Forum - View topicNEWS: Funimation Sues 1,427 John Does Over Ip Man
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hypeathon
Posts: 1176 |
|
|||||
|
So does 1427 mean anything in leet speak or something? Anywho, I'm suprised that many people cared to even watch a live-action Japanese film via Bittorrent. Now unless anime fans don't give a crap about this particular product being downloaded or aren't bothered at this point about what legal actions Funimation does to protect their own product, let the inevitable perpetually pointless piracy debate begin (not that I seriously want that to happen people).
|
||||||
|
||||||
jmaeshawn
 Posts: 170 |
|
|||||
|
Looks like Funimation didn't learn their lesson from the last mass lawsuit.
Here's how I pictured this... Funimation's lawyer: "Hey, so you didn't do so hot in the district with that one judge, maybe you'll have a better shot in a different district with a new judge! Just keep paying my attorney's fees!" Seems the only ones winning from these suits is their lawyer, while Funimation is only losing more money than they gain from the settlements. Money they could be spending to license more anime... |
||||||
|
||||||
DrizzlingEnthalpy
 Posts: 255 |
|
|||||
|
Here we go agaaain!
|
||||||
|
||||||
Richard J.
 Posts: 3367 Location: Sic Semper Tyrannis. |
|
|||||
|
[quote="jmaeshawn"]Funimation's lawyer: "Hey, so you didn't do so hot in the district with that one judge, maybe you'll have a better shot in a different district with a new judge! Just keep paying my attorney's fees!"
Of course, perhaps there are other angles you aren't considering. The Japanese for instance are taking an increasingly negative view of this market due to pirating. Perhaps Funimation has to keep trying to do something in order to maintain some of their working relationships? Or perhaps their lawyer is cheap. I haven't seen anything about what he gets paid. Maybe there aren't a lot of billable hours involved or the guy charges a decent flat rate for his services or maybe he's doing this stuff for them as a minor add-on to something else? Or maybe Funimation's just getting sick of paying money to license anime just so some jackass can rip what they spent money on and put it on the Internet without having any right to do so? People die for their principles, losing money on them can't be much worse. |
||||||
|
||||||
potatochobit
 Posts: 1373 Location: TEXAS |
|
|||||
|
Not this BS again
funimation should be more worried about losing their paying customers than trying to sue idiots who were not going to pay them in the first place sure, I do watch fansubs sometimes and I regularly buy those videos when they come to the US market. But if they keep this crap up I am sure sentai film works and aniplex would love to have all my money. I want to support funimation because they also do a lot of good, but hiring a porn lawyer to threaten people into settling is NOT morally or ethically correct. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
treatment
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
|
you know, I'm confused by the article.
the graphic/thumbnail uses the image from the rather bogus Ip Man 3 "The Legend is born". which is not actually THE actual Ip Man movie released/distributed by Mandarin Films. that Ip Man 3 "The Legend is born" thingy was probably just name-hopping on the more famous Ip Man movie. I don't see any actual connection between them or even with the actual Ip Man 2 sequel. Is Funi connected somehow with Mandarin Films? Could somebody clarify this confusion? add/edit: oh, and yeah. since all of those films were from HK, i think there's quite a possibility that it's already been bootlegged to death over there before it came here. 
Last edited by treatment on Wed Jun 01, 2011 12:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Leg
Posts: 17 |
|
|||||
http://blog.funimation.com/2011/05/funimation-licenses-the-legend-is-born-–-ip-man/ Funimation licensed The Legend is Born: Ip Man, as the article states. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
treatment
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
My confusion is that Ip Man is a well-known movie (prolly trademarked or something) that is definitely not the same movie that Funi is suing over with just based on the ANN-article titling. Reckon ANN needs to re-title their article to avoid further confusion. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Sorraffy
Posts: 158 |
|
|||||
|
don't know if this one will go any better for ya FUNi but good luck regardless!
|
||||||
|
||||||
Emerje
 Posts: 7339 Location: Maine |
|
|||||
|
$150,000 between 1,427 people. Does that mean they're only looking for $105 per person? Someone could probably settle out of court for less than a day's pay and not have to worry about it.
Emerje |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Leg
Posts: 17 |
|
|||||
According to the Funimation press release, the movie is the "prequel to the successful IP MAN franchise." The title of the article seems perfectly fitting, as Funimation is suing over Ip man (specific movie not mentioned), then goes onto to specify in the actual article which Ip man movie is in question. IMO, there's no confusion to be had. |
||||||
|
||||||
ikillchicken
 Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||
|
So...just to recap:
Funimation tried to do this before with One Piece. They promptly failed in epic fashion and thus: -failed to recoup any money -showed pirates that there's nothing Funimation can do to them for pirating -managed to come off like nasty draconian pricks regardless Naturally, the fine folks at Funimation looked at this, thought about it for a couple months and said: Hey, Let's do that again! Yeah...that's some real savvy management right there. Last edited by ikillchicken on Wed Jun 01, 2011 1:11 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Richard J.
Posts: 3367 Location: Sic Semper Tyrannis. |
|
|||||
Is it less correct than violating someone's rights? If you want to support Funimation, then why do you have a problem with them trying to enforce their rights. More to the point, why do you think Sentai or Aniplex isn't doing something to fight piracy as well? I always find these kinds of posts especially amusing: the "I want to support them but they're actually fighting back against the pirates and I actually like those pirates more so I'll claim I buy stuff and then say I'm going stop buying from them and buy from these other companies that I don't think are doing anything." These posts are classics! The contortions of logic necessary for such self-deluding nonsense are fascinating. I especially like how you have to state that their lawyer is a "porn lawyer" as if that actually means anything? Oh, sorry, I guess those EVIL PEOPLE in the porn industry aren't allowed to have lawyers? Also exactly what is wrong with telling someone "either settle or be sued?" when that person has or at least you believe due to reasonable evidence that they have violated your rights? Perhaps Funimation should just ignore the fansubbing? I mean, that's worked so well up until now right? It's not like illegal anime distribution is considerably greater than legal distribution or that the Japanese are increasingly concerned about piracy or that many fans are fed up with it too. Nah, everyone just loves those wonderful leechsubbers. Except those mean old Funimation folks! What bullies going after those poor violaters of federal and international law! 
These jackasses should consider themselves lucky they don't have the actually federal authorities going after them for their CRIMINAL violations of the law. A civil suit costs money. A criminal conviction carries minimum penalties measured in YEARS if I'm not mistaken. @ Emerje: Yeah that number does sound a bit off. Wish ANN had a link to the filing. Of course, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which I expect will be in place due to the jurisdiction involved, allow for complaints to be amended. It's not like they can't come back and adjust their damages. A main reason for this filing is probably to gian access to the discovery process to actually find out who the users were. Once they know who and where, they can take more steps. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
treatment
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
I think you are not getting what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that the ANN-article title is totally misleading. The article itself, as you say, is fine and all. Still, it does not excuse the practice of having readers being totally misled by the article-title. |
||||||
|
||||||
kinbalk
 Posts: 6 |
|
|||||
|
@ Richard J.
The porn lawyer thing is most likely a joke on the fact that Evan Stone is also the name of a former adult male actor. Calm down alittle on that one. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group