Jump to content
Toby

Archie Sonic Main Discussion

Recommended Posts

Those things that came out of the Espio and Vector Prelates....

Could they be soul orbs, perhaps? :huh:

Granted, they're not colored like the one from the last issue, but I've got hopes that they are.

Edited by DragonSoul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That purple thing that came out of the Espio Prelate....

Could it be a soul orb, perhaps? :huh:

Granted, it's not colored like the one from the last issue, but I've got hopes that it is.

Look closely, a green one comes out of Vector too. I kinda doubt its their sould myself, otherwise it would be a bit easy. Also, yeah. The Rotor is straight out of the Other M comic. Wonder if Fiona is gonna hone in on Silver like she did on Sonic in the Other M? The strange pairings never end....

Edited by Dr Spudhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever that thing is, how come the Mighty, Ray, Saffron and Charmy prelates didn't give one off?

The Mighty one was just punched into the ground, not actually destroyed. The other three, who knows maybe they're still working as well (or the smoke masked it fly away or something).

And I have to agree with Dr. Spudhead. After having a good read through that Other M last night, I'm kinda surprised at how much has been worked into the Silver story (and this is just so far) and I kinda don't know what to make of it :/ (thought it at least seems a good bit better presented this time around :P).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those things that came out of the Espio and Vector Prelates....

Could they be soul orbs, perhaps? :huh:

Granted, they're not colored like the one from the last issue, but I've got hopes that they are.

I mentioned this from the last issue when Enerjak was holding everyone on the wall hostage. I suggest that Enerjak is using everyone's soul (energy...whatever) as his own pawns in those dark versions.

Dark Eggman would look so awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an update on Archie's legal battle with Ken Penders.

http://www.tssznews.com/2011/03/02/penders...archie-lawsuit/

The attorney representing Ken Penders against a lawsuit brought by Archie Comics is attempting to have the case thrown out principally on a technicality.

Defense attorney Michael Ertel filed on February 8th the motion, arguing a lack of jurisdiction on Penders in the case. Specifically, the motion argues that because Penders never technically worked in a setting where New York jurisdiction applied (and where Archie is headquartered), he is not subject to the rules under them. Ertel also argued that because Penders filed for copyright protection of his work in California, where he currently lives, the case should be transferred to that district for the convenience of the parties and witnesses, and in the interest of justice, according to the document.

At the heart of this case is whether Penders signed a contract with Archie. According to the motion Ertel filed, Archie Comics allegedly conceded that contract is in dispute.

The sole basis on which Archie may rely on personal jurisdiction is a paragraph contained in two agreements that Archie claims were signed by Penders in 1996; however, Archie acknowledges that the validity of these documents is in dispute and to date, Archie has not supplied the original of either document to allow a handwriting expert to analyze Penderss purported signature or for any other purpose.

A Declaration opposing this motion was filed yesterday. It includes an affidavit by Archies current president Mike Pellerito, in which he claims Archie Comics requires all independent contractors to sign an agreement with the company. Pellerito also claims in the affidavit Archies records date back to at least 1988. A spreadsheet of individuals who allegedly signed the agreement, including some current staff on the Sonic comic, was provided as a supplementary exhibit. Copies of the agreements Penders allegedly signed were reportedly submitted as a part of Archies original complaint against Penders filed in November, according to Pelleritos declaration. We should note that complaint is not yet public record electronically.

Pellerito testified to the following, regard to Penderss alternative proposal to move proceedings to California. Pellerito claims Penders executed a contract while a resident of New York.

The locus of operative facts relevant to these claims is in New York because the ACP Penders Agreements which are central to this dispute were created in this District, executed in New York (while Penders was a resident of New York), performed in New York, are related to goods or services supplied by Penders to ACP in New York. Penders current presence in California is irrelevant to this factor.

Pellerito, in his affidavit, cited Edward Spallone, who allegedly executed the agreement between Penders and Archie. Pellerito noted Spallone was absent from Penderss planned witness list, and he called those witnessesnearly all of whom live in California- "disingenuous at best."

All of Pelleritos words are, in part, a response to a 14 page declaration Penders himself made in February in support of the motion to dismiss, which well explore in more detail here tomorrow, as there are a ton of revelations in it. Among Penderss claims are that, while he did live in New York state for almost 7 yearsincluding the period when he started working for Archie Comicshe never signed a work agreement with the company.

But none of this will move very far very fast. There is a period of discovery that is necessary, and the next status conference in the casewhere a decision on this motion may be madeisnt until June 7th. There will be a lot of waiting and a lot of research up to then, but in lead-up, there has already been a lot of mudslinging.

--------------------------------------------------------------

And here's part 2:

http://www.tssznews.com/2011/03/03/penders...-comics-tenure/

The fourteen page affidavit Ken Penders submitted last month in the lawsuit Archie Comics filed against him is perhaps the most raw, meticulous, and unabridged side to his story anyone could ever see. It tells a tale of a man who, now living off unemployment and close to penniless, was making absolutely sure he was not under the heart of the whole messs matter before diving in: A work for hire agreement.

Penders claims of confiding in past co-workers who were also allegedly not bound by such an agreement, and even allegedly confirmed with Archies editor in chief Victor Gorelick no such agreement between him and the company existed before filing copyright claims on many of his contributions to the Sonic comics last year.

Before undertaking these Copyright Office filings, I wanted to make absolutely certain of my position as the owner of all rights in the works I created which were published in the Sonic Comics, Penders explains in the declaration. I therefore telephoned Victor Gorelick, editor-in-chief of Archie Comics, in December 2008. During that conversation, I requested that Archie (i) return to me original artwork still in its possession, and (ii) provide me with copies of any agreement I may have signed with Archie Comics relating to any of the freelance work I did for them. Gorelick told me that no such documents existed.

To be sure, Penders then claimed he followed up several times with Gorelick through telephone and E-Mail, seeking written confirmation of the contracts non-existence. Gorelick never furnished such documentation. It was reportedly furnished when Archie filed its complaint against Penders, but it hasnt been made part of the public record electronically. Nevertheless, Penders later in the declaration disputed its authenticity:

First, the signatures are not believed by me to be authentic. Second, I have no record of ever receiving documents in 1996 from Archie, nor any recollection of the same. Third, I have no copies of these signed documents in my records when I receive a document that has already been signed by the other party, it is my normal business practice to make a copy of the fully-executed agreement before returning the document to them.

Penders says the only documents he signed from Archie during his tenure were pay vouchers and a group medical insurance waiver. He also alleges that all or most of the freelance creators on the Sonic Comics at the time of his employment did not sign work for hire agreements, and even provided a list of potential witnesses that, at times, is a trip through the series history. Penders names former staffers Scott Shaw, Michael Gallagher as likely witnesses.

But theres a lot more to the declaration than those disputes. Penders testifies at length as to how he came to prominence with the Sonic comics:

In October 1993, my friend Mike Kanterovich came to me, telling me he was approached by Paul Castiglia, the editor at that time of the Sonic Comics, who advised that the current writer for the Sonic Comics might be leaving and Archie was looking for some inventory stories to have on hand as a back-up precaution. Kanterovich told me that Castiglia offered him the opportunity to submit story ideas for potential assignments. Unfortunately for him, Kanterovich knew little or nothing about the character or the comic books, and so he reached out to me because he was aware that I knew a great deal about the character since the Sonic the Hedgehog video games, Sonic Comics and Sonic the Hedgehog television shows were favorites at that time of my young son Stephen. Kanterovich and I spoke about the Sonic Comic opportunity, and I provided Kanterovich with information on the characters. As our discussions continued, Kanterovich suggested that we work together on story ideas to pitch to Archie for publication in the Sonic Comics. Initially, we prepared and submitted three story ideas to Castiglia for approval during the second half of October 1993. All three stories were submitted by Archie to SEGA for approval, and two of the three were eventually approved by SEGA and Archie.

This method of working on a comic book was different than I was used to doing with other publishers. Specifically, rather than receiving a specific assignment, Archie invited us to pitch story ideas, which they would either accept or reject. Unlike my experience of submitting scripts at any other comic book publisher, Castiglia insisted we submit our scripts in full panel page layout form, clearly depicting everything in a rough visual format rather than in normal text format. We were paid no additional money for producing these story layouts, despite the additional time and effort it required, and received no credit or acknowledgement for them in the published works.

Penders alleges in the affidavit this eventually led to he and Kanterovich visiting Archie headquarters in New York, during which they encountered Archie publishers Michael Silberkleit and Richard Goldwater. Some joking around ensued, specifically on notion both Penders and Kanterovich would become the regular Archie writers. That eventually happened, but as Penders notes, there was at no time any official undertaking by Archie to formalize our working arrangements, and no guarantee of future work for the Sonic Comics.

It ultimately was the release of Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood by Sega in 2008, which Penders believed either referenced or outright used characters he created from the Sonic comics without his consent, that compelled him to seek copyright protection. Penders claimed upon doing so, the U.S. Copyright Office notified both Archie and Sega of his intent, and Archie did not intervene:

[....] During the copyright application process, the Copyright Office sent a notice to Archie Comics and SEGA advising them of my copyright claims, but Archie took no steps to object to the applications, and failed to provide the Copyright Office with copies of any agreements that would dispute my ownership. This was confirmed to me via e-mail on May 21, 2010 by William J. Briganti, Assistant Chief of the Visual Arts and Recordation Division at the Copyright Office.

Penders does not explain if the same circumstances held for Sega, and we are checking out that lost detail for clarification. But if that holds similarly, should Penders prevail in this case, it may mean Sega is also legally exposed.

There are two other notable items in the affidavit. One had potential to stop the runaway success of the Sonic comics, now Archies top selling adventure comic, dead in its tracks. Penders alleges that the early alignment with both of Sonics television series posed a conundrum for Archie once those series concluded, and Archie considered cancelling the series shortly thereafter (Not exactly a shock, as Ken already discussed this a great lengths himself on this very website not that long ago. -Ag). Penders says the Endgame arc, told from issues 47 through 50, was originally conceived as the comic series finale:

In the summer of 1995, (then Sonic comic editor Scott) Fulop advised me that both the Saturday morning animated series and the syndicated weekday Sonic animated television series were being cancelled. Because comic books licensed from another media (such as television) historically were cancelled within 8-12 months once the original media was no longer in the public spotlight, Fulop told me that Archie expected the Sonic Comics comic book series would be cancelled within the next year.

Undeterred, I continued to innovate with my work on the Sonic Comics, creating additional new characters and storylines, including perhaps the most renowned storyline for the entire series titled Endgame, which appeared in issues 47-50. This storyline was initially conceived as the last story in the series, featuring the characters final battle against his greatest enemy.

Despite Archies fears, however, the Sonic Comics proved to be the exception to the licensed comic book rule, and actually saw sales increase after the animated shows were taken off the air. As a result, I rewrote the original conclusion of the Endgame story thereby allowing the series to move forward rather than terminating.

The other disclosure Penders makes in the conclusion is more personal and more sobering. It involves the current motion to dismiss his attorney has prepared, on account of a lack of jurisdiction. Penders says he is too poor to make the trip to New York for a trial. Penders says, as of the date of the affidavit, he has less than $500 in his bank account and limited liquid assetspotentially making travel costs an issue. With no income available to him other than unemployment checks, Penders states The costs associated with having to travel to and stay New York City [sic] connected to this lawsuit would pose a hardship to me under my current circumstances.

As reported yesterday, Archie Comics has responded and opposed Penderss motion to dismiss with a declaration of its own penned by president Mike Pellerito. But it does not appear any decision will be made in the case until June 7th, the next scheduled court conference. No formal trial date has been set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Archie is suing Penders, not the other way around.

Or are you suggesting that he counter-sue them at a later date? O.o

Penders was the one who started the whole thing, remember? It was back in July, he was determined to sue Archie for royalties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's exactly right. Archie would've left Penders alone, but he went and sued them because he wanted to use "his characters" (which he can't claim as his characters, anyway, simply because they are Sonic fan-characters plain and simple), so Archie counter-sued. Penders isn't going to counter-sue; that's what Archie is doing right now.

Still, I'm trying to figure this thing out: how can Penders FILE a lawsuit if he's out of money? Seriously... You'd just be better off creating an entirely new story with new characters you create FROM SCRATCH and trying to write about that than attempting to go back to this. Of course, then again, that wouldn't have much popularity, then, would it? Sheesh... The REASON these characters even exist and have become so... "popular" is because they're in a comic book slapped with Sonic's name on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(which he can't claim as his characters, anyway, simply because they are Sonic fan-characters plain and simple)

They are not fan characters. Just because they don't appear in the games doesn't mean that they are fan characters. Sega owns the rights to them.

Sheesh... The REASON these characters even exist and have become so... "popular" is because they're in a comic book slapped with Sonic's name on it.

Or maybe it's because people actually like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FCBD preview for the Sonic comic can be found here.

'Twas in this thread already, actually.

Penders was the one who started the whole thing, remember? It was back in July, he was determined to sue Archie for royalties.

Archie counter sued Penders some time later, actually. I can't be arsed to find the source right now, but this is the only thing that came up. I might be getting some things mixed up because I'm not so great at this legal jargon.

Everybody at this point should just ignore Penders, though. At this point, he's nothing more than a kookie old man, whose always had a bit of an egoist problem and wrote for a book whose never even so much as glanced at the source material that he was supposed to write about in the first place. He is in no way going to gain anything from this if he tired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, despite what I think of Penders doing this, he could have a case. Since it looks like the documents aren't there, and he says the book didn't have regular writers at the time (book was shaky in its early years), he could say he didn't sign a thing. If he's got people from the company to back him up.

I don't think he could profit from or use the characters, since they're based upon Sega owned characters and places, but he might be able to go after Archie for royalties on his old stories. This might be what he's after to begin with if he's broke as fuck. I respect what he built as a Sonic writer, but I don't want him to tear it all down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, in my opinion TSSZ News really blows this Penders vs. Archie thing outta proportion. They like to make a really big deal out of everything related to it, reporting it like it's Doomsday. I personally shrug and laugh at crazy Penders and go back to my comics, knowing they won't be going anywhere any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not fan characters. Just because they don't appear in the games doesn't mean that they are fan characters. Sega owns the rights to them.

