ATTN: those having difficulty getting the new Harby HC

[magnusr]

In this analogy, VEI can keep the car, wash it and show it off to their friends. But if the road is considered "printing and selling new comics" then they just can't drive the car on the road with that same registration plate.

Too many analogies can be made here. Head spinning. I wanted to point out that VIP can't claim the car just because the registration plate had fallen off and been left on the street for several years.

Your analogy is great. I'll try to make a combined analogy and spin on it.

Let's say it's a vanity plate. Everyone knows whose it is. But the car is put away. Lots of people still remember the days when the shiny car was driven around but the owner can't afford to drive it anymore and finally goes bankrupt.

Then it's announced that the car will be sold and just about then someone picks up the vanity plate. So obviously the new car owner claims that since people still remember when the plate was on the car, it will be confusing if that plate is put on another car, and demands it back.

Before the issue of the plate is decided, the car is repaired and about to be taken out for a drive. The person who picked up the plate then blocks the road.

Had the old owner taken care of the plate all had been clear.

Had the plate been picked up and put in use before it was known that the car would be repaired, then we would have had those abandoned furniture that all these analogies started with.

The claim now is that
1) since this car has been remembered all this time, it's the same as if the plate had been in use, which would make it impossible for anyone else to pick up the same plate, even when abandoned, because that would be confusing to the general public.
2) as the previous car owner couldn't afford to drive the car, it takes more before the plate is considered abandoned
3) lots of other legal stuff

To me, as a trademark holder with experience of legal battles, that is convincing. I would say that strictly legally the plate does belong with the new owner of the car.

/Magnus

[greg]

Well, if comparing to a car, it was the registration plate that was on the street to pick up. The car itself was still in the garage that VEI bought. The question for the trademark office to decide is whether the car had been used enough for the public to recognice it as VEI's car, with a bit of extra slack added for the fact that Acclaim couldn't afford gas for a long period.

Yeah I know, not a perfect analogy. I think your main point is that our feelings of fair or not fair doesn't come in to play. Many good things to think about in your post. I agree it is just the law that matters. My point is that I believe that VEI has the strongest case strictly legally.

/Magnus

In this analogy, VEI can keep the car, wash it and show it off to their friends. But if the road is considered "printing and selling new comics" then they just can't drive the car on the road with that same registration plate. Lets say that registration plate included the right to call the car a Porsche and it is a Porsche. They just can't call it that anymore.

Except...



Now if that is enough to get past Marvels lawyers, I wonder if it would still work.

It's probably even easier than that... "harbinger" is a word in the dictionary.
A trademark for the word "harbinger" wouldn't supercede any dictionary usage.

So, the new title could probably be something like:
THE HARBINGERS OF THE EIGHTH DAY

...and for the courts to decide...

HARBINGER THE BEGINNING already isn't the same as "Harbinger"

[greg]

In this analogy, VEI can keep the car, wash it and show it off to their friends. But if the road is considered "printing and selling new comics" then they just can't drive the car on the road with that same registration plate.

Too many analogies can be made here. Head spinning. I wanted to point out that VIP can't claim the car just because the registration plate had fallen off and been left on the street for several years.

Your analogy is great. I'll try to make a combined analogy and spin on it.

Let's say it's a vanity plate. Everyone knows whose it is. But the car is put away. Lots of people still remember the days when the shiny car was driven around but the owner can't afford to drive it anymore and finally goes bankrupt.

Then it's announced that the car will be sold and just about then someone picks up the vanity plate. So obviously the new car owner claims that since people still remember when the plate was on the car, it will be confusing if that plate is put on another car, and demands it back.

Before the issue of the plate is decided, the car is repaired and about to be taken out for a drive. The person who picked up the plate then blocks the road.

Had the old owner taken care of the plate all had been clear.

Had the plate been picked up and put in use before it was known that the car would be repaired, then we would have had those abandoned furniture that all these analogies started with.

