Megathread The Lara-Su Chronicles and Ken Penders topic - READ PAGE 164, POST 4096

[Big Panda]

What are these "recent statements" Ian made?

[The Tenth Doctor]

9 minutes ago, Ernest the Snowpanda said:

What are these "recent statements" Ian made?

Ian's ideas and characters from the old comic are to be left there. Not to be used in IDW.

[horridus]

The rationale still eludes me. Just because Flynn CAN'T use them doesn't mean that they aren't still owned by SEGA. Like, IDW getting the license doesn't magically cause everything Archie made to just evaporate into the legal ether, free for anyone to use. 

[DabigRG]

What role/relevance would Scourge even have in this story?

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Ken, you are currently the real life version of this:

Just get on with it already.

[RedFox99]

So, how does Ken think he'll be allowed to use those stories if they aren't his own? More than likely, SEGA (or at least Archie) owns them, so he would probably need to consult them first. Though maybe he's just bluffing and wants to lure people in with bait.

[Zaysho]

3 hours ago, horridus said:

The rationale still eludes me. Just because Flynn CAN'T use them doesn't mean that they aren't still owned by SEGA. Like, IDW getting the license doesn't magically cause everything Archie made to just evaporate into the legal ether, free for anyone to use. 

Keep in mind this is the guy who said he picked up "Mobius" at the Goodwill SEGA and Archie left it. It doesn't surprise me he thinks he can try to do that with something less generic or that people just need to be paid and he can do whatever he wants.

[DoubleXXCross]

2 hours ago, SenEDDtor Missile said:

Ken, you are currently the real life version of this:

Just get on with it already.

Nah, he's not the 'real-life' version of that, because that'd imply he's not responsible for this mess. It's not the fictional characters' fault that their creators are only qualified to let people down. The Penders version of that is Lara-Su, nothing more or less.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

40 minutes ago, DoubleXXCross said:

Nah, he's not the 'real-life' version of that, because that'd imply he's not responsible for this mess. It's not the fictional characters' fault that their creators are only qualified to let people down. The Penders version of that is Lara-Su, nothing more or less.

I meant his mentality. He's counting chickens before they hatch by planning a whole franchise before even getting a good comi- I mean graphic novel out, much like how Mighty No. 9 tried to be a media franchise before getting a good game out.

[King Scoopa Koopa]

Remember when Mighty No. 9 was the preferable way of going about these things compared to what Ken is doing?

[ShadowSJG]

Can he even use Scourge?

[Razule]

3 hours ago, ShadowSJG said:

Can he even use Scourge?

He owns the rights to Evil Sonic, yes. Whether he could actually use a character that is literally Sonic the Hedgehog™ with a jacket and sunglasses is... doubtful. 

[Salamander]

A quick refresher on how copyright and trademark issues work, according to my understanding (with the disclaimer that I am not a qualified legal professional):

• You cannot own an idea, only the expression of that idea - so things like specific names, designs, extended portions of associated text.  So my understanding is that Ken cannot own the idea of "an evil Sonic," but he can own the specific character "Evil Sonic" as depicted wearing a leather jacket and sunglasses - and if anyone else tried to create an evil Sonic of a similar description, he would be entitled to claim it as an infringement on his own property.
• However, the elements of your expression which are themselves somebody else's property cannot become yours.  So my understanding is that an Evil Sonic who looks like Sonic the Hedgehog is something he cannot completely own, and Ken cannot use the design and name of Evil Sonic without Sega's permission - and vice-versa.  It's likely that there would be similar trouble with a version of Evil Sonic who was green, had scars, and was called Scourge; it seems that Sega owns the Sonic bit, he owns the stuff which comes from Evil Sonic specifically, and whichever individuals wrote and designed the Scourge-unique elements would own those.
• Non-commercial infringements are still illegal but are rarely pursued.  So if Ken releases all this stuff for free, he would probably be fine.  However, if he charged for it, or if he presented it in such a way as to imply it was his legitimate intellectual property in a sphere which directly competed with other Sonic the Hedgehog products, he could be in trouble.
• By extension, works which create confusion as to the proper ownership of the material they use or which dilute the uniqueness of somebody else's property are in danger.
• Parody, satire, and academic commentary are defensible, but not automatically legal.

