Talk:IP infringement - Revision history

Poliwag06: /* Coincidence? */ new section

2023-03-28T14:30:14Z

Coincidence?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:30, 28 March 2023
Line 34:		Line 34:
	:While there is certainly a case to be made that there is no objective difference between an almost-Lamborghini and an almost-Sunstreaker, I would argue that in reality there is a significant difference, which is that an incredibly small part of Hasbro's business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Lamborghini in their toy car collections, whereas 100% of IP theft companies' business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Sunstreaker in their Transformers collections. -[[User:LV\|LV]] ([[User talk:LV\|talk]]) 14:54, 19 May 2017 (EDT)		:While there is certainly a case to be made that there is no objective difference between an almost-Lamborghini and an almost-Sunstreaker, I would argue that in reality there is a significant difference, which is that an incredibly small part of Hasbro's business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Lamborghini in their toy car collections, whereas 100% of IP theft companies' business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Sunstreaker in their Transformers collections. -[[User:LV\|LV]] ([[User talk:LV\|talk]]) 14:54, 19 May 2017 (EDT)
	::Would you opposed mentioning this aspect including the caveat you brought up? Because I think there's a difference between citing "moral" reasons for opposing 3P figures and loyalty to Hasbro.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 12:21, 20 May 2017 (EDT)		::Would you opposed mentioning this aspect including the caveat you brought up? Because I think there's a difference between citing "moral" reasons for opposing 3P figures and loyalty to Hasbro.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 12:21, 20 May 2017 (EDT)

			== Coincidence? ==

			So apparently this popped up in my Twitter feed:
			https://twitter.com/AssTransformers/status/1640671070393860097?t=ZnQ8AzmV0WO1Y-f-R85tvg&s=19
			Is it worth putting in the article? I dunno if its true or just an interpretation and [[Circular reporting]].--[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 10:30, 28 March 2023 (EDT)

S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47: S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 moved page Talk:IP theft to Talk:IP infringement

2022-01-01T18:03:24Z

S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 moved page Talk:IP theft to Talk:IP infringement

← Older revision	Revision as of 18:03, 1 January 2022
(No difference)

Broadside: Riptide moved page Talk:IP infringing item to Talk:IP theft

2020-03-03T14:49:49Z

Riptide moved page Talk:IP infringing item to Talk:IP theft

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:49, 3 March 2020
(No difference)

Nevermore: /* Aaron Archer and Hasbro */

2017-05-20T16:21:17Z

Aaron Archer and Hasbro

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:21, 20 May 2017
Line 33:		Line 33:
	Also, how does Hasbro's own treatment of numerous car manufacturers' intellectual property with their figures' "not-Mustang", "not-Lamborghini" or "not-Civic" alternate modes figure into this?--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 14:05, 19 May 2017 (EDT)		Also, how does Hasbro's own treatment of numerous car manufacturers' intellectual property with their figures' "not-Mustang", "not-Lamborghini" or "not-Civic" alternate modes figure into this?--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 14:05, 19 May 2017 (EDT)
	:While there is certainly a case to be made that there is no objective difference between an almost-Lamborghini and an almost-Sunstreaker, I would argue that in reality there is a significant difference, which is that an incredibly small part of Hasbro's business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Lamborghini in their toy car collections, whereas 100% of IP theft companies' business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Sunstreaker in their Transformers collections. -[[User:LV\|LV]] ([[User talk:LV\|talk]]) 14:54, 19 May 2017 (EDT)		:While there is certainly a case to be made that there is no objective difference between an almost-Lamborghini and an almost-Sunstreaker, I would argue that in reality there is a significant difference, which is that an incredibly small part of Hasbro's business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Lamborghini in their toy car collections, whereas 100% of IP theft companies' business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Sunstreaker in their Transformers collections. -[[User:LV\|LV]] ([[User talk:LV\|talk]]) 14:54, 19 May 2017 (EDT)
			::Would you opposed mentioning this aspect including the caveat you brought up? Because I think there's a difference between citing "moral" reasons for opposing 3P figures and loyalty to Hasbro.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 12:21, 20 May 2017 (EDT)