The claim now is that
1) since this car has been remembered all this time, it's the same as if the plate had been in use, which would make it impossible for anyone else to pick up the same plate, even when abandoned, because that would be confusing to the general public.
2) as the previous car owner couldn't afford to drive the car, it takes more before the plate is considered abandoned
3) lots of other legal stuff

To me, as a trademark holder with experience of legal battles, that is convincing. I would say that strictly legally the plate does belong with the new owner of the car.

/Magnus

I like these analogies... and there's a step further they need to be taken.

We've been talking about a single car being known by the public,
with a single licence plate (vanity plate) that was known by the public.

What has actually occurred is that a FLEET of vehicles known by the public
have been purchased by VEI... and that FLEET of vehicles together form
a larger entity that makes up what the public recognizes as the "Valiant" fleet.

Now, imagine all those vehicles sitting in a showroom, side-by-side,
all cleaned up and repaired from the damage of the previous owner's neglect.
Not only that, there are hundreds of other (original) Valiant vehicles
around the lot and in the back. SOME of these vehicles already have
their original Valiant vanity plates. No disagreements, some already have their plates.

Across the street, imagine a completely empty showroom...
with a few of the other Valiant vanity license plates taped in the window.
The plates are taped next to black-and-white sketches of vehicles that look nothing
like what the public knows about the original Valiant fleet of vehicles.

Both buildings are labeled as the "Valiant fleet of vehicles".

A judge comes and hears both sides explain why they are the rightful "Valiant vehicles".

Who does he side with?

[ManofTheAtom]

the Harbinger trademark was reset at zero, as in everybody and his dog had equal legal opportunity to claim it. It was like old furniture put out on the street - it was up for grabs. The fact that Valiant once published it didn't matter because the previous owner does not automatically get prior claim in such a scenario. When a trademark lapeses, it is as though no one has ever had it before. Everything that happened before that point is no longer relevant. That's how trademarks are designed - so that one party cannot "squat" on them forever. It's a reboot, it's a restart... call it what you will, but it's a whole new day from that point on. The past doesn't matter anymore.

Yet VIP used it (along with other TMs that did't lapse, like Bloodshot's) to sell a 40 dollar ashcan in San Diego.

VIP was first in line with their "intent to use" filing.

VIP was also the first one to break the law when they used the undisputed Bloodshot tm in their ashcan.

It's like standing in line to buy tickets for a concert - if you leave the line, you lose your spot. It doesn't matter how long you were standing in line beforehand, once that continuous streak is broken, everything goes back to zero, and the guy standing in line behind you is now ahead of you. Continuous, folks. As in, all the time you put in is now wasted.

And VIP using the Bloodshot TM is like a thief coming into your home and taking your stuff, it's stealing.

However, if VIP decides to go the distance and produce new material under a bunch of names which, in a previous life, were associated with other characters, then that's it - the trademarks are theirs, whether people here like it or not.

Just like the Bloodshot TM is registered to VEI, yet VIP had no trouble using it in their ashcan, thus breaking the law and profiting from someone else's property.

That's how it works. VIP's claims are not invalid because people here like the old Valiant better. VIP's claims are not invalid because people here have an emotional attachment to the old Valiant universe.

Can they be invalid because they're a bunch of crooks who are making illegal use of someone else's trademark?

VIP's claims are very valid, and they are defending them to the fullest letter of the law.

They're as valid as a crook's who takes a stolen car to be dismantled at a shop.

They picked somebody else's old furniture up off the street, and it's theirs now.

They used something that doesn't belong to them, opening themselves up for a lawsuit.

It might not be practical for them to do anything with that furniture, but again, that's not the point. They took it home, and what they do with it now is up to them.

They took stolen property and sold it. That's still a crime, right?

