Custom Toy Blogger Accused Of Infringing On Wolverine

from the take-a-look-at-the-photos dept

Reader shaniac points us to a blog post on a custom toy blog, where the blogger explains how some of his photo galleries of custom toys he made were forced offline due to a DMCA takedown notice from 20th Century Fox, claiming that they infringed on intellectual property from the Wolverine movie. Except, if you look at the images, it seems pretty clear that they've got nothing, whatsoever, to do with Wolverine. In other words, 20th Century Fox appears to have broken the law, in claiming it held the copyright over the figures in those images, when it appears it did not. Unfortunately, the site hosting his content doesn't fully understand that under the DMCA it can re-enable his content if he files a counternotice and 20th Century Fox fails to file a lawsuit within a specified period of time. Instead, it's told the blogger that he needs to get the lawyer from 20th Century Fox to agree that the content doesn't infringe -- and the lawyers don't seem to be responding to any emails, meaning that the blogger is stuck in limbo for no good reason.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 1:52pm

    gotta love the dmca file&forget
    it does not get any better

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:00pm

    Wow, this one is beyond reason. If you look at the figures the only resemblance to Wolverine is one character has sideburns. Instead of blogging he should retain a lawyer who will work for a cut of the settlement cuz they have 20th Century by the balls.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    interval, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:08pm

    And we're always reminded that ignorance of the law is no excuse...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Coyote, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:08pm

    So?

    Host. Somewhere. Else.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    The infamous Joe, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:21pm

    Re: So?

    Why should he have to? He hasn't done anything wrong!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Overcast, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:21pm

    I wonder how much money these companies are wasting on trolling the web for their crap...

    And because they are acting like such asses - when I go to the Cinema next, I will intentionally avoid any and all movies from this company.

    This is so stupid, I don't know why people even bother with their content anymore. This is really crying out "WE NEED NEW MEDIA COMPANIES".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Davis Freeberg, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:23pm

    Shoot First Questions Later

    It does sound like he has a lousy hosting company, but there should be consequences when the studios make these types of false accusations. I bet if some random person started filing DMCA complaints against the official Wolverine site, it would never even get pulled down.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:09pm

    Re: Shoot First Questions Later

    There are consequences for filing false DMCA takedowns. Its part of the DMCA itself, and has always been there. Thats the whole point of this article, to point out that the hosting company has no clue how the DMCA works.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:10pm

    Re:

    why avoid their movies? Just download them for free like everyone else does. And keep downloading them for free until they figure it out.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Slackr, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:20pm

    Honestly this is just sad. Take a look at those photos and TRY and see the similarity. Someone at 20th Century Fox either has way too much time on their hands, a drug habit, or a really really good imagination (probably all three).

    This kind of stuff should never happen. Plain ridiculous.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:37pm

    Re: Re: Shoot First Questions Later

    There hasn't been any consequences to anyone as of yet that I've heard of. The consequences should be to who ever file the false DMCA take-down notice. As I understand it part of the DMCA take-down notice is that the copyright of the subject material is owned by the originator of the notice. Even a moron in a hurry (I know that's actually a legal standard for trademark law) would know that these images have nothing to do with the Wolverine therefore Fox and their lawyers have violated the law. They should be prosecuted and the lawyers who actually filed the notice should be disbarred or at the very least severely sanctioned. But that would mean the law was actually fair and equally enforced.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:40pm

    The law is fair, just and equitable

    ...for anyone who can afford it.

    In a related development, the estate of General Burnsides is considering its legal options.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:26am

    Re: Re: So?

    Because his host is an idiot and he shouldn't be giving them his money.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:28am

    Re: Re: Shoot First Questions Later

    There are potential consequences, but that doesn't mean they're enforced.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    hegemon13, Apr 21st, 2009 @ 10:28am

    Re: Re: So?

    Well, he doesn't have to. He can continue to get ripped off. I can tell you that if a store sold me a defective good and gave me a hard time returning it, I probably wouldn't go back. This seems like a similar situation. He CAN continue to use this host, but personally, I'd move my stuff far away from them and warn all my associates to avoid them, as well.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This