[RedFox99]

1 hour ago, FFWF said:

A quick refresher on how copyright and trademark issues work, according to my understanding (with the disclaimer that I am not a qualified legal professional):

• You cannot own an idea, only the expression of that idea - so things like specific names, designs, extended portions of associated text.  So my understanding is that Ken cannot own the idea of "an evil Sonic," but he can own the specific character "Evil Sonic" as depicted wearing a leather jacket and sunglasses - and if anyone else tried to create an evil Sonic of a similar description, he would be entitled to claim it as an infringement on his own property.
• However, the elements of your expression which are themselves somebody else's property cannot become yours.  So my understanding is that an Evil Sonic who looks like Sonic the Hedgehog is something he cannot completely own, and Ken cannot use the design and name of Evil Sonic without Sega's permission - and vice-versa.  It's likely that there would be similar trouble with a version of Evil Sonic who was green, had scars, and was called Scourge; it seems that Sega owns the Sonic bit, he owns the stuff which comes from Evic Sonic specifically, and whichever individuals wrote and designed the Scourge-unique elements would own those.
• Non-commercial infringements are still illegal but are rarely pursued.  So if Ken releases all this stuff for free, he would probably be fine.  However, if he charged for it, or if he presented it in such a way as to imply it was his legitimate intellectual property in a sphere which directly competed with other Sonic the Hedgehog products, he could be in trouble.
• By extension, works which create confusion as to the proper ownership of the material they use or which dilute the uniqueness of somebody else's property are in danger.
• Parody, satire, and academic commentary are defensible, but not automatically legal.

So, Ken is probably to have to do change some things to avoid a lawsuit. I really hope he wises up to what he's doing

[DabigRG]

5 hours ago, FFWF said:

  It's likely that there would be similar trouble with a version of Evil Sonic who was green, had scars, and was called Scourge; it seems that Sega owns the Sonic bit, he owns the stuff which comes from Evic Sonic specifically, and whichever individuals wrote and designed the Scourge-unique elements would own those.

Which in turn actually means SEGA owns a possible total 2/3's  of Scourge.

 

[SBR2]

On ‎12‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 12:29 PM, horridus said:

The rationale still eludes me. Just because Flynn CAN'T use them doesn't mean that they aren't still owned by SEGA. Like, IDW getting the license doesn't magically cause everything Archie made to just evaporate into the legal ether, free for anyone to use. 

There's not even anything saying he can't he just said he isn't going to, Right?

[Tylinos]

Another reminder that Ken really didn't like Karl playing with his toys during their time on the book together.  Ken only seems to like continuity being kept and developed on if it doesn't involve other writers developing on what he established.

[horridus]

5 minutes ago, Tylinos said:

Another reminder that Ken really didn't like Karl playing with his toys during their time on the book together.  Ken sure does seem to like the idea of continuity being kept and developed on unless it involves other writers developing on what he established.

Pfft. Amazing. One of the things that enhanced the popularity of BOTH characters, and he's STILL got a sore ass over the fact that it sprang from somebody other than him. To say nothing of all that talk about how EVERYTHING was gonna be in continuity and not contradict anything and all the other crap none of us believed from him for even an instant. 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

1 hour ago, Tylinos said:

Another reminder that Ken really didn't like Karl playing with his toys during their time on the book together.  Ken only seems to like continuity being kept and developed on if it doesn't involve other writers developing on what he established.

Not surprising.

[DoubleXXCross]

…Anyway, on review of this thread, I guess I'm putting some kind of riff on Scourge in my this-but-done-better series concept.

[CleverSonicUsername]

My favorite party of the Geoffrey and Hersey romance was when Hersey died off screen and was never heard from again.

[BlueSky]

He's really grasping on every single possible way to get any attention right now, isn't he?

It'd be fun to see him say it's a satire/parody if he ever gets into legal troubles, though I suppose he wouldn't...

 

[DabigRG]

On 12/30/2017 at 7:07 PM, Tylinos said:

Another reminder that Ken really didn't like Karl playing with his toys during their time on the book together.  Ken only seems to like continuity being kept and developed on if it doesn't involve other writers developing on what he established.

To be fair, that does make sense. 

<font size=1>And honestly, from a grander POV, it basically took Geoffrey off the market so they didn't have to worry about addressing his thing for Sally.</font>

On 12/30/2017 at 7:09 PM, horridus said:

Pfft. Amazing. One of the things that enhanced the popularity of BOTH characters, and he's STILL got a sore ass over the fact that it sprang from somebody other than him. To say nothing of all that talk about how EVERYTHING was gonna be in continuity and not contradict anything and all the other crap none of us believed from him for even an instant. 