[ManofTheAtom]

In my opinion, if it came down to paying off VIP for the TM's or spending several thousands of dollars (I have no clue how much the TM's are really worth) to acquire the services of top VALIANT style talent such as Shooter, Layton, and Hall, I say spend it on the talent and to upgrade the quality of the product even more.

VIP doesn't own the TMs, so VEI wouldn't be buying them from them, they'd be paying them to back away , which would be like paying for blackmail (which is what crooks like VIP do, they hold things or people for ransom).

[Zaphod]

In my opinion, if it came down to paying off VIP for the TM's or spending several thousands of dollars (I have no clue how much the TM's are really worth) to acquire the services of top VALIANT style talent such as Shooter, Layton, and Hall, I say spend it on the talent and to upgrade the quality of the product even more.

VIP doesn't own the TMs, so VEI wouldn't be buying them from them, they'd be paying them to back away from them, which would be like paying for blackmail (which is what crooks like VIP do, they hold things or people for ransom).

Except in the business world this happens all of the time. Lets face it, these are all business decisions being made by business people and lawyers. The ambiguity of intellectual properties and what constitute ownership of those properties is not "cut and dried" or I don't know we'd be having these conversations. Out of context the lawsuit between DC and Fawcett

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_C ... blications

lasted over a decade. That was back in the 40's and 50's. I can imagine this same lawsuit lasting as long and in my opinion that is what VIP is banking on VEI NOT wanting to occur and paying them off with a hefty sum sooner rather than later. And that lawsuit was over DC's (Then National Comics Publications) assertations that Captain Marvel was similar enough to Superman as to constitute "infringement on the copyright"

http://www.worldfamouscomics.com/law/back20001024.shtml

However, despite the fact that the trial judge ruled Captain Marvel infringed on Superman's copyright, Fawcett still won the trial. Why? Well, Fawcett had a two-pronged defense, it argued first that it did not infringe on the Superman copyright, then argued in the alternative that even if it did violate the Superman copyright, National had abandoned its copyright on Superman and couldn't enforce it in a court of law. (Yes, we lawyers do that sort of thing all the time; advance two contradictory simultaneously and do it with a straight face. It's the second most useful thing they teach in law school, right after how to hide ones bill padding.)

The basis for Fawcett's argument that National had abandoned the Superman copyright was the Superman comic strip. In the 40s, National licensed the rights to a Superman newspaper strip to the McClure Syndicate. These strips were to be copyrighted under the McClure Syndicate initially, but would revert to National after six months. Under this license McClure produced several years worth of a Superman comic strip. The trial court felt that this agreement went beyond the boundaries of a simple licensing agreement, and that DC and McClure were business partners in a joint venture, each jointly liable for the actions of the other. That was where the problem lay.

People may try to trivialize "abandoning" the trademark but its very serious business IMO.

And didn't I hear that Marvel tried to copyright the word "Superhero" not long ago? Marvel has the word "marvel" copyrighted so that DC cannot use it as a title (but as referenced above, perhaps not on a cover)

the problem is that its all down to "lawyering" at this point.

[ManofTheAtom]

The thing here is that VIP doesn't own anything. Their only interest in the TMs is as an adversarial competitor, not one of ownership.

If VEI gave them money it wouldn't be to buy something from them as VIP has nothing to sell, it be to get them to stay away from the TMs.

[wrunow]

In my opinion, if it came down to paying off VIP for the TM's or spending several thousands of dollars (I have no clue how much the TM's are really worth) to acquire the services of top VALIANT style talent such as Shooter, Layton, and Hall, I say spend it on the talent and to upgrade the quality of the product even more.

VIP doesn't own the TMs, so VEI wouldn't be buying them from them, they'd be paying them to back away , which would be like paying for blackmail (which is what crooks like VIP do, they hold things or people for ransom).

