Actually 'kef Ken DOES own the characters in a way. its a long comlicated thing but Ken HAS the copyrights for them
Toggle shoutbox
Shoutbox
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A Theory On Archie's Decision To Remove The "disputed Characters"
#21
Posted 06 June 2013 - 09:21 PM
#22
Posted 07 June 2013 - 06:44 AM
First off, He registered the copyright on some of his stories. That doesn't mean that the government fully acknowledges his ownership, although he seems to think it does. In particular, it doesn't mean Archie can't dispute the registration.
Second, I was talking about what he's morally entitled to, which, as I said, is jack shit, even if somehow he is legally entitled to more.
#23
Posted 07 June 2013 - 07:17 AM
I'm just saying i looked into it a bit more and Penders has a legit case against Archie
#24
Posted 07 June 2013 - 07:42 AM
I'm just saying i looked into it a bit more and Penders has a legit case against Archie
Yes but I have a legit case if the fast food guy is one pickle short on my burger. That doesn't mean it's worth going to court over.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users












