Slashdot Mirror
A Broke Fan Owes $5,400 For Pokemon-Themed Party Posters
Jason Koebler writes: A fan has been ordered by a Washington judge to pay the Pokémon Company International $5,400 for copyright infringement after attempting to throw a Pokemon-themed party earlier this summer. Even though he canceled the free event, the Pokemon Company successfully sued Ramar Larkin Jones, for using an image of Pikachu to promote the Unofficial PAX Pokemon Kickoff Party.
I've been thinking of buying a 3DS for when I travel...
If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans, I shudder to think of how they treat their enemies and competitors. What a fucking shitty thing to do. These people love Pokemon enough to have a big fun party kicking of PAX, and all Nintendo cares about is extracting it's fucking pound of flesh and in the process looking like a big, wobbly, flaccid dildo. In other words: Go fuck yourselves Nintendo, if you can't treat your fans well, then you deserve no fans. You bunch of litigious morons.
Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
Gotta catch them all!
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
The big piece of information that always gets neglected in these articles is that they didn't sue because he was throwing a party, but because he runs a business which hosts party events and then used Pokémon to promote such an event. Here is the company's trashy Facebook page. "Fans" and "Businesses" are NOT the same thing. https://www.facebook.com/Rucku...
Don't sue your fans!
There is a system for subverting the system and you should use that system!
The envelope please.... aaand the "Douchey" goes to.... Yes!!! The folks at Pokemon!! ...Ummm can they sue me for typing "Pokemon"?
You are all cows. Cows say moo. MOOOO!! MOOOO!! Moo cows MOOOOO!!! Moo say the cows. YOU COPYRIGHT INFRINGING COWS!!
why are adults still playing with Pokemon?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Brokemon
Table-ized A.I.
Starting with me not buying Pokemon for nephews and nieces.
People say Stallman is nuts for rabidly endorsing the GPL, but he doesn't hold a candle to the Slashbots who insist that they should get anything and everything for free for all eternity.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Noone says "End of story." unless there's more to the story and they don't want to acknowledge it.
I'd welcome fan backlash against a company who is punishing their fans for celebrations which don't earn an income. Question is: was this event really free or was it earning them an income?
Did Ramar Larkin Jones profiting from this in some way? Strange he says it's a money loser, and says he's got hardly anything in the bank and can't afford to pay the damages yet he did this five years running supposedly losing money each year?
> From Slasdot OP: Jason Koebler writes: Even though he canceled the free event
It wasn't free. Check below. They were selling tickets for $2 each. Big mistake for Koebler to make there since he's written about the Pokemon scene before
>"The Pokémon party would have been a money-losing endeavor, Jones told Geekwire, as it has been every year since 2011 when he first threw it. He collected about $500 by selling tickets at $2 apiece, but that revenue was outweighed by the $450 he spent on a DJ and gift cards, plus additional revenue spent on decorations, a Kindle Fire, and cash prizes. Jones refunded the tickets after he canceled the party."
>"Jones timed the party to coincide with the PAX gaming conference that takes place each year in Seattle, where he lives. According to the poster, the 5th Annual Unofficial Pokémon PAX Kickoff Party would have included "Pokémon themed shots and drinks," a "Smash Bros. Tournament with cash prize," as well as dancing, giveaways, a cosplay contest, and an "AMAZIN POKEMON MASHUP.""
Wouldn't it make more sense to let people in for free and have no door prizes? Are the number of places capped or did he stand to me a profit if he managed to sell more tickets than the cost of the door prizes?
>"A second defendant who was named in the suit, Zach Shore, is a manager at the host bar, and Jones said Shore had nothing to do with the event."
Was Shore selling drinks or food at the event? If he was then he'd be profiting from it. Ramar does the publicity. Shore makes the money. If that's true then they are making a profit by using Pokemon and without paying a cent in licensing fees
"The Pokémon Company is seeking statutory damages "within the higher range allowed when infringement has been committed willfully"; any profits the organizers made through the events since 2011"
That part means the Pokémon Company has no idea if Ramar and Shore have been making money but if it goes to court they can call evidence to find out.
That's what you get for not GROWING THE FUCK UP!
If you can't cook dinner is what my mom would say.