Did it?

16 hours ago, DoubleXXCross said:

…Anyway, on review of this thread, I guess I'm putting some kind of riff on Scourge in my this-but-done-better series concept.

...Meaning?

3 hours ago, CleverSonicUsername said:

My favorite party of the Geoffrey and Hersey romance was when Hersey died off screen and was never heard from again.

Ch'yeah!

I know it's been a while since I looked into preboot Archie stuff, but that sounds about right.

[horridus]

5 hours ago, CleverSonicUsername said:

My favorite party of the Geoffrey and Hersey romance was when Hersey died off screen and was never heard from again.

Now now- she actually wasn't dead, recall, just deep undercover. The only 'death' she got was thanks to the lawsuit forcing the entire universe being rebooted.

1 hour ago, DabigRG said:

Did it?

Yes, actually, it did. As minor as it was, it was a development that did help the two's popularity, firstly by showing Geoff as having gotten over his attraction to Sally (more on that later) and in doing so granting him a bit of dimension beyond 'unlikable jackass' and thus granting him a bit of humanity in the process, while serving to show that Hershey had managed to finally put the Drago thing behind her and find love elsewhere. 

The biggest thing though is that it helped people forget about Geoff's incredibly aggressive pursuit of Sally. Ignoring the (EXTREMELY badly handled) shipping aspect of things, the fact is that Geoff was in his early 20s, going after a girl who was about 15-16 at the time. It's one of those things that a kid might not notice, but as you got older and older it became creepier and creepier.

Penders declaring it 'non-canon' as such becomes unfortunate, though not remotely unanticipated on two fronts. Firstly, it verifies that according to him, Geoffrey being into jailbait is a completely essential and integral part of his character (the bio written for him even makes it clear he viewed Sally, his monarch, exclusively in terms of sexual conquest). Secondly and even less surprisingly, it simply continues to confirm how little real respect Penders had for the input of his fellow writers on the book, despite his repeated claims otherwise. Frankly if he cared THAT much, he should have actually done a bit more with the two and done more to overseen their development in the book. 

None of this is surprising mind you- after Bollers left Penders simply tried to pick up where he left off and undo any of the more permanent changes from Bollers' run. It is, however,  ASTOUNDING in how much of a self-inflicted wound it is, and it's even more hypocritical given that he has now namedropped Scourge despite having bluntly resented Flynn for the work he did on Anti-Sonic that helped popularize him as Scourge, all the while never bothering to keep up with anything of Flynn's run. 

 

[DabigRG]

42 minutes ago, horridus said:

Now now- she actually wasn't dead, recall, just deep undercover. The only 'death' she got was thanks to the lawsuit forcing the entire universe being rebooted.

Yeah, I was wondering if I should've brought that up myself, but just went for the laugh.

42 minutes ago, horridus said:

Yes, actually, it did. As minor as it was, it was a development that did help the two's popularity, firstly by showing Geoff as having gotten over his attraction to Sally (more on that later) and in doing so granting him a bit of dimension beyond 'unlikable jackass' and thus granting him a bit of humanity in the process, while serving to show that Hershey had managed to finally put the Drago thing behind her and find love elsewhere. 

 

Actually, Geoffrey had a fair bit of character development before that. In fact, some might even argue he actually saw less development after the marriage until the King Naugus Arc--which coincided with everyone thinking Hershey was dead. 

Oops.(Not that it didn't add/provide something to his character during that arc.)

 

42 minutes ago, horridus said:

The biggest thing though is that it helped people forget about Geoff's incredibly aggressive pursuit of Sally. Ignoring the (EXTREMELY badly handled) shipping aspect of things, the fact is that Geoff was in his early 20s, going after a girl who was about 15-16 at the time. It's one of those things that a kid might not notice, but as you got older and older it became creepier and creepier.

 

Uh, not to scar any ignorant brains or anything, but you do realize that 16 was an age of matrimony/consent in similar locations for years and is still one even in some states?

Don't get me wrong, it's still pretty eye scrunchy, but it has precedent.

42 minutes ago, horridus said:

Penders declaring it 'non-canon' as such becomes unfortunate, though not remotely unanticipated on two fronts. Firstly, it verifies that according to him, Geoffrey being into jailbait is a completely essential and integral part of his character (the bio written for him even makes it clear he viewed Sally, his monarch, exclusively in terms of sexual conquest). 

 

WTF?! Really?!

What bio is this exactly?