LV: /* Aaron Archer and Hasbro */

2017-05-19T18:54:39Z

Aaron Archer and Hasbro

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:54, 19 May 2017
Line 32:		Line 32:

	Also, how does Hasbro's own treatment of numerous car manufacturers' intellectual property with their figures' "not-Mustang", "not-Lamborghini" or "not-Civic" alternate modes figure into this?--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 14:05, 19 May 2017 (EDT)		Also, how does Hasbro's own treatment of numerous car manufacturers' intellectual property with their figures' "not-Mustang", "not-Lamborghini" or "not-Civic" alternate modes figure into this?--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 14:05, 19 May 2017 (EDT)
			:While there is certainly a case to be made that there is no objective difference between an almost-Lamborghini and an almost-Sunstreaker, I would argue that in reality there is a significant difference, which is that an incredibly small part of Hasbro's business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Lamborghini in their toy car collections, whereas 100% of IP theft companies' business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Sunstreaker in their Transformers collections. -[[User:LV\|LV]] ([[User talk:LV\|talk]]) 14:54, 19 May 2017 (EDT)

Nevermore: /* Aaron Archer and Hasbro */ new section

2017-05-19T18:05:28Z

Aaron Archer and Hasbro: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:05, 19 May 2017
Line 26:		Line 26:
	:How exactly is 'unlicensed product' more specific than 'IP infringing item'? The current title is because it's the terminology Fun Pub used in the past. [[User:Jalaguy\|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy\|talk]]) 15:37, 22 July 2016 (EDT)		:How exactly is 'unlicensed product' more specific than 'IP infringing item'? The current title is because it's the terminology Fun Pub used in the past. [[User:Jalaguy\|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy\|talk]]) 15:37, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
	**Knock Offs are also IP infringing and more blatantly so. Unlicensed Figure also covers add ons. That's not to mention the legality of these items is a bit more grey than that of KOs. --[[User:BlackStarscream\|BlackStarscream]] ([[User talk:BlackStarscream\|talk]]) 20:28, 2 August 2016 (EDT)		**Knock Offs are also IP infringing and more blatantly so. Unlicensed Figure also covers add ons. That's not to mention the legality of these items is a bit more grey than that of KOs. --[[User:BlackStarscream\|BlackStarscream]] ([[User talk:BlackStarscream\|talk]]) 20:28, 2 August 2016 (EDT)

			== Aaron Archer and Hasbro ==

			So with Aaron having had a very strong opinion on the matter during his stint at Hasbro, why don't we mention his own later involvment with one of these "third party" groups?

			Also, how does Hasbro's own treatment of numerous car manufacturers' intellectual property with their figures' "not-Mustang", "not-Lamborghini" or "not-Civic" alternate modes figure into this?--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 14:05, 19 May 2017 (EDT)

BlackStarscream: /* Article title, Part 2 */

2016-08-03T00:28:41Z

Article title, Part 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:28, 3 August 2016
Line 25:		Line 25:
	I have to agree with Spin-Out in that the current title sounds kind of off-topic; titles like "Unlicensed Transformers", "Unlicensed Products" or something along those lines gets the idea across without sounding like it's being snooty about it or getting off-topic. "IP infringing item" is unspecific, as well; what does this article's scope entail? Does it only include toys? Or does it encompass ''all'' unlicensed Transformers product, toys or not? I'm thinking a move to a more specific title is in order; I'm personally feeling "Unlicensed Product", myself; especially since knockoffs already have a section here. [[User:MaximalBroadjaw\|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw\|talk]]) 14:41, 22 July 2016 (EDT)		I have to agree with Spin-Out in that the current title sounds kind of off-topic; titles like "Unlicensed Transformers", "Unlicensed Products" or something along those lines gets the idea across without sounding like it's being snooty about it or getting off-topic. "IP infringing item" is unspecific, as well; what does this article's scope entail? Does it only include toys? Or does it encompass ''all'' unlicensed Transformers product, toys or not? I'm thinking a move to a more specific title is in order; I'm personally feeling "Unlicensed Product", myself; especially since knockoffs already have a section here. [[User:MaximalBroadjaw\|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw\|talk]]) 14:41, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
	:How exactly is 'unlicensed product' more specific than 'IP infringing item'? The current title is because it's the terminology Fun Pub used in the past. [[User:Jalaguy\|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy\|talk]]) 15:37, 22 July 2016 (EDT)		:How exactly is 'unlicensed product' more specific than 'IP infringing item'? The current title is because it's the terminology Fun Pub used in the past. [[User:Jalaguy\|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy\|talk]]) 15:37, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
			**Knock Offs are also IP infringing and more blatantly so. Unlicensed Figure also covers add ons. That's not to mention the legality of these items is a bit more grey than that of KOs. --[[User:BlackStarscream\|BlackStarscream]] ([[User talk:BlackStarscream\|talk]]) 20:28, 2 August 2016 (EDT)

Jalaguy: /* Article title, Part 2 */

2016-07-22T19:37:56Z

Article title, Part 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:37, 22 July 2016
Line 24:		Line 24:

	I have to agree with Spin-Out in that the current title sounds kind of off-topic; titles like "Unlicensed Transformers", "Unlicensed Products" or something along those lines gets the idea across without sounding like it's being snooty about it or getting off-topic. "IP infringing item" is unspecific, as well; what does this article's scope entail? Does it only include toys? Or does it encompass ''all'' unlicensed Transformers product, toys or not? I'm thinking a move to a more specific title is in order; I'm personally feeling "Unlicensed Product", myself; especially since knockoffs already have a section here. [[User:MaximalBroadjaw\|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw\|talk]]) 14:41, 22 July 2016 (EDT)		I have to agree with Spin-Out in that the current title sounds kind of off-topic; titles like "Unlicensed Transformers", "Unlicensed Products" or something along those lines gets the idea across without sounding like it's being snooty about it or getting off-topic. "IP infringing item" is unspecific, as well; what does this article's scope entail? Does it only include toys? Or does it encompass ''all'' unlicensed Transformers product, toys or not? I'm thinking a move to a more specific title is in order; I'm personally feeling "Unlicensed Product", myself; especially since knockoffs already have a section here. [[User:MaximalBroadjaw\|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw\|talk]]) 14:41, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
			:How exactly is 'unlicensed product' more specific than 'IP infringing item'? The current title is because it's the terminology Fun Pub used in the past. [[User:Jalaguy\|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy\|talk]]) 15:37, 22 July 2016 (EDT)

MaximalBroadjaw at 18:41, 22 July 2016

2016-07-22T18:41:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:41, 22 July 2016
Line 20:		Line 20:
	: Seconded, if my vote counts for anything. I think it's well written enough at this point. There might be some points to expand on (and get that third party page made) but it's good enough as-is. --[[User:King Starscream\|King Starscream]] ([[User talk:King Starscream\|talk]]) 15:04, 22 December 2015 (EST)		: Seconded, if my vote counts for anything. I think it's well written enough at this point. There might be some points to expand on (and get that third party page made) but it's good enough as-is. --[[User:King Starscream\|King Starscream]] ([[User talk:King Starscream\|talk]]) 15:04, 22 December 2015 (EST)
	::Yeah, I think if a "Third party" article can be put up (maybe as short as possible, to make it clear that it's a joke redirect?), then this is good to go live. I mean, unless Jalaguy isn't happy with it yet. --[[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:44, 11 January 2016 (EST)		::Yeah, I think if a "Third party" article can be put up (maybe as short as possible, to make it clear that it's a joke redirect?), then this is good to go live. I mean, unless Jalaguy isn't happy with it yet. --[[User:Riptide\|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide\|talk]]) 06:44, 11 January 2016 (EST)

			== Article title, Part 2 ==

			I have to agree with Spin-Out in that the current title sounds kind of off-topic; titles like "Unlicensed Transformers", "Unlicensed Products" or something along those lines gets the idea across without sounding like it's being snooty about it or getting off-topic. "IP infringing item" is unspecific, as well; what does this article's scope entail? Does it only include toys? Or does it encompass ''all'' unlicensed Transformers product, toys or not? I'm thinking a move to a more specific title is in order; I'm personally feeling "Unlicensed Product", myself; especially since knockoffs already have a section here. [[User:MaximalBroadjaw\|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw\|talk]]) 14:41, 22 July 2016 (EDT)

