THE KEN PENDERS CHRONICLES: court docs out, deluded people think it means anything

This has to be a joke. I can't believe that this dude would be so spiteful towards the publisher. I think that Archie will find a way around it, either through monetary compensation or outright challenging it in court. Panders is showing the maturity of a small, over privileged child. Such unprofessionalism is disgusting.

 

So he complains because a Sega game borrowed things from stories he wrote, these stories being inspired by Sega's properties? Yeah right, Penders.

 

I find it difficult to believe he'll have a leg to stand on legally. Archie or SEGA owns the Archie Sonic characters, surely.

 

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->At this time, anyone distributing and selling copies of SONIC ARCHIVES Nos. 3 through 13, SONIC SELECT Nos. 1 and 2, as well as any of the latest issues of SONIC THE HEDGEHOG and SONIC UNIVERSE that feature my characters in any way, shape or form will be asked to cease and desist or else risk facing the consequences. This includes any version of said material, which also includes my original works, which sees release in any format beyond the original published comic books, including but not limited to digital downloads. (Yes, the iTunes and iPhones stores distributing my stories are currently infringing my copyrights, and are in the process of being made aware of this infringement.)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->He also claims that the first sale doctrine doesn't exist. <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/05/court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.ars" target="_blank">Too bad Autodesk already tried that.</a>

 

I guess Ken Penders couldn't stand watching the series go on without a healthy heaping of gay walruses, rings and dick. What a douche.

 

Are you saying he JUST copyrighted it? If so, as soon as it was published it was copyright by Archie, at least I've always read that's how it worked.

 

How is this even possible? There's no way he could actually own any of these characters when they're all essentially Knuckles with optional gender swaps and accessories tacked on. Geoffrey is practically the only remotely original character he could lay claim to. He's going to crash and burn spectacularly.

 

.......Fuck you Ken............fuck you.

That's all I've got to say about this.

 

Oh and just to clear it up, here are the possible legal issues Ken is facing:
<ul><li> Sega and whoever else owns SatAM suing him for trademark infringement and copyright infringement by claiming ownership of Sonic and the SatAM characters</li><li> Consumers suing for false advertising (since this means Ken made Sonic and the characters) and violation of first sale doctrine (see above)</li><li> Archie suing for potential breach of contract (who knows), trademark infringement (the Archie logo), and copyright infringement (Archie owns the rights to the stories, not him)</li></ul>Yeah, he won't stand a chance.

 

<!--quoteo(post=476334:date=Jul 7 2010, 06:12 PM:name=Andlabs)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Andlabs @ Jul 7 2010, 06:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=476334"></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Oh and just to clear it up, here are the possible legal issues Ken is facing:
<ul><li> Sega and whoever else owns SatAM suing him for trademark infringement and copyright infringement by claiming ownership of Sonic and the SatAM characters</li><li> Consumers suing for false advertising (since this means Ken made Sonic and the characters) and violation of first sale doctrine (see above)</li><li> Archie suing for potential breach of contract (who knows), trademark infringement (the Archie logo), and copyright infringement (Archie owns the rights to the stories, not him)</li></ul>Yeah, he won't stand a chance.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well Crisis averted then.

 

So Ken Penders is claiming his fancharacters are &copy; him
wow he is literally every deviantart recolour artist

 

Well it looks like anyone with the name of Ken is a retard. This is truly copyrights as you imagined it.

 

Andlabs raises a valid point. If I know my Sonic history correctly, the SatAm television show came first. Since Penders wasn't a part of that creative team, he can't lay a claim. Especially since Archie either licensed or (more likely) outright bought the characters and concepts therein. Not to mention that if Archie didn't copyright the stories, they would be public domain. Usually (or always) part of a story copyright includes the phrase "and all characters therein are the property of Archie Comics Incorporated". He very likely has no claim. If he did this a decade ago it would be a different story, but as it stands there is a good chance that his claim to the story and characters will not stand in court.

 

This is awesome. I can't get this shit eating grin off my face.

 

<!--quoteo(post=476321:date=Jul 7 2010, 11:57 PM:name=Frozen Nitrogen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Frozen Nitrogen @ Jul 7 2010, 11:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=476321"></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I find it difficult to believe he'll have a leg to stand on legally. Archie or SEGA owns the Archie Sonic characters, surely.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's basically it. Sonic Chronicles is, according to Penders, a derivative work, because the plot is similar to the Knuckles comics.

So let's put this into perspective - he had a bitchfit over an original story using SEGA-made characters that could potentially be a homage (I assume BioWare has some fans of the Sonic comics in its staff) or derivative work of an original story using SEGA-made characters. Both of which were authorised by SEGA, and are therefore using all the Sonic characters with permission.

Either he'll be laughed out of court; or sued by Archie and/or Sega for trying to copyright -their- copyrighted characters (I do believe that, yes, all the original content from the Archie comics is copyrighted to them; but have no way to confirm this).

 

This is actually pretty funny, I can't stop grinning.

 

<!--quoteo(post=476341:date=Jul 7 2010, 07:21 PM:name=quarterman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (quarterman @ Jul 7 2010, 07:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=476341"></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not to mention that if Archie didn't copyright the stories, they would be public domain.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Actually in the mid-1980s US copyright law changed so that works were automatically copyright unless stated otherwise, so even if Archie didn't copyright the work outright it would still have been copyright. However the point is Archie is the technical owner of the copyright, not Ken alone.