Sometimes it is less expensive to negotiate an agreement than it is to go through the legal process of opposing these TM apps. My point is why bother, spend the cash on product, marketing, etc. If VIP wants to put out a book called "Harbinger" starring "Tin Can Man" as the lead character, who cares, let them. Concentrate on "the real stories of the Harbinger foundation" for "the real Valiant fans" instead of throwing money into the black hole that would be an agreement or a challenge to VIP.

[ManofTheAtom]

In my opinion, if it came down to paying off VIP for the TM's or spending several thousands of dollars (I have no clue how much the TM's are really worth) to acquire the services of top VALIANT style talent such as Shooter, Layton, and Hall, I say spend it on the talent and to upgrade the quality of the product even more.

VIP doesn't own the TMs, so VEI wouldn't be buying them from them, they'd be paying them to back away , which would be like paying for blackmail (which is what crooks like VIP do, they hold things or people for ransom).

Sometimes it is less expensive to negotiate an agreement than it is to go through the legal process of opposing these TM apps. My point is why bother, spend the cash on product, marketing, etc. If VIP wants to put out a book called "Harbinger" starring "Tin Can Man" as the lead character, who cares, let them. Concentrate on "the real stories of the Harbinger foundation" for "the real Valiant fans" instead of throwing money into the black hole that would be an agreement or a challenge to VIP.

It's not an agreement, it's a felony.

It's the equivalent of a goon extorting money from you in exchange for not wrecking your business.

VIP has nothing to sell other than themselves in the form of backing away from the tms in exchange for money.

That's no different from a goon that offers to protect your business from him in exchange for a fee.

[Zaphod]

In my opinion, if it came down to paying off VIP for the TM's or spending several thousands of dollars (I have no clue how much the TM's are really worth) to acquire the services of top VALIANT style talent such as Shooter, Layton, and Hall, I say spend it on the talent and to upgrade the quality of the product even more.

VIP doesn't own the TMs, so VEI wouldn't be buying them from them, they'd be paying them to back away , which would be like paying for blackmail (which is what crooks like VIP do, they hold things or people for ransom).

Sometimes it is less expensive to negotiate an agreement than it is to go through the legal process of opposing these TM apps. My point is why bother, spend the cash on product, marketing, etc. If VIP wants to put out a book called "Harbinger" starring "Tin Can Man" as the lead character, who cares, let them. Concentrate on "the real stories of the Harbinger foundation" for "the real Valiant fans" instead of throwing money into the black hole that would be an agreement or a challenge to VIP.

It's not an agreement, it's a felony.

It's the equivalent of a goon extorting money from you in exchange for not wrecking your business.

VIP has nothing to sell other than themselves in the form of backing away from the tms in exchange for money.

That's no different from a goon that offers to protect your business from him in exchange for a fee.

It sure is cause its their legal right to purchase those TMs. No different than cybersquatters unless you prove you are going to use them. VIPs gotta make the next move and look towards publishing something.

[ManofTheAtom]

It sure is cause its their legal right to purchase those TMs. No different than cybersquatters unless you prove you are going to use them. VIPs gotta make the next move and look towards publishing something.

I'm not talking about VIP's legal rights. I'm talking about VEI giving VIP money.

VIP doesn't own anything, so the only thing VEI would be paying them for would be to stay away from the TMs, not to buy them.

[Zaphod]

It sure is cause its their legal right to purchase those TMs. No different than cybersquatters unless you prove you are going to use them. VIPs gotta make the next move and look towards publishing something.

I'm not talking about VIP's legal rights. I'm talking about VEI giving VIP money.

VIP doesn't own anything, so the only thing VEI would be paying them for would be to stay away from the TMs, not to buy them.

VIP own the copyrights to those names. Their are legal rights that go along with owning copyrights. Its why I can't just start up a company tomorrow called Marvel, its why for many years in Canada the band Busy (90's reference) was known as Bush X, but the rest of the world called them Bush. There was some 70's Rock band in Canada that owned the rights to the name Bush. You or I do not have to like it but owning those copyrighted names entitles VIP to legal protection from someone else attempting to profit from those names.

