|
Post by eJm on May 23, 2017 5:06:25 GMT -5
Seriously, were they just allergic to the trademark office?
Why not just file the goddamn trademark before the Hardys could and solve this whole thing yourself?
Would it be dickish? Heck yeah, but then they'd at least have evidence of their claims instead of ambiguity and crap.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on May 23, 2017 7:28:04 GMT -5
At least they're being 'consistent' by going back to the contract claim again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2017 8:15:32 GMT -5
How does intellectual property work anymore? Back in the '90s, NBC prevented Letterman from using a lot of his old stuff because they claimed - since it was on NBC - they had rights to it. That ended eventually, as he was able to use old NBC footage again by the time his show ended, but I don't know if it was usable after a period of time or if the rules changed....
Anyway, this whole time I've assumed TNA could claim the Broken stuff is theirs for similar reasons, but now I don't know..
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on May 23, 2017 8:27:14 GMT -5
How does intellectual property work anymore? Back in the '90s, NBC prevented Letterman from using a lot of his old stuff because they claimed - since it was on NBC - they had rights to it. That ended eventually, as he was able to use old NBC footage again by the time his show ended, but I don't know if it was usable after a period of time or if the rules changed.... Anyway, this whole time I've assumed TNA could claim the Broken stuff is theirs for similar reasons, but now I don't know.. the broken FOOTAGE is TNA's, much like the WWE own the footage of all the companies libraries they own. And they can use that however they want. so like the WWE wouldn't be able to air Final Deletion.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkshi Tanahashi on May 23, 2017 8:30:22 GMT -5
Actually, a better example would be if CBS tried to keep the rights to Supergirl when it moved to CW despite not owning the trademark, the character and only paid for where it is and for contracts. I mean, all that stuff would have been sorted out in advance to move it to another network of another rival. Unlike TNA... Actually, The CW isn't really a rival network to CBS since The CW is a joint venture of the CBS Corporation and Warner Bros. So, that was more like WWE sending a guy from RAW to SmackDown! This is more like The CW suing WWE for the rights to SmackDown! because they used to air the show.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkshi Tanahashi on May 23, 2017 8:38:58 GMT -5
Also, I find it very questionable that WWE wouldn't be interested in the Broken gimmick, especially after they tried to rip off the Final Deletion with the Wyatt Compound Match.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on May 23, 2017 8:57:02 GMT -5
How does intellectual property work anymore? Back in the '90s, NBC prevented Letterman from using a lot of his old stuff because they claimed - since it was on NBC - they had rights to it. That ended eventually, as he was able to use old NBC footage again by the time his show ended, but I don't know if it was usable after a period of time or if the rules changed.... Anyway, this whole time I've assumed TNA could claim the Broken stuff is theirs for similar reasons, but now I don't know.. It depends on a lot of things and specifically involved the contracts being signed; one of the issues with TNA's claim of contracts is that everyone in TNA who gets booked on the indies is generally working their TNA gimmick there, and not everyone is/was on the contracts that had TNA in charge of everyone's bookings, including the Hardys, who didn't seem to be on that contract but were working the Broken gimmick everywhere without issue. In Letterman's case, a lot of it may come down to the origin of the content; creation does legitimately matter, especially when it comes down to when a contract claims company ownership over someone's work. If the old material he did was written by show writers employed by NBC whose contracts state what they do is for NBC, then that would not be material Letterman wrote, and so its performance in video form would be the property of NBC, but the actual content and idea itself would also be the property of NBC, which would have allowed them to put onto any other late night talk show without issue.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on May 23, 2017 9:18:28 GMT -5
Actually, a better example would be if CBS tried to keep the rights to Supergirl when it moved to CW despite not owning the trademark, the character and only paid for where it is and for contracts. I mean, all that stuff would have been sorted out in advance to move it to another network of another rival. Unlike TNA... Actually, The CW isn't really a rival network to CBS since The CW is a joint venture of the CBS Corporation and Warner Bros. So, that was more like WWE sending a guy from RAW to SmackDown! This is more like The CW suing WWE for the rights to SmackDown! because they used to air the show. Yeah, completely forgot about the collaboration stuff with the CW so my mistake. So from what Meltzer has said, having seen a TNA contract (not Matt's TNA contract), that TNA DO own the rights to the gimmick if it's put on television. But the main issue that it seems like is that TNA never put the trademark on the gimmick themselves so the wording of the contract is only there as a deterrent in this case from doing it outside of TNA rather than being held to it.
|
|
|
Post by finallydeleted on May 23, 2017 9:56:49 GMT -5
I really don't see how TNA can copyright deranged rants about deleting people whether he calls himself "broken" or not
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on May 23, 2017 10:19:10 GMT -5
If investing in a company was all it took to own things, Corgan would be running TNA right now.
There's a lot of ins and outs to intellectual property that muddies up the waters and it will come down to exactly what those contracts say.
As far as WWE saying they aren't interested, that's standard corporate speak. You never build up the value of something you're looking to get a hold of ahead of time.
|
|
chrom
Backup Wench
Master of the rare undecuple post
Posts: 84,915
Member is Online
|
Post by chrom on May 23, 2017 11:45:08 GMT -5
Apparently another lawsuit is going to be coming their way soon, as Matt is claiming that they have not paid Senor Benjamin for working for them and that he never signed a released form to allow himself to be shown.
And people were actually gullible enough to think that things were going to change
|
|
Gus Richlen Was Wrong
Patti Mayonnaise
Metal Maestro: Co-winner of the FAN Idol Throwdown!
