Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
White Wolf sues Sony over the movie "Underworld"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 1113224" data-attributes="member: 151"><p>Hmmm. Thorny issue, this.</p><p></p><p>On the one hand, WW appears to have some very strong consequential evidence. Individually not very compelling, but en masse (which presumably is part of their strategey for listing all those attributes) is starts to form (or try to form) a pattern. How much chance of success they have will be determined by a jury, the presentation of the case, and possibly even the facts. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Is it a widely-acknowledged fact that White Wolf's core line is, at the least, influenced by Anne Rice's Vampire series and Lumley's Necroscope? I think that it is. But so is D&D clearly taken from Tolkien, Lieber, Andreson, Howard and Vance. But the question is, how original are the ideas, and does White Wolf legitimately have a right to claim ownership of them? And therein lies the problem.</p><p></p><p>Many of the points listed serve two functions: to clarify how both properties are dissimilar to the wide-spread 'knowledge' of vampires and wereloves, and to establish a pattern of possible plagarism. Let's remember, outside of gaming and even further outside of fandom in general, many people hold very generalized 'Halloween' type ideas about vamps and werewolves.</p><p></p><p>But at the same time, many of these ideas aren't exactly revolutionary. It didn't take a huge stretch of the imagination to envision vampires, as they've been represented for a long time in western culture, as a collection of aristocratic sophisticates. That was, after all, what Dracula <em>was.</em> Formation of vampire clans isn't that much of stretch, especially with the idea of characters like Dracula again, who was already a member of the nobility....it's simply a matter of redefinition. And consider films like Wolfen, the Howling, The Crow and more....White Wolf didn't originate these ideas, by any stretch.</p><p></p><p>At issue is really the confluence of sources, and the depth of the material. Is it coincidence (albeit an extreme one) or sloppy behavior? If Underground stole it's visual look from The Matrix, and The Matrix stole it's look from somewhere else, who in turn did the same...how do you determine where the Worm Ourborous of cultural referential loop began?</p><p></p><p>I honestly don't know.</p><p></p><p>In Harlan Ellison's case(s), there was clear and substantial unacknowledged IP theft. And Harlan Ellison is a maniac when it comes to asserting his rights legally or otherwise, regardless of the amount of money involved. He is an intellectual pit bull, and has proven time and again that he'll bankrupt himself, if necessary, to prove his point. Corporations FEAR THIS.</p><p></p><p>Circumstantially, it looks like WW might have an actual case...or at least enough of one that they may get Sony to settle with them. Or Sony might fight them tooth-and-nail, to discourage exactly such lawsuits. Someone, somewhere within Sony's organization was familiar with White Wolf, I have no doubt. Either for potential cross-marketing opportunities, or for simply looking at a potential audience. That doesn't mean that the major decision makers did, or that it got that high up the chain. That doesn't remove them from liability, but it does explain some things, if they are found guilty.</p><p></p><p>To use Captain Marvel as an example, as Villano mentioned above, he doesn't look too similar, when comparing his minutae of details. But look at them from a broader picture, especially in light of a jury of non-comic book readers. They both wear costumes. They both have capes. They both have secret identities. They both fly, have super strength and speed, have 'families' of other similar characters (supergirl/mary marvel, superboy/Captain Marvel Jr.), have mad scientist arch-villians, have secret identities as journalists...and so on and so forth. You might say: "<em>But Superboy was superman as a young boy in Smallville, and Captain Marvel Jr. was a different kid entirely in the present!</em>" To which I would reply: "<em>Yes, that's true. But in the context of many stories, that's just plain irrelevant to the reader. A solo story of either character would look very similar if you ignored the minor differences. And to someone with no emotional investment in either character, it would be irrelevant.</em>" Of course, a better argument would be that most of Superman's 'family' didn't really appear until after Marvel was effectively banned...but that's another story entirely. (<em>Bonus question: who possessed the 'Shazambago'?</em><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />)</p><p></p><p>And that's really what this is all about, is a question of reasonable doubt. The deciding factor for the jury will be the credibility of Sony and it's writers over whether or not it was known and intentional. For example, if Sony made overtures prior to the film of licensing rights, and then didn't...they've got a problem. If the movie uses a lot of very similar, even if not copyrighted, terms and elements, then they have a problem.