In looking up the whole Superman vs Captain Marvel situation from the 40's and 50's I found it interesting to note that the estate of Jerry Siegel has been trying to gain the rights to Superman since the 70's and congress continues to extend the Copyrights act for the number of years a Copyright can be owned for.

Copyright issues

As part of the deal which saw Superman published in Action Comics, Siegel and Shuster sold the rights to the company in return for $130 and a contract to supply the publisher with material.[44][45] The Saturday Evening Post reported in 1940 that the pair was each being paid $75,000 a year, a fraction of Detective's millions in Superman profits.[46] Siegel and Shuster renegotiated their deal, but bad blood lingered and in 1947 Siegel and Shuster sued for their 1938 contract to be made void and the re-establishment of their ownership of the intellectual property rights to Superman. The pair also sued Detective in the same year over the rights to Superboy, which they claimed was a separate creation that Detective had published without authorization. Detective immediately fired them and took their byline off the stories, prompting a legal battle that ended in 1948, when a New York court ruled that the 1938 contract should be upheld. However, a ruling from Justice J. Addison Young awarded them the rights to Superboy. A month after the Superboy judgment the two sides agreed on a settlement. Detective paid Siegel and Shuster $94,000 for the rights to Superboy. The pair also acknowledged in writing the company's ownership of Superman, attesting that they held rights for "all other forms of reproduction and presentation, whether now in existence or that may hereafter be created",[47] but DC refused to re-hire them.[48]

In 1973 Siegel and Shuster again launched a suit claiming ownership of Superman, this time basing the claim on the Copyright Act of 1909 which saw copyright granted for 28 years but allowed for a renewal of an extra 28 years. Their argument was that they had granted DC the copyright for only 28 years. The pair again lost this battle, both in a district court ruling of October 18, 1973 and an appeal court ruling of December 5, 1974.[49]

In 1975 after news reports of their pauper-like existences, Warner Communications gave Siegel and Shuster lifetime pensions of $20,000 per year and health care benefits. Jay Emmett, then executive vice president of Warner, was quoted in the New York Times as stating "There is no legal obligation, but I sure feel there is a moral obligation on our part."[46] In addition, any media production which includes the Superman character were to include the credit "Superman created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster".[45]

The year after this settlement, 1976, saw the copyright term extended again, this time for another 19 years to a total of 75 years. However, this time a clause was inserted into the extension to allow a creator to reclaim their work, reflecting the arguments Siegel and Shuster had made in 1973. The new act came into power in 1978 and allowed a reclamation window in a period based on the previous copyright term of 56 years. This meant the copyright on Superman could be reclaimed between 1994 to 1999, based on the initial publication date of 1938. Jerry Siegel having died in January 1996, his wife and daughter filed a copyright termination notice in 1999. Although Joe Shuster died in July 1992, no termination was filed at this time by his estate.[50]

1998 saw copyright extended again, with the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act. This time the copyright term was extended to 95 years, with a further window for reclamation introduced. In January of 2004 Mark Peary, nephew and legal heir to Joe Shuster's estate, filed notice of his intent to reclaim Shuster's half of the copyright, the termination effective in 2013.[50] The status of Siegel's share of the copyright is now the subject of a legal battle. Warner Bros. and the Siegels entered into discussions on how to resolve the issues raised by the termination notice, but these discussions were set aside by the Siegels and in October 2004 they filed suit alleging copyright infringement on the part of Warner Bros. Warner Bros. counter sued, alleging the termination notice contains defects amongst other arguments.[51][52] The copyright ownership of Superman currently appears uncertain, with a decision "the subject of ongoing negotiation"[45] and an outcome "still pending".[53]

A similar termination of copyright notice filed in 2002 by Siegel's wife and daughter concerning the Superboy character was ruled in their favor on March 23, 2006.[53] However, on July 27, 2007, the same court issued a ruling[1] reversing the March 23, 2006 ruling that the Siegel heirs had reclaimed the rights to Superboy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman

Ownership of a Trademark is still ownership of something. Whether that "something" is important to the owners of the intellectual rights to those characters is another discussion altogether.

