(OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Now this is funny.

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

For this to hit the news the same week the RIAA (on behalf of Sony among others) goes gonzo with their enforcment of music swappers is irony at it's best. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Heh, see also Penny Arcade

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

anyone wanna post a summary for those of us who get bored 1/7 of the way through 'white wolf blah blah blah, white wolf yak yak yak?'

something a bit longer than penny arcade's?

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

White Wolf is claiming that 'Underworld' is directly ripping off 'Love of Monsters' which takes place in their RPG setting. I have to admit it sure is similar.

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I am sure it's all a coincidence. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

EDIT: Somewhat in defense of Sony it's very possible that noone that worked for the corporation had any idea that the story was ripped off. It's not a big stretch to think that they don't sit around playing fantasy punk role play games. But whoever wrote and pitched the story obviously knew it quite well. But Sony has a responsibility to check this stuff out thouroughly and they obviously dropped the ball.

[ September 09, 2003, 02:53: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Skimming through the brief once, I'd say that White Wolf has a good case. There are many, many similarities in both general theme and character details. I agree with Geo though, that Sony was probably unaware that they had been sold a 'stolen' property. Unfortunately for them, the law doesn't recognize 'good faith' in this respect, and they are the 'deep pockets' anyway, not the screen writers who probably did know what they were stealing. The only question is whether WW can purse to the end, or whether Sony can just wear WW down with legal maneuvers until they can't afford to pursue the case. Given the relative difference in size between the plaintiff and defendant it seems quite possible that Sony will just stonewall them.

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Can't help Sony's public image any though. This killed the Last shred of respect I had for the company. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Anyone else notice that Underworld seems to be Romeo & Juliet with monsters? Anyone think that the estate of Bill Shakespere will get in on this? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">They're busy trying to prove to the deconstructionists in modern Lit studies that it was Bill Shakespeare who actually wrote the plays attributed to him... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Not only that, but I believe the "lovers from waring factions" concept was done before Romeo & Juliet.

Wasn't it the Greek play in Midsummer's Night Dream?

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well then, here's something to send the account into the red -- while not bothering to check if it's stepping on anyone else's toes, Sony through the RIAA is simultaneously 'defending its intellectual property rights' like the proverbial bull in the china shop:

RIAA sues 71-year-old grandfather for downloads by his teenager grandchildren
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3092854.stm

RIAA sues 12-year-old girl
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96797,00.html

But this is not new, or even the worst example. Corporations have been on the copyright warpath for many years now.

1996: ASCAP threatens to sue girlscouts for singing without paying

http://www.s-t.com/daily/08-96/08-23-96/b02li056.htm

Quote:
"They buy paper, twine and glue for their crafts - they can pay for the music, too," says John Lo Frumento, ASCAP's chief operating officer. If offenders keep singing without paying, he says, we will sue them if necessary."

Yep, gotta stop those thieving girlscouts from damaging those corporate profits.

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, all of Shakespeare's works are in the public domain. Copyright only Lasts some 70 years (depending on country and what exactly is copyrighted of course).

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Un-F-ing believable!

I can almost understand going after people downloading music on the internet. Although I do believe that the heavy handed approach is going to cost them more in the long run then they recoup. I support people's right to make galactically stupid business decisions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

But are you telling me that people can't sit around in a group and sing a copyrighted song? What logic is that based on? That's freaking ridiculous.

[ September 09, 2003, 18:14: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Outside article:

The Music Industry Needs Hackers, Not Lawyers

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Its no joke if your name is on the list. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Yes, they really do want to control your every breath, twitch, fart, or blink and extract profit from it.

Indiana Karaoke clubs sued for copyright infringement.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97043,00.html

I can just see the secret RIAA labs where they are researching the detection of what songs you are thinking about by your brainwaves. Soon there will be scanners all over listening for tell-tale signs that you've got one of their copyrighted works stuck in your head & they'll send you a bill.

[ September 11, 2003, 17:23: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Back on topic, check this out. I especially like this part. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">o_O

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Not so oddly enough, Loser, I was going to mention that bit of information. It might be a detail that gives White Wolf a little bit of (if you will) credibility to their case, since one large corporation acknowledged White Wolf's rights. The WWF (now WWE) had a wrestler with a vampire gimmick called Gangrel. Any time you saw his name mentioned in print (like on their website or on the wrestler's figures), you saw a trademark for White Wolf. I don't know if there are any other instances. Marvel Comics has a similar copyright for "Hulk" Hogan. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

I finally got around to actually looking through the brief and I've got to say that I'm quite disappointed with white wolf. About 80% of those similarities can be applied to Blade, Dracula 2000, Vampires, and just about every other vamp flick that has been made in the Last decade.

Some of the similarities being cited were that silver is used to kill werewolves, that vampires are sensual, and that vampires and werewolves have an ancient rivalry. These are all things that have been in folklore for centuries, not creations of white wolf.

If WW thinks that it has a case then only cite the unique variations on the myths that were originated solely by WW. Not things like,'werewolves have a half form that is bigger than their human form' (that was first really done in 'The Howling' back in the early eighties).

As far as similarities with the characters... they aren't very original in the first place. Trying to say that you have cornered the market on femme fatales is an excercise in stupidity. You can also find correllations between the structure of vampire societies in WW products and just about any vampire movie. Why? Because WW drew upon existing vamp lore to create its books, they just did some reshuffling and polarized it a bit (having each clan personify a different aspect of the vamp myth).

I have been a long-time fan of WW and am quite familiar with the body of work that they have accumulated, but when I see them claiming responsibility for ideas older than dirt, and even lying about their own mythos, it really pisses me off. Pretentious swine.

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">When I scanned through the doc I thought the same thing. I wonder if WW has even seen the movie since it's not out yet. I noticed a couple times they mentioned "in the trailer..."

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Later on in the brief they mention key elements in the movie. In fact, the brief half ruined the movie for me. They have definitely seen the entire movie.

Re: (OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf
 

Everyone's gone copyright crazy now that the RIAA is on the war path.

I'm just waiting for the boycotts to start http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif