Upload
Login or register

thedudeistheman

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:8/08/2010
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#702
Comment Ranking:#2435
Highest Content Rank:#833
Highest Comment Rank:#1712
Content Thumbs: 1581 total,  1677 ,  96
Comment Thumbs: 6814 total,  7525 ,  711
Content Level Progress: 86% (43/50)
Level 110 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 111 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 9% (9/100)
Level 252 Comments: Contaminated Win → Level 253 Comments: Contaminated Win
Subscribers:2
Content Views:58236
Times Content Favorited:48 times
Total Comments Made:7961
FJ Points:6239
Favorite Tags: it (2)

latest user's comments

#44378 - My bad, I was talking about Gibson in the first Mad Max movie.… 06/08/2016 on Television - cartoon... 0
#9 - tiscomics Roland Emmerich said in 2013 that Will Smit… 06/08/2016 on smithy 0
#44344 - Dr. No - You Only Live Twice >Oh boy, James Bond! … 06/07/2016 on Television - cartoon... +1
#44343 - He's not really the Max we've come to know in the first one. T…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/07/2016 on Television - cartoon... 0
User avatar
#44367 - dorkledumbs (06/08/2016) [-]
He plays pretty much the same character the same way as Mel Gibson played him in The Road Warrior
"I don't give a shit about any of you, I just want to go my way"
"I guess I'm stuck with you guys"
"I could leave, but I've grown attached, but will attempt not to show it"
"My job is done, I'll go my way"
User avatar
#44378 - thedudeistheman (06/08/2016) [-]
My bad, I was talking about Gibson in the first Mad Max movie. He's not really the same Max as in The Road Warrior and Fury Road.
#61 - Also, sales source: Just need to change the platform… 06/07/2016 on BATTLEFRONT 3 LIVES 0
#60 - I don't think they'll lose money. If anything, they'll make sl…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/07/2016 on BATTLEFRONT 3 LIVES 0
User avatar
#61 - thedudeistheman (06/07/2016) [-]
Also, sales source: www.vgchartz.com/game/83364/star-wars-battlefront-2015/

Just need to change the platform to see the different numbers.
#32 - Anon, I would appreciate someone with more knowledge than me e… 06/07/2016 on BATTLEFRONT 3 LIVES 0
#19 - I was thinking faster than I could type. little to no… 06/07/2016 on BATTLEFRONT 3 LIVES 0
#18 - Yeah, I'm not a lawyer either, so this is just my understandin…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/07/2016 on BATTLEFRONT 3 LIVES +2
User avatar
#78 - sketchE (06/07/2016) [-]
theyd essentially have to make a game with no direct references to anything starwars. no xwings, no tie fighters, they might be able to get by with storm troopers solely because of germany but they couldnt even look like them if they did.

basicly my understanding of fair use is that you cant make something that could negatively influence someone elses business. for instance letsplays get by because they could increase interest in the game and they dont let you play the game obviously. making a game to compete with another game where the other developers own the rights isnt fair use. even if you arent competing to bring in more money you are taking income from them
User avatar
#19 - thedudeistheman (06/07/2016) [-]
I was thinking faster than I could type.

little to no relation to*
because the uniqueness of your brand is being lessened*
#16 - They're not making any money off of it so I don't know if Disn…  [+] (12 new replies) 06/07/2016 on BATTLEFRONT 3 LIVES +18
#134 - anon (06/07/2016) [-]
Dude, you don't fuck around with Mickey. If you have enough money you can do almost anything. They will find a way to shut it down if they really want to. Disney could buy Valve like 80 fucking times over again. It's not someone you want to fight.
User avatar
#105 - zenjion (06/07/2016) [-]
as said on the website, they don't have to loose in a court case to get shut down. Disney can just outlast them monetarily with lawyer fees.
User avatar
#135 - clannadqs (06/07/2016) [-]
Yep, people are forgetting that Disney could literally buy Valve 50+ times over and still have money left in the bank. You don't fuck around with mickey.
User avatar
#48 - dvdfaust (06/07/2016) [-]
They're not making money, but arguably EA/Disney will -lose- money.
User avatar
#60 - thedudeistheman (06/07/2016) [-]
I don't think they'll lose money. If anything, they'll make slightly less profit.

Let's assume that GiT comes out and is now in competition with Battlefront 2. I don't know about the digital sales, but the physical console sales of BF2015 significantly outweigh physical PC sales, which is really no surprise. For the sake of conversation, let's assume that PC is still selling less digitally than console is digitally, and that that trend continues with Battlefront 2. Even if GiT affects sales of BF2, the majority of EA/Disney's profit isn't coming from PC sales of the game, physically or digitally. Additionally, the overlap of people who would've bought BF2 but now won't due to GiT is likely to be relatively small. The overlap of people who will buy BF2 that know about GiT but won't let it affect their purchase is also probably small.

We don't even know when GiT is coming out, so this could be a non-issue.
User avatar
#61 - thedudeistheman (06/07/2016) [-]
Also, sales source: www.vgchartz.com/game/83364/star-wars-battlefront-2015/

Just need to change the platform to see the different numbers.
#30 - anon (06/07/2016) [-]
that is absolutely not how trademarks work. even free products dont fall under fair use in this case
User avatar
#32 - thedudeistheman (06/07/2016) [-]
Anon, I would appreciate someone with more knowledge than me explaining situation, but considering all you've said is "That's not how it works," I'm not inclined to believe you.
#17 - tuhuar (06/07/2016) [-]
Disney might be able to make a case for trademark dilution (I don't believe a product has to be sold in that case), if they believe that GiT would tarnish the reputation of the name / assets / characters, etc. I'm pretty sure they'd basically just have to say "these guys used our trademark without permission and their product could weaken our consumer base, as well as falsely representing our brand," but I'm no lawyer so I could be wrong.
User avatar
#18 - thedudeistheman (06/07/2016) [-]
Yeah, I'm not a lawyer either, so this is just my understanding.

So the argument for trademark dilution can be made if the supposedly-infringing product weakens the brand name of another product by having little to relation to the other product aside from name. So let's say you invent a line of vacuum cleaners called "Suck-Em Ups." Then, another guy creates an ice pop brand called "Suck-Em Ups." You'd have the right to claim trademark dilution because the uniqueness of your brand.

I don't know if this would work for GiT. It's very clearly Star Wars, and if they don't use big-name characters, then I'm not sure Disney has a legal standing for it. Even if they did, if the characters used aren't ruining their own reputations, then I would imagine some research would be done to prove that no harm is being caused to the brand.

Again, that's just my understanding of it based on some very surface-level research.
User avatar
#78 - sketchE (06/07/2016) [-]
theyd essentially have to make a game with no direct references to anything starwars. no xwings, no tie fighters, they might be able to get by with storm troopers solely because of germany but they couldnt even look like them if they did.

basicly my understanding of fair use is that you cant make something that could negatively influence someone elses business. for instance letsplays get by because they could increase interest in the game and they dont let you play the game obviously. making a game to compete with another game where the other developers own the rights isnt fair use. even if you arent competing to bring in more money you are taking income from them
User avatar
#19 - thedudeistheman (06/07/2016) [-]
I was thinking faster than I could type.

little to no relation to*
because the uniqueness of your brand is being lessened*