[ManofTheAtom]

VIP own the copyrights to those names.

No they don't.

You can't own copyrights on names.

Copyrights are the concepts (i.e. Visigoth from 408 AD is kidnapped by aliens and adquieres a suit of armor).

Trademarks are the names/logos that appear on the covers (i.e. X-O Manowar, Harbinger, etc).

VIP does NOT own the copyrights, and they do NOT own the trademarks.

VIP does NOT own anything related to the original VALIANT Universe.

Their are legal rights that go along with owning copyrights.

All of which are VEI's.

Its why I can't just start up a company tomorrow called Marvel, its why for many years in Canada the band Busy (90's reference) was known as Bush X, but the rest of the world called them Bush. There was some 70's Rock band in Canada that owned the rights to the name Bush. You or I do not have to like it but owning those copyrighted names entitles VIP to legal protection from someone else attempting to profit from those names.

VIP does NOT own the copyrights, VEI does.

And we're not talking about copyrights, we're talking about trademarks.

Every single thing in your example is a TRADEMARK, not a copyright.

In looking up the whole Superman vs Captain Marvel situation from the 40's and 50's I found it interesting to note that the estate of Jerry Siegel has been trying to gain the rights to Superman since the 70's and congress continues to extend the Copyrights act for the number of years a Copyright can be owned for.

Copyright and trademarks are not the same thing, so the Superman example doesn't apply.

If you're looking for an example from comics then look into DC's Captain Marvel TM vs Marvel's Captain Marvel TM.

When DC bought Captain Marvel from Fawcett the TM had lapsed, so Marvel swooped in and took it, which is why after DC adquiered the Captain Marvel property (aka copyright) they can't use the name (aka trademark) CAPTAIN MARVEL on any cover of his comics.

Ownership of a Trademark is still ownership of something. Whether that "something" is important to the owners of the intellectual rights to those characters is another discussion altogether.

VIP has no ownership over ANY trademark OR over ANY copyright.

[greg]

VIP own the copyrights to those names. Their are legal rights that go along with owning copyrights.

VIP doesn't own any copyrights. I assume you meant VEI.

VIP doesn't own any trademarks. They have applied for trademarks.

Even if VIP gets those trademarks approved, they cannot legally create
anything that even remotely resembles the VEI copyrights for those names.



From a larger doc...
http://www.valiantfans.com/images/Valia ... er2007.jpg
or
http://www.valiantfans.com/images/Valia ... er2007.pdf

[Daniel Jackson]

That article concerning Siegel and Shuster was very interesting (and sad for the creators). It's unbelievable how many times they keep extending the copyrights.

[Zaphod]

yeah, I was worried I was getting the terms backwards (didn't have time to edit myself when I sent it) but do I have it right that nobody currently owns the trademarks then?

I am sorry for taking this thread so far off topic.

[wrunow]

In my opinion, if it came down to paying off VIP for the TM's or spending several thousands of dollars (I have no clue how much the TM's are really worth) to acquire the services of top VALIANT style talent such as Shooter, Layton, and Hall, I say spend it on the talent and to upgrade the quality of the product even more.

VIP doesn't own the TMs, so VEI wouldn't be buying them from them, they'd be paying them to back away , which would be like paying for blackmail (which is what crooks like VIP do, they hold things or people for ransom).

Sometimes it is less expensive to negotiate an agreement than it is to go through the legal process of opposing these TM apps. My point is why bother, spend the cash on product, marketing, etc. If VIP wants to put out a book called "Harbinger" starring "Tin Can Man" as the lead character, who cares, let them. Concentrate on "the real stories of the Harbinger foundation" for "the real Valiant fans" instead of throwing money into the black hole that would be an agreement or a challenge to VIP.