You might notice the link to the Scribd document is no longer valid. Cause there has NOT been lawsuit yet. That motion was never filed. Please read the Techdirt article for much more thorough and correct information.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151002/17085432430/pokemon-wants-to-totally-bankrupt-one-biggest-fans-thanks-to-copyright.shtml
Posting anon to avoid karma whoring, please mod up for visibility. The linked article is fairly wrong and contradicts itself, the lawyer is being a douchebag on behalf of Pokemon International, and should know better. Honestly, its probably him you should be hating on and Pokemon International who merely hired his firm.
do not use shitty websites, scrubs!
You don't do it, it's as simple as that. Don't use someone else's property, especially when it belongs to a megacorp that will destroy your life just to send a message. Heed that message. Or is your life over if you can't have a Nintendo- or Disney-themed party?
Go ahead. If a thousands of people like you and your nieces and nephews died right now, a megacorp like Nintendo would not care. For one poor fool boycotting, a million does not. You're irrelevant and if your nieces and nephews like pokemon, you'll just alienate them and some smarter relative will nake them happy. You only hurt yourself.
The article doesn't make it clear, but Pokemon Company International have not claimed any money for the breach of the copyright. In the lawyer's letter, the money claimed is purely for court fees and attorney costs.
It's unusual for this type of claim to go to court, as they are almost invariably settled out of court. I'd guess that he got the C&D letter from the lawyers, and was offered an out of court settlement to pay for the lawyers fees accrued at that time. He then decided to take it to court, where he had no meaningful defence, and served only to rack up more lawyers fees and the court fees.
A lot of you are forgetting that this guy operates a cafe. Even if there was no cover charge to the event, he would have profited from the sales made during it. And now he will profit even more due to the exposure. Whether the operator is "broke" or not is irrelevant. A lawsuit like this 20 or 30 years ago could have been considered overly harsh...but in today's business environment, where everyone is desperate to eek out the slightest extra profit by any means necessary, it's not.
The organizer seems to be focussing on ticket sales as his source of revenue, but there is also mention of serving themed shots and drinks. Alcohol is expensive and surely he was not giving that away for free. It can also be a good revenue generator. I wonder how that fits into how much revenue he would have, and whether it would end up being profitable?
(Note: I'm not saying that this would be a hugely profitable event because of those drinks. I am suggesting that there are important details being left out, details which mean that this is more than a simple fandom party.)
That would be a more appropriate headline. The $2 admission their company charges is basically the cover charge to get into a party with sale of alcoholic beverages. Does this sound like your typical fan gathering?:
Defendants boast that the "5th Annual Unofficial Pokemon PAX Kickoff Party" will feature among other things, "Pokemon themed shots and drinks - Smash Bros. Tournament with cash prize - Dancing - Giveaways - Cosplay Contest and more," and an "AMAZIN POKEMON MASHUP."
This sounds like a typical commercial "theme night" that bars and clubs might have, only instead of using a generic unprotected theme like Halloween they made a Pokemon party. Not surprised their lawyers got angry, They managed to put a very good media spin on it though, clearly they as event organizers know how to get media attention and manipulate it. I hope they get to pay every dollar.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
This generation has the assumption that everything visible on the Internet and/or available for public consumption is by default Public Domain and thus available to use however they wish. Putting up some Pokemon decorations in your home for a game-night party is ok but organizing a public event and charging admission (even just to "cover expenses") is NOT ok.
Why is this even being debated?
Because old lawyers become judges... and it perpetuates the "good ol boy" club.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Fuck you, bootlicker. At this rate, corporations will own all culture within the next 30 years and you won't be able to blow your nose unless it's on government sanctioned, di$ney branded tissue that you had to pay $2 a piece for.
Chapter 7 bankruptcy can be done for a few hundred bucks and has the added benefit of burning your credit cards in the process.
I'm finding it hard to arrive at $5,000 in costs unless it's just a round number pulled out of a hat.
Can anyone detail how there could be $5,000 in legal fees. I can't see more than about 5-6 hours of time spent on this.
Time to spread some Rule 34 Pokemon art around! Dare them to sue, and invoke the Streisand Effect.
That's it, my kids are never getting into Pokemon. I'll find them an alternative.