</p><p></p><p>On the whole, it doesn't look frivolous to me, but it's far from ironclad, either. And having sat on the jury of a frivolous lawsuit, I can tell you that this ain't it, from what we're seeing. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WizarDru, post: 1113224, member: 151"] Hmmm. Thorny issue, this. On the one hand, WW appears to have some very strong consequential evidence. Individually not very compelling, but en masse (which presumably is part of their strategey for listing all those attributes) is starts to form (or try to form) a pattern. How much chance of success they have will be determined by a jury, the presentation of the case, and possibly even the facts. :) Is it a widely-acknowledged fact that White Wolf's core line is, at the least, influenced by Anne Rice's Vampire series and Lumley's Necroscope? I think that it is. But so is D&D clearly taken from Tolkien, Lieber, Andreson, Howard and Vance. But the question is, how original are the ideas, and does White Wolf legitimately have a right to claim ownership of them? And therein lies the problem. Many of the points listed serve two functions: to clarify how both properties are dissimilar to the wide-spread 'knowledge' of vampires and wereloves, and to establish a pattern of possible plagarism. Let's remember, outside of gaming and even further outside of fandom in general, many people hold very generalized 'Halloween' type ideas about vamps and werewolves. But at the same time, many of these ideas aren't exactly revolutionary. It didn't take a huge stretch of the imagination to envision vampires, as they've been represented for a long time in western culture, as a collection of aristocratic sophisticates. That was, after all, what Dracula [i]was.[/i] Formation of vampire clans isn't that much of stretch, especially with the idea of characters like Dracula again, who was already a member of the nobility....it's simply a matter of redefinition. And consider films like Wolfen, the Howling, The Crow and more....White Wolf didn't originate these ideas, by any stretch. At issue is really the confluence of sources, and the depth of the material. Is it coincidence (albeit an extreme one) or sloppy behavior? If Underground stole it's visual look from The Matrix, and The Matrix stole it's look from somewhere else, who in turn did the same...how do you determine where the Worm Ourborous of cultural referential loop began? I honestly don't know. In Harlan Ellison's case(s), there was clear and substantial unacknowledged IP theft. And Harlan Ellison is a maniac when it comes to asserting his rights legally or otherwise, regardless of the amount of money involved. He is an intellectual pit bull, and has proven time and again that he'll bankrupt himself, if necessary, to prove his point. Corporations FEAR THIS. Circumstantially, it looks like WW might have an actual case...or at least enough of one that they may get Sony to settle with them. Or Sony might fight them tooth-and-nail, to discourage exactly such lawsuits. Someone, somewhere within Sony's organization was familiar with White Wolf, I have no doubt. Either for potential cross-marketing opportunities, or for simply looking at a potential audience. That doesn't mean that the major decision makers did, or that it got that high up the chain. That doesn't remove them from liability, but it does explain some things, if they are found guilty. To use Captain Marvel as an example, as Villano mentioned above, he doesn't look too similar, when comparing his minutae of details. But look at them from a broader picture, especially in light of a jury of non-comic book readers. They both wear costumes. They both have capes. They both have secret identities. They both fly, have super strength and speed, have 'families' of other similar characters (supergirl/mary marvel, superboy/Captain Marvel Jr.), have mad scientist arch-villians, have secret identities as journalists...and so on and so forth. You might say: "[i]But Superboy was superman as a young boy in Smallville, and Captain Marvel Jr. was a different kid entirely in the present![/i]" To which I would reply: "[i]Yes, that's true. But in the context of many stories, that's just plain irrelevant to the reader. A solo story of either character would look very similar if you ignored the minor differences. And to someone with no emotional investment in either character, it would be irrelevant.[/i]" Of course, a better argument would be that most of Superman's 'family' didn't really appear until after Marvel was effectively banned...but that's another story entirely. ([i]Bonus question: who possessed the 'Shazambago'?[/i]:)) And that's really what this is all about, is a question of reasonable doubt. The deciding factor for the jury will be the credibility of Sony and it's writers over whether or not it was known and intentional. For example, if Sony made overtures prior to the film of licensing rights, and then didn't...they've got a problem. If the movie uses a lot of very similar, even if not copyrighted, terms and elements, then they have a problem. On the whole, it doesn't look frivolous to me, but it's far from ironclad, either. And having sat on the jury of a frivolous lawsuit, I can tell you that this ain't it, from what we're seeing. :p [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
White Wolf sues Sony over the movie "Underworld"
Top