| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
kokuryu
Joined: 07 Apr 2007
Posts: 915
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 1:23 pm
|
 |
|
|
Sounds like Funimation suddenly got greedy there....
But I am glad that the DB games will continue to come out here in the US in a timely fashion for once!
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Talon87
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 89
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 1:48 pm
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Atari reported in October that Funimation served notice of a pending termination of their agreement. |
Of what agreement?  Understanding this article and the lawsuit it details seems to hinge on this one fact, but nowhere in the article itself is it explained what "agreement" turned sour between Funi and Atari. For those of us not in the know, anyone care to explain? I don't understand on what grounds Funimation filed a lawsuit against Atari. I also don't understand how Funimation (an anime company) has any right to sue Atari if the original copyright holder in Japan issues Atari the license to make DBZ games; games hardly encroach on anime licensing territory, I would have thought.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Dargonxtc
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 4463
Location: Nc5xd7+ スターダストの海洋
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 1:50 pm
|
|
|
Well that should help the slumping quarterly sales. 
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Egan Loo
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1319
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 2:01 pm
|
|
|
| Talon87 wrote: |
| Quote: | | Atari reported in October that Funimation served notice of a pending termination of their agreement. |
Of what agreement? Understanding this article and the lawsuit it details seems to hinge on this one fact, but nowhere in the article itself is it explained what "agreement" turned sour between Funi and Atari. For those of us not in the know, anyone care to explain? I don't understand on what grounds Funimation filed a lawsuit against Atari. I also don't understand how Funimation (an anime company) has any right to sue Atari if the original copyright holder in Japan issues Atari the license to make DBZ games; games hardly encroach on anime licensing territory, I would have thought. |
Funimation not only has the license to the anime itself, but also the license for the anime-based merchandising such as games. Atari's current sublicense to release games came from its 2004 agreement with Funimation.
Funimation's merchandising license is also why Bandai America licensed the right to release Dragon Ball Z toys in America from Funimation, even though Bandai releases Dragon Ball Z toys in Japan.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Talon87
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 89
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:16 pm
|
|
|
Okay, so that answers half of my question; what about the other half, though?  Given that Funi gave Atari the green light in 2004, why has there been a falling out since? And a partial falling out at that, considering that Atari settled but insists they will still be the ones bringing DBZ video games to the US market? Normally these sorts of feuds end in a bitter falling out; when the companies kiss and make up, it's not usually the case that a $3 million dollar settlement be included in that. This is quite the peculiar case, and without more info, it's still impossible for a DBZ outsider (like me) to decipher.
Thanks for the quick response though; it did provide at least one crucial piece of the puzzle.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
MokonaModoki
Joined: 30 Oct 2005
Posts: 437
Location: Austin, Texas
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:46 pm
|
|
|
| ANN wrote: | | Atari can continue its holiday release of the Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 3 fighting game on the Sony PlayStation 3 |
Playstation 2, there's no PS3 version.
| Talon87 wrote: | | Given that Funi gave Atari the green light in 2004, why has there been a falling out since? |
The indication from the original Atari SEC filing was just that FUNimation had accused Atari of being in breach of the terms of the agreement. Per this announcement that has been "clarified" as "with respect to an audit of amounts due to FUNimation under certain sublicense agreements and other matters." Somebody owed money. Somebody got paid.
| kokuryu wrote: | | Sounds like Funimation suddenly got greedy there.... |
Do your knees actually jerk when saying things like that, or is it just an expression?
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Talon87
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 89
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:22 am
|
|
|
So ... you're saying Funimation accused Atari of owing Funimation money (i.e. a 2nd-degree licensing fee) but not paying the full amount? Is that right? If so, I don't see why it would even have taken so long for Atari to settle -- it would be so painfully obvious that they were in violation of the terms agreed upon. Or are you saying that Atari simply owed Funimation "monies" that have not been disclosed to the public, so we can't really do much except speculate as to what said "monies" would be for? This is starting to be more trouble than it's worth.  Seems like nobody can really give me a straight answer as to what specifically Atari did in violation of the law -- at best, we've established a generic answer of "they owed money." "Certain sublicense agreements" ... I mean, this is what I'm trying to get at. If nobody really knows what those sublicense agreements were, then it's hard to make a valid choice between defending Atari or supporting Funimation in this story -- without more details, it's not really clear who's the victim and who's the victimizer in this corporate relationship.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