Jalaguy: Jalaguy moved page Talk:IP infringing items to Talk:IP infringing item: Wait, singular article titles

2016-05-24T19:20:36Z

Jalaguy moved page Talk:IP infringing items to Talk:IP infringing item: Wait, singular article titles

← Older revision	Revision as of 19:20, 24 May 2016
(No difference)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:21, 20 May 2017
Line 33:		Line 33:
	Also, how does Hasbro's own treatment of numerous car manufacturers' intellectual property with their figures' "not-Mustang", "not-Lamborghini" or "not-Civic" alternate modes figure into this?--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 14:05, 19 May 2017 (EDT)		Also, how does Hasbro's own treatment of numerous car manufacturers' intellectual property with their figures' "not-Mustang", "not-Lamborghini" or "not-Civic" alternate modes figure into this?--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 14:05, 19 May 2017 (EDT)
	:While there is certainly a case to be made that there is no objective difference between an almost-Lamborghini and an almost-Sunstreaker, I would argue that in reality there is a significant difference, which is that an incredibly small part of Hasbro's business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Lamborghini in their toy car collections, whereas 100% of IP theft companies' business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Sunstreaker in their Transformers collections. -[[User:LV\|LV]] ([[User talk:LV\|talk]]) 14:54, 19 May 2017 (EDT)		:While there is certainly a case to be made that there is no objective difference between an almost-Lamborghini and an almost-Sunstreaker, I would argue that in reality there is a significant difference, which is that an incredibly small part of Hasbro's business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Lamborghini in their toy car collections, whereas 100% of IP theft companies' business is coming from people who want to put an almost-Sunstreaker in their Transformers collections. -[[User:LV\|LV]] ([[User talk:LV\|talk]]) 14:54, 19 May 2017 (EDT)
			::Would you opposed mentioning this aspect including the caveat you brought up? Because I think there's a difference between citing "moral" reasons for opposing 3P figures and loyalty to Hasbro.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore\|talk]]) 12:21, 20 May 2017 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:28, 3 August 2016
Line 25:		Line 25:
	I have to agree with Spin-Out in that the current title sounds kind of off-topic; titles like "Unlicensed Transformers", "Unlicensed Products" or something along those lines gets the idea across without sounding like it's being snooty about it or getting off-topic. "IP infringing item" is unspecific, as well; what does this article's scope entail? Does it only include toys? Or does it encompass ''all'' unlicensed Transformers product, toys or not? I'm thinking a move to a more specific title is in order; I'm personally feeling "Unlicensed Product", myself; especially since knockoffs already have a section here. [[User:MaximalBroadjaw\|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw\|talk]]) 14:41, 22 July 2016 (EDT)		I have to agree with Spin-Out in that the current title sounds kind of off-topic; titles like "Unlicensed Transformers", "Unlicensed Products" or something along those lines gets the idea across without sounding like it's being snooty about it or getting off-topic. "IP infringing item" is unspecific, as well; what does this article's scope entail? Does it only include toys? Or does it encompass ''all'' unlicensed Transformers product, toys or not? I'm thinking a move to a more specific title is in order; I'm personally feeling "Unlicensed Product", myself; especially since knockoffs already have a section here. [[User:MaximalBroadjaw\|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw\|talk]]) 14:41, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
	:How exactly is 'unlicensed product' more specific than 'IP infringing item'? The current title is because it's the terminology Fun Pub used in the past. [[User:Jalaguy\|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy\|talk]]) 15:37, 22 July 2016 (EDT)		:How exactly is 'unlicensed product' more specific than 'IP infringing item'? The current title is because it's the terminology Fun Pub used in the past. [[User:Jalaguy\|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy\|talk]]) 15:37, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
			**Knock Offs are also IP infringing and more blatantly so. Unlicensed Figure also covers add ons. That's not to mention the legality of these items is a bit more grey than that of KOs. --[[User:BlackStarscream\|BlackStarscream]] ([[User talk:BlackStarscream\|talk]]) 20:28, 2 August 2016 (EDT)