros. Entertainment and DC Comics are both part of the same corporate entity, the licensing fees paid to DC Comics in the period between 1999 and 2002 (for the aforementioned "Smallville" and "Superman Returns" projects) were below market value. Essentially, the Siegels argued that DC Comics gave Warner Bros. Entertainment a "sweetheart deal," which would result in DC (and due to their co-ownership, the Siegels) not receiving as much money as they would in a traditionally “fair market deal.”
In today’s decision, the court ruled that DC and Warner Bros. Entertainment did indeed participate in a “fair market deal,” and that the Siegels are not entitled to any payments beyond the terms of the audiovisual licenses as they presently stand."
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21944
"Another court decision has been made in the Siegel family’s tense relationship with DC Comics. By virtue of previous decisions, the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel have been co-owners with DC Comics of the Superman copyright from 1999 until now. In 2008, the Siegels alleged that DC, in licensing the Superman characters to Warner Bros. Entertainment for audiovisual projects including “Smallville” and “Superman Returns,” violated the terms of their profit-sharing agreement.
The plaintiffs felt that because Warner Bros. Entertainment and DC Comics are both part of the same corporate entity, the licensing fees paid to DC Comics in the period between 1999 and 2002 (for the aforementioned "Smallville" and "Superman Returns" projects) were below market value. Essentially, the Siegels argued that DC Comics gave Warner Bros. Entertainment a "sweetheart deal," which would result in DC (and due to their co-ownership, the Siegels) not receiving as much money as they would in a traditionally “fair market deal.”
In today’s decision, the court ruled that DC and Warner Bros. Entertainment did indeed participate in a “fair market deal,” and that the Siegels are not entitled to any payments beyond the terms of the audiovisual licenses as they presently stand."
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21944
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)