I wonder if Disney will be as lenient as Lucas was. Disney certainly isn't as picky or discriminating in what they will license for Star Wars, i.e. read anything or anyone who will pay a buck...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
What is Julian Assange doing at that Pokemon party?
lucm, indeed.
And yet, they haven't shut down this project yet:
http://pokemon3d.net/
Moral of this is never take on a lawyer in court without a lawyer of your own: The Honorable James P. Donohue 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 11 12 THE POKÉMON COMPANY INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:15-cv-01372-JPD FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION v. RAMAR LARKIN JONES; ZACH SHORE; and RUCKUS PRODUCTIONS, 16 Defendants. 17 18 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 19 20 1. This is an action for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 21 101 et seq. In the Complaint, Plaintiff The Pokémon Company International, Inc. (“TPCi”) 22 sought, among other relief, injunctive relief under 17 U.S.C. 502. 23 24 2. The Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). 25 26 27 FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION (2:15-cv-01372-JPD) - 1 DWT 27886547v3 0087890-000027 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP L AW O F FI CE S 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101-3045 206.622.3150 main 206.757.7700 fax 3. 1 The Complaint alleges, in part, that Defendants copied, reproduced, displayed 2 and distributed TPCi’s copyrighted Pokémon works without authorization, thereby infringing 3 TPCi’s copyrighted works. 4 4. 5 Jones (“Jones”). 6 5. 7 prejudice. 8 6. 9 Defendant Ruckus Productions is a trade name used by Defendant Ramar Larkin TPCi has previously dismissed its claims against Defendant Zach Shore without TPCi is the prevailing party in this action within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. 505. FINAL JUDGMENT 10 Judgment is entered in favor of TPCi and against Jones, individually and doing business 11 12 as Ruckus Productions (“Defendant Jones”). INJUNCTION 13 14 1. For the purposes of this Permanent Injunction, the following definitions apply: (a) 15 “Copyrighted Work” shall mean any work, or portion thereof, whether 16 now in existence or later created, in which TPCi, or a parent, subsidiary 17 or affiliate of TPCi owns or controls a valid and subsisting exclusive 18 right under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq. (b) 19 “Infringing Work” shall mean any unauthorized scan, copy, 20 reproduction, counterfeit, derivative work or other colorable imitation of 21 the Copyrighted Works or any part thereof. (c) 22 23 2. “Days” means calendar days, unless otherwise specified. Defendant Jones and his agents, servants, employees, assigns, and all those in 24 active concert or participation with any of them (“Enjoined Parties”), who receive actual notice 25 of this Permanent Injunction by personal service or otherwise, are ORDERED and ENJOINED 26 as follows: 27 FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION (2:15-cv-01372-JPD) - 2 DWT 27886547v3 0087890-000027 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP L AW O F FI CE S 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101-3045 206.622.3150 main 206.757.7700 fax (a) 1 Effective immediately upon the entry of this Permanent Injunction, the 2 Enjoined Parties are permanently enjoined from infringing the 3 Copyrighted Works, either directly or contributorily, including generally 4 but not limited to, by copying, reproducing, displaying, promoting, 5 marketing, advertising, offering for sale or otherwise disposing of or 6 distributing any Infringing Work. (b) 7 Effective immediately upon the entry of this Permanent Injunction, the 8 Enjoined Parties are permanently enjoined from inducing, aiding, 9 abetting, contributing to, or otherwise assisting anyone in infringing upon any Copyrighted Work. 10 (c) 11 Within seven (7) days of the entry of this Permanent Injunction, 12 Defendant Jones shall remove from websites, including but not limited to 13 Facebook.com and Eventbrite.com, all Infringing Works that he has 14 posted there. (d) 15 Within seven (7) days
Live long anarchy!
Corporations only own our culture because we buy our culture from corporations. If people don't want to be owned, they should stop being a fanboy of someone else's ideas and make their ideas. Of course this will never happen in society at large, it is an individual choice, and once you go it alone you cease to have a meaningful impact on culture. The vocal minority (backed by advertising $$$) will always hog the spotlight and create that gravitational center we think of as culture. Like it or not, our culture has been hijacked and we can't do jack shit about it.