Sorry, but a fan character is a fan character.

It doesn't matter if they were created by a child with a crayon or packaged and produced in a legit manner - they were created for a series overall by a fan.

This shouldn't mean that they are supposed to be viewed as anything less - look at Amy Rose, she started out as a fan character in a manga.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactley and considering the now delayed 'Archie Sonic Encyclopedia' as SEGA themselves were said to be extremely impressed and I think willl be available to buy nearer the 20th anniversary. So if there are 100's of characters in it, ,and has the backing of SEGA you can pretty much count that its all SEGA's

for e.g look at the STAR WARS universe! even though Lucas doesnt have any say on what happens in the books he will still own all chracters in the universe ( one character even appeared in the PHANTOM MENACE in the pod race scene breifly.

So to put this to an end SEGA and ARCHIE own all characters nuff said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some more news about Penders legal battle with Archie.

TSSZ News has obtained through sources copies of two work for hire agreements Archie Comics claims Ken Penders signed during his tenure with the Sonic series.

A five page “Revised Newsstand Comic Independent Contractor’s Agreement” and a three page “Licensed Comic Books Independent Contractor’s Agreement” are the heart of a current legal battle between Penders and Archie. The comic publisher submitted the documents when it filed a complaint against Penders in November, but it had never been available electronically for public review. Because the documents contain personally revealing information, such as address information that is pixelated in the above image, TSSZ News has elected not to publish the documents in full.

Both work for hire agreements carry Penders’s alleged signature, dated December 12th, 1996–more than three years after he started work on the series. They also carry the alleged signature of Archie’s then vice president of finance Edward Spallone, dated November 25th, 1996. In theory, that makes the long passage of time between Penders’s first contributions and the execution of said agreement important, were it not for Archie including the following paragraph Newsstand specific ICA:

18. Contractor represents that all of his/her contributions to any Properties or Works have been commissioned by Archie and prepared at the request and expense of Archie and that all past, pending and future contributions of Contractor to the Works and Properties are and shall be Works for Hire owned by and for the benefit of Archie. Contractor and Archie acknowledge that they have entered into previous oral and written Work for Hire agreements, including the Newsstand Comic Independent Contractor’s Agreement that Archie and Contractor executed in __________ (fill in year if applicable; leave blank if inapplicable), and that Contractor’s past and pending Contributions to the Properties and/or the Works, if any, were created pursuant to such earlier agreements and are Works for Hire.

You may have noticed a blank space in the above paragraph. The document has that space intentionally left blank, as are other potentially key spaces in both agreements. Whether those may become points of contention in the case is to be determined.

Still, to be sure, the contract states in paragraph 19 that any other works a contractor makes to a work or property–in this case, the Sonic series–that are not directly subject to the agreement are to have all rights assigned to Archie.

“Contractor will and hereby does assign to Archie any right, title and interest that he/she has or may obtain therein, including all copyrights, patents, trademarks and other proprietary rights,” the paragraph reads.

The Newsstand Comic ICA also states the agreement will be governed by the laws of New York State, where Archie is headquartered. That has become a new point of contention in the case, as counsel for Penders has moved to relocate the case to California, if not have the case thrown out completely.

The second agreement Penders allegedly signed, the Licensed Comic Books Independent Contractor’s Agreement, reaffirms jurisdiction. Though meant principally for the Sonic series and offshoots, it also does not specify in writing what “Licensed Comics” Penders was writing for, as the contract specifies. The agreement also does not specify Sega or anyone else as the “Licensor”–there are merely blank spaces left.

Where it gets even more complicated is where Archie was to specify the owner of the licensed work, who commissioned it, and who Penders was to look at for compensation. As seen in the image above, one party–presumably Archie–was to designate whether they or the “Licensor”, Sega in this case, were the “Owner” of Penders’s work. The documents entered into evidence show that never happened. That’s important because the contract states “that all past, present, and future contributions” are considered Works for Hire by the owner, but that owner is never clearly outlined.

In the suit, it has allegedly been conceded the documents are copies and not originals, and there remains a question as to whether Archie Comics has the original documents. Penders disputes the authenticity of those documents and has throughout the case for that and other reasons, alleging the style and scope of the agreements were unlike anything he had seen in his prior experience within the comic industry.

TSSZ News has also learned neither Archie Comics nor Sega responded to the US Copyright Office’s request for any challenge of the claims Penders sought when he filed for copyright protection, and that there was a 30 day window to do so. This paved the way for his works to be registered beginning in June of 2010.

Research and evidence continues to be collected in the case, with the next conferences scheduled for June. We will continue to bring you more developments as they enter into the public record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.