Fun while it lasted
Posts: 38,518
|
Post by Gus Richlen Was Wrong on May 23, 2017 11:59:07 GMT -5
If investing in a company was all it took to own things, Corgan would be running TNA right now. There's a lot of ins and outs to intellectual property that muddies up the waters and it will come down to exactly what those contracts say. As far as WWE saying they aren't interested, that's standard corporate speak. You never build up the value of something you're looking to get a hold of ahead of time. ARE they actually not interested or is Nordholm lying?
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,161
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on May 23, 2017 12:15:20 GMT -5
Apparently another lawsuit is going to be coming their way soon, as Matt is claiming that they have not paid Senor Benjamin for working for them and that he never signed a released form to allow himself to be shown. And people were actually gullible enough to think that things were going to change And Matt will lose that one, knowingly putting Senor Benjamin on camera when he knew that Senor Benjamin never signed the clearance.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,161
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on May 23, 2017 12:16:10 GMT -5
If investing in a company was all it took to own things, Corgan would be running TNA right now. There's a lot of ins and outs to intellectual property that muddies up the waters and it will come down to exactly what those contracts say. As far as WWE saying they aren't interested, that's standard corporate speak. You never build up the value of something you're looking to get a hold of ahead of time. ARE they actually not interested or is Nordholm lying? They're not interested in paying Ed Nordholm for it.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on May 23, 2017 12:30:02 GMT -5
The word from Meltzer is that it's business speak for 'WWE isn't interested in giving money to loan the rights' rather than 'They're not interested at all'
|
|
Shark
Hank Scorpio
The world's only Samurai Ninja Pirate
Posts: 7,045
|
Post by Shark on May 23, 2017 13:10:24 GMT -5
The word from Meltzer is that it's business speak for 'WWE isn't interested in giving money to loan the rights' rather than 'They're not interested at all' Exactly what I figured. They want it, just not on Impact's terms.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkshi Tanahashi on May 23, 2017 14:19:37 GMT -5
Actually, The CW isn't really a rival network to CBS since The CW is a joint venture of the CBS Corporation and Warner Bros. So, that was more like WWE sending a guy from RAW to SmackDown! This is more like The CW suing WWE for the rights to SmackDown! because they used to air the show. Yeah, completely forgot about the collaboration stuff with the CW so my mistake. So from what Meltzer has said, having seen a TNA contract (not Matt's TNA contract), that TNA DO own the rights to the gimmick if it's put on television. But the main issue that it seems like is that TNA never put the trademark on the gimmick themselves so the wording of the contract is only there as a deterrent in this case from doing it outside of TNA rather than being held to it. So, WWE could break Matt Hardy, but not call him "broken." He'd just be a broken Matt Hardy without the "Broken" nickname.
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on May 23, 2017 14:19:40 GMT -5
The word from Meltzer is that it's business speak for 'WWE isn't interested in giving money to loan the rights' rather than 'They're not interested at all' Which I completely understand. WWE is not interested in propping up TNA in any way, shape, and form, nor should they be. I honestly wouldn't have been surprised if WWE wouldn't have been interested in doing the whole Broken thing, they have a history of wanting to beat their own path rather than do something that may be more interesting when it comes to gimmicks. But even they understand they'd be fools to not want to bring aspects of the Broken gimmick to their company, because there's money to be made off of it. Nordholm probably isn't delusional, he's going to Mary Sue his company as much as he can to make them look like they're in the right, and cling to whatever hope they have of making money off of this, but that doesn't mean people are going to turn against the Hardys and the WWE when Anthem has proven themselves to be as scuzzy as it gets in the short amount of time they've been in the wrestling spotlight.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,161
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on May 23, 2017 14:22:38 GMT -5
The word from Meltzer is that it's business speak for 'WWE isn't interested in giving money to loan the rights' rather than 'They're not interested at all' Which I completely understand. WWE is not interested in propping up TNA in any way, shape, and form, nor should they be. I honestly wouldn't have been surprised if WWE wouldn't have been interested in doing the whole Broken thing, they have a history of wanting to beat their own path rather than do something that may be more interesting when it comes to gimmicks. But even they understand they'd be fools to not want to bring aspects of the Broken gimmick to their company, because there's money to be made off of it. Nordholm probably isn't delusional, he's going to Mary Sue his company as much as he can to make them look like they're in the right, and cling to whatever hope they have of making money off of this, but that doesn't mean people are going to turn against the Hardys and the WWE when Anthem has proven themselves to be as scuzzy as it gets in the short amount of time they've been in the wrestling spotlight. What is it about TNA that seems to exclusively attract Scoundrels, Charlatans, and Ne'er-Do-Wells?
|
|
|
Post by eJm on May 23, 2017 14:31:15 GMT -5
The word from Meltzer is that it's business speak for 'WWE isn't interested in giving money to loan the rights' rather than 'They're not interested at all' Which I completely understand. WWE is not interested in propping up TNA in any way, shape, and form, nor should they be. I honestly wouldn't have been surprised if WWE wouldn't have been interested in doing the whole Broken thing, they have a history of wanting to beat their own path rather than do something that may be more interesting when it comes to gimmicks. But even they understand they'd be fools to not want to bring aspects of the Broken gimmick to their company, because there's money to be made off of it. I mean, the counter argument I'd have, and I personally don't know if this is WWE's mindset at all with this but they sometimes struggle to find what to do with tag teams after they break up and find what gimmicks suit them. So if they have the Broken gimmick for Matt already in the bag, ready to go and with someone who knows what to do with it for show purposes (which I presume was something they discussed when coming back) then that saves them the work of doing that since Jeff can still be Jeff and draw a bit. Again, I'm pulling this out from nowhere and WWE could be trying to get the Broken gimmick for another reason but that's my theory.
|
|