(OT ) Litigation: Sony vs. White Wolf

[Loser]

Back on topic, check this out. I especially like this part.

White Wolf is one of two undisputed worldwide publishing leaders for pen and paper roleplaying games. White Wolf properties have been licensed to ... professional wrestlers...

o_O

[Baron Munchausen]

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 ]

[Cheeze]

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.

[QuarianRex]

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.

[DavidG]

Originally posted by QuarianRex:
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.

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..."

[QuarianRex]

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.

[Azselendor]

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

I'm just waiting for the boycotts to start