It's not an agreement, it's a felony.

It's the equivalent of a goon extorting money from you in exchange for not wrecking your business.

VIP has nothing to sell other than themselves in the form of backing away from the tms in exchange for money.

That's no different from a goon that offers to protect your business from him in exchange for a fee.

I am not trying to make an argument of whether VIP's actions are ethical or not, but reality is, they have applied for these TM's, and so, the choice is either to fight them and ring up some pretty large legal fees, negotiate and settle with them and hopefully this will cost less than a prolonged legal battle, or forget about them and give up the TM's and move on. Don't forget the "time value of money" and the longer VIP holds up VEI's plans to publish or promote their characters in the way they would like costs them money as they are not making any money to offset their initial investment and expenses so far. The principles of VEI could have invested their 700k+ in a safer business with more immediate returns and income streams I am sure.

[Zaphod]

Their is another option. Publish without using the names VIP are trying to get the (trademarks? I suck at this) for. Spend the money you would put into fighting VIP into advertising the "new titles" with the old characters in them and VIP can give up the ghost and allow the trademarks to lapse or sit on their trademarks of no value.

I'll read a book that is called "Gilad and his Amazing Friends" if it is a good enough product. With the net the way it is and the rabid following Valiant has all these years later, spending money on good promotion will mean so much more IMO.

[ManofTheAtom]

Trademarks = recognizion

Recognizion = sales

Sales lead to anger, anger leads to suffering..

Wait, that's not right.

If VEI lets the tm's go, they loose, and if they loose we all loose.

[wrunow]

Trademarks = recognizion

Recognizion = sales

Sales lead to anger, anger leads to suffering..

Wait, that's not right.

If VEI lets the tm's go, they loose, and if they loose we all loose.

I respectfully disagree with this opinion. VALIANT has been gone so long title recognition is less and less important each passing week.

If VEI lets the TM's go, the road is harder, but not insurmountable with the web and other ways to promote their product.

[ManofTheAtom]

Trademarks = recognizion

Recognizion = sales

Sales lead to anger, anger leads to suffering..

Wait, that's not right.

If VEI lets the tm's go, they loose, and if they loose we all loose.

I respectfully disagree with this opinion. VALIANT has been gone so long title recognition is less and less important each passing week.

If VEI lets the TM's go, the road is harder, but not insurmountable with the web and other ways to promote their product.

Just why exactly do you think VIP wants the tms?

They want them for the recognizion that comes with them.

[slym2none]

Just why exactly do you think VIP wants the tms?

They want them for the recognizion that comes with them.

I think they just want to squeeze VEI's balls for money, that's why they want the TM's.



-slym

[thePike]

I respectfully disagree with this opinion. VALIANT has been gone so long title recognition is less and less important each passing week.

If VEI lets the TM's go, the road is harder, but not insurmountable with the web and other ways to promote their product.

I'm in agreement here. If its everything I love about Original Valiant, with a few titles changed to expedite the return; then I'm game!!!

I'm willing to bet that a large percentage of the market right now wasn't even around when the Original Valiant was active.

[ManofTheAtom]

Just why exactly do you think VIP wants the tms?

They want them for the recognizion that comes with them.

I think they just want to squeeze VEI's balls for money, that's why they want the TM's.



-slym

Which is a felony, no different from racketeering.

[ManofTheAtom]

I respectfully disagree with this opinion. VALIANT has been gone so long title recognition is less and less important each passing week.

If VEI lets the TM's go, the road is harder, but not insurmountable with the web and other ways to promote their product.

I'm in agreement here. If its everything I love about Original Valiant, with a few titles changed to expedite the return; then I'm game!!!

I'm willing to bet that a large percentage of the market right now wasn't even around when the Original Valiant was active.

They could always rename it like they did Turok, from Son of Stone to Dinosaur Hunter.